# Will Marriott penalize resale owners?



## hotcoffee (Aug 11, 2008)

Last week, while staying at KBC, I attended a timeshare presentation.  One of the sales reps that I talked to began explaining that Marriott appears to be planning to begin their own internal exchange program.  I've heard hints about that before.  So, I was not too surprised by that information.  However, I was stunned when the same salesman noted that Marriott was also leaning to reduce the reservation window for resale owners (i.e., "external owners") from 12 months to 6 months.  If Marriott does that, it will be difficult for resale owners to reserve the best weeks.  Moreover, I would think that it will also become very difficult for any Marriott owner to sell his timeshare due to its value being greatly diminished.  Has anyone heard anything about this?


----------



## stevens397 (Aug 11, 2008)

Sounds like salesman scare tactics and BS


----------



## davidvel (Aug 11, 2008)

Never heard anything like that... actually, you may want to check here if you have some free time 

http://tugbbs.com/forums/showthread.php?t=60528


----------



## JimIg23 (Aug 11, 2008)

hotcoffee said:


> Moreover, I would think that it will also become very difficult for any Marriott owner to sell his timeshare due to its value being greatly diminished.



What would be funny is to write the sales manager saying I was very interested, but with what the salesperson said about the new system, if for any reason I had to sell it, my resale value would go into the toilet with the new system, so I can't buy.......


----------



## natashateach (Aug 11, 2008)

*Heard the almost the same*

I went on a presentation last week and the salesman alluded to Marriott having an internal exchange as well.


----------



## Zac495 (Aug 11, 2008)

It won't happen. They can't change the rules on those who already purchased - huge lawsuit, etc.  They can talk about changing it in the future - but who would buy if they knew that it was worthless to sell?  The salespeople have to have something to say about resale. and honestly - I think some of them believe it. Ignore it!


----------



## hotcoffee (Aug 12, 2008)

davidvel said:


> Never heard anything like that... actually, you may want to check here if you have some free time
> 
> http://tugbbs.com/forums/showthread.php?t=60528



Thanks for pointing me to that thread.  I spent a lot of time reading through it and learning that nothing seems to be definite.  

The salesman who told me about the 6 month reservation window for resale owners did not do himself or Marriott any favors.  There is no way on earth that I would purchase any Marriott timeshare if I thought that I could not sell it should the need arise.  In my view, such a discrimation against resale owners would greatly devalue all Marriott timeshares (both resales and developer sales) regardless of whether existing resale owners were grandfathered in or not.

Hopefully, this is just a rumor (as many of the posters in the other thread seem to believe).


----------



## stevens397 (Aug 12, 2008)

FWIW, they can often do just about anything they want.  Starwood has an internal trading system.  But a few years ago they came up with a fairly arbitrary breakdown of resorts into two categories.  In the largest category, called Voluntary, the internal trading privileges do not pass with a resale.  Yes, all current owners are in the system, but only five resorts can pass privileges along.

As you can imagine, the difference in resale price between equivalent resorts with unequal internal trading privileges is enormous.

I agree that this should be sent in letter form to the Sales Manager and directly to Marriott.


----------



## travelplanner70 (Aug 12, 2008)

I, too, was at KBC last week and also had the same talk.  Here is the concern I have:  the resale units I have purchased will decrease in value immediately upon implementation of the internal trading program; the trading power will be impacted negatively as well - even if we get "grandfathered" in.  From what the sales rep said, each property and each season within the property will have different point values.  Since I have always traded my "golds" for "plat" times of the year, this practice will become severely curtailed.  It might take me 2 years to build up enough points to get a Plat trade with a Gold unit.  If I planned to just use my Marriott timeshare, then I would not be impacted as much.  However,  I have never stayed at my home resort during the gold season.  I chose Marriott in the first place because of their "unique" trading ability.  

I would say changes are in the offing, and they do not favor resale owners.  

Any thoughts?


----------



## JimIg23 (Aug 12, 2008)

not to beat a dead horse, but if they change the program to decrease resale's "status," would that effect the grandfathered resales when, in turn, the resale is resold yet again?  (If I did not phrase that well, if a grandfathered resale week is resold, will it still be considered a "grandfathered" week to Marriott or like the new resales?  That would effect the resale price of a grandfathered resale)


----------



## m61376 (Aug 12, 2008)

Assuming that present resale units are grandfathered in (and for Marriott to do otherwise would be, in my opinion, shooting themselves in the foot from a public relations perspective) then any changes such as the above two posters are alluding to would affect all owners, whether they bought from Marriott or resale. Gold, Silver and Bronze week trades into Platinum may, as Jo-Jo is concerned, become a thing of the past or at least certainly less frequent, and it would impact everyone. 

Likewise, whether you bought originally from Marriott or on the resale market, when you sell the new owner would not be grandfathered in, so likely resale values would plummet. Who would want to purchase a unit if they could only reserve the left-over weeks?

I certainly hope many of the implementations discussed here don't come to fruition, because restricting the resale market will, ultimately, impact all owners and buyers. I know most people buy with the intention of keeping their purchase, but life sometimes throws curves in the road and people's needs change. I know I would think hard about spending $$$'s if I knew that it would have limited value (and those salespeople would have a hard time keeping a straight face touting a purchase as an investment  ).


----------



## Lawlar (Aug 12, 2008)

*Same Pitch Made at Newport Coast Villas*

The salesperson at NCV told us in June that Marriott puts a mark on its computer against anyone who owns from a source outside Marriott.  She said that within three years Marriott is going to be more exclusive and do all of its exchanges outside of II and that we wouldn’t want to be excluded from that process.  She said we would be on the outside looking in.

I wish I had asked her why I would want to buy a TS from Marriott if Marrott was going to depreciate the value of my TS by making it unappealing to resale buyers.  But I'll bet she had an answer to that question as well (another fib).


----------



## davidvel (Aug 12, 2008)

Lawlar said:


> She said that within three years Marriott is going to be more exclusive and do all of its exchanges outside of II and that we wouldn’t want to be excluded from that process.



We need to always distinguish between Marriott's changing the recorded governing docs. which control reservation of your week, and setting up a new (internal) system for trading. They are  distinct. 

 Marriott cannot in any way shape or form control how, with whom, or where you decide to "exchange" your reserved week. You can do it with friends, you can do it on e-bay, you can do it through a system such at redweek or II, or any other way you want. You can even start your own exchange sytem and set up your own rules if you want. Marriott can do the same as redweek, II, etc. have done, and make their own rules for those exchanges, but it would be your choice to participate or not as with all the other exchange systems.

They may even be able to limit their system to "direct" purchasers (although they would certainly be subject to anti-trust scrutiny based upon their market postion and position as "managers" of the resorts and control over the initial reservation process).  Remeber that if they did restrict it is a doubel edge sword: direct purchasers who deposited would not be able to exchange weeks deposited in that system with resale purchasers.

It seems to me that in any internal system (using points vs. II type system) would not change the relative trading power of any particular week. The power of any week is based upon what other people want and when, and shouldn't change from what it is now if you use points which would be based upon the trading power.


----------



## applegirl (Aug 12, 2008)

JimIg23 said:


> What would be funny is to write the sales manager saying I was very interested, but with what the salesperson said about the new system, if for any reason I had to sell it, my resale value would go into the toilet with the new system, so I can't buy.......



This was my thought too!   I just think it was scare tactics.  It wouldn't make any sense to do what he suggested.

Janna


----------



## kjd (Aug 12, 2008)

If you bought resale (which I did on one unit) why would you expect to be treated the same as a direct purchase owner?  Marriott said you wouldn't be treated equally when you made your resale purchase.  Marriott openly states that resale buyers will be treated differently by not granting MR points and withholding the services of a vacation advisor.  I'm sure they could come up with more Draconian measures if they wanted to. They have access to good legal advice.

It's not in Marriott's interest to depress the resale market.  However, it is in their interest to protect their sales.  I think that they are more interested in protecting themselves from other TS competitors rather than worry about a small and insignificant resale market.  (Resale market is estimated at about 7% of total TS sales)   The Marriott resale market is currently depressed because of the economy not because of any possible changes to a trading system.  

The rumored Marriott internal trading system would improve Marriott's competitive standing and add to their bottom line.  If any Marriott owners have a beef it should be the direct purchase owners who were given MRP trade-in availability and then had their reward schedules devalued.


----------



## JimIg23 (Aug 13, 2008)

I know it was said it was not true, but it seems, based on threads, more and more salespersons are saying this.  After a while, I get the feeling Marriott may still be considering this.


----------



## taffy19 (Aug 13, 2008)

Zac495 said:


> It won't happen. They can't change the rules on those who already purchased - huge lawsuit, etc. They can talk about changing it in the future - but who would buy if they knew that it was worthless to sell? The salespeople have to have something to say about resale. and honestly - I think some of them believe it. Ignore it!


Many people buy Wyndham resorts direct from the developer and what are they worth the moment they leave the sales office? I read that they lose 80 to 90% of the value of the purchase price they just paid but people are still buying as they don't realize this until they have to sell.

Developers should do anything possible to keep the re-sale values high rather than work against it as it eventually will hurt their retail sales too and that would serve them right.

That the  Marriott is going over to a point based system may not be so bad as it is more in line with what other developers do today but they cannot cut out re-sale buyers from that system because that would take exchange inventory away for people who bought directly from the Marriott but they may give them a lead time in making an internal exchange like they are having now for multiple week owners who can reserve their own week at their resort earlier depending on how many weeks they own but they can't cut anyone out of the new internal exchange system as there would be less inventory. JMHO, of course.


----------



## John Cerra (Aug 13, 2008)

*Resale*

I would guess Marriott could do anything on their internal trading system, but they could not stop you from trading elsewhere.  They certainly can't make it any harder to reserve in your home resort...afterall, they don't own the resort, they manage it.

I suspect that if they pulled this stunt, the other trading systems would have a field day with it, and pay you a premium in terms of points or exchanges, for a Marriott week.  It might actually increase the trade value since they will make Marriott TS weeks more scarce.  I like it!

John Cerra


----------



## derb (Aug 13, 2008)

Marriott is not wastegate, it will never punish resales.  Not only would retail sales be affected but Hotel stays as well.  If you owned a resaled Marriott and they deflated its value, would you ever stay at a Marriott hotel again?


----------



## lprstn (Aug 13, 2008)

*Don't believe sales talk...its a bully reaction...*

Every TS presentation I've gone to where I've expressed purchase of a resale, they tell me that resale owners suffer compared to new buyers, in very few cases is this true, and usually its not a significant variance to encourage me to purchase direct from the developer.  The only way I would purchase from the developer is if the price from the developer vs resale price is very close.

So I wouldn't take what your salesperson stated seriously.


----------



## Cindala (Aug 13, 2008)

jo-jo said:


> From what the sales rep said, each property and each season within the property will have different point values.  Since I have always traded my "golds" for "plat" times of the year, this practice will become severely curtailed.  It might take me 2 years to build up enough points to get a Plat trade with a Gold unit.  If I planned to just use my Marriott timeshare, then I would not be impacted as much.  However,  I have never stayed at my home resort during the gold season.  I chose Marriott in the first place because of their "unique" trading ability.



Resale vs. direct Marriott sales aside, this is what concerns me most. I purchased directly from Marriott and I have traded from 'gold' into 'platinum' season on all of my trades. We always read about great trades and upgrades with the current II system (gold to platinum, studio to 1bdrm, 2bdrm to 3 bdrm, views, etc). If this aspect of 'trading up' is also affected, then it will also diminish the value of the Marriott TS brand.


----------



## Lawlar (Aug 13, 2008)

*Why Does Marriott Allow Sales Reps To Misrepresent?*



JimIg23 said:


> I know it was said it was not true, but it seems, based on threads, more and more salespersons are saying this.  After a while, I get the feeling Marriott may still be considering this.



I have to assume that Marriott knows what its sales reps tell its customers.  Which leads to the question of why does Marriott allow its reps to misrepresent (lie) its products?

Isn't Marriott concerned about its reputation?

Any thoughts?  I would love to hear from Marriott's apologists on this question.  [Dave M?]


----------



## GregT (Aug 13, 2008)

*Marriott's apologists?*

Lawlar,

Why the insult?  Marriott's apologists [Dave M]?  

There are so many more professional/gracious/discrete ways to seek to address this relevant question.  Why did you choose this approach?

Dave is under no obligation to offer his opinion (or to defend Marriott) and if I were him I would be dismayed to be unfairly branded with this label.  

Greg


----------



## VacationPro (Aug 13, 2008)

Cindala said:


> Resale vs. direct Marriott sales aside, this is what concerns me most. I purchased directly from Marriott and I have traded from 'gold' into 'platinum' season on all of my trades. We always read about great trades and upgrades with the current II system (gold to platinum, studio to 1bdrm, 2bdrm to 3 bdrm, views, etc). If this aspect of 'trading up' is also affected, then it will also diminish the value of the Marriott TS brand.



I suspect that this will be much harder to do once the internal system is implemented, especially within the system.  

Instead of diminishing the brand, I think it might enhance the perception of exclusivity and hence enhance the brand.


----------



## Cindala (Aug 13, 2008)

VacationPro said:


> Instead of diminishing the brand, I think it might enhance the perception of exclusivity and hence enhance the brand.



Perhaps, but then who would buy gold, silver, bronze, sport, etc. seasons? Or for that matter, anything less than a 3bdrm? Kind of like cutting off your nose to spite your face.


----------



## VacationPro (Aug 13, 2008)

Cindala said:


> Perhaps, but then who would buy gold, silver, bronze, sport, etc. seasons? Or for that matter, anything less than a 3bdrm? Kind of like cutting off your nose to spite your face.



If the most recently announced resorts are any indication, there will be very few of those weeks (especially silver and bronze) going forward.  I would bet the sales pitch will emphasize every other year platinums versus EY "lesser" weeks.  JMHO.


----------



## Pit (Aug 13, 2008)

This is good business for Marriott. They have ROFR on most of their properties. So, they can devalue resales and pick them up cheap on the resale market. Then, they turn around and sell them for a premium, using the 6 month reservation advantage to justify buying from developer.

But, not so good for owners. It will be like Wyndam and Starwood (voluntary) where your developer purchase instantly losses tremendous value.


----------



## aka Julie (Aug 13, 2008)

Cindala said:


> Perhaps, but then who would buy gold, silver, bronze, sport, etc. seasons? Or for that matter, anything less than a 3bdrm? Kind of like cutting off your nose to spite your face.



Exactly!  When we bought 2 silver weeks at Barony over 9 years ago, the sales rep touted trading would be the way to go for us until my DH retired.  Since then we learned how to maximize our trades, especially into higher seasons at other Marriott's.

Now if they go to a points system, this will no longer be true.  If buying a a lesser season, will need to combine several years of points to trade/exchange into a higher season at another Marriott.  Their "trading tactic" will no longer hold up.


----------



## taffy19 (Aug 13, 2008)

Pit said:


> This is good business for Marriott. They have ROFR on most of their properties. So, they can devalue resales and pick them up cheap on the resale market. Then, they turn around and sell them for a premium, using the 6 month reservation advantage to justify buying from developer.
> 
> But, not so good for owners. It will be like Wyndam and Starwood (voluntary) where your developer purchase instantly losses tremendous value.


But if that gets known because of the Internet searches right after a purchase, who will buy unless there is a special reason or incentive? It has to hurt them eventually as people will investigate what they just bought on impulse and certainly when the purchase price is high. This is so easy to do now as most resorts have free internet access available in the condo or in the lobby.

It only will last until most people are aware of this problem. You have to be an idiot not to research this while you have time to rescind your contract.


----------



## hotcoffee (Aug 13, 2008)

kjd said:


> If you bought resale (which I did on one unit) why would you expect to be treated the same as a direct purchase owner?  Marriott said you wouldn't be treated equally when you made your resale purchase.  Marriott openly states that resale buyers will be treated differently by not granting MR points and withholding the services of a vacation advisor.  I'm sure they could come up with more Draconian measures if they wanted to. They have access to good legal advice.
> 
> It's not in Marriott's interest to depress the resale market.  However, it is in their interest to protect their sales.  I think that they are more interested in protecting themselves from other TS competitors rather than worry about a small and insignificant resale market.  (Resale market is estimated at about 7% of total TS sales)   The Marriott resale market is currently depressed because of the economy not because of any possible changes to a trading system.
> 
> The rumored Marriott internal trading system would improve Marriott's competitive standing and add to their bottom line.  If any Marriott owners have a beef it should be the direct purchase owners who were given MRP trade-in availability and then had their reward schedules devalued.




I think that you miss the point somewhat.  I was told before I purchased resale that I would not be able to participate in Marriott's points program.  That did not bother me because I got my ocean front 2BR unit cheaper than many resellers are asking for their ocean view 2BR units.  In fact, I was surprised when Marriott passed on its right of first refusal.

I was also told of Marriott's plan to implement their own internal trading system.  That did not particularly bother me either.  As long as I could still exchange through II, it would still be okay with me.

However, reducing the reservation window to six months for resale owners (whether existing ones were to be grandfathered or not) cannot help but greatly reduce the resale value of a timeshare.  Who would want to purchase a Marriott timeshare if they knew that they will probably not be able to reserve their desired week?  One of the biggest criticisms against the timeshare industry is the difficultly of getting out once you get in.  Were there to be a major change in ones life (like the death of a spouse), the remaining spouse might like to get out from under the yearly MFs.  Marriott's action (should they really do this) would demonstrate that they are very much a part of the sleaze factor of the timeshare industry.


----------



## Pit (Aug 13, 2008)

iconnections said:


> But if that gets known because of the Internet searches right after a purchase, who will buy unless there is a special reason or incentive? It has to hurt them eventually as people will investigate what they just bought on impulse and certainly when the purchase price is high. This is so easy to do now as most resorts have free internet access available in the condo or in the lobby.
> 
> It only will last until most people are aware of this problem. You have to be an idiot not to research this while you have time to rescind your contract.



Unfortunately, I believe only a small percentage of retail buyers figure out what they've done, before its too late. Most retail buyers aren't thinking about the resale implications of their "pre-paid vacations."


----------



## CMF (Aug 13, 2008)

*Man oh Man!*

I can't wait to see the thread(s) that spring up when Marriott actually does something!  Now that's entertainment!

Charles


----------



## Pit (Aug 13, 2008)

CMF said:


> I can't wait to see the thread(s) that spring up when Marriott actually does something!  Now that's entertainment!
> 
> Charles



I wish they would hurry up and do it. I'm holding out for one of those devalued resales.


----------



## m61376 (Aug 13, 2008)

Another reason why I am confident that they won't treat resale buyers as second class citizens, in addition to the arguments already proffered, is that their plans include marked expansion over the next several years. Many Marriott buyers are happy Marriott owners, and one of their best referral sources are repeat customers.

Many resale buyers are amongst the first pre-construction purchasers for that newly announced resort. How many current, knowledgeable TUG members, for example, just bought in Grand Lakes? Bad press, owner discontent, etc. would be a bad marketing strategy going forward.


----------



## Cindala (Aug 13, 2008)

aka Julie said:


> Exactly!  When we bought 2 silver weeks at Barony over 9 years ago, the sales rep touted trading would be the way to go for us until my DH retired.  Since then we learned how to maximize our trades, especially into higher seasons at other Marriott's.
> 
> Now if they go to a points system, this will no longer be true.  If buying a a lesser season, will need to combine several years of points to trade/exchange into a higher season at another Marriott.  Their "trading tactic" will no longer hold up.



Our sales rep also encouraged us to buy gold telling us we'd have no problem trading into platinum season at our resort. So far he was right. However with a points system it stands to reason that my TS will be diminished in value and trading ability. You'd have a riot on your hands with everyone who purchased less than platinum. 
Having a 12 month reservation window with a gold direct purchase probably wouldn't be on a level playing field with a 6 month reservation window with a platinum resale.
I think Marriott will have to look at both direct vs. resale purchases along with seasonal values to implement a fair internal trading system. Did I say fair?:hysterical: Just stirring the pot!!


----------



## KathyPet (Aug 13, 2008)

Branding Dave as a "Marriott apologist" is extremely unfair.  Dave is very reasoned and balanced in his approach to virtually every subject posted on these board and considering the hours of his personal time he has given to this board I think that that referring to him in that manner is very very insulting.  If you hate Marriott so much then why did you buy one?


----------



## Lawlar (Aug 13, 2008)

*Definition of Apologist*

No insult intended.

The word apologist means defender /supporter / ally / champion.  I think anyone who has read Dave's 3000 posts would conclude he is a strong supporter of Marriott.  He also has posted many times that Marriott has the right to change its reservation system to favor who it wants to benefit.  

That's no insult.  He and many of you love Marriott and that is fine by me.

What I meant is that I would like those who love Marriott to speak out when they see Marriott engage in activity that is harmful to the TS industry.  Making false statements to customers is fraudulent activity.  It isn't something that should be tolerated.

[If anyone misinterprets my post to suggest that Dave or anyone else favors fraudulent conduct - that wasn't what I meant.  I meant I would love for the Marriott fans to speak out against practices that tarnish Marriott's reputation.  Now if I wanted to insult someone I know some great insults!  But I would never use them against a TUG member.  And I do recognize that Dave posts some helpful info and he is loved by you guys.  OK, but reading his posts in favor of Marriott's right to change its reservation system in a way that hurts its customers was like listening to someone run their fingernails down a blackboard.]


----------



## taffy19 (Aug 13, 2008)

Pit said:


> Unfortunately, I believe only a small percentage of retail buyers figure out what they've done, before its too late. Most retail buyers aren't thinking about the resale implications of their "pre-paid vacations."


This is what this forum is for. Warn people to be careful when they buy on impulse and it doesn't matter where it is and from what developer. Also help them make the best of the timeshare and the exchange game once you own it which the forum does.  

Personally, I didn't like that Marriott changed the reservation system once we owned it but they can do it as it is spelled out in the documents. It definitely made reservation at our resort a lot more difficult so you can take it or leave it and move on.

The Marriott is out to make the most money for their investors but I believe that they owe loyalty to their customers but also to the little ones (one week owners) or they should make you aware that making reservations is very hard for a holiday week when you buy so people are aware of it.

The Marriott and all other developers make you believe that exchanging is a piece of cake and making reservations is your right but they don't tell you that it depends on how good a customer you are. This is my gripe.

What should have been done right from the beginning besides having different prices for the best season but also have different maintenance fees for highly demanded weeks and the system would be so much fairer. Right now, the best weeks are having a big advantage of the maintenance fees that weak weeks also have to pay but I know that some States do not allow different pricing. That is your Government meddling with private enterprise. JMHO.

Of course, this is a perk some of us have and I am not complaining about that but is very unfair. I know that some of you do not agree and certainly not the ones who profit by renting the best weeks out. I even read that they do this via Red Week so more of the best weeks are rented out that owners cannot get and Marriott can't even stop it even if they would like to.   Some people are just greedy and don't care about other owners.


----------



## davidvel (Aug 14, 2008)

iconnections said:


> Personally, I didn't like that Marriott changed the reservation system once we owned it but they can do it as it is spelled out in the documents. It definitely made reservation at our resort a lot more difficult. . .


Just curious, what exactly was changed, when, which resort?


----------



## TheTimeTraveler (Aug 14, 2008)

Davidvel:

I think the change the post is referring to is the implementation of Marriott timeshare reservations being made consecutively or concurrently.

This change started about 4 or 5 years ago and likely was implemented not only make it easier for multiple week owners, but to save Marriott from receiving/processing multiple phone calls from those same owners.


----------



## PerryM (Aug 14, 2008)

*The solution is very simple - wear your aluminum helmet*

THE smartest and most knowledgeable timeshare salesrep I’ve met in 10 years of timeshare ownership works at Marriott’s Timber Lodge – I met him 4th of July week this year.  He too hears the rumors and believes them.

Many believe UFOs are for real too – these are level headed folks who have no desire to kill all humans and take over our planet.  What can I say – many good folks believe in all kinds of stuff.

If anything these rumors should spur smart timeshare folks into buying resale versus from Marriott.  I normally recommend that folks buy Marriott – unless they are wonks like us.  However, if you believe in the Marriott salesreps then you should be buying Marriott resales like crazy.  Marriott sounds like they are not exercising the ROFR on some villas, because of the real estate market, and folks panic all the time so this is a great time to buy resale.

Marriott will incorporate ALL owners on the day they should release their internal exchange system - I've already put my money where my mouth is in a $25 bet to a charity in Tug's name on this issue.

Thank the Marriott salesreps who believe in this dribble – buy buy buy resale.

Me, I’m protected – I wear my aluminum helmet most of the day and am protected from UFOs and timeshare salesreps.  No one seems to bother me when I slap that puppy on....

P.S.
Can we put a moratorium on "Marriott's Internal Exchange System" - all this does is spread rumors and panic folks who don't have the knowledge we have?  If and when Marriott does introduce such a scheme is the day to form new strategies.

We seem to be doing the work of the timeshares salesreps - spread panic and a reason to buy from Marriott versus resale.


----------



## davidvel (Aug 14, 2008)

TheTimeTraveler said:


> Davidvel:
> 
> I think the change the post is referring to is the implementation of Marriott timeshare reservations being made consecutively or concurrently.



Thanks. The reason I asked is that many people say that Marriott can change the reservation procedures in any way that they want due to "catch all" phrases in the documents that allow flexibility. I have always tried to distinguish between general "procedures/rules" and substantive changes that affect an owner's core rights. The recorded governing docs. (in CA at least) are as important as the deed and set forth the rights of the owner that cannot be changed without a change in those docs. 

The 12month/13 month "rule" is actually in the recorded timeshare declaration for Shadow Ridge--not sure about other resorts.


----------



## Dave M (Aug 14, 2008)

davidvel said:


> The 12month/13 month "rule" is actually in the recorded timeshare declaration for Shadow Ridge--not sure about other resorts.


That's true for most resorts. It's in my Grande Ocean docs, which were printed in 1992. However, the way that Marriott applies the 13-month rule is not in those documents - at least for G.O. and the three other fairly new resorts for which I have documents.

Typically the provision states that if you own two or more weeks at your home resort, you can reserve 13 months in advance if you reserve two (or more) consecutive or concurrent weeks. However, as Marriott applies the rule now, your ownership can be at different resorts. Some docs might be silent about owning at your home resort, but I don't think there are any that spell out that your ownership can be at any two (or more) resorts to take advantage of the 13-month reservation policy.


----------



## taffy19 (Aug 14, 2008)

davidvel said:


> Just curious, what exactly was changed, when, which resort?


We owned at the Marriott DSV-I and well before the 13 months reservation perk came into effect. 

After that, we had a very hard time making reservations for use at our own resort in March when the wild flower may be in bloom. The month of March seems to be a very popular time in Palm Desert because of spring break, golf and tennis tournaments, etc. 

We also were able to make reservations for President's week before but never again after the reservation rules changed. The 13 months rule wasn't spelled out in our documents but it was stated that they could make changes in the reservation system, I believe. 

We much prefer a fixed week, fixed unit timeshare so traded up with the Marriott to get this and we don't have to deal with this rule anymore. Most people seem to prefer a floating system so everyone is happy but good weeks are gone in a matter of a few seconds.   Good luck!


----------



## taffy19 (Aug 14, 2008)

Dave M said:


> Typically the provision states that if you own two or more weeks at your home resort, you can reserve 13 months in advance if you reserve two (or more) consecutive or concurrent weeks. However, as Marriott applies the rule now, your ownership can be at different resorts. Some docs might be silent about owning at your home resort, but I don't think there are any that spell out that your ownership can be at any two (or more) resorts to take advantage of the 13-month reservation policy.


Dave, I didn't know this is in our documents. I may still have them and look it up. You make me curious now. I honestly didn't know. We only owned at one resort so I may have missed it and I didn't belong to TUG until much later. I will let you know if it is in there or not.  

If a Marritt DSV-I owner wants these original documents, email me and I can mail them to you, if I find them. We have no use for them anymore.


----------



## thinze3 (Aug 14, 2008)

*FWIW*

*I can tell you first hand that people at Marriott's exec desk in Orlando are reading this thread! *

It is probably best that we make sure we keep opinions separated from facts. I assure you that Marriott does not want its salespeople passing false statements around like they are facts either. This, however, is hard to monitor as the Marriott salespeople get paid mainly on commision and are typically willing to push the limit, especially to inexperienced buyers.


Terry


----------



## Icarus (Aug 14, 2008)

Terry,

If they really wanted to, I believe that they could stop their sales people from spreading rumors like this. (true or not.)

-David


----------



## m61376 (Aug 14, 2008)

Sometimes I wonder if they derive some benefit from these rumors; if they monitor bulletin boards, as Terry suggests (and is quite plausible) they get to gauge consumer reaction and potentially avoid the pitfalls of a public relations nightmare.

Personally, I agree with the others who have posted that all current owners will be treated equally. Resale owners purchasing in the future may not enjoy the same benefits, but as an owner I would have a problem purchasing at a new resort pre-construction from Marriott despite the potential benefit of the points offerings which might be in place if I felt that not only would the resale value plummet, but it would become increasingly difficult to sell a week. Presently even educated buyers still buy direct under the right circumstances, counting on  the value of their weeks increasing over time; for example, many original buyers at initial pre-construction pricing can sell their units at or above what they initially paid, while having the benefits of ownership and of the upfront points, and retaining the ability to trade for points. I think that many educated purchasers would be concerned if the resale value was undermined by limited reservation ability.

Of course, I would expect Marriott salespeople to tout it as an advantage for developer purchasers to have priority in reservations in the future. But I do think it would be a big mistake for Marriott to enact a policy that is dependent upon their buyers remaining relatively uninformed as to the resale market; given the pervasiveness of the Internet, I would expect more and more people to look at TUG and other sites as time goes on. Especially since their future plans include several new developments, I don't think they will antagonize a potential market.


----------



## Cindala (Aug 14, 2008)

thinze3 said:


> *FWIW*
> 
> *I can tell you first hand that people at Marriott's exec desk in Orlando are reading this thread! *Terry



Correct! And I know of at least one Marriott sales rep for sure that is a tug member. :ignore:


----------



## Latravel (Aug 14, 2008)

It seems that so many people focus on the fact that the value of resales will plumment if Marriott implements a restricted reservation system.  This may be a naive question, but doesn't Marriott clearly state that timeshares are for enjoyment only and not for investment purposes?  The purchasing documents state this point clearly - we had to initial next to that point in the purchasing documents.   It's a know fact that a timeshare purchase, whether resale or developer, is not an investment.

Therefore, given that fact, why would you expect your purchase to appreciate or even hold it's value, even if you purchased resale?  When we purchased (both direct from Marriott), I expected the purchase to immediately depreciate (kind of like a new car).  Since I was previously warned, I'm not expecting much back should I sell in the future. Anything back is like a cherry on the sundae!

Who knows, maybe Marriott is trying to attract buyers who don't care about the resale value?


----------



## Lawlar (Aug 14, 2008)

*Paper Doesn't Erase Lies*



Latravel said:


> This may be a naive question, but doesn't Marriott clearly state that timeshares are for enjoyment only and not for investment purposes?  The purchasing documents state this point clearly - we had to initial next to that point in the purchasing documents.
> 
> Therefore, given that fact, why would you expect your purchase to appreciate or even hold it's value, even if you purchased resale?  :



I use to represent sales companies (in an industry I won’t mention in order to protect the guilty).  Those clients use to have me prepare all kinds of written disclosures and waivers for their customers to initial and sign.  We even put in bold large print that nothing the salesperson said was to be relied upon.  

It was all a joke.  Everyone knew that the salespersons were going to lie big time until they got the sale.  The customers were worn down and they didn’t know what they were signing.  [AT least one of my former clients went to jail for this kind of stuff.  The Attorney General prosecuted others and it wasn’t the least bit impressed by all of the legalese intended to protect the seller.]

The Marriott salesperson at NVC last month told us that if we bought a TS we would be able to sell within a couple of years at a profit.  The whole presentation was based on how we could buy in at phase 1 pricing and then profit as the new phases went on the market at higher prices.  Do you think Marriott doesn’t know those types of pitches are being used?  Marriott is too smart not to know what is going on.

[I probably will have to spend a few centuries in purgatory as punishment for some of those legal documents that I wrote.]


----------



## bogeygolf (Aug 14, 2008)

So here is another very interesting tidbit that I found out.  I recently spoke with corp. sales in FL who sells all marriott resorts.  I spoke with a regional sales mgr and I asked him about the rumors that are going around about resale owners only having 6 months to reserve if marriott implements a new internal trading system.  He confirmed that he also heard the same rumors.  He also told me that Marriott has been discussing an internal trading systems for years and they are still discussing but there is no decision on whether they will implement or not.  I told him that if this rumor becomes true it would hurt all current owners as resales prices would plummet.  Well he said, then owners can let Marriott sell it for them as resale but THROUGH marriott.  To which I said what do you mean?  ( I did not know until my wife reminded me later that evening marriott sales rep had told us during one of our tours).  

So as it turns out marriott will resale your week for a outrageous 40% commision however the new owners of this sale according to the sales mgr would be considered buying through marriott instead of private party resale thus would qualify for 12 month reservation window.  So think about it, this is a win win for marriott b/c they will tell current owners selling it on your own you will get nothing but sell it through us and you will get much more minus the 40% (greedy marriott) which bottom line would probably net you more than selling it on your own.  

If this becomes true, from a business perspective it makes a lot of sense for marriott.  More owners will sell through marriott instead of on their own, marriott will make 40% on each deal and still keep resale prices high, thus retaining the value of marriott properties.  Two question that come to mind, are potential resale buyers willing to a pay a premium to buy through marriott to get 12 month or will they live with the 6 month windows for buying cheap?  And how many owners will sell on their own vs. sell through marriott(inventory of private resale vs. inventory of resale through marriott)?

What do you guys think???


----------



## hotcoffee (Aug 14, 2008)

json717 said:


> So here is another very interesting tidbit that I found out.  I recently spoke with corp. sales in FL who sells all marriott resorts.  I spoke with a regional sales mgr and I asked him about the rumors that are going around about resale owners only having 6 months to reserve if marriott implements a new internal trading system.  He confirmed that he also heard the same rumors.  He also told me that Marriott has been discussing an internal trading systems for years and they are still discussing but there is no decision on whether they will implement or not.  I told him that if this rumor becomes true it would hurt all current owners as resales prices would plummet.  Well he said, then owners can let Marriott sell it for them as resale but THROUGH marriott.  To which I said what do you mean?  ( I did not know until my wife reminded me later that evening marriott sales rep had told us during one of our tours).
> 
> So as it turns out marriott will resale your week for a outrageous 40% commision however the new owners of this sale according to the sales mgr would be considered buying through marriott instead of private party resale thus would qualify for 12 month reservation window.  So think about it, this is a win win for marriott b/c they will tell current owners selling it on your own you will get nothing but sell it through us and you will get much more minus the 40% (greedy marriott) which bottom line would probably net you more than selling it on your own.
> 
> ...



Your post is interesting because the sales rep who told me that he believed that Marriott was going to implement a 6 month reservation window for resale owners also told me that Marriott was looking at going into the resale business itself.  I had forgotten about that comment until I read your post.  I never asked him for any details.


----------



## dioxide45 (Aug 14, 2008)

hotcoffee said:


> Your post is interesting because the sales rep who told me that he believed that Marriott was going to implement a 6 month reservation window for resale owners also told me that Marriott was looking at going into the resale business itself.  I had forgotten about that comment until I read your post.  I never asked him for any details.



Marriott is already in the resale business. You can have Marriott sell your week for you. Looks like the rep doesn't know as much as he thought.


----------



## bogeygolf (Aug 14, 2008)

dioxide45 said:


> Marriott is already in the resale business. You can have Marriott sell your week for you. Looks like the rep doesn't know as much as he thought.



I think what hotcoffee meant was that marriott is probably looking to expand their resale business and grow it.  If you think about it they have a lot of very nice resort that have already sold out and resale would be another way to generate more revenue for existing resorts along with the sale of new resorts they are building.


----------



## GeNioS (Aug 14, 2008)

json717 said:


> I think what hotcoffee meant was that marriott is probably looking to expand their resale business and grow it.  If you think about it they have a lot of very nice resort that have already sold out and resale would be another way to generate more revenue for existing resorts along with the sale of new resorts they are building.


They are already doing this as well....what do you think they do with all the properties in which they exercise ROFR?


----------



## GeNioS (Aug 14, 2008)

json717 said:


> And how many owners will sell on their own vs. sell through marriott(inventory of private resale vs. inventory of resale through marriott)?


It's funny this question came up, because I've been spending a lot of time on this lately.

I try not to write too much because it doesn't take long for the missing filter between brain and mouth (or fingers) to become very apparent.....but.....you asked the question.

There is only one of three reasons a Marriott owner would not use Marriott to sell a Marriott timeshare.  1) You don't have any time to wait, 2) You bought it resale and aren't eligible, or 3) You are retarded.

Selling the timeshare through Marriott reminds me of diamonds.  Diamonds should be worthless.  They are abundant and are just old rocks....but some guys manage to limit the supply and do an amazing job of it.  You want to buy a diamond, you have to buy from a very few places, through some very limited markets....and it's worked amazingly well.  (Until the class action lawsuit stung them a tiny bit, but I digress.)

Other threads, including one very well worded post (kudos to Hoc for being dead on) in that eBay auction thread recently, have talked about the inflated price of buying directly from Marriott vs. actual market value.  But if all Marriott owners sold directly through Marriott, that "inflated" price would become actual market value.

If I can digress a moment, the real irony here, and future conversation of its own, is that while I've been researching the differences between retail from Marriott and resale, I've come to the conclusion that, while Hoc is absolutely correct and the Marriott values are what they are on eBay, if Marriott had to sell them at resale prices (actual market value) in the beginning, the resorts probably could not have been built in the first place.  Anyways....

I actually thought that the 60/40 split must be how Marriott chooses which ROFR it excercises....and it should be.  It would make sense that Marriott, in order to protect all owners and the integrity of its prices (not to mention more profit for them), should buy back any property where the resale price is below what Marriott would make on a 40% sales commission.  Clearly that's not the case.

Canyon Villas recently passed ROFR for $4200 on a week that Marriott sells for $19,500.  If you own that week, even if it takes a couple of years, would you rather have 60% of $19,500 or 100% $4200?  Which brings me back to #1, #2, and, of course, #3 above.  

Just to touch on Marriott getting _more_ involved in the resale business...as I just mentioned in the other post, Marriott is already involved in resale.  They resell every property which they acquire back through ROFR and offer resale for it's retail customers, and they do both at full retail (what they call _current market_ price...i know...don't laugh).  They've got retail.....er....market price.....covered.

This means that the only way Marriott is going to get _more_ into the resale business is if they offer _lower_ prices with less benefits on resales they acquire via ROFR or start their own ebay style sales world and take commissions on a different structure.  (And to digress again, if they did that they probably would have to give _more_ incentives to the buyer, else why would you use _Marriott's_ service as a seller as opposed to eBay.)

Given all the current opportunities, and looking at what I see as possible avenues of resale in the future....and.....looking at current market values according to the world of reality I live in, I'll wait as much time for Marriott to bump into my unit's buyer as necessary and gladly give 40% and if you still don't think that's your best option, again.....I hope you fit into options #1 or #2...otherwise, it's #3.

(No offense...I'm just a smarta**)


----------



## Icarus (Aug 15, 2008)

json717 said:


> What do you guys think???



Yes, it's already true, however, they won't accept resales if they are still selling developer owned units at your timeshare.

If you have an older timeshare (one no longer in developer sales), call them, and ask them how long the waiting list is for listing your unit for resale.

Also, at times, Marriott makes offers to some owners of units to build up their own resale inventory. Of course, those offers are at less than 60% of the current selling price. Plus they also own any units they pick up for less than that during the ROFR process.

So, while they will sell your unit for you, you are also competing for the sales of any resale units they already own, and guess which ones they will sell first, because they are more lucrative to their own bottom line and/or will free up their own funds for further investment?

I bet the salesmen don't tell you all that. They simply tell you that Marriott will resell your unit, giving you the impression that you can simply call Marriott and get it resold quickly. And yes, the sales people are very good about telling you how the ROFR process is there to protect you (not true) and how your unit may increase in value (also not true as a seller in most cases.)

And yes, Marriott knows that their salespeople do this and they also know they are spreading the rumors about the new internal trading system, and they don't do enough  to stop them from doing any of that.

So, how is Marriott better than the rest of the industry? That's easy. For the most part, the rest of the industry does far worse things than Marriott does. But that doesn't excuse Marriott from responsibility for the tactics that their salespeople use, especially if they know about it and do nothing (or not as much as they could) to prevent it.

ok, I'll get off my soapbox now. 

-David


----------



## cp73 (Aug 15, 2008)

GeNioS said:


> There is only one of three reasons a Marriott owner would not use Marriott to sell a Marriott timeshare.  1) You don't have any time to wait, 2) You bought it resale and aren't eligible, or 3) You are retarded.



GeNios,

#1 you hit on the head...When most people sell they want out. I have heard the Marriott resales typically take 1-2 years, if your lucky. Who can wait that long? That means 1 or 2 more years of maintenance fees. #2 I think resales are eligible for Marriot sales. I never had heard that one before. #3 Most all of us our special.


----------



## Steve (Aug 15, 2008)

Marriott definitely will accept weeks purchased resale into their resale program.  This can lead to a nice profit for those who buy resale on the open market and then have Marriott sell their weeks for them...even with the 40% commission.

Steve


----------



## GeNioS (Aug 15, 2008)

Steve said:


> Marriott definitely will accept weeks purchased resale into their resale program.  This can lead to a nice profit for those who buy resale on the open market and then have Marriott sell their weeks for them...even with the 40% commission.
> 
> Steve


Well this is huge then, because I called the resale department yesterday and they told me that if I purchased a week on the external market I would have to sell it on the external market.  So either #1) You guys are misinformed, #2) Marriott resale rep lied to me #3) I am retarded.

Will call again tomorrow.


----------



## ricki999 (Aug 15, 2008)

or maybe the Marriott rep is misinformed.


----------



## kjd (Aug 15, 2008)

*Marriott's resale market*

All of this speculation about Marriott getting heavily into the resale TS business (They are already in it to a degree) raises several tough questions.  

If the resale business is so lucrative why are people put on a waiting list to sell through Marriott?  Reports on TUG say that it takes over a year to sell through Marriott.  

Why would Marriott want to stick it to non-Marriott resale owners by depressing the resale market with different rules?  Even if the six month reservation cap on non-Marriott resale owners is true, resales are still a small and insignificant part of Marriott's total business.  Anyway, most of the really good trades on II are during flextime.

How would a six month's reservation cap affect present non-Marriott resale owners?  Legal questions aside, wouldn't Marriott carry more unreserved inventory longer and what implications are there for owners of other TS companies trying to trade into a Marriott TS through II?  Would you be better off owning a non-Marriott TS rather than owning a Marriott?  That's not very good for business.  Would they also restrict incoming II trades to a six months cap?

If EBAY averages about thirty Marriott listings on a given day, how large is the active resale market?  (There are several non-Marriott TS that cannot be sold or even given away because of their poor quality.)  Does this market seem like a place that a company with the resources of Marriott would make as a target?

The basic problem of the resale market is there are not enough buyers.  If there were, even more owners would sell.  If Marriott were to make a serious effort in the resale market, how will they attract enough new buyers in addition to what they already have?

Aside from a few cosmetic changes to the system that would enhance the sales of new properties and take a swipe at resale ownership, I can't see Marriott putting a lot of their resources into developing a viable resale program.


----------



## m61376 (Aug 15, 2008)

GeNioS said:


> Well this is huge then, because I called the resale department yesterday and they told me that if I purchased a week on the external market I would have to sell it on the external market.  So either #1) You guys are misinformed, #2) Marriott resale rep lied to me #3) I am retarded.
> 
> Will call again tomorrow.



They will also tell you that you can't get a vacation adviser and a few other things.

The bottom line is- well, I guess their bottom line- if they want your week because they feel they have a market to sell it, they will happily take it regardless of how it was acquired. Maybe 6 months ago (maybe more- I am not sure of the timeframe) I received a letter from them asking if I was interested in selling my week (acquired resale) back to them. A few other Surf Club owners had posted at the same time about receiving that letter. So the posters above are not misinformed, the salesrep was (or was stretching the truth).

The real problem with your argument is that Marriott closes the sales offices of many of its resorts over time and, while they may keep small inventories to satisfy customers that trickle in through their corporate offices, they are not equipped to resell large scale inventories at certain resorts. When people feel they want- or need- to sell their timeshare they generally are anxious, to some degree, for immediate gratification, and waiting years on a resale seller's list would be unacceptable. If finances or personal situations dictate a sale, they don't want the encumbrance of several thousands of dollars of MF's. So the overriding reason why people wouldn't want to just sell through Marriott is #1 in your argument- the time factor...and I can't see Marriott being in a situation to simply take all units back at a 40% discount off present selling price.


----------



## JonP (Aug 15, 2008)

Has anyone considered that the ‘six month’ reservation window for non-Marriott resale’s may only be for ‘internal exchanges’ within the new Marriott system and does not affect reservations at your home resort.  

This way no obligations under the current timeshare declarations are impacted.


----------



## thinze3 (Aug 15, 2008)

Steve said:


> Marriott definitely will accept weeks purchased resale into their resale program....



Yeah, through a program called ROFR. :rofl: 

With exponentially rising maintenece fees, you'll be lucky in the future to get your money back on the resale market from a recent resale purchase. IMO


Terry


----------



## CMF (Aug 15, 2008)

JonP said:


> Has anyone considered that the ‘six month’ reservation window for non-Marriott resale’s may only be for ‘internal exchanges’ within the new Marriott system and does not affect reservations at your home resort.
> 
> This way no obligations under the current timeshare declarations are impacted.



Has anyone considered that we may be giving Marriott ideas that they have not thought of yet? :ignore: 

Charles


----------



## PerryM (Aug 15, 2008)

*OMG!!!!*



CMF said:


> Has anyone considered that we may be giving Marriott ideas that they have not thought of yet? :ignore:
> 
> Charles




Not to worry – Marriott is NOT the airline industry where punishing their customers is #1 on the list of things to do.

This whole topic of Punishing Marriott Owners is a hoot to read – you’ve got Marriott salesreps cooking up stories all the time and laughing with bellyaching pain on how somefolks here actually believe their dribble.

Then you’ve got folks extrapolating these crazy ideas and I’m laughing so hard my side aches too.

This is all rubbish and is a great substitute for nothing on TV this time of year.

If folks want to believe the salesreps and play what-if games then who are we to stand in their way - it's great fun.  Ooooppppsss I just fell off my chair


----------



## taffy19 (Aug 15, 2008)

Sooner or later the Marriott will have to come with an announcement even if it is just to state that the rumors are all false.  Perry, you may be right that buying timeshares re-sale now or pretty soon may be the best and smartest thing to do if you can keep paying the maintenance fees but only platinum season in case the internal reservation system will change.  JMHO as I would no longer count on trading up if a point system will be in place.  I wished they would let us know SOON.


----------



## CMF (Aug 15, 2008)

PerryM said:


> Not to worry – Marriott is NOT the airline industry where punishing their customers is #1 on the list of things to do.
> 
> This whole topic of Punishing Marriott Owners is a hoot to read – you’ve got Marriott salesreps cooking up stories all the time and laughing with bellyaching pain on how somefolks here actually believe their dribble.
> 
> ...




It's childish to think that a business would set out hurt a class of patrons.  But, it could be an unintended consequence of their profit maximizing efforts.

Charles


----------



## Latravel (Aug 15, 2008)

I dont think Marriott wants to hurt it's customers but they want to protect their business.  One thing multiple people in the sales office stated when we purchased last month is that you are not a "complete Marriott owner" if you purchase resale, since your unit is marked in the system. 

From an operations point of view, the Marriott system is amazing and is probably studied in business schools around the country.  I have no doubt that they will come up with an equally good system that gives some priority to people who purchased from Marriott.  I really believe in their business model but then again, I purchased from Marriott and I purchased Platinum.  I did this on purpose because I didn't want to be worried, like people seem to be here, if they changed the system.   

Everyone knows that if you purchased resale, your unit is marked in the system so you should not be surprised if the changes (if any) affect you.  But, the few thousand dollars you saved on the purchase makes up for that fact, right?


----------



## VacationPro (Aug 15, 2008)

Latravel said:


> I dont think Marriott wants to hurt it's customers but they want to protect their business.  One thing multiple people in the sales office stated when we purchased last month is that you are not a "complete Marriott owner" if you purchase resale, since your unit is marked in the system.
> 
> Everyone knows that if you purchased resale, your unit is marked in the system so you should not be surprised if the changes (if any) affect you.  But, the few thousand dollars you saved on the purchase makes up for that fact, right?



Your response seems a bit smug, maybe that wasn't intended, but that is how I read it.  I hope you don't ever have to sell, (I know I don't plan on selling my weeks) but if you do, the resale value may become important to you.

Marriott will change the current system, in order to remain competitive with Starwood, Hyatt and Hilton, of this I have no doubt.  In order to change the rules to minimize the impact on ALL existing owners, I believe Marriott will "grandfather" all owners on the date of announcement or implementation.  I think people are fretting over the potential decline in resale values--which will impact direct purchasers more so than resale purchasers because their buy-in price is higher.  I am actually looking forward to the new system, and am looking at picking up resale platinum weeks in the next few months to try to ensure the weeks are included in the internal system.  I expect to save over $15,000 by buying resale, especially since Marriott seems to be relaxing the ROFR price in this economy.

Both Hyatt and Hilton allow full use of the internal system with resale owners, while Starwood does for the mandatory resorts and provides an avenue to "requal"  resale weeks for the voluntary resorts.  I would expect that Marriott has studied all of these systems in detail and will implement one that will provide a great new option for ALL current owners.  And there will always be the Interval International option, with a (perhaps reduced) Marriott preference period to snag external deposits.  JMHO


----------



## davidvel (Aug 15, 2008)

JonP said:


> Has anyone considered that the ‘six month’ reservation window for non-Marriott resale’s may only be for ‘internal exchanges’ within the new Marriott system and does not affect reservations at your home resort.
> 
> This way no obligations under the current timeshare declarations are impacted.



Jon- This is what I have always tried to express in my posts on this topic. As often occurs people mix apples and oranges and blur what is being discussed, sending people off on wild tangents. We don't know what is proposed (rumored?) if anything, but discussions should always clearly distinguish between the reservation process and any exchange system.


----------



## Latravel (Aug 15, 2008)

I completely agree.  I think any changes would likely occur with internal trading, not reservations with your own home resort.  It seems like Marriott can modify the program as they wish, but they couldn't touch reservations at your own resort, because we are part owners.  I could be completely wrong but that is a very good point.


----------



## hotcoffee (Aug 15, 2008)

json717 said:


> I think what hotcoffee meant was that marriott is probably looking to expand their resale business and grow it.  If you think about it they have a lot of very nice resort that have already sold out and resale would be another way to generate more revenue for existing resorts along with the sale of new resorts they are building.



Actually, I meant nothing in particular - only that I remember one of the saleman saying something about "getting into" or possibly "getting more into" the resales business.  I did not pay particular attention to him because I had other things on my mind at the time.  I have no idea whether he was well informed or not.  Most of you know more about how Marriott operates than I do.  What I have posted in this thread is what I remember the two salemen I talked to saying.  I don't know how accurate any of it was.  I assumed that he was not referring to units acquired via ROFR.


----------



## Lawlar (Aug 15, 2008)

*Time Will Tell*



Latravel said:


> I
> 
> From an operations point of view, the Marriott system is amazing and is probably studied in business schools around the country.  I have no doubt that they will come up with an equally good system that gives some priority to people who purchased from Marriott.  I really believe in their business model but then again, I purchased from Marriott and I purchased Platinum.  I did this on purpose because I didn't want to be worried, like people seem to be here, if they changed the system.



I hope you enjoy your 3 platinum weeks.  If you use them every year and you get the weeks you want, and the cost is not a concern, then you may indeed have purchased something that will give you a lot of pleasure.

On the other hand, in time you may question the value of the purchase when you realize how little you can get if you try to sell your units and that the maintenance fees, which are really high for what you get, increase considerably every year.  Also, you are now locked in to Marriott and you may at times in the future wish you could take advantage of other vacation options.  Time will tell.

Good luck and I wish you well.


----------



## JimIg23 (Aug 15, 2008)

I'm selling my Marriotts and buying Westgate..... at least I will know where I stand!!


----------



## Steve (Aug 15, 2008)

*Laugh all you want...*



thinze3 said:


> Yeah, through a program called ROFR. :rofl:
> 
> With exponentially rising maintenece fees, you'll be lucky in the future to get your money back on the resale market from a recent resale purchase. IMO
> 
> ...



Laugh all you want to, but I've actually had Marriott sell a week for me that I purchased resale from a non-Marriott source.  Guess what?  It didn't take years.  They sold it in less than 2 weeks from the day I signed the papers...and I made a 90% profit.  Not bad.

Steve


----------



## GeNioS (Aug 15, 2008)

I just had something come into my head today I thought I'd throw out there, then you can let it die.

A lot of people have said that Marriott will obviously sell their units first, before worrying about some pathetic owner's resale week.  And apparently this is the case....I called and on one of my weeks they said, indeed, that it could take 2-3 years to sell it.  (kudos for honesty I suppose.)  I'm guessing the logic being that Marriott makes more money on their unit.  But I don't think this has been well thought out by Marriott.

First, when Marriott sells a unit the first time, it's not all profit.  There is a cost of building the resort they have to pay with that revenue.  40% seems like a pretty good-sized markup and I doubt it's that high.  It seems logical to me that earning 40% on a second sale of a unit they already sold would be just as, if not more, profitable then selling one of theirs.  Because that commission is 100% profit (all things like sales commissions, etc. being equal).

Secondly, if Marriott would require that all owner's resell through Marriott and sold their units first, prices, along with values, would remain high and I think that's something everyone can appreciate.

Either way, it doesn't make sense that Marriott would put its owners last in line.

(fyi...just read steve's post....they did tell me my other week would take less time...probably 6-12 mos.)


----------



## bmccuske (Aug 15, 2008)

Steve said:


> Laugh all you want to, but I've actually had Marriott sell a week for me that I purchased resale from a non-Marriott source.  Guess what?  It didn't take years.  They sold it in less than 2 weeks from the day I signed the papers...and I made a 90% profit.  Not bad.
> 
> Steve



Steve--was this at a resort that didn't have ROFR?


----------



## Icarus (Aug 15, 2008)

bmccuske said:


> Steve--was this at a resort that didn't have ROFR?



I'm not sure it matters. Marriott will certainly resell a week no matter where you bought it. They make a 40% commission on the sale. There's no reason for them not to do that. The proposed change (if it's real or not) is to protect developer sales/resales and their fat profit margin. With the proposed change, they have a better answer for "why should I buy from you, when I can buy the same thing at resale at a deep discount". (besides the trade for points option and the lack of an adviser.)

There's a few people (some of them are here on TUG) who have been able to make money buying/selling timeshares. The rest of us are in the 99% range that don't make money buying/selling timeshares.

I'm happy for Steve that he made money on his deal. But that's not typical for the rest of us.

-David


----------



## bmccuske (Aug 15, 2008)

Icarus said:


> I'm not sure it matters. Marriott will certainly resell a week no matter where you bought it. They make a 40% commission on the sale. There's no reason for them not to do that. The proposed change (if it's real or not) is to protect developer sales/resales and their fat profit margin. With the proposed change, they have a better answer for "why should I buy from you, when I can buy the same thing at resale at a deep discount". (besides the trade for points option and the lack of an adviser.)
> 
> There's a few people (some of them are here on TUG) who have been able to make money buying/selling timeshares. The rest of us are in the 99% range that don't make money buying/selling timeshares.
> 
> ...



I think it's really cool that Steve was able to do that...I'm sure there's money to be made in the resale business somewhere, but I'm in it for the vacations!!

Where I was puzzled is why Marriott wouldn't have exercised ROFR when Steve originally purchased it--saving them about half of what they paid when they bought it from him.

Beth


----------



## Steve (Aug 15, 2008)

bmccuske said:


> Steve--was this at a resort that didn't have ROFR?



No, it was a resort that DOES have ROFR...and Marriott has been actively exercising it.  But, in my case, they took my week that I had purchased resale...marked up the price to what they are currently asking...and had it sold for me in less than 2 weeks.  I couldn't believe they sold it so fast.  They told me that mine was the only platinum week they had at the time, so I went straight to the top of the list.  I was lucky...I had a platinum week at the right resort at the right time.  

I don't say any of this to brag.  I was just lucky.  I mention my experience to let people know that it can happen.  If Marriott has a buyer for your week, they'll sell it for you in order to get their commission regardless of whether you bought it from them directly or not.  

Steve


----------



## bmccuske (Aug 15, 2008)

Steve said:


> No, it was a resort that DOES have ROFR...and Marriott has been actively exercising it.  But, in my case, they took my week that I had purchased resale...marked up the price to what they are currently asking...and had it sold for me in less than 2 weeks.  I couldn't believe they sold it so fast.  They told me that mine was the only platinum week they had at the time, so I went straight to the top of the list.  I was lucky...I had a platinum week at the right resort at the right time.
> 
> I don't say any of this to brag.  I was just lucky.  I mention my experience to let people know that it can happen.  If Marriott has a buyer for your week, they'll sell it for you in order to get their commission regardless of whether you bought it from them directly or not.
> 
> Steve



This is way cool!!  I'm still learning the ropes and couldn't figure out why in the world they would do that.  Congrats!  Beth


----------



## Steve (Aug 15, 2008)

bmccuske said:


> I think it's really cool that Steve was able to do that...I'm sure there's money to be made in the resale business somewhere, but I'm in it for the vacations!!
> 
> Where I was puzzled is why Marriott wouldn't have exercised ROFR when Steve originally purchased it--saving them about half of what they paid when they bought it from him.
> 
> Beth



Hi Beth,

I think it just depends on what inventory Marriott has at any given moment.  Perhaps when I bought the week, they had plenty of similar weeks in inventory.  Or maybe they had a smaller budget for purchasing ROFR weeks at that time.  One thing I have definitely learned is that ROFR fluctuates...it's not a constant.  What gets past ROFR today may not tomorrow...and vice versa.  

Steve


----------



## bmccuske (Aug 15, 2008)

Steve said:


> Hi Beth,
> 
> I think it just depends on what inventory Marriott has at any given moment.  Perhaps when I bought the week, they had plenty of similar weeks in inventory.  Or maybe they had a smaller budget for purchasing ROFR weeks at that time.  One thing I have definitely learned is that ROFR fluctuates...it's not a constant.  What gets past ROFR today may not tomorrow...and vice versa.
> 
> Steve



Steve--That makes sense.  I'm going to try to low-ball offers with a hope that something will eventually stick.  Not currently a Marriott owner but caught the bug when we were invited to to preview Summit Watch a couple weeks ago.  Patience!  Beth


----------



## JimIg23 (Aug 16, 2008)

If Marriott creating a new system which restricts resale weeks' power (except Marriott sold resales) for internal trading, I can see salespersons telling new and current owners that if they sell it themselves it will be worth a lot less than selling thru Marriott, then using that as a benefit that Marriott will resale your week.  It would make a very strong argument for owners to go thru Marriott.  the problem will lie in if Marriott gets too much inventory (such as in a newer resort in active sales), Marriott may not be able to resale that week for over 2-3 years.  That will leave owners facing two choices, waiting 5 years to get 60% of their purchase price or selling it resale on ebay for 5%.   That could get ugly and eventually hurt them.


----------



## m61376 (Aug 16, 2008)

GeNioS said:


> I just had something come into my head today I thought I'd throw out there, then you can let it die.
> 
> A lot of people have said that Marriott will obviously sell their units first, before worrying about some pathetic owner's resale week.  And apparently this is the case....I called and on one of my weeks they said, indeed, that it could take 2-3 years to sell it.  (kudos for honesty I suppose.)  I'm guessing the logic being that Marriott makes more money on their unit.  But I don't think this has been well thought out by Marriott.
> 
> ...



Actually, it does make sense, because Marriott is carrying the charges for any unsold weeks. Once they are sold, the owner assumes the MF's to carry the costs. 

Unless I am mistaken, Marriott will not resell weeks (except for those acquired through ROFR) until they have sold their original inventory for that particular unit type. Similarly, from what I've been told at least, that's one of the reasons ROFR fluctuates- if their inventory for a particular season/view is low and/or if they've gotten a lot of interest in a particular season/view in excess of their inventory, they look to repurchase those units.

I agree with the above post- while relying on Marriott for selling a unit has proved convenient and even profitable for some, it would be extremely problematic for anyone trying to sell in the early years of a development when Marriott still has lots of units to sell if Marriott was to restructure their reservations program to the detriment of resale buyers.


----------



## tombo (Aug 16, 2008)

I am surprised that more owners aren't upset by the fact that resale units are marked in the Marriott computer to differentiate them from Marriott developer sold units for any changes they make in the future. They are telling everyone up front that when (or if) you sell your week you will be selling a product which will have diminished value over what they are selling. 

Can you imagine buying a home that comes with pool rights and golf privileges, but the developer decides later that anyone who buys the house from you (resale) will no longer be able to access the pool or golf course drastically lowering the value of what you purchased from them. Of course the kind developer will sell your home for you raising the sale price by allowing the new owners the same priviledges you received when you bought. All the benevolent developer asks for is 40% of the proceeds from a home you OWN which YOU paid for in full and they have already profited on this home at least once before. What a deal.

Anyone who buys retail knowing up front that Marriott is going to devalue what you are buying from them if you purchase is IMO crazy. They tell you in the sales presentation all the things they do and are planning to do to reduce the value of the thing they are trying to sell you, and then expect you to buy. If you ever decide to sell, you will own exactly what they were telling you was a second class ownership with Marriott when you bought, a resale unit. If they make the changes talked about here, even a resale Marriott won't be worth buying. Excessive greed can kill anything, even the great accomodations that are Marriott.


----------



## m61376 (Aug 16, 2008)

Tombo-
I think resale owners haven't been concerned about the fact that they bought resale being marked is that they realize upfront that they do not have the right to trade for points, so it is expected that their ownership would be so marked.

As for the rest, I totally agree.


----------



## Icarus (Aug 16, 2008)

tombo said:


> I am surprised that more owners aren't upset by the fact that resale units are marked in the Marriott computer to differentiate them from Marriott developer sold units for any changes they make in the future.



They have to distinguish between private resales today because you can't trade for points if you didn't buy from the developer.

That has nothing to do with the future. Everybody that purchased resale knew that difference going in, and made the choice to save money and give up that option.

So what is there to be upset about? That's just the way it is. You have to ignore the salesman rhetoric about that, which has managed to find its way into this thread as usual. Yes, they know which units were purchased outside the system today. So what? That doesn't mean that any of the conjecture about it is true. The no trade for points on resales outside the system rule has been around for a long time.

-David


----------



## tombo (Aug 16, 2008)

My point about it being marked in the computer is that they already have a system in place to identify the "second class owners" who didn't purchase from Marriott, so they can easily and quickly implement new reservation rules if they decide to do so. I understand that many of the rumors discussed here might or might not ever actually become Marriott policy. The fact that so many salesman who work for Marriott keep saying that it is going to happen is reason enough to warrant concern. It is a possibility that you have to factor in to a Marriott purchase right now. If you buy resale now and the reservation window changes you will probably be grandfathered in and it probably won't affect your purchase. However if it does happen, it will drastically affect the value of what you own whether you bought retail or resale. Remember the old adage "Where there is smoke, there is usually fire".


----------



## PerryM (Aug 16, 2008)

*Their lips are moving.....*



tombo said:


> My point about it being marked in the computer is that they already have a system in place to identify the "second class owners" who didn't purchase from Marriott, so they can easily and quickly implement new reservation rules if they decide to do so. I understand that many of the rumors discussed here might or might not ever actually become Marriott policy. *The fact that so many salesman who work for Marriott keep saying that it is going to happen is reason enough to warrant concern.* It is a possibility that you have to factor in to a Marriott purchase right now. If you buy resale now and the reservation window changes you will probably be grandfathered in and it probably won't affect your purchase. However if it does happen, it will drastically affect the value of what you own whether you bought retail or resale. Remember the old adage "Where there is smoke, there is usually fire".




Negative!

The Marriott salesreps have a vested interest in spreading rumors which benefit them and harm resales.  That’s the ONLY reason they keep spreading this rumor.

I doubt but 1 in 10,000 sales is lost because Marriott has only a 24 day internal owner trading system.  It would take but one phone call to II to make it 365 days.  The reason they haven’t done even this is because the honchos at Marriott don’t care about this topic; they ONLY care about sales of timeshares.

Only Marriott timeshare salesreps and folks inside of Marriott who love to see TUG go nuts spread these baseless rumors.  Outside of TUG (and maybe one more chat room) this topic means nothing.

If Marriott were serious about offering internal exchange rights they would take the immediate first step by lengthening the Marriott Only” window in II from 24 days to 365 days.  Then I’d start to take the salesreps seriously.

Until then the ‘ol adage of “If their lips are moving they must be fibbing” should be the rule we follow and not that the salesreps are telling the truth on this one particular subject.


If you guys need to worry about something then an asteroid impacting North America is much more worthy of your concern – Tunguska was just 100 years ago.  Now this is worthy of worrying about.

There are all kinds of things to worry about - Marriott rumors are the least of our worries.


----------



## tombo (Aug 16, 2008)

I agree that most things salesmen say are half truths or outright lies and they are not to be believed. However, according to some here on TUG Marriott has admitted to considering the reservation change and to possibly starting their own exchange company. Once again these are TUG rumors. I know when Marriott announces it it will be fact, and not until then. However the proposed changes I am talking about has nothing to do with internal trades. I am talking about the alleged change which would allow owners of Marriott purchased weeks to reserve 12 months in advance while the resale owners would be limited to a 6 month reservation window. This will negativelly impact the value of an owner's week immediatelly upon announcement. It would also make buying a resale week a poor idea IMO.


----------



## dioxide45 (Aug 16, 2008)

tombo said:


> I am talking about the alleged change which would allow owners of Marriott purchased weeks to reserve 12 months in advance while the resale owners would be limited to a 6 month reservation window. This will negativelly impact the value of an owner's week immediatelly upon announcement. It would also make buying a resale week a poor idea IMO.



Actually it all depends on how you travel. Someone with great flexability who can travel on off weeks would be able to pick up some great resorts real cheap on the resale market and it would be a good idea for them.


----------



## PerryM (Aug 16, 2008)

*Messing around....*



tombo said:


> I agree that most things salesmen say are half truths or outright lies and they are not to be believed. However, according to some here on TUG Marriott has admitted to considering the reservation change and to possibly starting their own exchange company. Once again these are TUG rumors. I know when Marriott announces it it will be fact, and not until then. However the proposed changes I am talking about has nothing to do with internal trades. *I am talking about the alleged change which would allow owners of Marriott purchased weeks to reserve 12 months in advance while the resale owners would be limited to a 6 month reservation window*. This will negativelly impact the value of an owner's week immediatelly upon announcement. It would also make buying a resale week a poor idea IMO.




There is NO WAY that Marriott will screw around with changing the 12/13 month reservation window within Marriott.  None, zip, zilch; Marriott sale or resale.

The ill will that this would stir up would result in many class action lawsuits and bad press.  Why would Marriott want to do such a thing?  They would not.

Marriott may indeed release an internal, owner only, exchange system – expect it to look exactly like II.  If that’s the case then why spend millions doing what 1 simple phone call to II could do in 5 minutes?

I understand that other developers have internal exchange systems but I doubt that Marriott has lost ONE sale to them over this subject.  I’ve never heard of someone dumping Marriott in favor of Westin because they knew the difference and felt Westin had the better solution.  Maybe there is someone but I’ve never heard of it and I’ve sat thru many Starwood sales tours and this was never brought up.

Again, I’m not losing a second of sleep over any of these topics – I have faith in Marriott as a sales/marketing organization who knows that screwing around with a good thing is just stupid.


----------



## taffy19 (Aug 16, 2008)

tombo said:


> My point about it being marked in the computer is that they already have a system in place to identify the "second class owners" who didn't purchase from Marriott, so they can easily and quickly implement new reservation rules if they decide to do so. I understand that many of the rumors discussed here might or might not ever actually become Marriott policy. The fact that so many salesman who work for Marriott keep saying that it is going to happen is reason enough to warrant concern. It is a possibility that you have to factor in to a Marriott purchase right now. If you buy resale now and the reservation window changes you will probably be grandfathered in and it probably won't affect your purchase. However if it does happen, it will drastically affect the value of what you own whether you bought retail or resale. Remember the old adage "Where there is smoke, there is usually fire".


Present owners may be grandfathered but what will happen if these grandfathered units sell again? I doubt if they will be grandfathered too and these exchanges will be taken out of the new internal exchange system which will especially hurt owners who bought from the Marriott direct for making an exchange as less inventory will be available for them. Will these exchanges go to II? 

I understand that the fear is about exchanging through the new internal exchange system and not so much about making reservations for the unit itself for occupation or to do with what you want (exchanging or renting) as that will not change. They already have perks for the multiple week owners that one week owners lost when this perk became common knowledge so smart re-sale buyers took advantage of that and I don't blame them. I read now that the 13 months reservation perk may always have been there but most people didn't know that and nobody ever mentioned it to us when we bought direct from the Marriott in the early 90s. I am still looking for my paperwork as I no longer remember what year we bought and I would like to read all the documents too they gave us at that time.

The Marriott should hurry up and announce to us what they are going to do or stop all rumors cold and don't let their salesmen make these statements either to facilitate their sale. This uncertainty is hurting us all.

I already know that we have lost a big chunk of our purchase price but that is due to the economy cycle we are in and the expensive airline fares and not because of the Marriott greed or changes in the system. I posted earlier about the Marriott greed under a different thread where it was mentioned that the MRPs program also is losing value because more points are needed to make that world trip we once got for giving up our week but since our week never gets more points than what was given at the time of sale, the value is no longer there and loopholes are tightened when they find out that we take advantage of them.

Buy for use mainly and at a resort you like to visit often and in driving distance too and you will be more content. We never thought that flying would become such an issue but it is today and you can't blame the Marriott for this either.

Now we wished we hadn't traded in our Palm Desert resort for Maui but we couldn't stand anymore making reservations at our resort and had to try week after week before we finally succeeded so I am very bitter towards the Marriott. They shafted us and good. JMHO. However, we love the new resort and will try to keep flying there year after year as long as our health lets us. We never thought of our age when we bought because both of us had never been sick and felt in good shape but after my husband's stroke in Maui, we realize now that we were too old to buy. Don't buy if you are too old and have no heirs as you will have to sell at a big loss unless you can own it for many years and inflation may get you the same dollar amount but isn't worth the same as everything is more expensive then.

However, once you have used the timeshare many years and have enjoyed it, you cannot complain because a timeshare is not real estate. This is what people should know right from the beginning and should be plastered all over the sales contract and legal documents too. In that case, the developers will do anything to keep the re-sale values high rather than trash them by differentiating between wholesale and retail buyers.


----------



## hotcoffee (Aug 16, 2008)

tombo said:


> I am surprised that more owners aren't upset by the fact that resale units are marked in the Marriott computer to differentiate them from Marriott developer sold units for any changes they make in the future. They are telling everyone up front that when (or if) you sell your week you will be selling a product which will have diminished value over what they are selling.
> 
> Can you imagine buying a home that comes with pool rights and golf privileges, but the developer decides later that anyone who buys the house from you (resale) will no longer be able to access the pool or golf course drastically lowering the value of what you purchased from them. Of course the kind developer will sell your home for you raising the sale price by allowing the new owners the same priviledges you received when you bought. All the benevolent developer asks for is 40% of the proceeds from a home you OWN which YOU paid for in full and they have already profited on this home at least once before. What a deal.
> 
> Anyone who buys retail knowing up front that Marriott is going to devalue what you are buying from them if you purchase is IMO crazy. They tell you in the sales presentation all the things they do and are planning to do to reduce the value of the thing they are trying to sell you, and then expect you to buy. If you ever decide to sell, you will own exactly what they were telling you was a second class ownership with Marriott when you bought, a resale unit. If they make the changes talked about here, even a resale Marriott won't be worth buying. Excessive greed can kill anything, even the great accomodations that are Marriott.




You and I think alike.  I don't believe that there should be ANY letter "R" in front of resale purchasers' records.  Marriott should be treating all their owners the same regardless of how the timeshare was purchased.  Doing so would make their timeshares the industry's must desireable.  I don't think it would hurt Marriott at all.  In fact, it would more likely make them seem to the public like a consumer-oriented company rather than a something similar to the automobile dealer.  At least, if you make a bad decision when buying an automobile, you can sell the car for what you can get; and the buyer gets the whole car - not just the engine.

However, having said the above, I knew when I purchased my resale that I would not be included in the points program.  Nevertheless, it is unfortunate that Marriott misses out on an opportunity to differentiate themselves from the rest of the industry by becoming more consumer-oriented.


----------



## timeos2 (Aug 16, 2008)

tombo said:


> I am surprised that more owners aren't upset by the fact that resale units are marked in the Marriott computer to differentiate them from Marriott developer sold units for any changes they make in the future. They are telling everyone up front that when (or if) you sell your week you will be selling a product which will have diminished value over what they are selling.
> 
> Can you imagine buying a home that comes with pool rights and golf privileges, but the developer decides later that anyone who buys the house from you (resale) will no longer be able to access the pool or golf course drastically lowering the value of what you purchased from them. Of course the kind developer will sell your home for you raising the sale price by allowing the new owners the same priviledges you received when you bought. All the benevolent developer asks for is 40% of the proceeds from a home you OWN which YOU paid for in full and they have already profited on this home at least once before. What a deal.
> 
> Anyone who buys retail knowing up front that Marriott is going to devalue what you are buying from them if you purchase is IMO crazy. They tell you in the sales presentation all the things they do and are planning to do to reduce the value of the thing they are trying to sell you, and then expect you to buy. If you ever decide to sell, you will own exactly what they were telling you was a second class ownership with Marriott when you bought, a resale unit. If they make the changes talked about here, even a resale Marriott won't be worth buying. Excessive greed can kill anything, even the great accomodations that are Marriott.



AMEN.  Once you own it you own it and the developer has no business in the picture. If they insist it's not a wise move to "own" halfway or less.


----------



## PerryM (Aug 16, 2008)

*I the goal is to kill.....*

If the goal is to kill the resale market, and arguably that what all the rumors are all about, then Marriott could easily do so without doing a single thing!  I mean instead of 60% resales to current sales price how about 15%?

The ‘ol FairField now Wyndham folks face this – buy a $35k Wyndham week and by the time you get to your car it’s worth $5k.  Wyndham sells a boat load of timeshares every day.  Marriott could easily do this too – by not doing a single thing.

How?

Simple, Marriott would stop exercising the ROFR and watch resales fall to 15% of current sales and then buy them for peanuts.

So if you guys want to worry about Marriott killing the resale market this way leaves no fingerprints – no bad press – no class action lawsuits – just do nothing.


What shall we worry about next?


----------



## tombo (Aug 16, 2008)

PerryM said:


> If the goal is to kill the resale market, and arguably that what all the rumors are all about, then Marriott could easily do so without doing a single thing!  I mean instead of 60% resales to current sales price how about 15%?
> 
> The ‘ol FairField now Wyndham folks face this – buy a $35k Wyndham week and by the time you get to your car it’s worth $5k.  Wyndham sells a boat load of timeshares every day.  Marriott could easily do this too – by not doing a single thing.
> 
> ...



Marriott is not trying to kill resales, they are simply trying to make as much money as they can without regards to what it does to owners. ROFR raising resale prices is a joke. Westgate has ROFR and their resale prices are in the tank. Pahio/Wyndham is exercising ROFR and you can buy a 1 bed room Kauai week for under $500. Marriott's prices are as high as they are because of the quality of the accomodations and the locations of their resorts, not because of ROFR.

 ROFR doesn't raise resale prices, it is simply another way for Marriott to make money. If Marriott needs some inventory they ROFR to have more inventory to sell. If someone buys a Marriott week for $1000 then Marriott steals it from the buyer for $1000, not one penny more. Stealing a week for the exact price it has already sold for doesn't increase the selling price, it just changes who owns it for the same exact price it already sold for. If Marriott would set a minimum price or offer to buy weeks for x dollars then they would actually be keeping prices high. Marriott won't bid on auctions which would raise the price or buy your week for a guaranteed price, but they will steal a week that sold cheaply so they can make a big profit selling it themselves. 

The fact that so many weeks have sold for low prices recently but weren't ROFR'd by Marriott shows that they simply don't need the inventory at many locations in this economy.  If ROFR was designed to prop up prices they would ROFR all low prices at all resorts, not pick and choose when and where they will ROFR. To believe that ROFR was set up to help owners resale prices is insane. When a week sells on e-bay for x dollars, and Marriott steals it using ROFR for the same price, please tell me how much they raised the price for that owner. The answer is the owner got the same thing he would have gotten if Marriott didn't have ROFR. The only winner there is Marriott who had weeks or months to decide if they could use that week in their inventory for the price it already sold for. If Marriott doesn't need the inventory the buyer gets it, if the price is higher than Marriott wants to pay the buyer gets it, if it is good for Marriott the buyer is out of luck.

In my opinion ROFR actually hurts resale prices because many people won't bid on them after they have had one or more sales they purchased stolen from them by Marriott. The less buyers there are making offers on the resales, the less the weeks sell for.


----------



## PerryM (Aug 17, 2008)

*What's that smell?*



tombo said:


> Marriott is not trying to kill resales, they are simply trying to make as much money as they can without regards to what it does to owners. ROFR raising resale prices is a joke. Westgate has ROFR and their resale prices are in the tank. Pahio/Wyndham is exercising ROFR and you can buy a 1 bed room Kauai week for under $500. Marriott's prices are as high as they are because of the quality of the accomodations and the locations of their resorts, not because of ROFR.
> 
> ROFR doesn't raise resale prices, it is simply another way for Marriott to make money. If Marriott needs some inventory they ROFR to have more inventory to sell. If someone buys a Marriott week for $1000 then Marriott steals it from the buyer for $1000, not one penny more. Stealing a week for the exact price it has already sold for doesn't increase the selling price, it just changes who owns it for the same exact price it already sold for. If Marriott would set a minimum price or offer to buy weeks for x dollars then they would actually be keeping prices high. Marriott won't bid on auctions which would raise the price or buy your week for a guaranteed price, but they will steal a week that sold cheaply so they can make a big profit selling it themselves.
> 
> ...




If a developer wants to “recycle” their product they need two things:

1)	A ROFR
2)	A profit motive

I believe that a developer who views recycled inventory as a money maker results in a support level which benefits ALL owners.  Marriott and Disney are great examples.

This does NOT mean that these developers care a whit about the owners just that they can make some money with ZERO risk and little cost.  Why all timeshare developers don't recycle is something I can’t comprehend.

The economy cycles up and down all the time.  The developers' recycling efforts match these cycles.  If the developer sees soft sales they lower their ROFR and if they need recycled inventory they raise the ROFR.  Just like gasoline, it's supply and demand that drive prices up and down; not sinister plots by shadowy characters.

This applies to hard to get inventory too – a Week 52 ski week has a resale price much higher than 60% of Marriott’s current sales price – it’s about 80% and the developer can “flip” that week fast so they make it up in volume.

But the evidence is overwhelming with regards to the ROFR – without it the developer has no interest in resales and thus resales becomes enemy #1; just look at Wyndham and WorldMark.

Imagine a car manufacturer who refused to sell their recycled cars – the resale price would collapse and the word would spread that the total cost to own their car would be astronomical compared to a manufacturer who recycled their cars.

When a bottom-fisher snaps up a low-ball Marriott on eBay it is in everyone’s interest for Marriott to step in and keep the week “in the family”.  Our bottom-fisher will swim on to another rotting carcass and if that developer doesn’t recycle our bottom feeder will have a great dinner.

That’s what bottom-feeders do – find a rotting meal and hope a bigger fish doesn’t steal it; I sure don’t feel sorry for them – they will just find another smelly meal.


----------



## tombo (Aug 17, 2008)

Perry's quote

"Imagine a car manufacturer who refused to sell their recycled cars – the resale price would collapse and the word would spread that the total cost to own their car would be astronomical compared to a manufacturer who recycled their cars."



Oh what a great analogy. Imagine if you bought a Ford truck, paid for it, maintained it for several years, and decided it was time to sell it. You go to the dealership and ask them to buy it from you and they say that they don't buy cars back from previous owners (which is what Marriott says) unless it is a particularly popular model. So you run ads in newspapers and advertise on the internet at your expense for months all the while replacing tires, changing oil, etc. Finally you find a buyer for $5000 for your truck. Now Ford says hold on there, let me see if we can make a profit on the truck at $5000. If they decide it is good for Ford you have to sell it to them for $5000, if they don't want it you can sell it to your original buyer if they still want it. If Chevrolet and Dodge didn't have ROFR on their cars who would you buy from?

I worked in the auto industry for 10 years and I assure you that auto manufacturers do not recycle their cars. Once you buy a car it is yours to do with as you please. You can sell it to a friend for $1 and the manufacturer has nothing to say about it because it is your car you paid for. The used (recycled) cars on dealers lots are trade ins or lease turn ins, and they are there for profit and no other reason. Right now you couldn't give an Excursion to a Ford dealer to recycle because they can't sell it due to high gas prices. In fact there is a lot more profit in used cars than there is in new cars because the person trading in their car gets way below market value for their vehicle. If you go to trade in your car I can assure you that the dealership will get it much cheaper than they will sell it for or they won't trade. I never trade in my cars, I sell them myself so I can get more money than any dealership would ever have given me.

Other than timeshares I can't think of another high dollar item that you purchase and own that the original seller can tell you whether you can sell it for a particular price or not. Somehow the developer having control over what you purchased has been spun into a great thing for the buyer. If I buy it, pay MF's on it, and have a deed it is mine and I should be able to sell it to anyone I want for any price I want. 

I would love to sell you a house, a car, or any other high dollar item and put ROFR on it. I assure you that I don't want it to make your resale higher, I want ROFR so I can have the opportunity to buy it cheap if I think I can make a profit on it, but I will have no obligation to buy it if it seems like a bad deal for me. Where can a guy get a deal like that?


----------



## PerryM (Aug 17, 2008)

Our last car was a used BMW M3 – for my son.  I bought resale from a dealer and because of their screw ups bought it for 10k below what they initially asked for it.  Everyone at that dealership knows me to this day….

Here are some used BMWs – the BMW dealers actively look for BMWs coming off 3 year leases and outbid folks at the auctions all the time.  BMW dealers are actively supporting the resale price of their product.  Everyone knows what the dealers are asking – they prop up the market.

The dealers have a sort of ROFR on the 3 year leases that make up most of the sales here in St. Louis – they get to buy them at the auctions at very high prices since they then can offer “BMW certified pre-owned car” and tack on $5k+ when they sell them.  They, of course, know they control the resale price of those BMWs – so do folks at the auctions – the private resale lots who must outbid the dealers and who can’t tack on $5k for a 2 hour inspection.

The ROFR is a friend to everyone but that bottom-feeder and when they know a ROFR is involved the first question they ask is “At what price is Marriott buying this week?” – they must beat it if they want that week.

But if Marriott sees less demand they simply lower their ROFR and patiently wait for the next firesale to occur.  The ROFR is everyone’s friend – even that bottom-feeder who will eventually get tired of having their meal yanked out of their mouth and up their offer.  They will be thankful when they eventually sell their unit and Marriott stands ready to prop up the market for them.


----------



## tombo (Aug 17, 2008)

PerryM said:


> Our last car was a used BMW M3 – for my son.  I bought resale from a dealer and because of their screw ups bought it for 10k below what they initially asked for it.  Everyone at that dealership knows me to this day….
> 
> Here are some used BMWs – the BMW dealers actively look for BMWs coming off 3 year leases and outbid folks at the auctions all the time.  BMW dealers are actively supporting the resale price of their product.  Everyone knows what the dealers are asking – they prop up the market.
> 
> ...



First of all, the BMW you are so proud of because you bought it for 10K below it's value wouldn't have become yours if BMW had ROFR. The dealership and you would have come to an agreement and BMW would have ROFR'd it right out from under you. When you get a car for 10K under value you are proud of your deal, if someone buys a Marriott week cheap they are bottom feeders who shouldn't be part of the "Marriott family". I guess that bottom feeders sneak into the best of families.


Once again automobiles are in my area of expertise. Any BMW car on the used lot of a BMW dealership acquired from any source (factory sale or not) is a "BMW certified pre-owned car". It is nothing more than marketing. If the car was owned by a drug dealer and involved in a high speed chase prior to the dealership acquiring it from a government auction, it becomes a "BMW certified pre-owned car" once it hits a BMW dealer's lot. Yes they do inspect them in the repair shop before putting them out for sale, but they do the same thing with their used Lexuses,Toyota's, and other cars they trade for. It is a great marketing terminology for used cars, and Ford, Chevrolet, etc all have certified pre-owned cars on their lots too. If you believe all the things that car salesmen tell you you will be disappointed, just not nearly as misled as you will be after trusting the word of timeshare salesmen.

The BMW dealers are simply bidding against other BMW dealers for the lease turn ins because the only people allowed to bid on lease and rental car turn ins are BMW franchise dealers( unless the rules have changed in the last 5 years since I left the industry). They have closed auctions as does Ford, GM, etc. These are called program cars because they were in a factory program where they were leased to individuals or corporations and returned to the manufacturer at the end of the rental period. BMW itself never places bids on program cars because they have owned them the whole time.The lease cars and rental cars (Hertz etc) were rented from BMW by the lesees for an agreed upon period of time. When the rental period is up the owner (BMW) sells their vehicles at an auction.  If Marriott is leasing (renting) you your week then I could see their argument for having the right to buy it back if they want it because like BMW they own it. However I though Marriott actually sold you a week with a deed which should relieve them of all ownership rights. BMW can't exert any control over what an owner who purchased his car does with it or what he sells it for because the owner owns it. People who lease are simply renting. Apparently at ROFR resorts you are a renter.

The dealers at the factory auctions are simply trying to get the car for the cheapest price they can by bidding until they get to a point that the price is too high to guarantee them a profit selling the used car. Hmm, that sounds like e-bay, people bidding until no one wants to bid anymore making the sale price the actual fair market price. BMW dealers must be bottom feeders too. I don't think that Marriott has ever entering into a bidding war on e-bay raising the sellers prices by raising the winning bid. They simply steal the week after the auction is over if they like the price. 

As far as "bottom feeders", Marriott is the lowest bottom feeder of all. They see an agreed upon finalized sale at a price they can profit on, and steal it for their bottom line without ever making an offer on an owners investment or raising a sale price. Marriott buys resale weeks cheaper than any other "bottom feeder" ever has. The "bottom feeder" who place the winning bid is the one who raised the owners sale price, not Marriott. If I was an owner selling I would thank the "bottom feeder" for offering me more than anyone else would.  Marriott weeks sell constantlly on e-bay, and I can assure you that no one is trying to bid the price up so it passes ROFR, they are trying to win the bid for as cheap as they can. You seem to think it is great to keep it in the "Mariott family" by having Marriott ROFR it. The person who won the bid would have been a new member of the Marriott family if their purchase wasn't stolen from them. Apparently savvy buyers aren't allowed to be part of the "Marriott family", only those who pay more than Marriott itself feels that a week is worth should be welcomed in to "family".


----------



## PerryM (Aug 17, 2008)

*In conclusion...*

I realize that some here find the ROFR an evil plot by the developers.  I, personally, don’t see it that way – I view the ROFR the reason Marriotts sell, resale, for 60% of the every increasing Marriott sales price and Wyndham’s lack of the ROFR resales sell for 15% of the ever increasing Wyndham sales price.

It’s really that simple.

Name a developer who has high resale prices and I believe 100% of the time a ROFR is involved; I could be wrong.  That does NOT mean that low resale prices don’t have a ROFR which is exercised  at low prices – each developer has their own unique business plan.

The only person impacted by a ROFR is our bottom-feeder (I’m a proud member of that family) we low-ball an offer and there is a good chance it will be snatched away from us.  So, we simply raise our offer – the logical consequence of the ROFR!


In conclusion:
Anyway, to answer the OP’s question “Will Marriott penalize resale owners?” the answer is NO; they have too much profit at stake to do something that stupid.


----------



## timeos2 (Aug 17, 2008)

*Frame this post by Tombo*



tombo said:


> First of all, the BMW you are so proud of because you bought it for 10K below it's value wouldn't have become yours if BMW had ROFR. The dealership and you would have come to an agreement and BMW would have ROFR'd it right out from under you. When you get a car for 10K under value you are proud of your deal, if someone buys a Marriott week cheap they are bottom feeders who shouldn't be part of the "Marriott family". I guess that bottom feeders sneak into the best of families.
> 
> 
> Once again automobiles are in my area of expertise. Any BMW car on the used lot of a BMW dealership acquired from any source (factory sale or not) is a "BMW certified pre-owned car". It is nothing more than marketing. If the car was owned by a drug dealer and involved in a high speed chase prior to the dealership acquiring it from a government auction, it becomes a "BMW certified pre-owned car" once it hits a BMW dealer's lot. Yes they do inspect them in the repair shop before putting them out for sale, but they do the same thing with their used Lexuses,Toyota's, and other cars they trade for. It is a great marketing terminology for used cars, and Ford, Chevrolet, etc all have certified pre-owned cars on their lots too. If you believe all the things that car salesmen tell you you will be disappointed, just not nearly as misled as you will be after trusting the word of timeshare salesmen.



Tombo - You have it so perfectly figured out it's scary.  Thank you for a clear, unemotional and factual look at both ROFR and the concept that somehow once you purchase a week of timeshare (or anything else) the seller somehow retains a right to tell you what you can and can't sell it for or to whom.  We need Judge Judy on just one of these cases to put them to and end once and for all. Can't you hear her "You wait until the sale is agreed to and then step in to grabit? THAT'S OUTRAGEOUS!"  

Those who think ROFR and other meddling with legitimate resales helps owners in any way or fashion are truly living in a dream world. Price control never works - free markets have to  operate freely to thrive.


----------



## timeos2 (Aug 17, 2008)

*ROFR at a penny or less is still a penny or less*



PerryM said:


> I realize that some here find the ROFR an evil plot by the developers.  I, personally, don’t see it that way – I view the ROFR the reason Marriotts sell, resale, for 60% of the every increasing Marriott sales price and Wyndham’s lack of the ROFR resales sell for 15% of the ever increasing Wyndham sales price.
> 
> It’s really that simple..



Perry - It's not Wyndhams lack of ROFR that has torpedoed the resale value it's the FUD, intentional moves to degrade resales and Wyndham greed. If they had ROFR they would simply grab the resales @ $.01 with glee. It wouldn't do a thing to prop up resale prices if they held on to all their other purposeful actions to devalue resale prices. Heck, think about it. The way they do it now they SHOULD have ROFR and grab up all those penny points & resell them. They'd make twice what they make now selling the actual properties they built. 

ROFR is a nightmare for anyone except the greedy developer that inserts it.  Need an example? Look to Wastegate.


----------



## tombo (Aug 17, 2008)

I hate ROFR from any timeshare, not just Marriott. I obviously feel that it is bad for owners lowering sale prices by reducing the number of people bidding on a week for sale. You think that buyers have to have the week and lose sleep worrying about it passing ROFR. Most people don't feel that passionatelly about owning a particular vacation week. I bid rationally with a maximum bid price and I don't raise my price in the heat of battle. If it goes for more than I am willing to pay, no problem.

Same thing with ROFR. If they ROFR my week at my purchase price I won't offer to pay more, I give it to them. They should have had to outbid me to own the week but thanks to ROFR they get the week for the price I set. From now on I won't even make an offer on a week at that resort which I would like to buy because it isn't worth the headache. That leaves weeks for sale receiving fewer offers from myself and others disgusted with the ROFR process. I am sure the seller would be thrilled with ROFR if they knew that I would have paid them more than their top offer if not for ROFR.  However, Marriott does enjoy ROFR'ing it for a cheaper price thanks to me not bidding the price up higher.

I have also been the seller at an ROFR resort. After considerable time, money, and effort I finally find a buyer and we agree upon price. He said "I almost didn't make you an offer because last time I did the resort ROFR'd it." He was the only person who made me an acceptable offer in months and he almost didn't make the offer thanks to ROFR. Of course the resort ROFR'd this week out from under him too and he told me he would never make an offer on another week from the developer at any price. The next seller won't have a chance to sell their week to him because ROFR has soured him on the whole organization. The buyer who got me out of my week I wanted to sell (because of huge MF increases) didn't get to own the week. I owned it and I should have been able to sell it to who I wanted for any price I wanted. The resort never helped me on MF's, never helped me find a buyer, but they sure helped themselves to my week at a good price after I FINALLY found a buyer. I hate ROFR and won't buy from any resort the has it in their contract anymore.

We have hijacked this thread and I apologize to all for getting off on this tangent. I hate ROFR, some don't. We will have to agree to disagree.


----------



## AwayWeGo (Aug 17, 2008)

*That's Just It -- There Are No Guaranteed High Resale Prices.*




PerryM said:


> Name a developer who has high resale prices and I believe 100% of the time a ROFR is involved; I could be wrong.  That does NOT mean that low resale prices don’t have a ROFR which is exercised  at low prices – each developer has their own unique business plan.


No timeshare company I know of ( -- not that I know all that much anyway -- ) always has high resale prices across the board, ROFR or no ROFR _mox nix_. 

All ROFR does, when the timeshare company chooses at its own whim to exercise ROFR, is let the timeshare company snap up the low-price resales.  They're _still_ low resale prices -- just ask the seller who gets his or her resale timeshare snapped up that way. 

ROFR just makes it so that everybody else -- all us regular walking-around bargain hunters -- will have to _pay_ high(er) resale prices; it does _not_ make it so that the resale units _sell_ for higher prices -- only that the timeshare company snaps them up when the prices are low. 

ROFR is a 1-way street.   The timeshare company gets to buy low.  The timeshare owners do not automatically get to sell high.  

Just because I have to _pay_ high prices for resales doesn't mean that all owners are _receiving_ high prices for resales -- because the timeshare company snaps up the lowballs so that the general public can't. 

From the perspective of the individual timeshare owner, ROFR = ROFL. 

-- Alan Cole, McLean (Fairfax County), Virginia, USA.​


----------



## GeNioS (Aug 17, 2008)

I'm with Perry....the seller gets the same amount either way....why would a seller even care about ROFR?  Why do I care if I get the check says "Marriott" or some other guys name (except I'm pretty sure the "Marriott" check will clear).

It's funny to see buyers trying to take up the case that sellers should be concerned about it.  It is bottom-feeding.  Don't get me wrong...I'd like to do a little bottom-feeding myself after paying too much for the first two weeks I bought.  But if try to buy one and Marriott takes it instead, I don't have any place to complain.  In fact, I'll take some comfort that Marriott is doing something about keep values high.

P.S.  I'm glad you guys brought up the car analogy.  _Imagine a car manufacturer who refused to sell their recycled cars._  Yeah, about that....you don't actually have to _imagine_ that.  It's happened.  It's called the electric car.  And there's nothing Judge Judy can do about that one either.


----------



## AwayWeGo (Aug 17, 2008)

*Still Not Getting It.*




GeNioS said:


> Marriott is doing something about keep values high.


If so, it's not via ROFR. 

The ROFR gimmick does no such thing. 

Resale timeshares still _sell_ low, but thanks to ROFR only the timeshare company gets to _buy_ them low.  

The fact that you & I can't ever buy'm low in no way means that the values remain high -- only that the ROFR 1-way street shuts out every walking-around lowball _buyer_ while doing nothing for the lowball _seller_. 

If that is incorrect, I'd appreciate some kind of explanation or illustration or explication or enlightenment as to how ROFR keeps resale timeshare values high.  

From all I've been able to learn about it here on TUG-BBS, ROFR = ROFL plain & simple. 

-- Alan Cole, McLean (Fairfax County), Virginia, USA.​


----------



## tombo (Aug 17, 2008)

GeNioS said:


> I'm with Perry....the seller gets the same amount either way....why would a seller even care about ROFR?  Why do I care if I get the check says "Marriott" or some other guys name (except I'm pretty sure the "Marriott" check will clear).
> 
> It's funny to see buyers trying to take up the case that sellers should be concerned about it.  It is bottom-feeding.  Don't get me wrong...I'd like to do a little bottom-feeding myself after paying too much for the first two weeks I bought.  But if try to buy one and Marriott takes it instead, I don't have any place to complain.  In fact, I'll take some comfort that Marriott is doing something about keep values high.
> 
> P.S.  I'm glad you guys brought up the car analogy.  _Imagine a car manufacturer who refused to sell their recycled cars._  Yeah, about that....you don't actually have to _imagine_ that.  It's happened.  It's called the electric car.  And there's nothing Judge Judy can do about that one either.




Please explain how receiving the same amount from Marriott that you would have received from the original buyer raised the value by using ROFR. If it sold for $1, and Marriott ROFR'd it for a dollar, it still sold for a dollar. My math isn't that great but if Marriott matches the price weeks have already sold for, then they haven't raised the sale price one cent. 

Why should sellers be concerned? If you are trying to sell your week because of ridiculously high MF increases, job loss, etc, and there are many buyers who won't even make an offer on your week because they feel it is a waste of time thanks to ROFR, you have reason to be concerned. Many here on TUG (myself included) will no longer make offers or bid on ROFR resorts. My offer or bid would have been higher than anyone else had offered you so that I could buy the week. However, thanks to ROFR myself and many others don't offer you anything. This reduces the number of offers and amount of offers you receive for your week. You are stuck with the week, paying MF's you can't afford and hoping someone,anyone offers you something to get you out of your week. When someone finally makes you an offer, Marriott who wouldn't offer you a dollar for the week decides to take it from the person who got you out of your week you didn't want. Everytime they ROFR a week they are probably alienating a resale buyer you might need if you ever want to sell your week. 

As a seller I don't want a single buyer out there to feel that there is a reason to not offer me more than my current highest offer. I want them to up the bid and make higher offers secure in the knowledge that the best offer I receive will be the proud owner of my week. That doesn't happen if the current high bid is $2000 and they feel that Marriott will never let them have the week for that price. I want them to offer $2500 or more because that is how much money I will get for my week. When the offer isn't made because a buyer doesn't feel it will pass ROFR, I only get $2000, which is of course better for Marriott and worse for me the seller. This is how ROFR actually lowers sale prices and makes it much more difficult for a seller to sell their week. ROFR is only good for the Developer!


----------



## JimC (Aug 17, 2008)

PerryM said:


> I realize that some here find the ROFR an evil plot by the developers.  I, personally, don’t see it that way – I view the ROFR the reason Marriotts sell, resale, for 60% of the every increasing Marriott sales price and Wyndham’s lack of the ROFR resales sell for 15% of the ever increasing Wyndham sales price.
> 
> It’s really that simple.
> 
> ...




I believe high resale prices are possible when the timeshare is high quality and there is a ROFR exercised by the developer.  DVC (Disney) has resales that are much higher than MVCI's as a percentage of developer price.  It is a high quality brand and the developer has used its ROFR as a part of its pricing and own resale needs.  

DVC needs inventory to sell additional contracts to existing and new members in resorts that have been previously sold out.  Its use of ROFR has evolved depending on what new resorts it is marketing, its need for inventory to meet demand at existing resorts, the expiration date of the contracts and the overall demand for the particular resort.  It will continue to evolve its use of ROFR as its contracts mature.

While its product and strategy is different, DVC is still an example of ROFR working well for both developer and seller.  Marriott uses its ROFR differently to meet its different strategic needs; while helping to keep the market price higher than it would be otherwise.


----------



## PerryM (Aug 17, 2008)

AwayWeGo said:


> *No timeshare company I know of ( -- not that I know all that much anyway -- ) always has high resale prices across the board, ROFR or no ROFR *_mox nix_.
> 
> All ROFR does, when the timeshare company chooses at its own whim to exercise ROFR, is let the timeshare company snap up the low-price resales.  They're _still_ low resale prices -- just ask the seller who gets his or her resale timeshare snapped up that way.
> 
> ...



Disney.......(the above post came in while I messed around with as short an answer as vBulliten will allow)


----------



## AwayWeGo (Aug 17, 2008)

*R. T. U., Shmarrteeyoo.*




PerryM said:


> Disney.


Can't buy DVC -- can only rent (i.e., lease), longish term (i.e., RTU). 

Those Disney RTUs, BTW, are like musical chairs.  Each year that goes by chops 365 days off the remaining RTU term.  If I own DVC with an idea of selling while there's still some value, I need a crystal ball to divine what sell-by date is too soon & which is too late. 

The operational shelf life is known, but the remaining value life is semi-murky. 

Then again, RTU timeshares have their own built-in exit strategies, so that's something to be said for RTU timeshares that can't be said for deeded timeshares. 

So it goes.  

-- Alan Cole, McLean (Fairfax County), Virginia, USA.​


----------



## tombo (Aug 17, 2008)

And Disney would have high resales without ROFR because of the resorts themselves. People are assuming that ROFR is why the resorts with higher resale values remain high. Simple fact is that the resorts with higher resale value are what the developers want to ROFR. Who would want to ROFR a dog that they can't resell? Marriott has many of their own resorts they won't ROFR anymore. Why quit ROFR'ing at some of your locations if ROFR'ing is all it takes to prop up those falling prices? Why are marriott resale prices falling now? Why is Marriott ROFR'ing less often and at lower prices? Doesn't marriott care about keeping prices high anymore?

To say that DVC, Marriott, and HGVC have good resales values because of ROFR is like saying that gold has higher resale value than lead because jewelers will buy gold back from you. Gold is worth more than lead retail or wholesale which is why jewelers buy it from you, not to keep the price of gold high. Mercedes are worth more than Fords retail and used. None of those have ROFR, they simply bring higher prices because of quality and brand. Marriott , DVC, and HGVC are the top of the timeshares and ROFR has nothing to do with it. These will always bring the best prices and they would still  bring higher resale prices if there wasn't any ROFR. People pay more for the quality, benefits, and features which the big 3 offer. Please quit believing the marketing lies that ROFR is good for owners. Cigarette companies used to say that smoking was good for you. Don't suspend reality for good marketing.

ROFR is only good for the developers!


----------



## PerryM (Aug 17, 2008)

*Taking it from all sides....*



AwayWeGo said:


> Can't buy DVC -- can only rent (i.e., lease), longish term (i.e., RTU).
> 
> Those Disney RTUs, BTW, are like musical chairs.  Each year that goes by chops 365 days off the remaining RTU term.  If I own DVC with an idea of selling while there's still some value, I need a crystal ball to divine what sell-by date is too soon & which is too late.
> 
> ...




RTU should have been the model ALL fee simple, deeded timeshares, should have adopted way back in the 1960’s when timeshares first were cooked up.

Disney will simply allow folks nearing the end of the lease to re-up again – for 20 years probably.  I’ll bet a Krispy Kreme that the cost will be in line with existing leases and allow owners 20 more years of vacations.

At that point the buildings will be 60+ years old and time to tear them down and build new ones and resell the leases again.

Just what does a traditional timeshare do at the end of its life?  Who knows?  Disney will be more forthright than the other 90% of timeshares out there – they have no termination clauses that I know of. At 30+ years special assessments start appearing and its hard to resell an old, aging timeshare near the end of it's life - what will they command on the resale market?  Who knows.  The owner at the end of life of the resort could be in a really bad situation - major assessments and no market to sell their old timeshare.

Much of this is moot since many of us will be leaving this earth and going to that big timeshare in the sky.  I’m 61 years old and a 40 year lease means little over a fee-simple ownership “for the rest of my life”…..




tombo said:


> And Disney would have high resales without ROFR because of the resorts themselves. People are assuming that ROFR is why the resorts with higher resale values remain high. Simple fact is that the resorts with higher resale value are what the developers want to ROFR. Who would want to ROFR a dog that they can't resell? Marriott has many of their own resorts they won't ROFR anymore. Why quit ROFR'ing at some of your locations if ROFR'ing is all it takes to prop up those falling prices? Why are marriott resale prices falling now? Why is Marriott ROFR'ing less often and at lower prices? Doesn't marriott care about keeping prices high anymore?
> 
> To say that DVC, Marriott, and HGVC have good resales values because of ROFR is like saying that gold has higher resale value than lead because jewelers will buy gold back from you. Gold is worth more than lead retail or wholesale which is why jewelers buy it from you, not to keep the price of gold high. Mercedes are worth more than Fords retail and used. None of those have ROFR, they simply bring higher prices because of quality and brand. Marriott , DVC, and HGVC are the top of the timeshares and ROFR has nothing to do with it. These will always bring the best prices and they would still  bring higher resale prices if there wasn't any ROFR. People pay more for the quality, benefits, and features which the big 3 offer. Please quit believing the marketing lies that ROFR is good for owners. Cigarette companies used to say that smoking was good for you. Don't suspend reality for good marketing.
> 
> *ROFR is only good for the developers!*



The ROFR was great for me 5 times - I got 60% to 80% of the current Marriott sales price and that equates to BE in 5 years of timeshare ownership.  I thank the ROFR everytime I exchange into the Maui Ocean Club with my Gold Summit Watch...


----------



## AwayWeGo (Aug 17, 2008)

*And Not Only That . . .*




tombo said:


> Marriott , DVC, and HGVC are the top of the timeshares and ROFR has nothing to do with it.


What about the Hyatt timeshares ? 

( I got semi-scolded 1 time for commenting about Hyatts when all I am is just a non-ROFR bottom-feeding bargain hunter with no clue about the upscale timeshares. ) 





tombo said:


> ROFR is only good for the developers!


Or, as some few of us prefer expressing it, ROFR = ROFL. 

-- Alan Cole, McLean (Fairfax County), Virginia, USA.​


----------



## tombo (Aug 17, 2008)

PerryM said:


> The ROFR was great for me 5 times - I got 60% to 80% of the current Marriott sales price and that equates to BE in 5 years of timeshare ownership.  I thank the ROFR everytime I exchange into the Maui Ocean Club with my Gold Summit Watch...



And you would have received the same 60 to 80% if ROFR didn't exist. Don't equate high resale values with ROFR. High resale values come from high demand, high quality resorts. Marriot has several that don't fall into that category and despite the magic of ROFR have low resale values. I would say that without ROFR the average resale Marriott price would actually be higher because of more people bidding on them.

I have noticed that Marriott weeks for rent on Red Week seem to rent for a higher rental price than almost any other developer's weeks. I am sure that it has nothing to do with the resorts themselves, the high rental prices come courtesy of ROFR. I have noticed that most of the highest rental units have RORF so Marriott, DVC, HGVC, etc are keeping rental rates high with ROFR. I guess thr Right of First Rental lets them steal rental weeks from the original renter keeping those rental prices high too. ROFR is also good for arthritis, impotence, and getting stains out of shirts. Thank goodness developers invented ROFR!


----------



## taffy19 (Aug 17, 2008)

tombo said:


> And you would have received the same 60 to 80% if ROFR didn't exist. Don't equate high resale values with ROFR. High resale values come from high demand, high quality resorts. Marriot has several that don't fall into that category and despite the magice of ROFR have low resale values. I would say that without ROFR the average resale Marriott price would actually be higher because of more people bidding on them.
> 
> I have noticed that Marriott weeks for rent on Red Week seem to rent for a higher rental price than almost any other developer's weeks. I am sure that it has nothing to do with the resorts themselves, the high rental prices come courtesy of ROFR. I have noticed that most of the highest rental units have RORF so Marriott, DVC, HGVC, etc are keeping rental rates high with ROFR. I guess thr Right of First Rental lets them steal rental weeks from the original renter keeping those rental prices high. ROFR is also good for arthritis, impotence, and getting stains out of shirts too. Thank goodness developers invented ROFR!


The real smart bottom feeders will keep on bidding.  I have read it here on TUG.     It may still hurt the the seller if the general public will give up after one or two bids as they may not bid anymore so you are right that there will be less buyers for your timeshare.

I have a feeling that rental prices are high because the resorts rent them out at much higher prices yet.  When you own in the highest season, when schools are out, you do well with renting so far but if the economy is down, you may rent at a reduced rate or not at all.  It is a gamble so don't buy for renting timeshares out unless you pick them up for pennies on the dollar so you can get out in a hurry even if you give them away.  You can't do this with platinum resorts UNLESS YOU HAVE DEEP POCKETS.


----------



## JimC (Aug 17, 2008)

PerryM said:


> RTU should have been the model ALL fee simple, deeded timeshares, should have adopted way back in the 1960’s when timeshares first were cooked up.
> 
> Disney will simply allow folks nearing the end of the lease to re-up again – for 20 years probably.  I’ll bet a Krispy Kreme that the cost will be in line with existing leases and allow owners 20 more years of vacations...



Disney offered an extension on Old Key West in 2007 -- its original timeshare property with a 2042 expiration.  The extension is an additional 15 years to 2057 -- essentially making it a 50 year lease again.  The cost was $15 per point, now it is $20 per point.


----------



## JimC (Aug 17, 2008)

tombo said:


> And you would have received the same 60 to 80% if ROFR didn't exist. Don't equate high resale values with ROFR. High resale values come from high demand, high quality resorts. Marriot has several that don't fall into that category and despite the magic of ROFR have low resale values. I would say that without ROFR the average resale Marriott price would actually be higher because of more people bidding on them....



I agree that a quality product/brand is important to resale value.  However, I strongly suspect that DVC's active use of ROFR has kept its resale price higher than it would be without it.  I sense the same with Marriott.


----------



## GeNioS (Aug 17, 2008)

AwayWeGo said:


> If so, it's not via ROFR.
> 
> The ROFR gimmick does no such thing.
> 
> Resale timeshares still _sell_ low, but thanks to ROFR only the timeshare company gets to _buy_ them low.



Yeah...the timeshare company gets to buy them low...but the timeshare company is then immediately taking the selling price up to full retail.  Perhaps the "value" is artificial...but it's still a value.

Not only does ROFR help keep values high, but the only flaw in the system is that they don't use it every time.  If Marriott exercised ROFR on every property selling for $1 less than their retail price, and no one could get their hands on one without paying it, much like diamonds the prices and values would stay high.  Does it favor the developer....yes.  Will Marriott make $10,000 more to add to their billions?  Who cares....as a buyer, and it doesn't matter what...cars, boats, houses, etc., you want to know that everyone buying the property paid about what you did.

Did I pay too much for my wife's diamond?  Yes.  Is the value kept artificially high because the diamond monopolies limit the supply?  Yes.  But now that I bought her one, I'm in the game.  I don't want DeBeers to flood the market and make that diamond worthless.  I'm hoping they continue to limit the supply so that it holds it's value.  Yes....value.  And they've done a damn good job.

Obviously people that don't own a diamond would LOVE to have them flood the market.  They don't care about my value.  They just want one cheap.  I'm in a different place.


----------



## hotcoffee (Aug 17, 2008)

GeNioS said:


> Yeah...the timeshare company gets to buy them low...but the timeshare company is then immediately taking the selling price up to full retail.  Perhaps the "value" is artificial...but it's still a value.
> 
> Not only does ROFR help keep values high, but the only flaw in the system is that they don't use it every time.  If Marriott exercised ROFR on every property selling for $1 less than their retail price, and no one could get their hands on one without paying it, much like diamonds the prices and values would stay high.  Does it favor the developer....yes.  Will Marriott make $10,000 more to add to their billions?  Who cares....as a buyer, and it doesn't matter what...cars, boats, houses, etc., you want to know that everyone buying the property paid about what you did.
> 
> ...




I was absolutely NOT going to get involved in the ROFR discussion, but I was unable to control myself on this one.  If Marriott were to ROFR 100% of the resales, then sooner-or-later no one would ever bid on Marriott resales.

My concern that led to the creation of this thread was the potential for Marriott to destroy my ability to sell my timeshare if a downturn in life were to force me to sell.  I suspect that manyTUGGERs are in the same boat as I am - getting up there in age.  Who knows when we might not be able to take these expensive vacations anymore.  I dread the thought of having to pay yearly MFs on a timeshare that I am unable to use and cannot sell.


----------



## tombo (Aug 17, 2008)

The theory is great that Marriott would ROFR everything $1 below retail to help owners, but the fact is they only ROFR what will benefit them. If they did ROFR them all, people would quit making any offers to buy for any price. If they agreed to buy the weeks back from owners for a set price, that would help everyone and raise reale prices. If you think the value of your Marriott is high because of ROFR, list it for sale for 60% of the current Marriott selling price and see if you get a single buyer to contact you. What Marriott gets for weeks retail is irrelevant to a current owner, all that matters to the owner is what he could sell his week for if he needed to. The reality of trying to sell your week will wake you up to what resale prices really are. People here want to know why people sell their weeks so cheap on e-bay. If you have listed it for sale for a year lowering the price numerous times with no real offers, an e-bay real offer will sound pretty good. At least you won't have to pay another year's MF's. There are few buyers out there, and even fewer who want to pay a high price. Just list your week for sale and see. You don't have to actually sell it if someone does happens to try and buy it.

The diamond analogy won't work. Most every woman in the US wants a diamond engagement ring, most want diamond ear rings, many want diamond bracelets etc. The diamond prices are manipulated high and us guys pay it for the women we love. However, most women could care less about a timeshare week. Ask at work, church, sporting events how many of your friends own timeshares. Not only do most not own them, most will tell you they wouldn't own one for free. I quit telling people that I own timeshares because of the negative responses I received. Marriott has a product with a limited customer base and they can't manipulate price on the open market like Debeers can with diamonds. You can resell your diamond tomorrow in any city at any jewelry store or at any pawn shop. Try doing that with your Marriott. Somehow debeers seems to keep diamond prices high without having ROFR on your wife's engagement ring.


----------



## PerryM (Aug 17, 2008)

*Warning - radar patrolled...*



hotcoffee said:


> I was absolutely NOT going to get involved in the ROFR discussion, but I was unable to control myself on this one.  *If Marriott were to ROFR 100% of the resales*, then sooner-or-later no one would ever bid on Marriott resales.
> 
> My concern that led to the creation of this thread was the potential for Marriott to destroy my ability to sell my timeshare if a downturn in life were to force me to sell.  I suspect that manyTUGGERs are in the same boat as I am - getting up there in age.  Who knows when we might not be able to take these expensive vacations anymore.  I dread the thought of having to pay yearly MFs on a timeshare that I am unable to use and cannot sell.




The ROFR is like a traffic cop – they don’t need to be on every street corner aiming their radar guns – just random times and random locations does the same job.  Same with the ROFR – Marriott only cares about itself and when it sees a juicy sale they step in and become the buyer.  As an unintended consequence they provide support for ALL Marriott owners.

No one outside of a few chat rooms knows when they do it and at what price – just the rumor is enough to keep bottom-feeders at bay, and that’s what the ROFR addresses the fear of losing a sale has interested buyers submitting bids near the 60% of current sale level.


----------



## Pit (Aug 18, 2008)

PerryM said:


> The only person impacted by a ROFR is our bottom-feeder (I’m a proud member of that family) we low-ball an offer and there is a good chance it will be snatched away from us.  So, we simply raise our offer – the logical consequence of the ROFR!



Actually, a more logical consequence of ROFR is to lower your offer price.

They only exercise ROFR when they want the inventory. For each time they +1 to their inventory, the next one has less value to them. I bet they even have a formula for calculating the price at which they're willing exercise ROFR. And, once they have enough inventory on hand, they simply pass.


----------



## tombo (Aug 18, 2008)

Lowering your offer is one option. Many of us who buy a lot of timeshares simply refuse to make any offer at all at a resort that has ROFR. Contrary to many people's belief here, buyers don't have to buy marriott weeks at any price, and we don't feel obligated to raise our price. We simply don't make any offer at all thanks to ROFR. Marriott's are great timeshares, but even on TUG, only about 25% of TUG members own Marriott. 75% of TUG members seem happy without a Marriott week. 

I don't want to own at any resort that has ROFR because I want to be able to sell my week I paid for in full, to anyone I want ,for any price I want. If I want to sell my week to my secretary or neighbor for $1, I own it, pay MF's on it, and I'll be damned if any resort will tell me who I can sell my week to or at what price. 

I have seen plenty of E-bay bids recently where I would have bid higher than the winning bid if not for ROFR. Tell the owners who received  lower prices for their weeks thanks to me not bidding the price higher how happy they should be with ROFR. There are 3 diffferent Marriott e-bay sales in the last month that I would have bid $500 to $1000 more than the winning bid if there was no ROFR. That is 3 examples where ROFR lowered the sale price from me alone not bidding. How many others like me aren't making offers thanks to ROFR lowering the price received by many owners on many sales?

Marriott makes you fill out everything so they can be sure it was a legitimate sale, not just a fake sale to get them to buy an owner's week. You can do a fake sale to get them to ROFR though. I know someone who did it and dumped a Westgate that way. If you can't sell your Marriott week, fill out paperwork for say $10,000 with your neighbor buying it. if Marriott ROFR's you got rid of your week. If they don't tell marriott that your buyer backed out while waiting for them to ROFR. Then wait a while and send them a different buyer for $9000. Repeat until successful. If you do it this way, ROFR might actually be good for buyers. Beat them at their own game and actually make ROFR work for you. Then when you get out never buy a week from any resort that has ROFR.


----------



## PerryM (Aug 19, 2008)

tombo said:


> Lowering your offer is one option. Many of us who buy a lot of timeshares simply refuse to make any offer at all at a resort that has ROFR. Contrary to many people's belief here, buyers don't have to buy marriott weeks at any price, and we don't feel obligated to raise our price. We simply don't make any offer at all thanks to ROFR. Marriott's are great timeshares, but even on TUG, only about 25% of TUG members own Marriott. 75% of TUG members seem happy without a Marriott week.
> 
> *I don't want to own at any resort that has ROFR because I want to be able to sell my week I paid for in full, to anyone I want ,for any price I want*. If I want to sell my week to my secretary or neighbor for $1, I own it, pay MF's on it, and I'll be damned if any resort will tell me who I can sell my week to or at what price.
> 
> ...



This is where we disagree – allowing a foolish owner to dump their Marriott at a low price hurts ALL other owners.  Next time we try to sell that low-ball sale will impact us.  It’s out in eBay history for a while and resellers use it in their comps to calculate what a week should sell for.

This is why I want Marriott to step in and save us from foolish owners who, for a host of reasons, wants to hold a firesale.  That ROFR keeps outsiders from benefiting and hurting the existing owners.

I’d rather have Marriott make a few bucks and keep the sales office open then to have it close the door and allow owners to harm the rest of us and some sap we don’t know to benefit from the low-ball sale.

If a person doesn’t want to buy Marriott then don’t let the door kick them in the butt on the way out.

A perfect example of owners holding firesales is WorldMark - 5 years ago the developer charged $1.55 per WM credit and resale credits sold for about 80 cents each.  Now the developer sells them for $1.99 and resales easily go for 65 cents.

Those owners who divorce (50/50 chance there) or need cash for food or pass away and the kids want to get out of the MFs are killing the resale price.  There is no ROFR in WM and the developer, Wyndham, considers all 260k owners as a direct threat since resales are so cheap to the same thing they sell.

I'll take an active developer and ROFR any day.

Save me from all those crazy owners who feel that $1 is just fine to dump their timeshare.


----------



## Steve (Aug 19, 2008)

*Caution all Marriott owners...*



PerryM said:


> If a person doesn’t want to buy Marriott then don’t let the door kick them in the butt on the way out.



Touche.

It wasn't that long ago that you dumped your Marriott Mountainside weeks and purchased tens of thousands of WorldMark credits.  At the time, you advised everyone to follow your lead and do likewise.  

Of course, since then, the Marriott weeks that you sold have continued to rise rather significantly in value.  While, at the same time, the WorldMark credits you bought have dramatically decreased in value.  

(I realize that you purchased a Summit Watch gold week on the resale market, and have used it to make all sorts of trades into Park City and Maui that we, of course, should all be green with envy over).  

However, the fact remains that you basically cashed out your Marriott ownership in favor of WorldMark.  Indeed, you were extremely vocal about this. Yet, in this thread, you act like this great champion of Marriott.  

I hope your new found enthusiasm for Marriott isn't a harbinger of bad things to come.  After all, you certainly touted...and purchased...Windjammer Tall Ship ownership, a condo hotel in Daytona Beach, fractional Trendwest ownership in South Shore Lake Tahoe, and WorldMark...all of which have tanked big time after you purchased.  (Not counting your infamous Westgate Las Vegas purchase.)  Marriott owners, look out! 

Steve


----------



## PerryM (Aug 19, 2008)

Steve said:


> Touche.
> 
> It wasn't that long ago that you dumped your Marriott Mountainside weeks and purchased tens of thousands of WorldMark credits.  At the time, you advised everyone to follow your lead and do likewise.
> 
> ...



Thanks for the kind words.

There is a trick with WM that many use to protect themselves from falling WM resale prices.  I expect to make a handsome profit from our WM account when we eventually sell it.

The other purchases have been explained in past posts, I eventually expect to make a profit from all of them but Windjammer - that company went belly up and I lost 40% of our investment - the same as if I had bought a Marriott.  (We took cruses on their other shiip and rented our usage out)

I am glad to see folks trying to keep up with me 

P.S.
If you want to keep up you've got to PM and ask questions - just a suggestion.

Maybe I need to actually say it - if you believe in a decision and the market goes against you then stick to your guns and don't panic.  I hope folks owning stock this year don't panic and sell - it will turn around...  Same with real estate....  The alternative is to count yourself as a loser and dump your investment - as soon as you do you do know the market will turn around don't you?


----------



## Steve (Aug 19, 2008)

PerryM said:


> There is a trick with WM that many use to protect themselves from falling WM resale prices.  I expect to make a handsome profit from our WM account when we eventually sell it.



Yes, you have a non-housekeeping account with WorldMark.  But who wants an account with 60,000 + or - credits?  (Especially when you can buy a little 6000 credit account and rent all you need from other owners???) There aren't a lot of buyers for accounts that big.  So you may have to split them off into a much smaller account in order to sell. That, in turn, might cause you to lose money overall...even if you make money on the non-housekeeping part of the sale.

Or, Wyndham could change the rules.  Perhaps non-housekeeping status could be barred from transfering to a new owner.  Or perhaps only the original size of the account (say 6000 or 10,000 credits) could be transferred as non-housekeeping.  That could force you to split the account. Things are definitely changing in WorldMark.

Steve


----------



## PerryM (Aug 19, 2008)

Steve said:


> Yes, you have a non-housekeeping account with WorldMark.  But who wants an account with 60,000 + or - credits?  (Especially when you can buy a little 6000 credit account and rent all you need from other owners???) There aren't a lot of buyers for accounts that big.  So you may have to split them off into a much smaller account in order to sell. That, in turn, might cause you to lose money overall...even if you make money on the non-housekeeping part of the sale.
> 
> Or, Wyndham could change the rules.  Perhaps non-housekeeping status could be barred from transfering to a new owner.  Or perhaps only the original size of the account (say 6000 or 10,000 credits) could be transferred as non-housekeeping.  That could force you to split the account. Things are definitely changing in WorldMark.
> 
> Steve



Steve, Steve I don't own 60k credits - please check your facts before inserting your.....

We could be invaded by flying saucers too - I don't worry about that either.

Things ARE NOT changing at WM - you're listing to too many rumors.

I haven't set foot in a WM resort in 2+ years now and the next 12 months have me in Marriotts.  The arrangement WM has with II is rock solid - please don't start a rumor that it is not; it will just contribute to the falling WM prices.

Of course it's a great time to buy WM at 65 cents a credit!

If I can offer more cathartic support please let me know - I'm here for you buddy.


----------



## Steve (Aug 19, 2008)

PerryM said:


> Things ARE NOT changing at WM - you're listing to too many rumors.
> 
> 
> Of course it's a great time to buy WM at 65 cents a credit!



Anyone who tries very hard can purchase WorldMark credits for 50 cents a credit.  Things are apparently changing at WM even faster than you realize.


----------



## Latravel (Aug 19, 2008)

Not everyone has to own a Marriott but a lot of people would like to stay there.  I went to a Hilton presentation and they just basically said how they are comparable to Marriott.  When we went to a Diamond/Sunterra presentation in Tahoe, we said we were thinking about buying Timberlodge (we eventually did).  They told us, "Marriott is in a completely different league".  I am part of a different timeshare board and a main topic of conversation is how to trade into Marriotts.  

Though one of the above posters said that not everyone wants a Marriott, it is obviously a high demand product and a leader in the field.


----------



## PerryM (Aug 19, 2008)

Steve said:


> Anyone who tries very hard can purchase WorldMark credits for 50 cents a credit.  Things are apparently changing at WM even faster than you realize.



I bought 65 cents 3 years ago - there are always fools selling for ridicules prices.

I always quote the largest reseller of WM credits - I've kept his eMails since we bought ours 5 years ago for 80 cents.

I did make a forecast, many years ago here on TUG, that I believed resale WM credits would fall to 38 cents - adjusting for inflation that's 43 cents today.  My forecast will be met within a few years.

Does that mean folks should avoid WM - hell no.  WM is a fantastic bargain now - you can easily make 3 - 4 times the rental income versus the MF.  I do all the time.

There are lots of reasons to buy WM even with falling prices.

Folks, you've got to think outside the box a little...


----------



## Latravel (Aug 19, 2008)

When I was at Marriott Maui Ocean Club last April, I asked one of the ladies by the pool which Marriott she owned.  She said she wasn't a Marriott owner, she traded into the MOC with her WorldMark points she purchased from EBAY.  It really made me think.


----------



## tombo (Aug 19, 2008)

PerryM said:


> This is where we disagree – allowing a foolish owner to dump their Marriott at a low price hurts ALL other owners.  Next time we try to sell that low-ball sale will impact us.  It’s out in eBay history for a while and resellers use it in their comps to calculate what a week should sell for.
> 
> This is why I want Marriott to step in and save us from foolish owners who, for a host of reasons, wants to hold a firesale.  That ROFR keeps outsiders from benefiting and hurting the existing owners.
> 
> ...



The arrogance of this quote is amazing. If someone gets divorced, loses their job, or dies leaving a white elephant to their heirs, that doesn't give them the right to get out from under the obligation as quickly as they can for whatever price they can get because it might hurt your resale price! Marriott won't offer to buy their week or find them a buyer, so they must hang in there for months or years until they find someone who will buy their week for a price, any price to stop the bleeding. Of course if they can't afford the MF's, kind old marriott with the wonderful ROFR will put them in collections and get the week for nothing after foreclosing. This will make the resale price zero (that is what Marriott will pay) and add to the owner's problems by damaging their credit at a rough time in their life. 

It doesn't just happen to Worldmark owners. Marriott owners aren't immune from these life changing events. Perry it might come as a shock to you but some Marriott owners will be laid off or fired, 50% or more will get divorced, and I assure you that all Marriott owners will die. You expect them to keep paying MF's they can't afford at a location they can't afford to vacation at until they receive what you consider an acceptable selling price. You said that it is a foolish owner who dumps his/her Marriott week? No Perry, it is an owner in bad health or bad financial situation who dumps their week.The owners with plenty of money keep paying MF's year after year while advertising their week for the high prices which they feel sure they will get thanks to ROFR. After months or years of the reality that they aren't getting any offers sets in they either just keep it because they realize the loss they will incur if they sell, or they finally sell it for a realistic price where they can actually receive a purchase offer. This realistic price probably won't be acceptable to you either so they should hold out on a "good price" for several more years. When the other owners constantly offer their weeks for sale for less than you think they should, the ones holding out for your imaginary sale price will NEVER sell their week. You wouldn't pay someone $1000's more than you could buy the same thing from another owner. Keep holding on to that hope and you will forever own your week.

Quit giving ROFR credit for stopping fire sales. ROFR doesn't stop a single one of those people from having a fire sale. The owners will take any offer they can to get out. It will sell for whatever someone offers them (maybe $1), ROFR or no ROFR. How does Marriott step in and help anything? Marriott weeks are selling cheap every day on e-bay and Marriott isn't stopping a single cheap sale from happening. However thanks to ROFR the person who finally made an offer to get the owner out of their week (something Marriott won't do for them) doesn't end up owning the week. If it wasn't for that bottom feeder the owner would be foreclosed on or have to pay another year's MF's they can't afford.

You don't want any "saps" you don't know buying Marriott resale? I didn't know that potential owners had to go through a Perry meet and greet in order to own Marriott.  I am positive that you know a very small percentage of the current Marriott owners who bought retail or resale.The saps aren't the ones benefiting from the low ball sale price, the saps are the ones who pay retail.

Those of us wh were not born with a silver spoon in our mouth and people with compassion would understand that people hit hard times and can't afford things they used to be able to afford. We wish them the best and hope they find a way to survive until things turn around. You want them to let other bills slide while paying MF's at a vacation resort. They can't, won't, shouldn't, and for you to not understand that is sad.


----------



## AwayWeGo (Aug 19, 2008)

*R. O. F. R. = R. O. F. L.*




tombo said:


> Quit giving ROFR credit for stopping fire sales. ROFR doesn't stop a single one of those people from having a fire sale. The owners will take any offer they can to get out. It will sell for whatever someone offers them (maybe $1), ROFR or no ROFR. How does Marriott step in and help anything? Marriott weeks are selling cheap every day on e-bay and Marriott isn't stopping a single cheap sale from happening. However thanks to ROFR the person who finally made an offer to get the owner out of their week (something Marriott won't do for them) doesn't end up owning the week. If it wasn't for that bottom feeder the owner would be foreclosed on or have to pay another year's MF's they can't afford.


ROFR does not prop up resale values. 

Timeshares still sell cheap (some of'm), ROFR or no ROFR _mox nix_. 

ROFR only stacks the deck so that no one but the timeshare company gets to buy the lowball resales. 

ROFR = ROFL.  

-- Alan Cole, McLean (Fairfax County), Virginia, USA.​


----------



## Pit (Aug 19, 2008)

PerryM said:


> This is where we disagree – allowing a foolish owner to dump their Marriott at a low price hurts ALL other owners.  Next time we try to sell that low-ball sale will impact us.  It’s out in eBay history for a while and resellers use it in their comps to calculate what a week should sell for.
> 
> This is why I want Marriott to step in and save us from foolish owners who, for a host of reasons, wants to hold a firesale.  That ROFR keeps outsiders from benefiting and hurting the existing owners.



I don't follow your logic here. Any owners wishing to hold a firesale, are free to do so. ROFR does nothing to change that. If someone wants to dump their week on ebay, they do so. And that ebay history is sitting out there for everyone to see, regardless of whether Marriott picks up the week or not. Rofr does not alter the sale price. That's a good thing, because it allows prospective buyers to determine market value.

Rofr does, however, make the sales process more cumbersome and time consuming. Then, when Marriott refuses to grant a waiver while also refusing to meet terms of the original sales contract, the owner gets strung out. They either have to fight Marriott to get the waiver, or accept whatever terms Marriott offers.


----------



## timeos2 (Aug 19, 2008)

*The fool is the ROFR believer, sorry*



PerryM said:


> This is where we disagree – allowing a foolish owner to dump their Marriott at a low price hurts ALL other owners.  Next time we try to sell that low-ball sale will impact us.  It’s out in eBay history for a while and resellers use it in their comps to calculate what a week should sell for.



Perry - As smart as you are why can't you see that ROFR does nothing to to prevent the "dump at low price"? It still occurs it's just hidden from the unsuspecting buyer who hears there's a ROFR and surmises that somehow means they get top dollar.  The unit got "dumped at low price" but only Marriott, the shafted potential buyer and the low ball seller know it. It's the ultimate ruse of "protecting your value" while in reality doing worse than nothing to hold prices high. It is a clear case of another smokescreen to making things appear what they are not. All too common in all of timesharing sales/development.


----------



## AwayWeGo (Aug 19, 2008)

*That R. O. F. R. Kool Aid Is Powerful Stuff.*




timeos2 said:


> ROFR does nothing to to prevent the "dump at low price"? It still occurs it's just hidden from the unsuspecting buyer who hears there's a ROFR and surmises that somehow means they get top dollar.  The unit got "dumped at low price" but only Marriott, the shafted potential buyer and the low ball seller know it. It's the ultimate ruse of "protecting your value" while in reality doing worse than nothing to hold prices high. It is a clear case of another smokescreen to making things appear what they are not. All too common in all of timesharing sales/development.


Just a few sips of the ROFR Kool Aid & folks become pretty much immune to the reality. 

ROFR = ROFL. 

So it goes. 

-- Alan Cole, McLean (Fairfax County), Virginia, USA.​


----------



## rsackett (Aug 19, 2008)

When did this thread become about ROFR & Worldmark points?

I get very tired of people who do not own Marriott turning threads into "Why I will not but ROFR timeshares".  I think it is great that you have opinions and stick to them, but why to you always have to bring them up to a group that does not, in general share your opinions?

Do you think it will ever be possible to have a long thread that does not become a ROFR thread, and how you do not need to own Marriott to stay at Marriott?

Ray


----------



## AwayWeGo (Aug 19, 2008)

*I Must Have Missed The WorldMark Part.*




rsackett said:


> When did this thread become about ROFR & Worldmark points?


Surely you're not forgetting about the grand TUG-BBS tradition of hijacking discussion topics -- not that there's anything wrong with that.





rsackett said:


> I think it is great that you have opinions and stick to them, but why to you always have to bring them up to a group that does not, in general share your opinions?


Makes more sense than preaching to the choir, no ? 

-- Alan Cole, McLean (Fairfax County), Virginia, USA.​


----------



## Pit (Aug 19, 2008)

rsackett said:


> When did this thread become about ROFR & Worldmark points?
> 
> I get very tired of people who do not own Marriott turning threads into "Why I will not but ROFR timeshares".  I think it is great that you have opinions and stick to them, but why to you always have to bring them up to a group that does not, in general share your opinions?
> 
> ...



Just a hunch, but I guess that any and every thread discussing Marriott resales will, sooner or later, hit on the subject of rofr.


----------



## GeNioS (Aug 19, 2008)

rsackett said:


> When did this thread become about ROFR?


Perhaps it has something to do with the world _resale_ in the title of thread......(base drum/cymbal)


----------



## PerryM (Aug 19, 2008)

tombo said:


> The arrogance of this quote is amazing. If someone gets divorced, loses their job, or dies leaving a white elephant to their heirs, that doesn't give them the right to get out from under the obligation as quickly as they can for whatever price they can get because it might hurt your resale price! Marriott won't offer to buy their week or find them a buyer, so they must hang in there for months or years until they find someone who will buy their week for a price, any price to stop the bleeding. Of course if they can't afford the MF's, kind old marriott with the wonderful ROFR will put them in collections and get the week for nothing after foreclosing. This will make the resale price zero (that is what Marriott will pay) and add to the owner's problems by damaging their credit at a rough time in their life.
> 
> It doesn't just happen to Worldmark owners. Marriott owners aren't immune from these life changing events. Perry it might come as a shock to you but some Marriott owners will be laid off or fired, 50% or more will get divorced, and I assure you that all Marriott owners will die. You expect them to keep paying MF's they can't afford at a location they can't afford to vacation at until they receive what you consider an acceptable selling price. You said that it is a foolish owner who dumps his/her Marriott week? No Perry, it is an owner in bad health or bad financial situation who dumps their week.The owners with plenty of money keep paying MF's year after year while advertising their week for the high prices which they feel sure they will get thanks to ROFR. After months or years of the reality that they aren't getting any offers sets in they either just keep it because they realize the loss they will incur if they sell, or they finally sell it for a realistic price where they can actually receive a purchase offer. This realistic price probably won't be acceptable to you either so they should hold out on a "good price" for several more years. When the other owners constantly offer their weeks for sale for less than you think they should, the ones holding out for your imaginary sale price will NEVER sell their week. You wouldn't pay someone $1000's more than you could buy the same thing from another owner. Keep holding on to that hope and you will forever own your week.
> 
> ...




The ROFR is just like smoking bans – it curtails folks from doing foolish things that impact others.   The argument “I have the right…” is moot as soon as that activity harms others in unintended ways.

I’m about as conservative as you can get but I support both issues.  Folks can do all the foolish things they want but when their foolishness impacts me I have equal rights too.

I doubt that I can change the mind of the person opposed to the ROFR – I simply state my case for it.

To me there is ample evidence that the ROFR results in higher resale values, assuming the developer find it profitable – it’s 100% optional on the developer’s side.

If a couple divorces and the timeshare is a very sore issue both may agree to sell their Marriott, which sells for $45k, for $100 just to hurt each other – good for them.  However that $100 Marriott has detrimental consequences on ALL remaining owners;  Marriott knows this and simply steps in to keep that $100 out of the public’s grasp.

This has the direct impact of floating resales to the level Marriott decides to snap up a foolish sale and make some bucks for Marriott’s stockholders – good for them.  I want the Marriott sales office kept open and resales as high as possible.

I can’t think of a scenario where the ROFR causes prices to fall – I have yet to see this happen.

The ROFR is a cornerstone to Marriott – the topic of this thread is “Will Marriott penalize resale owners?” the ROFR is an integral part of this topic.

If you want to give your timeshare to a friend for $1 to settle up a poker bet Marriott has every right to yank that sale away and make their stockholders happy!

They built, maintain, and rely on their timeshare reputation and that can't be soiled by poker bets.

P.S.
You all agreed to the ROFR in that paperwork you signed when you bought direct or resale - live by the rules you agreed to - that's my advice to folks.  There ain't anything folks can do otherwise - be happy.


----------



## AwayWeGo (Aug 19, 2008)

*Detrimental Consequences (If Any) Are Intangible.*




PerryM said:


> If a couple divorces and the timeshare is a very sore issue both may agree to sell their Marriott, which sells for $45k, for $100 just to hurt each other – good for them.  However that $100 Marriott has detrimental consequences on ALL remaining owners;  Marriott knows this and simply steps in to keep that $100 out of the public’s grasp.
> 
> This has the direct impact of floating resales to the level Marriott decides to snap up a foolish sale and make some bucks for Marriott’s stockholders – good for them.  I want the Marriott sales office kept open and resales as high as possible.


OK, now you're talking intangibles.  

. . . sizzle, not steak.  

. . . the comfort that comes from knowing that no bottom-feeding bargain hunters could ever buy for nickels on the dollar what all the other owners had to shell out big bux to get.  

. . . the reassurance of not risking exposure to boasting or gloating from any lowball resale buyers.  (Wouldn't want to rub shoulders with any of those types while relaxing in the pool.)

Preserving that shroud of insulation from the bottom-feeding bargain hunters is the only benefit the owners get. 

Here's hoping they all think it's worth it. 

Otherwise, nobody benefits from ROFR but the timeshare company. 

-- Alan Cole, McLean (Fairfax County), Virginia, USA.​


----------



## tombo (Aug 19, 2008)

AwayWeGo said:


> OK, now you're talking intangibles.
> 
> . . . sizzle, not steak.
> 
> ...



Those are very good points I never thought of. After your enightenment I can see why so many owners are supporters of ROFR. If they didin't buy their week for $5000, they don't want anyone else to be able to get one for that price either. It is not that Marriott stopped the $5000 sale from ocurring using ROFr (which marriott can't do), it is the satisfaction of knowing that no one else got to own it for that price. They feel satisfaction that the $5000 sale will be snatched up by Marriott and resold as new for $25,000 or more.

Perry you said:
"I can’t think of a scenario where the ROFR causes prices to fall – I have yet to see this happen."
I have already told you of 3 different e-bay bids in the last month or so that I would have bid $500 to $1000 more than the winning bid on any one of these auctions if there was no ROFR. Those 3 owners lost $500 to $1000 each since the final bid price is all they received whether Marriott ROFR'd or not. These are specific examples of ROFR lowering sale prices, and I own over 20 timeshare weeks so buying 3 more weeks is nothing for me. The fact that I cost those 3 owners $500 to $1000 each because I didn't bid due to ROFR is not a scenario, it is fact.

The fact that ROFR is in the paperwork is why I don't own a week in what I consider the best timeshare organization there is. The reason I keep watching them on e-bay is every now and then I think I might bid and hope it passes ROFR. However ROFR is why I don't own a Marriott and never will bid on one again. I say again because I won 2 different weeks on e-bay and spent all the time doing the closing paperwork and sending my money to find out weeks later that I wouldn't own either week. Now I will never bid again and i will not raise the sale price for the owners wanting every dollar they can get.

Another great Perryism:
"The ROFR is just like smoking bans – it curtails folks from doing foolish things that impact others. The argument “I have the right…” is moot as soon as that activity harms others in unintended ways."
ROFR has never stopped a single owner from selling their week for a low price, and smoking bans have never stopped a single person from smoking. Your analogies are getting weaker. Have another margarita and get back to me. :whoopie:


----------



## PerryM (Aug 19, 2008)

*Moot hoot!*



tombo said:


> Those are very good points I never thought of. After your enightenment I can see why so many owners are supporters of ROFR. If they didin't buy their week for $5000, they don't want anyone else to be able to get one for that price either. It is not that Marriott stopped the $5000 sale from ocurring using ROFr (which marriott can't do), it is the satisfaction of knowing that no one else got to own it for that price. They feel satisfaction that the $5000 sale will be snatched up by Marriott and resold as new for $25,000 or more.
> 
> Perry you said:
> "I can’t think of a scenario where the ROFR causes prices to fall – I have yet to see this happen."
> ...





Isn’t all of this just a moot point and that no one really gives a hoot?  There isn’t anything we can do, there isn’t anything that Marriott will do differently.

The ROFR is an integral part of Marriott ownership and if folks feel that it hurts them there are other developers – Wyndham comes to mind.  There you can buy for 15 cents on the dollar resale and owners who bought direct lose 85 cents on the dollar – sounds good to me…  They don't have a ROFR and owners hold firesales 24/7.


----------



## tombo (Aug 19, 2008)

There are currently 45 Marriott timeshares on e-bay for sale 24/7 at fire sale prices. Marriott ROFR hasn't stopped a single fire sale from occuring.


----------



## PerryM (Aug 19, 2008)

tombo said:


> There are currently 45 Marriott timeshares on e-bay for sale 24/7 at fire sale prices. Marriott ROFR hasn't stopped a single fire sale from occuring.



Just makes Marriott richer.... few of those "buyers" will become owners and eBay make a tidy profit too.

Times are tough for lots of folks and they do all kinds of foolish things - someone will profit from those foolish decisions.  I'd rather see Marriott stay strong at the resort than an outsider get a firesale deal.

That's my view point - others have theirs.  Makes little difference since Marriott controls it all.


----------



## AwayWeGo (Aug 19, 2008)

*Confession Is Good For The Soul.*




PerryM said:


> I'd rather see Marriott stay strong at the resort than an outsider get a firesale deal.


That clears it up quite a bit, no ? 

That piece of information gets filed under the heading _Suspicions Confirmed_. 

-- Alan Cole, McLean (Fairfax County), Virginia, USA.​


----------



## taffy19 (Aug 19, 2008)

tombo said:


> Lowering your offer is one option. Many of us who buy a lot of timeshares simply refuse to make any offer at all at a resort that has ROFR. Contrary to many people's belief here, buyers don't have to buy marriott weeks at any price, and we don't feel obligated to raise our price. We simply don't make any offer at all thanks to ROFR. Marriott's are great timeshares, but even on TUG, only about 25% of TUG members own Marriott. 75% of TUG members seem happy without a Marriott week.
> 
> I don't want to own at any resort that has ROFR because I want to be able to sell my week I paid for in full, to anyone I want ,for any price I want. If I want to sell my week to my secretary or neighbor for $1, I own it, pay MF's on it, and I'll be damned if any resort will tell me who I can sell my week to or at what price.
> 
> ...


Some TUG people would bid on these timeshares anyway and if Marriott buys it from under them, they will try again. It didn't cost them a dime but time if you make a smart offer with the right contingencies. I don't see your logic here but that makes less competition for the people who do and want to own that resort, Marriott or otherwise.  

We learned the ropes too late but have enough timeshare weeks already and keep enjoying them a little longer, I hope.


----------



## tombo (Aug 19, 2008)

Dumping a vacation expense when you are suffering financially couild never be construed as a foolish thing. I woulld love to sick Dave Ramsey on you. Call Dave and say that you are broke, unemployed, getting a divorce, but you aren't sure if you should take a firesale offer for your Marriott week. Tell him that it might hurt the resale value of other owners. You would be crucified.

I don't understand how you rejoice in Marriott getting richer on the backs of owner's in financial distress. Individual's getting a good deal is bad? Marriott getting a good deal is good? Heck, Marriott got a great deal when they sold the week originally. Now it is time for the average Joe to get a break. I am sure that Marriott will appreciate your loyalty if you are ever between a rock and a hard place. Your repo letter will be in the mail.


----------



## dioxide45 (Aug 19, 2008)

tombo said:


> Dumping a vacation expense when you are suffering financially couild never be construed as a foolish thing. I woulld love to sick Dave Ramsey on you. Call Dave and say that you are broke, unemployed, getting a divorce, but you aren't sure if you should take a firesale offer for your Marriott week. Tell him that it might hurt the resale value of other owners. You would be crucified.



Dave would probably say how foolish you were to buy in the first place, resale or retail. Though your statement is true about hurting the resale value of other owners. You really should be watching Suze Orman though


----------



## McFail (Aug 19, 2008)

tombo said:


> Dumping a vacation expense when you are suffering financially couild never be construed as a foolish thing. I woulld love to sick Dave Ramsey on you. Call Dave and say that you are broke, unemployed, getting a divorce, but you aren't sure if you should take a firesale offer for your Marriott week. Tell him that it might hurt the resale value of other owners. You would be crucified.
> 
> I don't understand how you rejoice in Marriott getting richer on the backs of owner's in financial distress. Individual's getting a good deal is bad? Marriott getting a good deal is good? Heck, Marriott got a great deal when they sold the week originally. Now it is time for the average Joe to get a break. I am sure that Marriott will appreciate your loyalty if you are ever between a rock and a hard place. Your repo letter will be in the mail.


.

Perry is being, well, Perry. Just as he is entitled to want Marriott to have success, you are entitled to worry about the little guy. This thread is not really about either topic. Maybe it is time to move on.


----------



## davidvel (Aug 19, 2008)

iconnections said:


> It didn't cost them a dime but time if you make a smart offer with the right contingencies. I don't see your logic here but that makes less competition for the people who do and want to own that resort, Marriott or otherwise.


You cannot say that it does not cost a buyer money when they are ROFR'd. Time is money. Someone plunks down $5K-$20K to be held by some unknown title company waiting for ROFR to be waived, while they cannot bid on other units on the market. Then after all this time and stress, they find out Marriott bought it out from under them. Some argue this will make them bid more to beat the ROFR, but this is not how markets work. People bid the market price (ie., what a seller will take...) and will become soured in the future, leaving the market (lowering overall purchase demand). 

Further any real estate professional will tell you that a ROFR on any kind of property acts as a cloud on title and lowers the purchase offers--this is a given in the industry. (Uncertainty does not give a potential purchaser confidence.)  This is compounded in the Marriott TS market as (nearly) all units have ROFR. Imagine you are buying a house in a particular city and the original developer has ROFR on all houses in that city. You put in a offer, it is accepted, but have to wait 30-45 days to find out if you lose out to developer. Meantime, you are out of the market for that time, and cannot actively bid on other properties. Ask any real estate economics expert if an ROFR on a property _increases_ its marketability and sale price.


----------



## tombo (Aug 19, 2008)

davidvel said:


> You cannot say that it does not cost a buyer money when they are ROFR'd. Time is money. Someone plunks down $5K-$20K to be held by some unknown title company waiting for ROFR to be waived, while they cannot bid on other units on the market. Then after all this time and stress, they find out Marriott bought it out from under them. Some argue this will make them bid more to beat the ROFR, but this is not how markets work. People bid the market price (ie., what a seller will take...) and will become soured in the future, leaving the market (lowering overall purchase demand).
> 
> Further any real estate prefessional will tell you that a ROFR on any kind of property acts as a cloud on title and lowers the purchase offers--this is a given in the industry. (Uncertainty does not give a potential purchaser confidence.)  This is compounded in the Marriott TS market as all units have ROFR. Imagine you are buying a house in a particular city and the original developer has ROFR on all houses in that city. You put in a offer, it is accepted, but have to wait 30-45 days to find out if you lose out to developer. Meantime, you are out of the market for that time, and cannot actively bid on other properties. Ask any real estate economics expert if an ROFR on a property _increases_ its marketability and sale price.



Great response, and exactly why I will never bid or make an offer on a resort that has ROFR.


----------



## Pit (Aug 20, 2008)

The impact of ROFR will likely be debated on TUG until eternity. For those with time to kill and an analytical interest in ROFR, study the following paper. It's not light reading, but does offer insight.

http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=621181

Reader's Digest version:



> We have shown that granting the ROFR to a special buyer reduces the selling price of the object in a second-price auction: the seller is always worse off when a buyer has been granted the ROFR.



In other words, don't put yourself in the position of owning property on which someone else holds a ROFR. Unless, of course, you will never sell the property (in which case ROFR never comes into play).


----------



## davidvel (Aug 20, 2008)

Pit said:


> For those with time to kill and an analytical interest in ROFR, study the following paper. It's not light reading, but does offer insight.
> 
> http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=621181


What does that guy know?


----------



## PerryM (Aug 20, 2008)

*ROFR helped me*



Pit said:


> The impact of ROFR will likely be debated on TUG until eternity. For those with time to kill and an analytical interest in ROFR, study the following paper. It's not light reading, but does offer insight.
> 
> http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=621181
> 
> ...




Anyone can write a paper and have it published – who knows what qualifications these folks have and if it even is written by some high-school kids.  But it is an opinion outside of the parties here – I’ll accept that.

I look at what the status quo is in timeshares and the timeshares with the highest resale percentages all seem to have ROFRs and the lowest resale percentages seem to have NO ROFRs.

The ONLY way to get a more definitive answer is to have a group and split it into 2 parts – one with a ROFR and one without a ROFR and watch the results.  I’m not sure such a trial is even possible.  If anyone can find such a test I will accept their verdict!

Until then I’ll go with my gut feeling that the ROFR benefits the owners, the developers, and causes the buyers to raise their prices to above the ROFR level.  Theoretical papers can probably be found to bolster both sides.

But again, this entire discussion is theoretical – the ROFR exists for Marriott resorts and it isn’t going away; and to top it off we all agreed to the ROFR.  As a seller I used it to force the buyers into raising their offers on my 3 of my 5 Marriotts I sold.  Without that ROFR I doubt that my offers would have been no where near the levels that I sold.  My weeks were high demand holiday weeks that were sold out but Marriott was still selling non-holiday weeks.  Thanks ROFR.

So to keep from answering bottom-feeders simply state in your listing that the ROFR by Marriott is around $xx,xxx and that offers below that will probably be snapped up by Marriott.  Also point out that anyone selling a Marriott that does not advise buyers of this fact are dubious at best!!!  (If the ROFR is in effect)

Use the ROFR to your advantage.


----------



## taffy19 (Aug 20, 2008)

davidvel said:


> You cannot say that it does not cost a buyer money when they are ROFR'd. Time is money. Someone plunks down $5K-$20K to be held by some unknown title company waiting for ROFR to be waived, while they cannot bid on other units on the market. Then after all this time and stress, they find out Marriott bought it out from under them. Some argue this will make them bid more to beat the ROFR, but this is not how markets work. People bid the market price (ie., what a seller will take...) and will become soured in the future, leaving the market (lowering overall purchase demand).
> 
> Further any real estate professional will tell you that a ROFR on any kind of property acts as a cloud on title and lowers the purchase offers--this is a given in the industry. (Uncertainty does not give a potential purchaser confidence.)  This is compounded in the Marriott TS market as (nearly) all units have ROFR. Imagine you are buying a house in a particular city and the original developer has ROFR on all houses in that city. You put in a offer, it is accepted, but have to wait 30-45 days to find out if you lose out to developer. Meantime, you are out of the market for that time, and cannot actively bid on other properties. Ask any real estate economics expert if an ROFR on a property _increases_ its marketability and sale price.


You mean that you put $5,000 to 20,000 *deposit* down when most timeshares don't even cost that much re-sale?  I was under the impression that the balance is paid when escrow is ready to close.  Is that different with re-sale purchases as we have never done one yet?  Most people, who buy timeshares for use and enjoyment, are not in the business of buying multiple timeshares one after the other unless you have many vacation weeks.  How many people fall in that category?  I would think very few unless you are self-employed dealing in timeshares for rent or buying and selling for your timeshare business.  For you, it may be money wasted but not for the average person with a small deposit.  What is the average deposit anyway to make an offer?

PS.  Sooner or later you will be very limited in what you can buy because more timeshare developers are putting this clause in their contract now and even some condo developments too if they can get away with it.


----------



## davidvel (Aug 20, 2008)

iconnections said:


> You mean that you put $5,000 to 20,000 *deposit* down when most timeshares don't even cost that much re-sale?


Just to make it clear my post was not about me but the market in general. 


iconnections said:


> For you, it may be money wasted but not for the average person with a small deposit.


Not sure what you mean by money wasted, but my post was in response to a person who said that (to paraphrase)-it's no skin off a buyer's back if they are ROFR'd by Marriott. Purchases of resale weeks generally require most or all of the purchase price prior to receiving ROFR notice. If one doesn't care about tying up thousands of $$ and being unable to bid on other properties for weeks on end, they aren't worried about what is a good deal.


----------



## taffy19 (Aug 20, 2008)

davidvel said:


> Purchases of resale weeks generally require most or all of the purchase price prior to receiving ROFR notice. If one doesn't care about tying up thousands of $$ and being unable to bid on other properties for weeks on end, they aren't worried about what is a good deal.


I had no idea that you have to pay most of the money in advance before you get your ROFR clearance by the resort.     I thought you only pay a small deposit when you make an offer which is the norm when you buy real estate.  A timeshare purchase *isn't real estate* so that must explain why you have to pay more.

If people only knew this in advance that you aren't buying real estate, they wouldn't be so upset but what you buy is the use of the property with the Marriott, Hyatt, Starwood or Hilton name attached to the resort which means a certain standard so this is why they control the HOA as well as the maintenance company too which makes it more expensive than smaller independent developers with fewer amenities and no brand name attached to it.

I still see all the big timeshare developers taking more rights away from the owners so they can sell them as extra perks to people who buy direct from the resort which will hurt re-sale values.  They sell the concept of leaving your timeshare to your estate after you pass on and the word "sale" is never mentioned during a presentation.


----------



## ricki999 (Aug 20, 2008)

In reference to tying up funds,

In my experience, Marriott has responded quickly to ROFR, usually within 1 week of the contract submission. 

It has been my observation that sellers requiring full funds to be deposited prior to a ROFR determination by Marriott are not usually the actual title holders of the property, but are likely acting as a middle person, and possibly using a double closing to handle the sale.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double_closing

I have a suspicion that some delays in ROFR determinations are actually caused by the seller delaying submission.  Possibly because there is more than 1 contract in play.  Another contract that Marriott and the actual buyer may not have an opportunity to see.


----------



## PerryM (Aug 20, 2008)

ricki999 said:


> In reference to tying up funds,
> 
> In my experience, Marriott has responded quickly to ROFR, usually within 1 week of the contract submission.
> 
> ...



THIS IS A GREAT POINT!

If you are the buyer and a ROFR is involved INSIST that the ROFR eMail be sent to Marriott and a CC to you and DO NOT send ANY money until the ROFR has been retuned.

This is something that must be discussed BEFORE you bid or make an offer.  Notify the seller that you, the buyer, are second in line and that there is no reason to pay money until the primary buyer, Marriott in our case, decides what to do.

If the seller won't do this move on to the next seller.

Much/Most of the time the seller hasn't a clue what a ROFR is and needs to be educated.  If a reseller is involved they will strong arm you into coughing up money that will simply get tangled up if Marriott exercises the ROFR.  Demand the money go into an escrow account while the ROFR is being decided.  You control the purse strings...


----------



## davidvel (Aug 20, 2008)

iconnections said:


> A timeshare purchase *isn't real estate* so that must explain why you have to pay more.
> 
> If people only knew this in advance that you aren't buying real estate, they wouldn't be so upset but what you buy is the use of the property with the Marriott, Hyatt, Starwood or Hilton name attached to the resort which means a certain standard so this is why they control the HOA as well as the maintenance company too which makes it more expensive than smaller independent developers with fewer amenities and no brand name attached to it.


In California a Marriott timeshare _is_ real estate. You receive a fractional deed to a condominium unit restricted and benefitted by CC&Rs and a timeshare declaration. Marriott simply has management and licensing contracts with the HOA and must abide by those recorded docs.


----------



## Pit (Aug 20, 2008)

PerryM said:


> Anyone can write a paper and have it published – who knows what qualifications these folks have and if it even is written by some high-school kids.  But it is an opinion outside of the parties here – I’ll accept that.



The primary author is a professor in the management school at UCLA (not a high-school kid). Just as important, it is a sceintific study of ROFR from a disinterested, third-party. If you have uncovered a flaw in their analysis, please share it with us. Otherwise, I see no reason to discard their results.



PerryM said:


> I look at what the status quo is in timeshares and the timeshares with the highest resale percentages all seem to have ROFRs and the lowest resale percentages seem to have NO ROFRs.



Correlation does not imply causation. Resale prices are determined by supply and demand, not ROFR. Where resale percentages are weak, it is not due to lack of ROFR. It is the result of the developer taking steps to devalue resale weeks. An example is excluding resale weeks from premium reservation or exchange privileges. A clear example of this can be seen by comparing Starwood mandatory and Starwood voluntary resales. Resale percentages at mandatory resorts are much higher than at voluntary resorts due to the exclusion of voluntary resales from their internal points program (SVN).

Marriott resales do well because they offer a nice product that is in demand. This would still be the case in the abscence of ROFR (again Starwood mandatory resorts offer a good reference), and ROFR _will not_ protect owners from devaluation if Marriott limits resale reservations to 6 months. Resale prices will drop in spite of ROFR, and Marriott will simply exercise ROFR at the lower price point. Nice for Marriott, but not for owners. Thus, ROFR offers no price protection to owners, it simply allows Marriott to sit in the catbird seat.



PerryM said:


> The ONLY way to get a more definitive answer is to have a group and split it into 2 parts – one with a ROFR and one without a ROFR and watch the results.  I’m not sure such a trial is even possible.  If anyone can find such a test I will accept their verdict!
> 
> Until then I’ll go with my gut feeling that the ROFR benefits the owners, the developers, and causes the buyers to raise their prices to above the ROFR level.  Theoretical papers can probably be found to bolster both sides.



I've seen no scientific study concluding ROFR is good for the timeshare owner. I realize this view doesn't agree with your gut, but the sage advice is to follow the money, not your gut. The UCLA study demonstrates that the money flows to the developer at the expense of both sellers and other buyers.

This is not to say an individual seller can never benefit from ROFR. I'm certain there are examples of buyers who overpaid because of ROFR, but the net effect is detrimental to sellers and buyers.

Casino gambling offers a good analogy. In any casino, you can find some players that were lucky enough to come out ahead. But in the aggregate, the money flows to the casino, by design. So it is with ROFR.


----------



## davidvel (Aug 20, 2008)

Pit said:


> Nice for Marriott, but not for owners. Thus, ROFR offers no price protection to owners, it simply allows Marriott to sit in the catbird seat.
> . . .
> The UCLA study demonstrates that the money flows to the developer at the expense of both sellers and other buyers.


But that's exactly what Perry likes so much! Marriot makes more $$, and the "bottom feeders" (bargain hunters?)  are kept out!


----------



## PerryM (Aug 20, 2008)

*I'm for the Marriott owners, like me*



Pit said:


> The primary author is a professor in the management school at UCLA (not a high-school kid). Just as important, it is a sceintific study of ROFR from a disinterested, third-party. If you have uncovered a flaw in their analysis, please share it with us. Otherwise, I see no reason to discard their results.
> 
> 
> 
> ...





Supply and demand I know – it’s all in the minds of the buyers and sellers.

If anything Marriott should send a simple eMail to ALL Marriott owners explaining the ROFR – and suggest that selling their Marriott for peanuts will result in the buyer shoved aside and Marriott takes over – if Marriott wants that week.

They should also suggest that selling their Marriott for 60% of the current Marriott price will result in more money in the owner’s pocket.

But Marriott won’t do such a thing since there are foolish Marriott owners hell bent on holding their own firesale.

This is an education problem and NOT a supply and demand problem since there really isn’t a free market here with the ROFR – that’s what the ROFR papers I’ve read here seem to keep pointing out – I believe them.

So hopefully any Marriott owner stumbling upon this thread should be asking for 60% of current Marriott sales prices – why allow Marriott to buy your unit for less than 60%?

The more Marriott owners know these facts the higher resale prices – this helps ALL Marriott owners.  The buyer is never going to get that firesale price anyway.  (Unless Marriott sees the week as a dog and doesn’t want it – the bottom-feeders are welcome to those weeks – they pay the same MF as the Platinum Plus owners.  Woo Hoo)


The ROFR benefits Marriott owners FIRST and the developer SECOND and the bottom-feeders LAST.

P.S.
This issue is so clear to me that I can't believe other Marriott owners would oppose the ROFR.

*If every Marriott owner asked for 60% of current Marriott sales the ROFR would NOT be an issue.*

The ROFR is aimed squarely at the week-kneed Marriott owner hell bent on selling their unit for less than 60% - simply up your asking price and the ROFR will work for you and enrich your family's well being.

But if you're in a financial bind and need a few bucks go ahead and sell it for less than 60% and you will have your sale.  Marriott will make a profit and the bottom-feeder is left to swim for another firesale.

Who can ask for more than that?

(Well we bottom-feeders of course)  Why are we so concerned with them - screw them.

P.P.S.
From reading a dozen ROFR papers from academia *I think they are doing studies on a different ROFR than what we Marriott owners enjoy*.  In the scholarly papers I never see them describing a well know ROFR sale price that is known to ALL parties, if they had the foresight to do a little research.  They seem to concentrate on an unknown price level that is known ONLY to the 3rd party.

For this reason I'm ignoring all those papers - until I can find one where the ROFR "trip wire" price is known to all 3 parties.  Any reseller worth their salt knows of the Marriott 60% level and it's been documented on TUG a thousand times.

Let's not mix apples and oranges in this analysis.


----------



## AwayWeGo (Aug 20, 2008)

*Who's To Say What's Good For The Owners?  (Some Place Great Value On Intangibles.)*




Pit said:


> I've seen no scientific study concluding ROFR is good for the timeshare owner.


Well, it does keep out the bargain-hunting bottom-feeder riffraff, because with ROFR the only way to buy in is for big bux.  Who's to say that's not good for the timeshare owner, in an abstract sort of way ? 

The real question is how much it's worth to the owners in dollars & cents to make sure all other owners get fleeced to approximately the same degree.  

Unfortunately, ROFR doesn't jack up the prices individual timeshare owners receive on resale.  That's just a superstition the timeshare sellers have had wondrous success in spreading. 

All ROFR does is give the timeshare company the exclusive right to snap up the lowball resales -- so that the timeshare company can resell the resales for big bux.  If that's good for the timeshare owner, it's good only in a rarefied & abstract way, which goes right along with the warm intangible glow of knowing nobody bought in on the cheap. 

-- Alan Cole, McLean (Fairfax County), Virginia, USA.​


----------



## vacationtime1 (Aug 20, 2008)

PerryM said:


> The ONLY way to get a more definitive answer is to have a group and split it into 2 parts – one with a ROFR and one without a ROFR and watch the results.  I’m not sure such a trial is even possible.  If anyone can find such a test I will accept their verdict!



It is really hard to do any experiment in the World of Timeshare where we have insufficient information in lots of areas, starting with the lack of public awareness that there is a resale market.  That results in the insufficient data which PerryM describes.

But there is one situation close to PerryM's desired test case:  Desert Springs I vs. Desert Springs II/Shadow Ridge.  All are Marriotts, all are in the Palm Springs area, and all are basically similar.  

DSI has no ROFR; DSII and SR have it.

DSI has _slightly_ larger units, is closer to the Marriott Hotel, and has use privileges at the hotel; DSII and SR do not have hotel use privileges.  However, DSI is older.  I sure there are other differences, but I believe they are minor.

I don't track sales in these projects closely, but my impression is that DSI _generally_ sells for a couple of thousand dollars more.


----------



## Pit (Aug 20, 2008)

Perry, the problem with your logic is that buyers determine what a unit is worth, not the seller. The seller can ask for 60%, 100%, or the moon, but the buyer decides what its worth.

Robert has cited an example of ROFR in action. Perhaps ROFR is the reason DSII/SR owners sell for thousands less than DSI owners. In auction sales, attracting more bidders is the key to higher sale prices. ROFR drives away would-be bidders, accounting for the lower sale prices.




> Stick with eBay. Research into various different auction websites revealed that eBay attracted almost 60 percent more bidders and 30 percent higher prices than identical items on Yahoo’s online auctions. Unable to keep up, Yahoo shut down its US auction site last month. But in countries where Yahoo is dominant, it enjoys similar results.
> 
> http://www.csmonitor.com/2007/0716/p13s02-wmgn.html?page=4


----------



## tombo (Aug 20, 2008)

PerryM said:


> Supply and demand I know – it’s all in the minds of the buyers and sellers.
> 
> They should also suggest that selling their Marriott for 60% of the current Marriott price will result in more money in the owner’s pocket.
> 
> ...



Perry I don't believe you can possibly believe what you post. I feel like it has to be tongue in cheek sarcasm. 

You somehow say that all any owner has to do is raise their sale price to 60% of Marriott's retail price and they will sell it for a good price. Why stop there, raise it to 90%, heck make it 100% of the retail price. You will have the same thing either way, a pipe dream ad making yourself and other Marriott owners proud of the high prices resale weeks are bringing. The ads by "fools" at a lower price make you mad, but those ads might actually create a sale for the owner.. Raising the prices doesn't increase the number of buyers willing to purchase your week, it severelly limits who is willing to buy. There are thousands of resale Marriott weeks for sale at any given time, and many remain for sale for months or years with no offers. The only way to sell most of these weeks is to keep lowering your price until you find a buyer. Holding on to an unreasonable price that doesn't generate an offer from a buyer for years is as you like to say "foolish".

There is an owner who posted a thread ( http://www.tugbbs.com/forums/showthread.php?t=79493) talking about many weeks for sale at his resort on red week with owners continuing to drop prices, however in about 10 months he said none have sold. They don't understand Perrynomics. Perrynomics say that when you offer a week for sale at 40% of retail and you receive no offers, the obvious answer is to raise your price to 60% or more of retail and a buyer will appear. In regular economics as the price of an item increases, the number of buyers decreases. Obviously all the economic books are wrong and should be replaced with a book on Perrynomics. It would make a great fictional read.


----------



## davidvel (Aug 20, 2008)

PerryM said:


> If anything Marriott should send a simple eMail to ALL Marriott owners explaining the ROFR – and suggest that selling their Marriott for peanuts will result in the buyer shoved aside and Marriott takes over – if Marriott wants that week.


Absolutely, because those owners who are trying to sell, WANT to sell for peanuts--if they only had an e-mail from Marriott they would raise their reserve and then instantly have a buyer at the higher price--dumb desperate sellers never got the e-mail. Apparently all the buyers got a different e-mail and don't bid up the price to 60% of retail. 


PerryM said:


> They should also suggest that selling their Marriott for 60% of the current Marriott price will result in more money in the owner’s pocket.


Of course, the owner will instantly get more money as there will be a buyer at that price. 

Maybe we should send a similar e-mail to all those people who can't sell their house to cover their mortgage, then they would realize, just raise your asking price for your house above the loan amount and then somone will buy it and you can pay off the loan and not go into foreclosure.  





PerryM said:


> This is an education problem and NOT a supply and demand problem since there really isn’t a free market here with the ROFR – that’s what the ROFR papers I’ve read here seem to keep pointing out – I believe them.


Absolutely. Just educate people in the market what to sell for (and buy for?) and that will trump basic market principles. Marriott  should educate itself too. It should double or triple its retail prices and charge the same for silver and Platinum weeks: "voila" more money in _MARRIOTT'S_ pocket! 



PerryM said:


> So hopefully any Marriott owner stumbling upon this thread should be asking for 60% of current Marriott sales prices – why allow Marriott to buy your unit for less than 60%?


Bingo! Those silly sellers want to sell for less for some reason. If they only read this thread they would realize that it is better to sell for more, than sell for less!


----------



## EZ-ED (Aug 21, 2008)

LOL - this thread is a hoot!!!

I have a two step process for TS salespeople, including Marriott's.

Step 1:

remember this "ALL TIME SHARE SALESPEOPLE STRETCH THE TRUTH - aka LIE"

Step 2:

If you see the TS sales persons lips move then "go to step 1"

Follow my two step program and you will never have to worry about what a timeshare sales person tells you. :whoopie: Make them put it in writing.


----------



## PerryM (Aug 21, 2008)

*Perrynomics 101*



Pit said:


> Perry, the problem with your logic is that buyers determine what a unit is worth, not the seller. The seller can ask for 60%, 100%, or the moon, but the buyer decides what its worth.
> ...



Ok, just tell Marriott that you won't pay the $80k for week 52 at MountainSide but only it's true worth $20k....



tombo said:


> .
> ...
> replaced with a book on Perrynomics.
> ...



I like that - I'm going to steal that great motto...


Ok, I now understand our failure to communicate here - It's Perrynomics!  I must confess it's not my idea but Marriott's; I assumed all of you knew my principles and thus glossed over detailing them.

You guys think that the Marriott system is a free market - subject to the ebb and flow of supply and demand.  It's not and it runs under a completely different set of rules.  The ROFR is one of them.  THE MARRIOTT SYSTEM IS A RIGGED MARKET – IT IS NOT A FREE MARKET!  When was the last time Marriott's selling price flowed with the free market - right now it should be plummeting in price - why not???

I think some here are so confused that I'm not going to debate the issue simply lecture the finer points of the Marriott World of Economics (Perrynomics; I like that term).

Let's take the example of a week 52 at MountainSide.  I don't have the latest sales price but it's somewhere around $80k to $90k+.

Marriott sells week 52 for $80k and will not budge on the price – they don’t haggle, they won’t give you a “frequent buyer” discount, they won’t give you a “Holiday Sale” – nothing but $80k.  They will play around with MRPs which can be very substantial.

MountainSide is 8 years old and long ago sold out.  However, Marriott sticks with its marketing plan even here.  Timeshare developers selling price is about 4 (four) times the real estate value.  We all know this – 50% of the selling price is marketing and sales related.  Of the remaining 50% half of that is for profit, operations, and contribution to the Marriott name. *That leaves just 25% of the selling price for the real worth of the Marriott*; $20k in this example.

Will you ever see a MS Week 52 for sale on eBay for $20k?  You could but no eBay buyer will ever become the proud owner at that crazy price – Marriott will exercise the ROFR and recycle the unit.  It MUST protect the imaginary market it created.

Now there are plenty of timeshare systems out there where free market forces do work.  Wyndham is such an example.  If Wyndham had a comparable week to sell for $80k you would find many units for sale at $12k!!!!  Wyndham resales follow the 15% of developer prices almost universally.

Wyndham is an example of where the laws of supply and demand crash with Perrynomics - the developer sells for 4 times real estate value and then turns their back and the laws of supply and demand take over and resales are 15% of developers'.

Since we owners live in the market Marriott created you can’t use the normal laws of supply and demand -  you can’t mix and match them – Marriott will see to that.

This is why if Marriott removed the ROFR resale Marriott prices would gravitate towards their true worth – 25% of the current sales price.  Then seller forces would reduce that even further.  I don’t know about you guys but I don’t want to be part of that.  Keep the dream alive by honoring the ROFR!

For all these reasons I believe we live in a "Timeshare Bubble" that will one day burst.  I can't tell you when but at some point the true laws of supply and demand will take over.  Until then use Perrynomics when you sell your unit; demand higher prices when you sell.

Conclusion:
Sell your unit for 60% of Marriott's selling price and you will get 140% more than the true worth of the real estate value.  If everybody does this we will keep the dream alive.  *Don't sell for less and try to screw us!!!!*


----------



## AwayWeGo (Aug 21, 2008)

*Perrynomics, Shmerrymomics.*




PerryM said:


> Until then use Perrynomics when you sell your unit; demand higher prices when you sell.


You can demand higher prices all you want, but all the unit will ever sell for is what somebody will offer for it -- i.e., the level to which its true value has already plummeted.  

That doesn't mean regular walking-around riffraff can _buy_ it at its post-plummet actual-value price.  It only means that all the owner can receive by selling it is its actual shrunken value.  

Without propping up the market value in any way, ROFR makes it so that only the timeshare company gets to buy units at true resale value. 

The purposes of ROFR are (1) to augment the satisfaction of full-freight owners by excluding bargain buyers from the rarefied air of ownership in some particular timeshare chains & (2) to stack the deck in favor of the timeshare company. 

For regular people, ROFR = ROFL. 

For the timeshare company, ROFR = laughing all the way to the bank. 

-- Alan Cole, McLean (Fairfax County), Virginia, USA.​


----------



## JimIg23 (Aug 21, 2008)

AwayWeGo said:


> Without propping up the market value in any way, ROFR makes it so that only the timeshare company gets to buy units at true resale value.
> 
> 
> -- Alan Cole, McLean (Fairfax County), Virginia, USA.​



Based on the values of most timeshares, I tend to agree with this.  However, at the end of the day, if someone wants to buy a Marriott resale, after being ROFRed six times, unless they get lucky they have to offer around the ROFR price to buy it.  I was ROFRed more times than I can remember, but at the end of the day, I wanted to buy Marriott so I raised my offer (to the level of ROFR learned from TUG).  Now, because of my contracts there are probably 6-8 people who sold their Marriotts, but I only got 2 of them.  Am I upset, not really, because I knew that going in.  Now, Marriott may waive ROFR sometimes, but I have yet to hear them passing on a TS that was 25% of what they could sell it for.


----------



## AwayWeGo (Aug 21, 2008)

*Roffer & Roffle In The Real World ?*




JimIg23 said:


> However, at the end of the day, if someone wants to buy a Marriott resale, after being ROFRed six times, unless they get lucky they have to offer around the ROFR price to buy it.  I was ROFRed more times than I can remember, but at the end of the day, I wanted to buy Marriott so I raised my offer (to the level of ROFR learned from TUG).  Now, because of my contracts there are probably 6-8 people who sold their Marriotts, but I only got 2 of them.


OK, if I'm understanding this correctly -- a big _if_ in my case -- those 6-8 times your offers got _roffered_ by the timeshare company, the sellers got no more money by being forced to sell to the timeshare company than they would have got from you.  That is, you were prevented from buying lowball because the timeshare _roffered_ your lowball deals right out from under you. 

Then later, those 2 times when your resale offers went through, was that because you bid higher the current ROFR price?  Or was it because the timeshare company was not exercising ROFR at the time? 

I'm a strong believer that _roffer_ equals _roffle_.  But if you completed a resale by offering _more_ than the timeshare was offering on its _roffers_, then that sure looks like an instance where _roffer_ _did_ support the resale value, no ? 

Then again, if it was merely the case that the timeshare company wasn't exercising _roffer_ at the time, then ROFR still = ROFL, right ? 

In any case, it's nice to have somebody's actual experience with ROFR added to the discussion, which so far has been heavier on theory than on what happens in the real world. 

-- Alan Cole, McLean (Fairfax County), Virginia, USA.​


----------



## JimIg23 (Aug 21, 2008)

AwayWeGo said:


> OK, if I'm understanding this correctly -- a big _if_ in my case -- those 6-8 times your offers got _roffered_ by the timeshare company, the sellers got no more money by being forced to sell to the timeshare company than they would have got from you.  That is, you were prevented from buying lowball because the timeshare _roffered_ your lowball deals right out from under you.
> 
> The bids were pretty much at what Tuggers thought were the ROFR levels.[/COLOR]
> 
> ...




See above............


----------



## PerryM (Aug 22, 2008)

JimIg23 said:


> Based on the values of most timeshares, I tend to agree with this.  However, at the end of the day, if someone wants to buy a Marriott resale, after being ROFRed six times, unless they get lucky they have to offer around the ROFR price to buy it.  I was ROFRed more times than I can remember, but at the end of the day, I wanted to buy Marriott so I raised my offer (to the level of ROFR learned from TUG).  Now, because of my contracts there are probably 6-8 people who sold their Marriotts, but I only got 2 of them.  Am I upset, not really, because I knew that going in.  Now, Marriott may waive ROFR sometimes, but I have yet to hear them passing on a TS that was 25% of what they could sell it for.



Q.E.D.

The rest of you guys can keep demanding lower selling prices if you like; me I demanded a higher selling price of 60% to 80% of Marriott's and I got them.  

Try it you'll like it.

But if you are hell bent on holding a firesale realize that ONLY Marriott will profit from your foolish decision.

I'm unsubscribing from this thread - getting boring and I know it will be back next week.

C U


----------



## tombo (Aug 22, 2008)

PerryM said:


> Q.E.D.
> 
> The rest of you guys can keep demanding lower selling prices if you like; me I demanded a higher selling price of 60% to 80% of Marriott's and I got them.
> 
> ...




Bored equals too many people with facts on their side? The fact that everyone (including you) knows that a week for sale for $20,000 will never sell when identical weeks are for sale for $10,000 is non-refutable.The economic models absolutelly refute the ROFR at 60% regardless of prevailing prices argument. Of course Perrynomics are strong in your posts.  You espouse it, but as you read the responses you realize how ridiculous it sounds. You tell owners to hold out for 60% of retail for months, years, or decades while many other owners sell their weeks for what the market will bear. Your converts will be strong and refuse to sell for any price that any buyer will pay just to keep Perry's resale price high. The thousands of weeks that sell too cheap by Perrynomic standards will still sell while your converts hold on to their weeks to keep the resale prices high. Drink the Kool-aid Perry's lambs. Helter Skelter and trust Perry against all rational reasoning. 

Perryland will be opening in Orlando when? I am looking forward to visiting irrational Perryland and riding the ROFR up and down roller coaster. Actually Perryland will always remain a fairy tale and the all too real ROFR up and down roller coaster is a ride I hope to never ride again.


----------



## timeos2 (Aug 22, 2008)

tombo said:


> Bored equals too many people with facts on their side? The fact that everyone (including you) knows that a week for sale for $20,000 will never sell when identical weeks are for sale for $10,000 is too straight forward for the ROFR at 60% argument. You espouse it, but as you read the responses you realize how ridiculous it sounds. You tell owners to hold out for 60% of retail for months, years, or decades while many other owners sell their weeks for what the market will bear. Your converts will be strong and refuse to sell for any price that any buyer will pay just to keep Perry's resale price high. The thousands of weeks that sell too cheap by Perrynomic standards will still sell while your converts hold on to their weeks to keep the resale prices high. Drink the Kool-aid my lambs. Helter Skelter and trust Perry against all rational reasoning.



Always remember Wastegate Planet Hollywood Tower Of Terror when reading what has got to be tongue in cheek posts for a laugh, although well done if they are (or a really really good job of self-delusion and the true value of various timeshares). As you note there is no rational basis for the claims in the real world. Great reading though.


----------



## ricki999 (Aug 23, 2008)

bored = hijacked threads that end up being ROFR debates


----------



## aka Julie (Aug 23, 2008)

ricki999 said:


> bored = hijacked threads that end up being ROFR debates



Amen to that!


----------



## Dave M (Aug 23, 2008)

Those who wish to discuss the merits of Marriott's ROFR further should do so in this linked thread dedicated to the topic, not in this thread.


----------



## aka Julie (Aug 23, 2008)

Dave M said:


> Those who wish to discuss the merits of Marriott's ROFR further should do so in this linked thread dedicated to the topic, not in this thread.



Good idea.  Thanks, Dave.

ROFR is just one of those hot buttons.  There are 2 (or more) differing opinions on the subject and neither one is going to give way on their position.


----------



## taffy19 (Aug 25, 2008)

davidvel said:


> In California a Marriott timeshare _is_ real estate. You receive a fractional deed to a condominium unit restricted and benefitted by CC&Rs and a timeshare declaration. Marriott simply has management and licensing contracts with the HOA and must abide by those recorded docs.


Yes, a deed is considered real estate in California but a timeshare deed has so many rules, restrictions and limitations and the rules are written in such a way that they are very vague and can be changed at any time to the advantage of the Marriott or any other big developer. All you really have is the right to occupy the unit for a specified amount of time and use the furnishings and common grounds with all the amenities that are at the resort for free or with an additional charge. 

Most real estate appreciates in value but timeshares seldom do. They are an investment in quality vacation time and I am not complaining as we certainly have used and enjoyed all our timeshares starting in January 1984 in California and still go back every year and the same for Hawaii most every year.


----------

