# Could resale buyers lose ability to trade in HGVC system?



## david5437 (Jul 19, 2017)

Bought a 7000 pt resale Kohala Suites timeshare in 2014 for $7K.  At owner's update, salespeople said that with HGVC going public, they are likely to go Marriott and Starwood route and make it impossible for resale owners to trade outside their home resort.  Offered us to upgrade to Kings Land 8400 pt package for about $31.5K.  Deal includes 25,800 bonus points.  

How likely do you think that resale owners will lose ability to trade in the HGVC system?


----------



## alwysonvac (Jul 19, 2017)

When all else fails they use fear.
You got a good resale deal. Stop going to the owner (aka SALES) updates.

Here's a recent thread regarding the same topic
http://tugbbs.com/forums/index.php?threads/hgvc-restricting-points-for-developer-only.251934/


----------



## brp (Jul 19, 2017)

But the answers is Yes, the could do this. Certainly they could do it to future resale owners (as DVC did- discussed in the referenced thread). And this would impact our ability to sell.

Will they? No idea. Could they. Of course.

Cheers.


----------



## Talent312 (Jul 19, 2017)

david5437 said:


> How likely do you think that resale owners will lose ability to trade in the HGVC system?



Zilch. "How do you know a TS salesman is lying? ...His lips are moving."
First, it would devalue the entire brand. Even retail would take a big hit.
Also, they'd grandfather in current owners and apply it only to new buyers.

.


----------



## brp (Jul 19, 2017)

Talent312 said:


> Zilch. "How do you know a TS salesman is lying? ...His lips are moving."
> First, it would devalue the entire brand. Even retail would take a big hit.
> Also, they'd have to grandfather in current owners and apply it only to new buyers.
> 
> .



Since it's been done elsewhere, why are you so sure that they would not make changes for new resales? Granted, the other cases I know of were smaller in impact. Still, changes were made.

Cheers.


----------



## alwysonvac (Jul 19, 2017)

brp said:


> But the answers is Yes, the could do this. Certainly they could do it to future resale owners (*as DVC did*- discussed in the referenced thread). And this would impact our ability to sell.
> 
> Will they? No idea. Could they. Of course.
> 
> Cheers.


Ok, let's be clear what DVC did....

I also own DVC.

DVC Resale points can be used for all *Disney Vacation Club* resorts as well as RCI.
What DVC did was prevent DVC resale points being used for other options/ perks (think similar to HGVC Partner Perks such as Honors points, cruises, etc).

See this summary for details on DVC retail vs resale -  http://www.dvcnews.com/index.php/dvc-program/buying-dvc/buying-resale


----------



## SmithOp (Jul 19, 2017)

Just ask the salesman, "Why would I buy something that would be stripped of benefits if I tried to sell it in the future?



Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## brp (Jul 19, 2017)

alwysonvac said:


> Ok, let's be clear what DVC did....
> 
> I also own DVC.
> 
> ...



Yup. As I said in my other post above, the impact was smaller. The fact of the matter, though, is that they made changes that impacted resale owners after a certain date *only*. Just means it has been done. Means it can be done. That's all I was saying.

I don't think that HGVC would do as suggested here, but I also don't agree with the apparent unequivocal "no, it won't happen" posts.

Cheers.


----------



## brp (Jul 19, 2017)

alwysonvac said:


> Ok, let's be clear what DVC did....
> 
> I also own DVC.
> 
> ...



Yup. As I said in my other post above, the impact was smaller. The fact of the matter, though, is that they made changes that impacted resale owners after a certain date *only*. Just means it has been done. Means it can be done. That's all I was saying.

I don't think that HGVC would do as suggested here, but I also don't agree with the apparent unequivocal "no, it won't happen" posts.

Cheers.


----------



## brp (Jul 19, 2017)

alwysonvac said:


> Ok, let's be clear what DVC did....
> 
> I also own DVC.
> 
> ...



Yup. As I said in my other post above, the impact was smaller. The fact of the matter, though, is that they made changes that impacted resale owners after a certain date *only*. Just means it has been done. Means it can be done. That's all I was saying.

I don't think that HGVC would do as suggested here, but I also don't agree with the apparent unequivocal "no, it won't happen" posts.

Cheers.


----------



## david5437 (Jul 19, 2017)

They let me think about the offer overnight...  Said they have an e-mail from management suggesting that such a change is being considered and that they will show it to me tomorrow...   I am on the fence on this one...


----------



## david5437 (Jul 19, 2017)

Thanks alwaysonvac for a good explanation of what dvc did... anybody have a simple explanation of what marriott and starwood did to limit rights of resale owners?


----------



## alwysonvac (Jul 19, 2017)

david5437 said:


> They let me think about the offer overnight...  Said they have an e-mail from management suggesting that such a change is being considered and that they will show it to me tomorrow...   I am on the fence on this one...


All I can say is walk away and don't fall for the trickery.
Honestly, if they ever decide to go down that path you can make the decision to upgrade at that time. For now, I won't go on hearsay or whatever document they provide tomorrow until it's fully implemented. Keep in mind this sales threat has been around for years.

I also own Starwood (now called Vistana). They have implemented rules that have excluded resale buyers from internal resort exchanges. Access to the Starwood Vacation Network (SVN) is included with resale for some resorts (aka mandatory) and denied for others (aka voluntary). They basically screwed owners at voluntary resort causing these resorts to have very little resale value. Let's hope HGVC is smart enough not to go down that path.

See this thread for additional discussion on mandatory vs voluntary - http://tugbbs.com/forums/index.php?threads/history-of-mandatory-vs-voluntary.241011/


----------



## GT75 (Jul 19, 2017)

alwysonvac said:


> When all else fails they use fear.
> You got a good resale deal.





alwysonvac said:


> Honestly, if they ever decide to go down that path you can make the decision to upgrade at that time. For now, I won't go on hearsay or whatever document they provide tomorrow until it's fully implemented.



I second @alwysonvac.


----------



## tschwa2 (Jul 19, 2017)

brp said:


> Since it's been done elsewhere, why are you so sure that they would not make changes for new resales? Granted, the other cases I know of were smaller in impact. Still, changes were made.
> 
> Cheers.


I was going to ask the same question as the other poster. Where has it been done elsewhere?  There are no points owners or participants in Marriott, DVC, Wyndham, Starwood, bluegreen, etc that are limited to home resort only.  They have never taken points away from a current owner that is enrolled in a points program.  What some systems have done is prevent the points membership from transferring through resale to another owner but none have taken the enrollment away from a current owner regardless of how they purchased.  This would effect retail and resale purchasers equally when they go to sell and the membership is worth less because the ability to exchange using the points system won't transfer to a potential buyer.


----------



## onenotesamba (Jul 19, 2017)

I've spent a grand total of $5500 (plus transfer fees) for 9600 points annually. Since I'm at low MF properties, my annual MFs and taxes, etc. are much lower than the price I'd pay to get the rooms I've booked, were I to try to book them as hotel stays.

If HGVC devalues the resale value of their product to the point where it no longer makes sense to be a member, I'd be happy to dump my units for as little as I could get rid of them, and if it came to it--I'd lose that $5500 to be free and clear of them. 

Analogy--I've been a loyal frequent flyer on American Airlines for many years. Now that they've followed suit with Delta and United to de-value their frequent flyer program, it no longer makes sense to maintain loyalty. So, I'm now flying on the lowest-cost carrier, and switching my credit card loyalty to a card that provides points/benefits across a range of air travel providers.


----------



## GregT (Jul 20, 2017)

If HGVC did do something like this (and they could), I believe it would only affect future resale transactions.  Other systems like Worldmark (Nov 2006) and Marriott (June 2010) have dates where their system changed dramatically.  In those systems, existing owners were grandfathered in under old rules.  Hyatt has made a recent change, but I do not know what the impact has been.

We will see, but hopefully no changes are coming -- and if changes come, that we will be grandfathered.

Best,

Greg


----------



## Panina (Jul 20, 2017)

GregT said:


> If HGVC did do something like this (and they could), I believe it would only affect future resale transactions.  Other systems like Worldmark (Nov 2006) and Marriott (June 2010) have dates where their system changed dramatically.  In those systems, existing owners were grandfathered in under old rules.  Hyatt has made a recent change, but I do not know what the impact has been.
> 
> We will see, but hopefully no changes are coming -- and if changes come, that we will be grandfathered.
> 
> ...


I agree they could.  As other systems you stated changed dramatically, Hgvc sees this and knows they can do it too. Time will tell but I guess things will change and not for the best interest of Hgvc owners.


----------



## Talent312 (Jul 20, 2017)

brp said:


> Since it's been done elsewhere, why are you so sure that they would not make changes for new resales? Granted, the other cases I know of were smaller in impact. Still, changes were made.



As they say, "Past performance is not indicative of future results." However, since it's inception 25 years ago (1992), HGVC has avoided making wholesale changes. They've been a stable and conservative player in the field. They tout their reason for being as that of a "club," and so, I don't believe they'd cut off their left foot.

We may whine about it's website and pesky little fees, but generally, it's treated its members fairly... Once you get past (or avoid) the sales-office. HGVC doesn't need to prop up sales at this point - only the sales-weasels need to do so.

.


----------



## Jason245 (Jul 20, 2017)

If they kill that.. why would I keep paying the 160 per year membership fee? On top of that they would lose those reservation fees from me... cause at that point this stuff becomes home weeks reservation. .. 

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N910A using Tapatalk


----------



## Talent312 (Jul 20, 2017)

Jason245 said:


> If they kill that.. why would I keep paying the 160 per year membership fee?



Becuz you'd be grandfathered-in? Or becuz you wouldn't be able to sell the weeks you own?
If they dissolved the club, it'd prolly lower our dues... and I can drive to my home resorts.


----------



## 1Kflyerguy (Jul 20, 2017)

I would be surprised if HGVC did make that sort of change, as i agree with the others that it would reduce the value of the brand.  Might even make the new developer sales harder if people realize they can't easily sell their unit when they want.  

Probably more likely to strip off some other benefit, like the ability to exchange with cruise partners, or convert to Honors.  

Just my two cents...


----------



## SmithOp (Jul 20, 2017)

Talent312 said:


> As they say, "Past performance is not indicative of future results." However, since it's inception 25 years ago (1992), HGVC has avoided making wholesale changes. They've been a stable and conservative player in the field. They tout their reason for being as that of a "club," and so, I don't believe they'd cut off their left foot.
> 
> We may whine about it's website and pesky little fees, but generally, it's treated its members fairly... Once you get past (or avoid) the sales-office. HGVC doesn't need to prop up sales at this point - only the sales-weasels need to do so.
> 
> .



Past performance has been to raise the transaction fees on resale purchases, that is the direction I would expect.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## brp (Jul 20, 2017)

tschwa2 said:


> I was going to ask the same question as the other poster. Where has it been done elsewhere?  There are no points owners or participants in Marriott, DVC, Wyndham, Starwood, bluegreen, etc that are limited to home resort only.  They have never taken points away from a current owner that is enrolled in a points program.  What some systems have done is prevent the points membership from transferring through resale to another owner but none have taken the enrollment away from a current owner regardless of how they purchased.  This would effect retail and resale purchasers equally when they go to sell and the membership is worth less because the ability to exchange using the points system won't transfer to a potential buyer.



Right. As I mentioned, DVC has made changes affecting new resale owners. So, changes have been done before. Not the same changes as proposed here (as I also mentioned), but changes that impact resales.

And, yes, the did not take away things from current owners, even resale owners. Only new resales.

So, it seems that we're saying the same things here.

Cheers.


----------



## david5437 (Jul 20, 2017)

Update... Did not go through with transaction... thanks for all your inputs!

The e-mail about a new policy for resale owners never materialized... the Sr. Sales Leader who mentioned it in the first place said he deleted it because he did not think he needed it.  I know, I know if their lips are moving...  To boot, this guy just came off as untrustworthy in all my interactions with him.  On the other hand, the salesperson I started off with really was decent.

Spoke to another Sales Director and he said he does not see HGVC going the way of other developers and removing rights from resale owners.  Rather, they are trying to use their right of ROFR more often and with the economy better think there will be fewer resales.

Some tidbits from the salespeople:

I was offered a credit equivalent to the price the original owner paid if I upgraded my timeshare with HGVC.  Of course, I needed to spend at least $25,000 on top of this to get the credit.  Apparently it is HGVC policy to offer this to resale owners only once.  If that initial offer is refused, subsequent offers will be for a credit equivalent to 35% of the current price of the resale unit.

Mauii will not be finished before the towers at the Hilton Waikoloa hotel are converted to timeshares.

The five year plan is to have more timeshares in cities. Boston and San Francisco were mentioned so was Seattle I believe.

Hope this helps.


----------



## alwysonvac (Jul 21, 2017)

david5437 said:


> I was offered a credit equivalent to the price the original owner paid if I upgraded my timeshare with HGVC.  Of course, I needed to spend at least $25,000 on top of this to get the credit.  Apparently it is HGVC policy to offer this to resale owners only once.  If that initial offer is refused, subsequent offers will be for a credit equivalent to 35% of the current price of the resale unit.



Thanks for sharing the outcome. I'm glad you didn't go through with the transaction. 

I would take the statement about subsequent upgrade offers with a grain of salt. 
They would be shooting themselves in the foot if they ever change their policy. It's the 100% credit that seems to get owners attention and moves them closer to accepting the upgrade offer.

As far as I know they have always offered a credit equivalent to the original developer price with a minimum spend required for the update. But HGVC has increased the minimum spend amount over the years. I remember 10+ years ago the minimum upgrade spend was about $7K.  Of course it's significantly higher now.


----------



## Tamaradarann (Jul 21, 2017)

Talent312 said:


> Zilch. "How do you know a TS salesman is lying? ...His lips are moving."
> First, it would devalue the entire brand. Even retail would take a big hit.
> Also, they'd grandfather in current owners and apply it only to new buyers.
> 
> .



I agree that the chances of HGVC restricting resale owners to their home resort is remote.  However, if they did go through with this I would be extremely concerned about the whole system crashing.  I almost never go to my home resorts but reserve during the club season as many others.  Therefore, restricting my reservations to my home resort would make the ownership useless to me.  I would be looking to get rid of my and my families burden of ownership and $6000 a year in maintenance fees.  I am sure others would also be doing the same.  Do to the great deal of available resales on the market the price would drop and perhaps HGVC timeshares would not be able to be sold but must be given away like many other timeshares are.   Since getting rid of these timeshare expenses would become difficult and since usage became less desirable some owners would default on their maintenance and units would fall into foreclosure.  Others would hold on to them until they died.  As owners pass away many beneficiaries wouldn't want to carry on the ownership and paying maintenance and additional units would fall into foreclosure.  The maintenance on units that are owned would go up to compensate for the great deal of foreclosures.


----------



## HGVC Lover (Jul 22, 2017)

david5437 said:


> Update...
> 
> Some tidbits from the salespeople:
> 
> I was offered a credit equivalent to the price the original owner paid if I upgraded my timeshare with HGVC.  Of course, I needed to spend at least $25,000 on top of this to get the credit.  Apparently it is HGVC policy to offer this to resale owners only once.  If that initial offer is refused, subsequent offers will be for a credit equivalent to 35% of the current price of the resale unit.



We go to three or four owner updates a year at different HGVC properties and they ALWAYS offer us the original price the owner paid (bought resale) if we want our points to count for Elite and/or "legitimize" our points.  I agree with others....if their lips are moving not all of it maybe true.....


----------



## hurnik (Jul 22, 2017)

I concur.  *COULD* they do this?  Sure.  *WOULD* they do this?  I doubt it.

Plus, I think (given Hilton's IT department) they'd have difficulty for anyone with combined contracts (ie:  One bought direct, one bought resale, since it combines the points).  When you go to book, I doubt their system could handle which "bucket" it came from.


----------



## Talent312 (Jul 22, 2017)

hurnik said:


> ... given Hilton's IT department...



Aye, there's the rub, matey.
It'd prolly take their geeks 2-3 years just to set up a separate system for resale units.

.


----------



## Sandy VDH (Jul 22, 2017)

Talent312 said:


> Aye, there's the rub, matey.
> It'd prolly take their geeks 2-3 years just to set up a separate system for resale units.
> 
> .



2-3 years for HGVC IT team seems a bit long, should they decide to go this way.  It is an attribute of the contract which provides conditional logic.  They would have to add some data, and add additional logic that allow or disallowed certain functionality based on that attribute type.  

Now if it were Wyndhams IT department it might be 5 -7+ years for the same content.


----------



## david5437 (Jul 22, 2017)

Wanted to reemphasize the quote below in case it got lost in the shuffle.  Bottom line is that I am 100% convinced there are no plans to restrict resale owners from using their points at other HGV properties.  The sales director quoted below came across as one of the more senior people there.

"Spoke to another Sales Director and he said he does not see HGVC going the way of other developers and removing rights from resale owners.  Rather, they are trying to use their right of ROFR more often and with the economy better think there will be fewer resales."




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## brp (Jul 22, 2017)

hurnik said:


> I concur.  *COULD* they do this?  Sure.  *WOULD* they do this?  I doubt it.
> 
> Plus, I think (given Hilton's IT department) they'd have difficulty for anyone with combined contracts (ie:  One bought direct, one bought resale, since it combines the points).  When you go to book, I doubt their system could handle which "bucket" it came from.



If they did something like this, I would expect that they might do something like what DVC did. If you had *any* legitimate points, it legitimized *all* the points. So, there are people who bought resale after the perks were removed and are looking at small Direct add-ons to legitimize all of the points for the perks. This way, the underlying system only has a binary decision - legitimate or not.

We bought resale, but before the restrictions, so those points are both grandfathered into full benefits and would legitimize any future resale acquisitions.



Talent312 said:


> Aye, there's the rub, matey.
> It'd prolly take their geeks 2-3 years just to set up a separate system for resale units.



I would have thought that as well before seeing how quickly they drastically improved the new HGVC site following feedback. It happened within about the first week of the quarter in which they said they'd do it. And, at least in my uses, it has done what I've needed flawlessly. So, they seem to have upped their game.

Cheers.


----------



## jeepinjoel (Jul 24, 2017)

my two cents:  
keep what you have. If HGVC changes things in the future, they will always need to try and dig into your wallet then as well.... because NEW resorts continue to be built... and they will need to sell units.


----------



## MindReign (Sep 1, 2017)

I also heard the same scare tactics. From what I understand, existing owners that bought through resale (me included) could be at risk if they decide to allow property trading only to retail sales deals. It sounds like all they would need to do is remove the $159 club dues from our yearly fees and we would no longer be members of the club, gaining access to swapping. We would then be tied to our home resort. 

Like most others, after 1-2 years worth of vacation our resale properties have paid for themselves, so if they pull this, we'll have to dump our properties for $1 just to get out from under them. Possible, but not sure I'm buying into it just yet. Time will tell.


----------



## Talent312 (Sep 1, 2017)

MindReign said:


> I also heard the same scare tactics... Time will tell.



Again, won't happen for current owners. Imposed on future buyers, maybe, but...
It would harm their sales. Who would buy direct knowing their resale was worthless?
HGVC is foolish in many ways, but IMHO, they're not so stupid as to tarnish their brand that way.

.


----------



## Panina (Sep 1, 2017)

MindReign said:


> I also heard the same scare tactics. From what I understand, existing owners that bought through resale (me included) could be at risk if they decide to allow property trading only to retail sales deals. It sounds like all they would need to do is remove the $159 club dues from our yearly fees and we would no longer be members of the club, gaining access to swapping. We would then be tied to our home resort.
> 
> Like most others, after 1-2 years worth of vacation our resale properties have paid for themselves, so if they pull this, we'll have to dump our properties for $1 just to get out from under them. Possible, but not sure I'm buying into it just yet. Time will tell.


I'm not buying into it either yet but I would never say never.  Other systems have done it where when you buy resale they will let you convert your week if you buy another from them.  Ultimately it comes to what will be more profitable to them.  That's why I always buy where I would like to go.


----------



## CalGalTraveler (Sep 1, 2017)

MindReign said:


> It sounds like all they would need to do is remove the $159 club dues from our yearly fees and we would no longer be members of the club, gaining access to swapping. We would then be tied to our home resort.



+1. Trading would be less flexible but resale owners would not stranded; I believe it would be similar to Marriott weeks and Vistana voluntary program owners.  You would join RCI and trade your unit with RCI and swap back into HGVC or other resorts. IMHO they legally cannot take the ability to join RCI away from you as this was part of the purchase agreement.

This would be a boon to HGVC competitor (Wyndham/RCI) who would gain access to significantly more high quality HGVC units for Wyndham owners and bolster the quality of the RCI system.  Same goes for II/Hyatt/Vistana if you could possibly "free agent" and join there.  If they took away the HGVC program internal trading privileges, I wonder if a case could be made that they could not limit commerce for property owners who should have the right to deposit and trade their unit where they please (property owner rights).

In addition, if resale owners are a significant portion of the HGVC system or concentrated in certain resorts such as Lagoon Tower,  Kingsland, Bay Club, and Vegas, then this limits available trading units available for retail buyers who will be forced to trade only in the newer, more expensive developer points units such as Grand Islander which will create deep dissatisfaction and tarnish the brand.

I agree with @Talent312 and @Tamaradarann that it would be a deterrent to future retail buyers and may have unintended consequences. Vistana is selling their new resort Nanea as a voluntary resort on the beach in Maui and I've heard that sales are terrible. The economy is great, lots of Asian and American buyers with discretionary cash to pay retail, the location and units are gorgeous, so you have to ask, "Can Vistana charge a premium when buyers  know their property does not get trading privileges with little resale value to recoup their initial buy-in, that other Mandatory Vistana owners receive?

It would be a hot legal mess...


----------



## Talent312 (Sep 1, 2017)

Where did the <beating a dead horse> emoticon go?
I think that would'a been useful here.


----------

