Creating a liquid timeshare resale market

[strandlover]

SBP is a special case, they have fixed weeks attached to the deeds that you can reserve 24 months in advance....If they don't give you your fixed week when calling in 24 months ahead...I would raise hell

SBP is an example I pulled out of thin air. Could be any system. My point was systems will adapt to these kinds of practices.

I really commend the people here who are bringing out new ideas to solve these existing challenges, even if I disagree.

I am by no means an expert when compared to many of you here. However, I am convinced that this trust will be a timeshare cesspool. The risks are way way too high for what reward? In time, the trust will tank leaving thousands of units with unpaid MF and we are back at square one.

How do we solve this? I dunno. But it seems that solutions lie at the grass roots level: owner by owner, week by week, resort by resort.

 

[Ridewithme38]

In time, the trust will tank leaving thousands of units with unpaid MF and we are back at square one.

How do we solve this? I dunno. But it seems that solutions lie at the grass roots level: owner by owner, week by week, resort by resort.

IMO, a very very large drop, hundreds of thousands of weeks suddenly not being paid is exactly what the system needs...Owner by owner just isn't getting the point across the the HOA/POA/BOD's it's too slow a process....What we need is enough weeks to dump back on the resorts that they HAVE to take notice and do something...enough that its either solve the problem or close the doors, hopefully the 'right' resorts will fix it and the 'right' resorts will close the doors(i have no idea which resorts are the 'right' ones)...you can't do that owner by owner

Seriously...If 50% of Timeshares closed overnight, we'd be in a MUCH MUCH better situation with supply and demand and it maybe the only way to save the industry as a whole

 

[AwayWeGo]

Flying Dutchman.

How about the Flying Dutchamn instead of the Viking Ship. The Dutchman sails the seas with the Devil at is helm scooping up lost souls(TSes in this case)?

Click here for The Flying Dutchman.

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

 

[AwayWeGo]

Shux Upon The Timeshare "Industry."

If 50% of Timeshares closed overnight, we'd be in a MUCH MUCH better situation with supply and demand and it maybe the only way to save the industry as a whole

The industry ?

Who gives a rip about the timeshare "industry" ?

The timeshare companies could all go toes-up this afternoon & the timeshare resorts themselves would do just fine -- maybe better.

Shux upon'm -- the timeshare companies, I mean.

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

 

[strandlover]

IMO, a very very large drop, hundreds of thousands of weeks suddenly not being paid is exactly what the system needs...Owner by owner just isn't getting the point across the the HOA/POA/BOD's it's too slow a process....What we need is enough weeks to dump back on the resorts that they HAVE to take notice and do something...enough that its either solve the problem or close the doors, hopefully the 'right' resorts will fix it and the 'right' resorts will close the doors(i have no idea which resorts are the 'right' ones)...you can't do that owner by owner

Seriously...If 50% of Timeshares closed overnight, we'd be in a MUCH MUCH better situation with supply and demand and it maybe the only way to save the industry as a whole

Assuming your analysis is correct, you are going to need start up capital. How much? Where are you going to get it from? Who among you would put any significant portion of your life's savings against this?

Who is going to lend you seed money when your objective statement (agenda) is:

If 50% of Timeshares closed overnight, we'd be in a MUCH MUCH better situation with supply and demand and it maybe the only way to save the industry as a whole

Sorry for the dose of reality...

 

[Carolinian]

You are exactly right. Who cares about the developers, or for that matter the exchange companies. I care more about the individual owners, and by extension the HOA's comprised of those individual owners.

The industry ?

Who gives a rip about the timeshare "industry" ?

The timeshare companies could all go toes-up this afternoon & the timeshare resorts themselves would do just fine -- maybe better.

Shux upon'm -- the timeshare companies, I mean.

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

 

[Carolinian]

Maybe you could use the Kelo eminent domain decision to get the prime weeks. That is what it would take to get mine.

You are exactly right. Prime week owners are not going to be stampeded into such a collectivist structure, and they have legal rights to their week. It belongs to them and not a collective In my area (OBX), very few prime week owners even belong to exchange companies. Most of those weeks are still in the same families that originally bought them from the developer years ago, and they bought them to use, not exchange or play reservation roulette.

 

[Carolinian]

This is ultimately what needs to happen for timesharing at highly seasonal resorts to survive. If the dog weeks don't get value for their fee, they'll stop paying. Full stop, eventually that's what will happen.

If it all goes into a trust where MF is based on # of points, it can be sustainable as someone getting a prime week needs more points, and hence more MF.

The way to make this work would be to charge Blue/dog week owners a fee to join the trust. They'd do it, since it would save them fee money and give them more flexibility. Then, the HOA can take that money and use it to incent owners of prime weeks to deed them into the trust as well. Someone with a summer week (maybe worth 5k as per the example above) might take a $1500 cash payment to exchange it into the trust, since they'd get some extra flexibility plus extra $$ today.

Then each owner can take the number of points they have and use them for whatever inventory is in the trust. It also gives the HOA a great way to deal with deadbacks. Put them in the trust, and sell the points generated.

You seem to be suggesting things that might conflict with what a non-profit organization ought to be doing.

 

[Carolinian]

Ride:
How many prime oceanfront units exist within driving distance < 250 miles of us? Why should I give up mine to spend a whole day driving to the TS.

You have hit the nail on the head. What we are seeing are ''exchanger'' solutions and the own-to-use majorities at many resorts are not going to have any part of it. People bought the weeks they want, they know the other owners who own that week, their families see each other every year. They don't care for ''flexibility'' or trading somewhere else. They want what they own. There are two groups that are very underrepresented on TUG, and that is the own to use majority and the off season owners. e.bram, you are one of the few in the former category here, and you are arguing with some of those who not only come out of the exchanger end of things, but a particular niche of the exchanger end, the points niche. And there are also many exchangers who find points noxious.

 

[ampaholic]

You seem to be suggesting things that might conflict with what a non-profit organization ought to be doing.

I don't recall the VSVC being offered as a non-profit - I think it is envisioned as a publicly held corporation that answers to it's charter and it's shareholders.

It could be created from scratch - or an existing publicly held corporation could be taken over by TUGGERS buying up the shares.

 

[ampaholic]

You have hit the nail on the head. What we are seeing are ''exchanger'' solutions and the own-to-use majorities at many resorts are not going to have any part of it. People bought the weeks they want, they know the other owners who own that week, their families see each other every year. They don't care for ''flexibility'' or trading somewhere else. They want what they own. There are two groups that are very underrepresented on TUG, and that is the own to use majority and the off season owners. e.bram, you are one of the few in the former category here, and you are arguing with some of those who not only come out of the exchanger end of things, but a particular niche of the exchanger end, the points niche. And there are also many exchangers who find points noxious.

There you go again describing yourself and your own personal viewpoint as the "majority", sheesh I thought we had moved past that.

It matters little if these people you describe (the old schoolers) get on board with the VSVC or not - it will run fine without them and as they die off VSVC can get their intervals from the heirs.

Easy Peasy

 

[Carolinian]

It is not about ''hate'' or about whether RCI is good or bad, and the truth is that they are a mixture of both. It is about recognizing that RCI is, as they like to call themselves, a market leader, and as such major policy changes by RCI do have major impacts on timesharing beyond just RCI's own exchange system or even beyond just exchanging. As to the good impacts, the very creation of RCI by Chrystal deHaan was a huge positive impact for the timeshare industry as it allowed a new dimension, organized exchanging, and thus a new market for buyers. There have been other good impacts through the years, as well, and now more recently under Cendent, also some significant bad impacts.

The important thing is to recognize those impacts for what they are and then try to adjust for them, if possible. Burying our heads in the sand and pretending they are not happening is not a solution. I know that some here are so enamored by RCI that they always wear their rose colored glasses and have a hissy if anyone suggests that RCI is anything other than the guardian angel of timesharing in all matters.

Many here look at timesharing through a tunnel vision of what impacts how they themselves exchange. My viewpoint has always been based on my HOA BOD experience as to what is sustainable and practical for the industry, and particularly for member-controlled HOA's. Many of the things I post that you do not like have also been said by others in the industry observing the same thing, like the Seasons timeshare chain's newsletter when they dumped RCI over points and rentals, or the comments by a major developer at the Timeshare Stripped Bare conference last year. I got a lot more agreement on my observations over at The Timeshare Beat when it was active, as its participants were mainly people in the industry rather than timeshare members, and they understood the impacts of what RCI was doing. Also, the tone of some of the RCI defenders here have either run off some of the RCI skeptics or at least run them to other t/s boards. I have a thick enough skin that you are not going to run me off.

Oh, and from your screenname, we probably have something else we disagree on. It suggests you are a vegetarian. Personally a love a nice steak.

I called you not one name, let alone a childish one. As to you hating RCI, hate away. But your hatred of RCI causes you to attribute all things bad to RCI and it gets old because it is just not reasonable to infer that some of RCI's shady practices are responsible for the collapse of the timeshare market, which is what you seem to want folks to rally around. The independents are there and will still be there as alternatives.

Overwhelmingly, people are not fulfilling their MF obligations because they cannot afford it or cannot physically travel any longer, not because they are pissed that RCI shafted them through their exchange policies. Don't get me wrong, I am not saying that addressing these things should be of no concern. The focus should be on creating a healthy secondary market and TS model that can weather economic and generational cycles, irrespective of what RCI does.

 

[bizaro86]

You seem to be suggesting things that might conflict with what a non-profit organization ought to be doing.

In your opinion. The trust would be operated on a cash neutral basis. Money coming in from Blue week owners depositing deeds would be used to purchase red weeks. Non-profit, as a trust.

 

[AwayWeGo]

You Typed A Mouthful.

It is not about ''hate'' or about whether RCI is good or bad, and the truth is that they are a mixture of both. It is about recognizing that RCI is, as they like to call themselves, a market leader, and as such major policy changes by RCI do have major impacts on timesharing beyond just RCI's own exchange system or even beyond just exchanging. As to the good impacts, the very creation of RCI by Chrystal deHaan was a huge positive impact for the timeshare industry as it allowed a new dimension, organized exchanging, and thus a new market for buyers. There have been other good impacts through the years, as well, and now more recently under Cendent, also some significant bad impacts.

You are correct, sir.

Not only that, having the forthrightness to acknowledge those things -- the good & the bad & the so-so -- does not in any way make you part of the RCI Can Do No Wrong bunch.

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

 

[Carolinian]

. . . and that will not even get close to a simple majoriy as the own-to-use majority at most fixed week resorts will immediately shoot it down. They don't care about exchanging, or about RCI, or about ANY exchange company or how many points or stars or cooties or whatever they may give a week.

Some own to use members only just tolerate exchanging as it is. I found that out at one of my resorts and it is how I was first elected to the board. The HOA president at the time disliked the whole concept of exchanging and thought that members who exchanged were second class members who were somehow disloyal to the resort. All but one of the board thought like he did, but things rocked along okay until he got into a telephone argument with someone at RCI and I don't even remember about what, cussed them out, and hung up on them. The board majority then set a course that would have the resort exit RCI. There were no exchangers at all on the board and the one board member who opposed that course of action was an own to use member herself. One exchanger member, Lou, got together a petition to force a special meeting. As an exchanger, I attended, and as a lawyer was asked to be the floor leader for the pro-RCI side, which I did. One of the president's supporters did not like the conflict and had resigned. Halfway through the meeting, Lou asked if I would agree to serve on the board if we could force an election, which we did, and I got elected, largely through the help of the big stack of proxies Lou was holding. We got control of the resort back, eventually changed the whole board except for the one holdout who had been on our side, and stayed in RCI. (Lou, BTW, owned six blue weeks at out resort which he traded through the 45 day window and when RCI started degrading the 45 day window, he disposed of those six weeks and 6 others at other resorts and got out of timesharing). The point is that exchangers, even as a minority, came out in force when their part of the equation was being jeopardized while the own to use people mostly were not as extreme as the then HOA president and did not care. Let own to use people be threatened with being forced into exchanging, and they will fight just as hard as we did at that meeting.

Addendum to Declaration of Condominium and Timeshare Agreement - to be voted on and approved by a supermajority to pass:

From xx/xx/2013 on all timeshare maintenance fees at {fill in blank} resort will be based on one of the following formulas:

A: Fees will be 1.5 cents per year for each point awarded/granted/issued to the timeshare unit if it is enrolled in the RCI Points system.

B: If not in the RCI Points system the fees will be $15.50 per year per each TPU awarded by RCI to the unit.

The owner services dept at {fill in blank} resort will review unit fees and RCI allotment of points or TPU's between 4 months and 3 months before invoices are sent out.

Bla Bla Bla (other lawyer lingo about how you better pay up)

 

[Beefnot]

It is not about ''hate'' or about whether RCI is good or bad, and the truth is that they are a mixture of both. It is about recognizing that RCI is, as they like to call themselves, a market leader, and as such major policy changes by RCI do have major impacts on timesharing beyond just RCI's own exchange system or even beyond just exchanging. As to the good impacts, the very creation of RCI by Chrystal deHaan was a huge positive impact for the timeshare industry as it allowed a new dimension, organized exchanging, and thus a new market for buyers. There have been other good impacts through the years, as well, and now more recently under Cendent, also some significant bad impacts.

The important thing is to recognize those impacts for what they are and then try to adjust for them, if possible. Burying our heads in the sand and pretending they are not happening is not a solution. I know that some here are so enamored by RCI that they always wear their rose colored glasses and have a hissy if anyone suggests that RCI is anything other than the guardian angel of timesharing in all matters.

Many here look at timesharing through a tunnel vision of what impacts how they themselves exchange. My viewpoint has always been based on my HOA BOD experience as to what is sustainable and practical for the industry, and particularly for member-controlled HOA's. Many of the things I post that you do not like have also been said by others in the industry observing the same thing, like the Seasons timeshare chain's newsletter when they dumped RCI over points and rentals, or the comments by a major developer at the Timeshare Stripped Bare conference last year. I got a lot more agreement on my observations over at The Timeshare Beat when it was active, as its participants were mainly people in the industry rather than timeshare members, and they understood the impacts of what RCI was doing. Also, the tone of some of the RCI defenders here have either run off some of the RCI skeptics or at least run them to other t/s boards. I have a thick enough skin that you are not going to run me off.

Oh, and from your screenname, we probably have something else we disagree on. It suggests you are a vegetarian. Personally a love a nice steak.

I don't participate with RCI, and other than Disney being with them, I would prefer to keep it that way. I probably don't disagree with much of your beef with RCI. What I do disagree with is the incessant rehash and the overstatement of impact it has on the industry. In general, I would venture that people who have serially poor success exchanging have done so because either their expectations are unrealistic or they don't really know what the hell they are doing. So they get jaded, plain and simple. And I suspect that is the majority of timesharers. Because most folks are lazy or simple or not research-savvy, perhaps the TUG mantra of buy where you want to go makes sense for them.

P.S. Actually, I am an anti-vegetarian, if there could be such a thing. I love steak. Love it.

 

[Beefnot]

I'm disappointed with this VSVC concept. I just don't see how innovative it is or why the prime owners would feel any compulsion to want to join. And I don't get a clear sense for how it creates a very liquid secondary market and/or thoroughly accommodates owner exit strategies (i.e., sell or default). I think not solving fully for this reality would cripple any snazzy plan, let alone sink it. And if it sinks, those prime owners would watch those prime units they deeded to the trust sail away without them.

 

[timeos2]

I'm disappointed with this VSVC concept. I just don't see how innovative it is or why the prime owners would feel any compulsion to want to join. And I don't get a clear sense for how it creates a very liquid secondary market and/or thoroughly accommodates owner exit strategies (i.e., sell or default). I think not solving fully for this reality would cripple any snazzy plan, let alone sink it. And if it sinks, those prime owners would watch those prime units they deeded to the trust sail away without them.

I don't see it as a viable plan for all resorts as a big, pseudo RCI type organization. I do see it as a model that an Association can use to handle their delinquent / foreclosed time to obtain the equivalent fees from a non-traditional approach that wouldn't involve outright resale of the recovered ownerships. Making it too big would introduce the very problems and lack of adequate prime time deposits that have been mentioned.

On a smaller, resort scale it is far more likely to represent an reasonably priced option to a regular deeded ownership.

 

[ampaholic]

I'm disappointed with this VSVC concept. I just don't see how innovative it is or why the prime owners would feel any compulsion to want to join. And I don't get a clear sense for how it creates a very liquid secondary market and/or thoroughly accommodates owner exit strategies (i.e., sell or default). I think not solving fully for this reality would cripple any snazzy plan, let alone sink it. And if it sinks, those prime owners would watch those prime units they deeded to the trust sail away without them.

Just because you don't see how innovative it is doesn't mean it isn't - I'll recommend a good business school if you want to get some innovation glasses issued to yourself.

Like Bizaro says: for money

Oh, wait I get it, your pretending to be wrong again!

 

[bizaro86]

I'm disappointed with this VSVC concept. I just don't see how innovative it is or why the prime owners would feel any compulsion to want to join. And I don't get a clear sense for how it creates a very liquid secondary market and/or thoroughly accommodates owner exit strategies (i.e., sell or default). I think not solving fully for this reality would cripple any snazzy plan, let alone sink it. And if it sinks, those prime owners would watch those prime units they deeded to the trust sail away without them.

For money. The trust would have to pay the prime weeks owners to join, or they never would. The trust could use the money it received from taking blue weeks.

 

[bizaro86]

. . . and that will not even get close to a simple majoriy as the own-to-use majority at most fixed week resorts will immediately shoot it down. They don't care about exchanging, or about RCI, or about ANY exchange company or how many points or stars or cooties or whatever they may give a week.

You couldn't make such an arrangement mandatory without changing the deeded rights of the owners. The prime weeks would have the OPTION to join in exchange for getting paid some $$. The blue weeks would have the OPTION to join in exchange for paying some $$.

Foreclosed/deedback weeks would go into the trust, and the resulting points could get sold/rented.

 

[ronparise]

I'm disappointed with this VSVC concept. I just don't see how innovative it is or why the prime owners would feel any compulsion to want to join. And I don't get a clear sense for how it creates a very liquid secondary market and/or thoroughly accommodates owner exit strategies (i.e., sell or default). I think not solving fully for this reality would cripple any snazzy plan, let alone sink it. And if it sinks, those prime owners would watch those prime units they deeded to the trust sail away without them.

Nobody joins the VSVC and no body owns a week in the trust. In fact thats the point...it only would serve as a dumping ground for those that want out of their timeshare. However when it comes to using whats in the trust, its clear that that prime weeks would have to be added to the mix, and they wouldnt come free, but they could be purchased... The end result is not so much a collection of deeds but rather a collection of TPUs

Once created there will be the obligation to pay mf. I would calculate mf per tpu and then price vacations according to the the number of mf required

I think this would have to be a non profit to get around the RCI rule that you cant rent their inventory for a profit

Obviously there are details to work out (particularly with RCI) and we may find that we cant work out the details and we own a ton of inventory that no one wants to use at any price, hence the name: Viking Ship Vacation Trust

 

[ampaholic]

Perhaps with luck the next Mega Millions winner will be a TUGGER and will have read this thread and would be willing to shovel in $50M to get this puppy (the VSVC(T) off the ground.

What are the odds


----
In a very real sense, it will not be one man going to the moon it will be an entire nation. For all of us must work to put him there.
John F. Kennedy

Read more: http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/authors/j/john_f_kennedy_2.html#ixzz1pgFefYVT

 

[strandlover]

Nobody joins the VSVC and no body owns a week in the trust. In fact thats the point...it only would serve as a dumping ground for those that want out of their timeshare. However when it comes to using whats in the trust, its clear that that prime weeks would have to be added to the mix, and they wouldnt come free, but they could be purchased... The end result is not so much a collection of deeds but rather a collection of TPUs

Once created there will be the obligation to pay mf. I would calculate mf per tpu and then price vacations according to the the number of mf required

I think this would have to be a non profit to get around the RCI rule that you cant rent their inventory for a profit

Obviously there are details to work out (particularly with RCI) and we may find that we cant work out the details and we own a ton of inventory that no one wants to use at any price, hence the name: Viking Ship Vacation Trust

Sorry, I guess I am missing the boat. <Groan, bad joke.>

If an owner has a blue week, give it away, deed it back to the HOA if possible, or default and deal with the consequences. Why should we even allow a ship full of holes to sail in the first place?

It will take a long time to resolve, but so be it! Why should I care about the "industry"? I just wanna go on vacation!

 

[Beefnot]

Just because you don't see how innovative it is doesn't mean it isn't - I'll recommend a good business school if you want to get some innovation glasses issued to yourself.

Like Bizaro says: for money

Oh, wait I get it, your pretending to be wrong again!

I already have my B-school degree. Dangit, so that's what that other line was for. And I thought they were just a bunch of goggle-eyed nerds.