How Would You "Tier" Timeshare Properties?

[Lisa P]

What timeshare management companies would you rate to be top tier?

I interpreted this question to ask "which brands do you consider the most consistently high-end, offering luxury?" If that is accurate, then it would really only be asking about the hotel brands, basically, and the hotel brands are already well known for where they fit in "tiers".

Non-hotel brand timeshare companies do not usually narrow their market focus to the absolutely highest-end consumer, who often actually prefer - and are willing to pay for - full hotel service (room service, daily housekeeping, concierge, spas, local or airport transportation) rather than timeshares. Consumers in this category may prefer association with a name brand for a sense of assurance of perceived quality ... or ... they may only accept a "timeshare" if it has a desirable hotel brand name because it allows them to define themselves as "better" or "classier" or "more prestigious" than the "av-er-age bear". :rofl: (and you know who you are :ignore: ) Folks who want only a brand name probably already know this information (see above paragraph ).

By contrast, most (non-hotel) timeshare management companies market to families and adults in the middle to upper income brackets, who seek value: These consumers are more accepting of foregoing full hotel service and prestige, in favor of retaining nice, comfortable, sometimes luxurious features and amenities, while gaining more privacy and space at a price which is reasonable (to them) and definitely, a great value. Value-seeking timeshare owners often balk at the prices (purchase and maintenance fees) charged by profit-driven hotel brand, timeshare-management companies.

So, providing a "top tier" list of branded timeshare companies does not really assist potential new owners (reading this Buying/Selling/Renting forum) who want to know which hotel brands may interest them - that's intuitive, if they know anything about hotel branding anyhow. Much of this discussion may help potential exchangers (different forum) a little, especially those who are unfamiliar with the less-well-known, non-hotel timeshare groups. However, given the inconsistency of quality at resorts within most groups, discussing/reading about specific resorts is much more helpful than discussing "tier groups", IMO. And this is why we have the Resort Reviews for Tug Members. I've been to Marriott resort condos (in Hilton Head and Orlando - and I've heard, Colorado) which were sorely in need of updating, with little luxury to be found, and not nearly as high-end as many awarded (even unbranded, independent) timeshares, in furnishings, resort amenities, housekeeping, services available or attitudes of the front desk staff. This can happen with specific resorts of any brand, IMO.

Likewise, some upper tier timeshare resorts accomplish a blend of great value (reasonable cost/higher end furnishings and service) while permitting additional access to full hotel services next door at their luxury hotel. Examples that come to mind include: Harborside Atlantis, Wyndham Bonnet Creek, Disney Grand Californian. Further, there are some timeshare resorts which have excellent maintenance at such a premier location that the vacation experience offered is of very high quality and value - and many would consider them top tier in the timeshare world. Good examples may be found in urban locations like New York City, London, or San Francisco. However, none of these management companies offer top tier, high-end, hotel style service at ALL of their resorts.

One of the ideas of timeshare is to get great value for the dollar. Owning the top brands for anything other than using just those brands locations tends to be a more expensive rather than a good value way to do things.

Obviously, I completely agree with this statement. Having grown up in New Canaan, CT (an expensive suburb of NYC), I remember many discussions of "old money" value-seeking vs. "new money" splurging and prestige-seeking. To me, this discussion brings up the same concepts.

 

[Lisa P]

Personally I find Westin, Hyatt & Grand Mayan to be a little more hip/modern, while Marriott, Hilton, Disney and Royals are a little more "comfortable generic upper middle class". I like both styles but prefer hip/modern, so I give a premium to those resorts unless location is better in the comfortable generic upper middle class resort, then that trumps hip/modern.

Heathpack, you articulated another thing I like- that they tend to be more 'hip/modern' in design and decor.

It's interesting that you both equate a "hip/modern" style with high-end or top tier. There's plenty of room for varied opinions and style preferences. We've valued more of the experience of locally-influenced or immersive, theme decor, done well and with additional service or amenities available... mountain lodges (ex., Bluegreen Wilderness), some of the DVC themes, art deco high rises with oceanfront rooms at the beach, restored turn-of-the century landmarks/historic buildings in cities on both US coasts (Boston, NYC, Charleston, San Francisco). We'd love to stay in European castles-converted-to-timeshares, and enjoy timesharing on a Caribbean windjammer boat or in a thatched bungalow over a South Seas ocean lagoon. These unique timeshares speak very, very "high-end" and "top tier" to me - even if not lavish in service - and much more so (to me) than "hip/modern" decor, which may be so easily found in hotels in nearly every city. But that's just me - YMMV.

 

[Larry]

IMNSHO, ALL of the big management companies manage the resorts to benefit the management company, and their stock holders. IMNSHO, only the owner controlled resorts have management that looks after the best interest of the owners...

Totally agree !!!

I own a platinum Marriott week and would gladly do a permanent transfer of ownership to one of my independently run resorts in the same area.

 

[lizap]

Our tastes, preferences, etc are all different from one another, and that's ok.

It's interesting that you both equate a "hip/modern" style with high-end or top tier. There's plenty of room for varied opinions and style preferences. We've valued more of the experience of locally-influenced or immersive, theme decor, done well and with additional service or amenities available... mountain lodges (ex., Bluegreen Wilderness), some of the DVC themes, art deco high rises with oceanfront rooms at the beach, restored turn-of-the century landmarks/historic buildings in cities on both US coasts (Boston, NYC, Charleston, San Francisco). We'd love to stay in European castles-converted-to-timeshares, and enjoy timesharing on a Caribbean windjammer boat or in a thatched bungalow over a South Seas ocean lagoon. These unique timeshares speak very, very "high-end" and "top tier" to me - even if not lavish in service - and much more so (to me) than "hip/modern" decor, which may be so easily found in hotels in nearly every city. But that's just me - YMMV.

 

[traveler36]

Add mexico's grand luxxe

Mexico's Grand Luxxe chain located in Nuevo Vallarta and Rivieria Maya is extremely well managed, with both outstanding service and facilities maintained to perfection. It is the top tier. The name of the management company, currently Grupo Vidanta, keeps changing but not the quality of management. The sales force comes in for criticism but that has nothing to do with the quality of its resort management.

 

[lizap]

Wow! I looked at the photos on their website. I believe they can be gotten using II? How difficult is it to exchange into one of their properties?

Mexico's Grand Luxxe chain located in Nuevo Vallarta and Rivieria Maya is extremely well managed, with both outstanding service and facilities maintained to perfection. It is the top tier. The name of the management company, currently Grupo Vidanta, keeps changing but not the quality of management. The sales force comes in for criticism but that has nothing to do with the quality of its resort management.

 

[DeniseM]

There is far more supply, than demand for timeshares in Mexico, so almost all resorts in Mexico are an easy trade. Be careful though, this resort's sales practices are just plain criminal.

 

[mlpmd56]

Great posts!

This is a fascinating thread and expresses so well what I have not been able to put into words. (Of course, liberal arts--NEVER my forte, just give me a physics problem!) Anyway, I love the post about VALUE. I owned both Marriott and Westin in Hawaii for awhile. (Bought resale and sold for just about what I paid for them--net zero basically.) What annoyed me about those properties was my total lack of control over anything, most notably maintenance fees. My Westin in Kaanapali almost doubled the maintenance fees while I owned there. Ouch. Did I love the luxury and consistency--absolutely. Did I think it was WORTH the maintenance fees--no. I have a total no name resort, Maui Schooner, that does have Premier Status, but no door man, no restaurant. Owners recently voted down a huge refurbishment that would have generated a large special assessment. Instead, the owners had the employees who already worked at the Schooner do the remodel with tile floors, beautiful granite counters and cabinets in the kitchens, etc. Our maintenance fees only went up slightly to cover the costs. No special assessment at all. I promise that would have never happened with my Marriott or Westin, I would have just been slapped with a special assessment on top of my exhorbitant maintenance fees. I understand people's desire for a "known product" so this hopefully is not construed as critical to anyone who loves their Marriotts, Westins, Hyatts, etc. I am a germaphobe myself and cannot stand dirty lodging. For me, I check the reviews to figure out where I want to trade and use my high "value" no name resort to try to get those trades. If I want to go to a "name" resort, I check out the tug classifieds! Just my two cents.

 

[lindner]

One chain left out so far is Bluegreen. I would rate them the same as Wyndham. Like Wyndham, they have some outstanding resorts (Fountains, Big Bear, Aspen, etc.), some unique experiences (Charleston, Hershey, Shenandoah Crossing), some decent resorts and some subpar resorts. Like Wyndham, they have a better value rating than tier 1 chains. Bluegreen has more resorts in the southeast than Wyndham, fewer virtually everywhere else. Under the OP's definition using luxury and consistency, both are probably tier 2. However, under Rons and my definition, these are highly ranked due to value and number of locations.

 

[CatLovers]

Shell resorts are as nice as any of the Marriott resorts.

I would agree with this statement BUT it really depends on the resort. For example the Arizona and most of the Hawaii resorts are definitely up to par with the Marriotts, so I'd call those Tier 1s. I too love the Donatello in San Fran and the Vino Bello in Napa is top-notch as well. But the Peacock Suites in Anaheim is basically a converted motel. They've done their best, but it just doesn't have the high-end vibe of some of their other properties. So I'd say Shell is Tier 1 for some properties and Tier 2 for others. But in the good news department ... you're not paying the Marriott level MFs!

 

[johnwm1022]

Marriott

Marriott offers decent properties and I can see why most people would put them in the upper tier. However, considering what Marriott did in spinning off its timeshare division and the way in which they treated half of their owners' community in implementing their points system, they belong in the bottom tier in terms of integrity.

And MVC only bears the Marriott name today as a marketing convention. Marriott really doesn't own the business. In other words, they are a false image.

When you stay at a resort, I think the question really has to be addressed in terms of the individual property itself. When you do business with a timeshare developer, Marriott is not even a player, and nothing more than a Potemkin Village.

 

[traveler36]

Fairmont

One brand that belongs in the top tier is Fairmont. Have you checked out its timeshare in San Francisco at Ghiradelli Square or the one in Telluride called the Franz Klammer Lodge? Both are top notch. Fairmont others as well in the United States, Mexico and South Africa.

 

[K2Quick]

And MVC only bears the Marriott name today as a marketing convention. Marriott really doesn't own the business. In other words, they are a false image.[/URL]

I think that's overstating the case. Yes, Marriott doesn't own the timeshares or even develop them any longer. But the same is true of the vast majority of hotels around the world bearing the Marriott name - they are built by independent companies and operated under a franchise agreement. But they all are required to adhere to the same stringent requirements to retain their license.

 

[Kauai Kid]

Any ranking will be biased by what people own, the DRI contingency hasn't weighed in yet . . . .


I would not put Worldmark and Wyndham at the same level, the higher maintenance fees of WVO allow for more upscale finishes . IMHO

As a former owner of Diamond Resort International (DRI) Point at Poipu they belong way way way down on the list after hitting the owners with a $5-6K special assessment for each week.

Sterling

 

[pipet]

they may only accept a "timeshare" if it has a desirable hotel brand name because it allows them to define themselves as "better" or "classier" or "more prestigious" than the "av-er-age bear".

I tend to be a "value" person in everyday life, but sometimes I really love the escape of a more "luxurious" vacation. For that type of vacation, where I stay is a part of the vacation. I could care less about the the appearance of being classy or better, but I love well-manicured grounds, large swimming pools, clean rooms with crisp linens, comfortable mattresses (super important!), etc. Those top tier resorts brands, with some exceptions, generally offer that. Yes, they aren't cheap with MFs, but you are less likely to be unpleasantly surprised, and if you are, there is generally some recourse for you.

I realize that some independents and lower tier brand locations can offer the same luxury experience, so I always take notice of some of the highly rated independents for a future vacation possibility. Generally, though, they are more low-key and basic in what they offer. I don't think that is a bad thing, but it certainly offers a different experience and is great for the more practical vacation. I'll also sleep in a crappy park cabin or tent if needed to see/stay in an area of outstanding natural beauty, but I consider that a whole different type of vacation, and I go in with "primitive" expectations.

I realize the best deal is to buy one of the lower tier resorts and exchange in to one of the top tier resorts, but on the other hand, having priority for exchanges within a system can be really nice, and not everyone has the flexibility to make those great T2/3 -> T1 uptrades.

 

[GrayFal]

One chain left out so far is Bluegreen. I would rate them the same as Wyndham. Like Wyndham, they have some outstanding resorts (Fountains, Big Bear, Aspen, etc.), some unique experiences (Charleston, Hershey, Shenandoah Crossing), some decent resorts and some subpar resorts. Like Wyndham, they have a better value rating than tier 1 chains. Bluegreen has more resorts in the southeast than Wyndham, fewer virtually everywhere else. Under the OP's definition using luxury and consistency, both are probably tier 2. However, under Rons and my definition, these are highly ranked due to value and number of locations.

I also agree about Bluegreen, great management, easy to use reservation system, nice locations.

THey are not tier one luxury but definitely are up there with Wyndham.
Have recently stayed at Wyndham Old Town Alexandria, Atlantic City location and Wyndham South Shore Lake Tahoe, I would compare them in quality to Bluegreen La Cabana Aruba and Solara Surfside Miami. Cost of ownership also includes RCI membership for both points and weeks and trades with RCI and II and SFX. All in all a great ownership.

I like my Marriott luxury but the value I get from my Bluegreen ownership is just great!

 

[lizap]

Completely agree. When I'm on vacation, I want to stay at a property at least as nice (preferably nicer) as my home.

I tend to be a "value" person in everyday life, but sometimes I really love the escape of a more "luxurious" vacation. For that type of vacation, where I stay is a part of the vacation. I could care less about the the appearance of being classy or better, but I love well-manicured grounds, large swimming pools, clean rooms with crisp linens, comfortable mattresses (super important!), etc. Those top tier resorts brands, with some exceptions, generally offer that. Yes, they aren't cheap with MFs, but you are less likely to be unpleasantly surprised, and if you are, there is generally some recourse for you.

I realize that some independents and lower tier brand locations can offer the same luxury experience, so I always take notice of some of the highly rated independents for a future vacation possibility. Generally, though, they are more low-key and basic in what they offer. I don't think that is a bad thing, but it certainly offers a different experience and is great for the more practical vacation. I'll also sleep in a crappy park cabin or tent if needed to see/stay in an area of outstanding natural beauty, but I consider that a whole different type of vacation, and I go in with "primitive" expectations.

I realize the best deal is to buy one of the lower tier resorts and exchange in to one of the top tier resorts, but on the other hand, having priority for exchanges within a system can be really nice, and not everyone has the flexibility to make those great T2/3 -> T1 uptrades.

 

[Rent_Share]

As a former owner of Diamond Resort International (DRI) Point at Poipu they belong way way way down on the list after hitting the owners with a $5-6K special assessment for each week.

Sterling

The inverse effect of owner bias trying to rationalize their spend

 

[henrycpa91]

Certainly not a TS expert like all of you. I own DVC and nothing else at this point so am not broadly experienced.

I have now been looking for the past 2 years at other properties from other companies.

I think Marriott, 4 Seasons, and Starwood have the highest quality resorts by far. They also tend to be in the best locations. That said, I hate their reservation and points systems as I try to educate myself on them. Will say some of the Marriott's are getting some age on them.

I think Starwood has beautiful resorts but not always where I want to stay.

Four Seasons places are beautiful but I do not see them much different than DVC as far as options.

DVC is by far the easiest points/rules if you ask me. With Auliani it has expanded its base but HHI and VB are really 2nd tier locations.

Just my 2 cents as a newbie.

 

[lizap]

Looked closely at Disney and have decided against buying for now (maybe in the future). Their properties are relatively expensive and are primarily clustered in the Orlando area (as you know).

Certainly not a TS expert like all of you. I own DVC and nothing else at this point so am not broadly experienced.

I have now been looking for the past 2 years at other properties from other companies.

I think Marriott, 4 Seasons, and Starwood have the highest quality resorts by far. They also tend to be in the best locations. That said, I hate their reservation and points systems as I try to educate myself on them. Will say some of the Marriott's are getting some age on them.

I think Starwood has beautiful resorts but not always where I want to stay.

Four Seasons places are beautiful but I do not see them much different than DVC as far as options.

DVC is by far the easiest points/rules if you ask me. With Auliani it has expanded its base but HHI and VB are really 2nd tier locations.

Just my 2 cents as a newbie.

 

[Lisa P]

Consumers in this [upper economic] category may prefer association with a name brand for a sense of assurance of perceived quality ... or ... they may only accept a "timeshare" if it has a desirable hotel brand name because it allows them to define themselves as "better" or "classier" or "more prestigious" than the "av-er-age bear". ........ Value-seeking timeshare owners often balk at the prices (purchase and maintenance fees) charged by profit-driven hotel brand, timeshare-management companies.

I tend to be a "value" person in everyday life, but sometimes I really love the escape of a more "luxurious" vacation ........ Those top tier resorts brands, with some exceptions, generally offer that. Yes, they aren't cheap with MFs, but you are less likely to be unpleasantly surprised, and if you are, there is generally some recourse for you.

Pipet, I generally agree with this when it comes to the newer properties of the brands (still in sales and for several years past that). We owned with DVC and Marriott for the exact same reasons you've cited (we still vacation that way). The higher fees charged seemed acceptable to me when we bought but less so as time passed, with more experiences of staying in high-end, branded resorts which had not been kept up to higher standards over time - including 2+ (very nice but definitely not "top tier") stays at different resorts within each: Marriott, Hilton and DVC. The assurance I had previously felt, of consistently higher quality at a higher price with a name brand, dissipated. After all, these companies do provide a great product for the most part but they also spend a LOT on marketing and image.

We still need to research individual resorts on TUG and TripAdvisor to adjust our expectations. We still have WONDERFUL vacations in beautiful resorts. However, for us, if we need to do that anyway, then why were we paying the higher fees for perceived assurance that was based on the "name"?

Over the last 15 years of timesharing and TUG, I've seen a LOT of people experience the same disappointment with brands - they are often value-oriented people who could afford the timeshares but became disillusioned with the name brands showing their profit motive. Along the way, we've seen occasional Tuggers who treat branding (and the owners) according to a "class system" of sorts. The OP just registered on TUG last year and was likely unaware of some rather unpleasant past history in that regard.

More often, regular 'ol Tuggers who tend to have enthusiastic brand-loyalty sufficient to earn them commission may occasionally, inadvertently and unaware, encourage lurkers and newbies to drop $30K on their brand without researching. Their enthusiasm and excitement is understandably contagious. But threads like this one raise a cautious red (or at least, yellow) flag, in my mind.

We absolutely LOVE to trade around and experience luxurious resorts. Owning within a mini-system can help. We still understand the value of buying where you want to stay and a mini-system extends this. So there is value in understanding the different companies. But whenever I see folks excited and confident about brand names (rather than resorts), and implying that the brand provides an assurance of ongoing, high-end quality, I get very wary. I did not intend to offend with my earlier comments. Please accept my apology, if it did.

 

[timeos2]

Very well said Lisa. You've captured the underlying fact that each resort, branding or not, stands on it's own. There are no guarantees that because it says "Brand Fabulous" on the signs that in fact it will be any better than average.

 

[lizap]

Would Ritz Carlton or Four Seasons allow one of their properties to turn into a dump? Don't they have standards?

Very well said Lisa. You've captured the underlying fact that each resort, branding or not, stands on it's own. There are no guarantees that because it says "Brand Fabulous" on the signs that in fact it will be any better than average.

 

[Rent_Share]

Would Ritz Carlton or Four Seasons allow one of their properties to turn into a dump? Don't they have standards?

No but I cannot afford 2,500 in annual maintenance fees 3-4 x Average

 

[Lisa P]

Would Ritz Carlton or Four Seasons allow one of their properties to turn into a dump? Don't they have standards?

No one has suggested they'd allow a resort to become a "dump".

No one with the resources to purchase a Ritz Carlton or Four Seasons timeshare would think that they offer anything but quality resorts, so where is the value (for TUG readers) in trying to emphasize or establish this??? Or to try to create a list of these hoteliers-in-in-the-timeshare-business, which are already well known?