$1000

[1965]

will many Marriott platinmum 2 bedroom weeks eventually be worth only $1000 or even less on ebay,etc
because of the Marriott Weeks system and other factors.

I am not stating tommorow but eventually
if that means 10 to 20 years?

 

[dioxide45]

This is like trying to forecast the stock market. No one really knows. I am sure when/if Marriott starts building new resorts, the older ones may drop in value more. Platinum beach and ski locations should continue to hold value very well. A lot also depends on what happens with the MFs. If they go way up and people don't see the value, they will start to bail out and resale prices will plummet. If MFs can be kept in line, then I think they should still hold decent value.

 

[bogey21]

If MFs can be kept in line.....

IMO the probability of this is zero.

George

 

[ronparise]

I dont own Marriotts, and I dont know how the new points system works, but for what its worth:

As long as its costs more to rent comparable lodgings than Marriotts mf; then the timeshare will have some value, but if I can rent something as nice for less than what you pay in mf, than the value of your timeshare will be zero

Said another way...as the spread between mf and rent goes, so goes your resale value

if I was to make a prediction, Id bet Marriotts will go to zero with all the rest

 

[m61376]

The other intangible is the cost of rentals- both of timeshare units and hotel reservations. Because of the economy they have either remained stagnant or decreased. Like other costs of living, expenses have gone up so MF's have not largely been suppressed.

However, the biggest factor, imho, that will influence future value and even viability of the industry is whether, as the economy recovers, rental rates outpace MF's in increase. I'd venture to guess that we will see increases in hotel reservation costs, which will trickle down into rental rate increases, as the economy recovers and demand for travel resumes. In some areas we've already seen a resurgence of travel, since that seems to be one of the things people are gravitating towards as their financial status improves.

 

[pacheco18]

It should not matter.

If you bought your timeshare to resell it at a profit or for what you paid for it shame on you (or a salesperson fooled you).

If you bought your timeshare to have vacations for the long term just for the MFs and to pass on to your heirs you will not worry about the resale value. You will get more than what you paid for it in vacations over the long term.

 

[kjd]

It gets back to the old economic arguement of substitution. Yes, maintenance fees will rise. Hopefully, Marriott will keep the existing properties up to their standard. Value really gets down to the point of what you can get for the money you spend and is it worth it. While maintenance fees have risen so have the prices of hotel rooms. I generally stay at a Marriott product when traveling. I've seen the price of hotel rooms increase just as much or more than timeshare maintenance fees. Last week I paid $121 a night for a Fairfield hotel room.

There are two problems with the currently depressed resale market IMO. One is the economy and the other is Marriott's policies on outside resales. Until these problems are corrected the resale market for Marriotts will flounder. Eventually, Marriott's policies will hurt their own sales and they will have to change them. The economy and the loss of wealth of the middle class is another matter.

 

[classiclincoln]

"If you bought your timeshare to have vacations for the long term just for the MFs and to pass on to your heirs you will not worry about the resale value. You will get more than what you paid for it in vacations over the long term.''

You hit the nail on the head. I'm at the airport coming home from a week at the Grand Caymanian resort. Fees on the unit I traded were $1,034, the cost of the week (on Trip Advisor) was something like $4,400.

Stu

 

[pacheco18]

"If you bought your timeshare to have vacations for the long term just for the MFs and to pass on to your heirs you will not worry about the resale value. You will get more than what you paid for it in vacations over the long term.''

You hit the nail on the head. I'm at the airport coming home from a week at the Grand Caymanian resort. Fees on the unit I traded were $1,034, the cost of the week (on Trip Advisor) was something like $4,400.

Stu

You make my point!! Great deal!

 

[ronparise]

You make my point!! Great deal!

I dont see how that makes your point. The poster has reduced the value of his vacation to the money difference between his mf and the rental price of the property. He got a deal, in my mind that makes his time share valuable. (from a dollars and cents standpoint) Your point was that the memories are all that count. It dosent matter how much it costs.

 

[pacheco18]

I dont see how that makes your point. The poster has reduced the value of his vacation to the money difference between his mf and the rental price of the property. He got a deal, in my mind that makes his time share valuable. (from a dollars and cents standpoint) Your point was that the memories are all that count. It dosent matter how much it costs.

Did anyone else see the word "memories" in my post? I am not the sentimental type. I am talking dollars and cents. If you can get a vacation (1 2 or sometimes 2 weeks) whose cost would exceed your MFs then you have the value of your timeshare.

 

[yumdrey]

will many Marriott platinmum 2 bedroom weeks eventually be worth only $1000 or even less on ebay,etc
because of the Marriott Weeks system and other factors.

I am not stating tommorow but eventually
if that means 10 to 20 years?

Marriott resale prices already dropped too much, and considered 'so prime weeks' like ski week, summer beach week or event weeks are not exceptions.
However, it's not just Marriott. Hyatt and Starwood are in the same path.
Hyatt prices are keep falling now and Starwood prices already fell drastically during the last two years and now hold it steady - but still very low.
I have seen summer marriott timber lodge week (2BR L/O) was sold for $3200 last week and platinum marriott canyon villas (2BR L/O) was sold for a little over 3k several weeks ago.
A few days ago, platinum marriott desert springs villas I (2BR L/O) was sold for a little over 3k and seller offered free 2012 usage so it makes the real sale price close to 2k.
It seems like Marriott platinum prices are keep falling still except platinum Grande ocean or platinum myrtle beach.

 

[OldPantry]

I'm afraid I come down more on the $1000 side. Sure, an unbroken downward trend might reverse sometime, but would you want to bet on it? The factors forcing prices down are unlikely to reverse soon. First and foremost is maintenance fees. They have risen far faster than inflation, and I really wonder when this will moderate. When we signed on at Ko Olina, 2004 maintenance fees were $938/year. Now they're $1716, an 83% increase over 8 years. Obviously, Marriott sold owners a bill of goods regarding these fees, deliberately setting them artificially low. The HOAs then had to bite the bullet once the real costs of maintaining the properties became apparent.

Even so, I really fear that we're still not keeping up with these real costs.
We just came back from Newport, after a lovely Christmas week. For the first time, though, I noticed some troubling maintenance issues. The tile flooring throughout the unit was in shabby condition, cracked, bulging and loose. I suspect the repairs have not been done because they're expensive. Maybe this defect is just an outlier, but it could also point to longer-term problems. Newport has a 2012 budget of $32 million. For such a huge complex (seven large pools, 40+ separate buildings with perhaps 700 villas, tons of landscaping), this seems really tight. Will capital set-asides really cover the huge maintenance expenses this resort will soon face? The 2010 reserve fund was a mere $11 million. I'd say that's a drop in the bucket. What if some of those lovely tile roofs start leaking?

Bottom line, if maintenance fees have never yet really covered true long-term maintenance costs, the outlook is truly bleak. HOAs will have to raise MFs even more, or levy punishing special assessments. This will trigger more owner flight. Platinum folks will not be exempt, as the mud-weekers will bolt en mass, leaving yet higher fees for folks who actually want to visit their resorts. Will there be bankruptcies? Well, I'd be surprised if there weren't.
In that case, a resort's owners will be out of luck.

So, I too think we will see all weeks, even prime ski weeks and choice summer beach weeks, head way down. I would think that a Marriott timeshare ownership will, eventually, be nothing more than the right to pay a weekly rate that may or may not be cheaper than a direct rental. That might still be valuable, but it might also be less than worthless.

 

[kjd]

Several of these posts present an overly pessimistic view of the timeshare market, IMO. A few points need to be considered when evaluating these posts.

First, anyone who bought a timeshare thinking you would sell it for a profit or at least sell it for what you paid for it was mistaken. A few owners have done it but most have not or never will. If they were promised that by the sales staff they were lied to. ROFR has no effect on resales. The real market is determined by what someone else is willing to pay. ROFR always comes after a market price is determined.

Second, Marriott has failed to support a resale market that could have never been viable because of the huge maketing costs of every unit sold. Additionally, they now have structured a system that depresses resale prices for everyone else but them.

It has been common knowledge for as long as I can remember that the timeshare resale market was no market at all. Owners were actually paying companies upfront fees to get rid of their timeshare obligations. It's hard to imagine anyone thinking that they're entitled to a decent resale price for their timeshare under these market conditions.

Third, timeshares are a depreciating asset just like a golf membership, automobiles, RV motorhomes, watercraft, etc. In other words they all have a useful life and then are worth little or next to nothing. The cost of them is justified in the use that one receives from them and not to be measured as an investment. If someone thought they were investing in real estate they made a mistake.

Fourth, renting a timeshare has nothing to do with the value of a timeshare. If someone can make a "profit" from a rental so much the better. On a longer term basis it is a ridiculous notion that there will be any profit due to the massive depreciation that all owners suffer.

Fifth, the object of timesharing is not to have low maintenance fees. It's to have fun and make memories when you use the timeshare. Keeping maintenance fees low by deferring maintenance is a bad idea in the long run. It defeats the original purpose of buying a timeshare. That is, personal enjoyment.

 

[jont]

Buy to enjoy

You should buy your timeshare to use and enjoy. There are ways to maximize your options or you can always rent out a good week. Anyone who buys thinking that their timeshare will hold it's cash value is destined to be disappointed.

 

[gnorth16]

Bottom line, if maintenance fees have never yet really covered true long-term maintenance costs, the outlook is truly bleak. HOAs will have to raise MFs even more, or levy punishing special assessments. This will trigger more owner flight. Platinum folks will not be exempt, as the mud-weekers will bolt en mass, leaving yet higher fees for folks who actually want to visit their resorts. Will there be bankruptcies? Well, I'd be surprised if there weren't.
In that case, a resort's owners will be out of luck.

A very valid point. Vegas and Florida would be somewhat immune to this (which factors into my buying). Skiing and Northern properties (especially Canada!!!) are not.

 

[OldPantry]

gnorth16,

I agree the east coast (South Carolina and Florida) resorts have shown better resilience than most other Marriott sites (Aruba excepted). However, I'm not sure they're any more immune to the maintenance issue than the rest. One good hurricane would be devastating to the MFs. And, they too have the steady deterioration that requires continuous renewal. If anything, the coast is tougher on infrastructure than inland locations. Long term, that might spell real trouble.

 

[OldPantry]

Several of these posts present an overly pessimistic view of the timeshare market, IMO. A few points need to be considered when evaluating these posts.

First, anyone who bought a timeshare thinking you would sell it for a profit or at least sell it for what you paid for it was mistaken. A few owners have done it but most have not or never will. If they were promised that by the sales staff they were lied to. ROFR has no effect on resales. The real market is determined by what someone else is willing to pay. ROFR always comes after a market price is determined.

Second, Marriott has failed to support a resale market that could have never been viable because of the huge maketing costs of every unit sold. Additionally, they now have structured a system that depresses resale prices for everyone else but them.

It has been common knowledge for as long as I can remember that the timeshare resale market was no market at all. Owners were actually paying companies upfront fees to get rid of their timeshare obligations. It's hard to imagine anyone thinking that they're entitled to a decent resale price for their timeshare under these market conditions.

Third, timeshares are a depreciating asset just like a golf membership, automobiles, RV motorhomes, watercraft, etc. In other words they all have a useful life and then are worth little or next to nothing. The cost of them is justified in the use that one receives from them and not to be measured as an investment. If someone thought they were investing in real estate they made a mistake.

Fourth, renting a timeshare has nothing to do with the value of a timeshare. If someone can make a "profit" from a rental so much the better. On a longer term basis it is a ridiculous notion that there will be any profit due to the massive depreciation that all owners suffer.

Fifth, the object of timesharing is not to have low maintenance fees. It's to have fun and make memories when you use the timeshare. Keeping maintenance fees low by deferring maintenance is a bad idea in the long run. It defeats the original purpose of buying a timeshare. That is, personal enjoyment.

Hi. Your counter-argument is emphatic, but the first four points seem to support my pessimism.
1. Misrepresentation: you seem to blame the folks who bought with an expectation of appreciation. But, most were specifically encouraged to think that way. I know I was. I'm glad you were wiser, but I think a large majority of developer buyers were in fact thinking they could resell without a loss. That disappointment is a steady drag on timeshare prices.
2. Obviously, Marriott's refusal to support resale prices has contributed, inevitably, to their collapse. Unless they step up to the plate (don't bet on it), this will continue to be a negative factor.
3. Yes, timeshares have certainly been depreciating assets. I suspect hind-sight is aiding your acute observation.
4. This point seems muddled. If you can rent far above MFs, then you are simply wrong. Certain Aruba folks have apparently profited substantially, and may even have recouped their original inflated purchase prices. Folks who have bought on the resale market may even be doing very well renting. But, yes, if rentals cannot, in general, recoup MFs, then this too is a negative supporting my general pessimism.
5. The priceless memory argument. My memories too are priceless, and I'm grateful for them. I have also had many priceless memories for free (a walk in the park with toddlers, for example). I think it's pretty much irrelevant to a discussion about the long-term outlook for timeshare values (by that I mean money).

 

[OldPantry]

Accidental dupe.

 

[OldPantry]

Accidental dupe.

 

[dioxide45]

Why the posts in triplicate?

 

[OldPantry]

Why the posts in triplicate?

Honestly, I didn't try to do that. I think I just posted once. I'm going to try to delete the repeats.

 

[OldPantry]

Yes, another dupe. I'll do better next time.

 

[kjd]

Here's my point on rentals. If you were able to make $1,000 per weekly rental (which many owners won't make) above the annual maintenance fee it would usually take thirty+ years to recover the purchase price if you made a developer purchase. ($30,000+ cost) Depreciation will eat up any rental profits most people could ever make. If you bought resale it probably would be one-half that time. I'm sure there are a few owners that may have exceeded this example of rental profit but most won't. It's just an example anyway.

The sad part of this example is that even if you could successfully rent your unit every year you won't have the use of it for 15-30 years. Where is the logic in that? You will be paying for others to use your unit even though the rent is $1,000 more that the annual maintenance fee. The smartest person in this instance is the renter.

That's why personal enjoyment is the key to happy timeshare ownership.

 

[ronparise]

Did anyone else see the word "memories" in my post? I am not the sentimental type. I am talking dollars and cents. If you can get a vacation (1 2 or sometimes 2 weeks) whose cost would exceed your MFs then you have the value of your timeshare.

No ...I didnt see memories, What I did see was this

"you will not worry about the resale value. You will get more than what you paid for it in vacations over the long term."

From that I made the leap that if you weren't talking about money, you were talking about something else. Perhaps memories

My mistake ...sorry