What we need to remember is that USA Marriott developed resorts that are timeshares are exactly what Y-ASK stated.
They are REAL ESTATE Property. The property is not OWNED by Marriott...but by the people who felt they could pay developer or resale prices. THEY become the Homeowners Association, and can vote, and change rules. (and even oust Marriott...no secondary owners here)
Once Marriott gives over control to the OWNERS....Marriott is paid by them to (supposedly) run the resort in the BEST INTEREST of the owners.
Of course, buying points in the DVC may be more fair. Thats probably because the owners are Disney...not the points holders. The points owners have no say, no votes, and can't change the rules of the HOA because there isn't any.
Of course, some (Hi, Carl ! ) feel this is a better form of USAGE of resort time. Paying for a set of points that give you leasing rights to a group of rooms owned by Disney Corp for a specific period of time. Of course some here feel the value of the points MAY go down as the lease time gets closer to its end....but there wasn't any bother of worring about owning anything.
I don't know when the lease on the DVC contracts end....but usually, (as seen in many Mexican T/S, (except the Royals that give you your purchase price of the RTU back) the value goes down a bit as the RTU (Lease) period ends. Called Residual Value.
Does Disney also give back residuals when the leases expire?
Y-ASK said:
Why should anyone purchase what is suppose to be a real estate property from a developer who is obviously over charging the buyer for what the property is actually worth. It is interesting the way in which you have changed this entire thread for it's orginal intent. I hold issue with the resort and the different treastment primary and secondary owners are given by the resort concerning this one issue:
The developer rep. I spoke with told me that, while they still have units available during the building phase, primary owners who purchase directly from the developer can upgrade to a more desirable season or view and secondary owners cannot. What is so hard to understand about that?
Now I can only go on what the sales rep. told me but I cut and pasted his exact quote from an E-Mail in an early post and that is how I see it. Think about it, if the developer is not willing to value all of their properties for what they are currently asking then how can they possilbe set a fair price for the property. So what your saying is that like Ford they over price everything but unlike Ford when you try to do a trade-in they should only give you fair market value (in this case they won't even give the secondary owner that) and not the artificially inflated value they charge for an identical piece of property. Do you work for Marrott or something? I would think that everyone who owns a real estate property would want the value to remain reasonable stable and increase over time as the market goes. No so with timeshares. People actually come here and defend the developers, amazing...
Y-ASK
The bottom line if they are going to offer the upgrade option they should offer it to all owners whether they be primary or secondary. If they can't compete with the resale market then maybe they're charging too much to begin with.
We've decide to purchase more points from the Disney Vacation Club where the owners are all treated equally well and the value of the property remains resonable high. I'm not going to have to disclose to someone I plan to sell to that they will not be getting the same treatment that I received because they are a secondary owner.
As to holding its value........how much value will it hold after the lease runs out? Timeshare may not be a good "investment" , but my grandkids are already making plans on what they are going to do someday with timeshares that I own.
...
