You called people who bough from the developer "starry-eyed dreamers burning their money.", that's not complimentary.
Not really, but there is not much they can do. With marketing ~ 50% of the sell price and ~ 25% selling 9 months platinum vs. 4 months actual platinum and the best they can hope for is a resale value of ~ 25% of retail, usually less. The only alternative is a captive/very limited rental market like DVC. That will hold a much higher % due to the cost to rent DVC direct from Disney. It is a much easier pitch to say buy from us with no risk and you can always get 75% back by selling vs. we can't discuss resale because you only get 10% back and the customer might think a 90% discount is worth the risk.
If timeshare sold themselves, like homes, then it might work. Another inherent problem with timeshares is that about 50% of the developer purchase price is in marketing and commissions. They throw a huge amount of money around to try and sell one timeshare to unsuspecting people on vacation who attend a high pressure pitch. Any price would naturally drop by that 50% right away since any resale buyer isn't going to pay all that money to market their timeshare for resale.
You are again confusing the method used vs the assumptions that go into the method. The assumptions are a distant second, though of course it is possible to get them totally wrong.
You have some good points. But I did not say I totally agreed with the idea that they should de-value. I said there will be 1 or more employees who react that way. Large companies often do things that are not overflowing with logic. I am talking about reactions, not logic.
a 2nd person who tries to equate TS sales with sales of full-time residential homes. There are so many things wrong with that comparison, it would take all day to go thru them. They are completely different markets. I suggest you start with the differences in business models of home-builders vs TS developers.
Yes! Well said, these are EXACTLY the reasons I initially bough a timeshare week, and subsequently several others. It allows me to stay in much higher quality properties than I'd be willing to pay for on a nightly basis, and it forces me to take more vacations. I never expected to save lots of money, I expected I'd spend roughly what I would have spent anyway, but I'd stay in much nicer places with full kitchens and amenities that made those stays much more comfortable than a hotel would be. And over the past twenty years, that's proven to be true.
Yes deeds are tougher. This might be a reason they moved to trusts because trusts are easier to swap around and manipulate since the trust owns those deeds vs. an individual you need to convince. If someone just deeded back unit 123 week 5 and you need 123 you swap 123 for one you don't need in the trust.
You aren't really a tenant in common though which would require your signature on a deed. I don't think they can convert individual units, but they could collapse the entire timeshare scheme with a majority vote then sell the entire resort as whole ownership. Each owner getting proceeds from the sale. Though I think MVW would eat up a lot of the proceeds with legal fees and other fees so there wasn't much left to pay out.
They can swap deeds in an out of trusts as much they like as long as there is another deed to replace the one they swap out. They also have unsold deeds that can be swapped and insert deeds from resorts they intend to keep as timeshares. I don't believe the lawyers would include any provision in trusts that says exactly what resorts / seasons etc. need to be in the trust - just that there are deeds and the deed composition of the trust can change from time-to-time.
True, but for a whole resort converting to whole ownership? Swapping wouldn't be easy.
For resorts that have been deeded it wouldn't be easy. That might be why HGVC is continuing to sell deeds while Diamond and Bluegreen will continue as trust programs. Alternatively you could go with a mixed TS plus wholly-owned condo Whalers village concept.
I thought Nanea was homeoptions which is deeded in some way and not trust points. The Pulse locations are purely trust points I believe .
Yes, if the goal was to convert a property to whole ownership, the proper way to do it is as you suggest - have a vote of the HOA to convert with all owners sharing any leftover proceeds. Trying to slowly accumulate intervals would be virtually unworkable, I would think.
Obviously the newer properties like Waikoloa Ocean Club that are totally owned by the trust would not have the same difficulty in accumulating intervals if they wanted to sell it off, but as you say, those points would have to be replaced in the trust.
I seem to recall the income requirement to attend a MVC presentation at $75K. Some here say $100K. There is no net worth requirement either.
I think maybe I found what you're referring to below. It actually talks about median (I thought maybe it was confused with average). But it doesn't seem like that $1.5M refers to MVC specifically. Seems to include Ritz and St. Regis in there and could include all those with second homes for all we know - it's vague at best...
A Closer Look at Marriott Vacations
A strong brand in an industry that caters mostly to wealthy baby boomersfinance.yahoo.com
About Marriott Vacations
Marriott Vacations Worldwide offers vacation ownership, exchange, rental and resort and property management. It was formed in 2011 when Marriott International spun off its timeshare operations.
Today, the company has expanded from three to seven iconic brands that own more than 120 resorts, including The Ritz-Carlton, St. Regis and Grand Residences. Currently, it has around 700,000 owners and 1.6 million international members across 90 countries and territories.
More importantly, the vacation ownership market serves households with a median net worth of $1.5 million, better FICO scores, higher annual income and has over 40 million potential buyers. In other words, Marriott Vacations focuses on the high-end vacation ownership market, targets affluent customers and owns properties that live up to that standard.
I believe so, but I also believe that they have a maximum age for attending a sales presentation of 60 (or was it 65?)
Current requirement is $100,000 incomeI seem to recall the income requirement to attend a MVC presentation at $75K. Some here say $100K. There is no net worth requirement either.
I think maybe I found what you're referring to below. It actually talks about median (I thought maybe it was confused with average). But it doesn't seem like that $1.5M refers to MVC specifically. Seems to include Ritz and St. Regis in there and could include all those with second homes for all we know - it's vague at best...
A Closer Look at Marriott Vacations
A strong brand in an industry that caters mostly to wealthy baby boomers
About Marriott Vacations
Marriott Vacations Worldwide offers vacation ownership, exchange, rental and resort and property management. It was formed in 2011 when Marriott International spun off its timeshare operations.
Today, the company has expanded from three to seven iconic brands that own more than 120 resorts, including The Ritz-Carlton, St. Regis and Grand Residences. Currently, it has around 700,000 owners and 1.6 million international members across 90 countries and territories.
More importantly, the vacation ownership market serves households with a median net worth of $1.5 million, better FICO scores, higher annual income and has over 40 million potential buyers. In other words, Marriott Vacations focuses on the high-end vacation ownership market, targets affluent customers and owns properties that live up to that standard.
Correct. No enforcement and any acknowledgments to the terms (initial here, sign there) is all on the honor system. They don't verify income income to attend a presentation. I am sure they do when you buy, but at that point they don't care.
