There is more than comparability of location needed to get an apples-to-apples comparison upon which to base one's decision when comparing Marriott vs Vistana. This thread started with a very generalized observation of MF increases at Marriott appearing to be larger on a percentage increase basis than the increases (and even a decrease at Nanea) at Vistana. However, the last several posts have waded into more specificity than the generalized discussion.
When making such comparisons there is so much to consider that I really doubt we will be able to make a truly informed decision other than the generalized "For the past several years Marriott's MFs have increased a larger percentage than those of Vistana."
Things to consider (this list is not all-inclusive):
- Age of the resort. This impacts the embedded cost, including the cost of land and construction, and the cost of replacement reserves.
- Comparability of resort amenities such as food service, pools, etc.
- Comparability of landscaping, quality of unit furnishings, size on a per-unit basis.
- Utility infrastructure such as solar, co-generation, etc.
As to the issue of "Marriott employees are striking so you can assume MFs will rise to finance higher wages", Marriott employees are not and were not striking. The striking employees were employees of Kyo-ya Hotels and Resorts. All of the properties where employees were/are striking are properties franchised to Kyo-ya Hotels and Resorts. Franchisees are responsible for setting their employee pay scales. I believe 100% of the timeshare properties of Marriott and Vistana are owned by MVC and are not franchised.