Timeshare Resort Fees Are you ok with them?

[Panina]

Recently within other threads the conversation went to whether one thinks it is ok/right to have resort fees in timeshares you trade into.

I personally feel no but am open to hearing if I should rethink my opinion. I believe these fees should be in the maintenance fees of the original owners.

I own one timeshare that charges a $5 resort fee to the trader or owner that checks in. To me, this shows mfs should be $35 more. I must say I am not happy about my resort doing this even though it is a small cost.

My belief is Mfs should cover all expenses to run the resort. Unfortunately I feel these resort fees we see are in the beginning stages and we will see more and more resorts charging them and increasing them. Initially My thought is trade value will decrease. In time I fear between the trade fees and the resort fees the risk is more people will walk away from their timeshares if they don’t use their home resort.

Is there any scenario I feel these fees are ok? Disney would be one as they include parking in the parks and the wristbands.

What do you think and why?

 

[DannyTS]

The resorts try to make more money while pissing off as few people as possible. At least the ones they deal with on a regular basis, their owners. I think that if given the choice, most owners would prefer the exchangers to pay more than to see their own MF go up especially since the premium brand owners already pay much more than the average owner.

There is a very wide range of products in terms of quality and the premium brands will always feel that the exchangers may access their properties while giving less in return. I think they also see RCI and II making hundreds of dollars from these exchanges so they figure: why not join the party if we can!

I also do not know how integrated the IT systems of the resorts are with the exchange companies. If they are not, they may also feel that they have to do a lot of extra work for bookings, changes, cancellations, confirming deposits etc.

I was surprised to see how little integration was in reality between Vistana and Interval even if they are the same company and despite the fact that Vistana has reps within Interval that help us. To correct some issues i had to call not only Interval but Vistana directly and this takes time and money for them I assume.

I do not like to pay extra fees when i exchange, just to be clear about that.

 

[Sugarcubesea]

I actually have refused to trade into TS’s that charge resort fees.

 

[vacationtime1]

I don't like paying "junk fees" one bit. I totally understand the argument that the person who receives the unit I own and traded should have all of my benefits.

That said, if I were running an HOA of a high end resort, I would see the benefit of charging a substantial resort fee to exchangers. It is money coming into the HOA that is not paid by owners -- "free" money.

Interval and RCI have learned that exchange fees can go up and up as long as people want to trade, and especially if they want to trade up. There will eventually be a price point at which trading will not make financial sense. But until that point, there is this "free" money going entirely to Interval and RCI. By putting in a resort fee, the resort grabs some of this trading profit from the exchange companies (and the exchangers). Not a bad thing.

Of course, if the overall cost of trading gets too high (Interval/RCI membership, exchange fees, re-exchange fees, resort fees), trading will diminish to everyone's detriment.

 

[bbodb1]

The problem is you can't totally avoid all locations that extort resort fees. But you can try - and I do as well.

My first interaction with resort fees came at Williamsburg and I certainly was not there for the resort amenities. Fortunately, I was able to get those fees waived but since that stay, I have tried my best to select stays without additional fees. Resorts should NOT charge ANY additional fees. As Panina said above, MF should be covering these expenses. I do not expect to pay parking fees at a resort either but I've been less successful in finding resorts in metro areas that do not charge parking. Is that realistic? It is getting harder to find destinations that charge no fees - but not impossible.

It is, after all, a cash grab in another form. Another reason to decrease satisfaction with the TS experience (as if the sales weasels weren't already enough....)

 

[klpca]

I own at two independents that charge resort fees. At those resorts it covers beach gear (chairs, umbrellas, boogie boards, skim boards, beach toys, wagons, and bikes). All get abused and are replaced somewhere frequently. Most timeshares don't offer things like those - we have to go out and rent. If the resort fee doesn't cover any extras I have a hard time justifying the fee.

 

[WinniWoman]

I personally think resort fees are BS.

And- as deeded fixed week owner I would refuse to pay them.

For exchanges I wouldn't go to a resort that charges them.

 

[jacknsara]

Assuming the resort fee is disclosed before the exchange is offered / confirmed, I support the resorts freedom to charge it. If potential exchangers or renters don’t want to pay, they don’t have to take the exchange or rent the unit.

Long time Tuggers are generally aware of large disparities in the MF per point or TPU across various resorts. Many resorts in Hawaii have higher than average cost per point or TPU than mainland or foreign resorts. It doesn’t bother me that exchangers get charged; in many cases they are still enjoying that Hawaiian resort at a lower cost than owners. In many cases, if I were to exchange my Hawaiian week into that mainland resort, I would be paying far more for my stay than owners.

Besides, taxation without representation is a great American tradition. While it was an apparent red line for the American colonists, it has been adopted by many or most local jurisdictions seeking to get or retain professional sports franchises. When faced with baseball league pressure to build a new stadium (with moving roof) in order to retain a major league team, the Washington state legislature decided the three large counties that would benefit from it should vote on some sort of local tax (I’ve long forgotten the details) to pay for it. We locals voted no. Apparently, that was the wrong answer so the state legislature passed a tax on rental cars picked up at the airport (impacting no local resident) and restaurants http://www.historylink.org/File/3429

In many places where I have rented a car, I notice that part of the tax on the car is to pay for some professional sports facility. Its not my team. Why should I have to pay for my competitor's stadium?

 

[chemteach]

I think resort fees are just capitalism at work. Some people will choose not to stay at certain resorts because of their resort fees, some will look at the fees, do a cost analysis, and decide whether the week is worth the total cost or not, and some may not even notice the fees. What I think may be so irritating to many is that the fees are becoming more common as time goes by. The system will continue to change - if people choose not to go to a resort due to their fees, the trade value may go down a bit - but only if enough people choose not to go to the resort. I think Vidanta is a prime example. They instituted fees a short time ago, continually increased the fees until units started to sit around on RCI and II. They have now changed their fees from $75 per week, to $11 per person per day, which would be $308 for 4 people staying in a 1 or 2 bedroom, to a range of fees based on unit size. The Vidanta weeks sit much longer on both II and RCI now, but the holiday weeks do tend to get taken.

As for my own beliefs about resort fees - I don't like them, but I'll do the cost analysis to see if the week is worth it to me. I stopped going to the Grand Mayans due to the fees because I can find other places that are just as nice that are more cost effective. But I still go to a few resorts that charge fees.

 

[Egret1986]

As stated by some (which has been discussed previously), these extra add-on's for exchange guests should be included in the maintenance fees paid by the owner. I do agree to an extent. I don't like them and will, in some cases, shut out those resorts when making an exchange. However, I do believe we will see more and more of this happening.

Assuming the resort fee is disclosed before the exchange is offered / confirmed, I support the resorts freedom to charge it. If potential exchangers or renters don’t want to pay, they don’t have to take the exchange or rent the unit.

Long time Tuggers are generally aware of large disparities in the MF per point or TPU across various resorts. Many resorts in Hawaii have higher than average cost per point or TPU than mainland or foreign resorts. It doesn’t bother me that exchangers get charged; in many cases they are still enjoying that Hawaiian resort at a lower cost than owners. In many cases, if I were to exchange my Hawaiian week into that mainland resort, I would be paying far more for my stay than owners.

I get this to a point. Unfortunately, many resorts charging these "new" fees are not the high-end resorts/destinations like Hawaii. Many are basic resorts; some in the overbuilt areas. Last year, one of my independent resorts started instituting a $125 cleaning fee for exchangers and renters. I won't be exchanging back into my home resort. There's other options in that area. I believe a clean unit should be provided without having to pay a $125 fee for that privilege. This resort doesn't have the amenities that could warrant such a $125 resort fee, so I guess they decided to call it a cleaning fee.

I agree with you that when these add-on's are disclosed prior to the exchange, then it becomes the exchanger's or renter's choice whether it's worth it to them to pay the add-on fees or forego the exchange/rental.

Ninety+ percent of the time, we don't use the amenities. There's no way to bow out of the fees, where we've been, even though we won't be using the amenities. I understand that it would be nearly impossible to differentiate who paid and who didn't for most of the amenities, so everyone needs to be charged. It's my option....pay the fee or forego the exchange.

Yes, I have seen more and more resorts going this route and foresee this possibly becoming the new normal.

 

[geist1223]

We do have a problem with Resort Fees for Exchangers. In order to trade through DRI (Club Select/Club Combinations), RCI or II an Owner has already made an Exchange and deposited their week or Points into DRI, II or RCI. That Owner has already paid the MF's We traded and stayed at a Resort on the BI that would not turn on the A.C. unless we paid $10 per day. It is turned on for free for Owners. We should step into the shoes of the Owner.

With DRI if you have used all your DRI Points and trade into a DRI Resort through RCI or II using your Ownership in another Timeshare DRI will hit you with a Resort Fee. At least this was true a couple years ago at Point at Poipu.

 

[Sandy VDH]

• I don't particularly like it.
• I don't like it if I have booked a reservation and then they change the rules and want a resort fee.
• But it if is disclosed, I can make it a decision points.
• I will avoid them if I can, but I might make a decision once in a while.

I stopped trading into Manhattan Club because of the daily fees charge, I started booking HGVC or Wyndham in NYC instead.

Now I will stop trading into HGVC too, those I can just book directly with my HGVC points instead.

i had not yet had to return to resorts in the Caribbean that want to charge utilities charges. Morritt's and a few other do this. But I also avoid this if it is possible. If i want the exchange bad enough I might take it. But this fee annoys me too.

I actually think that Disney started this whole additional fee crap years ago with their $95 fee to exchangers. I have traded into Disney once in that entire time period.

If you actually get something for the fee, like free bottled water daily, and high speed internet on unlimited devices, it might be worth it. But each booking is a decision based on quality of exchange and other alternatives available.

 

[bluehende]

Has anyone seen their MF's go down when they institute these fees. I would have less problem with them if the fees actually helped the owner. If the fee is for resort facilities that are not funded by maintenance fees (how many of those are there?) then the exchanger should have the option to forego the amenities. The problem with these fees I see is they do not help the owners they are a cash cow for whoever manages the resort. This devalues your ownership as the value of your rental or exchange is now old rental rate minus the fee.

 

[silentg]

Maybe some resorts charge additional fees because of delinquent owners not paying maintenance fees?
We always pay our maintenance fees and have stayed at resort that charge additional fees for exchangers. We don’t mind if some activities are included in these fees, but when the charge an extra fee for ice cream social or bbq. That bugs me.
Silentg

 

[SmithOp]

I can see where the resorts will use this as additional leverage to get fresh meat for the sales presentation. Don’t like the fee, fine, sign up for a presentation and we’ll drop the fee, throw in a parking pass and maybe a $100 gift card. A presentation tax on exchangers.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

 

[youppi]

I don't like those fees but I prefer those known fix fees to resorts that charge for electricity used (variable fee that you have no idea how much you will pay until check-out and you have no way to challenge the amount charged).
Electricity should be part of the MF of owners and should not be pass to exchangers.

 

[Miss Marty]

SAY NO TO TIMESHARE RESORT FEES

If a timeshare can`t run on what they collect
from the owners/annual fees. Maybe they
should cut back on some of their amenities.

What happens during the "off season"
when the resort or hotel is half empty?
How do they supplement their income?

The easiest way to get out of paying a daily
resort fee speaks the loudest to the industry:
Simply don’t book a timeshare exchange with
RCI or II or with any hotel that charges one!

Check Out the following:

http://killresortfees.com/

https://www.frommers.com/deals/hotels/how-to-get-out-of-paying-a-hotels-resort-feeit-can-be-done

 

[rickandcindy23]

The $25 per day charge for Hilton Orlando exchanges through RCI is going to keep me from exchanging through RCI for those resorts. I would hope to see a drop in the TPU's for those weeks because inventory will just sit there.

I like a lot of Orlando resorts and don't mind staying elsewhere. I just won't pay that fee.

But you are right, Panina, I see this becoming a trend.

 

[bizaro86]

I think the "fairest" option is for everything to be included in MF. The exchanger steps into the owners shoes. Differences in amenities/location would logically affect the trading power of different units.

That said, I'm personally pragmatic about it, and have often booked units where a fee is added. (Vidanta, HGVC, etc). I look at the all in cost (MF of unit traded, exchange company fees, resort fee) to determine if the stay is good value.

 

[DannyTS]

Some of us seem to believe that the timeshare companies die to having 100% occupancy. I doubt it. Less occupancy means less wear and tear and let's not forget that the maintenance fees are already paid by the owners.

 

[Dori]

Several years ago, we traded into a Tennessee resort that had a lovely golf course in the middle of a full-time community. They charged $1 per person per day to use the pool. There were 6 of us, and when I balked at the $42 weekly fee, the manager said, “Well, you can swim in the lake for free.” It seems that the money was used to subsidize the full-time residents’ golf fees!!

You can be sure I wrote a scathing review on TUG!

Dori

 

[bbodb1]

Several years ago, we traded into a Tennessee resort that had a lovely golf course in the middle of a full-time community. They charged $1 per person per day to use the pool. There were 6 of us, and when I balked at the $42 weekly fee, the manager said, “Well, you can swim in the lake for free.” It seems that the money was used to subsidize the full-time residents’ golf fees!!

You can be sure I wrote a scathing review on TUG!

Dori

Fairfield Glade?

 

[SmithOp]

There were 6 of us, and when I balked at the $42 weekly fee, the manager said, “Well, you can swim in the lake for free.”

Gators in the lake?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

 

[Dori]

The resort was Hiawatha Manor at Lake Tansi, in Crossville, Tennessee. This was way back in the late nineties! Still makes me angry to think about it!

Dori

 

[dougp26364]

Recently within other threads the conversation went to whether one thinks it is ok/right to have resort fees in timeshares you trade into.

I personally feel no but am open to hearing if I should rethink my opinion. I believe these fees should be in the maintenance fees of the original owners.

I own one timeshare that charges a $5 resort fee to the trader or owner that checks in. To me, this shows mfs should be $35 more. I must say I am not happy about my resort doing this even though it is a small cost.

My belief is Mfs should cover all expenses to run the resort. Unfortunately I feel these resort fees we see are in the beginning stages and we will see more and more resorts charging them and increasing them. Initially My thought is trade value will decrease. In time I fear between the trade fees and the resort fees the risk is more people will walk away from their timeshares if they don’t use their home resort.

Is there any scenario I feel these fees are ok? Disney would be one as they include parking in the parks and the wristbands.

What do you think and why?

Without reading all other responses I’ll directly reply to your query.

From an exchangers point of view, no, I don’t think they’re fair. From an owners point of view I’m all for keeping my MF’s down. Part of this could be resorts “protecting” themselves from people who buy “cheap” MF resorts and use the. To trade into “expensive” MF resorts. Sort of, leveling the playing field, if you will.

However, I believe resort systems look at this differently than owner/exchangers. They look at it as a “sales incentive”. Own in our system, stay within our system and don’t pay excessive fees. They use it as sort of a sales tool trying to get exchangers who like their resorts to buy into their system or keep their owners staying in their system so that they’ll buy more within their system and aren’t tempted by somewhere else. Stupid maybe, but buying a timeshare isn’t necessarily a logical decision for the average person.

Timeshare keeps evolving. In 1998, we bought our first timeshare. If we wanted to go somewhere else we exchanged. We had a 2 bedroom unit, locked it off and got two weeks vacation, always trading the studio up to a 1 bedroom or larger. Twenty years down the line we rarely trade due to the expense. Our personal RCI account has long been cancelled as will our personal II account when it comes due for renewal. Membership fees, upgrade fees, unit size upgrade fees and resort fees make exchanging to expensive. Now we either use what we own or reserve within the systems we own