Timeshares never came back after the recession of 2008. Resales are not recovering value.

[dagger1]

My words always were, "We'll just walk away."

Ten year walk, so, we didn't, of course.

 

[bogey21]

I would not touch an independent TS for fear of getting stuck.

I see it just the other way around. Many years ago I sold my 4 Marriott Weeks for $85,000. This was back when they were holding their value. I then bought six Fixed Week/Fixed Units at six different HOA controlled Independents for a total of roughly $6,500. When I bought them my mindset was that I would get nothing when I didn't want them anymore so I mentally amortized the $6,500 over their useful life to me and mentally added that to their relatively low annual MFs. I used them all for 7 or 8 years and probably netted about $1,000 total when I divested. Bottom line is that I didn't feel "stuck". Netting close to zero for them was part of my plan. And trust me I would have lost a lot more than $5,500 had I held onto my 4 Marriott Weeks over the same time period...

George

 

[bogey21]

K A R S Kars for Kids...Donate your car today. Not sure how much they got out of it'..

I called the local Kars for Kids and asked them what they do with the cars. They told me they hold auctions every Saturday and have been doing so for the last 25 years...

George

 

[rickandcindy23]

Independent timeshares, especially legacy timeshares (older, non-hotel branded) have very specific issues and concerns. I am on the board of an older timeshare. The board wants to charge $2,000 for ski weeks I can get from eBay for $1.00. But I understand why they want money for the weeks we have in inventory because they want someone responsible to take the weeks. We do offer a way out, and it's a few years' maintenance fees.

 

[rrsafety]

I stay at 4 and 5 star places for 25% of the cost. I also get a lot of other perks from the ownership that non hotel brands do not get.

Times change, and we adjust. That is what makes life worth living. Hopefully prices will rise. If not, I still have my timeshares....

Which timeshares are considered Five Stars?

 

[sail27bill]

Which timeshares are considered Five Stars?

Four Seasons Aviara is 5 stars.

 

[california dreaming]

Isn't there a difference between a Deeded timeshare with a specific location vs a Right to Use system, Like Wyndham Access, where you own nothing. In addition, there seems to be unlimited inventory coming to the market - no scarcity. Do you really own anything in a right to use system? Are right to use systems actually timeshares?

 

[dagger1]

Isn't there a difference between a Deeded timeshare with a specific location vs a Right to Use system, Like Wyndham Access, where you own nothing. In addition, there seems to be unlimited inventory coming to the market - no scarcity. Do you really own anything in a right to use system? Are right to use systems actually timeshares?

From what I understand Wyndham Club Access points are points in a Trust which actually owns time (backed by deeds) at 70 plus resorts. CWA owners own points in the trust which are backed by the deeds owned by the trust. Or something like that.

 

[rickandcindy23]

Timeshares just are not going to recover. It's the negative commercials on the radio and TV, and of course Google ads. Those ads are brainwashing people into thinking timeshares are awful to own.

I looked at ebay a few minutes ago, and even the best ones for trading in RCI weeks are not holding value. I paid $2,000 for a few of my Presidential Villas in Surfside, SC. Those are going for almost nothing on ebay, even for summer months. I am going to take a loss, should I sell. I realize ebay is not the only source for selling, there is also Redweek and My Resort Network, but I doubt I can recover what I paid for those weeks.

 

[A.Win]

The price of weekly timeshares have been dropping. However, sales of points are growing (RCI points, Wyndham, DVC, Marriott, etc). Points give you flexibility for shorter or longer visits. People want flexibility of selecting a weekend stay only, or the flexibility of saving and staying weekdays only.

 

[CalGalTraveler]

The price of weekly timeshares have been dropping. However, sales of points are growing (RCI points, Wyndham, DVC, Marriott, etc). Points give you flexibility for shorter or longer visits. People want flexibility of selecting a weekend stay only, or the flexibility of saving and staying weekdays only.

Vistana and HGV provide that flexibility with points assigned to each deed.

The points trust programs are worth even less that deeded weeks resale. Take a look at Vistana Flex resale.

 

[rickandcindy23]

I wonder how low things will go. If I could see a spark of increase in value, I would be ecstatic, but I don't see any increases in anything. Even Hilton has not recovered the value it had before 2008.

It's Disney that has gone up in value. To think I could sell what we own for almost double what we paid, that amazing. I might sell, but we have one of the older contracts in OKW, and I think it's going to decrease in value, as the time gets closer for the RTU to end.

Disney holding value is no surprise to me. Marriott not holding value is a surprise. I think it's Marriott's increasing fees that are making people walk away. Just have to say that. Willow Ridge has gone up significantly, and that is the only one we own as of today.

And by the way, Wyndham points devalue a property. Take a look at ebay at Wyndham Shearwater. Two for sale. I am so tempted, but they are in Wyndham points. That is not a big selling point for me. Can I get those out of Wyndham points?

 

[Ralph Sir Edward]

Supply and Demand.

The timeshare development model is based on getting all the profit up front at sale time. (Except Marriott DC point, which demand a cut every time they are traded.) What happens after doesn't matter to the developers, except for how it would affect the ongoing sales process. (That's why branded tend to do better that non-branded. They always have an ongoing sales process, somewhere. Having prospects trade into another branded property that is junk hurts the image. . . )

Otherwise the developers DON'T CARE what happens to a finished property. They only care about getting those units sold, whether or not to people who are suitable for the timeshare concept or not. Sell that unit, SELL THAT UNIT!

The long term result is a lot of timeshares sold, and many more our there to people who aren't a match to the product.

There are more units out there than there are people who want to use them for their intended use. In any product/market, when that happens, the value goes to $0 (or less). (A generic comment. Some systems/properties managed to "beat the system" with a stable ownership clientèle. They are few and far between, however. There are other niches, if you look hard for them. . .)

But on goes the building of new units. . . .

 

[bogey21]

One of the things that works is to buy Fixed Weeks where you plan to use. Assume you will get zero back when you are done with the Week. Divide the sum of the MFs paid and the original cost by the number of times used. If the result is a reasonable cost per week, you should be happy with your purchase. This worked well for me with 6 Weeks a number of years ago...

George

 

[PigsDad]

One of the things that works is to buy Fixed Weeks where you plan to use. Assume you will get zero back when you are done with the Week. Divide the sum of the MFs paid and the original cost by the number of times used. If the result is a reasonable cost per week, you should be happy with your purchase. This worked well for me with 6 Weeks a number of years ago...

The same logic applies to buying a point system, except that points give you much more flexibility. To each their own.

Kurt

 

[dagger1]

Vistana and HGV provide that flexibility with points assigned to each deed.

The points trust programs are worth even less that deeded weeks resale. Take a look at Vistana Flex resale.

Exactly. So do Hyatt fixed weeks/units.

 

[JudiZ]

Supply and Demand.

The timeshare development model is based on getting all the profit up front at sale time. (Except Marriott DC point, which demand a cut every time they are traded.) What happens after doesn't matter to the developers, except for how it would affect the ongoing sales process. (That's why branded tend to do better that non-branded. They always have an ongoing sales process, somewhere. Having prospects trade into another branded property that is junk hurts the image. . . )

Otherwise the developers DON'T CARE what happens to a finished property. They only care about getting those units sold, whether or not to people who are suitable for the timeshare concept or not. Sell that unit, SELL THAT UNIT!

The long term result is a lot of timeshares sold, and many more our there to people who aren't a match to the product.

There are more units out there than there are people who want to use them for their intended use. In any product/market, when that happens, the value goes to $0 (or less). (A generic comment. Some systems/properties managed to "beat the system" with a stable ownership clientèle. They are few and far between, however. There are other niches, if you look hard for them. . .)

But on goes the building of new units. . . .

This continues to make no sense to me. I know that developers make a bundle on those sales but one look at the DVC model makes me wonder why others don't follow it. Clearly, DVC is a notable exception to so many rules. It's a date ended RTU, it has a reasonably expensive buy in and maintenance fees and yet it not only maintains its value but shows an increase. This is certainly why brands do better than generic resorts but why wouldn't any company want its product to remain profitable? Disney builds a new resort and people are literally lining up around the block to buy in. Buy in and pay maintenance fees. And Disney doesn't need to give incentives or lock people in rooms for hours. Yes DVC has the parks and the movies, but that isn't the only thing selling those units. I suppose those resorts that have gotten old and not so desirable anymore might not care, but making people unhappy with their purchase for folks like Wyndham or others just doesn't make sense. Why wouldn't they have real vacation counselors to teach people how to use what they have and then create more business? Virtually every one I know who isn't happy with timeshares doesn't have a clue how to use them.

Yes, I know, preaching to the choir here but, really and truly, it doesn't make sense to me.

 

[CalGalTraveler]

Disney hasn't expanded like the others. It's oversupply. Plus all of the factors you mentioned such as RTU, keeping people happy etc.

ARDA and the industry came up with "Responsible Exit" because the developers were getting hammered with exit close companies and bad press that were killing sales - not because they cared about keeping their timeshare owners happy.

Marriott/Vistana/Hyatt/HGV do a passing grade at these measures and have taken high pressure out of their sales processes (although many people who cannot afford or don't fit a timeshare still get through). Some systems are downright bottomfeeders and bloodsuckers which doesn't help demand.

 

[dioxide45]

Disney hasn't expanded like the others. It's oversupply. Plus all of the factors you mentioned such as RTU, keeping people happy etc.

Exactly. How many new timeshare units has the vacation ownership industry added in the last 5-10 years. A LOT. They keep adding supply, but the demand simply isn't there, certainly not on the resale side. Disney is unique because they are trying to protect their retail price as well as their onsite resorts. If one can buy DVC dirt cheap ($1), it would be hard for them to sell a room onsite for $200 a night.

 

[rickandcindy23]

Exactly. How many new timeshare units has the vacation ownership industry added in the last 5-10 years. A LOT. They keep adding supply, but the demand simply isn't there, certainly not on the resale side. Disney is unique because they are trying to protect their retail price as well as their onsite resorts. If one can buy DVC dirt cheap ($1), it would be hard for them to sell a room onsite for $200 a night.

Which is why the new Hilton on Turkey Lake Road (Parc Soleil) has not continued to build the units they obviously planned to build. I have never been to a sales presentation at Hilton, not even once in my many years of ownership. If I ever did go, I would ask the plan for that land because it's a lot of land and very few buildings. It's really been many years!

 

[CalGalTraveler]

Exactly. How many new timeshare units has the vacation ownership industry added in the last 5-10 years. A LOT. They keep adding supply, but the demand simply isn't there, certainly not on the resale side. Disney is unique because they are trying to protect their retail price as well as their onsite resorts. If one can buy DVC dirt cheap ($1), it would be hard for them to sell a room onsite for $200 a night.

Although Disney wants to make money, their objective for the timeshares is to consistently bring people back to the park, and create more loyalty for the brand.

The business model for the rest of the industry is driven by high profits. To add to @dioxide45 point. Where else can you charge a multiple of a wholly owned condo by selling it in 52 pieces and charge a MF per week that is at least 4x for the same wholly owned condo?

 

[Jason245]

Although Disney wants to make money, their objective for the timeshares is to consistently bring people back to the park, and create more loyalty for the brand.

The business model for the rest of the industry is driven by high profits. To add to @dioxide45 point. Where else can you charge a multiple of a wholly owned condo by selling it in 52 pieces and charge a MF per week that is almost as much as a year for the same wholly owned condo?

The resale price of Disney is inverted to logic.

The product literally offers you less and less time as each year goes by and the contract gets closer to expiration, but for some reason people are willing to pay more for less time each and every year (and when you factor inflation it makes even less sense).

 

[geist1223]

With Disney changing its Rules as to access to Resorts for resale I wonder if this will cause a decrease in the resell value.

 

[CalGalTraveler]

Two other factors affecting supply and demand in the past few years:

1) A glut of credit card points and free anniversary nights for hotels. Credit card churning and 100k point sign-up bonuses did not exist a decade ago. We now receive a week's worth of anniversary nights a year across our hotel credit cards. This is in addition to ever inflating 100k credit card sign up bonus points and free night incentives.

Most people have a limited amount of vacation so those free anniversary nights go first because they expire within a year. Points also need to be earned and burned before they devalue. So no vacation time remaining for a timeshare. Besides why pay for a timeshare when you can earn and burn credit card points - especially if you are retired with only two traveling so a hotel room for many is "good enough."

OR

You can access shoulder season timeshare nights with hotel points via the hotel site = free/resort fees only and no committment.

TS values still do exist to own, but many historically feasible ownership value windows have been narrowed to certain resorts and high seasons because of plentiful and almost free loyalty program alternatives.

2) As stated by a prior poster, there are a lot more hotel rooms with suites and AirBnBs that have added to the supply.

 

[Ralph Sir Edward]

This continues to make no sense to me. I know that developers make a bundle on those sales but one look at the DVC model makes me wonder why others don't follow it. Clearly, DVC is a notable exception to so many rules. It's a date ended RTU, it has a reasonably expensive buy in and maintenance fees and yet it not only maintains its value but shows an increase. This is certainly why brands do better than generic resorts but why wouldn't any company want its product to remain profitable? Disney builds a new resort and people are literally lining up around the block to buy in. Buy in and pay maintenance fees. And Disney doesn't need to give incentives or lock people in rooms for hours. Yes DVC has the parks and the movies, but that isn't the only thing selling those units. I suppose those resorts that have gotten old and not so desirable anymore might not care, but making people unhappy with their purchase for folks like Wyndham or others just doesn't make sense. Why wouldn't they have real vacation counselors to teach people how to use what they have and then create more business? Virtually every one I know who isn't happy with timeshares doesn't have a clue how to use them.

Yes, I know, preaching to the choir here but, really and truly, it doesn't make sense to me.

DIsney didn't build timeshares to get all the profit up front with the sale. It built them to funnel people into the theme parks (and other associated Disney themes). Calculate the average spend (per day) at Disney theme parks, and figure out how much the timeshares actually gain Disney. You simply don't have that model with any other timeshare system.

How many people buy Marriott themed cartoons and movies, and want to have their picture taken with the Marriott mascot? (Or HGVC, or Blue Green, ect.)