Bargain Deals Forum - this bothers me

[A.Win]

Both Ron and CO Skier brought up an excellent example. Ron posted several contracts for sale with points stripped. In other words, with usage about 3 years down the road.

As I recall, several people felt it was reasonable and I believe Ron sold at least a couple of them.

However, several people agreed with CO skier and warned everyone else that it was NOT a bargain at all. It seems that some people think these type of warnings are appropriate, whereas other feel they are inappropriate.

It was a quite a lengthy debate. Since he listed several contracts, I felt that some were indeed bargains and some were not so great, but I kept my opinion to myself while others argued back and forth. For the not so great bargains, Ron was willing to negotiate and sweeten the deal I think.

 

[TUGBrian]

one can certainly say its not a bargain and cite the reasons for it.

that is a far different situation than just making a statement of "i wouldnt buy this".

 

[ronparise]

but how is this helpful to the next guy?

Posts that add missing info are helpful. "I would never take such a timeshare" adds no value and makes no sense when the ad isn't about you. Pooping on someone'e sale is rude, imo, and does nothing to help the prospective buyer.

Its not helpful at all and it is rude, but that's whats invited by the current policy

to quote "" Items posted here MUST be "Bargain deals" as decided by the membership."

as long as the guy pooping on my offer is a member I think the pooping is allowed, even encouraged"

My own view is that the merits of the offer will be decided at the checkout...If it sells it was a bargain, if not , its not, and its nobodies business except the buyer and seller.

A bargain could be $1, or $10000 and sometimes even a $1 is too much

 

[MuranoJo]

I think this is a very interesting question, and I'm not exactly sure where my opinion falls.

I agree that straight-up snarky posts are unhelpful. But it may be difficult to discern what is snarky and what is informative.

Here are my hypothetical scenarios:
1) A poster mentions that the furniture and appliances at a resort in a Bargain listing are old and outdated and look like my grandmother's bedroom.

2) A poster mentions that the furniture and appliances at a resort in a Bargain listing are old and outdated, so the resort may be ripe for a special assessment.

Now the first post is pretty clearly in the snarky category. The second is probably intended to be helpful, but it could have the very likely effect of decreasing the chance that someone could find a new home for the unit. Also, the old furniture may not mean that a special assessment is imminent.

I guess it depends on which side we want to show more allegiance to: the giver or the receiver. It would be sad to hamper someone's efforts to give away their unwanted timeshare, but I also wouldn't want to saddle someone with a dog unit. For many units, there is at least some value somewhere, so there will probably be a taker at some point. But what about the ones that really can't even be given away? Do TUG members have an obligation to help someone avoid taking on one of these? I don't have a good answer.

IMO, both of the above are uncalled for. First is definitely snarky, second is a qualitative judgment where it's just a guess there may be a SA, so it's even snarkier. (After all, I may think the furniture is just fine.)

Guess I'd draw the line at someone posting obvious missing important info., or misleading or outright lies about a property. In that case, I think 'corrections' are called for.

No harm in suggesting interested newbies take it easy with the first t/s and do their homework first. In fact, that should be a warning on the forum.

 

[JudyS]

It seems to me that there is a debate here about the purpose of the Bargain Board. Two possible purposes are:
1) The Bargain Board is a place to offer any timeshare for free (or $1, to meet legal requirements), even if the timeshare isn't really worth owning if it's free. If this is the case, criticizing a free timeshare should be discouraged or disallowed.
2) The Bargain Board is a place to post bargains, whether they are free or not. In this case, timeshares at various price points should be allowed, but members should be free to comment on whether the timeshare is a good deal or not.

Or, I suppose the board could be used both ways, with price critiques allowed for timeshares that cost more than $1, but no critiques allowed on free/$1 timeshares.

We need some clarity on how TUG members want to use the Bargain Board.

 

[TUGBrian]

I think the clarity is established by how its been used in the last 6 years =)

 

[uscav8r]

It seems to me that there is a debate here about the purpose of the Bargain Board. Two possible purposes are:

1) The Bargain Board is a place to offer any timeshare for free (or $1, to meet legal requirements), even if the timeshare isn't really worth owning if it's free. If this is the case, criticizing a free timeshare should be discouraged or disallowed.

2) The Bargain Board is a place to post bargains, whether they are free or not. In this case, timeshares at various price points should be allowed, but members should be free to comment on whether the timeshare is a good deal or not.



Or, I suppose the board could be used both ways, with price critiques allowed for timeshares that cost more than $1, but no critiques allowed on free/$1 timeshares.



We need some clarity on how TUG members want to use the Bargain Board.

The forum rules clearly fall under Option 2, above. There is no requirement for "free," only "cheap or free." As this latter description is always a subjective matter, it invites subjective comments.

For every 1-2 negative comment(s) I have seen on a property, I have seen a positive comment on other offerings, such as:

"This is a steal!" or
"Too bad I am not in the market right now, or I would jump on this."

To skew the comments strictly to the positive (or to strip comments altogether) is the actual "unhelpful" action. The offeror is always able to refute bad comments or take them under advisement with respect to asking price.

Likewise, any truly knowledgable buyer will not automatically be deterred by some snarky comment. He/she will likely use other sources of information to see if something will fit in one's portfolio.

Some people may not care about old furnishings, with MF as their primary criterion. Others may be the exact opposite and not have as much a care about MF, but want nicer amenities.

To the comment about one person's dump being another person's treasure, the posting of negative comments does NOT change this underlying dynamic! There will be potential buyers that see through the negative opinions and junk to see a potential treasure within.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[taterhed]

It's funny; I can't believe how long this thread is dragging on, but...

Recently, there was an offer for a Luwai unit in the bargains.
I commented "wow, seems like a good deal!" (I like Lawai)
The next poster commented "does the unit have air conditioning?"

This was obviously an example of a knowledgeable tugger trying to help (or somebody learned how to use the search!!!).

I didn't view the comment as negative, but rather informative--as units in Hawaii without a/c can be a bit stifling at some resorts. If the comment had been "I wouldn't stay anywhere without a/c--avoid this place" I would have been pretty upset. But, tone of the comment was helpful and informative.

It's not rocket science. There are many ways to point out the flies in the ointment without 4-letter words or a nasty tone.

IMHO.

 

[heathpack]

I totally agree with Denise.

Years ago, we were selling an old sailboat through Craigslist super-cheap. If you knew much about sailboats (or bothered to educate yourself), you'd know from our listing details that it was an inexpensive sailboat to start with, it was already 25 years old, it had not been in the water in 3 years, and since we were selling it with the original sails you'd pretty much have to count on replacing the sails.

However, the real bargain in the deal was the fact that the boat was sitting on a 5 year old trailer easily worth $2500. And we were selling the entire package for $1500- boat and trailer and all the gear to sail it (we were moving cross country and had gotten busy and were basically last minute fire-selling the thing). Probably if we had more time to sell it, we could have gotten $3500 or so for the package.

The day we listed it some people called and 100% wanted the boat. They lived 2 hours away and wanted to wire us the money so we wouldn't sell it before they could arrive to pick it up. We told them, "Never buy a sailboat like that. You've got to look at it and inspect it first. Don't send us money, just come see it, if someone local comes first and wants it, we'll call your cell".

Of course they show up and don't buy it. But so rude because they post on CL how the boat is old (yep the model year of the boat was in the ad), needs paint (yep, you could tell that from the pics posted), and needs new sails (self-evident from the fact that we listed the fact that it was being sold with original sails). They claimed the ad was deceptive.

Nothing deceptive whatsoever about our ad- all the facts were there, these people just didn't know how the assess the facts. We could tell they were clueless and did the right thing by refusing to sell the boat to them sight unseen. Which made their ridiculous post even more galling.

Whatever. We had their response to our ad deleted and successfully sold the boat the following day. I guess to me, timeshares are similar. People should educate themselves on what they're getting before they sign on. If vital info is left out of a Bargain Basement ad, sure point that out. If the ad is deceptive, sure point that out. If all the facts are there but it's not something you personally would bite on, then just refrain from commenting. IMO.

 

[csxjohn]

There is no need to write in the thread that you don't think something belongs in the bargain deals forum.

About four years ago I posted a couple Harley Davidson rings I had for sale. They retailed for around $90 and I listed them for $50.

A mod posted that many peeps had reported the post as not belonging but since it was within the rules it stayed.

Hit the triangle for "report post" and let them know you don't think it belongs.

I had asked for offers but did not sell them here, my Craig's List ad sold them both, one for the price in the BD ad and one $5 cheaper.


But this brings me to another question about the bargain deals forum. I recently had a link to my Craig's List ad for my bargain deals timeshare giveaway deleted. I put the link in to add a lot of detail I thought would be easier to read over there than in the forum here.

The mod said it was against the forum rules to include a link to CL. I have read the rules many times and cannot find it. Is it maybe a general forum rule that applies to all the forums?

I don't see what's wrong with doing it but if it is a rule here I'm OK with it. What am I missing.

 

[DeniseM]

I don't remember the specific post (in the future, it would be better to ask right away if you want it reviewed.)

Sometimes people post a free or cheap timeshare for sale or rent, and then post a link to an Ad with a higher price.

Or sometimes they post a link to an Ad with other offers in it, and the other offers don't meet the requirements for the TUG Forum.

Or they post an link to an Auction.

Or they post a link to their commercial website.

Not sure if this happened in your case or not, but remember, it also creates additional work for TUG volunteers who now have to go to a 2nd website, and review the Ad there.

It's better to just post all the info. in your TUG post - it's easy to copy and paste it from another Ad.

 

[Ty1on]

Disregard...

 

[silentg]

Let's try this:

I respond to Bargain Deals posts frequently. Usually, I ask questions because the OP has not provided enough info. about their timeshare, so I am trying to get them to post all the facts about what they are offering.

Sometimes, however, the person is not realistic about what their timeshare is worth, and they are asking for payments and fees that I know they won't get. In those cases, I make suggestions about how they can sweeten the pot and make their offer more attractive.

If I have other Info. about the timeshare that I think would be helpful, I post that too - even if it is negative.

IMNSHO, that is the difference between eliciting accurate info., and undermining the offer.

This will be my last post on the topic - hopefully I sparked a few thoughts.

Isn't this why we write reviews?

 

[csxjohn]

I don't remember the specific post (in the future, it would be better to ask right away if you want it reviewed.)

Sometimes people post a free or cheap timeshare for sale or rent, and then post a link to an Ad with a higher price.

Or sometimes they post a link to an Ad with other offers in it, and the other offers don't meet the requirements for the TUG Forum.

Or they post an link to an Auction.

Or they post a link to their commercial website.

Not sure if this happened in your case or not, but remember, it also creates additional work for TUG volunteers who now have to go to a 2nd website, and review the Ad there.

It's better to just post all the info. in your TUG post - it's easy to copy and paste it from another Ad.

Thank you for this answer and I understand better now.

In my case the CL ad had a higher price and I explained why but I can see why it seemed like a different ad. I hadn't realized that the mods also had to read through that ad to make sure it was OK.

In the end it is a give away here on the BD forum and just included the cost of transfer and reimbursed fees on CL.

 

[DeniseM]

I hadn't realized that the mods also had to read through that ad to make sure it was OK.

If we didn't, there would be people who would be happy to take advantage of it.

 

[Talent312]

Disregard...

No. If you're not gonn'a say it, we'll just infer what it was, anyway.

 

[CO skier]

My experience posting here was posting a few timeshares where the first use was a few years down the road, and where I wanted the buyer to pay closing costs> It prompted a lot of comment much of which was in the nature of criticizing me for taking advantage of uninformed buyers (that inspite of the fact that my ad did inform.)

Both Ron and CO Skier brought up an excellent example. Ron posted several contracts for sale with points stripped. In other words, with usage about 3 years down the road.

What both of these posts "inform" is that 2-3 years of points were stripped from the accounts. What neither mentions, and what the original "Bargain" ad was never corrected for, is that the maintenance fees for the two years of missing points would be paid by the new owner in addition to the maintenance fees for the third year of points that they could access by paying yet another fee of $39. Two years of missing maintenance fees, plus another year of maintenance fees plus a $39 credit pool fee to access the points 3 years in the future for one vacation is hardly a bargain, especially to someone unfamiliar with Wyndham and the fact that they allow owners to use points up to two years in advance without paying the maintenance fees.

I do not know who the seller was/is in this linked post, and it does not matter for this discussion, but what does matter is that even highly experienced Wyndham owners and TUG members can be "surprised" by these stripped Wyndham accounts and the missing years of maintenance fees.

http://www.tugbbs.com/forums/showpost.php?p=1872088&postcount=5

Even newbies spending 15 minutes in the Marketplace and seeing similar timeshares advertised for $1 or $12,000 will know to investigate further -- something clearly does not add up. The Marketplace is a different venue for ads and clearly The Land of Buyer Beware.

When ads appear in the Bargain Forum and thereby receive the imprimatur of being a "Bargain", it is entirely appropriate, and perhaps obligatory, for members with knowledge to "out" ads with less than full disclosure that may not, in fact, be such a bargain.

 

[JudyS]

I think the clarity is established by how its been used in the last 6 years =)

My impression is most Tuggers use the Bargain Board as a place to put free timeshares, but a few post timeshares there that are relatively low-priced, but not free. So, both uses are OK?

If someone posts a timeshare for *sale* (more than $0/$1) on the Bargain Board, I think it is fine for other members to say it's not a good deal. For free timeshares, though, I'd rather members not be too critical.

 

[TUGBrian]

that is correct.

 

[MSchleicher]

I think of timesharing as a hobby. With me just acquiring my first unit, I openly accept the fact that it wasn't the best deal in terms of value (MF in comparison to trading power). However unimpressive the deal may be, it is still a great deal for me. It will allow me to stay in a spacious two-bedroom villa for ~$100/person for the entire week. With hotel rates booming $150+/night for a room that squeezes in four people, the timeshare is a great deal.

Do I know there are better units available? Yes.

Am I likely going to continue to learn more about this newly founded hobby of mine? Yes.

In the end though, I wouldn't have wanted anyone to taint my decision to the point I would have second-guessed the choice I made for the simple fact that I acquired a property in Orlando.

Now, will I acquire a second property in Orlando? No, most likely not. With that said though, many timeshares that are criticized on these forums (I've been searching for a while) do get some level of negative criticism that typically isn't warranted as the annual MF are still a great deal and provide a lot of value for those that vacation on a regular basis.

 

[ronparise]

that is correct.

what is correct>>

a bargain can be a bargain even if it costs a lot of money,

or only free stuff allowed

 

[ronparise]

What both of these posts "inform" is that 2-3 years of points were stripped from the accounts. What neither mentions, and what the original "Bargain" ad was never corrected for, is that the maintenance fees for the two years of missing points would be paid by the new owner in addition to the maintenance fees for the third year of points that they could access by paying yet another fee of $39. Two years of missing maintenance fees, plus another year of maintenance fees plus a $39 credit pool fee to access the points 3 years in the future for one vacation is hardly a bargain, especially to someone unfamiliar with Wyndham and the fact that they allow owners to use points up to two years in advance without paying the maintenance fees.

I do not know who the seller was/is in this linked post, and it does not matter for this discussion, but what does matter is that even highly experienced Wyndham owners and TUG members can be "surprised" by these stripped Wyndham accounts and the missing years of maintenance fees.

http://www.tugbbs.com/forums/showpost.php?p=1872088&postcount=5

Even newbies spending 15 minutes in the Marketplace and seeing similar timeshares advertised for $1 or $12,000 will know to investigate further -- something clearly does not add up. The Marketplace is a different venue for ads and clearly The Land of Buyer Beware.

When ads appear in the Bargain Forum and thereby receive the imprimatur of being a "Bargain", it is entirely appropriate, and perhaps obligatory, for members with knowledge to "out" ads with less than full disclosure that may not, in fact, be such a bargain.

Good job, CO skier> You were right to point out that most timeshares require a maintenance fee be paid, but that was clear in my purchase and sale agreement anyway. Your rants didnt stop any sales that time, in fact you may have helped me by keeping my offer at the top of the forum. But you can rest easy knowing that because of that experience, I dont advertise on TUG any more, not so much because of your watch dogging, but because I could offer a timeshare for free here and offer to pay the next 10 years of maintenance and tuggers would ask for 11

So know this, I dont advertise any more on TUG, bargains or otherwise and I wont pay pay Brian any more $15. And I dont offer rentals to Tuggers for less than mf, and less than market, which had been by practice

 

[taterhed]

Alright then. 97 posts and it finally turns nasty.

sent from my cell phone...

 

[T-Dot-Traveller]

OK

Hi Folks -
I am sure TUG Brian sometimes thinks re is actually running a recovery group
for very functional people - with mild to xxx OCD - and not a timeshare forum.

This thread would seem to support that theory .

I still loved reading the thread

and my wife certainly thinks I qualify for the support group .

*********

Happy Friday & weekend to all

 

[taterhed]

Hi Folks -
I am sure TUG Brian sometimes thinks re is actually running a recovery group
for very functional people - with mild to xxx OCD - and not a timeshare forum.

This thread would seem to support that theory .

I still loved reading the thread

and my wife certainly thinks I qualify for the support group .

*********

Happy Friday & weekend to all

What time is the meeting this week? :hysterical: