Bargain Deals Forum - this bothers me

[davidvel]

It seems everyone is generally in agreement that:
- the general forum rules apply in Bargain Deals like everywhere else,
- like everywhere else snarky, mean spirited, and discourteous comments violate the rules
- positive or negative comments that pertain to the offer are permitted, if they don't otherwise violate the general posting rules

Some people touched on this, but it is not highlighted: experienced TUGers inherently know that "most" $1 Bargain Deal are fraught with potential problems, downsides, and hidden issues. Otherwise it wouldn't be worthless (or worth a $1.) In fact, lots are worth less than a $1, due to the ongoing obligation that is being dumped. But people who come here from Facebook, or google searches for cheap ($1) timeshares may not know all this.

My personal opinion is the overarching theme of TUG is to help get information out to those that don't have it, and to interpret the information so that newbies understand it, and not get "ripped off" in a TS purchase. This applies to Bargain Deals as well. Just because all the "facts" are there, doesn't mean inexperienced potential buyers grasp the consequences. A buyer can't "beware" if they don't know what to beware of. This is how developers thrive with "non-bargain" deals.

I don't think the rules give bargain sellers any special protection over developer sellers. If a comment is allowed in a developer thread, it should be allowed in a Bargain Deals thread. (And unlike the Bargain Deals forum, the developer isn't here to defend their potential sale.)

Put another way, we (as posters) should err on the side of protecting buyers, as opposed to sellers. Sorry if this acts to reduce your chance of dumping your dog.

 

[CO skier]

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.

Would an alternative lead to comments about a sudden, precipitous drop in postings?

 

[csxjohn]

This happened to me a few years ago.

I had a TS in Lehigh Acres Fla advertised on the Bargain Deals forum. I had a lot of helpful comments on the area and the property. One person posted that it's not far from the Ft. Meyers beaches.

Someone else popped up and said it's no where near those beaches. Others commented that the distance is relative to your perspective and actual distances were quoted.

I got a few PMs suggestion that I not post in the thread and let it drop a few pages then make a new post.

This is what I did and of course did not mention the proximity to the beaches.

Someone wanted to help me and someone else decided they knew better. Should those comments be not allowed? I don't think so but it made it a little harder on me for no reason.

My feeling is that the beaches anywhere in Fla are a lot closer to any point in Fla than they are to anywere in Ohio but I would not have mentioned it, someone else was trying to help out my effort.

 

[Saintsfanfl]

My feeling is that the beaches anywhere in Fla are a lot closer to any point in Fla than they are to anywere in Ohio...

Not necessarily

Florida, Ohio

 

[SueDonJ]

There are timeshares that could be listed on the Bargain Deals forum for $5000 and be a "smoking hot deal" because they can be sold easily for much more elsewhere but, they still wouldn't be a good fit for every single person who puts eyes on the post. The way I read the rules of the forum, anybody would be free to add constructive commentary - both pro and con - in those threads as long as the TUG Posting Rules are followed and as long as what's said about the timeshares is correct.

Unless the rules change, if I put my $5000 bargain on that board then I hope that if I've missed any pertinent details you all will be more than willing to chime in. That's what will help with the goal of getting unwanted timeshares into the hands of folks who can/will use them and keep them performing, not efforts that might inadvertently keep any takers in the dark about why any timeshare might not be a good fit.

 

[ronparise]

It seems everyone is generally in agreement that:
- the general forum rules apply in Bargain Deals like everywhere else,
- like everywhere else snarky, mean spirited, and discourteous comments violate the rules
- positive or negative comments that pertain to the offer are permitted, if they don't otherwise violate the general posting rules

Some people touched on this, but it is not highlighted: experienced TUGers inherently know that "most" $1 Bargain Deal are fraught with potential problems, downsides, and hidden issues. Otherwise it wouldn't be worthless (or worth a $1.) In fact, lots are worth less than a $1, due to the ongoing obligation that is being dumped. But people who come here from Facebook, or google searches for cheap ($1) timeshares may not know all this.

My personal opinion is the overarching theme of TUG is to help get information out to those that don't have it, and to interpret the information so that newbies understand it, and not get "ripped off" in a TS purchase. This applies to Bargain Deals as well. Just because all the "facts" are there, doesn't mean inexperienced potential buyers grasp the consequences. A buyer can't "beware" if they don't know what to beware of. This is how developers thrive with "non-bargain" deals.

I don't think the rules give bargain sellers any special protection over developer sellers. If a comment is allowed in a developer thread, it should be allowed in a Bargain Deals thread. (And unlike the Bargain Deals forum, the developer isn't here to defend their potential sale.)

Put another way, we (as posters) should err on the side of protecting buyers, as opposed to sellers. Sorry if this acts to reduce your chance of dumping your dog.

Thanks Dad

The real purpose of the forum is to dump the dogs (as you put it) on unsuspecting newbees. and Denise is right, the negative comments make that more difficult.

 

[DeniseM]

Some people touched on this, but it is not highlighted: experienced TUGers inherently know that "most" $1 Bargain Deal are fraught with potential problems, downsides, and hidden issues.

I currently own 12 timeshares. I got 11 of them for very cheap or free - some of them from the Bargain Deals Forum. To get rid of them I would have to give them away.

It's a gross exaggeration to say that they are "fraught with potential problems, downsides, and hidden issues," just because they were free, and I'd have to give them away for free.

There are some "dogs" out there, but there is a huge difference between a timeshare with no resale value, and a "dog." Many timeshares with no resale value would be perfect for the right person to own for their own use.

 

[SueDonJ]

I currently own 12 timeshares. I got 11 of them for very cheap or free - some of them from the Bargain Deals Forum. To get rid of them I would have to give them away.

It's a gross exaggeration to say that they are "fraught with potential problems, downsides, and hidden issues," just because they were free, and I'd have to give them away for free.

There are some "dogs" out there, but there is a huge difference between a timeshare with no resale value, and a "dog." Many timeshares with no resale value would be perfect for the right person to own for their own use.

But doesn't this prove that we're all coming at the Bargain Deals forum with a different perspective? That forum isn't limited to only timeshares that have to be given away for free; any timeshare being sold for less than their market resale value can also be listed. For some of us, zero resale value IS the very definition of "a downside" and WOULD make that timeshare "a potential problem," compared to any others which do have resale value but are still bargains at certain prices.

We do agree that it serves no good purpose for any of us to troll through the Bargain Deals forum and, for example, put a negative comment about zero resale value unsolicited in every free-timeshare thread. But if knowledgeable owners want to open that can of worms I wouldn't have a problem with it. After all, it's the other owners at those properties who will ultimately be responsible if a Bargain Deals transaction ends up a bad fit in the hands of an unsuspecting taker and ultimately becomes non-performing.

 

[davidvel]

This thread reminds me of something I deal with often. Agents/Brokers want an opinion about whether a particular fact pertinent to property a sales transaction is "material" and needs to be disclosed, by the seller.

I rarely need to know the fact, but start with a rule of thumb: If the seller does not want the fact disclosed to the buyer for fear of its affect on the potential sale, then its almost always material to the buyer, and the transaction.

 

[Ty1on]

I think the distinction is whether I post a fact that is important to the potential buyer in making the decision and is either misrepresented or omitted by the seller, or I am posting opinion that casts shade on the offering without any factual basis.

For example, I did make a comment in a BB deal that advertised that it was a Independence Day Week fixed week. The truth was that it was only Independence day in one year because of the leap year, but normally it is not. I see that as a misrepresentation and I think it is a service to buyers to point out that they will only get July 4th every few years.

On the other hand, if I think Vista Mirage is a dirty run down place that isn't worth taking over for free, it's not helping anyone for me to state that, and would be unfair to the seller.

Edit: Weird, I posted this without having read davidvel's above.

 

[Saintsfanfl]

any timeshare being sold for less than their market resale value can also be listed.

That's what the rules state but is that reality? I seem to remember a reseller getting "moderated" out of the bargain forum because they were listing units for amounts above just the closing and transfer fees. In my mind I have bought all of my units for real bargains compared to even resale market rates but these amounts are usually $500 to several thousand. How does one judge what price they can list something in the bargain forum?

 

[T-Dot-Traveller]

AKA - most TS in Mexico

I currently own 12 timeshares. I got 11 of them for very cheap or free - some of them from the Bargain Deals Forum. To get rid of them I would have to give them away.

It's a gross exaggeration to say that they are "fraught with potential problems, downsides, and hidden issues," just because they were free, and I'd have to give them away for free.

There are some "dogs" out there, but there is a huge difference between a timeshare with no resale value, and a "dog." Many timeshares with no resale value would be perfect for the right person to own for their own use.

*******
Like the majority of the ones in Mexico. ( perhaps excluding Royal fixed weeks
and a few others that sell for $ 1000 and up,resale )

Denise - this is not a shot - I totally agree with your statement

*******
Any Mayan with a 5 x MF transfer cost probably cannot even be given away - which is why I am glad we have the MF on use addendum and an end date because it is RTU .
Great resorts - no ability to sell- and that is how the developer wants it.

*******
Taterhed- I think the meeting this week is this thread

Happy Weekend to All

 

[DeniseM]

For some of us, zero resale value IS the very definition of "a downside" and WOULD make that timeshare "a potential problem," compared to any others which do have resale value but are still bargains at certain prices.

Sue - your response does not address the point of my post:

Saying that no resale value is a "potential problem"

and saying

"fraught with potential problems, downsides, and hidden issues." and calling free timeshares "dogs"

are completely different statements.

 

[SueDonJ]

That's what the rules state but is that reality? I seem to remember a reseller getting "moderated" out of the bargain forum because they were listing units for amounts above just the closing and transfer fees. In my mind I have bought all of my units for real bargains compared to even resale market rates but these amounts are usually $500 to several thousand. How does one judge what price they can list something in the bargain forum?

"You are permitted to post your own timeshare ads, however if the price asked is not a "smoking deal" your ad is subject to removal!

Who will decide...well the members of course. While some "deals" will be painfully obvious, many others will fall to the fate of the people! If the masses say your post isnt a smoking deal...then OFF WITH ITS HEAD! :rofl:"

So, based on the existing forum rules I'd say that if somebody puts a price to a timeshare claiming it's a bargain, the members are free to add facts about the current resale market that either support or refute that claim. If it's supported, I wouldn't expect For Sale items to be moderated off of the forum.

 

[davidvel]

I think the distinction is whether I post a fact that is important to the potential buyer in making the decision and is either misrepresented or omitted by the seller, or I am posting opinion that casts shade on the offering without any factual basis.

For example, I did make a comment in a BB deal that advertised that it was a Independence Day Week fixed week. The truth was that it was only Independence day in one year because of the leap year, but normally it is not. I see that as a misrepresentation and I think it is a service to buyers to point out that they will only get July 4th every few years.

On the other hand, if I think Vista Mirage is a dirty run down place that isn't worth taking over for free, it's not helping anyone for me to state that, and would be unfair to the seller.

Edit: Weird, I posted this without having read davidvel's above.

I agree, and disagree. If you made the bolded statement, and it was based on your own knowledge of the place, I think you should make the comment. Sure, you should probably be a little more specific, and it could be "nicer." But if the place is a dump, in your opinion, this should be posted and vetted by the buyer (and refuted by seller if necessary/possible.)

 

[DeniseM]

Question for Sue and davidvel:

Have you ever bought on the resale market?

 

[Saintsfanfl]

"You are permitted to post your own timeshare ads, however if the price asked is not a "smoking deal" your ad is subject to removal!

Who will decide...well the members of course. While some "deals" will be painfully obvious, many others will fall to the fate of the people! If the masses say your post isnt a smoking deal...then OFF WITH ITS HEAD! :rofl:"

So, based on the existing forum rules I'd say that if somebody puts a price to a timeshare claiming it's a bargain, the members are free to add facts about the current resale market that either support or refute that claim. If it's supported, I wouldn't expect For Sale items to be moderated off of the forum.

This isn't happening though. If anything it's the opposite. The definition is really "free or near free". It is definitely not "smoking deal". There are hundreds of listings that are not "smoking deals" by any definition (but might be a fair deal for owner usage) while on the flip side you could post a premium unit for $1,000 that could easily be sold for double with a normal listing and it would probably be removed.

 

[Saintsfanfl]

The forum was originally started to sell anything (not just timeshares) that is a "smoking deal". It evolved into a giveaway timeshare forum.

By the very definition of the posting rules almost all of the listings are in violation of the posting rules. There is a fair deal for a free timeshare but that by no means makes it a "smoking deal".

I love the forum and not saying it should be re-purposed but the posting rules should probably be updated.

 

[vacationhopeful]

I regularly get comments about places I own ... some people ONLY want a Marriott level place with a GREAT location & view and others are hoping for basic & clean timeshare with location near to things.

And if someone ONLY wants 5-star and you are offering 3-star ... make sure your pictures are current, you described the unit & view as best as you can, and clearly state NO REFUNDS in the paperwork. I never say, "the unit is a lesser level of finish than a Marriott/Starwood/Hilton/Wyndham resort" as those resorts CAN ALL VARY in their level of finishes also.

PS I know my resorts ... and the last thing I want is UNHAPPY guest because they TOTALLY expected the unit with the best view. Unassigned means ... total crap shoot with the later you checkin, the worst the view might be. Deeded week ... my guests better be ROOSTING in my owned unit .. unless you "ask" me or if my guest is ONSITE the prior week, YOU ask their permission.

 

[SueDonJ]

Sue - your post does not address what I wrote:

Saying that no resale value is a "potential problem"

and saying

"fraught with potential problems, downsides, and hidden issues." and calling free timeshares "dogs."

are completely different statements.

I'm sorry but I just don't see that there's a need to parse the posts in this thread or moderate the forum in question as semantically-specific as you're making things. It's obvious we all have different interpretations of how "fraught with problems" or "a dog timeshare" might be interpreted, or, of what constitutes a negative v. positive comment, or, maybe more importantly, how the usage value of a timeshare might or might not validate the price for which it can be had.

Look at just this one example in this thread: Saying "there is a Special Assessment ..." is considered by some to be negative while asking, "has the Special Assessment been paid?" is not. Really?! Is that what we want, to delineate the forum rules so particularly that only certain qualifiers can be discussed, that only comments written in a pre-determined specific manner are allowed? That's frankly too much moderation, for me as both a TUG Member and moderator, for a topic that by its very nature is much more subjective than objective.

If as you've said the object of the forum is to re-home timeshares in a manner that doesn't leave them to the PCC's and other non-performers, then making sure the new owners don't become non-performers due to a lack of important information should be an equal priority. That can be done within the parameters of the overall TUG rules and the forum rules. IMO.

 

[SueDonJ]

Question for Sue and davidvel:

Have you ever bought on the resale market?

No, not me. Does that matter? I'm familiar enough with it, especially as it relates to Marriott timeshares, and I don't have an aversion to it.

I also don't troll, and don't intend to, the Bargain Deals forum.

Neither of which means that my opinions in this thread are any less valid than anyone else's, I should think.

 

[SueDonJ]

This isn't happening though. If anything it's the opposite. The definition is really "free or near free". It is definitely not "smoking deal". There are hundreds of listings that are not "smoking deals" by any definition (but might be a fair deal for owner usage) while on the flip side you could post a premium unit for $1,000 that could easily be sold for double with a normal listing and it would probably be removed.

Isn't that why/how this thread started? Because what's happening on the forum now isn't in conformance with the rules as they're stated? And because one person was bothered by comments that actually are in conformance with the rules?

The forum was originally started to sell anything (not just timeshares) that is a "smoking deal". It evolved into a giveaway timeshare forum.

By the very definition of the posting rules almost all of the listings are in violation of the posting rules. There is a fair deal for a free timeshare but that by no means makes it a "smoking deal".

I love the forum and not saying it should be re-purposed but the posting rules should probably be updated.

Or, the forum should be allowed to remain as the rules are written, with the leeway that allows free timeshares to be listed and their qualifiers discussed.

 

[T-Dot-Traveller]

Timeout

Perhaps it is time to start a tread called

What do you think of the 5 ( or so ) remaining US presidential candidate s

******
Canadian TUG members only
but all others can comment on the the language details of those posting
and the rules of the debate .

******

then we can really see what TUGGERS have to say


Still - have a good weekend

 

[theo]

When is euthanasia appropriate?

I have not participated in this thread and certainly do not intend to do so --- other than to now openly suggest that perhaps it's time to just put it out of its' misery and just mercifully (if belatedly) close it.

 

[Saintsfanfl]

I have not participated in this thread and certainly do not intend to do so --- other than to now openly suggest that perhaps it's time to just put it out of its' misery and just mercifully (if belatedly) close it.

That may or may not be true.