Reflections (properly put onthe Opinion board)
Loooong post. I thought I would put my reflections all in one post. That way anyone who wants to ignore me because I have been labled a RCI Happy can ignore just this single post.
Orlando: Orlando has been a favorite whipping boy ever since I joined TUG (and not just by a single poster). From day one, there were declarations that it was overbuilt and easy to get into. For that reason, don't buy there.
Overbuilt, maybe, but how well has Orlando done as a trader? Way back, Orlando owners used to post that, despite all the bashing, they got good trades. TUG trade tests seem to have confirmed that. There was a 2004 trade test, but the RCI portion did not include an Orlando resort. (The II test included a Vistana and it did well. Actually, there was little difference in any of the resorts that were matched up. No penalty for owning Orlando in II at the time.) Going back to the next previous test - 2003 - generalizing (and people can look at the test themselves - feel free) the Orlando resorts ended up in the middle of the pack, one step down from a grouping (with small differences among them) that was decidedly higher. (Put differently, the Orlando resorts ended up in the second and what would be best described as a middle tier.)
One shocker from this test (I remember when it was published) was that the Orlando resorts did better than one of the two Shearwater resorts used in the test. One Shearwater unit was at the lower end (marginal differences) of the top tier, which is what people expected; the other was in the third tier. There is an easy explanation for this: it was a Dec.1 week. Still, even an October Orange Lake (low, low season in Florida - tremendous excess capacity) out performed it.
So, if people are shocked by the numbers that Orlando units are getting, it appears that all that they are learning is what was behind that secret curtain all of the time. (We are always being told that what was behind that secret curtain was the way things should be.) What will be interesting is now that this is more out in the open and people won't be trading one for one, what sort of adjustments will be made as true supply and demand kicks in. This will be interesting to watch.
One vs. Two Bedrooms: To me, the real shocker in the published values is how little extra point value is being given for larger units. In Points, there is a real incentive to try to save some extra points by not taking a bigger unit than you really need. This helps open up two bedroom units for those who really need them. Not so with the published values. For an extra point or two, why not take a bigger unit? (And also, split your lockout for sure.)
So is this new? Hindsight makes me think not. In the past, whenever someone posted a question about how well just part of their lockout would trade, the responses were always it will trade really well (even for the studio portions). People reported that the smaller portions brought them trades equivalent to their entire unit so the advice was always "Split, baby, split."
I agree with the critics that this is a terrible feature of the Weeks system. Hopefully, published values, with supply and demand will lead to change and reform.
Supply and demand: I am honestly puzzled trying to figure out some people's conception of supply and demand. Under classical economic theory, any company that tries to ignore it will be punished. Price things too low and it lowers its own profits. Price things too high and it will be stuck with unsold inventory. This is not something that can be controlled by putting one's thumbs on the scale. Misprice and you will be punished.
For this to work, however, you have to have published and incrimentally differing prices. If you want to avoid supply and demand and introduce corruption, secret pricing is the way to go.
Beach vs. near beach: For some, being on the beach is the sine qua non (that without which nothing) for timesharing. Nothing on the beach should be outrankedby anything off no matter what. If it is, then something must be amiss in the pricing.
I haven't been to OBX or Myrtle Beach, but I can't help think about the fact that one of the most desired areas on the East Coast is Hilton Head and few of the resorts there are actually on the beach. In fact, the most desired of all Hilton Head resorts - Disney - is not. Apparently, many people are looking for something more out of timesharing than just being able to see the ocean from their window.
Duck vs Kitty Hawk: As mentioned, I have never been to OBX. Given the constant references, however, I have had to look at some of the claims about it. Starting about ten years ago, BIS Duck was praised and Kitty Hawk was bashed. The story has been Duck is desirable because of its location and Kitty Hawk should be receiving lower points because it is located away from the beach.
First an apology to AFARR. Duck has been taken over by new management and seems to be on the upswing as some much needed upkeep and repair is occurring. If you own your own unit and know what you are getting, it appears as if this is rapidly becoming a good place to own. But what about for outsiders?
First by the numbers: On RCI directory page, Duck has 53 reviews and an overall 2.7 rating. Kitty Hawk has 41 review and an overall 3.9 rating. Hmmm... Looking at the first two pages (the first eight) of the actual reviews for Duck, five of them mention that the resort is on the upswing. Three of the reviews, however, give it one star. They mention things like water leaking through the ceiling (that is also in one of the three star reviews), dated appliances and furniture, offensive smells, crumbs in the kitchen drawers and dirty pans. The bottom line is that if you own or somehow know that you will get a renovated unit, this might be a great place. But there is a difference between just a lack of amenities and dirt. As an outsider, would I be willing to take a gamble on a week of my vacation living in a broken down unit? As one of the reviews titles itself "only if you are desperate" (and for me not even then).
The previous paragraph probably goes a lot further toward explaining the lower point value for Duck than the oft cited thumb on the scales or overemphasizing of amenities.
Blue weeks: Yeah, it is a worry about how those resorts with blue weeks will survive. But, is the worry soley due to the introduction of point values or the loss of the 45 day grace period for trades?
Starting with the 45 day period, I have to mention that the principle proponent of this argument sold his blue weeks and bought into SA when the 45 day period was still there. That is fine. I am sure it made more economic sense to do so. I just hope he openly told everyone at his resort about his reasons because I am sure that it made economic sense for others to do so. The bottom line is that there were already economic pressures on the blue weeks before Points came into existence.
Still, do points lead to the demise of resorts having blue weeks? Is this the nail in the coffin. I am a skeptic. Fairfield, Worldmark, and Bluegreen all existed long before RCI Points, all had points based systems, all have resorts with blue weeks, and their resorts with blue weeks have all managed to survive. Quite frankly, there is more demand for trading into the blue weeks because of the low price. That helps bolster their value. So before we cry over the resorts with blue weeks, let us see what actually happens.
