• The TUGBBS forums are completely free and open to the public and exist as the absolute best place for owners to get help and advice about their timeshares for more than 30 years!

    Join Tens of Thousands of other Owners just like you here to get any and all Timeshare questions answered 24 hours a day!
  • TUG started 30 years ago in October 1993 as a group of regular Timeshare owners just like you!

    Read about our 30th anniversary: Happy 30th Birthday TUG!
  • TUG has a YouTube Channel to produce weekly short informative videos on popular Timeshare topics!

    Free memberships for every 50 subscribers!

    Visit TUG on Youtube!
  • TUG has now saved timeshare owners more than $21,000,000 dollars just by finding us in time to rescind a new Timeshare purchase! A truly incredible milestone!

    Read more here: TUG saves owners more than $21 Million dollars
  • Sign up to get the TUG Newsletter for free!

    60,000+ subscribing owners! A weekly recap of the best Timeshare resort reviews and the most popular topics discussed by owners!
  • Our official "end my sales presentation early" T-shirts are available again! Also come with the option for a free membership extension with purchase to offset the cost!

    All T-shirt options here!
  • A few of the most common links here on the forums for newbies and guests!

Where do all the unused weeks go?

Mel

TUG Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2005
Messages
1,882
Reaction score
0
Points
36
Location
Connecticut
Maybe I should ask if you support adding trips to the center of the earth to points partners.
QUOTE]
Sure, if RCI can come up with a supplier.

No matter how many times you are asked, you still refuse to answer a simple question with a simple yes or no. I did not ask whether a developer might want to put weeks into the system. You want a system where there is a balance of weeks coming in and going out. But out of the other side of your mouth, you say you want a system that includes developer weeks. Where is the incentive for the developer to keep placing their weeks in the spacebank?

I'll rephrase, and maybe you will answer - two parts:

1) Does the current model of week-for-week exchange need an influx of developer weeks to operate properly?

2) If it does, what are you willing to give developer, other than worthless bonus week certificates, in exchange for their deposits?
 

Carolinian

TUG Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2005
Messages
10,644
Reaction score
936
Points
598
Location
eastern Europe
More rhetorical games from one of the more tenacious of the self appointed RCI defenders! If you read my posts in this thread, you will find I have discussed both issues.
 

"Roger"

TUG Review Crew
TUG Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2005
Messages
4,414
Reaction score
3,213
Points
598
I have read your earlier posts. As best that I can tell, this is your definitive answer. You think RCI should segregate developer weeks from the exchange weeks because no one cares to go to any of them anyway.

If this becomes the outcome of the suit, should the same apply to SFX?

Who cares about ''new'' resorts? Most care about resorts located where they want to go. Often the better locations are already taken and the ''new'' resorts don't get them.

RCI seems big into ''flexibility'' and the concept of ''excess inventory'' is extremely ''flexible''. It can be anything RCI wants it to be and to adjust the numbers to accomplish that. Renting spacebank inventory to the general public is simply a huge conflict of interest and needs to be brought to a screaching halt.
 

John Cummings

TUG Lifetime Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2005
Messages
5,020
Reaction score
80
Points
433
Location
Murrieta, California
Many years ago, when I used to use RCI, I was able to get a second consecutive week in Mazatlan because of developers weeks. As I have said many times, I do NOT care where my week comes from as long as I get it.
 

Carolinian

TUG Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2005
Messages
10,644
Reaction score
936
Points
598
Location
eastern Europe
I have read your earlier posts. As best that I can tell, this is your definitive answer. You think RCI should segregate developer weeks from the exchange weeks because no one cares to go to any of them anyway.

If this becomes the outcome of the suit, should the same apply to SFX?

How typical to take something out of context. That quote refers what governs demand. It is location, not ''newness'' that drives demand.

You are well aware from the posts directly on the subject of developer weeks that I have not taken the position you allege.
 

"Roger"

TUG Review Crew
TUG Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2005
Messages
4,414
Reaction score
3,213
Points
598
In post #140 Mel was pointing out that if developer weeks become unavailable to RCI exchangers, those who own good weeks and want to go to some of the newer resorts will drop out of the system. Post #141 (quoted above) was your response.

[Added: Mel is obviously frustrated in that she can't find your answers to her questions. Given the context of post #141, that was the best I could find. This is an excellent opportunity for you to make your position clear. Please provide direct and clear answers to the questions she poses in post #176. Thanks.]
 
Last edited:

timeos2

Tug Review Crew: Rookie
TUG Lifetime Member
Joined
Apr 11, 2005
Messages
11,183
Reaction score
5
Points
36
Location
Rochester, NY
Today isn't 1985, is it?

The Weeks model made Christel deHaan a rich lady. It works.

The Points mini-system model came out of the gate first in timesharing (Hapimag of Switzerland) but was quickly ecliped when French developers came up with the superior Weeks model.

There are lots of comparable things that blue and white weeks can trade for, that are also in oversupply compared to demand, and that is weeks from the overbuilt areas - an equal trade based on supply and demand.

If you really want like for like, maybe overbuilt areas should only trade for other overbuilt areas.

Weeks is necessary for Points to loot to prop up the otherwise unsustainable Points system. If they pull the plug on Weeks, they kill Points.

Even if the system did work in the old days, and TUGS' very existence says there were serious problems even then, the timeshare landscape of today isn't the one that existed then. We have covered those changes time and time again so no need to repeat them. But that model simply doesn't have legs anymore.

It may surprise you to find out that if a crazy result like red for red only was fully implemented (effectively limiting what you call overbuilt areas to other similar areas and the limited red times of the seasonal resorts) the owners of those areas would for the most part be happy while the seasonal blue and white owners, now officially regulated to equal trades, would be the ones complaining. Ending the free ride enjoyed by those owners has always been fair game. Actually that is what the systems implied they enforced all along so THAT result of the class action would actually be good. Not that any result is likely. The colors are there for a reason. In a simple world they would determine what you could get. Talk about rigged and fixed.
 
Last edited:

AwayWeGo

TUG Review Crew: Expert
TUG Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2005
Messages
15,687
Reaction score
1,630
Points
699
Location
McLean (Fairfax County), Virginia, USA.
Resorts Owned
Grandview At Las Vegas

[triennial - points]
Great Idea. Where Do I Sign Up ?

If you really want like for like, maybe overbuilt areas should only trade for other overbuilt areas.
Now that's the 1st creative timeshare exchange idea I've encountered in quite a while -- & it's so way-out crazy it just might work.

By "overbuilt," do we agree on . . .

Orlando FL ?
Williamsburg VA ?
Las Vegas NV ?
Branson MO ?

Any others ?

-- Alan Cole, McLean (Fairfax County), Virginia, USA.​

 

Carolinian

TUG Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2005
Messages
10,644
Reaction score
936
Points
598
Location
eastern Europe
My suggestion was overbuilt area for overbuilt area, NOT red for red.

There are too many ''red'' weeks in the RCI system that should be blue or white. There was a day that it was well justified to make all weeks in Orlando red. Marvin Beard used to speak of the day that timeshare there was like gold - ''mousefront property'' he said it was called. But a LOT of timeshare has been built since then, and the Availibility tables in the European version of the RCI Directory clearly show that much of it now should be blue or white. Don't expect the developers in sales to ever allow that to happen, however. In Europe, the Canary Islands is a similar example where in the current market it is laughable to call it ''red all year'' Ha! Ha!




Even if the system did work in the old days, and TUGS' very existence says there were serious problems even then, the timeshare landscape of today isn't the one that existed then. We have covered those changes time and time again so no need to repeat them. But that model simply doesn't have legs anymore.

It may surprise you to find out that if a crazy result like red for red only was fully implemented (effectively limiting what you call overbuilt areas to other similar areas and the limited red times of the seasonal resorts) the owners of those areas would for the most part be happy while the seasonal blue and white owners, now officially regulated to equal trades, would be the ones complaining. Ending the free ride enjoyed by those owners has always been fair game. Actually that is what the systems implied they enforced all along so THAT result of the class action would actually be good. Not that any result is likely. The colors are there for a reason. In a simple world they would determine what you could get. Talk about rigged and fixed.
 

Carolinian

TUG Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2005
Messages
10,644
Reaction score
936
Points
598
Location
eastern Europe
Now that's the 1st creative timeshare exchange idea I've encountered in quite a while -- & it's so way-out crazy it just might work.

By "overbuilt," do we agree on . . .

Orlando FL ?
Williamsburg VA ?
Las Vegas NV ?
Branson MO ?

Any others ?

-- Alan Cole, McLean (Fairfax County), Virginia, USA.​


Bootleg's list was:

Orlando
Williamsburg
Branson
Massanutten

For Europe, you could add:

Canary Islands
Costa Del Sol, Spain
 

timeos2

Tug Review Crew: Rookie
TUG Lifetime Member
Joined
Apr 11, 2005
Messages
11,183
Reaction score
5
Points
36
Location
Rochester, NY
Lest make REdWeek mean Redweek. Thats all it trades for

My suggestion was overbuilt area for overbuilt area, NOT red for red.

There are too many ''red'' weeks in the RCI system that should be blue or white. There was a day that it was well justified to make all weeks in Orlando red. Marvin Beard used to speak of the day that timeshare there was like gold - ''mousefront property'' he said it was called. But a LOT of timeshare has been built since then, and the Availibility tables in the European version of the RCI Directory clearly show that much of it now should be blue or white. Don't expect the developers in sales to ever allow that to happen, however. In Europe, the Canary Islands is a similar example where in the current market it is laughable to call it ''red all year'' Ha! Ha!

So who declares a region "overbuilt"? What would be the criteria? What if OBX was declared "overbuilt" because 6 months a year there is a massive supply overload? Or would it take 7 months of <50% occupancy to be "overbuilt"? If any occupancy rate above 50% means it's in demand then Orlando isn't in overbuilt territory. But OBX, with 5 month of low demand, would be.

The same issues you raise with red vs pink vs white vs blue arise again. Just substitute "Overbuilt" for "blue" and "Underbuilt" for red. The disagreements would be exactly the same as everyone thinks they own the best I'm sure.

Or lets go down the idyllic path of "overbuilt for overbuilt" only. Provided the plan is fair and it's also off season for off season, etc. where do you think the howls would come from? The Orlando/Branson/ Las Vegas owners who get to trade freely between those "overbuilt" locations OR the seasonal owner of OBX or Cape Cod who wanted a trip to Orlando/LV but is blocked as those are available for "overbuilt" owners only? Remember, even the red times would no longer qualify for "overbuilt" areas. So they get to pick from other red times in seasonal areas but not the top destinations - they are "overbuilt". That system wouldn't last long for those not in the "overbuilt" group. Which is the whole issue. Weeks aren't equal and "overbuilt" is a catch phrase while seasonal is a fact. Should all construction stop tomorrow and the same number of timeshares exist in Orlando for the next ten years "overbuilt"would fade away. Seasonal is forever and cannot be altered.
 

rickandcindy23

TUG Review Crew: Elite
TUG Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2005
Messages
31,901
Reaction score
9,003
Points
1,049
Location
The Centennial State
Resorts Owned
Wyndham Founder; Disney OKW & SSR; Marriott's Willow Ridge,Shadow Ridge,Grand Chateau;Val Chatelle; Hono Koa OF (3); SBR(LOTS), SDO a few; Grand Palms; WKORV-OF (2),Westin Desert Willow.
Boca would say the rest of the country is just underbuilt. :rofl:

It is true that the system would work well for us if every area we wanted to travel had as many resorts as Orlando. I used to say Orlando was overbuilt, but I changed my mind because, as Boca says, Orlando has enough to satisfy most everyone during the busy times of year. Of course, some of the resorts are going to be the lesser ones, because not even half are GC. The less knowledgable exchangers will take whatever RCI assigns them, which is such a shame, because TUGgers are just hogging all the good ones. ;)
 

John Cummings

TUG Lifetime Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2005
Messages
5,020
Reaction score
80
Points
433
Location
Murrieta, California
I don't think TUGGERS are hogging too much of anything. I hate to break the news to you but TUG really has only a minuscule effect, if any on the timeshare world.
 

Steve Barr

TUG Member
Joined
Jun 20, 2005
Messages
19
Reaction score
0
Points
1
Location
Raleigh, NC
AHHH, my brain's going to explode from laughing as I read the WHOLE thread (and we never exchange, we use 5 weeks and rent out the 3 others- every year). Best thread yet for entertainment value.

Let's see- chronologically so far it's 'I'm right, you're right, the developers are pond scum, it's RCI's fault, RCI is great, points is screwing weeks, points have no effect on weeks availability, Cendant (the devil) made me do it, you are scum, no-you misinterpreted what I meant/thought I said from your response to my response to your earlier response to my response to the third party's response to the original post, I understand what you said- you're still an idiot, exchange systems are great/bad/unethical/the reincarnation of Enron, let's sue, no you should sue, no let a third party sue, no one should sue'. Did I miss anything major?

About the only explanation I have not seen is that it must be CFI/Wastegate trying to take over the world (which I find as likely as some of the other proposed theories).

Now I'll admit I've NEVER traded/exchanged with a company. So I have no experience but also no dog in this fight. It strikes me that many are fine with exchanging as long as they get to trade up when they want with the trade. Do the math, for all deposits vs. trades in a system it's a zero sum game.

As I said, great entertainment value. Let's have a tag team wrestlemania rumble- it's RCI vs. non-RCI, winner takes all.
 

bruwery

TUG Member
Joined
May 25, 2006
Messages
219
Reaction score
2
Points
16
Location
Lowell, MI
This thread has taken an interesting tangent into the land of overbuilt vs. underbuilt vs. red vs. white vs. whatever.


This is really getting fun!! I am learning absolutely nothing, and loving every word of it.

One could make an argument that almost every location is overbuilt, because most areas have softer periods or excess units. Now, I didn't say ALL areas. Those of you who believe you live in a perpetually hot spot with no excess (you don't, but I don't mind if you believe otherwise), please don't take offense and shoot me.

Due to the fact that I own in overbuilt Orlando, I'll just assume that anything I can trade into must be overbuilt and therefore worthless. Hence, I shouldn't trade into it, or I'm somehow getting shortchanged, because even though Orlando's overbuilt, my resort is an exception because it has great location (according to me). However, if I deposit my resort, that would make it available for exchange - a key indicator in the "overbuilt" rankings. Therefore, nobody should trade into it...

At the end of the day, all of us timeshare owners should just jump in a lake and drown ourselves because all timeshares are worthless and nothing will trade for anything that isn't overbuilt.

I know somebody from southern California or New York City is going to come on here and tell me they have no soft period. They may be right, but I don't want to go to either place, so that makes those locations overbuilt to me. And, when you cut right to the chase, "me" is all I really care about...:D
 

AwayWeGo

TUG Review Crew: Expert
TUG Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2005
Messages
15,687
Reaction score
1,630
Points
699
Location
McLean (Fairfax County), Virginia, USA.
Resorts Owned
Grandview At Las Vegas

[triennial - points]
You Can't Get There From Here.

At the end of the day, all of us timeshare owners should just jump in a lake and drown ourselves because all timeshares are worthless and nothing will trade for anything that isn't overbuilt.
Sounds very much like the situation I'm in when I ask for directions in New York City . . .

Pardon me, sir.
Could you please tell me how to get to Times Square?
Or should I just go *bleep* myself ?

-- Alan Cole, McLean (Fairfax County), Virginia, USA.​
 

John Cummings

TUG Lifetime Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2005
Messages
5,020
Reaction score
80
Points
433
Location
Murrieta, California
It is true that this overbuilt vs under-built, etc. is laughable. Seeing as I only participate in these useless discussions for the entertainment value, I find this thread to be a great one.

In all seriousness, does any of this really matter? To me, the only important thing is that one gets to go where they want whether it is overbuilt, under-built, seaside, mountain, desert, beach, and yes, even amusement parks. Gosh even developer weeks work just fine.

I have been trading weeks for 17 years and have always been able to go where I wanted so I am happy. End of story.
 

Carolinian

TUG Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2005
Messages
10,644
Reaction score
936
Points
598
Location
eastern Europe
That's why a valid system should only be built on supply and demand, as is RCI Weeks. The market determines what is overbuilt not someone aribtrarily designating an area overbuilt or arbitrarily setting numbers. Many Tuggers who have expereience using the system are able to identify it. Bootleg, with his access to RCI's computers was able to see it more graphically. The avilibility tables in the European version of the RCI directory also show it.

The season with excess supply on the OBX runs a bit less than 3 months, not 5. Yearround, the OBX t/s has better occupancy than Orlando.

Any system should allow trades down. That would mean that a red week from a high demand area certain should be able to trade down into an overbuilt area.




So who declares a region "overbuilt"? What would be the criteria? What if OBX was declared "overbuilt" because 6 months a year there is a massive supply overload? Or would it take 7 months of <50% occupancy to be "overbuilt"? If any occupancy rate above 50% means it's in demand then Orlando isn't in overbuilt territory. But OBX, with 5 month of low demand, would be.

The same issues you raise with red vs pink vs white vs blue arise again. Just substitute "Overbuilt" for "blue" and "Underbuilt" for red. The disagreements would be exactly the same as everyone thinks they own the best I'm sure.

Or lets go down the idyllic path of "overbuilt for overbuilt" only. Provided the plan is fair and it's also off season for off season, etc. where do you think the howls would come from? The Orlando/Branson/ Las Vegas owners who get to trade freely between those "overbuilt" locations OR the seasonal owner of OBX or Cape Cod who wanted a trip to Orlando/LV but is blocked as those are available for "overbuilt" owners only? Remember, even the red times would no longer qualify for "overbuilt" areas. So they get to pick from other red times in seasonal areas but not the top destinations - they are "overbuilt". That system wouldn't last long for those not in the "overbuilt" group. Which is the whole issue. Weeks aren't equal and "overbuilt" is a catch phrase while seasonal is a fact. Should all construction stop tomorrow and the same number of timeshares exist in Orlando for the next ten years "overbuilt"would fade away. Seasonal is forever and cannot be altered.
 

Carolinian

TUG Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2005
Messages
10,644
Reaction score
936
Points
598
Location
eastern Europe
According to Bootleg, who with his access to RCI computers would know, the two resorts with the biggest oversupply in the entire RCI system are both Gold Crowns in Orlando.

That is why a blue week from anywhere will trade into Orlando much of the year. Their supply/demand profiles are similar, so they are an equal trade.


Boca would say the rest of the country is just underbuilt. :rofl:

It is true that the system would work well for us if every area we wanted to travel had as many resorts as Orlando. I used to say Orlando was overbuilt, but I changed my mind because, as Boca says, Orlando has enough to satisfy most everyone during the busy times of year. Of course, some of the resorts are going to be the lesser ones, because not even half are GC. The less knowledgable exchangers will take whatever RCI assigns them, which is such a shame, because TUGgers are just hogging all the good ones. ;)
 

"Roger"

TUG Review Crew
TUG Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2005
Messages
4,414
Reaction score
3,213
Points
598
....Due to the fact that I own in overbuilt Orlando, I'll just assume that anything I can trade into must be overbuilt and therefore worthless. Hence, I shouldn't trade into it, or I'm somehow getting shortchanged, because even though Orlando's overbuilt, my resort is an exception because it has great location (according to me). However, if I deposit my resort, that would make it available for exchange - a key indicator in the "overbuilt" rankings. Therefore, nobody should trade into it...

At the end of the day, all of us timeshare owners should just jump in a lake and drown ourselves because all timeshares are worthless and nothing will trade for anything that isn't overbuilt....
Thanks for providing me with a good laugh.
 

bruwery

TUG Member
Joined
May 25, 2006
Messages
219
Reaction score
2
Points
16
Location
Lowell, MI
Sounds very much like the situation I'm in when I ask for directions in New York City . . .

Pardon me, sir.
Could you please tell me how to get to Times Square?
Or should I just go *bleep* myself ?

-- Alan Cole, McLean (Fairfax County), Virginia, USA.​

Now THAT'S funny!!
 

Mel

TUG Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2005
Messages
1,882
Reaction score
0
Points
36
Location
Connecticut
More rhetorical games from one of the more tenacious of the self appointed RCI defenders! If you read my posts in this thread, you will find I have discussed both issues.
Maybe, but you don't answer the questions. Roger tried to clarify your answer and you jumped down his throat accusing him of taking things out of context.

If you insist on hinting at your answers, rather than answering, then perhaps all of your posts should include the following disclaimer:

"ignore the man behind the courtain"

You have every right to your opinion, but if you're going to insist on telling us we're all wrong, at least give us the courtesy of answering our questions so we know where you truly stand.

1 - you don't like RCI
2 - you think weeks-for-weeks is the only fair system
3 - you think developer should put their weeks into the exchange system
4 - you think nothing should be taken out in exchange
5 - eliminating rentals by RCI will solve all the major problems
6 - if Developers remove their weeks from the system, it won't matter, because nobody in their right mind wants them anyway.
 

Carolinian

TUG Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2005
Messages
10,644
Reaction score
936
Points
598
Location
eastern Europe
Ah! The pro-RCI spinmaster.

To correct the spin of your assertions:

1. I have stated many times that RCI created the best timeshare exchange system there has ever been. Unfortunately Cendant hijacked it. Timesharers should try to get it back to where it will be dependable again. I have never joined those who advocated cancelling RCI membership, just diverting as many deposits as feasible to other companies until some corrective action occurs at RCI.

2. Weeks is the best system, but I have actually set out at some lengths how most of the bugs could be taken out of a points system. Unfortunately, as long as they use paper and ink to public tables, points systems are always going to be seriously flawed.

3. I think developers should do whatever they want with their weeks. They can get certain advantages in putting them in the exchange system, but some may see more benefit elsewhere. That is up to them, not you.

4. (I really don't know what you mean by this distortion!)

5. Eliminated rentals by exchange companies to outsiders from exchange deposits will solve one major problem. It will not solve all major problems, like the unfair crossover grids.

6. The same out of context distortion as above! The driver of demand is location not ''newness''. If the developer weeks are from an oversupply area or a poor location, they will make no difference if they are in the system or not. If they are from an area with more demand than supply then yes they will make a difference. Some might actually benefit if developers pulled their inventory, such as an overbuilt area since this would decrease the glut of supply to some extent and therefore probably help trading power for owners there.


Maybe, but you don't answer the questions. Roger tried to clarify your answer and you jumped down his throat accusing him of taking things out of context.

If you insist on hinting at your answers, rather than answering, then perhaps all of your posts should include the following disclaimer:

"ignore the man behind the courtain"

You have every right to your opinion, but if you're going to insist on telling us we're all wrong, at least give us the courtesy of answering our questions so we know where you truly stand.

1 - you don't like RCI
2 - you think weeks-for-weeks is the only fair system
3 - you think developer should put their weeks into the exchange system
4 - you think nothing should be taken out in exchange
5 - eliminating rentals by RCI will solve all the major problems
6 - if Developers remove their weeks from the system, it won't matter, because nobody in their right mind wants them anyway.
 

Mel

TUG Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2005
Messages
1,882
Reaction score
0
Points
36
Location
Connecticut
I wasn't spinning, I was asking if it was an accurate representation of your opinion, because you won't answer questions directly - much like a politician.

We shouldn't accuse you of bashing RCI and anyone that understands their model of business, because you don't dislike RCI, just Cendant. Yet it's OK for you to call us names because we feel that your accusations deserve a response.

1 - you used to like RCI, now you won't take a stand, though you don't like what Cendant has done to RCI.

2 - you are entitled your your opinion that weeks is the best system. Many others, however, disagree, or Point would never have gotten off the ground.

3 - I never said it was up to me. You don't seem to have an opinion

4 - what distortion? Should anything be removed from the spacebank in exchange for the developer weeks? This is the one question you seem to have the most trouble with. Should the developers have a right to something from the spacebank in exchange for the weeks they deposit?

5 - good, you realize it won't solve the problem. The solution to your other little delemma is for all resorts to affiliate, and there won't be any crossover grids.

6 Your words from post # 141,
Who cares about ''new'' resorts? Most care about resorts located where they want to go. Often the better locations are already taken and the ''new'' resorts don't get them.
and post # 150
I look at the areas I trade into and I really don't see developer inventory from new resorts as making much difference. I can't think of any resort I would trade into just because it is ''new''. In fact, I could name a long list of ''old'' resorts I would much rather have than anything ''new'' I can think of. It is all about location.

An interesting statistic - a recent ARDA poll showed that location was considered "very important" to only 68% of 2005 buyers surveyed, while quality was very important to 82%

Copy/paste functionality has been disabled during the survey.
 

Carolinian

TUG Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2005
Messages
10,644
Reaction score
936
Points
598
Location
eastern Europe
Still spinning! You take a post on the issue of location vs. ''newness'' and try to apply it to something else. You also try to spin questions that are overbroad and you don't seem to like anwers that deal with different aspects of the issue which deserve different responses.

You clarified the gibbersih that was your #4. In response, I am aware that HOA's get tentative bulkbank exchange credits for their deposits, so I suspect that developers would get the same. That seems perfectly fair to me.

As to #3, my opinion is that developers should have a right to do what they want. You say it is not up to you, but imply that it should be up to someone other than the developer. With that I certainly disagree with you.

As to #5, ending the rentals WILL solve one of the major problems, just not all of the major problems. Again, you seem to like to spin to overgeneralize.

Same ole' same ole' . Your spin is NOT my answer.

Your ARDA survey appears to deal with new buyers, which is a far different group than timeshare exchangers for a variety of reasons. There have been quite a few location vs. ''quality'' threads on several t/s boards, and location always blows away ''quality''.


I wasn't spinning, I was asking if it was an accurate representation of your opinion, because you won't answer questions directly - much like a politician.

We shouldn't accuse you of bashing RCI and anyone that understands their model of business, because you don't dislike RCI, just Cendant. Yet it's OK for you to call us names because we feel that your accusations deserve a response.

1 - you used to like RCI, now you won't take a stand, though you don't like what Cendant has done to RCI.

2 - you are entitled your your opinion that weeks is the best system. Many others, however, disagree, or Point would never have gotten off the ground.

3 - I never said it was up to me. You don't seem to have an opinion

4 - what distortion? Should anything be removed from the spacebank in exchange for the developer weeks? This is the one question you seem to have the most trouble with. Should the developers have a right to something from the spacebank in exchange for the weeks they deposit?

5 - good, you realize it won't solve the problem. The solution to your other little delemma is for all resorts to affiliate, and there won't be any crossover grids.

6 Your words from post # 141,

and post # 150


An interesting statistic - a recent ARDA poll showed that location was considered "very important" to only 68% of 2005 buyers surveyed, while quality was very important to 82%

Copy/paste functionality has been disabled during the survey.
 
Last edited:
Top