|
Author
|
Topic: ?s on DVC---still debating
|
tonyg
TUG MemberPosts: 6990
From: East Canaan, CT -- Own at:Royal Mayan, Seapointer
Registered: DEC 2000
|
posted 08-29-2001 10:24
 
Deb-don't be too sure about prices going up. Timeshares are not necessities and if the economy continues to sour Disney may actually exercise the refusal part or lower their numbers. Vacations are much more expendable than other expenses and timeshare resales will be strongly adversely affected by economic downturns.------------------
"The problem with the rat race is even if you win, you're still a rat" (Lily Tomlin)
|
sandcastles
TUG MemberPosts: 502
From: Terre Haute, In Own at Hurricane House on Sanibel; 2 weeks at PBC at South Seas on Captiva; BWV and BCV with DVC; Foxrun; 2 weekSkiView in Gatlinburg
Registered: MAY 2001
|
posted 08-29-2001 12:05
Marina,No offense taken. I just love San/Cap and DVC so much I get a little carried away. June
------------------
*Hurricane House-Sanibel
*DVC
*Plantation Beach Club @South Seas Plantation (2 weeks)
*Ski View at Gatlinburg(2 weeks)
|
Lisa P
TUG MemberPosts: 1124
From: NC (owner - Fairfield Harbour 154,000 FSP pts.)
Registered: DEC 2000
|
posted 08-29-2001 19:08
quote:
Originally posted by tuguser:
Old Key West is rated #6 and Boardwalk Villas is #3 in the TUG top ten timeshare list worldwide.
These are definitely wonderful resorts and we've enjoyed stays at both. Sometimes, I wonder why people tout the TUG Top Ten when describing their own resorts. With DVC being rather hard to trade into (few II deposits), most of the ratings are likely made by DVC owners themselves, rather than outside exchangers. My own DVC Ratings & Reviews were made when we owned and I know that I was incredibly "pro-DVC" at that time. It's natural. Owners obviously love their own resorts or they wouldn't have bought, so the ratings may be a bit skewed, no?This complaint has sometimes been lodged against Marriott resorts here at TUG as well (which we have also owned). I think it's valid. Perhaps the ratings ought to have some kind of symbol placed next to them if more than half were given by owners. And I question whether owners' ratings ought to be considered at all when placing a resort on the TUG Top Ten, since it seems to get used as a marketing tool (with Resale Brokers) and ought to be less slanted. Just a thought.
|
tuguser
unregistered
TUG MemberPosts: 1124
From: NC (owner - Fairfield Harbour 154,000 FSP pts.)
Registered: DEC 2000
|
posted 08-30-2001 07:09
Lisa, Good point about the rating list. It is so irritating when owners refer to it, isn't it. We should all agree that the list should not be mentioned without the appropriate disclaimers and clarifications. Otherwise, it has no value as one point of reference and may unduly confuse a person considering purchasing DVC or evaluating its market value. Chuckle, Chuckle.
|
tuguser
unregistered
TUG MemberPosts: 1124
From: NC (owner - Fairfield Harbour 154,000 FSP pts.)
Registered: DEC 2000
|
posted 08-30-2001 07:37
Seriously, I do see that several of the positive recent OKW reviews are from non-owners. Apparently, non-owners are actively using the resort through exchanges or rentals.
|
Lisa P
TUG MemberPosts: 1124
From: NC (owner - Fairfield Harbour 154,000 FSP pts.)
Registered: DEC 2000
|
posted 08-30-2001 08:40
We don't have to agree on this. I just notice that as new resorts begin to show up on TUG's Top Ten, they often have primarily owner reviews. As OKW has had more non-owner guest reviews, it's ratings have dropped accordingly, as they do with other new resorts. I would expect the same to happen with BWV... unless the lack of exchangers into the resort prevent balance from affecting its ratings.OKW has maintained a spot on TUG's Top Ten and I have already said that I think it's a wonderful resort. But look at its reviews. Some of the "non-owner" reviews were provided by DVC members who own at other home resorts (and who would likely still have a pro-DVC bias). There's a pretty striking absence of criticism from owner & non-owning DVC'ers, when compared with the reviews by those who mention the $95 fee they'd paid. The fee payers are the only people who were clearly exchangers - these are the same folks who provide most of the reviews and ratings for the vast majority of TUG's database. They are favorable and not nearly as glossy. And that is my point. So long as the rest of the DVC resorts continue to have so few exchange-in opportunities, their ratings and reviews will be slightly skewed. I'd expect OKW to gradually drop slightly lower in its ratings as more exchangers visit. And I'd expect BWV, VWL and eventually BCV to end up high on the TUG Top Ten and stay there. But I'd take it all with a teeny, tiny grain of salt.    Just like I'd take Marriott Maui's rating with a grain of salt... since nearly no non-Marriott owners will ever get in there. Again, we needn't agree - it's just this one little person's opinion.
|
tuguser
unregistered
TUG MemberPosts: 1124
From: NC (owner - Fairfield Harbour 154,000 FSP pts.)
Registered: DEC 2000
|
posted 08-30-2001 11:20
Actually, we agree that DVC has wonderful high demand resorts. The only thing we disagreed on is whether it was appropriate for me, as an owner, to refer to the ratings list in support of my opinion. That troubles you when you see owners do that. You have a lot more information about the accuracy of that list then I do. I don't think that breaking it down to distinguish the owner/non-owner ratings statistic is a bad idea. Although, people who don't trade or rent their resorts very often might have a reason, e.g. the resort is fabulous and not some cheap dog they bought just to trade. On the other hand, I think owners do have an incentive for holding back criticism, and thereby artificially inflating ratings. I had not given that aspect of the ratings much thought before.
|
tonyg
TUG MemberPosts: 6990
From: East Canaan, CT -- Own at:Royal Mayan, Seapointer
Registered: DEC 2000
|
posted 08-30-2001 19:13
It's a good point about DVC, as I think if we really investigated every review or rating, there would be a higher percentage of owner reviews than with other resort groups. The solution would be to not include owner ratings for top ten inclusion or not to let owners give a rating. Then comes the question of who will do the work and how you can tell who is an owner and if an owner is anyone within the resort group. I'm not sure if I ever put in a rating for a resort that I own, but I know I rate every exchange since I joined TUG, except for the three reviews and ratings that are coming.------------------
"The problem with the rat race is even if you win, you're still a rat" (Lily Tomlin) [This message has been edited by tonyg (edited 08-30-2001).]
|
ralphd
TUG MemberPosts: 410
From: Stone Mountain, GA
Registered: DEC 2000
|
posted 08-31-2001 20:25
I believe you could say that any high demand resort complex including DVC, the Royals and several Marriotts will have a high percentage of owners returning to the resort each year. Which means the resort will not have as many exchangers giving reviews or rating (the resort). Have seen owners of resorts (or sister resorts)under construction post on this forum that the resort will receive 10's. Some people will always be more objective and some will always be more emotional in their reviews than others.
Hope there isn't any move to restrict reviews and/or ratings.
ralphd
|
Dean
TUG MemberPosts: 2683
From: Disney's Old Key West, Marriott's Grande Ocean, Marriott's Harbour Pt. and La Cabana, Aruba
Registered: DEC 2000
|
posted 08-31-2001 21:13
Tonyg, I guess I'm a little behind on this one. True the DVC resorts are RTU as are the Royals and many other highly rated resorts. Also true that at some point the value will begin to decline simply because of the limited time remaining. I think it's a little less true for some resorts than others. I'd guess that the value will start being affected significantly when there's around 20 years remaining and it will be a slow but steady decline in comparison to any new DVC resorts, if there are any. I guess the fact that I will be 84 when it ends and don't want to own a 50 year old structure in FL makes me ambivilent to the RTU.I think with DVC we can assume the price per point of any new resort will continue to increase for some time to come. I just can't see DVC backing down especially with continued record sales of the on sight properties in spite of the slower economy. As for the review bias, I'm sure there is. As several point out, owners at that resort and at sister resorts are likely to rate them higher but that's not always the case. I also own at Marriott and rated Ocean Pointe lower I'm convinced becasue it didn't meet my expecations though it's still a great resort. Few of the resorts ratings will have much statisticaly significance and I don't believe we can single out one resort and adjust it's ratings because we assume there is a bias. As a matter of fact, there are a number of TUG members that are anti DVC and I know at least one of those that stayed at OKW. I'm sure that person rated it but not very highly. Actually there are relatively few DVC members on TUG as a percent of owners compared to Marriott, Royals, etc. I feel DVC members are under represented on TUG. I'm sure this is because most DVC members could care less about II or exchanging. I suspect if DVC were represented in a similar percentage that Royal or Marriott owners are, the DVC resorts would be number 1-5 with number six on the way in Beach Club. I don't say that because I think they all better than every other resort, just that I think that as a whole DVC members are thrilled with their resorts and passionate about them and Disney. Just assume that DVC has higher fees than most resorts because they do, especially if you figure a single size unit for a full week. The benefits are staying on property and in the flexibility. Actually comparing price to benefits and value, I'd say DVC has been my best ownership. It's already paid for itself and then some. ------------------
Dean
My Timeshare Page
|
Timeshare Users Group Bulletin Boards
