No, lot's of things are different. I've rented some periodically since 1994/95. I don't own as many points as I once did at 432 (previously 885) but I still rent an average of maybe a couple of units a year or slightly more. Even during the recession I was easily able to get $10 per point which is the lowest I've ever rented for that wasn't a distressed rental. The only distressed rental was someone who backed out having paid only their 25% deposit so my total amount was still comparable or slightly higher even. But finding distressed rentals for more in the $6 pp post range and rentals in general at $8.50 pp were fairly routine during that time. Compared to sales prices at the time the rental price was actually more during the recession than it is now. During a true recession people don't do on vacation, ROFR totally stops at any reasonable level, more people want to rent out their points and even those that are willing to do so are not going to pay as much. Even if they could pay more they know that they can get a deal so they make that a priority. On top of that many of the properties have less years remaining on the RTU that were around then. I turned down a VWL contract for 150 pts at $42.50 offering $40 which in retrospect might not have been a good choice and even then that was a good deal but not a great deal. One could easily get SSR at $40 pp at VB at under $30 pp.
The same thing happened and would happen in many areas. Real estate dropped in many areas by far more than being discussed here as did the stock markets in that range as well.
Definitely an huge aspect of how the resale market would go. Why would DVC want to get more contracts/point when they would likely be having difficulty selling what they have already. When or if it were to happen there would also still have to be a line where it makes sense for someone to sell -- either the need the money to pay off an existing loan or they need to dump luxury expenses but are still not willing to just give away a contract. Lets hope we are not headed towards that. But a lot has to do with making sure you don't over extend yourself, which is why many here will promote paying cash for the contract.
This concept makes me cringe. I have seen so many people buy homes with no or very little down (and they think this is a great concept). Those who did buy before the housing bubble burst in 2007ish with the no/low down payment are just finally starting to have some equity in their homes after paying on it for 10 years.
Had I been intent on buying there I would have taken it. It was a good deal then and I got greedy but it didn't cost me anything. It was worth the risk and loss.
It seems you're thinking of ROFR as mainly to support the resale price and that's not the case. What ROFR is designed for is to aid with retail sales. Other than a fire sale situation, they don't make as much money on resale as they do on retail. They'll make these decisions based on the dollars involved. I'm sure there were those following ROFR much closer than I during the last recession who can say how ROFR was distributed but the lower demand resorts certainly were easy to get through. They had to have the cash to do so thus picking and choosing the ones easier to sell would be a no brainer. In reality they don't care about resale prices per se, what they care about is selling retail and the smaller the differential between one and the other, the easier it is to get those who are informed to buy. Those who don't know, which is the majority, it doesn't matter at all. Some of those will learn about the resale option after signing and cancel during the cancelation window. Their ideal situation would be the appearance one could resale but a reality one can't feasibly do so. Marriott Trust Points have added such fees that it's not that much cheaper than retail but you get all the perks. I'm not sure if DVC could do it that way since Marriott is a trust system rather than a direct (RTU) ownership.
FTFY.
Thanks, the time locally is 4:20 am and I'm still on eastern time.
As annoying as resale can be, there is no way DVD would be able to move retail with a significant differential in cost. The economics would need to be compelling enough that buying, say CCV is worth that difference. Benefits factor into that equation, but price difference will be the most compelling driver.
There are ways to do so. You just have to create enough hassle, smoke & mirrors and real lost options to do so. Plus you have to change the sales approach. Even companies you can buy for pennies on the dollar can sell consistently at retail prices. Additional fees and the qualified vs non qualified will make a difference and the more aggressive it is the more difference it'll make. The fees on a Marriott Trust Points purchase can literally be half the cost but you do get a fully functional purchase. There are lots of things they can do they haven't done though some (not all) are different than their past philosophy. A VIP system is something they could add to the mix as well but at this "late date", I doubt they will. Don't let anyone tell you they can't though but there would be hurdles.
