Is'nt this just wrong?

[Dean]

Yes it is emotional a bit... Think of it in terms similiar to this. I respect someone's right to burn a flag but I find the practice slimy. I see it as too different elements Dean... the first is the right to do something... can my neighbor sell their house for $50K below market value, can someone say they hate a certain race, sex, sexual orientation, etc. of people... Absolutely... That is their rights as Americans. Just as it is the rights of that person to reserve the days and sell them.

Then the second part comes along. There is emotion, some would say ethics as well, but that is philosophical debate. I find the KKK's message to be absolutely reprehensible, but they have the right say it. I find the burning of a flag a bad thing (unless done to retire the flag) but again, people have the right to do it. And I find the practice of poaching the good days to not use but sell to be slimy as well, taking them away from other members who would like to go those days... but they have the right to do this. BTW, I feel the same way about ticket brokers as well. I guess my point is that just because one CAN do something doesn't mean they SHOULD do it.

The difference between this and all the examples is that everything most of us would agree is wrong is simply considered wrong when it's compared to a standard. something objective whether it's religious, general moral accepted practice (least compelling), legal, etc. Non of these would apply that I can see. IMO, it basically comes down to one of a few issues. These are the only ones I can think of right now

1. Selfishness that I can't, or might not in the future, be able to get what I want.
2. Pettyness that it somehow lessens my sense of belonging.

There is a similar practice in the timeshare world. There are a few timeshares that will not allow a member to deposit the highest demand weeks with an exchange company and keep them for owners. The differences to this scenario are 2. One is that it's in their rules to allow this approach and the other is we're talking owners at THAT resort, not other resorts trying to trade in. And while I know most don't think of it this way, a DVC member trying to reserve at a different DVC resort is simply an exchanger. That's why I pointed out that a renter from a member there should be higher than other DVC owners from different resorts.

 

[Dean]

You see? There you go again taking the emotion out of it!

The legal documents say it's a timeshare.
When I walk into the VWL atrium, my senses (read emotion) say it's Disney.

While on vacation I couldn't care less what the legal mumbo-jumbo says.

MG

LOL, that may be true if things go well. But what if you show up at VWL and they don't have a room for you and tell you that you have to go to OKW or somewhere else. It has happened at least twice that I know of. I bet you'd be really interested in the rules and legal mumbo-jumbo then wouldn't you?

Seriously, the reason this stuff is important is to realize that to expect and what not to expect so you DON'T have to worry about it later, know how to use it to the best of your ability and are armed if things don't work right to know how to respond. Specific to this issue. If one knows the rules, costs and risks involved, they wouldn't worry about anyone who rents. It's simply not worth it if rental is your primary goal.