this direction has taken me aback. really? i am surprise "of the
other"...that is, the whole concept of buying a "time"--share.
also the whole selling of points or weeks or part thereof would
come into play inclduing all sorts of legal matters.
then there all the off ramps connecting the main body ( the
parts of the building one is thinking they paid money for. )
first , see what i am saying.....if this was not a real option then
how could they even offer it--multiple contacts. and then how
could there be varying amounts of weeks/points of any unit if
one person contact isn't being define by the same principle/s?
there are 365 days x the amount of units that make up the
total points. the only restriction is dividing up the sells over
the limit of a 24 hrs period. i guess they could lower each
unit by each room & each contact for having the right to
stay 24 hrs and then extend them out to 365 days. therefore,
i would think the lowest amount of "weeks" or points would
be whatever the amount necessary for a single day. then
all of those 'shares" can then be extended out from day,
to days, to a weeks & greater. that would be a real
product for sale. now whoever name/s on each contact
would not matter how long or even many units are brought
by many or the few , as long as they each have a single
day to stay. it just liked the recent change/offer to buy
additional points , one time. mist come their reserves , &
i knw most are just trying to fill a vacation..but they are
impacting the other owners because they are opening up
more rooms to be off the market under the 7 mos
periods.
just an added observation, as i been trying to learn the
ins & outs of the
dvc system---- but many of their "ways"
are just mind boggling.
& i have alwys wonder....why do dvc chose certain amounts
that they limit new buyers?
the thing that dean brought "up'--that single families ownership
covering different contacts of time shares could not be
divided into different sections , for ex. keeping one/selling 2
if they have 3 separate contacts....what control measures
for the dvc company to do this? time to me begins @ 24hrs
..and up from there ...while shares are all the owners
that make up the resort. so the only reasonable logic for
dvc to do this..would prevent any owner from resales- but
of course, no ways to prevent defaulting.
one thing that bothers me , how dvc tolerated the vandalism
and did nothing to the managers turning a blind eye. ( i talk
to many of the workers and their frustrations were clear.)