With current incentives (which are about to expire as I understand it), the quote I got for Riviera direct was going to be less than AKV direct. I didn't get a quote for SSR, but I would guess the discounts on RIV would also make it comparable to SSR direct (presuming SSR, like AKV, has minimal discounts).
We preferred to buy at AKV rather than RIV, but I couldn't see paying more for AKV, which made RIV more tempting. But I also took into account that, if we did sell RIV, the new owners would be subject to the restriction of using it ONLY there. Compared to selling a direct contract at one of the "legacy" resorts where the new owner would be able to use it at all of those legacy resorts. Which restriction is worse? In my book, not having the option to use those points at any other resort is worse than not being able to use them at a few of the newest resorts.
Of course, the length of contract also plays into this calculation, with legacy resorts expiring sooner but, for many, the "emotional" component of not getting to stay at other resorts might outweigh the expiration date (not to mention that many buyers may have no intention of keeping the contract until 2070).
At the end of the day, we decided to stick with getting another resale contract for $10K less (which may eventually go towards another 100 points in the future).