Full Bundle of Rights? Not So Fast.

It seem every day another timeshare developer puts restrictions on anyone who purchases their timeshare on the secondary market.

I'm not talking about the awful transfer companies that "own" the timeshare in name only and have no intention of using it or more importantly, paying dues.  I'm talking about your neighbor who finds a great deal through a legit secondary market platform.

They can only trade to a handful of resorts  They don't qualify for discounts.  In some cases, they can't trade at all.  Their "full bundle of rights" ain't so full.

Instead of coming up with new ways to piss off annoy consumers who actually want the product, why not spend some time looking of ways to develop a clear differentiation between owners and renters?

Why would you pay upwards of $20,000 and annual fees of nearly $900 to own when you can get all the great timeshare experiences by renting for less than the annual fees?

Renters stay in the same accommodations as owners.
Renters have access to the same pools, spas and restaurants.
There is no restriction on how often renters can stay at a specific resort.

It seems clear that by limiting the resort to people who own it, no matter where they purchased or how much they paid, instead of treating secondary market purchasers like trash, they could get in everyone's better graces.

But then again, when did anyone ever listen to me?  Or disgruntled owners?