|
TIMESHARES
VERSUS FRACTIONALS;
NAMING BY THE NUMBERS
By
Sarah B. Rezak
People often ask how private
residence clubs ("PRCs") differ from timeshare.
Ask this question to a
developer or seller of the PRC product, and you'll
get a list of reasons why they're completely different
products. But look at the legal documents the buyer
signs at closing and you'll see they're fundamentally
the same, as is the concept behind each. Very simply
stated, both are shared ownership of real estate.
Essentially, the difference
between the two concepts is the consumer -- and the
product they choose. Because PRC buyers generally
have higher income levels, more discretionary income,
more discriminating tastes and different expectations
than timeshare consumers, the vacation product they
desire is different. Because the consumers' demands
vary, the sales approach, the price point, the services
provided and the atmosphere are all different.
The first and most obvious
variance between timeshares and PRCs is the size of
the existing markets. Ragatz Associates estimates
that there are about 2,160 timeshare products existing
in the United States (1,600), Canada (110), Mexico
(300), and the Caribbean (150). By contrast, the PRC
market in North America consists of 73 existing projects
in the moderate- and high-priced tiers. There are
an additional 60 or so older fractional interest projects
selling mostly quarter shares and affiliated with
one or both of the two major timeshare exchange companies.
These projects, known as "traditional fractionals"
are typically lower priced, less luxurious, and offer
fewer ownership benefits than PRCs. This article focuses
primarily on the 73 PRC projects in the two highest
tiers, as they represent the growth area in the industry
today. As of May 2003, there were at least 30 additional
PRC projects slated to start sales that year.
One important reason for
the disparity between the number of timeshare and
PRC resort projects is the length of time each concept
has existed. Timesharing dates back to the early 1970s.
In contrast, 55 percent of PRC projects started sales
after 1999.
The locations of PRC projects
and timeshare projects also vary. Ragatz Associates
estimates that about 24 percent of all U.S. timeshare
projects are located in Florida, with the remainder
fairly evenly spread throughout the various regions
of the country - 16 percent in the Pacific region,
16 percent in the Mountain region, 16 percent in the
Central region, 16 percent in the Southeast and 12
percent in the Northeast.
Yet, as you can see in
the graph below, PRC projects are much more concentrated
in the Mountain region. The PRC concept first appeared
in ski destinations, where high prices and land scarcity
led to a creative alternative to a million-plus dollar
second home. Fully 46 percent of existing PRC projects
are located in Western mountain destinations. Only
1 percent are located in Florida.
Most (52 percent) timeshare
projects were originally built to be sold as such;
the remainder consist of conversions from condominiums
(22 percent), hotels/motels (12 percent), apartments
(5 percent) and other uses (8 percent). On the other
hand, almost all PRC projects are purpose-built to
be sold as PRCs. Because the PRC consumer demands
high quality unit design, construction and FF&E
(furniture, fixtures and equipment), conversions of
existing projects have not been common.
On the whole, PRCs tend
to contain larger units than timeshare projects. Three-
and four-bedroom units are more common in PRCs than
in timeshare projects. Some 39 percent of built PRC
units contain three or four bedrooms, yet the same
holds true for only 7 percent of built timeshare units.
At the other end of the spectrum, 42 percent of timeshare
units are studios or one-bedroom units compared to
only 22 percent of PRCs.
It should not come as a
surprise that PRC units have larger areas than their
timeshare counterparts. The graph below shows the
average square footages for each category of unit
among both types of projects. The difference between
the PRC and timeshare unit average square footage
increases with the number of bedrooms in the unit.
For example, the average timeshare studio unit is
500 square feet, while the average PRC studio unit
is 565 square feet. This creates a difference of 65
square feet, or 13 percent. On the other hand, the
average four-bedroom or larger timeshare unit is 1,800
square feet, compared to 3,290 in a PRC four-bedroom
or larger unit. This is a difference of 1,490 square
feet, or 83 percent. Across all unit types, the average
timeshare unit measures 1,000 square feet, which is
about one-half the size of the average PRC unit at
1,990 square feet.
One of the most important
differentiating factors between timeshares and PRCs
is the level of services offered by each. Typically,
timeshare ownership simply involves the shared ownership
of a condominium or resort property. In contrast,
PRC projects, almost without exception, offer both
pre- and post-arrival concierge services - from arranging
tee times and tuning skis, to stocking unit refrigerators
with groceries and placing family photos in residences.
Year-round storage is offered at 69 percent of the
Private Residence Clubs, but rarely provided at timeshare
projects.
Free transportation, ranging
from airport shuttle service to the use of an SUV
during the owners' visit, is offered at 41 percent
of PRC projects, and ski or golf valet services are
also common. While many timeshare resorts are built
adjacent to or in the same development as golf courses,
few offer priority tee times or greens fee discounts.
Yet these perks are offered by 51 percent and 43 percent
of PRC projects, respectively.
Since PRCs provide higher
levels of service, it is not surprising that their
maintenance fees are higher than those of timeshare
projects. The average timeshare owner pays $380 annually
in maintenance fees compared to the $1,330 per owned
week paid by the average PRC owner.
Clearly, the product offering
of PRCs has both similarities and differences to that
of timeshares, but what about marketing and sales?
In both cases, the product is shared ownership of
real estate. The consumer has to be made aware of
the offering, then has to be asked to purchase the
product. But, because the consumer is different, the
approach is different. The same marketing methodologies
used by timeshare projects are used to attract consumers
to PRC projects, but the higher-income PRC consumer
has different expectations, and consequently, must
be treated differently.
On average, three out of
four timeshare purchases are made utilizing financing
offered by the developer. Yet, despite the significant
cost difference, three out of four PRC shares are
purchased with cash. PRC's higher income consumers
obviously have less difficulty making large cash purchases
than do timeshare purchasers. They also usually have
access to financing at lower interest rates than can
typically be offered by PRC developers.
For a timeshare project,
sticks and bricks, or construction costs, typically
only make up 25 percent of sales volume. Marketing
and sales costs consume another 45 percent, and general
and administrative costs average 10 percent. However,
for most PRC projects, much more of the sales price
is represented by product cost - typically 55 percent.
Thus, in order for PRC projects to remain profitable,
marketing and sales costs have to stay around 20 percent
and general and administrative costs around 5 percent.
But, let's get back to
our initial question: are PRCs different from timeshare?
Yes.and no. The jury's still out-but buyers are still
flooding in.
Author Profile
Sarah B. Rezak is
research manager for Ragatz Associates, a real estate
market research and consulting firm located in Eugene,
Oregon. Ragatz Associates is a wholly owner subsidiary
of Resort Condominiums International LLC. Since joining
Ragatz Associates in 1997, Ms. Rezak has made contributions
in over 75-vacation ownership consulting assignments,
including business plans facilitating the entry of
developers into timeshare industry, feasibility analyses,
economic impact analyses, and consumer surveys.
|