• The TUGBBS forums are completely free and open to the public and exist as the absolute best place for owners to get help and advice about their timeshares for more than 30 years!

    Join Tens of Thousands of other Owners just like you here to get any and all Timeshare questions answered 24 hours a day!
  • TUG started 30 years ago in October 1993 as a group of regular Timeshare owners just like you!

    Read about our 30th anniversary: Happy 30th Birthday TUG!
  • TUG has a YouTube Channel to produce weekly short informative videos on popular Timeshare topics!

    Free memberships for every 50 subscribers!

    Visit TUG on Youtube!
  • TUG has now saved timeshare owners more than $21,000,000 dollars just by finding us in time to rescind a new Timeshare purchase! A truly incredible milestone!

    Read more here: TUG saves owners more than $21 Million dollars
  • Sign up to get the TUG Newsletter for free!

    60,000+ subscribing owners! A weekly recap of the best Timeshare resort reviews and the most popular topics discussed by owners!
  • Our official "end my sales presentation early" T-shirts are available again! Also come with the option for a free membership extension with purchase to offset the cost!

    All T-shirt options here!
  • A few of the most common links here on the forums for newbies and guests!

WKORVNorth North

capjak

TUG Member
Joined
Mar 16, 2006
Messages
1,683
Reaction score
270
Points
444
Location
US
Resorts Owned
DVC BC & SSR, Marriott GV+MVC Pts, WKORV & SVV, HGVC Flamingo
I saw Syed's report that the third phase of the WKORV development will start with the foundation in Feb 2015 with completion of 2 parking garages to complete
by 2017.


Anyone confirm this......
 

Rsauer3473

TUG Member
Joined
Apr 22, 2013
Messages
203
Reaction score
8
Points
128
Location
Salem, OR
We are at North now. Part of a foundation has been in place for some time. Google Earth shows an outline of an additional building. I first read of this project around 2007 when we were sent a brochure about an expansion. There were no drawings of a resort but Starwood emphasized how the green space north of North and south of new development would be preserved. Green fabric walls have surrounded the area for years. I will be not hold my breath until cranes go up.
 

capjak

TUG Member
Joined
Mar 16, 2006
Messages
1,683
Reaction score
270
Points
444
Location
US
Resorts Owned
DVC BC & SSR, Marriott GV+MVC Pts, WKORV & SVV, HGVC Flamingo
Thanks we have been going there for years. We will be there end of Feb for 2 wks so will see if any construction is going on.
 

Ken555

TUG Review Crew: Veteran
TUG Member
Joined
Jun 7, 2005
Messages
14,522
Reaction score
5,638
Points
898
Location
Los Angeles
Resorts Owned
Westin Kierland
Sheraton Desert Oasis
Will be there in early March and hope I have a north view! (Just so I can report back to TUG of course, not that I'd also have an ocean view... ;))


Sent from my iPad
 

okwiater

TUG Member
Joined
Mar 9, 2010
Messages
1,693
Reaction score
260
Points
293
Resorts Owned
WKV 2B Plat+ (x2)
WSJ 3B Plat+ (VGV/BV)
WLR 2B Plat+ Oceanside
SMV 2B Plat+
Sheraton Flex (x2)
Get ready for a Maui StarOptions bump!
 

Ken555

TUG Review Crew: Veteran
TUG Member
Joined
Jun 7, 2005
Messages
14,522
Reaction score
5,638
Points
898
Location
Los Angeles
Resorts Owned
Westin Kierland
Sheraton Desert Oasis

okwiater

TUG Member
Joined
Mar 9, 2010
Messages
1,693
Reaction score
260
Points
293
Resorts Owned
WKV 2B Plat+ (x2)
WSJ 3B Plat+ (VGV/BV)
WLR 2B Plat+ Oceanside
SMV 2B Plat+
Sheraton Flex (x2)

DeniseM

Moderator
Joined
Jun 6, 2005
Messages
57,668
Reaction score
9,088
Points
1,849
Resorts Owned
WKORV, WKV, 2-SDO, 4-Kauai Beach Villas, Island Park Village (Yellowstone), Hyatt High Sierra, Dolphin's Cove (Anaheim)
Starwood has been slowly doing improvements to this lot for years, and years, to keep their building permit open. With the stipulations that Maui put on this resort (it must be totally self-sufficient) I am have trouble believing that it will be completed in the near future. I predict that they will build the foundations, and then there will be another long period of in-activity.
 

okwiater

TUG Member
Joined
Mar 9, 2010
Messages
1,693
Reaction score
260
Points
293
Resorts Owned
WKV 2B Plat+ (x2)
WSJ 3B Plat+ (VGV/BV)
WLR 2B Plat+ Oceanside
SMV 2B Plat+
Sheraton Flex (x2)
This is obvious.

Not to me. They just upped SVR. They upped WSJ. They put StarOptions banking in place to facilitate people trading from lower-value resorts to higher-value ones. What reason is there for Starwood NOT to increase the Maui StarOptions allotments?
 

DeniseM

Moderator
Joined
Jun 6, 2005
Messages
57,668
Reaction score
9,088
Points
1,849
Resorts Owned
WKORV, WKV, 2-SDO, 4-Kauai Beach Villas, Island Park Village (Yellowstone), Hyatt High Sierra, Dolphin's Cove (Anaheim)
What reason is there for them to increase it? :shrug: SVR and WSJ were relatively low - Maui is the same 1-52.
 
Last edited:

Ken555

TUG Review Crew: Veteran
TUG Member
Joined
Jun 7, 2005
Messages
14,522
Reaction score
5,638
Points
898
Location
Los Angeles
Resorts Owned
Westin Kierland
Sheraton Desert Oasis
Not to me. They just upped SVR. They upped WSJ. They put StarOptions banking in place to facilitate people trading from lower-value resorts to higher-value ones. What reason is there for Starwood NOT to increase the Maui StarOptions allotments?

Lots of threads here about this topic and reasons why. SVR and WSJ are rather unique circumstances correcting obvious errors. There isn't a similar situation at WKORV or other resorts (that I'm aware of at this time).
 

okwiater

TUG Member
Joined
Mar 9, 2010
Messages
1,693
Reaction score
260
Points
293
Resorts Owned
WKV 2B Plat+ (x2)
WSJ 3B Plat+ (VGV/BV)
WLR 2B Plat+ Oceanside
SMV 2B Plat+
Sheraton Flex (x2)
Lots of threads here about this topic and reasons why. SVR and WSJ are rather unique circumstances correcting obvious errors. There isn't a similar situation at WKORV or other resorts (that I'm aware of at this time).

So the fact that a week at Sheraton Desert Oasis is valued equivalent to an oceanfront week on Maui isn't an obvious error? It was necessary before StarOptions banking was available to balance the supply of traders in with the number of traders out. But I'm not convinced this is the case any longer. In addition, if WKORVNN becomes a reality they'll need to sell those at a higher SO valuation than 148,100.
 

DeniseM

Moderator
Joined
Jun 6, 2005
Messages
57,668
Reaction score
9,088
Points
1,849
Resorts Owned
WKORV, WKV, 2-SDO, 4-Kauai Beach Villas, Island Park Village (Yellowstone), Hyatt High Sierra, Dolphin's Cove (Anaheim)
Error? No, I don't think it's an error. There are many 2 bdms in the system worth 148,100 Staroptions - not just Maui and SDO.

I'd be pleased to see it, because it's so hard to get a Staroption reservation at the Maui resorts now, but I will be surprised if they raise it.
 

DavidnRobin

TUG Member
Joined
Dec 20, 2005
Messages
11,812
Reaction score
2,224
Points
698
Location
San Francisco Bay Area
Resorts Owned
WKORV OFD (Maui)
WPORV (Kauai)
WSJ-VGV (St. John)
WKV (Scottsdale)
SOs for OF weeks are the same as IV and OV weeks - so by this 'logic', OF weeks should have more SOs

Increasing WSJ VGV SOs had nothing to do with non-WSJ resorts.
 

Ken555

TUG Review Crew: Veteran
TUG Member
Joined
Jun 7, 2005
Messages
14,522
Reaction score
5,638
Points
898
Location
Los Angeles
Resorts Owned
Westin Kierland
Sheraton Desert Oasis
I'd be pleased to see it, because it's so hard to get a Staroption reservation at the Maui resorts now, but I will be surprised if they raise it.


I've had zero difficulty obtaining reservations at WKORV. But, I don't travel during school holidays. If anything changes, I'd suggest SVN finally have realistic seasons and associated different StarOptions amounts at the Maui resorts. But I doubt any changes will occur.


Sent from my iPad
 

gregb

TUG Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2009
Messages
664
Reaction score
45
Points
238
Location
Cupertino, CA
Resorts Owned
WKORN
Be careful what you ask for. What prevents SVN from increasing the number of Star Options needed to reserve a unit, but not increase the number of Star Options that owners of those units receive for them.

I seem to remember that happening at one of the resorts when they raised the number of options needed to get into the resort. If I recall correctly, owners could reserve their units during the owner preference period. But if they tried to reserve using star options, they could not reserve what they owned.

If that happened to me, I would be very unhappy!

Greg
 

pharmgirl

Guest
Joined
Mar 2, 2006
Messages
715
Reaction score
7
Points
328
Location
jersey
Be careful what you ask for. What prevents SVN from increasing the number of Star Options needed to reserve a unit, but not increase the number of Star Options that owners of those units receive for them.

I seem to remember that happening at one of the resorts when they raised the number of options needed to get into the resort. If I recall correctly, owners could reserve their units during the owner preference period. But if they tried to reserve using star options, they could not reserve what they owned

Marriott did that to those who signed up to change to points, if you just want to reserve your Marriott week not using points, then nothing changed
 

sjsharkie

TUG Member
Joined
Dec 26, 2012
Messages
2,321
Reaction score
441
Points
293
I would be among those that revolt.

WSJ and the limited 1-52 owners at SVR were a small drop in the bucket compared to the number of owners at WKORV, WKORVN and WPORV (I don't see how you can apply the change just to Maui -- it would need to be extended to Kauai).

In addition to David's points about view, I would also say that the Harborside units I own are out of whack when compared on a maintenance fee basis to cheaper mf properties (i.e. SDO, WKV, SMV, etc.). If you are changing those, why not Harborside?

Plus they are still selling new developed units at WSJ in the CV phase so incentive for Starwood to make the change there. And the SVR change only impacted those that bought from the developer.

Applying it to Hawaii properties would dilute the SO pool because the Maui properties are mandatory. Plus IMHO you'd have to fix the inequalities with all of the other properties (Harborside -- plat+ and summer season). There would be many complaints, and I don't think Starwood would want to deal with the headache. Much easier just to jack up the club fees every year...

Not saying it couldn't happen -- but it would be much more monumental than the adjustments that have occurred recently.

-ryan
 

okwiater

TUG Member
Joined
Mar 9, 2010
Messages
1,693
Reaction score
260
Points
293
Resorts Owned
WKV 2B Plat+ (x2)
WSJ 3B Plat+ (VGV/BV)
WLR 2B Plat+ Oceanside
SMV 2B Plat+
Sheraton Flex (x2)
I don't see how you can apply the change just to Maui -- it would need to be extended to Kauai.

Why would it need to be extended to Kauai? It's a different resort and a different island (and a different demand curve as well). What is your reasoning for thinking Starwood would have to apply the change to both islands?

If you are changing those, why not Harborside?

I think it is unlikely Starwood would change any resort's StarOptions allotments without a new phase or resort under development. Historically, that is when they have bumped up the options at St. John. If Harborside got a new phase (which is highly unlikely) then an SO bump wouldn't be an unreasonable prediction, in my mind.

Plus they are still selling new developed units at WSJ in the CV phase so incentive for Starwood to make the change there.

Exactly. It benefits Starwood to bump up the SOs when they develop a new phase.

Applying it to Hawaii properties would dilute the SO pool because the Maui properties are mandatory.

WSJ also has a mandatory phase (Virgin Grand/Hillside) which was not excluded from either SO bump. I would predict the same for Maui.

Plus IMHO you'd have to fix the inequalities with all of the other properties (Harborside -- plat+ and summer season).

Why would Starwood have to do any such thing?

There would be many complaints, and I don't think Starwood would want to deal with the headache. Much easier just to jack up the club fees every year...

Keep in mind my original prediction of a Maui StarOptions increase is predicated on WKORV-NN becoming a reality. My guess is, in that situation, Starwood would much rather suffer a few headaches from existing owners than try to explain to a potential buyer why their brand new Hawaii timeshare doesn't trade for a similar unit in St. John.

Not saying it couldn't happen -- but it would be much more monumental than the adjustments that have occurred recently.

It's certainly possible that I'm wrong. But I think there are plenty of reasons why it might make sense for Starwood to do this, and I haven't heard any convincing counterarguments thus far.
 

Ken555

TUG Review Crew: Veteran
TUG Member
Joined
Jun 7, 2005
Messages
14,522
Reaction score
5,638
Points
898
Location
Los Angeles
Resorts Owned
Westin Kierland
Sheraton Desert Oasis
Sorry but nothing in this thread is new. We have discussed the same issue and potential changes for many years. There are inherent issues with the SVN allocation across the resorts, and always has been. Whenever they make a change someone seems to think that more changes are coming.

Among other reasons, I suspect SVN is making sufficient revenue from WKORV visitors that there is little reason for them to change the options allocation at those resorts.


Sent from my iPad
 

sjsharkie

TUG Member
Joined
Dec 26, 2012
Messages
2,321
Reaction score
441
Points
293
Why would it need to be extended to Kauai? It's a different resort and a different island (and a different demand curve as well). What is your reasoning for thinking Starwood would have to apply the change to both islands?
Has the same level of high MFs as the Maui properties. It doesn't need to be extended to Kauai -- then again, Maui SOs don't need to be raised either. I guarantee a lot of WPORV owners would be upset if they didn't/couldn't get an equivalent exchange into Maui for their unit -- they already got the short end with the voluntary status.

I think it is unlikely Starwood would change any resort's StarOptions allotments without a new phase completed or resort under development. Historically, that is when they have bumped up the options at St. John. If Harborside got a new phase (which is highly unlikely) then an SO bump wouldn't be an unreasonable prediction, in my mind.
This logic is counter to the SVR 1-52 change that just occurred. Starwood can pretty much do anything they want for any reason.

Exactly. It benefits Starwood to bump up the SOs when they develop a new phase.
I agree this is the greatest reasoning for doing this. However, there is no new phase yet and no active sales that I am aware of. Things could get stalled again.

WSJ also has a mandatory phase (Virgin Grand/Hillside) which was not excluded from either SO bump. I would predict the same for Maui.
For fairness sake, they had to do it. How could they justify excluding it? BV wasn't excluded either -- again, it would be tough to justify. My point was that the number of units on Maui far exceeds the number of units at WSJ, and it would have a much larger impact because all of the phases are mandatory.



Why would Starwood have to do any such thing?
Note the IMHO in my OP... Starwood doesn't have to do anything which is why I think they won't revalue the SOs for Maui.

Keep in mind my original prediction of a Maui StarOptions increase is predicated on WKORV-NN becoming a reality. My guess is, in that situation, Starwood would much rather suffer a few headaches from existing owners than try to explain to a potential buyer why their brand new Hawaii timeshare doesn't trade for a similar unit in St. John.
I think a "few headaches" is understating. All of the people that bought at WPORV (under your assertion, they won't extend to Kauai), Harborside, WKV and SVV mandatory will not be happy (not to mention those who bought voluntary from the developer).

It's certainly possible that I'm wrong. But I think there are plenty of reasons why it might make sense for Starwood to do this, and I haven't heard any convincing counterarguments thus far.
Of course. It's possible all of us are wrong -- there are no guarantees and Starwood can change club rules at any time. We both agree that we don't find each other's arguments convincing, but that's what I love about this board.
 

sjsharkie

TUG Member
Joined
Dec 26, 2012
Messages
2,321
Reaction score
441
Points
293
Be careful what you ask for. What prevents SVN from increasing the number of Star Options needed to reserve a unit, but not increase the number of Star Options that owners of those units receive for them.

I seem to remember that happening at one of the resorts when they raised the number of options needed to get into the resort. If I recall correctly, owners could reserve their units during the owner preference period. But if they tried to reserve using star options, they could not reserve what they owned.

If that happened to me, I would be very unhappy!

Greg

Egad, let's not give them any ideas. That would be terrible. :eek:
 

YYJMSP

TUG Member
Joined
Apr 2, 2009
Messages
2,518
Reaction score
177
Points
298
Location
BC, Canada
Be careful what you ask for. What prevents SVN from increasing the number of Star Options needed to reserve a unit, but not increase the number of Star Options that owners of those units receive for them.

I seem to remember that happening at one of the resorts when they raised the number of options needed to get into the resort. If I recall correctly, owners could reserve their units during the owner preference period. But if they tried to reserve using star options, they could not reserve what they owned.

That's exactly the mess at SVR with the owner-only "Gold Select" season and SO rates that got "fixed" by this increase in SOs. Part of this change at SVR basically undoes what they "enhanced" a few years ago.

They got rid of the internal trading rates, which were exactly what you described, owners in some cases not having enough SOs to reserve in their owned season if they went out of the Home Resort period.
 

gregb

TUG Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2009
Messages
664
Reaction score
45
Points
238
Location
Cupertino, CA
Resorts Owned
WKORN
We are at WKORN now, and the only work going on at the site is building a new fence on the East side of the property. Other than that, the place looks pretty much identical to what it looked like last year.

Greg
 
Top