# Marriott getting tough with BeachPlace HOA!!!



## pwrshift (Jan 3, 2008)

The annual letter from Marriott BeachPlace’s HOA president with the maintenance invoice has some worrisome comments that indicates a strong battle brewing between Marriott and HOA. Personally I am glad Marriott is on the owner’s side in this fight. The condition of BeachPlace has deteriorated for years and I’m surprised Marriott didn’t do something about it before now. 

Is BeachPlace in danger of losing Marriott management because of poor decisions made by the current HOA? The letter goes so far as to say: 

_“Marriott threatened BeachPlace owners with a 15% loss of Marriott Reward Points if the board did not change BeachPlace’s parking fee policy; change BeachPlace’s occupancy policy; and purchase Sony or LG flat panel TVs for the refurbishment project.”_ It continues: _“The Board had no advance warning on these issues and was stunned by the threat.”_

*Re: Studio Occupancy Issue*: When the HOA announced studio occupancy was being reduced to 3 persons (or 2 adults and 2 pre school children) they did it in isolation without surveying owners. So parents faced a serious problem if they had 2 teens – one would be turned away. This was a very contentious issue when announced, and I assume owner calls, letters and comments to MVCI and JW himself, and perhaps from reading TUG BBS, have all had a positive result in Marriott refusing to accept the HOA decision. Good move by Marriott IMO, but the board is very upset with comments in their letter to owners like_: _

_“Marriott sold BeachPlace as a resort, but wants to overcrowd it like a second rate hotel. Violating its own occupancy brand standard and overcrowding our resort is unacceptable to our board.”_ 

*Re: Parking Fees*: The HOA plans to raise the parking fee in that terrible garage from the already high $14 to $17 a night bringing in an estimated $894,000 (taxable) income in 2008. Pure greed. The letter states, 

_“Marriott wants to exclude all MVCI owners from paying our parking fee.”_

*Re: Flat Panel TVs*: Marriott wants a 40” Sony or LG flat panel TV in the living room, but the Board wants the smaller, cheap 37” _Olevia_ instead, and proposes that Marriott pay the difference if they continue to insist or give up some fees. If you do a décor upgrade, do it right. A 37” widescreen flat panel TV is the same height as an old 25” TV and really too small for a living room these days. The extra cost of about $15 a week is minimal if the HOA really wants a ‘wow’ effect instead of going cheap like in the past. Instead, they unrealistically planned to have no MF increase and that tells me the new décor will be a grave disappointment.

The board is planning to get tough with Marriott, it seems, mid January to try and reconcile these issues. It surely appears the HOA just wants it their way, a few people in seclusion making decisions for thousands of owners who want to keep it a Marriott managed timeshare. Marriott has made their reputation for quality and are tough masters in protecting their name - rightly so. I’m pleased to see Marriott step in and say it has to be their way for the sake of the owners. The Board makes decisions based on a handful of owners attending board meetings, but Marriott is in contact with all owners all year. So, keep those comments and letters going to MVCI as the HOA needs to realize they represent the owners, not themselves.

The final paragraph of the HOA letter and shows their attitude towards Marriott: 

_“The Board represents our Owners on all financial and operations issues. The Board exercised its fiduciary responsibility in making these three decisions and they were in the best interest of BeachPlace Owners. The parking fee and TV purchase decisions were budget decisions and the Board has the authority to approve the budget. COA Rules and Regulations give the Board the authority to amend villa occupancy limits. Marriott has the right to change the rules of its rewards program, but when it does so with the intent of overturning legitimate Board decisions, it is an act of intimidation and an attempt to undermine the Board’s authority. Marriott’s action in this matter is very disappointing and reveals a vindictive side of the company that is so different from the friendly vacationclub company that sold us our timeshare weeks.”_

With comments like these, IMO the Board hasn’t learned a thing and has no idea of what the owners want. I, for one, hopes Marriott doesn't yield an inch.

Brian


----------



## Kilby5924 (Jan 3, 2008)

Sounds like BP could use you on its board. Have you thought of runing?
Sheldon


----------



## GrayFal (Jan 3, 2008)

Thanks for posting this information Brian - I am glad the owners sounded off loud and clear. You need to protect your investment.


----------



## thinze3 (Jan 3, 2008)

Brian,
I love reading about the continuing saga at BeachPlace. If these isssues come to pass and prices continue their slide, I sure would like to steal one of these units?


----------



## pwrshift (Jan 3, 2008)

thinze3 said:


> Brian,
> ... I sure would like to steal one of these units?


 
But would you still want it if it wasn't a Marriott?


----------



## buzzy (Jan 3, 2008)

pwrshift said:


> But would you still want it if it wasn't a Marriott?



I really hope that it does not get that far.  I received my letter less than a week ago and the first thing I thought was...The HOA needs to play nice, not nasty.  They emphasized that they are looking out for the owners best interest but what is in the owners best interest is to remain a Marriott.  So, let play this game nice HOA!! The letter had undertones in it that seemed a little too hostile which did not seem like words needed to be put in writing in such a manner. The owners are really stuck in the middle.


----------



## thinze3 (Jan 3, 2008)

pwrshift said:


> But would you still want it if it wasn't a Marriott?



NO! That what I meant by "issues come to pass."  

.


----------



## Steamboat Bill (Jan 3, 2008)

I own a Marriott MMC and live in South Florida. The BeachPlace property is a real jewel and the HOA is thinking very short sighted when you see the quality and prices of the surrounding buildings going up. They should do a cost per square foot comparison with their neighbor the St Regis!

The parking garage is a disgrace and can easily be improved with a power washer and paint. Nice things like plasmas, LCD, granite add a WOW factor that can lead to increased rental rates and demand.

I was surprised at how high the BeachPlace is ranked by redweek. This property could be a flagship Marriott with a small % increase in annual dues. Heck, if I can buy a 2 bedroom unit for a steal, I might buy one for my mother as a trader and occasional use for out of town family members.

When you compare BeachClub with Exclusive Resorts Destination Club at the St Regis, I have to agree with Brian, that the Marriott is a SMARTER buy.

I wonder how much it would cost to buy 52 weeks for a 2 bedroom place as this unit would charge $1-2m for a condo of that size in that location.


----------



## Steel5Rings (Jan 3, 2008)

Sounds a lot like the letter we got as Streamside Cedar owners a few years back when Marriott put the gun to our head......if the owners want to keep Marriott, they better be prepared to pay up big time with special assessments.


----------



## thinze3 (Jan 3, 2008)

Steamboat Bill said:


> ...I wonder how much it would cost to buy 52 weeks for a 2 bedroom place as this unit would charge $1-2m for a condo of that size in that location.




Probably about $650K based on $15K platinum and $10K other - without looking at the calendar.

I totally agree with you and have been telling Brian for months that I would love to have a week here. I want one good week that will trade me into HI without a problem so that I can spend two weeks there when I go. Have also been considering Ko Olina, but cost is 50% more and MF's higher as well.

.


----------



## hipslo (Jan 3, 2008)

Steel5Rings said:


> Sounds a lot like the letter we got as Streamside Cedar owners a few years back when Marriott put the gun to our head......if the owners want to keep Marriott, they better be prepared to pay up big time with special assessments.



The word "streamside" is exactly what came to my mind when I read Brian's post.


----------



## timeos2 (Jan 3, 2008)

*Maybe the Board has the right idea*



Steel5Rings said:


> Sounds a lot like the letter we got as Streamside Cedar owners a few years back when Marriott put the gun to our head......if the owners want to keep Marriott, they better be prepared to pay up big time with special assessments.



Exactly.  While it may be great if the resort can remain a Marriott what is the true cost? How many postings would there be if the HOA Board (OWNERS representing Owners not Marriott) simply gives in & adds all those "only $15/week" items? I hope there was a long standing plan for renovation and upgrades that is now bing implemented. If that doesn't include the cost of Sony brand LCD's in the living room but "only" some other brand who is picking up the tab for the excess? Marriott? Nope. They will charge their (rising) fees as well as demand unplanned improvements then leave the Board to take the heat for the sudden rise in costs. I'm all for improvements but you have to be financially prudent and work with a plan.   

It sounds like the Board is doing exactly what they should and not simply give into Marriotts every whim and wish. The side that needs to show some flexibility is Marriott.  Best wishes to the Board. 

To the OP I certainly applaud your spirit. I wonder how you know better than the sitting Board members and "those few owners who attend meetings" what the majority wants? As you seem to feel you do it would be great if you took the time to attend meetings, published your ideas to the owners in the form of a candidacy resume and ran for the Board. Then the majority of owners could in fact let their feelings be known by electing you as a representative for them or by electing another candidate.  The ultimate owner poll.


----------



## camachinist (Jan 4, 2008)

I wonder what other issues aren't being publicized. Sounds like the tip of the proverbial iceberg to me, and not just with BeachPlace...



> The condition of BeachPlace has deteriorated for years and I’m surprised Marriott didn’t do something about it before now.



How long ago did the independent HOA take control from Marriott "people" and, under the terms of the management contract, who is responsible for maintaining the resort to the "standard"? I always thought that was Marriott's job as manager...

All in all, 2008 is shaping up to be a difficult year for Marriott, IMO.

Pat


----------



## Hoc (Jan 4, 2008)

OK, this is a mirror image of the dispute at Streamside about 2 years before Marriott refused to renew the contract for the Aspen and Cedar units.  You can almost bank on the fact that Beachplace will likely lose Marriott management as of the next management contract renewal.


----------



## dmharris (Jan 4, 2008)

Wow, Hoc, that is troublesome!  If I were an owner I'd be very upset.  Wouldn't that change your standing and opportunities for exchanging?  Marriott has more exchange value than a non-branded resort.  Wow!  

Also, for other Marriott owners (like me) this means we would have one less resort in our pool.  That could be troubling, but we've got the new one in Florida on the west coast being built to even the count.  Still, I'd rather have more choices for exchange within Marriott.  What happened to the owners from the Vail resorts when Marriott backed away?  Did they lose exchange power?


----------



## vacationmama (Jan 4, 2008)

Unlike the other Marriott's that I own, Beachplace does not give the e-mails of its HOA members. So if owners want to oppose the decisions of the HOA, how do we go about it? I am opposed to the three person rule that they have put on the studio but other than Eric Minotti who visits this board, how do we , as owners , other than flying to Florida from Boston for a board meeting, post our opposition to some of their decisions that will directly affect not only our Marriott standing but the resort itself?


----------



## timeos2 (Jan 4, 2008)

vacationmama said:


> Unlike the other Marriott's that I own, Beachplace does not give the e-mails of its HOA members. So if owners want to oppose the decisions of the HOA, how do we go about it? I am opposed to the three person rule that they have put on the studio but other than Eric Minotti who visits this board, how do we , as owners , other than flying to Florida from Boston for a board meeting, post our opposition to some of their decisions that will directly affect not only our Marriott standing but the resort itself?



They should give email addresses to contact the Board members but if they don't email the resort (or fax, phone, write, whatever) and ask that the messages/fax/letter be given to the Board members. Hopefully they are interested in what the owners think.


----------



## pwrshift (Jan 4, 2008)

John ... If you don't own and use Marriott BeachPlace you have no idea how depressing it has been to see it get worse year after year as the MF increased and nothing seemed to be done. Pitted fixtures, wallpaper held in place with duck tape, burned counters, worn out carpets, soft and hard goods, and TV's and appliances that haven't been changed or upgraded since the resort opened. You would never allow your own home to fall that far before taking action. 

It's no wonder that so many MBP owners don't use it anymore and it has become an 'exchange' haven full of transients. As an original owner, I bought MBP to use every year - splitting my 2 weeks into 4 with the lockoff feature - love the location and winter weather, but there is certainly no 'wow' factor to ownership. Inside, it's a dump. Hopefully the new decor will bring the owners back. Even so, limiting occupancy isn't the solution to keeping it a nice place - it's collecting an upfront fee from transients and inspecting the place before they get it back after check out.

The solution is not as simple as running for HOA office, as you know, and I assume you are on a board from your comment. You have to get elected and even then so many of the good people get frustrated and leave the board as they are always outvoted by the old boy's club. It was pretty clear on some of his posts that TUG member _Minoter_ has had frustrations as a board member and I wonder if he has ever been taken to task for communicating with us on TUG ... which makes me fear he might not run for re-election, as it is so refreshing to at least feel we have a contact. 

I wouldn't have bought MBP if it wasn't for Marriott's name and reputation and I'll bet I'm not the only one. Here is a resort that resales for less than half of a week at its offspring - Ocean Pointe which originally sold for less money. The value of ownership would plummet even more without that name. I wouldn't care if there were several extra $15 per week charges to make the place look great - and I'd be happy just if it looked like GO and other fine Marriott TS - but I do want to see the money properly spent to enhance pride of ownership rather than having to go next door to the St. Regis, Hilton, W, Trump, Atlantic to see that MBP could be so much better than its become.

Originally there were to be two 'towers' for BeachPlace Towers, but something happened over the years and Marriott let the space go to the St. Regis condo-hotel. Who knows if that was an early indicator that the HOA was marching to dump Marriott, as this is not the first time there's been a flare up between them.

Brian




timeos2 said:


> ...While it may be great if the resort can remain a Marriott what is the true cost? How many postings would there be if the HOA Board (OWNERS representing Owners not Marriott) simply gives in & adds all those "only $15/week" items? I hope there was a long standing plan for renovation and upgrades that is now bing implemented. .


----------



## thinze3 (Jan 4, 2008)

_Marriott (MAR) as a corporation.

I deleted this post because it was not my true opinion of Marriott. I was just poking fun at all the "rumors" that have been circling lately. Truth is Marriott is a very good, financially sound, company, and if its stock (MAR) price gets much cheaper I may actually begin buying it.

S&P even thinks it is now a bargain.

*Thanks Dave*._


----------



## thinze3 (Jan 4, 2008)

One way to "test" Marriott's will is to try and get a cheap week through ROFR. If Marriott buys it back, that to me would indicate they still have interest in MBP, unless, of course, they have buyers currently standing by.


What is the date that the OLD contract expires?
Is there a "must meet requirements" date for a new contract?


----------



## pwrshift (Jan 4, 2008)

Marriott and Starwood over the last 5 years have followed a pretty comparable stock performance line.  I don't think there's any worry these companies will file for Chapter.

http://moneycentral.msn.com/investo...=0&MA1=0&symbol=HOT&nocookie=1&SZ=0&CP=0&PT=9


----------



## Dave M (Jan 4, 2008)

thinze3 said:


> Maybe worse than you think!! Please read below.


That's the second time you have posted that information. If you look at what's going on, you'll see that Marriott is as healthy as ever. It's income is still high and on track for a record year of revenue and profits in 2007. It's balance sheet is healthy with equity of over $1.6 *b*illion. A major reason its liabilities have increased significantly (with the resulting decrease in net assets) over the past several years has been Marriott's aggressive and responsible stock buy-back program. 

To suggest that a company that earns in excess of $600 million per year with positive cash flow might have to enter bankruptcy seems silly.


----------



## timeos2 (Jan 4, 2008)

*I still thonk a good Board member helps*



pwrshift said:


> John ... If you don't own and use Marriott BeachPlace you have no idea how depressing it has been to see it get worse year after year as the MF increased and nothing seemed to be done. Pitted fixtures, wallpaper held in place with duck tape, burned counters, worn out carpets, soft and hard goods, and TV's and appliances that haven't been changed or upgraded since the resort opened. You would never allow your own home to fall that far before taking action.
> 
> It's no wonder that so many MBP owners don't use it anymore and it has become an 'exchange' haven full of transients. As an original owner, I bought MBP to use every year - splitting my 2 weeks into 4 with the lockoff feature - love the location and winter weather, but there is certainly no 'wow' factor to ownership. Inside, it's a dump. Hopefully the new decor will bring the owners back. Even so, limiting occupancy isn't the solution to keeping it a nice place - it's collecting an upfront fee from transients and inspecting the place before they get it back after check out.
> 
> ...



Brian -  I am a Board member and I do know exactly what you mean about watching a resort slide into mediocrity while fees just go up.  There certainly is blame to be placed but even more importantly work to get accomplished.  

When a Developer hangs on to management after the building is over they tend to have a heavy hand of control.  It's tough for the owners - on the Board or not - to question them as they usually act like they are the ultimate decision maker.  When things get bad, as it sounds like it has & I saw at my resort over a three year period, the Board needs to step up and take the reins.  I hope thats what your Board is doing - not just butting heads with Marriott to make things miserable.  

Have they presented a long term capital improvement plan? A reserve study? Are they setting fees to properly fund operations and reserves each year? Or do they make everything an emergency and then they float talk of special assessments? 

Who holds the voting power? Are the Board members truly elected by a majority of owner voters or does Marriott still hold votes that can control the outcome?

I'm always more comfortable with a Board controlled by owners but just having that does nothing to guarantee they will do the job right.  You need members who want to volunteer the time and have an interest in improving the resort.  Thats why someone who cares - an owner who USES the property like you - makes the best type of Board member.  

As for the frustration it is real.  At our resort the owner Board had to sit by and watch as things got bad not because we didn't see it but it took time to clean up the financial situation (also allowed to become completely out of control by the sales focused developer/management), get a change made in management (something you may wish to avoid at your resort), address short term needs,  put together a workable long term plan and finally get to see the improvements take shape.  Not a one or two year process and plenty of frustrating times. 

Overall I hope your Board and Marriott sit down and seriously address the issues. Neither should be handing down ultimatums but each should bring plans to get things right.  With some serious effort (and money) almost anything can be done if both parties work to make it happen.


----------



## davemy (Jan 4, 2008)

*email address*

Marriott does NOT Give out email info. HOA  do not have owner info. Marriott should give out email's for board members. The only way you get this info like aruba or ocean pointe or others is if they have their own web page or forum. I dought very strongly that Marriott would walk away from beachplace. They are being paid, I think $1,000,000.00 A YEAR to manage this place. Marriott has very few beach locations in florida. If Marriott gets everything they want our Maintance fee would go thru the roof.


----------



## timeos2 (Jan 4, 2008)

*Fees sem way out of line - wheres the performance?*



davemy said:


> Marriott does NOT Give out email info. HOA  do not have owner info. Marriott should give out email's for board members. The only way you get this info like aruba or ocean pointe or others is if they have their own web page or forum. I dought very strongly that Marriott would walk away from beachplace. They are being paid, I think $1,000,000.00 A YEAR to manage this place. Marriott has very few beach locations in florida. If Marriott gets everything they want our Maintance fee would go thru the roof.



Wow! $1 million in management fees?  Thats about 4 times the average for a third party management firm. What the heck are they doing for that type of fee and how can things get run down of they are doing the job correctly? 

Back in 2001 our old management was taking about $550,000 in fees and they had delinquencies at more than 50%, the resort on the path to losing all RCI award recognition, units that were nearly a decade old and not close to what they were when new, a pattern of changing managers every 9 months (no continuity for plans or employees) and more. We felt that wasn't a good situation and opted for new management at half the cost who stepped in and worked with the owner Board to fix collections, get a stable on site management presence, tackle both the short and long term needs of the resort and get things turned around. I truly doubt it could have been done had we stayed with the original management operation despite their never ending promises to improve.  Based on history at other resorts where they did stay on and the poor results there as well as the 180 degree turn around at our resort it seems we made the right choices over 5 years ago.  

If Marriott is really taking that level of annual fees simply for management I would have to ask if the return of keeping the Marriott name on the resort sign is really worth the cost. You could be putting at least $500,000/year or more toward improvements rather than feeding the Marriott management group. Thats a lot of money for a name.


----------



## Kazakie (Jan 4, 2008)

*Just an outsiders view (and didn't even cost a penny)*

Just an outsiders view (and didn't even cost a penny)



pwrshift said:


> *Re: Studio Occupancy Issue*: When the HOA announced studio occupancy was being reduced to 3 persons (or 2 adults and 2 pre school children) they did it in isolation without surveying owners.



-> Seems silly, do flat panel TV's take up more space?  Did they add furniture to the room?  If not then it was built for 4 people, why would the HOA reduce the number?? 
*Winner-> *Marriott 



pwrshift said:


> [*Re: Parking Fees*: The HOA plans to raise the parking fee in that terrible garage from the already high $14 to $17 a night bringing in an estimated $894,000 (taxable) income in 2008. Pure greed. The letter states,
> 
> _“Marriott wants to exclude all MVCI owners from paying our parking fee.”_



->I think other resorts have added parking charges, i can understand the argument either way (Free parking for owners OR Free parking for MVCI owners) - but idealy if I were Marriott, i'd like to see consistency.
*Winner->* Whatever's consistent with other Marriott timeshares that charge for parking



pwrshift said:


> *Re: Flat Panel TVs*: Marriott wants a 40” Sony or LG flat panel TV in the living room, but the Board wants the smaller, cheap 37” _Olevia_ instead, and proposes that Marriott pay the difference if they continue to insist or give up some fees. If you do a décor upgrade, do it right. A 37” widescreen flat panel TV is the same height as an old 25” TV and really too small for a living room these days. The extra cost of about $15 a week is minimal if the HOA really wants a ‘wow’ effect instead of going cheap like in the past. Instead, they unrealistically planned to have no MF increase and that tells me the new décor will be a grave disappointment.



-> 90% of occupants won't notice or care about 3" more of diagonal space (as long as they're flat panel, as opposed to a tube tv).  How many people noticed when tube tv's went from 25" to 27"?   This is one where I can totally agree with the HOA.
*Winner->* HOA


----------



## pwrshift (Jan 4, 2008)

John ... Based on 224 two-bdrm suites that's about $85 a week. Do you really think you'd get more from a no-name manager that charges only $21.25 a week?

We appreciate your insight, but do you actually own a Marriott?

Brian



timeos2 said:


> Wow! $1 million in management fees? _Thats about 4 times the average for a third party management firm_. What the heck are they doing for that type of fee and how can things get run down of they are doing the job correctly?
> 
> ... Thats a lot of money for a name.


----------



## short (Jan 4, 2008)

*All buildings lost trading power including the Marriotts*



dmharris said:


> Wow, Hoc, that is troublesome!  If I were an owner I'd be very upset.  Wouldn't that change your standing and opportunities for exchanging?  Marriott has more exchange value than a non-branded resort.  Wow!
> 
> Also, for other Marriott owners (like me) this means we would have one less resort in our pool.  That could be troubling, but we've got the new one in Florida on the west coast being built to even the count.  Still, I'd rather have more choices for exchange within Marriott.  What happened to the owners from the Vail resorts when Marriott backed away?  Did they lose exchange power?



I own 2 summer weeks in Cedar and Birch.  The 2007 weeks both have weak trading power and I believe it has more to do with the Clubhouse renovations, refurbishments and general turmoil than the management company.  The Cedar week actually is the stronger of the two weeks, possibly because it is week 29 vs Birch being week 24.  Both weeks for 2008 are being offered AC's.

I traded the Cedar 2006 week for a Marriott Custom House April 2007 week after Cedar lost there Marriott affiliation.  I deposited Cedar 2008 to RCI where it gets a VRI priority.

I will likely be trading the Birch week and the AC during flexchange(something I frequently do anyway) using the Marriott priority.

In theory, prime summer Colorado mountain resorts should trade better than they do.  They both would fit a family of 6.  Vail in the summer would make a great vacation destination with lots to do.  Kids are out of school.  All deposits will be taken, even those deposited late.  The weeks are both offered AC's which would indicate that II wants all the weeks they can get during that timeframe.  I think II has placed a damper on trading power because of the quality issue.  If Beachplace suffers from quality issues and management turmoil they will likely suffer trading power reductions also irrespective of whether Marriott stays or goes.

Short


----------



## pwrshift (Jan 4, 2008)

Thanks Kazakie ... I've put my comments below in blue:

Brian



Kazakie said:


> *The studio occupancy change from 4 to 3 persons was an HOA idea to cut down on transient damage during Spring Break and had nothing to do with TV's. After the redecoration after Spring Break the HOA wants only 3 people in the studio (or 2 parents with 2 pre-school children) and no exceptions even if your 2 kids are 6 year old twins. Dumb decision when security deposits could solve the problem easily. This makes BeachPlace the only lockoff suite with a 3 'adult' occupancy limit in the Marriott system...yet the studio is 450 sq ft, half the size of some homes.*
> 
> -> Seems silly, do flat panel TV's take up more space? Did they add furniture to the room? If not then it was built for 4 people, why would the HOA reduce the number??
> *Winner-> *Marriott
> ...


----------



## timeos2 (Jan 4, 2008)

pwrshift said:


> John ... Based on 224 two-bdrm suites that's about $85 a week. Do you really think you'd get more from a no-name manager that charges only $21.25 a week?
> 
> We appreciate your insight, but do you actually own a Marriott?
> 
> Brian



No, no Marriott now.  But resort operation is similar no matter what name its under.

What are they doing that's worth $85 per owner/week? Until a couple years ago that was more than our reserve fee! 

It sounds more like a franchise fee than management. Management is front desk, collections, reservations & operations.  Unless that includes all labor (in which case its too low) that is way too much for simple management in my experience.  If I was on that Board I'd be looking for a big reduction.


----------



## Icarus (Jan 4, 2008)

Marriott's fees are based on a percentage of the MFs. This is true at all Marriott properties as far as I know. At the end of the day, the percentage might vary, because each property has their own management contract.

It's hard to just compare the base amount of the fee and say that it's x times the national average. The fees are really based on the number of units and the amount of work required. BP is probably much larger than the average timeshare, and as a beach property, there's probably a lot more maint than an average non-beach front property.

But I guess you shouldn't let that stop you from advising owners there to dump Marriott, even though you don't own there yourself. 

-David


----------



## AwayWeGo (Jan 4, 2008)

*No-Name, Shmo-Name.*




pwrshift said:


> Do you really think you'd get more from a no-name manager that charges only $21.25 a week?


Maybe there are no-name timeshare management firms out there, I don't know. 

However that may or may not be, the only independent professional timeshare resort management service firm that I do know about -- Vacation Resorts International -- is hardly no-name. 

( Not that there's anything wrong with that. )

-- Alan Cole, McLean (Fairfax County), Virginia, USA.​


----------



## Icarus (Jan 4, 2008)

I wouldn't buy an Olevia tv for my home either.

Marriott wants to maintain a standard at all their properties. For better or worse, they've decided that one way do to that is to use certain size and brand name flat panel TVs.

The replacement cost of TVs and other things should be amortized over the expected life of the TV. That's got to be at least 5 years for a TV.

Has BP done replacement fund surveys and do they not have enough money in the replacement fund to cover the cost of the TVs that Marriott wants to use?

They also do the same thing with the brand of coffee served on all Marriott properties and many other things. Ideally, the HOA should be able to take advantage of the volume prices and contracts Marriott has with their vendors when making purchases like this.

-David


----------



## Kazakie (Jan 4, 2008)

More comments, in red



pwrshift said:


> -> Seems silly, do flat panel TV's take up more space? Did they add furniture to the room? If not then it was built for 4 people, why would the HOA reduce the number??
> Winner-> Marriott
> 
> In other words the reduction in occupancy has nothing to do with space - then that's a managment/deposit issue - I still believe it should be 4 in the Lockoff
> ...


----------



## timeos2 (Jan 4, 2008)

Icarus said:


> Marriott's fees are based on a percentage of the MFs. This is true at all Marriott properties as far as I know. At the end of the day, the percentage might vary, because each property has their own management contract.
> 
> It's hard to just compare the base amount of the fee and say that it's x times the national average. The fees are really based on the number of units and the amount of work required. BP is probably much larger than the average timeshare, and as a beach property, there's probably a lot more maint than an average non-beach front property.
> 
> ...



I actually said they may NOT want to change management cos if that means losing the Marriott brandijg. But if I were an owner and fees where that high and still doesn't cover "standard" Marriott items I'd sure be asking questions. Having a brand name and high fees doesn't mean things are being handled correctly.  I'd trust the Board over Marriott until its shown to be wrong. 

Again there is nothing magical about running any resort. Beach or not, 224 units is not that large (although there are plenty dmaller).  Getting value for your fees is always the goal as well as having an up to date & well maintained resort. It sounds like both may be lacking under Matriotts high cost watch.


----------



## Steel5Rings (Jan 4, 2008)

Never mind the Sony vs. LG issue on TV's....wait until Marriott comes in and demands which contractor the resort can use to make upgrades.

At Cedar Streamside, we had selected a local contractor at a reasonable price to install the "Marriott Required" granite countertops........Marriott rejected the local contractor and said that Cedar had to use one of Marriott's preferred contractors from out of the area.....which of course cost more money to the HOA........was never a question if whether the firm we selected could do the work, in fact, I bet that our firm in Vail likely put some nice granite counters in many of the high priced homes in the area,,,,but no, Marriott tells you use the firm from Denver that is approved or else......finally we just walked.

Marriott made it so hard and so costly to comply we had no choice.....never mind the fact that Marriott had managed the place for years and never lifted a finger to alert the HOA of need upgrades before the contract was expiring....Marriott let the place rot and says we offered you a deal to stay with us....never mind the cost and hurdles of their bad faith offer.

I am telling you folks at BeachPlace....be careful......with new units coming in at Ocean Pointe, Crystal Shores and a slowing housing market.....great location or not Marriott DOES NOT need you enough to blink first.....with no active sales there the financial incentive for them to stay are small.

I am not a Marriott basher like some.  I love MCVI, generally have gotten great value for my money and stayed in far better accomadations than I likely could afford otherwise.  But the Streamside experience runs counter to the "Marriott Way", runs counter to the salesman pitch about Marriott being your "vacation partner"......Streamside made it clear that Marriott is a business just like any other......Ford closes car plants....Marriott closes hotels and opts out of timeshare resorts......let's not forget Swallowtail and Spicebush too.


----------



## Icarus (Jan 4, 2008)

timeos2 said:


> It sounds like both may be lacking under Matriotts high cost watch.



I don't know, John. All expenses have to be approved by the board no matter who is managing the operation. It sounds like in this case, the HOA has not been approving expenses to keep the place up. But I don't really know, since I'm not an owner or board member there. But the board is the entity that decided to change the max occupancy rules for their units, not Marriott. The board apparently decided to do that to cut down on the amount of damage done to units during spring break, but they could have done it differently. (deposits, inspections, etc.)

It sounds like this property has multiple problems. Swapping out the management company may not be the answer to their problems, but it might save them some money and in the process they would lose the Marriott branding, which is what most owners bought into in the first place. But they could probably get the cheap TVs if they swap out the management company. 

-David


----------



## dougp26364 (Jan 4, 2008)

dmharris said:


> ......Also, for other Marriott owners (like me) this means we would have one less resort in our pool.  That could be troubling, but we've got the new one in Florida on the west coast being built to even the count.  Still, I'd rather have more choices for exchange within Marriott.....



Don't forget Oceana Palms opening about 50 miles north of BPT and 1 mile north of Ocean Pointe. Occupancy in the first of two towers is expected in 2010 and pre-construction sales are suppose to begin tomorrow.


----------



## thinze3 (Jan 4, 2008)

I am not sure that comparing Streamside at Vail to BeachPlace is apples to apples.

A good percentage of Colorado timeshares have weeks in certain seasons that are virtually worthless, and therefore spending any amount of money just wouldn't make sense to those owners. BeachPlace does not have that problem as the resort has high demand year round. The owner of every week, no matter the season, has something to gain from a major renovation, if that's what it takes. Again, that would not be the case at Streamside, even in the remaining Marriotts there.  
*IMO *


----------



## MikeM132 (Jan 5, 2008)

Kazakie---where did you get your parking info on Hawaii? We specifically asked and were told self-parking is free. Self parking is still available at MOC, too (we asked this directly). They had a temporary issue due to taking down the old garage during construction. At least that's what we were told direct from the resort.
BTW--we stayed before at JW Marriott Ihilani and were told parking was 14/day. We were never charged, nor was anybody else I knew about.


----------



## Dean (Jan 5, 2008)

This will be interesting.  I guess the true questions are whether Marriott is simply pushing them around and whether the BOD will truly stand their ground. 





> “The Board had no advance warning on these issues and was stunned by the threat.”


I find it hard to believe that this is the first time that Marriott has expressed those concerns as listed here.  It seems the requests are reasonable and appropriate to owners and the Club in general though the tactics do leave a little to be desired.  I'd think what's gone before would determine the reasonableness of the current Marriott approach.


----------



## thinze3 (Jan 5, 2008)

MikeM132 said:


> Kazakie---where did you get your parking info on Hawaii? We specifically asked and were told self-parking is free. Self parking is still available at MOC, too (we asked this directly). They had a temporary issue due to taking down the old garage during construction. At least that's what we were told direct from the resort.
> BTW--we stayed before at JW Marriott Ihilani and were told parking was 14/day. We were never charged, nor was anybody else I knew about.



FYI - I stayed in my own Waiohai unit and rented another for my inlaws this past July and was never charged a dime for parking. We had two cars.  


.


----------



## Dean (Jan 5, 2008)

MikeM132 said:


> Kazakie---where did you get your parking info on Hawaii? We specifically asked and were told self-parking is free. Self parking is still available at MOC, too (we asked this directly). They had a temporary issue due to taking down the old garage during construction. At least that's what we were told direct from the resort.
> BTW--we stayed before at JW Marriott Ihilani and were told parking was 14/day. We were never charged, nor was anybody else I knew about.


My daughter was at the Marriott on Maui and Ko'Olina in Sept and did not have to pay for parking at either.


----------



## Kilby5924 (Jan 5, 2008)

Correct me if I am wrong but doesn’t BP have one of highest MF outside Hawaii in the Marriott system and those high fees are result of the mismanagement of HOA. Now when it comes to keeping to a standard that  they knew was out there by looking at what  Marriott was doing in it other timeshare they want to cut corners and reduce quality of the rooms. The HOA in the past didn’t complain about Marriott’s management but now when Marriott wants them to comply with that standard they are a being bullied. Why does HOA tell owners the truth that they will have increase fees because they screwed up. There is a reason that a Olevia is cheaper than LG or Sony and it not just the difference in 3inch.
Sheldon


----------



## dioxide45 (Jan 5, 2008)

Dean said:


> This will be interesting.  I guess the true questions are whether Marriott is simply pushing them around and whether the BOD will truly stand their ground. I find it hard to believe that this is the first time that Marriott has expressed those concerns as listed here.  It seems the requests are reasonable and appropriate to owners and the Club in general though the tactics do leave a little to be desired.  I'd think what's gone before would determine the reasonableness of the current Marriott approach.



Remember that the letter quoted has come from the side of the HOA. So you are not hearing both sides. The situation could have been exagerated by the board.


----------



## davemy (Jan 5, 2008)

The letter is mailed to us owners by Marriott vacation club. They have every oppurtunity to give us  their side of the story.  Also I think my Maintance fee only went up a couple dollars this year.  2 bedroom Platinum is Around  $1050.00. Airfare to south florida in the the winter or spring is much more manageable than aruba, st thomas, st kitts, hawaii. figure that cost into your trip when you have a family of 4.


----------



## Michigan Czar (Jan 5, 2008)

Kazakie,

I think your parking post is misleading. That may be the cost for non-owners but I can tell you I have been to Maui and Ko Olina recently and did not pay parking at either place because I was an owner.

Jim


----------



## Dean (Jan 5, 2008)

dioxide45 said:


> Remember that the letter quoted has come from the side of the HOA. So you are not hearing both sides. The situation could have been exagerated by the board.


That I totally understand and one of the reasons I suggested that this was not likely the first indication of an issue that the HOA had from Marriott.  It's also interesting they would send out such a letter drawing a line in the sand as it will make it more difficult to arrive at a "compromise" IMO.


----------



## Kazakie (Jan 5, 2008)

*Parking Info*



MikeM132 said:


> Kazakie---where did you get your parking info on Hawaii? We specifically asked and were told self-parking is free. Self parking is still available at MOC, too (we asked this directly). They had a temporary issue due to taking down the old garage during construction. At least that's what we were told direct from the resort.
> BTW--we stayed before at JW Marriott Ihilani and were told parking was 14/day. We were never charged, nor was anybody else I knew about.



The parking rates were from the Marriott website (if you reserve a vacation villa), it has parking listed on your confirmation.  So I have no way of knowing who is and is not being charged for parking, but these are the official rates Marriott has on the reservation confirmations.  (In an earlier post I recommended that BT should be consistent with other MCVI resorts that charge for parking - I don't know if there is a general rule, but it would be nice to have consistency). 

In Jan 2007 at Marriott Maui, there was no self parking but valet parking was gratis - although I do not know if that was only for owners, MCVI or everyone.  (again, i'm just reporting the parking rate on the Marriott confirmation)

In Jan 2007 at Waiohai (we went to Kauai after Maui) we were there when they put up parking gates and were told that they'd start charging for parking (I did not ask if that's for everyone, MCVI or non-owners). 

We didn't go to Ko 'Olina.


----------



## Kazakie (Jan 5, 2008)

Michigan Czar said:


> Kazakie,
> 
> I think your parking post is misleading. That may be the cost for non-owners but I can tell you I have been to Maui and Ko Olina recently and did not pay parking at either place because I was an owner.
> 
> Jim



Jim,

If I've been following the tread correctly, BeachPlace Towers owners don't pay for parking either.  But at BP other MCVI owners do pay for parking and Marriott would like no MCVI owners to pay for parking.

I would like to see consistency across MCVI resorts as to who does and does not actually have to pay for parking - as many resorts post actual parking rates.

Do you know that Maui and Ko Olina didn't charge you because you were an owner at that resort, or because you're an MCVI owner, or do they not really charge anyone?

-Kaz


----------



## laxmom (Jan 5, 2008)

Thanks, OP, for posting this.  I think this is of concern to all Marriott owners.

I do have a question.  How does Marriott get voted out as management company?  Is it something the board can decide or does it take a majority vote of owners by special ballot?


----------



## Steel5Rings (Jan 5, 2008)

laxmom said:


> Thanks, OP, for posting this.  I think this is of concern to all Marriott owners.
> 
> I do have a question.  How does Marriott get voted out as management company?  Is it something the board can decide or does it take a majority vote of owners by special ballot?




The HOA Board takes the final vote.......now in the case of Streamside, the HOA Board did poll owners and the owners voted to negotiate a renewal with Marriott....but when the terms from Marriott came down owners complained and the HOA went back to Marriott to get relief only to be told no.....then the HOA board voted to opt out and go with VRI, without seeking additional authority.

It is kind of like Congress....representative democracy......We vote for the HOA Board to make the decisions, rather than owners having to vote on each and every issue that comes along.


----------



## pwrshift (Jan 5, 2008)

It really bothers me that, in this day and age when the internet makes polling/voting so easy and affordable, that a handful of owners on the HOA could make decisions for 10,000 owners to kick Marriott out.

Resale prices on BP are about $14,000 these days on Ebay and are bound to plummet more if these people don't represent the owners properly.

It would be interesting to know what Streamside sells for now, compared to what it got when a Marriott.

Brian


----------



## wuv pooh (Jan 5, 2008)

Seems pretty simple to me, Marriott is a BRAND.  If you do not like the brand then get out - like Streamside.

Some things go along with a brand because they require consistency to maintain the brand.  Those include:

Dictating furnishings
Dictating supplies
Dictating contractors
etc., etc.

Yes, you can buy cheaper TVs and toilet paper and contractors, but then it is not the Marriott brand.  They have approved vendors and contractors who are guaranteed a level of business and in turn guarantee availability and quality etc.  It is part of running a multi billion dollar company.

Just like you can buy IBM or HP or get a no brand for cheaper.

At the end of the day Marriott makes a 6% net profit, so it is not like they are screwing anyone - you can get 4 seasons for 12% or Joe Blow for 3% but Marriott is the brand for me, which is why I bought it and why it is worth another few cents a dollar to me.

All the whining makes me laugh :rofl: If you can name another brand which lets you trade into more top resorts in more top locations with priority then go for it, but Marriott still takes me where I want to go for the best value.

I am sure that you can find many well run, lower cost, beautiful resorts if that is what you want, but you won't be able to trade into 50 other places under the same priority.


----------



## laxmom (Jan 5, 2008)

I agree, Brian, especially on such a big move.  It seems like cutting your nose off to spite your face to fire Marriott or fail to take action resulting in them walking away from the contract.  The brand name means value to most people.  I understand their point of wanting to keep things top notch.  It is their reputation that suffers when the properties decline.  I also understand them wanting to keep the facilities that bear their name of consistent quality with like amenities.

Lets face it.  Marriott has clout.  Like it or not.  Like them or not.  They hold the upper hand here no matter what the HOA make think or feel.  And I personally do like the value they bring to our TSs.  Honestly, the name Marriott is why we bought where we bought.

I must have been hibernating when the previous instance happened because I never caught wind of it until now so I am really uninformed on the ins and outs of this type of dilema.  Any of us Marriott owners could find ourselves in this type of situation in the future, something that never occurred to most us when we made our purchase.  I wish all the BP owners out there the best in a difficult situation.


----------



## Hoc (Jan 5, 2008)

dmharris said:


> Wouldn't that change your standing and opportunities for exchanging?



I couldn't say for sure, because I sold my Streamside unit when they lost Marriott management -- I had bought it specifically for the Marriott preference, and when they lost that, it became worth much less to me.  That said, after it stopped being a Marriott, and after I sold, I still traded my remaining deposited Streamside unit into the Quarter House in New Orleans at Halloween, which is a difficult trade.

I don't think that losing the Marriott name necessarily impairs the trade power.  I do think it makes it harder to trade the unit into a Marriott resort in high season.


----------



## Hoc (Jan 5, 2008)

Dean said:


> My daughter was at the Marriott on Maui and Ko'Olina in Sept and did not have to pay for parking at either.



I was at the Maui Marriott two weeks ago.  Self parking is free, while valet parking costs something like $12 a day.  For awhile, no self parking was allowed.  That was the case when I was there about 3 years ago.  I was told that was due to construction of the new building, but that self park is allowed again now.


----------



## Hoc (Jan 5, 2008)

Steel5Rings said:


> then the HOA board voted to opt out and go with VRI, without seeking additional authority.



The board did not opt out.  Marriott proposed a contract that renewed for only three of the five buildings, and the other two buildings objected.  Marriott did it anyway, because the overall resort documents appeared to allow Marriott to manage buildings with a three out of five vote.


----------



## Hoc (Jan 5, 2008)

pwrshift said:


> It would be interesting to know what Streamside sells for now, compared to what it got when a Marriott.



Most of the Streamside units -- even the ones that are still Marriotts -- are virtually worthless on the resale market, except for ski weeks.  And even those are significantly less valuable than they were three years ago.  That includes the Marriott units.


----------



## timeos2 (Jan 5, 2008)

Hoc said:


> Most of the Streamside units -- even the ones that are still Marriotts -- are virtually worthless on the resale market, except for ski weeks.  And even those are significantly less valuable than they were three years ago.  That includes the Marriott units.



Paying a big premium for the Marriott name doesn't appear to be a wise move as there are zero guarantees any resort, even those Marriott builds, will always remain a Marriott.  That plus the higher than average fees while they are under the umbrella - as well as the relative ease of obtaining all but the highest demand times in exchange - makes the need to own fairly low unless you want one specific resort all the time. And even getting that seems to be an issue (reservation hassles for non-fixed weeks) so the whole value proposition becomes a question mark.  We sure do love the resorts while they are up to snuff. We've traded into a bunch and they've all been some of the best in the area that we've stayed at.  But pity those that paid big only to have then change to "standard" unbranded resorts (even though in the long run that may be the best route for the owners pocketbooks if they stick as owners) as the resale price, once the artificial props go away, does plummet.


----------



## Steel5Rings (Jan 5, 2008)

Hoc said:


> The board did not opt out.  Marriott proposed a contract that renewed for only three of the five buildings, and the other two buildings objected.  Marriott did it anyway, because the overall resort documents appeared to allow Marriott to manage buildings with a three out of five vote.



No you are wrong....Cedar was offered a contract for renewal, owners opted against the contract because the terms were outragous and the special assessments would have been huge....terms such as using only Marriott approved contractors to install granite countertops, as opposed to using a local contractor at less cost.


----------



## Steel5Rings (Jan 5, 2008)

Hoc said:


> Most of the Streamside units -- even the ones that are still Marriotts -- are virtually worthless on the resale market, except for ski weeks.  And even those are significantly less valuable than they were three years ago.  That includes the Marriott units.



Last year I was lucky to unload my late ski season week last week March/first week April for $1,000...1br..........I paid around $3K in 2001 for the unit.

So I took a hit....I would say that week is now worth $500 or less.


----------



## timeos2 (Jan 5, 2008)

Steel5Rings said:


> No you are wrong....Cedar was offered a contract for renewal, owners opted against the contract because the terms were outragous and the special assessments would have been huge....terms such as using only Marriott approved contractors to install granite countertops, as opposed to using a local contractor at less cost.



Which shows it was a ruse to get out as there would have been no difference (no Sony vs lesser brand) in granite counter tops regardless of who installed them.  That was a power and/or money grab - not a legitimate requirement IMO. It's easy to create a situation where the Board "dumps" management if they make impossible demands.


----------



## Icarus (Jan 5, 2008)

Steel5Rings said:


> ....terms such as using only Marriott approved contractors to install granite countertops, as opposed to using a local contractor at less cost.



I'm curious about that one .. what was the difference in price between the local contractor and the Marriott approved contractor?

-David


----------



## jimf41 (Jan 5, 2008)

The more important question is how much liability insurance did each contractor have. Marriott has a stiff requirement for any contractor on it's properties to carry a high level of insurance. Most small contractors can't afford or don't qualify for that level of liability insurance.


----------



## timeos2 (Jan 5, 2008)

jimf41 said:


> The more important question is how much liability insurance did each contractor have. Marriott has a stiff requirement for any contractor on it's properties to carry a high level of insurance. Most small contractors can't afford or don't qualify for that level of liability insurance.



It's not "their property". They manage it and have only the power to recommend coverage not demand or require it. It's the Boards (owners) call as to what is adequate.  Another red herring dangled to make it sound like they were forced out when in fact they wanted out after mismanaging the resort for years then trying to cash in on the corrective actions needed.


----------



## Hoc (Jan 6, 2008)

Steel5Rings said:


> No you are wrong....Cedar was offered a contract for renewal, owners opted against the contract because the terms were outragous and the special assessments would have been huge.



I don't really know anything about what happened to Cedar.  I only know what happened at Aspen, and they were not given the opportunity to remain a Marriott when the new management contract was proposed.


----------



## pwrshift (Jan 6, 2008)

Kazakie said:


> -> 90% of occupants won't notice or care about 3" more of diagonal space (as long as they're flat panel, as opposed to a tube tv). How many people noticed when tube tv's went from 25" to 27"? This is one where I can totally agree with the HOA.
> *Winner->* HOA


 
I was on Grand Ocean's site and saw they have 43" flat screen widescreens in the living room, and I'll bet they aren't no-name brands like the 37" ones BP's HOA wants to put in.  That's a sure sign the HOA has decided to go cheap on the reno ... after promising owners it will have a 'wow' factor from the $8 million they are spending (with no special assessment).  Do it right or don't do it.

Brian


----------



## Hoc (Jan 6, 2008)

Icarus said:


> I'm curious about that one .. what was the difference in price between the local contractor and the Marriott approved contractor?
> 
> -David



I can only speak to Streamside.  In that case, Marriott's contractors were 150 percent of the price of the local contractors.  Marriott's contractors were to be flown in from New York and Salt Lake City.


----------



## Icarus (Jan 6, 2008)

Hoc said:


> I can only speak to Streamside.  In that case, Marriott's contractors were 150 percent of the price of the local contractors.  Marriott's contractors were to be flown in from New York and Salt Lake City.



Wow, that is a big difference percentage-wise. How much money was involved? You would think that in order to be fiscally responsible they would solicit bids for the work if they didn't have reasonably local contractors available.

-David


----------



## minoter (Jan 6, 2008)

*I'll Forward Thread to Board of Directors*

There is a great deal of information in this 3 page thread that the BP Board should see. I will forward the comments tomorrow to the other Board members after giving BP owners an opportunity today to finish their thoughts on this issue. By the way, all Board members annually occupy BP, and the Board President occupies 10 weeks during the winter. Those owners who do occupy during the winter should seek George out and personally express your concerns to him.

The Board of Directors at BeachPlace cannot fire Marriott. Marriott can only be discharged by a super majority of owners voting to do so. Also Marriott is not required to negotiate the current management agreement with the Board. The agreement automatically renews every 3 years. The current Board attempted unsuccessfully to renegotiate certain provisions of the Marriott contract that would benefit owners. (As an example, revise the current 18% interest rate Marriott could charge on funds loaned to the Association to a more reasonable market rate. Also, to reduce the 10% Marriott management fee on annual increases in Ft Lauderdale property tax increases).

By the way, the Board actually officially increased the occupancy limits at BeachPlace. The BeachPlace official documents indicated that the maximum occupancy was 6 in a full 2br villa (Owners, please review your documents). The Board voted to legally increase that to 8. Management was allowing as many as 10 in a full villa which was contributing to the wear and tear on the property.

There are many discussion items that are addressed in this thread-too many for me to comment on in this reply. The Board is meeting with Marriott this month in an attempt to compromise the issues. The Board also believes in the value of Marriott and our discussions with Marriott will involve maintaining that value. This value proposition carries a cost to BeachPlace owners, 80% of which don't even occupy BP. Trading value seems to be the most important point for most BeachPlace owners.

Eric Minotti


----------



## Kazakie (Jan 6, 2008)

*occupancy rate*



minoter said:


> This value proposition carries a cost to BeachPlace owners, 80% of which don't even occupy BP. Trading value seems to be the most important point for most BeachPlace owners.



Did i read this right:  BP has a 20% owner occupancy rate?  Is it correct to assume owner occupancy is higher during platinum than gold or silver seasons? 

...I wonder if there are stats on MCVI occupancy rate as well... (now I'm just being courious)


----------



## minoter (Jan 6, 2008)

*Approximate Occupancy Statistics*

Approximate Occupancy Statistics for BP:

Owner Occupy-20% 
All Exchangers-50% (70% of which are MVCI exchangers)
Owners Exchange for points-30%


----------



## pwrshift (Jan 6, 2008)

Thanks Eric for your participation in this thread. Good to have you on the Board and a member of TUG.

I wonder if you have any figures going back to the beginning of MBP to see if owner occupancy has fallen off from loftier levels. I can remember, way back when, that almost everyone I talked to around the pool, deck, owner lounge, etc., were MBP owners and proud of their suites, the resort and location. In recent years I rarely meet someone who owns at MBP when I'm there for my 4 weeks every year, and that's prime time when I assume most owners would go.

Re: Owner Occupancy: To see that *only 20% of owners actually use the resort* might indicate severe owner disatisfaction with the deterioration of fixtures, furnishings, appliances, decor, etc., especially after they go to GO and elsewhere to see their 43" flat screens, stainless appliances, Revive bedding, granite, etc. Ocean front properties need special care and more frequently than 5 years just because of the salty air eating into everything.

Re: Trading for Points: IMO turning in a week that has a MF of more than $1000 a year for 110,000 MR points doesn't make sense as it's almost the cost of of buying the points from Marriott and losing your week use in the process -- so it shocks me that *even more owners (30%) trade their weeks for MR points* when MVCI resorts with less MF (MMC, MCV, LE, etc.) represent the same points for less cost.

*Re: Occupancy Issues: You mentioned the Board agreed to an 8 person occupancy for the whole unit, but didn't mention the studio stiuation of only 3 adults. Does your statement mean they have agreed to leave the 4 adult occupancy level for studios as in all other Marriotts, after the decor change? If so, I'm very pleased they saw the light on that issue.*

As Steamboat Bill said above, BeachPlace should be a real gem amidst several new jewels on the beachfront with the St. Regis, W, Trump, Hilton, Atlantic and a host of multi-million dollar condos. The whole area is going upscale big time! If the new decor is done properly we might see a dramatic increase in owner occupancy *and* our new neighbours might draw owners back as there'd be a *different* classy restaurant within a 5 min walk for every night of the week. All these things coming together might show a great increase in resale values that MBP owners have never seen before -- watch out OP! 

I, for one, will be going again in the Fall to see how much 'wow' the new decor has, and can't wait. No doubt, I'll report back on TUG with pics!

Thanks again,
Brian


----------



## saturn28 (Jan 6, 2008)

minoter said:


> There is a great deal of information in this 3 page thread that the BP Board should see. I will forward the comments tomorrow to the other Board members after giving BP owners an opportunity today to finish their thoughts on this issue. By the way, all Board members annually occupy BP, and the Board President occupies 10 weeks during the winter. Those owners who do occupy during the winter should seek George out and personally express your concerns to him.
> 
> The Board of Directors at BeachPlace cannot fire Marriott. *Marriott can only be discharged by a super majority of owners voting to do so. *Also Marriott is not required to negotiate the current management agreement with the Board. The agreement automatically renews every 3 years. The current Board attempted unsuccessfully to renegotiate certain provisions of the Marriott contract that would benefit owners. (As an example, revise the current 18% interest rate Marriott could charge on funds loaned to the Association to a more reasonable market rate. Also, to reduce the 10% Marriott management fee on annual increases in Ft Lauderdale property tax increases).
> 
> ...



Is this the case with all Marriott Resorts. The only way for Marriott not to be the mangers of the property, when they have submitted a new contract, is for a supper majority of all the owners.


----------



## JimIg23 (Jan 6, 2008)

How much power does the HOA Board hold over making the decision to comply with Marriott’s demands?  Can they say yeah or nay without majority of the owner’s vote? 

How often and thru what manner (mailed ballots, voice vote, etc) are they elected? Is it truly a representative voting process or do members have to show up one day to vote?  It seems HOA Boards (in general) has a fiduciary responsibility to the owners, I am wondering about what accountability or guidance they have.


----------



## timeos2 (Jan 6, 2008)

*If it isn't sensible it isn't enforcable*



saturn28 said:


> Is this the case with all Marriott Resorts. The only way for Marriott not to be the mangers of the property, when they have submitted a new contract, is for a supper majority of all the owners.



And how ridiculous is that "contract"? Marriott can always walk away if they want. It's almost impossible to get a super majority vote - yes or no - so if it fails then technically Marriott stays on yet they can't force the Board to pay or give into all their demands so effectively they are "fired" yet there is no vote to back it up. The whole thing doesn't pass the smell test and most likely wouldn't be enforceable as it isn't in the best interest of the owners and the documents/contract was written by Marriott so the owners get the benefit of any ambiguity.  These types of "forever" deals are frowned on by courts so Marriott & the defenders had better not think they can't be booted as most likely they can be.


----------



## PerryM (Jan 6, 2008)

*Thanks!*



minoter said:


> Approximate Occupancy Statistics for BP:
> 
> Owner Occupy-20%
> All Exchangers-50% (70% of which are MVCI exchangers)
> Owners Exchange for points-30%



Wow, as an II exchanger into this resort many times my heart is pitter pattering.

All I can say to those that are responsible for these numbers is: *Job well done*!

Could this be a case of the HOA trashing the china shop?  And Marriott is the shop keeper telling them to calm down?



C U at the beach, boys…

P.S.
I've been warning WM owners hell bent on taking over the WM BOD that the new crop of demigods might actually be worse than the developers set now running the place.  Maybe I've got a great case study right here to bolster my position.

It certainly will be fun to watch this slugfest with nothing at stake...

What am I saying, if things get better it's going to get harder to exchange into Beach Place.  So maybe I should be rooting for the current set of demigods.

Ok, go demigods....


----------



## minoter (Jan 6, 2008)

Brian,

At this point there is no reversal of the 3 adult rule in the lock-off at BP.

My comment regarding the 8 occupants in a full villa was intended to respond to the person on this tread that seemed to be unaware of the Board voting to change the legal document at BP that only allowed 6 in a full villa. It was the Board's intent to strengthen the owners rights, while limiting the prior common practice of allowing 10 in a full villa.

Eric


----------



## pwrshift (Jan 6, 2008)

*Faulty HOA math?*

Eric ... correct me if I'm wrong, but the MBP Board has decreed they want the 2 bdrm suite occupancy to be 8 adults.  For the studio it is to be 3 adults (over 5 yrs old) IF they get their way with Marriott.  For the 1 bdrm suite it is to be 4 adults.

*8 = 3 + 4?      The MBP HOA needs to go back to school.   Don't you see how they have been using faulty math for years in running this place into the ground!  What's next -- no name flat screens?*

MBP owners -- keep those letter and calls in to Marriott so that two parents and their teens won't be turned away at check in to a 450 sq ft studio with kitchenette facilities and balcony!  This HOA nonsense has to stop...Marriott to the rescue please.

Brian


----------



## Steel5Rings (Jan 6, 2008)

JimIg23 said:


> How much power does the HOA Board hold over making the decision to comply with Marriott’s demands?  Can they say yeah or nay without majority of the owner’s vote?
> 
> How often and thru what manner (mailed ballots, voice vote, etc) are they elected? Is it truly a representative voting process or do members have to show up one day to vote?  It seems HOA Boards (in general) has a fiduciary responsibility to the owners, I am wondering about what accountability or guidance they have.




The HOA board is elected....you should as an owner get a ballot prior to the annual meeting each year to vote for the directors.  The elected directors then vote on the matters before the board and oversee the management, which is usually contracted out to a firm like Marriott who the board contracts the terms with.

Some boards will poll or ask for members to vote on certain HOA business, and some HOA bylaws might require owners vote on certain matters.  But by and large, the HOA board can take action as needed as the elcted representatives of the HOA.

Of course none of this really matters with Marriott, Marriott contract negotiations are a one way street....either you agree to all of Marriotts terms or you walk.  It is pretty simple.....like a hostage negotiation.


----------



## JimIg23 (Jan 6, 2008)

thank you, I need to pay more attention to this on my own front. 

I really hope a large majority of the owners believes in what the Board is doing.....    Send those letters!


----------



## london (Jan 6, 2008)

Steel5Rings said:


> The HOA board is elected....you should as an owner get a ballot prior to the annual meeting each year to vote for the directors.  The elected directors then vote on the matters before the board and oversee the management, which is usually contracted out to a firm like Marriott who the board contracts the terms with.
> 
> Some boards will poll or ask for members to vote on certain HOA business, and some HOA bylaws might require owners vote on certain matters.  But by and large, the HOA board can take action as needed as the elcted representatives of the HOA.
> 
> Of course none of this really matters with Marriott, Marriott contract negotiations are a one way street....either you agree to all of Marriotts terms or you walk.  It is pretty simple.....like a hostage negotiation.



Sounds like a "Marriott Rules" situation to me. Protection of the brand name via high standards to me met for service and quality of units and furnishings.


----------



## timeos2 (Jan 7, 2008)

london said:


> Sounds like a "Marriott Rules" situation to me. Protection of the brand name via high standards to me met for service and quality of units and furnishings.



Yeah - sounds great until you realize they want a cut of everything that gets done as well as unbelievably high fees. Plus they are running the resort as management yet it has gone downhill (as have others under their watch).   

If the quality is maintained owners aren't likely to see a problem. But some of the highest fees around and a deteriorating resort means money isn't going to the right purposes.  They can't have it both ways. They are demanding the fees and to be in charge but then want to claim the HOA Board is to blame if things aren't right.  Hmmm. I tend to take the Board's side until it is proven wrong.  

PS - The Marriott name isn't going to be "hurt" by a second or even third tier brand of HD Flatscreen TV if that is what fits the budget.  I was recently at one of the newest Marriotts - GC in Vegas - and they still have TUBE tv's in the bedroom of that brand new resort! And the flat screen they do have in the living area is compromised by the worst reception I've seen since using rabbit ears in the 50's.  It wasn't just our room as the same ghosting & fuzziness appeared in the model & the two tv's in the lobby/owners lounge.  So they don't put their own money in when building a new place but want others to when they can twist the knife over branding.  If the resort is well maintained and on the beach in FL it doesn't matter if the TV says SONY or Sylvania or anything else. People will be happy with a flat screen - 37", 40", 50" they don't care as they are only there for a week - if its in a nice unit.  Far more than the run down, dated units that exist now from the sounds of it.  Better they should get the sales spiels cleaned up (as they once were known for) if they want to improve the Marriott image.


----------



## Kilby5924 (Jan 7, 2008)

timeos2 said:


> Yeah - sounds great until you realize they want a cut of everything that gets done as well as unbelievably high fees. Plus they are running the resort as management yet it has gone downhill (as have others under their watch).
> 
> If the quality is maintained owners aren't likely to see a problem. But some of the highest fees around and a deteriorating resort means money isn't going to the right purposes.  They can't have it both ways. They are demanding the fees and to be in charge but then want to claim the HOA Board is to blame if things aren't right.  Hmmm. I tend to take the Board's side until it is proven wrong.
> 
> PS - The Marriott name isn't going to be "hurt" by a second or even third tier brand of HD Flatscreen TV if that is what fits the budget.  I was recently at one of the newest Marriotts - GC in Vegas - and they still have TUBE tv's in the bedroom of that brand new resort! And the flat screen they do have in the living area is compromised by the worst reception I've seen since using rabbit ears in the 50's.  It wasn't just our room as the same ghosting & fuzziness appeared in the model & the two tv's in the lobby/owners lounge.  So they don't put their own money in when building a new place but want others to when they can twist the knife over branding.  If the resort is well maintained and on the beach in FL it doesn't matter if the TV says SONY or Sylvania or anything else. People will be happy with a flat screen - 37", 40", 50" they don't care as they are only there for a week - if its in a nice unit.  Far more than the run down, dated units that exist now from the sounds of it.  Better they should get the sales spiels cleaned up (as they once were known for) if they want to improve the Marriott image.



I for one do care that is the reason I bought a Marriott. I recently traded into GV and got one the older unit that didn't have a granite counter top and I was disappointed not that  there was anything wrong with the counter top but wasn't what I expected in a Marriott. It is the reasonability of HOA to supervise the management team and as far know they have not complained about the job Marriott has done if there was problem then they should have said something. Now when Marriott insisted that keep to there standard they what to skimp. That HOA highest one of the MF's in the system outside of Hawaii are the fees Marriott is charging them more excessive than other Marriott’s? How is it GO can do refurbish it units and put in 40” name brand TV and have a lower MF and both are beach front properties?  Same Management Company only differences is a different HOA.
Sheldon


----------



## Kazakie (Jan 7, 2008)

*What's really important*



timeos2 said:


> PS - The Marriott name isn't going to be "hurt" by a second or even third tier brand of HD Flatscreen TV if that is what fits the budget.  I was recently at one of the newest Marriotts - GC in Vegas - and they still have TUBE tv's in the bedroom of that brand new resort! And the flat screen they do have in the living area is compromised by the worst reception I've seen since using rabbit ears in the 50's.  It wasn't just our room as the same ghosting & fuzziness appeared in the model & the two tv's in the lobby/owners lounge.  So they don't put their own money in when building a new place but want others to when they can twist the knife over branding.  If the resort is well maintained and on the beach in FL it doesn't matter if the TV says SONY or Sylvania or anything else. People will be happy with a flat screen - 37", 40", 50" they don't care as they are only there for a week - if its in a nice unit.  Far more than the run down, dated units that exist now from the sounds of it.  Better they should get the sales spiels cleaned up (as they once were known for) if they want to improve the Marriott image.



John, you're confusing facts with the story - don't do that.

I think John and I are the only two people who seem to think Marriott isn't 100% right (although I'm not with John thinking Marriott might be 100% wrong).

Lets look north a couple states to Hilton Head.

Marriott SurfWatch is the nicest and newest timeshare in Hilton Head, yet Grande Ocean and Barony both have much higher demand.  Why?  It's not because of flat-panel TV's, rather a *balance *between location (oceanfront) and well maintained properties.  By well maintained it does not mean competing with the St Regis (or surpassing SurfWatch) but means being well maintained - nice grounds, clean rooms, etc - not "WOW factor" - this is NOT a destination resort.  There were a considerable amount of Barony owners who were not happy to pay for gannet counter tops as they saw that as a complete waste of money.  (I can't tell you a single owner I know who had the gannet counter tops make/break their decision to go to Barony or buy at Barony).  That doesn't mean they want to resort to fall into disrepair, but they bought Marriott, not Westin, not Four Seasons, most Marriott owners care about quality and value - not luxury without regard to cost.  

Location isn't everything as we see at Marriott Monarch.  Supposedly one of the best OceanFront locations in HHI, but poorly maintained grounds and units, keep it lower on the demand list.

It sounds like improving the maintenance of the grounds and units should be Job 1.  That does not mean competing with the St. Regis, it means having a nice (not luxurious), clean, dependable, well-maintained property.  The size of the tv or the logo on the front of it isn't important - what's important is that the TV is clean and works 99% of the time when a guest checks in.


----------



## PerryM (Jan 7, 2008)

*Thanks HOA...*



Kazakie said:


> John, you're confusing facts with the story - don't do that.
> 
> I think John and I are the only two people who seem to think Marriott isn't 100% right (although I'm not with John thinking Marriott might be 100% wrong).
> 
> ...



I would argue that what's most important at Beach Place Towers is *the name Marriott which is in front of the building name*.  Folks are buying a Marriott brand name and for the HOA to get into a fight with Marriott is insanity and the president of the HOA needs to find another project to screw up.

The 20% of the owners who actually use their resort should send off alarm bells that the resort has terrible problems and that getting into a fight with Marriott is about as stupid a thing as a group of owners, with way too much time on their hands, should be doing.

But I'm not an owner there, I've exchanged into a 2BR unit at 59-days for just 4,000 WM credits or a cost of $200 + II exchange fee.  Thanks boys.

So I guess I should maybe buy lunch for the HOA the next time they meet.  But to you owners you should be looking at another route - this one is full of potholes and it's breaking up your resort.

P.S.
Don't get me wrong, I love Beach Place Towers as it now stands.  I can't afford to stay at the expensive Motel 6 down the road so this Marriott will have to do.


----------



## timeos2 (Jan 7, 2008)

Kazakie said:


> John, you're confusing facts with the story - don't do that.
> 
> I think John and I are the only two people who seem to think Marriott isn't 100% right (although I'm not with John thinking Marriott might be 100% wrong).
> 
> BP sounds like improving the maintenance of the grounds and units should be Job 1.  That does not mean competing with the St. Regis, it means having a nice (not luxurious), clean, dependable, well-maintained property.  The size of the tv or the logo on the front of it isn't important - what's important is that the TV is clean and works 99% of the time when a guest checks in.



Actually I think we do agree. I don't feel Marriott is 100% wrong but do seem to be more than a bit heavy handed.  Maybe 60%?  Is the Board 100% right? Most likely not - they are the watchdogs and need to get things done with or in spite of Marriott - whatever it takes.  Your last paragraph is on the money. What owners/guests expect is a clean, well maintained room with "Marriott" features (hey, they are SO good that it is the standard many non-Marriott  resorts shoot for!).  Give the owners/guests that, even if it isn't the best of the Marriotts as it is a beach front and they have their own challenges other resorts don't face and there aren't likely to be too many complaints.  

I hope for the owners sake that this goes down the road of compromise on both sides. Obviously the branding is an important factor and unless it absolutely can't be maintained both sides should work to keep it. Marriott may need to flex a bit as well.  The resort already has high fees in comparison to even other Marriotts - forget non-Marriotts.  Isn't there room there to let the Board make a few cost saving decisions this round and bring it to 100% in 5 years when the next work gets done?  Right now any improvements will be better than what they have so whats the harm (Note: I'm NOT saying this is a run down, motel conversion type beach resort only that it isn't at the level of the majority of other Marriott branded resorts at the current time) From the tone of the Board message they sound ready to work things out. Lets hope Marriott has the same approach, the work gets done and the Marriott name stays on the sign.  Saber rattling by either side accomplishes nothing.


----------



## pwrshift (Jan 7, 2008)

Perry ... with your loveable sense of humour you've told the whole story in a few paragraphs, especially paragraphs 1, 2, and the PS. Thanks.

Here are just two pics of the Master Bath condition of a MBP unit I was checked into for my 4 week stay ... I got moved to another suite:

http://www.freewebs.com/pwrshift/MasterBath condition.jpg


For some reason, this is OK for a lot of the posters here who think the HOA is doing the job, yet they (hopefully) wouldn't allow their own home to get into this condition!

Brian





PerryM said:


> I would argue that what's most important at Beach Place Towers is *the name Marriott which is in front of the building name*. Folks are buying a Marriott brand name and for the HOA to get into a fight with Marriott is insanity and the president of the HOA needs to find another project to screw up.
> 
> The 20% of the owners who actually use their resort should send off alarm bells that the resort has terrible problems and that getting into a fight with Marriott is about as stupid a thing as a group of owners, with way too much time on their hands, should be doing.
> 
> ...


----------



## PerryM (Jan 7, 2008)

pwrshift said:


> Perry ... with your loveable sense of humour you've told the whole story in a few paragraphs, especially paragraphs 1, 2, and the PS. Thanks.
> 
> Here are just two pics of the Master Bath condition of a MBP unit I was checked into for my 4 week stay ... I got moved to another suite:
> 
> ...




Yikes!  Maybe I'll have to spend a little more and upgrade to the Motel 6 - they have free parking too.


----------



## Kazakie (Jan 7, 2008)

*Blank Check*



PerryM said:


> I would argue that what's most important at Beach Place Towers is *the name Marriott which is in front of the building name*.  Folks are buying a Marriott brand name and for the HOA to get into a fight with Marriott is insanity and the president of the HOA needs to find another project to screw up.



I'm pretty sure the owners wouldn't be too happy with the HOA if they gave Marriott a blank check either.  I'm also sure it's important to Marriott to keep the resort (and 6% fees), so hopefully they're *both *willing to discuss what's really important (maintenance, # of occupants, etc) and what's not important (TV size).


----------



## Kazakie (Jan 7, 2008)

*Job 1 (maintenance)*



pwrshift said:


> Here are just two pics of the Master Bath condition of a MBP unit I was checked into for my 4 week stay ... I got moved to another suite:
> 
> http://www.freewebs.com/pwrshift/MasterBath condition.jpg
> 
> For some reason, this is OK for a lot of the posters here who think the HOA is doing the job, yet they (hopefully) wouldn't allow their own home to get into this condition!



I don't recall anyone stating (mabye i missed it) the HOA has done a good job, but thanks for reinforing my point that maintenance, not the size of the TV's are the largest issue at hand..



Kazakie said:


> It sounds like improving the maintenance of the grounds and units should be Job 1.






PerryM said:


> P.S.
> Don't get me wrong, I love Beach Place Towers as it now stands.  I can't afford to stay at the expensive Motel 6 down the road so this Marriott will have to do.



From what Brian just posted, Motel 6 might be better maintained...


----------



## timeos2 (Jan 7, 2008)

pwrshift said:


> For some reason, this is OK for a lot of the posters here who think the HOA is doing the job, yet they (hopefully) wouldn't allow their own home to get into this condition!
> 
> Brian



So who is on site maintaining the resort and spending the limited amount of cash available - Marriott Management or the Board? What is getting done first - needed repairs or making sure Marriott Management is paid? Who proposes the budget for each year and how much is going for management fees vs reserve/capital funding? 

I think I know the answers.  At least I know how most Developer based managements do it.  The result is in the picture.  Looks like the resort physical plant comes after the Marriott checks are written and cashed. Wrong order IMO.  Let Marriott share in the hit to get things back where they belong for the big fees already being paid as they played a big part in it OR let a competent third party management take over and do it under the "watchful" (doesn't appear to be all that true) eye of Marriott standards.  Again Marriott has the control but doesn't want the blame when they aren't producing for the money spent. All too typical but I would hope Marriott was above that and does whats needed to earn their fees.


----------



## PerryM (Jan 7, 2008)

*The time is right...*

As an outside Marriott owner I remember watching the St Regis being built next door to Beach Place Towers.  First we were at BPT when the pile drivers woke us 7 am each morning as the building shook, later we watched an internet cam of the construction taking place.

It struck me that this was a VERY expensive part of the beach and that taxes would reinforce this location with eye watering taxes and very high expectations from the owners.

Sounds like BPT owners need to pay a lot more MFs to bring the resort up to the standards of the neighborhood.  I’d bet an outside consultant could come in and make recommendations for a special assessment to get BPT up to Marriott standards in short order.

Anyone want to guess what the special assessment will cost?  This would get rid of the parking fees that this Marriott inflicts on their brother/sister Marriott owners who exchange into BBT and don’t fleece BPT owners with similar dinky fees.

My guess, and that’s all it is, would be *a $200 monthly special assessment for 12 months*.  Let’s see what they will be – because, to me, that’s where BPT is right now – a massive infusion of cash to rise above the Motel 6 down the road.


----------



## Icarus (Jan 7, 2008)

timeos2 said:


> So who is on site maintaining the resort and spending the limited amount of cash available - Marriott Management or the Board?



The management company is responsible for normal operation and maintenance of the property, but the board oversees the management company. If the management company isn't keeping the place up properly (or under performing in any other way), then the board should be working with their management company to get those items addressed.

The caulk and the mold/mildew in the showers seems like normal maintainence, and I don't see why it wasn't kept up properly, but if the board knew that it wasn't being addressed properly, they should have brought it up with the management company. Since I'm not on the board, it's hard to say what actually happened with items like that. For example, did the board and Marriott elect to defer those items because of an under-funded maint. budget? We don't really know why it was done the way it was done.

All expenditures need to be approved by the BOD as far as I understand it.

-David


----------



## minoter (Jan 7, 2008)

The BeachPlace Board has always approved Marriott's recommended budget for maintenance and housekeeping. Marriott assures the Board that they are attempting to keep up with the maintenance issues. Once the money is approved, Marriott is responsible for the day to day housekeeping and maintenance. 

We are all frustrated with the appearance of several of the villas BPT. The Board believes the high occupancy rates and certain undesirable occupants presents a challenge to the housekeeping and maintenance staff. Marriott agrees. The Board does provide adequate funds and authorizes Marriott to do whatever is necessary to maintain the property. Unfortunately, those who post on this Board have not attended a BPT Board meeting to observe the process of give and take with Marriott.  

Marriott would love to solve the problem with a massive special assessment. Marriott would receive a 10% fee on that assessment. This Board does not believe throwing good money into a poor situation is wise. A review of the BPT audited financial statements would attest to the fact that BPTs is one of the best financially positioned MVCI properties. Marriott had Board controlling power for 6 of the 10 years of BPTs existence. What ever Board you appoint for BPT, that Board would have been faced with the catch-up finances and construction deficiencies of BPT. Marriott, not the Board installed the furniture and fixtures that are failing. The Board is attempting to bring BPT to a point that will makes us all proud owners. Except for the TV issue, the Board has approved Marriott's recommendations for the refurbishment. Also, this Board had to play catch-up with the Marriott underfunding the reserve account during the sellout period. 

The Board takes its fiduciary responsibility to owners seriously and agree that the Marriott brand is important for our owners. However, the Board does challenge Marriott. Attendance at a Board meeting would confirm that fact. I believe that Marriott and the Board can resolve the problems of BPT if we all work in the spirit of partnership. 

Eric Minotti


----------



## Icarus (Jan 7, 2008)

Eric,

Why isn't Marriott able to keep up with normal maint on the units? The specific example might be those pictures that Brian posted. When something like that is brought to the boards attention, are those things addressed with Marriott and are they fixed? Even if there's an overhaul of the units, how will Marriott be able to keep up with normal maint of the units in the future?

Marriott gets a 10% management fee at all of it's resorts, so there's nothing unusual about that. In a sense, Marriott doesn't have a real incentive for keeping expenses down at any of the properties it manages because the higher the fees, the higher it's management fee. On the other hand, they have a fiduciary responsibility as a manager to keep expenses down and not waste money. Do those two roles conflict? To a certain extent, they do. But this problem is the same with any management company. Perhaps the management fee structure needs to change across the industry so there are incentives for staying on budget and for performance? That's not going to be easy to change, especially with a name brand like Marriott. As you noted, they would simply walk away if the BoD doesn't acquiesce to their demands. 

-David


----------



## PerryM (Jan 7, 2008)

*Best of luck BPT owners...*



minoter said:


> The BeachPlace Board has always approved Marriott's recommended budget for maintenance and housekeeping. Marriott assures the Board that they are attempting to keep up with the maintenance issues. Once the money is approved, Marriott is responsible for the day to day housekeeping and maintenance.
> 
> We are all frustrated with the appearance of several of the villas BPT. The Board believes the high occupancy rates and certain undesirable occupants presents a challenge to the housekeeping and maintenance staff. Marriott agrees. The Board does provide adequate funds and authorizes Marriott to do whatever is necessary to maintain the property. Unfortunately, those who post on this Board have not attended a BPT Board meeting to observe the process of give and take with Marriott.
> 
> ...



I have no axe to grind in BPT, however when only 20% of the owners actually stay there this is a report card on how the HOA runs the place.

Without knowing a single thing about BPT but knowing that just 20% of the owners use it versus an industry average of about 50% has got to mean that the HOA is doing a "Less than perfect" job.  Who else would the owners there blame?

If Marriott recommends a special assessment and charges 10% to generate the report and monitor compliance I'd say that this is a reasonable amount.

Sounds like the HOA is too busy saving pennies, cooking up crazy income schemes (parking fees for fellow Marriott owners), and just seems to be out of touch with this resort that is next to the St. Regis for anything to get done.

I pity the owners at BPT, wish them well, and will probably be there this summer on a 59-day II exchange.


----------



## Icarus (Jan 7, 2008)

minoter said:


> We are all frustrated with the appearance of several of the villas BPT. The Board believes the high occupancy rates and certain undesirable occupants presents a challenge to the housekeeping and maintenance staff. Marriott agrees.



ok, so we know that the BoD took steps to reduce the occupancy limit to 3 adults in a studio and 8 (from 10) in the full 2BR villas. But Marriott wants BPT to be in compliance with all other Marriott's and make the efficiency/studio occupancy 4 adults, and it seems like some of the owners agree with that change. (Why did they ever allow 10 occupants in the 2BR villa when the legal limit was 6?)

But how will Marriott and the BoD get rid of undesirable occupants? I imagine that you must be talking about rowdy college students during spring break, since the resort is in Ft. Lauderdale. Is that accurate? I guess you could have a higher age limit for all non-MVCI owner occupants of the unit if that's legal? Other resorts in the area must be faced with the same problem, and I'd be interested in knowing what they do to discourage that type of occupant during spring break. What about larger damage deposits during those periods?

-David


----------



## minoter (Jan 7, 2008)

Perry,

I hesitated even addressing your ill-informed comments about the Board's ability; but I will for the benefit of the others that are participating in this discussion--talk about a demigod! 

We have been told by Marriott and Interval International that the low owner occupancy is a result of the high trading power of BPT. As a mature property, we are told that most BPT owners want to maximize their trading power-a fundamental objective of timesharing. This property is 95% occupied throughout the year. So there appears to be more satisfaction than dissatisfaction with occupants of BPT. Sure there is work to be done and compromise to get it done. The current Board wants to address the challenges at BPT and work with Marriott to resolve the issues. 

The dissatisfiers at BeachPlace (as per guest surveys) for which the HOA has no control is the honky tonk shopping area below and the parking garage configuration. The dissatisfiers that are controllable were displayed earlier in Brian's picture, and the HOA is just as disappointed as Brian in the condition of some of the units. The parking fee (another apparent dissatisfier) is intended to cover legitimate costs associated with the expenses of a 2 story parking facility and local taxes. (Owners, ask local management about the significant costs to be incurred in 2008 regarding the garage).

David,

Marriott allowed 10 in the room in order to sell rooms, even though the official condo documents (Drafted by Marriott) limited the occupancy to 6 in a villa. Not only is this property subjected to "Spring Breakers", it is also a low priced overnight hotel destination for cruise people who are looking for a 1 or 2 night stay in Ft Lauderdale before boarding their cruise ship. Marriott rents a 2 bedroom villa to 10 people for $300/night--$30/person, you get the point. None of the other high-end hotels would rent to that many people at that rate. This is why the Board took the action regarding occupancy. These type of guests were/are destroying the property and wasting housekeeping and maintenance staff time. Although for 2 years the Board has asked Marriott to require a security deposit on the rooms rented to these occupants, they have not and will not comply.

The Board cannot set Marriott's room rates. One might point out--if you had better rooms, Marriott could charge a higher rate. The Board's response is that the 10 occupancy, low cost room caused the deterioration of the room to the point where we are at now. It is a chicken or egg discussion. The point is, after renovation, the Board does want to raise the bar and attract the high end occupants that BPT and its owners deserve.


Eric Minotti


----------



## Kazakie (Jan 7, 2008)

minoter said:


> Although for 2 years the Board has asked Marriott to require a security deposit on the rooms rented to these occupants, they have not and will not comply.



Do they not supply a credit card at checkin?  Or does marriott (or the HOA) not bill for damages? (or is that a legal thing)


----------



## timeos2 (Jan 7, 2008)

minoter said:


> The BeachPlace Board has always approved Marriott's recommended budget for maintenance and housekeeping. Marriott assures the Board that they are attempting to keep up with the maintenance issues. Once the money is approved, Marriott is responsible for the day to day housekeeping and maintenance.
> 
> The Board takes its fiduciary responsibility to owners seriously and agree that the Marriott brand is important for our owners. However, the Board does challenge Marriott. Attendance at a Board meeting would confirm that fact. I believe that Marriott and the Board can resolve the problems of BPT if we all work in the spirit of partnership.
> 
> Eric Minotti



Eric - If I were an owner that is exactly what I would want to hear from the Board. Keep up the good work for the owners and that careful watch on the bottom line.  It should never be getting things done at any cost but getting the best for the money spent. Hold Marriott to that standard and everyone wins.


----------



## davemy (Jan 7, 2008)

As a owner, I am not in favor of a special assessement, what owner would be?  What is interesting to me is out of 100 plus replys very few beachplace owners are part of this thread. I wonder if Marriott ever reads this message board?  Thanks again to Eric being part of this thread, Its to bad we don't hear Marriott's side of the story. Even thou I think they will make lots of excuses for their bad Management at this resort.


----------



## Dean (Jan 7, 2008)

minoter said:


> Perry,
> 
> I hesitated even addressing your ill-informed comments about the Board's ability; but I will for the benefit of the others that are participating in this discussion--talk about a demigod!
> 
> ...


Eric, it's good to get a BOD view on these issue but I can't think of any other high end US timeshare that I am aware, including HI, that has owner occupancy that low.  I'm not saying I have the answer but that I don't believe that high trade power is the answer to that question.  There are other properties that have lower yearly fees and trade as well or better that have well over 85-90% owner usage during Gold and Platinum seasons.  I don't think BPT wants to be a place people own to trade.


----------



## mas (Jan 7, 2008)

Dean said:


> ... I don't think BPT wants to be a place people own to trade.



I've owned at BPT since '99.  I agree with Dean, and Eric.  As an owner I would like to see a marked improvement in the owner occupancy as I believe that would go a long way toward reducing the wear & tear problem.  I've only exchanged my week once in the 9 years that we have owned there.  

I was there last year--early Feb and saw first hand the deterioration of the rooms: pealing paint, thread bare carpets etc.  It was interesting to hear Eric's comments on how Marriott management was responsible for allowing 10 people/villa.  If true, and I have no reason to doubt this, that practice has to stop.


----------



## minoter (Jan 7, 2008)

The practice of allowing 10 occupants in a villa was discontinued in 2007 based on the Board action limiting 8 occupants to a full villa. Marriott assures the Board that 10 guests no longer occupy a full villa.

Eric Minotti


----------



## Dean (Jan 7, 2008)

minoter said:


> The practice of allowing 10 occupants in a villa was discontinued in 2007 based on the Board action limiting 8 occupants to a full villa. Marriott assures the Board that 10 guests no longer occupy a full villa.
> 
> Eric Minotti


I think all of my resorts legal paperwork says 6, 8 with the consent of the management, and trades for 6.


----------



## KenK (Jan 7, 2008)

Eric:

   What is the minimum age allowed to occupy a unit ?

   We have stayed there many times, and twice during different weeks, had to evacuate the building because teens thought it would be funny to watch all the 'old folks' have to hobble down the staircases, just by setting off an alarm.  They were on the street ( Cortez) when the folks came marching out.
Management seemed to know who did this the second time.

   As for peeling paint off the ceilings,  mold, and broken appliance parts, we were at Ocean Point last year and had it all.   

     We were at the Manor Club over Thanksgiving, and had an old unit that was excellent.  Nothing must beat that American of Martinsville Federal furniture-when Marriott paid for the good stuff upon development.......no matter how hard those exchangers try to distroy.  Didn't have a single appliance problem.  What appeared as large CRT Sonys TVs were very sharp in the definition. 

     Seaview was also excellent.....

    And we paid no parking fees...anywhere...period...and not because we were MVCI owners.

   I wonder if an owner can book the OWNERS LOUNGE at MBP?  We are thinking of having a TUG & Forums get together.  

   Of course, there's always the Hollywood Beach B'Walk......


----------



## m61376 (Jan 7, 2008)

When we went to Cancun and stayed at the Royal Sands they had a very interesting way of warning Spring-breakers, to prevent rowdy gathering. In the resort book there was a very clear message to all young adults as to what the house rules were and that no outside guests were allowed. They went on to say that any disturbances would be met with then getting thrown off the premises and they made it clear that parents (whoever was the owner/responsible party for the unit) would be notified and to trust them- they would be calling parents and describing any problematic activities. I thought it was interesting that they had a very strong "no nonsense" type policy in a huge Spring-break destination. Perhaps Marriott and/or the Board needs to develop a real deterrent here so that the resort isn't constantly trashed.


----------



## PerryM (Jan 7, 2008)

*80% of all the folks in BPT are non-owners - this is good?*



minoter said:


> Perry,
> 
> I hesitated even addressing your ill-informed comments about the Board's ability; but I will for the benefit of the others that are participating in this discussion--talk about a demigod!
> 
> ...



I’ll be the first to admit that I know nothing about the internal struggle between the HOA and Marriott.  I can only look at stats and make inferences.  I have no stake in BPT except that it’s extremely easy to exchange into with WM credits both beyond 59 days and within 59 days it costs me but $200.

ARDA stats indicate that 47% of timeshare owners exchange their usage with 36% of the owners using the timeshare.

*To me, the 20% occupancy rate versus the 36% rate indicate that owners just don’t want to visit BPT and with the $1,000 MF that’s a really expensive destination to bypass.*

50% of BPT folks exchange and 30% turn in their usage for MRPs or *80% of the BPT owners just don’t want to visit their own resort*.  Seems exceedingly high to me compared to just 47% of normal owners avoiding their resort.

I’d put a grain of salt in the pronouncement from the Marriott salesreps and II’s reps believe that all this is the result of “High Trading Power (TP)”.  Me, I’d believe my gut feeling that something is horribly wrong with BPT and that TP has nothing to do with this.

I must pass on the comments from my 21 year old son and his 7 frat brothers that love to exchange into BPT – Party’s on!  I can see that many exchangers would get BPT hopping during spring break and summer vacation.

The parking fee is a matter that is more of an insult to fellow Marriott owners – our resorts don’t make extra money off the backs of fellow Marriott owners visiting our resorts.  We include parking garage maintenance in normal MFs.  BPT has chosen another path and is just another piece of the puzzle that suggests the HOA is the biggest problem for BPT and not Marriott.

Throw in a simmering war with Marriott and my conclusion is that the HOA is grinding this resort into dust.  But this is just a WAG on my part.

BPT can't have it both ways - 80% of the folks in the building at any minute are not owners and don't treat the place as anything but a rental and high TP to visit other resorts.  Those 80% renters/exchangers are killing the resort.

Take it for what it’s worth.  My son and his frat brothers will be back this summer – party’s on!!!


----------



## pwrshift (Jan 8, 2008)

minoter said:


> ...These type of guests were/are destroying the property and wasting housekeeping and maintenance staff time. Although for 2 years the Board has asked Marriott to require a security deposit on the rooms rented to these occupants, they have not and will not comply.
> Eric Minotti


 
I don't understand why Marriott thinks it's a big deal to take a security deposit as they already do it the moment they swipe your card at check in.

I had a timeshare in Fort Laud from late 80's to until BeachPlace opened that simply charged owners and exchangers/renters a $100 security deposit against your card, and presented you with a list of inventory items in each suite that you had to check, sign and return within 2 days - counting all the knives, cups, etc.  A 10 minute task but it didn't bother me as I could see the wisdom of protecting our MF.  At check out time, someone went to your room and did a quick check - maybe 5 minutes - while you settled everything.  I don't know how common that is with non-Marriotts but that old place still has the lowest MF in Ft. Laud, so it worked.

By today's standard, a $300-$500 would be an appropriate (and thought provoking) security deposit for owners as well as exchangers and renters ... and I'll bet the destruction problem would come to a quick end faster and more effectively than the dumb move of reducing the studio occupancy to 3 people over the age of 6.  Why Marriott would *refuse* to do this is of great concern when it's obvious there is a problem.

On the point of room inventory ... for my annual 2007 visit to BPT there were several dinner plates missing and a few other items (normally servings of 8).  When I asked housekeeping to replace them, they told me they couldn't as they didn't have any extras because the HOA was not buying any more until the new decor was done in 2008.  I guess they'll only have paper plates by now!  

Brian


----------



## minoter (Jan 8, 2008)

Brian,

Marriott indicated to the Board that a security deposit policy is not a Marriott standard, and therefore declined our request to implement a security deposit and checkout inventory policy.  

Over twelve months ago the Board drafted a new check-in document outlining the rules of the resort which was designed to address the fraternity parties and bon voyage parties at BeachPlace. The Board asked Marriott to include the document in the check-in welcome package and the in-room resort guide. Marriott declined to include that document (which was approved by their legal staff) year round with the welcome package and in the room, and opted to use it only for the 5 weeks of Spring Break. The Board was told that the tone of a "rules of the resort" document and the security deposit policy contradicts Marriott's standard of "an awesome vacation experience". 

I asked local management about your (and other's) request for missing kitchen items. Management emphatically disagreed (and was disappointed in your suggestion) that those requests were not addressed and indicated to me that any missing items were brought to the room from the stock room. I have personally seen the stock of kitchen items at BeachPlace, so there is no reason a villa should not be stocked properly. What is true is that the Board does not want to purchase and stock the villas with all new kitchen plates and glasses, etc before the renovation project. Your are welcome to disagree with that decision. But management assures me that every villa will have the required inventory at check-in, or upon request if missing.

The positive news is that the Board and Marriott are attempting to (and want to) workout and compromise the issues at BeachPlace. 

Eric Minotti


----------



## vacationmama (Jan 8, 2008)

Eric, as an owner, I wonder why Marriott would not want to preserve Beachplace as a showplace. If spring breakers don't go to OP or other resorts, fine. But if our resort appeals to them, then there should be strict rules enforced to make sure they behave or pay the consequences of their behavior... or their parents do. 

I visited Monarch and the table in the bedroom had been stained badly by the previous tenant who had spilled nail polish on it. The people were sent a bill for the restoration of the piece. Can we not do the same with Marriott's blessing. Why do they feel this would wreck someones vacation "fun" more than the next person coming to view their pillage?

Will eight people be allowed into the two bedroom unit? Seven is such a strange situation for a family. 

I appreciate your efforts to keep us informed on the HOA thinking and Marriott responses. I love having a Marriott resort but do believe that they can be heavy handed and do not oversee refurbishments with the same care they would their own home. Their major concern is granite countertops and Sony tvs but not that the wallpaer in the bathrooms is done behind the sinks or that the wallpaper paste is washed off the woodwork before it is dried for life. Just some observations from other unit refurbs. Some would say that is nitpicking, I say for the huge amount they recieve to oversee the projects, I would say valid.


----------



## pwrshift (Jan 8, 2008)

vacationmama said:


> ...Will eight people be allowed into the two bedroom unit? Seven is such a strange situation for a family.
> 
> .


 
I believe Eric will tell you the HOA has decided that the 2 bdrm suite can have 8 adults in it. But, after the reno in May 2008, the studio by itself can only have 3 adults and the 1 bdrm by itself can only have 4 ... but the 2 bdrm suite can still have 8 adults! Huh? *3+4=8?* That's the kind of math the HOA used to get BPT in such terrible condition to start with. Marriott is contesting this decision.

If it goes through, the HOA ruins the purpose of the lockoff concept for families (and owners). While parents and 2 teens stay in the 1 bdrm portion for week one, they will have to send one of the teens home for week two in the studio ... even though there is the same bedding in both parts (a king bed AND a double sofa-bed). What kind of wisdom is that?

But *3+4=8* so the HOA says.  BPT will be the only Marriott TS studios with a 3 adult occupancy if Marriott weakens on this. Someone I spoke with today at Marriott's head office said it won't happen ... we'll see.

Rather than playing games with studio occupancy they should attend to proper maintenance for the fees they charge. My suite in 2007 had a broken fridge and garbage disposal, leaky dishwasher, 2 elements out on the stove and a TV so old you couldn't plug your camcorder into it ... and not one of the shower heads would stop dripping even though they replaced one (with a reconditioned one). *If the HOA president stays in BPT for 10 weeks a year he obviously gets a better room than I do, or he would have done something before now!*

Brian


----------



## thinze3 (Jan 9, 2008)

pwrshift said:


> ...BPT will be the only Marriott TS studios with a 3 adult occupancy if Marriott weakens on this. Someone I spoke with today at Marriott's head office said it won't happen ... we'll see....[/B]
> 
> Brian



Brian,
When I checked marriott.com for next fall at MBP, it already states that the maximum occupancy is 3 for a studio/hotel room.


----------



## PerryM (Jan 9, 2008)

*The BPT timeshare model - something to avoid?*

BPT is going to be a laboratory that I’m keeping an eye on – *what happens when a timeshare becomes a motel*!  It don't look good.

When 80% of the owners don’t use the place those 80% are replaced with renters and exchangers.

This has 2 catastrophic effects on the resort:

1)	Renters/exchangers trash the place

2)	Owners don’t want to spend money on the place

*Renters/exchangers trash the place*

I can only imagine the BPT condo after my son and 7 frat brothers leave – he exchanged in.  Renters are the same.  While there, these 8 guys make quite an impression – the Pike shirts, caps and other stuff immediately signifies a fraternity and these guys are huge – they all work out every day and are not bashful kind of guys.  I did tell my son that any damage to the room would be repaid by the guys.  They did not get kicked out and I was happy about that.


*Owners don’t want to spend money on the place*

If I were an owner at BPT I too would want the renters and exchangers to pay for a lot of stuff.  The parking garage is one target and I’d imagine that the HOA can cook up other fees to charge non-owners too.  How long before a sort of tax is charged, per night, to renters/exchangers (beyond taxes for renters)?

This, to me, seems to be a situation that has already started to spiral out of control.    The owners there have let this snow ball get out of control and is just going to gather speed as owners refuse to pay for all the wear and tear that non-owners inflict on the place.

Sadly the only solutions that pop to mind are punishments and no rewards.  I guess the HOA could offer rewards for owners to use their own resort – free tickets to some restaurants, and other incentives.  This is hard to come up with.

Oh well, I don’t think this will ever happen to Summit Watch, but other Marriotts might start to think of BPT as the salesreps and II talk about “Unbelievable Trading Power” and encouraging owners to abandon their Marriott and go elsewhere.

Sounds like Marriott and II did too good of a job.

P.S.
Punishments are easy to come up with:

1) The parking fees - the HOA has already done this
2) Limit as to how many II exchanges allowed per year
3) Limit the number of owners turning in their unit for Marriott Reward Points
4) Limiting occupancy - the HOA seems to be headed down this path (max of one body per bed?)
5) Close the pool
6) Remove the A/C

I don't see #2 and #3 ever happening but they are the culprits in this morphing of a timeshare into a motel.

P.P.S.
Don't expect any sympathy from Marriott - they are in the hotel/motel business and do very well.  I doubt that they could care less except to enforce standards among all MVCI units.


----------



## pwrshift (Jan 9, 2008)

*What percent of owners use their Marriott TS?*

Perry, while I find it surprising that more BPT owners (30%) turn in their weeks for Marriott Reward points (they can do it EY) than owners who use their weeks there (20%), I'm not so sure that is much different from other Marriotts, with some exceptions like Grand Ocean in platinum season.   For me, 75 degree weather in Feb-Mar is like heaven compared to snow-bound Toronto and I can't think of a better domestic location for that, other than OP, and the transient use bears that out.  

I just want to be proud of what I own and use ... and have that with ownership at Manor Club and Canyon Villas.

The parking fee doesn't bother me too much as you kind of expect that in a big city urban beachfront location.  Even $17 a day is half what is charged in Boston Wharf at Custom House.   Parking downtown Toronto is higher than that...wonder what NYC is. 

The studio occupancy thing is a really bad HOA decision when an owner family of 4 can't use it as before ... and because so much else has been left undone for so long. 

Besides, your son and his 7 frat guys will just sneak the other 5 extra into the studio anyways ... because Marriott won't check ... or get $500 from them on check in.  Mandatory Daily maid service might also be an answer for 8 guys in a studio.  

*It would be interesting to hear from other Marriott TS as to what percent of 'owner use' they have.*

Brian


----------



## saturn28 (Jan 9, 2008)

pwrshift said:


> Perry, while I find it surprising that more BPT owners (30%) turn in their weeks for Marriott Reward points (they can do it EY) than owners who use their weeks there (20%), I'm not so sure that is much different from other Marriotts, with some exceptions like Grand Ocean in platinum season.   For me, 75 degree weather in Feb-Mar is like heaven compared to snow-bound Toronto and I can't think of a better domestic location for that, other than OP, and the transient use bears that out.
> 
> I just want to be proud of what I own and use ... and have that with ownership at Manor Club and Canyon Villas.
> 
> ...



I see you own at Canyon Villas. I did a trade into there a couple of summers ago. I really enjoyed the property and the Marriott Hotel across the street. It seems to be one of the more difficult trades to get during the winter months. How have you found it being an owner there. Do you know what the trading power is like for a gold week at the resort.

Thanks


----------



## pwrshift (Jan 9, 2008)

Saturn - I bought CV for the points plan - and trade EOY for points to replace points that I use, and use CV in the between years. This is my 'use' year for the first two weeks of April ... I split the suite into two parts for $75 and get two weeks holidays ... and they allow 4 adults in the lockoff (if I wanted). In addition, the place is spotless and always feels 'new' -- and even though it's a brand new resort they've already replaced all the bedding with the fancy Revive Marriott stuff, unlike BPT's worn out soft goods. 

I've never traded CV with II as my plan was always 'use' and/or 'points' as IMO the MF makes that a good deal still, and better than BPT's higher MF for the same number of points.

Brian

PS ... I assume it was just part of a 'mass owner' email today but I got an invite from the GM at BPT to apply to run for election for the two openings on the Board this Spring. Quite ironic. I'll have to ask Nick if he reads TUG?


----------



## thinze3 (Jan 9, 2008)

pwrshift said:


> Perry, while I find it surprising that more BPT owners (30%) turn in their weeks for Marriott Reward points (they can do it EY) than owners who use their weeks there (20%), I'm not so sure that is much different from other Marriotts, with some exceptions like Grand Ocean in platinum season.....
> *It would be interesting to hear from other Marriott TS as to what percent of 'owner use' they have.*
> 
> Brian




From Waiohai GM.
"In response to your question, our *owner occupancy rate for 2008 will be very close to 70%*.
This is one of the highest in all the MVCI resorts, over double the average."

Total occupancy is 98%.


----------



## LLW (Jan 15, 2008)

thinze3 said:


> Brian,
> When I checked marriott.com for next fall at MBP, it already states that the maximum occupancy is 3 for a studio/hotel room.



It also shows 3 on II for as early as April 2008. And 6/8 for 2BRs.


----------



## minoter (Jan 16, 2008)

*BeachPlace Update*

The Board and Marriott met to resolve the following matters relating to BeachPlace;

Occupancy--The Board agreed to rescind the lock-off/studio 3 occupancy rule and voted to allow 4 adults in the lock-off. 
Marriott agreed to reinforce the policies that monitor the number of occupants in the room by asking at check-in the financially responsible occupant for the number of occupants in the room. During the 5 or 6 weeks of spring break, the names of all occupants will be listed on a form at check-in. Marriott also agreed to publish and distribute to guests and owners at check-in a "rules of the resort" document. This document will outline the behavior that will not be tolerated at the property and the resulting consequences of disruptive or destructive behavior. This document will also be laminated and placed in the "Vacation Experience Guide" located in each room. Most important is that these rules will be enforced by local management. The rules are intended to provide a positive vacation experience for owners and guests while protecting the assets of the owners of BeachPlace.

TVs replaced during refurbishment--The Board and Marriott agreed to purchase and install 3 LG brand flat panel HDTVs in each villa. This was a compromise TV that all agreed would provide good value (compared to Olevia) at a high quality rating for operation at a reasonable cost (compared to Sony). Marriott indicated that this upgrade TV would not effect the $8 million refurbishment budget.

Eric Minotti


----------



## timeos2 (Jan 16, 2008)

minoter said:


> The Board and Marriott met to resolve the following matters relating to BeachPlace;
> 
> Occupancy--The Board agreed to rescind the lock-off/studio 3 occupancy rule and voted to allow 4 adults in the lock-off.
> Marriott agreed to reinforce the policies that monitor the number of occupants in the room by asking at check-in the financially responsible occupant for the number of occupants in the room. During the 5 or 6 weeks of spring break, the names of all occupants will be listed on a form at check-in. Marriott also agreed to publish and distribute to guests and owners at check-in a "rules of the resort" document. This document will outline the behavior that will not be tolerated at the property and the resulting consequences of disruptive or destructive behavior. This document will also be laminated and placed in the "Vacation Experience Guide" located in each room. Most important is that these rules will be enforced by local management. The rules are intended to provide a positive vacation experience for owners and guests while protecting the assets of the owners of BeachPlace.
> ...



Eric - Thanks for a very positive update!  Sounds like cooler heads prevailed and both sides met in the middle for the good of the owners and guests.  Thats as good as anyone can hope for. Lets hope the pattern holds going forward.


----------



## dlpearson (Jan 16, 2008)

*Great news!*



minoter said:


> The Board and Marriott met to resolve the following matters relating to BeachPlace;
> 
> Occupancy--The Board agreed to rescind the lock-off/studio 3 occupancy rule and voted to allow 4 adults in the lock-off.
> Marriott agreed to reinforce the policies that monitor the number of occupants in the room by asking at check-in the financially responsible occupant for the number of occupants in the room. During the 5 or 6 weeks of spring break, the names of all occupants will be listed on a form at check-in. Marriott also agreed to publish and distribute to guests and owners at check-in a "rules of the resort" document. This document will outline the behavior that will not be tolerated at the property and the resulting consequences of disruptive or destructive behavior. This document will also be laminated and placed in the "Vacation Experience Guide" located in each room. Most important is that these rules will be enforced by local management. The rules are intended to provide a positive vacation experience for owners and guests while protecting the assets of the owners of BeachPlace.
> ...



Eric, thanks for the update.  Sounds very positive--good resolution on the studio occupancy issue, reinforced management attention to monitor infractions, and TV situation from this owner's point of view! 

-David


----------



## Kazakie (Jan 16, 2008)

minoter said:


> Occupancy--The Board agreed to rescind the lock-off/studio 3 occupancy rule and voted to allow 4 adults in the lock-off.
> Marriott agreed to reinforce the policies that monitor the number of occupants in the room by asking at check-in the financially responsible occupant for the number of occupants in the room. During the 5 or 6 weeks of spring break, the names of all occupants will be listed on a form at check-in. Marriott also agreed to publish and distribute to guests and owners at check-in a "rules of the resort" document. This document will outline the behavior that will not be tolerated at the property and the resulting consequences of disruptive or destructive behavior. This document will also be laminated and placed in the "Vacation Experience Guide" located in each room. Most important is that these rules will be enforced by local management. The rules are intended to provide a positive vacation experience for owners and guests while protecting the assets of the owners of BeachPlace.



It'll be interesting to see how maintenance and maintenance fees progress over the next 5 years if spring-breakers were the main culprits (and taxes on the fees side - but can't do too much about that)


----------



## pwrshift (Jan 16, 2008)

Eric ... thanks for the update.  I'm very pleased about the studio situation.  Could you elaborate on the 'compromise' TV's ... in my town a 43" LG and Sony are not much different in price...was the compromize in size?   Was parking discussed and revised ... or staying at $17 a night?

Brian


----------



## Icarus (Jan 17, 2008)

That's great news, Eric. Congratulations.

-David


----------



## minoter (Jan 17, 2008)

According to the LG web site, the company does not make a 43 inch TV, so a valid comparison based on the question asked cannot be made. Marriott has indicated that their purchasing power for HDTVs that will comply with the new digital TV standards in 2009 for the 37 inch LG (living room) and 32 inch LG (bedroom) compared to Sony will result in a savings. The Board has not agreed to increase the approved refurbishment budget. 

The Board agreed to review the parking charge at BeachPlace. Marriott has no issue with a BeachPlace parking charge for renters (hotel type guests) and non-MVCI exchangers. A charge for parking at BeachPlace for that group of occupants will not change. The Board has agreed to consider a change in the parking charge for 2008 and forward for all MVCI exchangers if Marriott can develop a budget neutral solution. Marriott has agreed to present their attempt at a solution no later than the May, 2008 Board meeting. Until then, I will make no more comments on this matter. 

Eric Minotti


----------



## pwrshift (Jan 17, 2008)

Thanks Eric.  I assume you're on your annual Florida vacation time and hope you enjoy it.  

BPT owners here appreciate your communications with us more than you perhaps realize.  Without this contact, owners feel are on the outside looking in and feel they have to count on Marriott to defend our ideals of ownership instead of the HOA.  That isn't the way it should be.  Any TUG thread of more than 3600 views indicates an impressive showing of great concern of all Marriott owners, not just owners of BPT.

You have served us well, and I hope you continue on the Board.

Brian


----------



## buzzy (Jan 17, 2008)

Eric,

I want to thank you too, as it makes my ownership of BPT more valuable instead of "why did I buy this"?  I appreciate your updates as well.

Do you know when II will change it's studio occupancy to read 4 instead of 3?  

Thanks again Eric!


----------



## minoter (Jan 17, 2008)

Buzzy,

The II website should be changed by mid-February. However, we were told that the II phone associates will be informed of the change within a week. 

I am sure Marriott will change their Marriott websites as soon as possible.

Eric


----------



## thinze3 (Jan 17, 2008)

*Brian,
Is it time for me to buy MBP yet??*


----------



## Michigan Czar (Jan 17, 2008)

Eric,

I appreciate the updates and I am glad to hear a compromise was completed.

Jim


----------



## thinze3 (Jan 21, 2008)

I spoke to a Marriott sales person this weekend about MBP. The platinum units are now $29,900 and offer 110,000 MR points every year. Wow, I didn't realize that they were that high now! Gold units are $19,900.

Anyhow, she stated that the renovations at MBP would include upgrading the appliances to the new stainless steel, like Marco Island and Oceana Palms. She also said that the renovations would include crown molding and flat screen televisions.

I had not heard about the crown molding and stainless appliances. Have any of you?


----------



## jerseyfinn (Jan 21, 2008)

A very interesting thread. 

Although I'm not a BPT owner, I think that any of us who own MVC can learn something here about the relationship between Marriott and the various resorts and the complexeties of creating both a stable relationship with Marriott while melding resorts into a relatively uniform MVC product which serves owner interests.

I'm appreciative that Eric steps forward to inform and educate. If there's one thing which really annoys me at present with Marriott's management policy, it's the invisibility of our HOA members.  I think it's time for every owner to have direct contact information to our board members rather than this foolish system which requires us to contact our resort first which in turn is suppossed to forward our querey/comments to the board member ( a Marriott.com address would work just fine for me). 

Our relationship with Marriott should be mutual and synergistic, but Marriott should always remember that it is we owners who plunked down big bucks to purchase weeks, and we owners who pay the MFs which fund their profitable  management contracts. It's their brand and they do indeed get to call most of the big shots ( which is a necessary consequence of this sort of relationship), but Marriott rules with our consent.

What I'm pulling out of this thread is that although Marriott goes to great lengths to try to create a uniform TS product, there are factors beyond the control of both Marriott and owners which prevent fully transparent uniformity.  

In the case of BPT, it's interesting to learn that only 20% of owners actually occupy their weeks.  This has to have an influence upon the character and function of the resort. The 30% taking points are a measure of how Marriott has been marketing these weeks as an alternative MRP ATM machine -- and this is not necessarily a bad thing. I would be curious if Eric knows what the annual occupancy rate at BPT is. Likewise, I'm curious if the BPT Platinum season has more than 20% owner occupancy. 

To illustrate resort differences: Ocean Pointe some 40 miles north has a year round occupancy rate exceeding 90%. In platinum season, owners represent 90% of occupants ( my figures come from remarks by the OP GM in August 2007 ). I don't know our aggregate annual % of owner occupancy or % taking points versus trading etc. (perhaps an OP board member reading this might choose to comment).

In any case, best wished to BPT owners and their board as they try to move forward and hash things out with Marriott. It's an unenviable task, but very necessary.  With the looming changes as Marriott subsumes II's exchange role for Marriott owners, I think it's very important that our boards at all of the MVC properties are fully plugged into these issues and that we owners have direct and fluid contact with our board members. Owner feedback and board participation is very important to the future for the investment that each of us have made in Marriott TS.

Barry


----------



## pwrshift (Jan 21, 2008)

jerseyfinn said:


> ...If there's one thing which really annoys me at present with Marriott's management policy, it's the invisibility of our HOA members. I think it's time for every owner to have direct contact information to our board members rather than this foolish system which requires us to contact our resort first which in turn is suppossed to forward our querey/comments to the board member ( a Marriott.com address would work just fine for me).
> 
> ...To illustrate resort differences: Ocean Pointe some 40 miles north has a year round occupancy rate exceeding 90%. In platinum season, owners represent 90% of occupants ( my figures come from remarks by the OP GM in August 2007 ). I don't know our aggregate annual % of owner occupancy or % taking points versus trading etc. (perhaps an OP board member reading this might choose to comment).
> 
> Barry


 
Barry, you're right on the money here ... IMO the HOA at BPT (and probably other Marriott TS boards) is making decisions for owners in isolation, without the benefit of owner surveys and direct owner feedback.  In addition, there is very little contact to these owners who would find, as I did, that the HOA knows only 20% of owners use the resort, 30% trade for points, and 50% exchange.  Not only is the HOA unavailable to owners directly, they are not communicating resort info to the owners they serve other than to rant that Marriott didn't like the changes they proposed, such as changing occupancy in studios to only 3 adults.  Marriott, in fact, has more contact with the BPT owners than the HOA!  Sad.  

In post 100 in this thread, Eric says BPT has a 95% occupancy rate, I believe one of the highest in the Marriott system.  The power of the location ... not the quality of the resort.

Brian


----------



## thinze3 (Jan 21, 2008)

pwrshift said:


> ... IMO the HOA at BPT (and probably other Marriott TS boards) is making decisions for owners in isolation, without the benefit of owner surveys and direct owner feedback...
> Brian




I sent an email today to the General Manager at Waiohai asking for some members of the HOA to contact me.

I wrote that I wanted to discuss the possibility of a Waiohai owner's website (similar to Aruba's). I also stated that I would like to see members of the HOA join discussion boards like Tug in order to get input from actual owners.

This is all in hopes of preventing the next MBP debacle. We shall see.


----------



## jerseyfinn (Jan 23, 2008)

> In post 100 in this thread, Eric says BPT has a 95% occupancy rate



Brian,

Thanks for the info . . . I must have skipped over it. 

BPT overall occupancy pretty much mirrors Ocean Pointe's. No surprise there as it is indeed about location. Still the opposite owner occupancy figures at the two resorts also speak volumes. OTOH, it indicates that there is no one way for a resort to function. IOW, there's all sorts of ways to market a specific TS resort.  

However, it does seem that the "disconnect" between owners and their resort and HOA is greater when less owners actually occupy at their resort.  It's not due to negligence or disinterest, but if you're not occupying your home resort with some modicum of regularlity, you're simply not seeing/experiencing the nuances of the resort, and feedback will not be as strong and it will take longer to bring things to the attention of the HOA. Indeed, Marriott attempts to obtain feedback from all guests, but I firmly believe that owners are the ultimate caretakers of their resorts.

Judging by the interest in Brian's thread, it appears that owners are becoming more engaged. Likewise it's very helpful that you at least have one board member speaking openly to their owners here on TUG. And communication is what it's all about.

The moral of this story remains the same to me. It's time for Marriott to take heed that the owners are an essential part of the partnership equation in this MVC relationship. Owners can cede a great deal of ( necessary ) authority to Marriott so that they can run it in the best interest of all parties. But Marriott should not step over us.  It is essential that board members at all resorts come out of the holes in which they've been hiding/lurking.  Mind you, I'm not accusing our HOAs of shirking responsibility/duty. But many boards and Marriott have gotten too cozy with the present arrangement. It's time to end the transparancy and make access to our board members more fluid and open.

One approach is for board members who "lurk" here on TUG to become more active and informative in threads on this board ( you can indeed speak freely while allowing Marriott the drivers seat it so desires ). Likewise, when a board memeber is on property at their resort, put up a sign that says you're there so we owners might seek you out for a friendly chat. Finally, we owners must become vocal advocates of change by contacting our HOA, seeking out board members while staying at our home resorts, and letting the resort GMs know that things need changing in the Marriott universe.

I'm not advocating a Boston Tea Party here. I remain generally satisfied with the MVC product and the destination travel that we enjoy. I simply want fluid access to my HOA and the ability to speak my mind since I've put up the big bucks to own and I pay the annual MFs which feed Marriott. Hopefully, others feel the same

Barry


----------



## PerryM (Jan 23, 2008)

*Whac-A-Timeshare game?*

BPT is an example of what the timeshare market seems to dream about – own where you want to vacation and then never go there and convert usage into exchanges, rent, or Marriott Reward Points which eventually get rented to the public.

As this happens, fewer and fewer owners stay there and more and more non-owners invade and trash the place.  Maybe trash is a harsh word but when I rent something I always have the mental attitude of “Hey, it’s just a rental”.  The owners don't want to keep the place up for a bunch of renters/exchangers so dump fees on them.

Marriott could care less – they made their money selling the units, make their money managing the place, and make some bucks doing sales.  They convert their MRPs to cash with rentals to the public and since there are a ton of exchanges they make more money charging more cleaning fees.

It’s the owners who are caught in exactly what everyone seems to want in a timeshare and they don’t seem that happy.

Oh well, this is going to be fun to watch over the years.

I don’t think the problems will go away but change form and reappear as something else to solve.  Kind of like a timeshare Whac-A-Mole.


----------



## TheTimeTraveler (Jan 24, 2008)

*Marriott Beach Place Tower Experience*

I revisited Marriott's Beach Place Tower last year, and after negotiating many stories up a poorly designed expensive parking garage, and waiting 10 minutes for elevator service (and crowded at that) I decided this wasn't the place for me ever again.   Additionally, some of the common area carpeting appeared to be dirty and the outdoor pool didn't receive any sun after 1:00 pm due to its location on the sixth floor.

I originally visited this property about six years ago, and at that time Marriott owned the lot next door and was planning another building.   But, I see now that they sold this land and another developer built condos there instead of more TS.

I'll take Ocean Pointe over Beach Place any day!


----------

