# [2009] Hyatt Highlands Inn Point Allocation Change! Increase for All Units



## jkc22

Well, I got a mail in the letter about Highlands Inn points allocation change. It's generally good for owners, but bad news for others trying to get in.



> A Special Announcement for Highlands Inn Members
> 
> I know you appreciate the value of Highlands Inn, a Hyatt Vacation Club from the interiors, to the impeccable service and spectacular views. As time passes, the demand versus the supply for this prestigious property continues to increase.
> 
> The Hyatt Vacation Club Rules and Regulations provide for periodic demand analysis of all destinations. After careful consideration, the determination was made to modify the point values of one and two bedroom units according to the high demand for the property. Two new unit type designations have been established. One-bedroom units will now be categorized, as One Bedroom Premiere and Two Bedroom units will now be referred to as Two Bedroom Deluxe. This creates more travel options for you at no additional cost.
> 
> 
> 2009 Point Value
> 1 Bedroom - Gold 1,240; Platinum 1,320; Diamond 1,450
> 2 Bedroom - Gold 1,880; Platinum 2,000; Diamond 2,200
> 
> 2010 Point Value
> 1 Bedroom Premiere - Gold 1,880; Platinum 2,000; Diamond 2,200
> 2 Bedroom Deluxe - Gold 2,520; Platinum 2,680; Diamond 2,950
> 
> The new point values are exclusive to the Highlands Inn, a Hyatt Vacation Club and will take effect week 1 of 2010 (January 2, 2010).



As far as I can understand, basically the points allocation/requirement for the Highlands Inn units increased - one bedroom to the equivalent of regular two bedroom point requirement; two bedroom to the equivalent of regular three bedroom point requirements........

Owners get the equivalent of a free week of studio points per year!

Seems like Hyatt really wants to keep this property difficult for others to get in - maybe because of the abundance of float points that it sells as part of the Residence Club?? 

Another note - I was given AMAZING offers while at Breck last week, almost tempted to buy a Platinum 3-Bedroom week from the developer!! With this change, it seems very unlikely that I will be buying.....


----------



## Carmel85

jkc22 said:


> Well, I got a mail in the letter about Highlands Inn points allocation change. It's generally good for owners, but bad news for others trying to get in.
> 
> 
> 
> As far as I can understand, basically the points allocation/requirement for the Highlands Inn units increased - one bedroom to the equivalent of regular two bedroom point requirement; two bedroom to the equivalent of regular three bedroom point requirements........
> 
> Owners get the equivalent of a free week of studio points per year!
> 
> Seems like Hyatt really wants to keep this property difficult for others to get in - maybe because of the abundance of float points that it sells as part of the Residence Club??
> 
> Another note - I was given AMAZING offers while at Breck last week, almost tempted to buy a Platinum 3-Bedroom week from the developer!! With this change, it seems very unlikely that I will be buying.....




THANK YOU for the information.. 

I have passes you post on to one of the members of the Hyatt Lake Tahoe Board members.

This is HUGE news something Hyatt,Marriott and other timeshare owners should see how a company like Hyatt can do what they want to do whenever they wish for the good or the bad but always for management Hyatt,Marriott or II etc and not really the owners.

51% increase in points due to HIGH DEMAND!!!!   I know Lake Tahoe sometimes of the year are in HIGH DEMAND also so why shouldnt those owners get it also?

HIGH DEMAND what a lame excuse by HYATT.

I think Hyatt is going to shoot themselves in the foot for this one.
Thank you 
C85


----------



## tahoeJoe

*Class Action Suit?*

This is wrong, illegal, and all Hyatt owners need to fight this. 

- TJ


----------



## Ken555

So... seems this resort just got more valuable on the resale market. I suppose this should be the one to buy now, esp if interested in trading within Hyatt.


----------



## Divot

*So Much for "Points are Points"*

Good for Hyatt and the buyers that purchased in Carmel. 

For the Sedona or San Antonio points buyers, it looks like you really should own where you want to vacation. Don't forget about the new mid-week & weekend point charts, or the new II exchange requirements or, the folks who bought the EOY's in Carmel. How about getting in on an II exchange - I don't think it will happen... I for one, look forward to see how this affects future HI purchases. Remember, its all about boutique locations and the brand. Carmel has both.  I guess (according to Hyatt) the high HI maintenance fees can now be justified with this announcement. This strategy came right out of the Cornell School of Hospitality Management playbook. At least Hyatt's not giving up. Lets see what this does to Hyatt's stock price


----------



## heathpack

Divot said:


> Don't forget about the new mid-week & weekend point charts, or the new II exchange requirements or, the folks who bought the EOY's in Carmel.



What new mid-week & weekend points charts?

What new II exchange requirements?

I totally agree with the sentiment in TahoeJoe's post, but does anyone know if this move actually IS illegal?  It never occured to me that it would be possible for Hyatt to create more points out of thin air.  By building new properties, yes-- but just deciding- poof, owners at property A are assigned more points?  Pretty outrageous.

H


----------



## Carmel85

Again I ask are there any great lawyers out here on TUG or and TUG members that know a great lawyer that wants to take on Hyatt and thier new president Ed Crovo?

I agree this is a outrage but we all can talk, we need a great lawyer that can get in court and fight.

I know the board up at the Hyatt Tahoe have been informed by all of us on TUG but what about the other Hyatt resorts that Hyatt does not control thier board like Sunset Harbor?

What Hyatt timeshares have owner boards besides the super strong Hyatt Tahoe Board?

I eve heard at the last annual meeting in Tahoe Mr. Crovo (Hyatt timeshares new President) was there and so was a full on court reported taking down everything.

At least the Hyatt Tahoe board fights back but we need all owners not to just write on TUG but write can call Hyatt 1-800-340-9997 as for Ed Crovo tell him what is wrong and contact your  Hyatt Boards.

What Hyatt did here in Carmel is just the first of many steps what Hyatt can and will do to all of us if they can get away with it.

 We need to stand up and call. I would even encourage all Marriott,Hilton,Starwood, etc. to call the Hyatt and complain 1 phone call times all of us here on TUG can and will make a difference  1-800-340-9997 Ed Crovo.


----------



## ScoopKona

I certainly wish luck to anyone who cares to hire counsel and fight this.

I also think doing so will be a waste of money. Hyatt is nothing if not conservative -- this change has been studied to death, run through a battery of in-house attorneys, restudied, and studied some more. 

The only advantage I can see is that a lawsuit could be heard in California. Owners would have a fighting chance there. If the suit is forced to be heard in St. Petersburg, I would give up. Florida _loves_ their corporations.

This is hardly the first time. Hyatt has conjured Diamond Season out of thin air, bumped Copper owners to Bronze in Key West, and has generally monkeyed with the points as they see fit.

This is the reason I have ALWAYS suggested that people buy something at a resort they wouldn't mind using, at a time of year they wouldn't mind traveling.

I'd bet my 2010 points that this is a litmus test for Hyatt. If it's successful, skiiers are going to be shopping for resale points to account for what Hyatt is about to do with all the Colorado ski weeks. Wyndham opened the gates with the "increase point values to drive more sales" model. And Hyatt obviously thinks this will work for them, too. (HVC has never been an innovator. They let the competition make changes, then copy things that work.)

PS -- I've met Ed Crovo. He seems like a nice guy. But he's a company man. He's going to do what's right for the Pritzkers.


----------



## ScoopKona

Divot said:


> Lets see what this does to Hyatt's stock price



Hyatt is not publicly traded. It is owned wholly by the Pritzker family.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pritzker_family


----------



## heathpack

ScoopLV said:


> This is hardly the first time. Hyatt has conjured Diamond Season out of thin air, bumped Copper owners to Bronze in Key West, and has generally monkeyed with the points as they see fit.
> 
> This is the reason I have ALWAYS suggested that people buy something at a resort they wouldn't mind using, at a time of year they wouldn't mind traveling.



When did the diamond conjuring take place?  How about the alchemical change from copper to bronze?

I'm pretty new to the Hyatt system, but part of the appeal of HVC is the points aspect.  Fortunately we did buy a location/season that we can use so in a pinch that's what we'll do.  But we would not have purchased had it been likely this would be our main option.

I've looked at the HVC purchase as an agreement between myself and Hyatt-- I'll pay a chunk of cash now to fix a portion of my travel expenses in the future.  The original investment is a fixed cost and the annual costs are non-fixed, subject to changes with inflation or other factors I can't control.

Now, however, I understand that my initial fixed cost is not so fixed.  If HVC decides to increase points values at all resorts except mine, my points become devalued and my initial purchase buys less.  So HVC has essentially figured out a way to make BOTH my initial investment and annual fees subject to inflation.  And this runs counter to the basic deal as I understood it.

I would personally not be so much the "let's sue the guys" type.  But I would be the type to cut my losses and sell my HVC if this type of monkey business continues and escalates.  I'd just spend my on-going vacation dollars somewhere else.  Yes, HVC will come out ahead, I'm sure-- at least in the short term.  But if they make decisions that undermine the premise of a timeshare purchase-- ie fixing part of the cost of future vacations-- they hurt their own business model in the long run, don't they?

So we will see how HVC evolves over the next few years and what our response will be vis a vis our ownership.

H


----------



## heathpack

ScoopLV said:


> Hyatt is not publicly traded. It is owned wholly by the Pritzker family.
> 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pritzker_family



I believe Hyatt just went public in the last few weeks.

H


----------



## jbercu

I agree! Hyatt should not be able to create more points out of thin air.  The points should be taken out of other Hyatt resorts!

But seriously, there are some problems that this adjustment fixes.

1) Because of the high dues at Highlands Inn it is hard for Hyatt to sell remaining inventory and turn the resort over to an independent Board.  This will help sales.
2) There has been a well known movement to treat Hyatt is a points club, where you buy the points at the lowest ratio of dues to points and then exchange into the best available properties regardless of dues. The reason the club is specific unit and specific week, is so that owners will use their purchased weeks, and as a benefit be able to exchange.  This creates a club where the owners are more involved in the resorts they own and this creates a better club.  This adjustment will help this problem.
3) It may help club availability at Highlands Inn.
4) E-Bay sales of Hyatt are lower now, so it is not as hard to get additional points.  Instead of Hyatt exercising ROFR, maybe they can influence the market this way.

I am an owner at Highlands Inn and also at High Sierra.  We always use Highlands Inn and High Sierra so this change makes no difference to us.  If we bought a unit for points, it would probably be Sedona.
I recommend buying more points or a resale unit at the Highlands Inn on EBay or other reputable resale outlet.  This may cost less than a lawyer.


----------



## ScoopKona

jbercu said:


> I recommend buying more points or a resale unit at the Highlands Inn on EBay or other reputable resale outlet.  This may cost less than a lawyer.



This is exactly what HVC hopes to accomplish, I think.

Eventually, one of the big hotel chain timeshare companies is going to find a way to mitigate the effect of the resale market on developer sales. Once that particular genie out of the bottle, there will be no turning back. Every timeshare company will follow suit. Hyatt included.

Remember, these companies are not in business to provide us with vacations. These companies are in business to sell condos. When given a choice of increasing sales vs. keeping the user base happy, they will generally go for the former. They'll only side with the owners if they feel the opportunity cost tarnishes the brand to the point where sales will decline.

The only people who are in any position to call Hyatt and complain (effectively) are Lifetime Diamond Hyatt Gold Passport members. This is the market segment that Hyatt listens to. If Lifetime Diamond holders who are also HVC members feel unfairly treated, Hyatt will pay attention. The rest of us, not so much.


----------



## heathpack

ScoopLV said:


> When given a choice of increasing sales vs. keeping the user base happy, they will generally go for the former. They'll only side with the owners if they feel the opportunity cost tarnishes the brand to the point where sales will decline.



Very interesting.  It seems that in particular companies that sell timeshares should be careful about reputation because the whole industry is increasingly viewed with skepticism.  For us, the general happiness of the user base was a big part of what led us to purchase both Hyatt and Disney.  So user happiness does drive some percentage of sales.  

I am a little afraid that now that Hyatt is publically traded, the desire for short-term profits will become the primary consideration.  Big picture issues like the long-term viability of the business model may become unimportant.

Such is life, I suppose.

H


----------



## jkc22

heathpack said:


> When did the diamond conjuring take place?  How about the alchemical change from copper to bronze?
> 
> I'm pretty new to the Hyatt system, but part of the appeal of HVC is the points aspect.  Fortunately we did buy a location/season that we can use so in a pinch that's what we'll do.  But we would not have purchased had it been likely this would be our main option.
> ...
> ...if they make decisions that undermine the premise of a timeshare purchase-- ie fixing part of the cost of future vacations ....
> 
> H



Not to side with the HVC, but the point you made re: fixing part of the cost of future vacations - in keeping the points constant - only applies to the deeded week that you purchased at your home resort. 

The "perk" or privilege of exchanging into other resorts within HVC, although implied at purchase, was never going to be guaranteed. This would apply also when at some day, for example, a resort leaves the HVC system altogether. Then one would lose the ability to exchange into HVC altogether. 

As long as your points allocation gets you a week during your deeded week, I don't think HVC did anything to hinder your ability to your enjoyment of future vacations [at your purchased resort], which was what your purchase contract guarantees you. 

On the flip side, this is exactly what HVC is doing for Highlands Inn owners - increasing the points allocation to account for the increased level, thereby guaranteeing their future usage of Highalnds [at the increased points levels].


----------



## heathpack

jkc22 said:


> Not to side with the HVC, but the point you made re: fixing part of the cost of future vacations - in keeping the points constant - only applies to the deeded week that you purchased at your home resort.
> 
> The "perk" or privilege of exchanging into other resorts within HVC, although implied at purchase, was never going to be guaranteed. This would apply also when at some day, for example, a resort leaves the HVC system altogether. Then one would lose the ability to exchange into HVC altogether.  [at the increased points levels].



I disagree that I was not sold a points system.  And what about the resorts that are now being sold as fixed weeks and floating points?  Would you argue that those folks were not sold points explicitly?  


H


----------



## ScoopKona

I for one would have preferred they create a "Titanium" season, or "Dilithium" season, or what have you, and then slide weeks upwards as necessary.

Interval's Red, Yellow, Green (Or RCI's Red, White and Blue) are not sufficient to differentiate the demand between say, Key West in July, March, Fantasy Fest and New Year's.

Even the expanded "rainbow of colors" seasons Hyatt maintains does is not specific enough. 

Even though they're both Diamond, President's Week is worth more than Christmas Week in Key West, simply due to higher demand. Fantasy Fest is technically silver, but really ought to be gold or platinum.

Season for season, any week in Carmel is going to be more in demand than any week in San Antonio. If Hyatt completely reworks the system to account for that, I'll be disappointed, but it's hard to blame them.

While I nearly always sympathize with the fox, I think it is important to also understand the point of view of the hound.

EDIT:



heathpack said:


> I disagree that I was not sold a points system.  And what about the resorts that are now being sold as fixed weeks and floating points?  Would you argue that those folks were not sold points explicitly?



You were sold a condo. The contract is very clear that anything above and beyond the fixed week at the condo is subject to change. (It's been awhile since I've written a sales contract, but I'm sure it hasn't changed much.) Hyatt is only supposed to change the system to benefit "all the owners." In reality, they can do basically whatever they want and claim it's for the good of the members.


----------



## ondeadlin

The "you were sold a condo and nothing else is guaranteed" retort is technically true and, at the same time, absolutely weak sauce.

There's nothing more valuable to a business than its reputation, and in doing this Hyatt sends a clear signal that will lie to it customers. It doesn't matter if that lie is spelled out in documents or implied by the sales people who tell buyers that a Diamond week in one resort will get you a Diamond week in another. A lie is a lie is a lie.

I've always expected my next purchase to be a Hyatt. 

There's no chance of that now. I'm a skier and I'm not purchasing a 2200 point Diamond week only to have the rules change some time in the future.

Anyone who does their research on TUG will quickly come to the same conclusion - they can't trust the system.

And that's a terrible business strategy.


----------



## Carmel85

ondeadlin said:


> The "you were sold a condo and nothing else is guaranteed" retort is technically true and, at the same time, absolutely weak sauce.
> 
> There's nothing more valuable to a business than its reputation, and in doing this Hyatt sends a clear signal that will lie to it customers. It doesn't matter if that lie is spelled out in documents or implied by the sales people who tell buyers that a Diamond week in one resort will get you a Diamond week in another. A lie is a lie is a lie.
> 
> I've always expected my next purchase to be a Hyatt.
> 
> There's no chance of that now. I'm a skier and I'm not purchasing a 2200 point Diamond week only to have the rules change some time in the future.
> 
> Anyone who does their research on TUG will quickly come to the same conclusion - they can't trust the system.
> 
> And that's a terrible business strategy.




I hear rumors out there Hyatt did this Carmel point increase becaucse the Hyatt Carmel is not even close to being sold out like 65-68% sold.  So what Hyatt did was only for Hyatt and not the owners.

 Im very sad Hyatt did this but again I request we all call and ask for Ed Crovo 1-800-340-9997 and write to you own Board of Directors where you own. 

I know a few letters or emails have gotten to the Hyatt Tahoe board and they need all other Hyatr Boards through out the system to stand up and possible class action suit against Hyatt.

I agree we need to fight back not just here but at all our resort in writting or the board never hears from us.

At least the current Tahoe Board President Steve Dykstra is a tug member and I know 2 other board members read TUG Jack Hoipkins and Steve Dallas.

If you are looking to buy Carmel by now from Hyatt before the price increase.

Please everbody here *on TUG call Ed Crovo *including Marriott,Hilton,Starwood, Fourseason owners the more we call I feel Hyatt will listen.

C85


----------



## ScoopKona

Carmel85 said:


> Please everbody here *on TUG call Ed Crovo *including Marriott,Hilton,Starwood, Fourseason owners the more we call I feel Hyatt will listen.



I think writing a letter is stronger than calling. And I think Hyatt is going to care more about the high-roller Hyatt Hotel Gold Passport members and the multi-week-developer-purchase HVC members than the people who bought a resale week. 

People here are basically dismissed (at the sales side, at least) as people who want to game the system through resales. I don't agree with that, but that was what other salespeople thought when I was working there.

It's also a sure thing that someone from HVC is monitoring this thread. They keep tabs on whats going on here and a few other timeshare owners forums.

I'm also certain that this is only the beginning. Sales figures are likely in the toilet, and management has likely been tasked with rectifying the situation. They're going to do whatever it takes to get back in black. (Short of cutting back on marketing and dropping developer prices, natch.)


----------



## Divot

*Hyatt is on the NYSE: Symbol "H"*



ScoopLV said:


> Hyatt is not publicly traded. It is owned wholly by the Pritzker family.
> 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pritzker_family



FYI,

Divot


----------



## heathpack

ScoopLV said:


> You were sold a condo. The contract is very clear that anything above and beyond the fixed week at the condo is subject to change. (It's been awhile since I've written a sales contract, but I'm sure it hasn't changed much.) Hyatt is only supposed to change the system to benefit "all the owners." In reality, they can do basically whatever they want and claim it's for the good of the members.



You can say that I was sold a condo, but I will accept this argument the day Hyatt starts selling by saying "you can buy a condo at location X and _maybe you will be able to stay at one of our other locations.  But then again maybe not."  They very much sell access to other resorts through their points system as a major feature of their system.

So HVC can hide behind legal technicalities if they would like, but eventually this strategy will come back to bite them.  If they devalue their points system, they devalue their entire timeshare system.  People will catch on eventually.

I think your comment about the Hyatt sales team placing no value on the resale owners is amusing in its short-sightedness.  A reputation is built by treating all your customers well, not just your most profitable.  You may say this type of thinking is pie-in-the-sky, but it is actually just good business sense.  Companies that do not understand this will eventually fail.

Hyatt is going to do what Hyatt is going to do and I'm not going to worry too much about it on a personal level.  But if they create a poor-value product, I'm out.  Then my resale will be out there competing with the developer's prices, no?

H_


----------



## ScoopKona

heathpack said:


> Hyatt is going to do what Hyatt is going to do and I'm not going to worry too much about it on a personal level.  But if they create a poor-value product, I'm out.  Then my resale will be out there competing with the developer's prices, no?
> 
> H



You're preaching to the choir. I have never said I agree with what's happening, and I don't. But I will try to look at it from Hyatt's perspective as well. 

We can rail about it all we want. But we cannot in good conscience simultaneously complain about changes and laud Hyatt for opening swank new resorts. Hyatt (and all the rest of the developers) are in business to make money selling condos. They have to look after their best interest. We have to look after ours. Usually, those interests are mutually exclusive.

I'm affected less than most because I use my week as an II tiger trader. But making some (2 bdrm) Diamond weeks 2200 and other Diamond weeks 2950 is unfair. Patently unfair. That really sticks it to the owner who ponied up for a Diamond thinking he or she would be able to trade it anywhere. I'd prefer seeing a new season, like they did when they created the Diamond week. I think there would be less grumbling. (Still a lot of grumbling, but less than the current scheme.)

But I can see why Hyatt is doing it. It may be good for short-term business. I don't think it will be good long-term business.

PS -- When was Diamond created, anyway? I don't know the answer to that. It was before I started working there. I started right after they bumped Copper owners in Key West to Bronze.


----------



## heathpack

*Does anybody have a copy of a Hyatt puchase contract...*

...for a property sold in California?  I would be interested in reading it and would be fine with blanked out names and dollar amounts.  PM me if you would be willing to share this document.

I have been reading a little and have learned that in California, timeshares are regulated by the Department of Real Estate.  There are specific laws that pertain to timeshare points and I would bet that the applicability of such laws to Hyatt will depend on how the purchase contract is worded.

If I am going to complain to Hyatt, I would try to educate myself first on the subject.

FYI, I have pasted below what the California DRE says about timeshare points; *note in particular the last paragraph which I have bolded*.  And here is a link to the DRE website if anyone wants to take a peek: http://www.dre.ca.gov/sub_timeshares.html

Whether the sale is a just a timeshare itself or a timeshare plus points system will likely turn out to be the key issue from a legal perspective.  I believe this determination would have been made before the project would have been approved in California.

H

_From CA DRE website:_
Q. - What is a Time-share "Points" Program?

A. - There is another variation of time-share programs that is becoming more popular, especially in time-share plans in which purchasers have the right to reserve occupancy in more than one resort. Rather than the purchasers having the right to reserve a week every year or every other year in a resort, a certain number of "points" are assigned at the time of purchase to each purchaser. Point systems are structures for flexible use whereby the value of the use right of a time-share interest owner is expressed in terms of points rather than in increments of time.

The product sold to a time-share purchaser may consist of a time-share estate or a time-share use, however, the value of reservation rights is entirely a function of the points the purchaser receives at the time of purchase. The number of points conveyed to a purchaser is typically shown in the purchase agreement. In some cases, they may be indicated on the Grant Deed, if the offering is a time-share estate offering. The number of points assigned to a purchaser does not change as long as the purchaser owns the time-share interest or unless he or she purchases additional points.

In a points-based time-share plan, the more points a purchaser buys, the more flexibility he or she has in using the interest. In projects that involve more than one resort, a purchaser with a large number of points will have reservation rights to longer use periods in a wider variety of unit-types during the more popular seasons of the year than a purchaser of a smaller number of points.

Point valuations for each accommodation, season and resort are typically established in the governing documents for the time-share plan. Points-based programs may include the right of the operator of the reservation system for the project to make changes, subject to certain limitations, to point valuations for units in a resort. Such changes may affect the ability of time-share interest owners to reserve occupancy in those accommodations. Developers prefer to include the right to change point valuations in the event that use patterns of accommodations change over time.

*However, California law includes some protections regarding the right to change point valuations. First, no change exceeding 10% per year in the manner in which points may be used may be made without the assent of at least 25% of the votes of time-share interest owners, other than the developer. No time-share interest owner may be prevented from using a time-share plan as a result of changes in the way in which point values may be used. In the event of changes in point values, no interest owner shall be prevented from using his or her home resort as provided in the purchase contract that he or she signed for the purchase of the time-share interest.*


----------



## optimist

heathpack said:


> ...
> In the event of changes in point values, no interest owner shall be prevented from using his or her home resort as provided in the purchase contract that he or she signed for the purchase of the time-share interest.[/B]




Unless Carmel is your home resort,  you don't have a property interest in the Carmel timeshare and therefore do not have standing. For those that do, their interest has NOT been devalued, in fact, their value has increased.  You won't see them complaining.
The fact that other members of the HGV were able to use the point system  to stay at other properties within HGV is a perk and a marketing tool, not a guaranteed right.


----------



## heathpack

optimist said:


> Unless Carmel is your home resort,  you don't have a property interest in the Carmel timeshare and therefore do not have standing. For those that do, their interest has NOT been devalued, in fact, their value has increased.  You won't see them complaining.
> The fact that other members of the HGV were able to use the point system  to stay at other properties within HGV is a perk and a marketing tool, not a guaranteed right.



Thanks, Optimist for replying-- every opinion on this subject is very interesting to read.

If the ability to use the HCV points system is indeed a perk and a marrketing tool- then California law will not regulate this aspect of HVC.  However, by California law, if members are required to participate in and pay for a benefit, then it is *not* what is termed "an incidental benefit."  Note that Hyatt refers to the annual fees we all pay as "club dues" and not "maintenance fees."  If Hyatt collects club dues for members to belong to a _required_ Hyatt Vacation Club and the currency of that club is points, then changes to the points system is likley in fact governed by California law.

While I disagree that the points-aspect of the system is not an integral part of HVC sale, really right now this is just my opinion.  If I were to read a CA contract, then I could do more than formulate an opinion.  I'm not the type of person who is going to stick to my postion no matter what.  If I can tell from a purchase contract and I am wrong, I will be posting back here in a second to let ya'll know.

I also hear what you are saying about Carmel owners being happy.  And they'll stay happy until Hyatt decides Aspen is way better than Carmel and triples the points requirements there.  

H


----------



## jbercu

heathpack said:


> While I disagree that the points-aspect of the system is not an integral part of HVC sale, really right now this is just my opinion.  If I were to read a CA contract, then I could do more than formulate an opinion.  I'm not the type of person who is going to stick to my postion no matter what.  If I can tell from a purchase contract and I am wrong, I will be posting back here in a second to let ya'll know.
> 
> H



H:
I completely agree with your approach.  Less speculation and more facts!
Upon a cursory review of the different documents that I signed when I bought a week at Hyatt Highlands Inn from the developer, there are a few documents that define the Club membership.  The most direct reference to the item in question is a document called “Single-Site Purchaser Disclosure” that I had to sign.
This document states that “You are purchasing an interest in a single-site timeshare project only.  This means that you have no guaranteed right to reserve or to use a site other than this one, which is the only site that has been qualified by the Department of Real Estate“ …  “Your right to use the other sites is speculative only, however, your membership in the program and payment of the related fees are mandatory.”  
Another interesting aspect of the deed for a specific week and unit is that the club reserves the right to deny membership and also no guarantee that the resort will remain affiliated with the club.  There is so much doubletalk to cover all possibilities.  There is also an on-sale clause that triggers a non transfer of the club-membership.
I have not heard of the club ever denying membership to a resale purchaser once the unit passes ROFR, nor have I heard of resale purchaser having to sign the Single-Site Purchaser Disclosure.  
Typically, the deed transfer on a resale does not include the documents referred to in the deed.
There is a lot of good will involved in a purchase.  As is with most timeshares, voting with your feet is a lot more practical than a legal fight, or a proxy vote. 
J


----------



## heathpack

jbercu said:


> The most direct reference to the item in question is a document called “Single-Site Purchaser Disclosure” that I had to sign.
> This document states that “You are purchasing an interest in a single-site timeshare project only.  This means that you have no guaranteed right to reserve or to use a site other than this one, which is the only site that has been qualified by the Department of Real Estate“ …  “Your right to use the other sites is speculative only, however, your membership in the program and payment of the related fees are mandatory.”
> J



Thanks J.

The phrase "single-site" is a reference to a specific category of timeshares as defined by the DRE.  In California, this means that the timeshare you are buying into is just a single property and not a part of a timeshare system.  You are therefore entitled only to use of that single property.  However, reading on this issue suggests that the Carmel property would more properly be categorized as a "multi-site timeshare plan with specific timeshare interest."  This is a system where you buy a week at one locale and also mandatory membership in a club to which you are required to pay dues.

It may not really matter, however.  I think the only thing that will matter is whether you are buying points, as changes to points requirements would then be regulated by the CA DRE.

Again, I am not going through the process of trying to understand this because I think a lawsuit would be fruitful or relevant to me personally.  My immediate purpose is to write a well-informed, reasoned letter of complaint to Hyatt.  My secondary purpose is to try to figure out if I should cut my Hyatt losses sooner rather than later.  My tertiary purpose is a public discussion that might influence the basic information available here on TUG about the facts of the Hyatt system.  HVC is very much discussed as a points-system and if it is actually a traditional timeshare system-- well, that would be a great thing for people to know when they turn to TUG to educate themselves.

H


----------



## heathpack

*Have now read the CA Timeshare Act of 2004...*

...Yes, all 63 pages of that scintillating piece of legislation.

I think there _actually_ may be some legal irregularity to Hyatt's actions in CA-- if I am able to read a Carmel purchase contract, I'll post more.

It may take me a little bit of time to get a good letter of complaint composed (as I'll try to hold out until I can read a Carmel purchase contract), but I'll post that as well once its done.

This really is a precedent that all Hyatt owners should be concerned about- why the lack of buzz here on the TUG board, do you think?  

H


----------



## optimist

heathpack said:


> ...
> This really is a precedent that all Hyatt owners should be concerned about- why the lack of buzz here on the TUG board, do you think?
> 
> H



I had wondered why the same thing myself, not vis a vis this change but generally,  and posted a thread to that effect. 
There never seems to be a lot of response to Hyatt posts.


----------



## Steve

Although I've never actually purchased a Hyatt week, I have considered it several times and studied up on the various resorts and the exchange system.  Resorts I seriously considered purchasing a week at include Coconut Plantation, Beach House, and High Sierra Lodge.  I also looked into buying at Pinon Pointe and Main Street Station.  

From my research, I have always understood Hyatt to be a fixed week, fixed unit product that uses a point system for internal exchanges.  I never got the impression that a Hyatt purchase would be a points purchase or that I would be buying anything other than a single resort ownership.  At Main Street Station, the fixed weeks come with additional floating time during the off season...but that time is still deeded only to that single resort.  

However, if I had purchased a Hyatt week somewhere with the intent of exchanging into Highlands Inn on a regular basis, then I would be very upset with the recent change in point values.  I also think that it is a cause for concern for any Hyatt owner, or potential owner, as it establishes a terrible precedent.  What is particularly unfortunate in this situation is that Hyatt is changing the point values of an existing resort...rather than just requiring higher point values for any new resorts as many other developers have done.

This is yet another powerful reminder of the importance of purchasing at the specific resorts where you want to vacation.  The terms of exchange programs are always subject to change.  In fact, it is almost inevitable that they will change...and usually not for the better.

Steve


----------



## ral

heathpack said:


> ...Yes, all 63 pages of that scintillating piece of legislation.
> 
> I think there _actually_ may be some legal irregularity to Hyatt's actions in CA-- if I am able to read a Carmel purchase contract, I'll post more.
> 
> It may take me a little bit of time to get a good letter of complaint composed (as I'll try to hold out until I can read a Carmel purchase contract), but I'll post that as well once its done.
> 
> This really is a precedent that all Hyatt owners should be concerned about- why the lack of buzz here on the TUG board, do you think?
> 
> H



I am very concerned about the change in point values at Highlands Inn. I never expected Hyatt to change point values for established properties. All timeshare owners should be concerned about this. Just recently, Disney also made changes to point values at its various properties. If I am not mistaken, Disney's contracts state that they can rearrange point values for various seasons and days, but the original total number of points must remain the same for the individual property. That certainly is not the case with the Hyatt Highlands Inn change.


----------



## heathpack

optimist said:


> I had wondered why the same thing myself, not vis a vis this change but generally,  and posted a thread to that effect.
> There never seems to be a lot of response to Hyatt posts.



Yes, I had read your thread.  But, ironically, I did not reply...   

H


----------



## heathpack

Steve said:


> From my research, I have always understood Hyatt to be a fixed week, fixed unit product that uses a point system for internal exchanges.  I never got the impression that a Hyatt purchase would be a points purchase or that I would be buying anything other than a single resort ownership.  At Main Street Station, the fixed weeks come with additional floating time during the off season...but that time is still deeded only to that single resort.



Hi Steve,

Where did you do your research?  For me it was here on the TUG boards, on Kal's website and by attending a sales presentation in Carmel- and I devoted a pretty good chunk of time to said research.  In all of these sources, the vast majority of the discussion is about Hyatt Vacation Club's point system.  Look for example at the document explaining Hyatt's system posted as a sticky at the beginning of this thread (in the "hotels-based timeshare" folder)-- that is an approximately 1500 word document.  About 50 words are dedicated to the deeded week aspect of HVC and about 585 to the points system.  I point this out not to criticize the document-- I can vouch for the fact that this is pretty much the ratio of the amount of time the Carmel sales pitch I experienced devoted to each of these topics.

Look as well at TUG posts over the years-- "what Hyatt should I buy?" or the like. The conversation almost always reverts back to points strategies.  Yes, some people consistently mention buying a week you will use, but typically as a fall-back position and there is FAR, FAR more discussion on these boards about points. 

For me, coming into timesharing with the majority of my knowledge coming from DVC, the notion that one is buying points is a concept I am completely familiar with (I'm not saying it's correct, just that it was my perspective when I start my research on the subject).  So if a Hyatt sales person talks about selling me a week that is equivalent to 1880 points there is no reason that I would not take that pretty literally.  For you, maybe you came with a familiarity with a more traditional timeshare model and hence you start from a place of thinking "I am buying a week" and the rest is gravy.

However, although we may have come to a different understanding of the main features of Hyatt's system, I think we see the *doubling* of the points requirements at HI in the same light-- as a potential slippery slope for TS owners.

Please do post if you don't mind as to where you did your research and what your Hyatt sales pitch was like if indeed you did attend one.  I would be curious to know if perhaps I got a bum salesperson?

H


----------



## Steve

Hi Heathpack,

I have never attended a Hyatt sales presentation.  The closest I came was when I exchanged telephone calls and emails...and received sales materials in the mail...with a Hyatt salesman at Main Street Station.  I felt he was pretty clear that I would be buying a deeded ownership in Breckenridge, but as you mention, I come from a traditional timeshare background in that most of my experience has been with weeks.

The other research I have done on Hyatt has consisted of extensive reading about Hyatt on TUG, Kal's website, eBay and other resale venues, plus conversations and emails with resale agents including a very knowledgeable outfit in Key West that specializes in Hyatts.  I have also visited a number of the Hyatt timeshare resorts, but I have not attended any sales presentations while there.  (I really dislike timeshare presentations.)

While I tend to think that Hyatt is probably within their legal rights to make the change to the points at Highlands Inn, I agree 100% that it sets a terrible precedent.  It raises a huge red flag for anyone owning or considering a Hyatt.

Steve


----------



## ScoopKona

heathpack said:


> Please do post if you don't mind as to where you did your research and what your Hyatt sales pitch was like if indeed you did attend one.  I would be curious to know if perhaps I got a bum salesperson?



I gave Hyatt sales pitches for a few years, and ALWAYS mentioned the bump to bronze that Key West copper owners received in the early 2000s. I never had problems selling weeks using the tried and true pitch: "Here's how it works. Here's how much it costs. Here's how much you're currently spending on hotels." 

Salespeople who used other techniques were often accused of "pitching heat" which is timeshare sales lingo for "pulling stuff out of his or her posterior in the hopes of getting a sale."

The change is definitely a 180-degree about-face in how Hyatt deals with the owner base, and is certainly ominous.


----------



## jbercu

heathpack said:


> Hi Steve,
> Please do post if you don't mind as to where you did your research and what your Hyatt sales pitch was like if indeed you did attend one.  I would be curious to know if perhaps I got a bum salesperson.
> H



Another place to do research on Hyatt is the Yahoo Group 

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HyattVacationClub/

The Highlands Inn points change subject is also discussed there and the group is more active than Tug on the subject of the HVC Club.
The sales pitch I got at Highlands Inn about 3 years ago was definitely geared towards selling the week and unit and not points.  I think there were a few factors that affected the presentation:
1)	When Hyatt first started selling the Highlands Inn property there was a large price difference between the Garden View vs Ocean View and Partial Ocean View.  The garden View sold out very fast, mostly because it had the same point value as the Ocean and Partial Ocean views but cost a lot less.  Once Hyatt sold out the Garden View units they had to adjust the presentation to emphasize the importance of the specific unit views so they can sell the higher cost units.
2)	I was aware of the unique property before it became a Hyatt, and we went to the presentation because of the attraction to the property and not the Hyatt system, so we may have inadvertently influenced the presentation.

J


----------



## bdh

ScoopLV said:


> Making some (2 bdrm) Diamond weeks 2200 and other Diamond weeks 2950 is unfair. Patently unfair. That really sticks it to the owner who ponied up for a Diamond thinking he or she would be able to trade it anywhere. I'd prefer seeing a new season, like they did when they created the Diamond week. I think there would be less grumbling. (Still a lot of grumbling, but less than the current scheme.)



Other than the HI owners, I expect every HVC will be irritated with the unit/point re-alignment as it is absolutely unfair.  The move seems to shake one of the basic tenets of the HVC program (that units of equivalent size and season are equal and interchangeable).  I'm surprised and disappointed that Hyatt made this move - I'd love to hear their answer to "What were you thinking?"  The thought that HI has more amenities and offers an overall higher end experience and justifies the point realignment can be dismissed with a multitude of comparisons to other HVC properties.  And the thought that the demand for HI is so strong doesn't seem viable - while the Interval International demand index for HI is a little higher than that of Sunset Harbor, I believe that SH has the highest occupancy rate in the HVC system.   

While creating another season would create essentially the same scenario as the points shuffle, there is no doubt it would not create as much grumbling and turmoil.  I’m not sure how many HVC owners there actually are at this point, but I’m sure 95% of them are not aware of this change – no doubt that as the HVC membership slowly becomes aware of it, there will be many disgruntled owners.  Hyatt will easily be able to withstand an occasional irate letter or phone call in St Pete, so the only real question is can the individual voices of HVC owners be unified and magnified to a level that will be troubling for Hyatt.    



Steve said:


> While I tend to think that Hyatt is probably within their legal rights to make the change to the points at Highlands Inn, I agree 100% that it sets a terrible precedent.



Not that I am trying to discourage Heathpack from his research and efforts to protest/undo the points shuffle, but I would believe that Hyatt did some homework before making the change and are well within their legal rights.  Not doing the homework and having to undo it would be just as bad as the points change as they then would be caught with their pants down and look inept.




ScoopLV said:


> ]
> I gave Hyatt sales pitches for a few years, and ALWAYS mentioned the bump to bronze that Key West copper owners received in the early 2000s.
> 
> The change is definitely a 180-degree about-face in how Hyatt deals with the owner base, and is certainly ominous.



The Copper to Bronze adjustment in KW was/is not nearly as problematic as the HI change.  There was an external basis for the KW change since Interval International had the Copper weeks listed as prime Red time - an II Red 2 bedroom week takes 1300 points, so it was a logical adjustment to make the 1100 point Copper weeks worth 1300 points of the Bronze weeks.  IE: Copper owners did not have enough HVC points to get an II Red week even though II deemed the weeks they owned Red.

The KW adjustment leveled the playing field for a small segment of HVC owners with II – the HI adjustment skews the playing field for the entire HVC membership on an internal level.


----------



## heathpack

bdh said:


> Other than the HI owners, I expect every HVC will be irritated with the unit/point re-alignment as it is absolutely unfair.  The move seems to shake one of the basic tenets of the HVC program (that units of equivalent size and season are equal and interchangeable).



Exactly.  This is what I am driving as well when I discuss what my sales pitch was like.  The points system/allocation is very central to how HVC works and is marketed.

And although I hear what you are saying-- it is unlikely that I will be able to come to a better understanding of the legalities of this issue than Hyatt's lawyers have-- I think it would be silly not to try to understand the important issues from a legal/regulatory perspective.  One can then write a more effective letter of complaint that addresses the aspects of all this that Hyatt (possibly) fears will come back to bite them.  And you never know-- sometimes corporations *convince* themselves that a move they make wil be ok, only to find it causes them a very big headache down the road.

H


----------



## jerseygirl

I'm as unhappy about this change as everyone else (except the HI owners, of course), but I don't think we have a legal leg to stand on.

When I look through the "Hyatt Vacation Club Rules and Regulations" on the member website, the following clauses are repeated time and time again:  .

The Club Point Chart is amended by HVOI from time to time.

*The number of Club Points assigned to represent the reservation power of a Club Member’s Fixed Week is based upon such factors as relative Member demand for use of the respective Club Resorts, seasonality, and Unit type. HVOI reserves the right to reasonably revise these Club Point assignments from time to time without Club Member consent in the best interests of Members as a whole.*

b. Floating Club Points. Each Club Member who has the right to reserve a Floating Week or Floating Split Week shall annually be assigned, at the start of the Home Resort Preference Period (Float), an allocation of Floating Club Points to represent the reservation power of the Member’s access to the Floating Weeks or Floating Split Weeks at the Member’s Home Resort. The number of Floating Club Points assigned to represent the reservation power of a Club Member’s access to the Floating Weeks or Floating Split Weeks at the Member’s Home Resort is based upon such factors as relative Member demand for use of the respective Club Resorts, seasonality, and Unit type. *HVOI reserves the right to reasonably revise these Club Point assignments from time to time without Club Member consent in the best interests of Members as a whole.*

3.2 Club Point Chart. The number of Club Points required to reserve the use of a given Week or Split Week within the Club during the Home Resort Preference Period (Float), the Club Use Period or the Limited Club Use Period is set forth in the Club Point Chart. *The number of Club Points required to reserve the use of a given Week or Split Week within the Club is based upon such factors as relative Club Member demand for use of the respective Club Resorts, seasonality, and Unit type. HVOI reserves the right to reasonably revise the number of Club Points required to reserve the use of the various Weeks and Split Weeks within the Club, from time to time, without Club Member consent in the best interests of Members as a whole. Pursuant to this reserved right, HVOI has the right to change the makeup of the existing seasons set forth in the Club Point Chart or create additional seasons to be set forth in a revised Club Point Chart in response to anticipated Club Member demand for a particular Club Resort, Unit type, or Week*....


----------



## ScoopKona

I don't see how this change improves the system for members as a whole. HI owners certainly benefit. As will owners at other boutique resorts. (EDIT -- When Hyatt invariably* monkeys with the point system for prime ski weeks.)

I'd still prefer a "double diamond" season -- an apt name for skiiers, if nothing else.

*I assume this will be the case. I can't see why they would change just one resort.


----------



## jerseygirl

ScoopLV said:


> I don't see how this change improves the system for members as a whole. HI owners certainly benefit. As will owners at other boutique resorts.



That's a good point -- it's benefitting only a small minority of owners.


----------



## bdh

jerseygirl said:


> *HVOI reserves the right to reasonably revise these Club Point assignments from time to time without Club Member consent in the best interests of Members as a whole.*



Seems to me that the simple equation of the number of Highland Inn owners divided by the number of total HVC owners provides ample proof that the point realignment is *not* in the best interests of Members as a whole?


----------



## heathpack

jerseygirl said:


> When I look through the "Hyatt Vacation Club Rules and Regulations" on the member website, the following clauses are repeated time and time again:  .
> 
> The Club Point Chart is amended by HVOI from time to time.
> 
> *The number of Club Points assigned to represent the reservation power of a Club Member’s Fixed Week is based upon such factors as relative Member demand for use of the respective Club Resorts, seasonality, and Unit type. HVOI reserves the right to reasonably revise these Club Point assignments from time to time without Club Member consent in the best interests of Members as a whole.*
> 
> b. Floating Club Points... *HVOI reserves the right to reasonably revise these Club Point assignments from time to time without Club Member consent in the best interests of Members as a whole.*
> 
> 3.2 Club Point Chart...*The number of Club Points required to reserve the use of a given Week or Split Week within the Club is based upon such factors as relative Club Member demand for use of the respective Club Resorts, seasonality, and Unit type. HVOI reserves the right to reasonably revise the number of Club Points required to reserve the use of the various Weeks and Split Weeks within the Club, from time to time, without Club Member consent in the best interests of Members as a whole. Pursuant to this reserved right, HVOI has the right to change the makeup of the existing seasons set forth in the Club Point Chart or create additional seasons to be set forth in a revised Club Point Chart in response to anticipated Club Member demand for a particular Club Resort, Unit type, or Week*....



Just because Hyatt has a disclaimer in its club rules does not mean that legally said disclaimer is binding.  For example, I am a veterinarian and if you leave your pet with me for surgery or hospitalization, you will have to sign all kinds of paperwork absolving me from liability should something happen...  But your signing these papers does not mean you cannot sue me and win if I drop your dog on its head (don't worry, veterinarians *do* go to great lengths to avoid canine head trauma-- this is just meant to be an *example*).  Veterinary disclaimers/liability waivers are commonly more over-reaching than is legally tenable.  We can make you sign them but a judge may just ignore whatever over-reaches.  We know this and our lawyer knows this (and now when you take your dog to the vet you know this, too).

The bigger issue with the legal approach is that Hyatt has full-time lawyers and the general public does not.  So suing a corporation is problematic.  Complaining smartly to the corporation is better.  Complaining to a state regulatory agency may work.  Influencing the corporation's reputation to its customer base may work.  Hundreds of HVC members doing all of the last three options will probably be most effective.

H


----------



## jerseygirl

I don't disagree with either of the above posts, but do think this challenge could be a legal "stretch" unless the "best interests of members as a whole" argument is successful.  I'm pretty familiar with the clauses big corporations put into contracts ... have sat through plenty of arbitrations where my own company's have been challenged ... sometimes we win, sometimes we lose. C'est la vie.

I just think that the _ability _to change point values is crystal clear in the contract and would be held up.  Again, however, I find the "members as a whole" aspect a plausible argument that this _particular_ change was unfair.

We have developer issues over on the Starwood board right now (one has to do with Starwood's attempt to control II deposits for non network accounts).  I tried the letter writing route, requesting legal justification for their position, and received a boiler-plate response.  So, I then involved a state regulator and the issue is reportedly being investigated.  I don't know if I'll be successful, but I'm all for "fighting the fight."  But, since I'm not a frequent user of Highlands Inn (sent my brother's secretary there for 2 nights over Thansgiving), I can't bring myself to take on this fight as well.  But, I do wish all of you west coasters luck with whatever you decide to do.

Oh, and heathpack, please don't drop the dogs on their heads.  Regardless of whether or not your contract would be held up, it can't possibly be good for them or your business!


----------



## heathpack

jerseygirl said:


> Oh, and heathpack, please don't drop the dogs on their heads.  Regardless of whether or not your contract would be held up, it can't possibly be good for them or your business!



No worries.  I really like dogs.  I wouldn't drop them on their heads even without a liability waiver.  

H


----------



## Divot

*It is as it is....*

I think many you are missing the point. We buy timeshares to travel (vacation) more and stay in nicer (larger) digs. We get to invite friends and family to join us. We prefer to own rather than rent. We save $ by purchasing resale.  We add up the costs of renting (rooms) and compare that to owning (our deeds). Our purchase "forces" us to use what we've paid for. (vacation). Hotel room rates go up, as does everything else over time. Is there one HVC owner that now can't use exactly what they purchased? No. If I own week 1 in Carmel, and I purchased it to use that week - nothing has changed. If I purchased week 2 in Sedona - same deal. If anything, I would be very concerned that Hyatt would start selling "points" to allow other HVC owners the ability to use Carmel. Look at the mess called Wyndham. Resale points are less than $.05 Read some of the posts from those poor owners. Ouch. Look at Marriott Rewards or Gold Passport points - more points to get into the best resorts. Same deal. Frequent flier miles - same story again.
My advice: read the contract and if the deal doesn't pencil out for how you can (not might) use it, - walk.  

PS - I'm in Carmel this week and it feels like Tahoe, without the snow.....


----------



## DeweyWhopper

*Hyatt's response to points increase at HI*

I emailed the Hyatt at concierge@hyattvacationclub.com

Here is the response I received and my original outgoing email.  I hope they speak truthfully, and that there are no current plans for point changes.  Who knows what the future holds though:
-----------------------------------------------------------
Good Afternoon Mr. Dewey;

A quick review of your account tells us that you indeed make the most of your purchase.  Your travel patterns tell us you understand and appreciate the Hyatt Vacation Club system.

Rest assured, the value of your Hyatt Beach House purchases remains the same.  Your 2200 and 2000 points will still bring you premium accommodations.

The Hyatt Vacation Club rules do provide the ability to adjust point values from time to time based upon demand analysis.  That stated, there is no plan to  make any adjustments to any other properties.

We don't see that you have experienced the Highlands Inn - if the Carmel area becomes of interest to you, let us assist in finding availability.


Thank you,
Hyatt Vacation Club Concierge
Monday to Friday, 9am -5pm EST

-----wrote: -----
To: "CONCIERGE@HYATTVACATIONCLUB.COM" <CONCIERGE@HYATTVACATIONCLUB.COM>
From: 
Date: 11/26/2009 11:15AM
Subject: New Point schedule at HVC Highlands in Carmel

Dear Hyatt,

I am writing to share my disappointment with your recent decision to increase the points needed at the HVC Highlands Inn in Carmel, CA.  By arbitrarily assigning more points to current owners at that property, you have diminished the value of every single other owner at Hyatt Vacation Club. 

As an owner of a Diamond week and a Platinum week, the Hyatt point system was the most important factor in my choosing to buy.  I sincerely hope you do not change the point value system for other properties. 

Respectfully,

Dewey


----------



## ral

Thank you for sharing your communication with Hyatt Vacation Club.

I find particularly interesting the sentence "Rest assured, the value of your Hyatt Beach House purchases remains the same." While the job of the Concierge is to put your mind at ease, it’s simply illogical to state that the value of your purchase, with its associated points, has remained the same when a major change in the value of Highlands Inn owners’ purchases has occurred. All non-Highlands Inn HVC owners have seen a devaluation of their points when compared to Highlands Inn owners.

Beginning in 2010, Hyatt Vacation Club owners with 2200 points are no longer able to reserve a 2 bedroom unit at Highlands Inn for a week’s stay.

Unfortunately, the value of all non-Highlands Inn HVC owner purchases has not remained the same. And the phrase “Rest assured” does not change that.

I could understand a realigning of points with respect to the various seasons, resulting in the original number of points assigned, but to increase point value for every season is a dangerous precedence. One of the most important reasons for my purchase with Hyatt was the equality of the weeks in the Hyatt Vacation Club system. One has an initial higher or lower purchase price based on one’s staying at a particular location, season, floor plan, etc. If one chooses to give up his/her home unit, the playing field is level when using the internal trade system of the Club. That is what encouraged me to purchase with Hyatt. With the change in point structure at Highlands Inn, it would seem that members of HVC can only hope for the best.


----------



## jkc22

ral said:


> I find particularly interesting the sentence "Rest assured, the value of your Hyatt Beach House purchases remains the same."
> ...
> Beginning in 2010, Hyatt Vacation Club owners with 2200 points are no longer able to reserve a 2 bedroom unit at Highlands Inn for a week’s stay.
> 
> Unfortunately, the value of all non-Highlands Inn HVC owner purchases has not remained the same...



Why should the value of a given week remain the same for an owner for all other HVC resorts, other than that for the deeded week at the home resort an owner has purchased (or purchased via resale)? Just because someone bought a resale at the lowest dollar per point relative to all properties in HVC is no longer able to use 2,200 points for a two-bedroom at Highlands Inn, because he did not purchase Highlands Inn in the first place, it doesn't make HVC in the wrong. The buyer should have bought Highlands Inn in the first place if he wishes to count on using it year after year.

As others have maintained, it is clearly written in the HVC contracts that anything beyond an owner's deeded week at the owner's home resort the owner has purchased are a "privilege," and as such are subject to change anytime. 

I completely agree that this is a bad precedent set by HVC, but what can you do? I am in Aspen now enjoying a two-level penthouse four-bedroom condo with a pool table, private hot tub, and a private elevator for a mere 1,280 points midweek. Will I care if the point requirement triples to 3,840? You bet, since it will exhaust 60% of my point allotment for the year; but, considering what this unit is selling for right now ($290K) for a deeded week plus 10 floating days, I think it’s completely justified. Like many others, I purchased resale weeks, but I purchased at locations I envision myself going to year after year. Aspen is nice and it's a nice perk to be able to get in cheaply via my weeks at other HVC resorts. Should the point requirement for Aspen (or for that matter, all other Colorado ski resorts) increase three, four, or five fold, and if I really like Colorado that much, I will buy a deeded week there to be able to go there year after year. Perhaps those who like Highlands Inn and want to go there year after year should start looking for a resale week there.

The playing field needs to be leveled for the cheaper resorts vs. the more expensive ones, and the ways to do it are to add in more premium seasons or to add in more unit classifications, and HVC is fully within its right to do the above as long as it has maintained the points required for owners for their deeded week at their home resorts.


----------



## heathpack

jkc22 said:


> I completely agree that this is a bad precedent set by HVC, but what can you do?



You can try to make it clear to Hyatt that you do not think this is ok and that maybe they should think twice about similar changes in the future.

You seem to think that any one who has a problem with this change is desperate to stay at Highlands Inn every year.  You also seem to think that everyone within the HVC system should want to stay for a full week in the same resort year after year.

For us, a big part of the appeal of the HVC system is the ability to book 3 or 4 night stays and in order for this to be practical in regards to travel time, we'd need to have good access to nearby resorts (which for us is Sedona, Tahoe and Carmel).  We have no interest in returning to the same resort every year.

More power to you if you bought exactly what will suit you _ad infinitum_.   You may be totally pleased even if the HVC points system someday becomes a joke.  However if you decide to sell your weeks down the road, you may find that without a great HVC points system your weeks are not worth nearly as much.

H


----------



## ral

jkc22 said:


> ...The buyer should have bought Highlands Inn in the first place if he wishes to count on using it year after year.
> 
> 
> 
> The playing field needs to be leveled for the cheaper resorts vs. the more expensive ones, and the ways to do it are to add in more premium seasons or to add in more unit classifications, and HVC is fully within its right to do the above as long as it has maintained the points required for owners for their deeded week at their home resorts.




I, for one, do not wish to use Highlands Inn year after year. I have not yet stayed there and don't have any immediate plans to stay there. If I did want to stay there annually, I would have purchased at Highlands Inn. 

What is most important is the major change in Hyatt Vacation Club philosophy. While this change is of immediate advantage to Highlands Inn owners, it may open the door to a series of changes to the detriment of all Hyatt Vacation Club members.

The original philosophy behind the Hyatt Vacation Club was to have a program that allowed an owner six months to choose whether he wishes to stay in his purchased unit. If he chooses not to stay in his deeded unit, he can then trade into another Vacation Club unit using comparable points. The main idea was to have the same number of points for the same bedroom size unit, with differences in seasons. Point value for a two bedroom is the same for all two bedrooms in the same season in the Vacation Club. The Highlands Inn restructure is definitely a change in the philosophy of the Hyatt Vacation Club. I can recall during the developer presentation how strongly the sales staff emphasized how well this program functioned. 

I still don't understand why this change in points is needed. If a Highlands Inn owner chooses to stay in his deeded week, that week is not available to the Vacation Club. If the Highlands Inn owner wishes to give up his week, he still has the number of points necessary to book at whichever Hyatt Vacation Club unit he wishes. The unit given up then becomes available to others in the Vacation Club at no loss to the original owner.

I do understand the new classifications of two bedroom premier and two bedroom deluxe at the Hyatt Siesta Key because they are actually three bedroom and four bedroom units with additional baths (the third and fourth rooms are without windows, so they are not allowed to be called “bedrooms.”)

Does anyone know how this change in point value was initiated?


----------



## optimist

ral said:


> The original philosophy behind the Hyatt Vacation Club was to have a program that allowed an owner six months to choose whether he wishes to stay in his purchased unit. If he chooses not to stay in his deeded unit, he can then trade into another Vacation Club unit using comparable points. The main idea was to have the same number of points for the same bedroom size unit, with differences in seasons. Point value for a two bedroom is the same for all two bedrooms in the same season in the Vacation Club. The Highlands Inn restructure is definitely a change in the philosophy of the Hyatt Vacation Club. I can recall during the developer presentation how strongly the sales staff emphasized how well this program functioned.
> 
> 
> Does anyone know how this change in point value was initiated?



The problem with this system, of allocating the same number of points to every unit in the system,  is that it results in people buying where maintenance is lowest. Those resorts where maintenance fees run higher (as in Carmel)  end up having sluggish sales. Few want to buy them, many want to trade into them.

I am also not thrilled with this change but I don't see that Hyatt had much choice if their intent was to level the playing field.

If you read the Starwood boards, you will see how angry people are with their increase in maintenance fees. Now if Starwood had done what Hyatt has, which is increase the number of star options or points or whatever they are called, in the resorts with the highest fees, (allowing people to get more vacation days out of the same maintenance fees) I think they would not have such a marketing disaster on their hands, where their resorts are trading for a dollar on ebay.  

The only strategies that work well in life are where everyone benefits. It has to be win win for both sides.


----------



## ral

optimist said:


> The problem with this system, of allocating the same number of points to every unit in the system,  is that it results in people buying where maintenance is lowest. Those resorts where maintenance fees run higher (as in Carmel)  end up having sluggish sales. Few want to buy them, many want to trade into them.
> 
> I am also not thrilled with this change but I don't see that Hyatt had much choice if their intent was to level the playing field.
> 
> If you read the Starwood boards, you will see how angry people are with their increase in maintenance fees. Now if Starwood had done what Hyatt has, which is increase the number of star options or points or whatever they are called, in the resorts with the highest fees, (allowing people to get more vacation days out of the same maintenance fees) I think they would not have such a marketing disaster on their hands, where their resorts are trading for a dollar on ebay.
> 
> The only strategies that work well in life are where everyone benefits. It has to be win win for both sides.



If leveling the playing field is what Hyatt had in mind, and again, this is a major change from the original Hyatt Vacation Club philosophy, then we have huge problems forthcoming. We are probably looking forward to a change in the point value of the four ski resorts in Colorado, along with any other Hyatt Vacation Club Resort whose HOA feels that its owners deserve better point value than what was originally contracted. 

I don't have any documentation for the following statement, but I do think that the majority of Hyatt owners purchased the location they most wanted, rather than purchasing the location with the lowest maintenance fees. Otherwise why would the Colorado ski resorts and Key West beach resorts be very strong sellers? 

In any Vacation Club, there are always going to be more popular locations. That's why people purchase in those locations. But if the owners of those locations should choose not to use their purchased unit, they have an alternative, using the allocated points with internal trading or Interval International. Should Highlands Inn owners be restricted from trading into Four Seasons Aviara Resort because Four Seasons Aviara has the dubious distinction of having one of the highest maintenance fees in the timeshare industry? ($2311.18 per week including taxes for highest season two bedroom)

I would prefer not to be a pessimist, but I think this change will initiate chaos within the Hyatt Vacation Club point system.

Also, I am still wondering how this change was initiated.


----------



## jkc22

*"Fixed" Point Values*

I do appreciate the arguments that point values should be "fixed," and to a certain extent, I wish ALL point values are to stay constant for the life of HVC ownership for an owner. However, unless specifically stated at purchase that such point values are guaranteed to remain constant, there's not much owners can do.

I do have yet another question, mainly to those who bought directly from HVC and/or authorized resellers that allow transfer of HVC points to Hyatt Hotels Gold Passport points. What were you told about the equivalence of exchange? Were you sold that "for a given week of HVC points, you are able to stay in the Park Hyatt Tokyo for 5, 7, or 10 nights....?" If so, I would think you should have more issues with HVC (earlier) than the Highlands Inn increase.

I am a 10+ year Hyatt Diamond member, and have accumulated over 1M Gold Passport points over the past 15+ years. I've seen the point value requirement for Park Hyatt Tokyo increase from around 10K points/night to 15K points/night, to 18K points/night now. This means for whatever your 75K points you get for exchanging into Gold Passport, you were able to stay at the Park Hyatt Tokyo for 7 nights 15 years ago, 5 nights about 5 years ago, and only 4 nights now. I am surprised that no HVC members have complained about this “change” that was supposed to stay “fixed”? Wouldn’t you argue that’s you were sold 7 nights of Park Hyatt Tokyo for your week, and now you only get 4? 

The Hyatt Gold Passport hotel categories change every year, and as such, HVC points will get varying number of nights depending on the category changes year after year. While I do not see HVC categories or seasons change every year, HVC has reserved all rights to do so. After all, it OWNS and OPERATES the HVC program, while the HVC owners only own the deeded weeks at their home resorts, and as members, they have exchange privileges within the HVC program.

I had been upset my Gold Passport points won’t get me as many nights at the Park Hyatt Tokyo now, but I am still an active member. I still get many free nights out of the program, and I could certainly vote with my feet as I stay over 75+ nights with Hyatt every year. All other hotel/airline/timeshare programs are changing point requirements anywhere you look. I think the important fact is to realize that the operators OWN the point programs, and if you can get over that fact (as an owner’s ownership in a timeshare has absolutely no rights over the operations of the program, but only privileges to participate and use the program), you will be less upset.


----------



## heathpack

jkc22 said:


> All other hotel/airline/timeshare programs are changing point requirements anywhere you look. I think the important fact is to realize that the operators OWN the point programs, and if you can get over that fact (as an owner’s ownership in a timeshare has absolutely no rights over the operations of the program, but only privileges to participate and use the program), you will be less upset.



No it does not upset me when my FF miles or hotel points requirements change over time, as I do not pay for them and as such my expectation from them is low-- if I get something of value out of them, great.  If not, well, I didn't pay anything for them, so no great loss.  They are a free consqeuence of activity I would otherwise engage in.

This is in no way the same as a timeshare which I actually paid for.

And the timeshares whose points requirements keep escalating-- what has happened to their value over time?  Many of them are now worthless, don't you agree?  You would be happy with Hyatt going down that path?

It seems to me that there is a good chance that Hyatt's ultimate goal is to try to hike the points requirement for as many properties as possible.  I don't buy the high demand argument-- I check Hyatt's website very frequently and I can tell you HI reservations are not very hard to come by.  Nor do I buy the "levelling the playing field because HI MF are too high arguement" that some on this thread have proposed.  HI MF are what?  $1250/year?  Isn't this the same as Coconut Plantation?!

You can ardently believe, jkc22, that escalating points requirements are a good thing for HVC-- to each his own.  But I personally can't see many people being happy to spend thousands of dollars buying into a timeshare system if you're likely to get less by spending more.  You might as well just stick with the open market and pay for lodging as you go.

I also think RAL's question is a good one-- what _was_ it that set this change in motion?

H


----------



## Carmel85

*Please write to Florida and Chicago HQ if you really are upset and do not think this Carmel Points adjustment is fair.*

Ed Crovo is the man and person who Oked this point adjustment just so Carmel could sell units thhat is the facts.  As people have said Ed is just a company man and not look out for all of us owners so he is useless in ever helping us owners.

Ed Crovo
Hyatt Vacation Ownership, Inc.
450 Carillon Parkway, Suite 210
St. Petersburg, FL 33716 

Mark S. Hoplamazian,
President and Chief Executive Officer
71 South Wacker Drive, 12th Floor
Chicago, IL 60606

H. Charles Floyd,  (Ed Crovo's boss)
Chief Operating Officer, North America Operations


 So please cut and paste your posts and send them by snail mail and lets get this letter drive started!!! 

Also I would suggest you copy your letters to you local Board of Directors where you own a Hyatt Timeshare.

Start writting today send it to Chicago Hyatt HQ. that will make Ed's head turn and start to listen to us owners.

c85


any Marriott,Starwood,Hilton,FourSeason owners, or prospective Hyatt owners want to write please do so we all need to work together just like all the Timeshare Companies do to us.


----------



## ecwinch

Just curious - is Hyatt selling timeshare intervals in California for any out of state properties that would require a California public report to be filed with the DRE for those offerings?

Or is it safe to assume that the HI location is the only resort that a public report has been filed with the DRE?

Just trying to figure out how California law would be invoked for those resorts outside of California. Seems like there would be a lack of jurisdiction.


----------



## heathpack

ecwinch said:


> Just curious - is Hyatt selling timeshare intervals in California for any out of state properties that would require a California public report to be filed with the DRE for those offerings?
> 
> Or is it safe to assume that the HI location is the only resort that a public report has been filed with the DRE?
> 
> Just trying to figure out how California law would be invoked for those resorts outside of California. Seems like there would be a lack of jurisdiction.



Sorry to take so long to reply-- we've been sick and busy getting ready for the holidays.

When we toured and got our timeshare spiel at HI, they also pitched us Pinon Pointe in Sedona.  We could have purchased PP through the Carmel sales office.

And although this does not really matter to the gist of your post: HI is not the only Hyatt property in California.  Northstar is also in CA; both are registered with the DRE.

CA law does require that a multi-site timeshare company selling in the state of CA be in compliance with law in every state in which they operate.  I'm not saying that Hyatt is not in compliance in any other state, just that as a point of law, the state of CA does care what a timeshare company does in other states.

Now, once again, I am not proposing suing Hyatt.  I am just proposing understanding CA timeshare law.

H


----------



## D2-S3

*HI points allocation*

This could not have changed without the blessing of II.  If I owned 2 weeks of 2BR units at HI, then the new point allocation would provide me with around 1300 total additional points, enough to give me an extra 2BR week if the points were deposited into II.  There must be something in it for them if they are to be expected to sign off on this.

What might be in it for II is the same "benefit" for the non-HI Hyatt owners.  That is, the availability of units to exchange into would increase.  This would occur because fewer Hyatt owners would want to spend the points to exchange into it because of the increased cost.  Can anyone comment on how easy it has been until now to exchange into HI?

Finally, it is worth noting that HI owners already had extra points allocated to them prior to this new change.  The majority of the weeks there are listed as Platinum or Diamond season, and the rest are Gold season.  This is supposed to be the way that demand is reflected within the club.  No other Hyatt property has a similar distribution of weeks limited to these seasons. 

I am not an attorney, and don't know if what they are doing is legal or not.  If this is used sparingly and only for the stated purpose it may not cause major problems.  However, I find it worrisome that this could be just the start of the devaluation of points because this change occurred shortly after Hyatt went public.


----------



## luvtotravel59

heathpack said:


> Sorry to take so long to reply-- we've been sick and busy getting ready for the holidays.
> 
> When we toured and got our timeshare spiel at HI, they also pitched us Pinon Pointe in Sedona.  We could have purchased PP through the Carmel sales office.
> 
> And although this does not really matter to the gist of your post: HI is not the only Hyatt property in California.  Northstar is also in CA; both are registered with the DRE.
> 
> CA law does require that a multi-site timeshare company selling in the state of CA be in compliance with law in every state in which they operate.  I'm not saying that Hyatt is not in compliance in any other state, just that as a point of law, the state of CA does care what a timeshare company does in other states.
> 
> Now, once again, I am not proposing suing Hyatt.  I am just proposing understanding CA timeshare law.
> 
> H


I have written to the president of Hyatt Vacation Club, Carol Hray.  I am very upset about the increase.  I was also told that it is supply vs demand and that because they pay higher maintenance fees, they have the right to increase their points.  However, they increase the points by 50% for the standard one bedroom and put it in the same category as the two bedroom. From what I understand, Highland Inn has 1 bedroom lofts which are two stories and standard one bedroom.  They have priced other HVC members out from trading into their property.  Not only that, but they increased their points for themselves, with out any regard for the whole HVC point system and its members.  I wish that we could all pursue this because, as I told Ms. Hray, if this continues, then all properties would do the same thing and what would be the advantage of being HVC owners?  The purpose of the program is to be able to travel to other places other than your home resort. Correct?


----------



## luvtotravel59

*I agree!*



ral said:


> I, for one, do not wish to use Highlands Inn year after year. I have not yet stayed there and don't have any immediate plans to stay there. If I did want to stay there annually, I would have purchased at Highlands Inn.
> 
> What is most important is the major change in Hyatt Vacation Club philosophy. While this change is of immediate advantage to Highlands Inn owners, it may open the door to a series of changes to the detriment of all Hyatt Vacation Club members.
> 
> The original philosophy behind the Hyatt Vacation Club was to have a program that allowed an owner six months to choose whether he wishes to stay in his purchased unit. If he chooses not to stay in his deeded unit, he can then trade into another Vacation Club unit using comparable points. The main idea was to have the same number of points for the same bedroom size unit, with differences in seasons. Point value for a two bedroom is the same for all two bedrooms in the same season in the Vacation Club. The Highlands Inn restructure is definitely a change in the philosophy of the Hyatt Vacation Club. I can recall during the developer presentation how strongly the sales staff emphasized how well this program functioned.
> 
> I still don't understand why this change in points is needed. If a Highlands Inn owner chooses to stay in his deeded week, that week is not available to the Vacation Club. If the Highlands Inn owner wishes to give up his week, he still has the number of points necessary to book at whichever Hyatt Vacation Club unit he wishes. The unit given up then becomes available to others in the Vacation Club at no loss to the original owner.
> 
> I do understand the new classifications of two bedroom premier and two bedroom deluxe at the Hyatt Siesta Key because they are actually three bedroom and four bedroom units with additional baths (the third and fourth rooms are without windows, so they are not allowed to be called “bedrooms.”)
> 
> Does anyone know how this change in point value was initiated?



From what I understand, Highlands Inn has standard 1br, 1 bedroom lofts (2 story) and two bedrooms.  The owners felt that it was unfair that they pay very high maintenance fees compared to other HVC resorts and that owners pay the same amount for points for the lofts as a one bedroom. Hence the vote to increase the points for 1 bedrooms across the board
With that being said, why it is okay for the standard one bedrooms to have increase 51% and have the same point value as two bedroom unit?  

This is totally wrong, certainly not fair and equitable to HVC owners across the board.  We have been blocked out of their resort for a week stay.  Not only that, but they earned additional points for themselves that they can use in the HVC point system for other resorts, like ours.  Does that seem fair?  Is this legal?  How does HVC corporate approve this?  This does set a precedent for HVC resorts.  This just seemed to slip by all of us and I have written to Carol Hray, President of HVC in Florida asking for her help to get Highlands Inn to reconsider the points for a standard one bedroom.
JB


----------



## heathpack

luvtotravel59 said:


> From what I understand, Highlands Inn has standard 1br, 1 bedroom lofts (2 story) and two bedrooms.  The owners felt that it was unfair that they pay very high maintenance fees compared to other HVC resorts and that owners pay the same amount for points for the lofts as a one bedroom. Hence the vote to increase the points for 1 bedrooms across the board
> With that being said, why it is okay for the standard one bedrooms to have increase 51% and have the same point value as two bedroom unit?
> 
> This is totally wrong, certainly not fair and equitable to HVC owners across the board.  We have been blocked out of their resort for a week stay.  Not only that, but they earned additional points for themselves that they can use in the HVC point system for other resorts, like ours.  Does that seem fair?  Is this legal?  How does HVC corporate approve this?  This does set a precedent for HVC resorts.  This just seemed to slip by all of us and I have written to Carol Hray, President of HVC in Florida asking for her help to get Highlands Inn to reconsider the points for a standard one bedroom.
> JB



Go get em!

I would not listen to any balderdash about HI thinking their units are worth more because of higher MF and then demanding more points.  This was a move by HVC pure and simple.  NOT HI owners.  

 Totally outrageous.

H


----------



## nanette0269

Interesting.  I got married at Hyatt 2 years ago and used my Hyatt Hotel points and my timeshare to get enough rooms for all my immediate family...had no issues booking.  Was the peak stature because of my wedding?


----------

