# [ 2012 ] Letter from the Ritz Carlton Destination Club



## Lockwoodroad

See letter received today.  In short: RCDC members have lost access to the Abaco and Kapalua Bay Ritz Carlton Clubs today--Kapalua Bay was probably the nicest club along with the Bachelor Gulch property. They lost access to the Abercrombie and Kent properties-which included a host of $2-3mm properties-and was a huge perk (while it lasted which wasn't very long). And "Based on The Ritz-Carlton Destination Club Member feedback," the RCDC members now have the pleasure of being part of the Marriot Vacation Club.  Perhaps at the remaining RCDCs they can begin to offer a complimenaty breakfast if you sit through a "short informational (timeshare) presentation".

--------------------
Dear Member,

In the past several years we evolved The Ritz-Carlton Destination Club for the greater enjoyment of our Members. As you are aware, three years ago, we launched a new product offering known as Portfolio, providing a flexible membership option which allows Members to enjoy participating in Ritz-Carlton Destination Club locations within the Portfolio program. As a result of the Portfolio program offering, we also extended Home Club Members the opportunity to enjoy more flexible travel by exchanging their allocated time for points through The Lion & Crown Exchange Company.

In response to Member feedback, we sought ways to provide exceptional usability through a variety of destinations and experiences. As a result, we have some changes to share with you. Not surprisingly, with the decline of the economic climate, some adjustments had to be made but in other areas we are continuing to advance forward. Rest assured that as we advance forward, nothing about your Home Club Membership has changed.

After careful consideration, The Ritz-Carlton Destination Club has made the strategic business decision to remove The Ritz-Carlton brand from The Abaco Club at Winding Bay. The unforeseen deterioration of and uncertainty surrounding global economic conditions have not only rendered this location unsustainable from a business perspective, but have limited the prospects of any enhancements in the near term.

On July 10, 2012, The Ritz-Carlton Management Company, LLC, as manager of the property known as The Ritz-Carlton Club, Kapalua Bay, exercised its right to issue a default notice pursuant to its management agreement with the Kapalua Bay Vacation Owners Association. As a result, it is the intention of The Ritz-Carlton Management Company, LLC to terminate its management agreement for The Ritz-Carlton Club, Kapalua Bay and to remove The Ritz-Carlton brand from the property at the conclusion of the applicable notice period, with termination to be effective on September 10, 2012 at 11:59 P.M. HST. Concurrently with the termination of the management agreement for The Ritz-Carlton Club, Kapalua Bay, the Kapalua Bay Condominium will no longer be a Ritz-Carlton Destination Club location. If you have future reservations or waitlist requests for Kapalua Bay, Member Services is available to assist you with making alternate arrangements.

While we understand that it may be disappointing not having The Abaco Club at Winding Bay or Kapalua Bay Condominium within the collection of Ritz-Carlton Destination Club locations, we have determined new ways to provide a variety of experiences.

Based on The Ritz-Carlton Destination Club Member feedback, additional benefits and experiences will be available through a new affiliation with Marriott Vacation Club Destinations. This affiliation will enable Ritz-Carlton Destination Club Members to expand their options.
Affiliation will extend you the opportunity to deposit your Reserved Allocation on an annual basis. Once you deposit, the following will be available for you:
• Secure available Ritz-Carlton Destination Club locations while enjoying the ability to choose the appropriate size accommodation and length of travel
• Secure any of the 51 worldwide Marriott Vacation Club Resorts, including Europe
• Bank unused points into the following year
• Borrow points from the coming year
• Book any experience in the Explorer Collection which includes over 100 experiences to
enjoy. 

The Explorer Collection will replace the current affiliation with Abercrombie & Kent Residence Club; however, the new offering will include fully escorted tours, upscale cruises, special events and packages.

To clarify, nothing about the Home Club Membership that you purchased has changed. If you wish to continue to use your Membership as you do today, you maintain the opportunity to:
• Reserve your allocated time
• Exchange your Reserved Allocation with fellow Home Club Members via the existing
The Cobalt Travel Company, LLC
• Retain the ability to purchase additional Space Available Time at the prevailing per diem
fee
• Continue to enjoy The Ritz-Carlton 2012 Hotel Reservation Service
Initially access to the enhancements made available through the new affiliation with Marriott Vacation Club Destinations will be complimentary and easily added to your Membership for you to enjoy. We encourage you to participate, as we feel that you will be delighted with the additional destinations and countless experiential excursions available to you when you choose not to visit your Home Club during your allocated time.

In order to implement these additional options The Lion & Crown Travel Co., LLC ("Lion & Crown") will require the execution of an Addendum to your current Enrollment Agreement. Therefore, pursuant to its reserved rights under your Enrollment Agreement and the Exchange Procedures, Lion & Crown hereby notifies you that effective immediately, it will not accept the renewal of any Enrollment Agreements for which an Addendum is not executed or accept reservations for usage associated with your Allocation which would result in the renewal of any Enrollment Agreements for which an Addendum is not executed. Following December 31, 2012, Lion & Crown will only accept reservations for parties that execute the Addendum (or are otherwise entitled to make reservations, including parties who execute new Enrollment Agreements). Further information regarding how to enroll, details on point values and the Addendum will be provided for your consideration in an email communication this Fall. We encourage you to execute such Addendum to avoid termination of the Enrollment Agreement and take advantage of this exciting new opportunity. Recognizing that this exciting new affiliation may impact your decision to deposit for 2014, we will be opening the deposit windows in Spring 2013 for 2014 usage.

We are enthusiastic about the future of The Ritz-Carlton Destination Club and look forward to assisting you with your travel planning.

Warmest Regards,
Eveleen Babich
General Manager
The Cobalt Travel Company, LLC
￼628691-7


----------



## Kagehitokiri2

thanks.

so theyre ending management of abaco fractionals, kapalua fractionals, kapalua residences? 
all related to financial situations of developments?


----------



## NeilGoBlue

Do you know if the addendum to stay in the Lion and Crown club is a formality? Or does it materially change the agreement?  Is AK still in the Lion and crown club?  I know that they were negotiating 2013.  We haven't been told anything.


----------



## Kagehitokiri2

pretty clear >


Lockwoodroad said:


> The Explorer Collection will replace the current affiliation with Abercrombie & Kent Residence Club


----------



## DazedandConfused

Lockwoodroad said:


> Based on The Ritz-Carlton Destination Club Member feedback, additional benefits and experiences will be available through a new affiliation with Marriott Vacation Club Destinations. This affiliation will enable Ritz-Carlton Destination Club Members to expand their options.
> 
> Affiliation will extend you the opportunity to deposit your Reserved Allocation on an annual basis. Once you deposit, the following will be available for you:
> 
> • Secure any of the 51 worldwide Marriott Vacation Club Resorts, including Europe



So people that could afford to buy Ritz Carleton Destination Club for $200,000+ or so can now use a Marriott Timeshare that can be bought resale for less than $5,000.

Gee, what a great benefit.


----------



## ada903

So is there a chart somewhere showing how many points it takes to book the various Marriott's and under what conditions?  How do Ritz weeks translate to Marriott points? Or Marriott weeks?


----------



## Kagehitokiri2

so far website has dropped abaco and A&K, but not kapalua...

also dropped kauai, wonder if development suspended.

losing abaco and kapalua leaves st thomas and jupiter, and jupiter is ~2 miles to the beach.

the people who are screwed are fractional owners at abaco (if any, or was it suspended?) and fractional/residence owners at kapalua (including ER) - funny how they dont mention that in the letter, even though OP isnt one

***

FS exuma had some condos, and a couple fractional shares, changed to sandals
setai miami dropped GHM mgmt
FS aviara TS is still managed by FS, but hotel changed to PH


----------



## NeilGoBlue

Kagehitokiri2 said:


> pretty clear >



Yep.. Sorry missed that..


----------



## Love2TS

DazedandConfused said:


> So people that could afford to buy Ritz Carleton Destination Club for $200,000+ or so can now use a Marriott Timeshare that can be bought resale for less than $5,000.
> 
> Gee, what a great benefit.



My thoughts exactly.


----------



## Lockwoodroad

*Abercrombie and Kent*

Among my many concerns is that the Ritz/Cobalt has not been transparent with the RCDC members about this deteriorating situation. 

For instance, the Abercrombie and Kent relationship was reduced to just four (4) properties months ago.  Not only were the RCDC members not ever informed of this cut back (even as of today), on the RCDC website it appeared as if all the A&K properties remained available to the members.


----------



## bogey21

Are Ritz Carlton and Marriott one and the same?

George


----------



## Lockwoodroad

*my letter to the Marriot Vacations Club*

Lee Cunningham
Executive Vice President & Chief Operating Officer
The Ritz-Carlton Destination Club 
Member.inquiry@ritzcarltonclub.com 

Dear Lee, the recent communications from the Marriott Vacations Worldwide Corp. are both insulting and disingenuous. I encourage you and your team to communicate with the Ritz-Carlton Destination Club members in an earnest and forthright manner.

First, let's start how you sign your letter. You are the Executive Vice President and Chief Operating Officer of the Marriott Vacations Worldwide Corporation. I assume you sign your August 20th letter under the "The Ritz-Carlton Destination Club" to provide us the RCDC members comfort that you have our best interests at heart. I would encourage you to be upfront that you work for the Marriot Vacations Worldwide Corp., of which only a small fraction of its members belong/bought into the RCDC brand. Such honesty will suggest you understand that there are competing interests at play. 

Second, you start your August 20th letter with an absurd and patently false statement: "We would like to assure you that nothing that you originally purchased has changed or will change as a result of the announcement mentioned above." Sir, in one fell swoop RCDC members lost access to the Ritz Carlton Clubs in Abaco and Kapalua Bay. We also lost access to the upscale Abercrombie and Kent properties. And "Based on The Ritz-Carlton Destination Club Member feedback," (ha-ha) RCDC members will see their properties being marketed to and being made available to MVW timeshare/points members who have a much lower cost of entry. We, the RCDC members, are not idiots. Please do not treat us as if we were.

Third, beyond the obvious spin you try to put on the Marriot Vacation Club efforts to "expand its luxury experience options", the reality is that Marriot Vacations Club properties cater to a consumer with a different price point with different expectations. To be clear, if any RCDC member wanted to be part of the the Marriot Vacation Club, he or she would have saved one hundred or two hundred thousand dollars and bought into the Marriot Vacation Club. 

Lastly, your recent communications fail to acknowlege the underlying issue which all RCDC members need to understand. The Marriot Vacations Worldwide Corp. has a huge incentive to dilute the RCDC brand to further its greater interest of selling more Marriot Vacation Club memberships. The growth of Marriott Vacations Worldwide Corp. as a public company it tied with growth of the sales of more and more Marriot Vacation Club memberships. The sale of more RCDC memberships is not currently relevant for this public company. Thus the value of the investment made by each RCDC members is at jeopardy.

The recent communications by you and your team have undermined your credibility with the RCDC membership. Unless the Marriot Vacations Worldwide Corp. changes its attitude and begins to address the clear conflict of interest that will destroy the value of our investment, I continue to encourage the RCDC Aspen Highlands board to explore exiting from the Marriot relationship and cancel all management contracts. 

Best regards,


----------



## Kagehitokiri2

i notice tons of discussion in marriott forum now, including lots of TS owners staying at RC, and one post saying the unsold inventory / trust is available

so basically, the (little unowned) time there is, is being used up by TS owners, instead of RC fractional/DC owners/members

http://tugbbs.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=29

http://www.sherpareport.com/destination-clubs/ritz-carlton-points.html


----------



## DazedandConfused

bogey21 said:


> Are Ritz Carlton and Marriott one and the same?
> 
> George



I guess they are now (minus the $100,000+ buy-in)


----------



## Lockwoodroad

*Webinar for Members of The Ritz-Carlton Destination Club*

"We have scheduled a webinar for Members of The Ritz-Carlton Destination Club with myself and the President and Chief Executive Officer of Marriott Vacations Worldwide on August 28th at 4:00 PM Eastern Standard Time to help address questions we have received from our Members." 

I just have one question: Do you realize that you are destroying the value of each and every Ritz Carlton Destination Club member's investment?

Every action taken by the MVWC thus far indicates it is solely interested in advancing the sale of more MVWC memberships and not concerned about protecting the value of the investment of RCDC members.


----------



## Kagehitokiri2

*Lockwoodroad*,

when RCDC launched it was a part of marriott
after TS spinoff, RCDC is a part of marriott TS

how many "portfolio" members are there?
most are "home" owners and their use will never change


----------



## BocaBoy

DazedandConfused said:


> So people that could afford to buy Ritz Carleton Destination Club for $200,000+ or so can now use a Marriott Timeshare that can be bought resale for less than $5,000.
> 
> Gee, what a great benefit.



This is comparing apples to oranges--why would you compare RC developer prices to MVCI resale prices?  I admit that RC developer prices were considerably higher than most Marriott timeshare prices on a week to week comparison, but not nearly the degree of difference you imply.  Also, some Marriott timeshares (e.g., Maui oceanfront weeks, prime ski weeks, etc.) sold for prices well in excess of $70,000 per week, which is equivalent to over $200,000 for a three week interval.  There were even a few prime Maui weeks that sold for over $100,000 per week.


----------



## DazedandConfused

BocaBoy said:


> This is comparing apples to oranges--why would you compare RC developer prices to MVCI resale prices?  I admit that RC developer prices were considerably higher than most Marriott timeshare prices on a week to week comparison, but not nearly the degree of difference you imply.  Also, some Marriott timeshares (e.g., Maui oceanfront weeks, prime ski weeks, etc.) sold for prices well in excess of $70,000 per week, which is equivalent to over $200,000 for a three week interval.  There were even a few prime Maui weeks that sold for over $100,000 per week.



I will clarify that the majority of Marriott timeshares can now be bought for under $5,000 on the resale market and some are in the $10-15k range. It really does not matter what they originally sold for as the prices have tumbled.

I was only pointing out the bad value of trading expensive RCDC points for a Marriott stay. Of course there may be a few isolated good examples such as Maui or ski weeks, but the majority of trades will be bad deals for RCDC members.

It is like two steps forward and one back. Hey members we are offering some new perks to your overpriced membership...one perk allows stays at a Marriott (gee thanks)


----------



## bogey21

I admit that I don't understand the nuances of what Ritz Carlton/Marriott are doing but it sure looks like another example of Marriott doing what is in the best interest of Marriott to the detriment of their Owners.  If true, all I can say is what else did you expect?

George


----------



## BocaBoy

DazedandConfused said:


> I will clarify that the majority of Marriott timeshares can now be bought for under $5,000 on the resale market and some are in the $10-15k range. It really does not matter what they originally sold for as the prices have tumbled.
> 
> I was only pointing out the bad value of trading expensive RCDC points for a Marriott stay. Of course there may be a few isolated good examples such as Maui or ski weeks, but the majority of trades will be bad deals for RCDC members.
> 
> It is like two steps forward and one back. Hey members we are offering some new perks to your overpriced membership...one perk allows stays at a Marriott (gee thanks)



My main point is you are comparing developer prices at RC to resale prices at MVCI.  Of course, RC is generally more expensive than MVCI, even if you compare apples to apples.  But not as dramatic as you are trying to make it seem.  RC prices have tumbled also.  Not cool.

I also don't see why you say this is a bad enhancement for RC owners.  You probably would not want to trade for a mud week in a MVCI ski resort or a summer week in Phoenix, but you don't have to.  Now you have the ability to access some very good additional properties.  And the exchange is not week for week.  Your RC points would undoubtedly be enough to get a lot more time at many of the Marriott timeshares than you are giving up.  I own at Maui and if exchange for DC points I can get lots of weeks at other places with my points from a single Maui week.  Even though I will normally go to Maui, I think this is a great enhancement to my ownership.


----------



## DazedandConfused

BocaBoy said:


> My main point is you are comparing developer prices at RC to resale prices at MVCI.  Of course, RC is generally more expensive than MVCI, even if you compare apples to apples.  But not as dramatic as you are trying to make it seem.  RC prices have tumbled also.  Not cool.



I am not an owner at RCDC but when I looked into the program in the past, it was very expensive and the point chart conversion for resorts were complex and most trades were expensive.

You have to re-read the post #1. It cracks me up that RCDC thinks losing a few great Ritz locations can be overcome by offering stays at 51 Marriott timeshares.

It is hard for me to imagine that someone that paid $250,000 to joine RCDC and then pay outrageous high dues would be happy trading their points to stay at a Marriott timeshare when they can rent that unit for so cheap from an owner, pay cash for the same thing, or buy that week resale if they really want.

This is simple -- Ritz Carlton putting lipstick on a pig.


----------



## Kagehitokiri2

*BocaBoy*, youve got to be freaking kidding me. who cares what TS owners think? 

the problem, that everyone (on DC4MS) was clear on from the very beginning, is that RCDC was never a DC.


----------



## WBP

The current status of The Ritz-Carlton Destination Club can be attributed to its origin, when The Ritz-Carlton Hotel Company turned to Marriott Vacation Club, and enaged Marriott Vacation Club to develop, sell and support their "private residence club." In retropsect, The Ritz-Carlton Hotel Company should have found an experienced "luxury" partner to do this, not a timeshare outfit.

How sad that what was once touted as a "private residence club," "accessible only to Ritz-Carlton Club members and their guests" has become as private as the Port Authority Bus Terminal.


----------



## Kagehitokiri2

as mentioned, marriott owns ritz carlton 

marriott wasnt selling out RC fractionals, so they decided to sell unsold inventory as portfolio memebership

with no reference to what they would do in future if they were going to finish selling fractionals

although how many fractionals werent owned by marriott? dont they own most, except kapalua for example?


----------



## WBP

Kagehitokiri2 said:


> as mentioned, marriott owns ritz carlton
> 
> marriott wasnt selling out RC fractionals, so they decided to sell unsold inventory as portfolio memebership
> 
> with no reference to what they would do in future if they were going to finish selling fractionals
> 
> although how many fractionals werent owned by marriott? dont they own most, except kapalua for example?



If my memory is right:

Marriott Vacation Club, DBA as some entity of The Ritz-Carlton Club, sold millions of dollars of fractional ownership, before they took some of their remaining inventory and placed it in the Ritz-Carlton Destination Club "Portfolio" pool/trust. At one point, Marriott Vacation Club took some of the fractional homes at the The Ritz-Carlton Club, Jupiter and converted them into whole ownership, which they called "Villas." Even after the advent of Portfolio membership, Marriott Vacation Club continued to sell some inventory as non-Portfolio inventory, an example of which was the St. Thomas "Suites" inventory.

With the exception of some of the original Ritz-Carlton Club's, which had joint-venture partners, an arm of Marriott Vacation Club held the mortgage to the unsold inventory, known as Developer inventory. Three of the Club's that had joint-venture partners were Jupiter, Kapalua, and San Francisco. In the case of the failed Ritz-Carlton Club, South Beach, Marriott Vacation Club reportedly had no money in that real estate, and served solely as the sales and marketing arm for the Developer (who was not Marriott Vacation Club). I don't remember if Marriott Vacation Club reported having any money in the Ritz-Carlton Club, Santa Barbara, which also failed to come to fruition.


----------



## BocaBoy

So let me get this right.......Ritz Carlton Club priced itself so high that it essentially failed.  The market would not support it.  Marriott Vacation Club essentially rescued them by opening up the RC properties to Premier and Premier Plus elite members of Marriott Vacation Club.  And some of you are complaining that it is so terrible to now have the opportunity to use your points to stay (only if you choose) at quality places like the Maui Ocean Club.  Very interesting.

And yes, if I owned at RC, I would much rather have the ability to stay at over 50 MVCI resorts than to keep the two or three that are no longer RC Clubs (unless of course I owned at those two or three specific resorts).

When my wife and I were looking to buy fractional ownership a few years ago we looked at the Ritz Carlton Club but concluded that it was way overpriced.  Notice that I said overpriced, not expensive.  Expensive is OK if you get appropriate value from it.  We felt that we got much better value at MVCI.  I wonder if those who are so upset now have actually stayed at some of the MVCI resorts.


----------



## BocaBoy

Kagehitokiri2 said:


> *BocaBoy*, youve got to be freaking kidding me. who cares what TS owners think?


Well, that is a mature attitude.

[/QUOTE]the problem, that everyone (on DC4MS) was clear on from the very beginning, is that RCDC was never a DC.[/QUOTE]

True, but they had to do something to stop the bleeding or there would be no RC Club left.


----------



## Kagehitokiri2

"Non-traditional Interval Ownership" doesnt target TS discussion



WJS said:


> If my memory is right:
> 
> Marriott Vacation Club, DBA as some entity of The Ritz-Carlton Club, sold millions of dollars of fractional ownership, before they took some of their remaining inventory and placed it in the Ritz-Carlton Destination Club "Portfolio" pool/trust. At one point, Marriott Vacation Club took some of the fractional homes at the The Ritz-Carlton Club, Jupiter and converted them into whole ownership, which they called "Villas." Even after the advent of Portfolio membership, Marriott Vacation Club continued to sell some inventory as non-Portfolio inventory, an example of which was the St. Thomas "Suites" inventory.
> 
> With the exception of some of the original Ritz-Carlton Club's, which had joint-venture partners, an arm of Marriott Vacation Club held the mortgage to the unsold inventory, known as Developer inventory. Three of the Club's that had joint-venture partners were Jupiter, Kapalua, and San Francisco. In the case of the failed Ritz-Carlton Club, South Beach, Marriott Vacation Club reportedly had no money in that real estate, and served solely as the sales and marketing arm for the Developer (who was not Marriott Vacation Club). I don't remember if Marriott Vacation Club reported having any money in the Ritz-Carlton Club, Santa Barbara, which also failed to come to fruition.



brilliant, thanks

marriott must have been minority in kapalua

marriott owns all of RC st thomas hotel etc


----------



## DazedandConfused

BocaBoy said:


> So let me get this right.......Ritz Carlton Club priced itself so high that it essentially failed.  The market would not support it.  Marriott Vacation Club essentially rescued them by opening up the RC properties to Premier and Premier Plus elite members of Marriott Vacation Club.  And some of you are complaining that it is so terrible to now have the opportunity to use your points to stay (only if you choose) at quality places like the Maui Ocean Club.  Very interesting.
> 
> And yes, if I owned at RC, I would much rather have the ability to stay at over 50 MVCI resorts than to keep the two or three that are no longer RC Clubs (unless of course I owned at those two or three specific resorts).
> 
> When my wife and I were looking to buy fractional ownership a few years ago we looked at the Ritz Carlton Club but concluded that it was way overpriced.  Notice that I said overpriced, not expensive.  Expensive is OK if you get appropriate value from it.  We felt that we got much better value at MVCI.  I wonder if those who are so upset now have actually stayed at some of the MVCI resorts.



Your logic is misplaced at best, but you entitled to your opinion.

The RCDC failed from day 1 because they were overcharging for an incredibly complicated system (every day at every property had a different point value), had incredible limited portfolio (did not include all Ritz properties, only a few), charged high fees ($250k to join and like $700 per day in annual dues and fees).

Now the RCDC is putting lipstick on a pig by offering their members access to Marriott timeshares. Sure there may be 5 or so nice properties such as the Maui location, but RCDC members will not be staying there at any bargain or discount rates. In fact, they are probably paying MORe than if they simply rented the same exact unit off VRBO, Redweek, etc.




BocaBoy said:


> True, but they had to do something to stop the bleeding or there would be no RC Club left.



If adding access to the Orlando Grand Vista timeshare is stopping the bleeding, I think it would be better to let the members die a fast and painless death than subject these high net worth individuals that paid $250,000 to join and $25,000 in yearly fees to think that the RCDC is doing them any favors.


----------



## BocaBoy

DazedandConfused said:


> Your logic is misplaced at best, but you entitled to your opinion.
> 
> The RCDC failed from day 1 because they were overcharging for an incredibly complicated system (every day at every property had a different point value), had incredible limited portfolio (did not include all Ritz properties, only a few), charged high fees ($250k to join and like $700 per day in annual dues and fees).
> 
> Now the RCDC is putting lipstick on a pig by offering their members access to Marriott timeshares. Sure there may be 5 or so nice properties such as the Maui location, but RCDC members will not be staying there at any bargain or discount rates. In fact, they are probably paying MORe than if they simply rented the same exact unit off VRBO, Redweek, etc.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If adding access to the Orlando Grand Vista timeshare is stopping the bleeding, I think it would be better to let the members die a fast and painless death than subject these high net worth individuals that paid $250,000 to join and $25,000 in yearly fees to think that the RCDC is doing them any favors.



I understand why you call yourself Dazed and Confused.


----------



## WBP

DazedandConfused said:


> Your logic is misplaced at best, but you entitled to your opinion.
> 
> The RCDC failed from day 1 because they were overcharging for an incredibly complicated system (every day at every property had a different point value), had incredible limited portfolio (did not include all Ritz properties, only a few), charged high fees ($250k to join and like $700 per day in annual dues and fees).
> 
> Now the RCDC is putting lipstick on a pig by offering their members access to Marriott timeshares. Sure there may be 5 or so nice properties such as the Maui location, but RCDC members will not be staying there at any bargain or discount rates. In fact, they are probably paying MORe than if they simply rented the same exact unit off VRBO, Redweek, etc.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If adding access to the Orlando Grand Vista timeshare is stopping the bleeding, I think it would be better to let the members die a fast and painless death than subject these high net worth individuals that paid $250,000 to join and $25,000 in yearly fees to think that the RCDC is doing them any favors.



I agree with your assessment.


----------



## DazedandConfused

BocaBoy said:


> I understand why you call yourself Dazed and Confused.



"Dazed and Confused" is a song by Jake Holmes, which was covered by The Yardbirds, and later reworked by Led Zeppelin who hold a separate copyright on the song. The song is included in The Rock and Roll Hall of Fame's 500 Songs that Shaped Rock and Roll.

Why don't you logically explain why I am incorrect in my assessment and you are correct.


----------



## BocaBoy

DazedandConfused said:


> Why don't you logically explain why I am incorrect in my assessment and you are correct.



I don't disagree with anything you say regarding the failure of RC Club.  I only disagree with your comments about this new option.  Even you say there are at least  five or so nice MVCI properties, although I believe there are many more than that.  So forget the others.  Allowing access to these five is a reasonable substitute for having access to the two or three RC lost.  At least they are trying to do something positive.  This is not about saying RC members should not be upset to have bought into a failed and overpriced concept.  That is already a done deal.  It is about an attitude.  And it is about a thought process that says the new choice is an insult to RC members because their developer prices were a lot higher than MVCI resale prices.  One of your arguments is that RC had so few locations.  That is a valid complaint.  And the new affiliation with Marriott Vacation club seems to me to be an attempt to address that deficiency.  And I still have not heard anything that says RC owners will not be able to get significantly more time at MVCI resorts than at RC resorts.  I think that is a key point in assessing value.  But heck, I don't really personally care if RC stays in business or shuts its doors.


----------



## DazedandConfused

ok, I better understand your thoughts now.

I have no idea what the points chart looks like for a Ritz to Marriott trade, perhaps it is generous, but I doubt it.

Yes, having this access is better than nothing, so you are correct, but I am stating that anyone that seriously considers RCDC or even joins, is NOT someone that will be satisfied with a typical Marriott, especially if the point conversion is expensive.

I agree the 3 bedroom Marriott Maui oceanfront (new building) is awesome, but it is NOWHERE as nice as the Ritz Kapalua Bay and that is what typical RCDC members will expect. Thus, any substitution for lost properties with inferior products will be met with unhappiness.

Now, if RCDC allowed trades into marriott properties as a added benefit and the point conversion was low, then it might be a worthwhile new perk, but the letter was to inform members about losing two great RCDC properties and then rather than adding comparable properties, they added the Timeshare portfolio.


----------



## WBP

BocaBoy said:


> I don't disagree with anything you say regarding the failure of RC Club.  I only disagree with your comments about this new option.  Even you say there are at least  five or so nice MVCI properties, although I believe there are many more than that.  So forget the others.  Allowing access to these five is a reasonable substitute for having access to the two or three RC lost.  At least they are trying to do something positive.  This is not about saying RC members should not be upset to have bought into a failed and overpriced concept.  That is already a done deal.  It is about an attitude.  And it is about a thought process that says the new choice is an insult to RC members because their developer prices were a lot higher than MVCI resale prices.  One of your arguments is that RC had so few locations.  That is a valid complaint.  And the new affiliation with Marriott Vacation club seems to me to be an attempt to address that deficiency.  And I still have not heard anything that says RC owners will not be able to get significantly more time at MVCI resorts than at RC resorts.  I think that is a key point in assessing value.  But heck, I don't really personally care if RC stays in business or shuts its doors.



I completely disagree. MVCI timeshare resorts are just that; not their physical plant, personnel, operating values, service capacity or service intensity are at the level of a luxury model (e.g. Ritz-Carlton, Four Seasons, Madarin). To develop some level of understanding of the pillar of The Ritz-Carlton, read: The New Gold Standard, 5 Leadership Principles for Creating a Legendary Customer Experience Courtesy of the Ritz-Carlton Hotel Company, available at Amazon.com. I'd venture to bet that no more than 15% of Marriott Vacation Club personnel - - including their leadership - - could make it past the Ritz-Carlton pre-hire screening process. The disparity between the Guest Experience at a Ritz-Carlton Club and Marriott Vacation Club resort is significant. And last but not least, although I don't have the data to support this, I'd speculate that the wealth capacity of those vacationing at Ritz-Carlton Club resorts - - in the aggregate - - is dramatically higher than those at Marriott Vacation Club resorts. What Marriott Vacation Club has, in fact, done, is dramatically lower the bar on The Ritz-Carlton Club. Take that one step further, there are those who believe that many of the employees of The Ritz-Carlton Club do not live up to the same performance standards as their contemporaries at The Ritz-Carlton Hotel Company.

Marriott Vacation Club has contributed little to nothing to the betterment of The Ritz-Carlton brand, and now they've introdced a group of people who are accustomed to getting a towel for providing Marriott Vacation Club with referral names, or 15,000 Mariott Rewards points for attending a sales presentation. It won't be long for the Boom Boxes and coolers to arrive poolside at The Ritz-Carlton Clubs.


----------



## Kagehitokiri2

bottom line, RC avail is now used up by TS owners

marriott owns ritz carlton (acquired ~50% in 1996 and ~50% in 2000)

RC standards arent equal to four seasons and amanresorts (nor mandarin oriental and peninsula)
FS is the one known for pre-screening process


----------



## BocaBoy

WJS said:


> I completely disagree. MVCI timeshare resorts are just that; not their physical plant, personnel, operating values, service capacity or service intensity are at the level of a luxury model (e.g. Ritz-Carlton, Four Seasons, Madarin). To develop some level of understanding of the pillar of The Ritz-Carlton, read: The New Gold Standard, 5 Leadership Principles for Creating a Legendary Customer Experience Courtesy of the Ritz-Carlton Hotel Company, available at Amazon.com. I'd venture to bet that no more than 15% of Marriott Vacation Club personnel - - including their leadership - - could make it past the Ritz-Carlton pre-hire screening process. The disparity between the Guest Experience at a Ritz-Carlton Club and Marriott Vacation Club resort is significant. And last but not least, although I don't have the data to support this, I'd speculate that the wealth capacity of those vacationing at Ritz-Carlton Club resorts - - in the aggregate - - is dramatically higher than those at Marriott Vacation Club resorts. What Marriott Vacation Club has, in fact, done, is dramatically lower the bar on The Ritz-Carlton Club. Take that one step further, there are those who believe that many of the employees of The Ritz-Carlton Club do not live up to the same performance standards as their contemporaries at The Ritz-Carlton Hotel Company.
> 
> Marriott Vacation Club has contributed little to nothing to the betterment of The Ritz-Carlton brand, and now they've introdced a group of people who are accustomed to getting a towel for providing Marriott Vacation Club with referral names, or 15,000 Mariott Rewards points for attending a sales presentation. It won't be long for the Boom Boxes and coolers to arrive poolside at The Ritz-Carlton Clubs.



This is the attitude I was speaking about.  I never said the level of luxury at MVCI is equal to RC, but it is nothing to be ashamed of.  Kind of like comparing Holland America to Regent Cruises.  Regent wins the cruise line awards for luxury and Holland America is routinely voted the world's best cruise experience.  And the quality of MVCI personnel is outstanding also.  

My biggest objection is to your statement that MVCI has "contributed little to nothing to the betterment of the Ritz-Carlton brand".....Without Marriott it would probably be out of business.  That would sure be good for the RC brand.

Also, a previous poster stated the RC availability is now used up by timeshare owners.  There are actually very few timeshare owners staying at RC Clubs.  First, only owners with elite status are eligible to stay at the RC Clubs.  And second, the points required to stay there are beyond the totals available to most TS owners.


----------



## Kagehitokiri2

this thread has gotten ridiculous.



BocaBoy said:


> Regent wins the cruise line awards for luxury



my standards are not high, and i thought silversea was a joke. really bad. 
original/small seabourn was ok, but i would not recommend to someone with standards.



BocaBoy said:


> Holland America is routinely voted the world's best cruise experience.



berlitz says hapag lloyd's ms europa is the best. no one with standards cares about voter awards.



BocaBoy said:


> very few timeshare owners staying at RC Clubs



youre confusing percentage with absolute number.
there has been discussion in marriott forum.



BocaBoy said:


> elite status...points required to stay there are beyond the totals available to most TS owners.



while that is a good thing, overall big picture its almost irrelevant.


----------



## DazedandConfused

BocaBoy said:


> Kind of like comparing Holland America to Regent Cruises.  Regent wins the cruise line awards for luxury and Holland America is routinely voted the world's best cruise experience.



Technically to top dogs in cruises are:

- Crystal
- Azamara
- Silversea
- Regent Seven Seas

For families - Disney smokes them all

Holland is generally the best ship for people over 65yo


----------



## Kagehitokiri2

DazedandConfused said:


> Technically to top dogs in cruises are:
> 
> - Crystal
> - Azamara
> - Silversea
> - Regent Seven Seas
> 
> For families - Disney smokes them all
> 
> Holland is generally the best ship for people over 65yo



all-inclusive >
seadream
seabourn

top berlitz >
ms europa

premium categories >
cunard queens grill
NCL haven

there are also small operators


----------



## WBP

*Ritz-Carlton Club unloading more assets - - Jupiter*

SEE: http://www.palmbeachpost.com/news/business/real-estate/trump-to-buy-ritz-carlton-in-jupiter/nS7ff/


----------



## TarheelTraveler

Just stayed at the Jupiter Ritz-Carlton Destination Club through the now ending RC-A&K exchange.  Very nice property with great service.  Other than not having a beach club or something similar, it's a fantastic place.  So I assume this means another property is being dropped from the Ritz-Carlton DC (or will there be some sort of continuing exchange)?


----------



## JonathanB

*Ritz Aspen*

They say its a Ritz Carlton, but its more like a Motel 6. The front line staff are friendly but incompetent. And don't complain to management or should I say mismanagement, unless you want a defensive , bite your head off response. One mismanager who goes by Mr. Black ( how appropriate) actually screamed at my wife when she complained that the sheets were stained.  So what are the highlights. Housekeeping or should I say unkeeping. It is a great opportunity to practice your foreign language skills, because that is all they speak. Ski Valet Valet is a laudatory term for chucking your equipment around like baggage handlers.   I stay at Ritz hotels and this is not a RItz property. DONT STAY HERE!
		Stayed January 2013


----------



## JonathanB

*Class Action Lawsuit Filed Against RC and Marriott 12/11/2012 (Post 1 of 3)*

_(Moderator Note: These posts have been edited to fit TUG's format.  No information was changed other than the page break notations of the original filing, which are indicated here by numbers at the bottom of each page.) - SueDonJ _

*UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA*
Steven B. Hoyt and Bradley A. Hoyt , on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated, *Plaintiffs*,
*vs.*
Marriott Vacations Worldwide Corporation, Inc., Marriott Ownership Resorts, Inc. d/b/a/ Marriott Vacation Club International, The Ritz-Carlton Hotel Company, L.L.C., The Ritz-Carlton Management Co., LLC, The Ritz-Carlton Development Co., Inc., and, The Ritz-Carlton Sales Company, Inc., *Defendants*.

*Case No. 12-3093*

*CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT*
(Jury Trial Demanded)

Plaintiffs Steven B. Hoyt and Bradley A. Hoyt (“Plaintiffs”), individually and on behalf of all other individuals and entities similarly situated, by and through their attorneys Zimmerman Reed, P.L.L.P., as a complaint against Defendants Marriott Vacations Worldwide, Inc., Marriott Ownership Resorts, Inc. d/b/a/ Marriott Vacation Club International, (“Marriott”), The Ritz-Carlton Hotel Company, L.L.C., The Ritz-Carlton Management Co., LLC., The Ritz-Carlton Development Co., Inc., and The Ritz-Carlton Sales Company, Inc. (“Ritz” or “Ritz Defendants”)—collectively “Defendants”—state and allege as follows:

*INTRODUCTION*

1. In 2003, Plaintiff Steven B. Hoyt purchased an undivided fractional interest in a condominium at the Ritz-Carlton Bachelor Gulch resort, located in

[** Page break ** CASE 0:12-cv-03093-DSD-JJK Document 1 Filed 12/11/12 Page 1 of 23 **]

Beaver Creek, Colorado.

2. In 2003, Plaintiff Bradley A. Hoyt also purchased an undivided fractional interest in a condominium at the Ritz-Carlton Aspen Highlands resort, located in Aspen, Colorado.

3. Defendants Ritz-Carlton Development Company Inc. and Ritz-Carlton Sales Company, Inc. marketed these luxury condominiums as a “second home
alternative” and a way to enjoy luxurious vacation homes with the exclusivity and amenities associated with Defendants’ Ritz-Carlton brand.

4. The Bachelor Gulch and Aspen Highland resorts are two of many developed and operated by the Ritz-Carlton Development Company, now a unit of Marriott, and the Ritz-Carlton Management Company. In addition to the Bachelor Gulch and Aspen Highland resorts, Ritz-Carlton developed and sold fractional interests in seven other Ritz-Carlton residence condominiums located at Ritz-Carlton resorts in the Bahamas, Colorado, California, Florida, Hawaii, and the U.S. Virgin Islands.

5. Plaintiff Steven Hoyt’s purchase at the Bachelor Gulch resort entitled him to 21 days per year of use of his unit, per a rotating schedule from year-to-year, or reciprocal use of another similar unit in another Ritz-Carlton condominium
property.

6. Plaintiff Bradley Hoyt’s purchase at the Aspen Highlands resort entitled him to 28 days per year of use, of which 21 days was reserved for use in his unit at Aspen Highlands on a rotating schedule from year-to-year. The remaining 7

[** Page break ** CASE 0:12-cv-03093-DSD-JJK Document 1 Filed 12/11/12 Page 2 of 23 **]

days could be reserved for use at any Ritz-Carlton condominium property based on availability on a first-come, first-served basis.

7. When Plaintiffs purchased their fractional interests, they signed purchase contracts, obtained title insurance, and received title to their fractional interest. In addition, they became members of the “Ritz Carlton Club” (“RCC”) and each resort’s homeowners’ association.

8. At some point, Defendants decided that the fractional-interest concept was not working or as profitable as planned. In or around April 2009, Defendants introduced the “Portfolio Membership” concept, in which new buyers could purchase “points-based” interests for use at designated “Ritz Carlton Destination Clubs” (“RCDC”). These points could be used to reserve accommodations at the same properties the Plaintiffs could reserve pursuant to their purchase contracts.
Alternatively, buyers could purchase a “Home Club Membership,” which Defendants represented as “identical to the successful fractional interest ownership offering.” Nonetheless, the Portfolio Membership was less expensive than the Home Club Membership, and as a result fewer individuals and families continued to purchase fractional interests in Defendants’ condominiums, including at Bachelor Gulch and Aspen Highlands. This meant that Plaintiffs and other putative class members would have difficulty selling their interest.

9. Ritz then also decided that any fractional interest not sold through the Defendant Ritz-Carlton Sales Company would not enjoy the reciprocity privileges at other RCDCs. This meant that Plaintiffs and other putative Class members would

[** Page break ** CASE 0:12-cv-03093-DSD-JJK Document 1 Filed 12/11/12 Page 3 of 23 **]

have to use the Ritz sales office, not an independent broker, if they decided to sell their interest.

10. In 2012, Defendants further unilaterally changed the terms and conditions of Plaintiffs’ and putative Class members’ fractional interest ownership by eliminating the Ritz-Carlton Winding Bay, Bahamas, and Ritz-Carlton, Kapalua Bay, Hawaii from the designated list of Ritz Carlton Destination Clubs. Defendants also announced their intention to “affiliate” the formerly exclusive RCDCs with Marriott Vacation Clubs, diluting the value and prestige of the Ritz branded residences.

11. As a result of Defendants’ unilateral introduction of the points-based Portfolio Membership, and elimination of important clubs, Plaintiffs and other
Class members are no longer able to enjoy the same benefits and privileges they had paid a substantial premium to experience.

12. The impact of these changes on the value of Plaintiffs’ and putative Class members’ fractional interests has been severe, resulting in property devaluation of their condominiums well outside of normal market fluctuations.

*JURISDICTION AND VENUE*

13. This court has subject matter jurisdiction over this action pursuant to the Class Action Fairness Act of 2005, 28 U.S.C. § 1332(d), because at least one Class member is of diverse citizenship from the Defendant, there are more than 100 Class members nationwide, and the aggregate amount in controversy exceeds $5,000,000.

[** Page break ** CASE 0:12-cv-03093-DSD-JJK Document 1 Filed 12/11/12 Page 4 of 23 **]

14. Defendants are subject to jurisdiction in this district by virtue of their extensive business dealings and transactions within this district. Defendants purposefully avail themselves of the Minnesota market. Defendant Marriott Vacations Worldwide, Inc. is licensed to conduct business in this district. Upon information and belief, Defendant Marriott Ownership Resorts, Inc. is a subsidiary of Marriott Vacations Worldwide Corporation, and is a licensed business with the Minnesota Office of the Secretary of State and is further licensed with the Minnesota Department of Commerce under the assumed name Marriott Vacation Club Destinations. Additionally, Defendant Marriott Ownership Resorts, Inc. maintains a registered agent in the district.

15. Defendants conduct substantial business in this district and have sufficient minimum contacts with this district, and otherwise purposefully avail themselves to the Minnesota forum, through the promotion, sale, and marketing of their resorts and hotels, including the fractional ownership options offered through, among others, the Marriott Vacation Club, in this district. Additionally, Defendants derive substantial amounts of revenue from individuals who are citizens of this district.

16. Defendants have entered into contractual relationships with both Plaintiffs while the Plaintiffs were residing in, and citizens of, the state of Minnesota. For example, Defendants The Ritz-Carlton Development Company, Inc., and The Ritz-Carlton Sales Company, Inc., negotiated and finalized sales agreements with the Plaintiffs while both Plaintiffs were in this district – via mail. Additionally,

[** Page break ** CASE 0:12-cv-03093-DSD-JJK Document 1 Filed 12/11/12 Page 5 of 23 **]

Defendants deliberately and routinely sent mail to Plaintiffs in Minnesota, including information regarding the complained of conduct described below.

17. As such, venue is proper under 28 U.S.C. §1391(b)(1).

18. Venue is also proper under 28 U.S.C. §1391(b)(2), as the events giving rise to the claims asserted by Plaintiffs arose in this district.

*PARTIES*

19. Plaintiff Steven B. Hoyt resides in Minneapolis, Minnesota. In September 2003, Hoyt purchased an undivided 1/12 interest in a residence located at the RCC-BG Condominiums in Bachelor Gulch, Colorado. Plaintiff Steven Hoyt negotiated and finalized his purchase agreement with Defendants through mail, sent to him while he was a citizen of Minnesota. The purchase agreement lists Defendant The Ritz-Carlton Development Company, Inc., as the grantor, with Defendant The Ritz-Carlton Sales Company, Inc., acting as the broker.

20. Plaintiff Bradley A. Hoyt resides in Minneapolis, Minnesota. In 2003, Hoyt purchased an undivided 1/12 interest in a residence located at the RCC-Aspen Highlands Condominiums in Aspen, Colorado. Plaintiff Bradley Hoyt negotiated and finalized his purchase agreement with Defendants through mailings, which Defendants sent to him while he was a citizen of Minnesota. The purchase agreement lists Defendant The Ritz-Carlton Development Company, Inc., as the grantor, with Defendant The Ritz-Carlton Sales Company, Inc., acting as the broker.

21. Defendant Marriott Vacations Worldwide, Inc., is a Delaware corporation with its principal place of business in Orlando, Florida. Defendant

[** Page break ** CASE 0:12-cv-03093-DSD-JJK Document 1 Filed 12/11/12 Page 6 of 23 **]

Marriott Vacations Worldwide, Inc. is the parent corporation of Defendant Marriott Ownership Resorts, Inc. d/b/a Marriott Vacation Club International. Defendants The Ritz-Carlton Development Company, Inc., and Ritz-Carlton Sales Company, Inc., are wholly-owned subsidiaries of Marriott Vacations Worldwide, Inc.

22. Defendant Marriott Ownership Resorts, Inc. d/b/a Marriott Vacation Club International is a Delaware corporation with its principal place of business in Orlando, Florida and a registered agent for service of process at Corporation Service Company, 380 Jackson Street #700 St. Paul, Minnesota 55101. Upon information and belief, Marriott Ownership Resorts, Inc. is a subsidiary of Defendant Marriott Vacations Worldwide, Inc. and affiliates with The Ritz-Carlton Destination Clubs through The Lion & Crown Travel Co., LLC. Marriott Ownership Resorts, Inc. is a licensed corporation with the Minnesota Office of the Secretary of State.

23. Defendant Marriott Vacations Worldwide, Inc. is a worldwide developer, marketer, seller and manager of vacation ownership resorts and vacation club, destination club and exchange programs, principally under the “Marriott” and “Ritz-Carlton” brands and trademarks, which it licenses from Marriott International and the Ritz-Carlton Hotel Company.

24. Upon information and belief, Marriott Ownership Resorts, Inc. d/b/a Marriott Vacation Club International operates the timeshare brand of Defendant Marriott Vacations Worldwide, Inc. and is licensed to conduct business in the State of Minnesota under the name “Marriott Vacation Club International.” Marriott Vacation Club Destinations is also a licensed real estate company with the Minnesota

[** Page break ** CASE 0:12-cv-03093-DSD-JJK Document 1 Filed 12/11/12 Page 7 of 23 **]

Department of Commerce.

25. Defendant The Ritz-Carlton Hotel Company, L.L.C. is a Delaware corporation with its principal place of business in Maryland.

26. Defendant The Ritz-Carlton Management Company, LLC is a Delaware limited liability company operating out of Maryland.

27. Defendant The Ritz-Carlton Development Company, Inc., is a Delaware corporation. Defendant was the grantor of multiple undivided fractional interests of residences in the RCC-BG Condominiums located in Bachelor Gulch, Colorado and the RCC – Aspen Highlands Condominiums located in Aspen, Colorado, as well as the grantor of fractional interests in numerous other residences in condominiums located in the Bahamas, Colorado, California, Florida, Hawaii, and the U.S. Virgin Islands.

28. Defendant The Ritz-Carlton Sales Company, Inc., is a Delaware corporation. Defendant was the broker of Plaintiffs’ purchase of undivided fractional interests of residences in the RCC-BG Condominiums located in Bachelor Gulch, Colorado, as well as the broker of numerous other sales of residences in condominiums locates in the Bahamas, California, Colorado, Florida, Hawaii, and the U.S. Virgin Islands.

*FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS*

*A. The Ritz-Carlton Residential Properties and Ritz-Carlton Club*

29. Upon information and belief, in or around 2001, Defendants began to capitalize on the growing market demand for elite vacation properties. To do so, Defendants began selling fractional interests in condominium residences in select

[** Page break ** CASE 0:12-cv-03093-DSD-JJK Document 1 Filed 12/11/12 Page 8 of 23 **]

locations. These locations included Winding Bay in the Bahamas; Lake Tahoe and San Francisco, California; Aspen Highlands, Vail and Bachelor Gulch, Colorado; Jupiter, Florida; Kauai Lagoons and Kapalua Bay, Hawaii; and St. Thomas in the U.S. Virgin Islands.


----------



## JonathanB

*Class Action Lawsuit Filed Against RC and Marriott 12/11/2012 (Post 2 of 3)*

30. Defendants marketed these fractional interests as an “alternative” to both a second home as well as a traditional timeshare.

31. Purchasers of these fractional interests, including Plaintiffs, were given the ability to (1) reserve a certain number of weeks per year in their specific unit; (2) exchange time they would have spent at their residence with a different purchaser of a fractional interest in a residence at another Ritz-Carlton condominium; and (3) enjoy Ritz-Carlton’s branded services and amenities through participation in the RCC.

32. Plaintiffs’ purchases provided them access to numerous types of amenities and services including, but not limited to, spas, fitness centers, daily ski lift tickets, and preferential golf tee times. In addition, just like any other real estate purchase, Plaintiffs’ fractional interests provided them an asset that they could later sell to a different buyer.

33. Ritz designed the fractional ownership concept as an exclusive ownermember organization. Purchasers of the fractional interests became members of the RCC. RCC membership was an appurtenance to the properties themselves. Ritz represented that future purchasers of Plaintiffs’ fractional interests in condominium residences would be able to enjoy the same benefits and privileges as Plaintiffs.

[** Page break ** CASE 0:12-cv-03093-DSD-JJK Document 1 Filed 12/11/12 Page 9 of 23 **]

Defendants’ marketing of the owner-member aspect of the Club was important to Plaintiffs, who valued having a private residence at an exclusive Club. Plaintiffs, like other Class Members, were not sold, and did not want, a traditional timeshare residence.

34. By attaching RCC membership to the residences, and therefore Ritz-Carlton’s branded services and amenities, the values of the residences were substantially increased. Ritz-Carlton has come to be known for its service and attention to detail, and has developed a brand which has become synonymous with luxury. Indeed, rather than simply purchasing property, Plaintiffs purchased “personalized travel experiences and legendary Ritz-Carlton service.”

35. The advantages of Ritz’s residences, however, came at a price. First, Defendants charged a substantial premium for the properties they sold due to the benefits which came with Club membership. Additionally, Plaintiffs paid condominium association fees and title insurance to maintain their property and continue to be eligible to receive RCC benefits.

*B. The “Evolution”*

36. In 2009, however, Ritz announced the “unveiling” of an “evolution” of the RCC—the Ritz-Carlton Destination Club. Press Release, April 28, 2009, available at http://ritzcarltonclub.com/ritzcarltonrealestatepress.

37. The RCDC introduced, for the first time, two distinct membership options. The first option was Home Club membership, which Defendants represented was “identical to the fractional ownership” that Plaintiffs had

[** Page break ** CASE 0:12-cv-03093-DSD-JJK Document 1 Filed 12/11/12 Page 10 of 23 **]

purchased. Previous buyers of the undivided fractional interest in Defendants’ condominiums, such as Plaintiffs, automatically became Home Club members.

38. The second membership option was Portfolio Membership. New buyers could become Portfolio members by purchasing a beneficial interest in a trust, not a residence. Their purchase entitled them to RCDC “points” that could be used to book vacations at any one of the condominium residences that Plaintiffs originally had sole access to, but also at certain Ritz-Carlton hotels. In addition, Portfolio members were able to enjoy Ritz-Carlton’s branded services and amenities at any of the residence locations.

39. Introducing the Portfolio Membership option immediately changed the essence of the properties Defendants had sold to Plaintiffs. Portfolio Members were permitted to enjoy Defendant’s branded services and amenities at one of the resort locations without having to purchase a fractional interest in a condominium residence, and at a much lower price.

40. Plaintiffs, on the other hand, no longer had the ability to sell their property as a “private residence” located at an exclusive club. By introducing the Portfolio Membership, Defendants had removed the defining characteristic of the Club—its exclusivity—and devolved it into something that was similar or identical to the vacation programs offered by less prestigious brands, such as the Marriott Vacation Club.

41. Upon information and belief, Ritz made these changes and “evolved” its brand in consultation with Defendant Marriott Vacations Worldwide, Inc. In

[** Page break ** CASE 0:12-cv-03093-DSD-JJK Document 1 Filed 12/11/12 Page 11 of 23 **]

creating the RCDC Portfolio Membership, Ritz “evolved” the RCC and fractional ownership concepts into a mere spinoff of the Marriott Vacation Club, a less prestigious brand.

42. In 2012, Defendants again chose to unilaterally change additional fundamental aspects of Club membership. In July 2012, Defendants, together with Marriott Vacations Worldwide Corp., announced that the Kapulua and Abaco condominiums would no longer be affiliated with the RCDC. As a result, RCDC members could not reserve stays at either location. Defendants expressed in communication to RCDC members that they understood that it “may be disappointing not having [the Bahamian and Hawaiian RCDCs] within the collection of Ritz-Carlton Destination Club locations[.]”

43. Plaintiffs and putative Class members were not merely disappointed, but surprised and shocked to learn of these changes. As with the 2009 “evolution” these changes were made unilaterally, without any input from Plaintiffs or homeowners’ associations.

44. Also in July 2012, Defendants announced a new “affiliation” with “Marriott Vacation Club Destinations,” a brand of Defendant Marriott Vacation Club International. In addition to its new “affiliation” with Marriott Vacation Club Destinations, Marriott Vacations Worldwide Corporation announced its intention to affiliate with Lion & Crown Travel Co., LLC - the exclusive external exchange company for The Ritz-Carlton Destination Club.

[** Page break ** CASE 0:12-cv-03093-DSD-JJK Document 1 Filed 12/11/12 Page 12 of 23 **]

45. An affiliation with The Lion & Crown Travel Company purportedly permits access to the so-called Lion & Crown Collection - a group of properties made available to members via their “partnership” with The Lion & Crown Travel Company. Defendant Marriott Vacations Worldwide Corporation’s decision, made in concert with other Defendants, to affiliate Plaintiffs’ clubs with both Marriott Vacation Club Destinations and The Lion & Crown Travel Company, would permit thousands of Marriott Vacation Club members to use “points” to access and use Plaintiffs’ clubs for a fraction of what it cost Plaintiffs to purchase and maintain their residence interests.

46. These affiliations would depress the values of Plaintiffs’ Residence Interests in their properties and disproportionally burden Plaintiffs with the cost of upkeep, as the resulting significant increase in use of the clubs increases overall maintenance costs. By making these changes, Defendants have diluted and will continue to dilute the “exclusive” brand that Plaintiffs had paid a premium for.

47. The “brand evolution” that Ritz represented in both 2009 and 2012 has resulted in Plaintiffs no longer possessing fractional interests in a private residence in a collection of exclusive clubs. As a result of these drastic and significant changes, Plaintiffs have received exactly what they had paid a substantial premium to avoid—confusion of their property with an ordinary timeshare, property devaluation, and loss of enjoyment of their property.

*C. Deterioration of Plaintiffs’ Property Values*

48. The “evolution” of the Club has lowered the real estate values of

[** Page break ** CASE 0:12-cv-03093-DSD-JJK Document 1 Filed 12/11/12 Page 13 of 23 **]

Plaintiffs’ and putative Class members’ fractional interests. Defendants’ affiliation of the Ritz brand with the Marriott Vacation Club brand has diluted the value of the Ritz branded properties, including Plaintiffs’. The values of Plaintiffs’ properties are inextricably linked to the value of the products, services, and amenities offered by Ritz-Carlton through the RCC. Any changes which devalue the RCC similarly affect and lower the value of Plaintiffs’ fractional interests.

49. The introduction of the Marriott Vacation Club and its members has removed a key characteristic from the Bachelor Gulch, Aspen Highlands, and other properties: exclusivity. The introduction and expansion of the points-based Club membership concept has given potential consumers a less expensive alternative to outright ownership and, therefore, lowered the value of Plaintiffs’ fractional interests.

50. Additionally, the removal of the Ritz-Carlton brand from the Abaco and Kapalua Bay was more than just disappointing. The opportunity to stay at these properties through the exchange based system was a significant incentive for prospective buyers of fractional interests in Defendants’ residences and an important reason for why Plaintiffs bought their fractional interests. No longer being able to stay at these properties would significantly depreciate the value of Plaintiffs’ properties.

51. Due to the changes to the RCC and RCDC and the benefits it provides, Defendants have changed the core characteristics of Plaintiffs’ purchases. Though Plaintiffs purchased fractional ownerships in exclusive, owner-member

[** Page break ** CASE 0:12-cv-03093-DSD-JJK Document 1 Filed 12/11/12 Page 14 of 23 **]

organizations, they are left with memberships to a general, points-based reservation system. As a result of Defendants’ actions, Plaintiffs’ property values have decreased well below the value for similar properties on the market.

*CLASS ACTION ALLEGATIONS*

52. Plaintiffs bring this action on behalf of themselves and as a class action under the provisions of Rule 23(a), (b)(2) and (b)(3) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The proposed Class is defined as follows:
All purchasers of deeded fractional ownership interests in Ritz-Carlton properties located at Winding Bay in the Bahamas; Lake Tahoe and San Francisco, California; Aspen Highlands, Bachelor Gulch, and Vail, Colorado; Jupiter, Florida; Kauai Lagoons and Kapalua Bay, Hawaii; and St. Thomas in the U.S. Virgin Islands.

53. Excluded from the Class are Defendants, Defendants’ officers, directors, and employees.

54. This action is properly maintainable as a class action. Upon information and belief, there are over 100 owners of the properties and as such, the class for whose benefit this action is brought is so numerous that joinder of all members is impracticable. The disposition of their claims in a class action will provide substantial benefits to both the parties and the Court.


----------



## JonathanB

*Class Action Lawsuit Filed Against RC and Marriott 12/11/2012 (Post 3 of 3)*

55. A class action is superior to other methods for the fair and efficient adjudication of the claims herein asserted, and no unusual difficulties are likely to be encountered in the management of this class action. Additionally, the prosecution of separate actions by individual members of the Class would create a risk of inconsistent or varying adjudications, establishing incompatible standards of conduct for Defendants.

[** Page break ** CASE 0:12-cv-03093-DSD-JJK Document 1 Filed 12/11/12 Page 15 of 23 **]

56. Rule 23(a)(2) and Rule 23(b)(3) are both satisfied because there are questions of law and fact which are common to the Class and which predominate over questions affecting any individual class member. The common questions include, inter alia, the following:
a. whether Defendants have devalued the properties located at its RCDCs by removing the essential qualities of the RCC/RDCD, including, but not limited to, its owner-member characteristic;
b. whether Defendants have devalued Plaintiffs’ properties by removing its brand from resorts at Winding Bay in the Bahamas, and Kapalua Bay, Hawaii;
c. whether Defendants charged and received improper sums based on claims that the properties would provide benefits they did not;
d. whether the Class is entitled to injunctive and other equitable relief, including restitution and disgorgement, and if so, the nature of such relief; and
e. whether the Class is entitled to compensatory damages, and if so, the amount of such damages;

57. Plaintiffs’ claims and the claims of members of the Class all derive from a common nucleus of operative facts. That is, irrespective of the individual circumstances of any class member, liability in this matter will rise and fall with a relatively few core issues related to Defendants’ changes to the Club and resort reservation system.

[** Page break ** CASE 0:12-cv-03093-DSD-JJK Document 1 Filed 12/11/12 Page 16 of 23 **]

58. Plaintiffs’ claims are typical of the claims of the Class members. Plaintiffs have the same interest as all members of the Class in that the nature and character of the challenged conduct is the same.

59. Plaintiffs will fairly and adequately represent and protect the interests of the Class. Plaintiffs purchased and paid a premium for properties based on Defendants’ representations about the quality and nature of the Club. Plaintiffs’ interests are entirely consistent with, and not antagonistic to, those of the other members of the Class. Plaintiffs have retained competent counsel experienced in the prosecution of consumer and class action litigation.

60. Defendants have acted or refused to act on grounds generally applicable to the Class, making injunctive and declaratory relief appropriate with respect to the proposed Class as a whole.

*INJURY*

61. By reason of the above-described conduct, Defendants caused actual harm, injury-in-fact, and loss of money to Plaintiffs and the Class. Plaintiffs and the Class were injured in the following ways:
a. Plaintiffs and members of the Class paid hundreds of thousand dollars for Defendants’ properties for the purpose of becoming a part of and enjoying specific privileges including, but not limited to, exclusivity and Defendants’ branded amenities and services;
b. Defendants’ changes to the Club have removed these aspects which Plaintiffs valued and paid a premium for;

[** Page break ** CASE 0:12-cv-03093-DSD-JJK Document 1 Filed 12/11/12 Page 17 of 23 **]

c. Plaintiffs and members of the Class have been deprived of the cost of their properties, requiring restitution;
d. Plaintiffs and members of the Class have been deprived of the benefit of their bargains and suffered other damages by purchasing these properties which do not provide the benefits that Defendants represented.

*CAUSES OF ACTION*

*COUNT I (BREACH OF CONTRACT)*

62. Plaintiffs incorporate paragraphs 1 - 56 by reference as if fully set for the herein.

63. As described herein, in exchange for their purchase of an undivided fractional ownership in Defendants’ properties, Defendants offered to provide Plaintiffs with, among other things, (1) the benefit of an owner-member based system rather than a points-based system, and (2) the benefit of Ritz-Carlton’s branded services and amenities.

64. Plaintiffs accepted Defendants’ offer and paid a substantial premium for the benefit of being a member of the Club which included the benefits described herein.

65. By introducing the points-based system and by removing some of the amenities and services previously offered to purchasers of fractional ownership interests, Defendants have changed the fundamental characteristics of Plaintiffs’

[** Page break ** CASE 0:12-cv-03093-DSD-JJK Document 1 Filed 12/11/12 Page 18 of 23 **]

ownership interests such that Plaintiffs are no longer receiving the benefit they bargained for.

66. As a result of this conduct, the values of Plaintiffs’ properties has declined and Plaintiffs have suffered substantial losses. Plaintiffs are entitled to recover the losses they have sustained due to Defendants’ breach.

*COUNT II (UNJUST ENRICHMENT AND RESCISSION)*

67. Plaintiffs incorporate paragraphs 1 - 56 by reference as if fully set for the herein.

68. As described herein, Defendants agreed to provide a product to Plaintiffs which included two key characteristics: exclusivity and Defendants’ branded services and amenities. Defendants knew or should have known that these characteristics provided substantial value to Plaintiffs’ properties. Defendants knew or should have known that these two characteristics were material to the Plaintiffs’ decisions to buy Defendants’ properties and would be material to prospective buyers as well. Thus, Defendants knew or should have known that these two characteristics greatly influence the value of Plaintiffs’ properties.

69. Defendants, however, have ceased to offer a product that contains the two important characteristics. Specifically, Defendants have: (1) changed the “exchange-based” reservation system to one that is “point-based” such that purchasers no longer have to buy deeded fractional ownership interests to enjoy the benefits of any resorts; (2) opened the “point-based” reservation system to Marriott Vacation Club members; (3) removed highly valued locations from Ritz-Carlton’s

[** Page break ** CASE 0:12-cv-03093-DSD-JJK Document 1 Filed 12/11/12 Page 19 of 23 **]

brand such that Plaintiffs are no longer able to reserve time at those locations; and (4) stopped offering certain branded amenities and services.

70. As a result of the conduct described herein, Plaintiffs paid monies to Defendants to which Defendants were not entitled. Defendants have voluntarily accepted and retained these monies with full knowledge that they do not provide a product of the quality, nature, fitness, or value that had been represented or that reasonable purchasers expected.

71. Because of the acts set forth herein, Defendants have been unjustly enriched.

72. Plaintiffs are entitled to restitution of the amounts Defendants’ unjustly charged and received as described herein.

*COUNT III (DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF)*

73. Plaintiffs incorporate paragraphs 1 - 56 by reference as if fully set for the herein.

74. The Declaratory Judgment Act, 28 U.S.C.A. §2201 et seq., provides that “any court of the United States, upon filing of an appropriate pleading, may declare the rights and other legal relations of any interested party seeking such declaration, whether or not further relief is or could be sought.”

75. An actual controversy has arisen between Plaintiffs and Class members on the one hand and Defendants on the other hand.

76. Defendants have engaged in conduct, and have expressed further intention to “evolve” or “alter” Plaintiffs and Class members fractional ownership

[** Page break ** CASE 0:12-cv-03093-DSD-JJK Document 1 Filed 12/11/12 Page 20 of 23 **]

property interests as described throughout this Complaint, by, among other things, affiliating Plaintiffs’ and Class members’ clubs with the Marriott Vacation Club and The Lion & Crown Travel Company.

77. The practices and intentions of Defendants result in, or would result in, depriving Plaintiffs and Class members of the value of their fractional ownership interests. Defendants have changed the fundamental characteristics of Plaintiffs’ and Class members’ ownership interests such that Plaintiffs and Class members are no longer receiving the benefit they bargained for. As a result of this conduct, the values of Plaintiffs’ and Class members’ properties have declined or would decline resulting in substantial losses. Plaintiffs ask that the herein-described actions and intentions of Defendants be declared unlawful, which would provide for recovery of all sums determined by this Court to be owned by Defendants, and each of them, to the Plaintiffs and the Plaintiff Class members.

78. Plaintiffs are also entitled to any appropriate injunctive relief, preventing Defendants from “evolving” Plaintiffs’ ownership interests in the manner discussed above, as such “evolving” constitutes an unlawful practice.

79. Plaintiffs request declaratory and injunctive relief as described above and all other relief deemed appropriate by the Court.

[** Page break ** CASE 0:12-cv-03093-DSD-JJK Document 1 Filed 12/11/12 Page 21 of 23 **]

*PRAYER FOR RELIEF*

WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs pray for relief as follows:
a. That the Court determine that this action may be maintained as a class action under Rules 23(a), 23(b)(2) and (b)(3) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, that Plaintiffs be certified as class representative and Plaintiffs’ counsel be appointed as counsel for the Class;
b. That the unlawful conduct alleged herein be declared to be illegal and in violation of the state laws alleged herein;
c. That Defendants be enjoined from engaging in the same or similar practices alleged herein;
d. That Plaintiffs and members of the Class recover damages, as provided by law, determined to have been sustained as to each of them, and that judgment be entered against Defendants on behalf of Plaintiffs and members of the Class;
e. That Plaintiffs and members of the Class receive restitution and disgorgement of all Defendants’ ill-gotten gains;
f. That Plaintiffs and members of the Class receive pre-judgment and post-judgment interest as allowed by law;
g. That Plaintiffs and members of the Class recover their costs of the suit, and attorneys' fees as allowed by law; and
h. For all other relief allowed by law and equity.

[** Page break ** CASE 0:12-cv-03093-DSD-JJK Document 1 Filed 12/11/12 Page 22 of 23 **]

*DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL*

Pursuant to Rule 38(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Plaintiffs demand a trial by jury on all issues so triable.

Dated: December 11, 2012
/s/ Anne T. Regan
Charles S. Zimmerman
Anne T. Regan
ZIMMERMAN REED, PLLP
1100 IDS Center
80 South Eighth Street
Minneapolis, MN 55402
Telephone (612) 341-0400
Facsimile (612)341-0844
Email:
charles.zimmerman@zimmreed.com
anne.regan@zimmreed.com

[** Page break ** CASE 0:12-cv-03093-DSD-JJK Document 1 Filed 12/11/12 Page 23 of 23 **]


----------



## GregGH

I can see why original buyers are super pissed ... reminds me of High Country Club stuff ... sure paid a lot for a little

Speaking of Kapalua - started this thread in case any deals show up ...

http://www.tugbbs.com/forums/showthread.php?t=186502&highlight=kapalua

Greg


----------



## billkoelpin

Exactly that is what i was trying to explain in the other post it is a long story with a tough almost ending for the Ritz Home Club members. It is sad because it was a great concept. 

With the location destinations recently reduced (Kapalua/Abaco/maybe to come Jupiter with Trump buying it and all of the A&K locations removed). So they originally purchased an exclusive membership to Ritz locations for Ritz members and now have less to travel to and to add insult to injury were given Marriott Timeshare locations to trade down to. It would be like (on a significantly smaller scale) buying a lift ticket to Snowmass only to find out at the top that only two runs were open but that they re-opened the bunny trail for you as compensation. I almost bought in St Thomas 7 or 8 yrs ago and thank my acct every year that i didn't do it.

Not sure what the end is but probably just folded in with the rest of the marriott timeshares and the few locations that survive over the next few years will be the luxury collection for the thousands of marriott timeshare owners. They sure made out with a lot lower like 200 or 300k initial investment and lower annual dues as well and now get to use the remaining locations. Not sure what i would do but would have to strongly consider tossing the keys on the floor rather than pay the 15k+/- dues each year. Over the next 20yrs without any assessments or increases you are in 300k deeper...Just rented in St Thomas 2bed over Pres day week for 6k - why would anyone pay anything to "buy" one and be saddled with 15k/yr in dues?


----------



## fraction101

*RCDC in San Francisco*

I was alerted by a post on the Marriott Resort System BBS to a potential issue with the initial sale of Residences and Fractionals in the RCDC San Francisco. After a fair amount of research I dug up the case that was handled in San Francisco Superior Court, the "Del Grande" case. It was handled as called for in the contract by mediation by a retired judge, his decision is very damning of the practices that Marriott used during the initial sale. If you purchased a fractional in December 2007, you might want to look it up: it is case CPF-09-509429  in SF Superior court and the attorneys that handled it for the Purchasers are Niven and Smith.


----------



## Lockwoodroad

*In case you want to view the filings in the lawsuit*

http://webaccess.sftc.org/Scripts/M...AME=IJS&PRGNAME=ROA22&ARGUMENTS=-ACPF09509429


----------



## SMHarman

RC is a brand of Marriott


----------



## GregT

Do any of the Ritz Carlton DC owners have Cobalt Points?   I stayed at St. Thomas in 2011 and they were selling Cobalt Points at the time (in 2008, they were still selling weeks).

I'm curious what the conversion rate that Marriott is offering to you -- if it is a reasonable trade (and I'm not trying to defend the difference in quality, only trying to figure out if Marriott at least offered a ton of points in trade for your Cobalt Points).

I _think_ 4,500 Cobalt Points were selling for approx $100K.  Today, $100K would buy approx 10,000 Marriott DC Points.

So, I'm hoping the conversion rate is something like 4:1 -- Marriott DC Points for Cobalt Points.  

Can anyone comment?

Thanks very much,

Greg


----------



## billkoelpin

there aren't and cobalt points they changed the entire points to the marriott points. 5000 cobalt was like 11500 marriott. we decided against joining since they dropped the a&k residences and dropped ritz kapalua and bahamas and then opened it all up to the marriott owners. you can just rent the ritz st thomas whenever you want it there is not need to "buy"...


----------



## FractionalTraveler

Is the RC Destination Club still alive?

Just saw this post on their recent alliance with Exclusive resorts: http://www.ritzcarltonclub.com/ritz...nation-Club-Announce-Strategic-Alliance.shtml

Is this for real?  I thought all this was folded into the MVCI points program?


----------



## GregGH

there is a thread on the Marriott folder ...

http://www.tugbbs.com/forums/showthread.php?t=195919


----------



## Josephine

*Ritz Carlton Club Jupiter*

What a great letter. I have just join TUG. I have been a member of Ritz Carlton Club Jupiter for year having spent more than $300k for the 5 weeks plus also buying the Golf membership which has now been taken over by Trump.  I am now trying to sell it for a $90K and have been told that i have no chance.



Lockwoodroad said:


> Lee Cunningham
> Executive Vice President & Chief Operating Officer
> The Ritz-Carlton Destination Club
> Member.inquiry@ritzcarltonclub.com
> 
> Dear Lee, the recent communications from the Marriott Vacations Worldwide Corp. are both insulting and disingenuous. I encourage you and your team to communicate with the Ritz-Carlton Destination Club members in an earnest and forthright manner.
> 
> First, let's start how you sign your letter. You are the Executive Vice President and Chief Operating Officer of the Marriott Vacations Worldwide Corporation. I assume you sign your August 20th letter under the "The Ritz-Carlton Destination Club" to provide us the RCDC members comfort that you have our best interests at heart. I would encourage you to be upfront that you work for the Marriot Vacations Worldwide Corp., of which only a small fraction of its members belong/bought into the RCDC brand. Such honesty will suggest you understand that there are competing interests at play.
> 
> Second, you start your August 20th letter with an absurd and patently false statement: "We would like to assure you that nothing that you originally purchased has changed or will change as a result of the announcement mentioned above." Sir, in one fell swoop RCDC members lost access to the Ritz Carlton Clubs in Abaco and Kapalua Bay. We also lost access to the upscale Abercrombie and Kent properties. And "Based on The Ritz-Carlton Destination Club Member feedback," (ha-ha) RCDC members will see their properties being marketed to and being made available to MVW timeshare/points members who have a much lower cost of entry. We, the RCDC members, are not idiots. Please do not treat us as if we were.
> 
> Third, beyond the obvious spin you try to put on the Marriot Vacation Club efforts to "expand its luxury experience options", the reality is that Marriot Vacations Club properties cater to a consumer with a different price point with different expectations. To be clear, if any RCDC member wanted to be part of the the Marriot Vacation Club, he or she would have saved one hundred or two hundred thousand dollars and bought into the Marriot Vacation Club.
> 
> Lastly, your recent communications fail to acknowlege the underlying issue which all RCDC members need to understand. The Marriot Vacations Worldwide Corp. has a huge incentive to dilute the RCDC brand to further its greater interest of selling more Marriot Vacation Club memberships. The growth of Marriott Vacations Worldwide Corp. as a public company it tied with growth of the sales of more and more Marriot Vacation Club memberships. The sale of more RCDC memberships is not currently relevant for this public company. Thus the value of the investment made by each RCDC members is at jeopardy.
> 
> The recent communications by you and your team have undermined your credibility with the RCDC membership. Unless the Marriot Vacations Worldwide Corp. changes its attitude and begins to address the clear conflict of interest that will destroy the value of our investment, I continue to encourage the RCDC Aspen Highlands board to explore exiting from the Marriot relationship and cancel all management contracts.
> 
> Best regards,


----------



## GregGH

Josephine said:


> What a great letter. I have just join TUG. I have been a member of Ritz Carlton Club Jupiter for year having spent more than $300k for the 5 weeks plus also buying the Golf membership which has now been taken over by Trump.  I am now trying to sell it for a $90K and have been told that i have no chance.



Hey - Josephine ... I would think the Four Seasons Aviara ( Carlsbad Ca - just north of San Diego ) could match that 5 weeks in gold time  ... at 300K and offer a $280k gift card at Costco ... damm I do love their wine selection when we are there.  Just a suggestion ... but I appreciate you pain on your loss ... I own gold & silver ... I also have similar pain

Greg
ps- what a deal for resale weeks at a Four Seasons resort ...call Judy Rulli 800-998-0946 to see  ... http://www.luxuryresidenceclubresal...tinations/Aviara/Currently_Available&id=48231 ... ps - I have no connection with her ... she is the 'official' reseller now ... I got 6 of my 9 weeks from Tri-West.


----------



## sparty

*Marriott Vacations Fraud Suit*

Majority of property owners at The Abaco Club in The Bahamas filed suit against Marriott Vacations and The Ritz-Carlton Hotel for breach of contract/fiduciary duty and fraud.

Allegations are MVCI didn't own/operate the club at contractually required levels and extend a first right of refusal to owners in connection to Marriott Vacation's plan to sell the property.


----------



## SueDonJ

PRNewswire article link:
Marriott Vacations Worldwide And Ritz-Carlton Hotel Company Sued By Owners Of Homes And Property At The Abaco Club On Winding Bay

The article mentions similar allegations elsewhere and there are several related threads on the TUG Non-Traditional Interval Ownership board.  The Abaco property is specifically mentioned in the first post, and the 12/11/12 lawsuit filing is posted beginning in Post #44, of this thread:  Letter from the Ritz Carlton Destination Club

I understand making the connection to the timeshare board because Marriott Vacations Worldwide is named in the suit.  However, I'm merging this thread with the existing thread linked above because it's more suitably placed where the topic has been mentioned previously.


----------



## nakyak

Are there members of any property that are not suing and actually happy with Ritz-Carlton Club?

Are there other places where members are more actively discussing the challenges associated with membership?  As a member I would like to be more actively involved with getting the facts on the table.


----------

