# Former owner looking to buy again - skeptical because of sale to Wyndham



## lorinrandy (Apr 9, 2008)

Hi All!  
I used to own 10k WM credits, and sold them after a divorce. My new husband and I are looking to buy again, on the resale market However, we're super skeptical after reading many posts here that are super negative about WM after the sale to Wyndham, and after hearing some not-so-glowing accounts of trying to book time (bonus or otherwise).
Specifically:


 One of our family members is a long-time WM owner who began calling for time in Kauai at 6 a.m. on day one of the 13-month window. He was told "nothing is available," day after day.


Reading posts on this board that talk of non-owners being allowed to rent at resorts to entice them to buy. 


Hearing about certain resorts being "impossible to get into."

Also, Perry's posts are so anti-Worldmark...wow! Yeah, I know the resorts are nothing fancy (we're staying in WM Victoria right now - it's super clean but on the outside looks like "The Projects" - a big ugly concrete fortress), but he is so incredibly down on them. 

We just don't understand or have the patience or time to work incredibly hard or learn all the in's and out's of trading, exchanging, or banking time, or whatever it's called these days. (I"d love to get the Cliff's Notes version of how to do this, if anyone's willing!).

Bottom line: has WM just gone down the tubes, thanks to Wyndham? Does their system basically screw owners? 

Thanks in advance for your honest and candid answers!

Warmly,
Lori & Randy


----------



## drguy (Apr 9, 2008)

The WM BOD allowing WYN to increase credit values for new units has been the problem.  New owners are still buying 6000 credit accounts, but new resorts are coming in at 15,000 credits/week, putting stress on the older, lower priced resorts.  There are now close to 300,000 owners, primarily on the West Coast all trying to get those spots.
Also, the addition of presidential units at about 30,000 credits/week has allowed more credits to be created in place of an older 14,000 credit unit.
Holidays are tough to get at prime resorts as they are in almost any program.
Many owners with large accounts book a couple of days at a resort with ample availability and white time prior to the days they want to go to the prime resort so they can book earlier (low cost throw away days).  
Guy


----------



## rhonda (Apr 9, 2008)

*WM ownership still works well for us.*  We've owned since 2000 and have enjoyed stays at 30 different WM properties.  Looking forward to a roadtrip this summer to Yellowstone visiting WM properties at St George, Bear Lake, Yellowstone, Estes Park, Midway and Vegas.  It was an easy trip to book with a single phone call to the WM reservation desk.

We continue to enjoy the resorts, their locations and the many vacation options offered by this flexible program.


----------



## bnoble (Apr 9, 2008)

> The WM BOD allowing WYN to increase credit values for new units has been the problem.


WM is far from the only points system with "point creep"---it's happening in DVC, FSP, etc. etc. as well.  Yet, WM owners will tell you that the effects of point creep in WM are much much worse than the other systems.

Can anyone explain the differences between WM and FSP/DVC that exacerbate point creep?


----------



## rhonda (Apr 9, 2008)

bnoble said:


> WM is far from the only points system with "point creep"---it's happening in DVC, FSP, etc. etc. as well.  Yet, WM owners will tell you that the effects of point creep in WM are much much worse than the other systems.
> 
> Can anyone explain the differences between WM and FSP/DVC that exacerbate point creep?


The key difference is that DVC, and I believe FSP also, offers a "home resort advantage" protecting an owner's right to book their own resort ahead of all other members.  WM does not offer this concept and as the membership grows ... so does the competition for favorite resorts w/in the program.

Edited to add:  Not sure if you need more detail on the membership growth or not?  WM's developer sells new memberships based on the number of credits generated by new inventory added to the Club.  It is important to note : _credits _added not _units _added.  The accusation is that the developer is increasing the ratio of "members to units" as new inventory carries higher credit values.  A similar argument is made when new inventory appears in less desirable locations.  Both problems lead to the same concern: greater competition for units in better locations with lower nightly or weekly credit values.


----------



## janej (Apr 9, 2008)

Don't know much about WM.  But I own DVC.  My home resort is OKW.  I don't think DVC has much point creep problem.  The new AKV studio requires the same points as OKW studio.  The Beach Club and Boardwalk requires more points.  But that is just due to the location.  Actually these are the hardest resorts to get into.  You have to own there if you want to stay there sure.


----------



## rhonda (Apr 9, 2008)

janej said:


> Don't know much about WM.  But I own DVC.  My home resort is OKW.  I don't think DVC has much point creep problem.  The new AKV studio requires the same points as OKW studio.  The Beach Club and Boardwalk requires more points.  But that is just due to the location.  Actually these are the hardest resorts to get into.  You have to own there if you want to stay there sure.


The DVC version of the argument: "SSR is too big!  It has created _too many new owners!_  No SSR owner really wants to stay at SSR -- they all want my time at BCV/VWL/BWV ..."  

Sound familiar?


----------



## rhonda (Apr 9, 2008)

rhonda said:


> Both problems lead to the same concern: greater competition for units in better locations with lower nightly or weekly credit values.


Lori -  As to my comments in post #5 ...

I _thought_ we would hate Indio for the following reasons:  higher credit values than earlier resorts; undesirable location; TOT charges.  Turns out ... we love it.  It has become a great 2-3 night getaway for us ... lovely resort, wonderful pools, easy drive from San Diego ... and the TOT isn't unreasonable.  (C'mon southwest owners ... try it ... you might like it.)   

I _thought_ adding a WM location in Orlando was a mistake given the existing market saturation.  Who would book it given the number of available exchanges in the same area?  I was told that Orlando was a highly requested destination w/in the membership ... and that many WM owners prefer booking directly w/in the club vs using an exchange.  From casual observation through the online reservation tool -- WM Orlando seems to be well utilized.  

I'm still not sure about Galena ... but have certainly enjoyed our expansion in OK, AZ, CA and looking forward to the new destinations in NM!


----------



## lprstn (Apr 9, 2008)

Well I am a Wyndam owner, Wyndam points are cheaper resale than WM, so do your research an purchase with wyndam as we have access to some WM resorts also.


----------



## bnoble (Apr 9, 2008)

> The key difference is that DVC, and I believe FSP also, offers a "home resort advantage" protecting an owner's right to book their own resort ahead of all other members. WM does not offer this concept


I see.  Yes, that certainly could make a big difference (and FSP has a version of this problem in Myrtle Beach, where all resorts share "home" booking privileges.)



> WM's developer sells new memberships based on the number of credits generated by new inventory added to the Club. It is important to note : credits added not units added.


This is also true of FSP for sure, and possibly DVC.



> A similar argument is made when new inventory appears in less desirable locations.


This is also true of FSP (inland South Carolina?  Huh?) and DVC (HHI/VB).



> The DVC version of the argument: "SSR is too big! It has created too many new owners! No SSR owner really wants to stay at SSR -- they all want my time at BCV/VWL/BWV ..."


Yes, this is exactly what I had in mind, and SSR is slightly more "pointy" than OKW as well, but in arguably a worse location on property.

But, when it comes to these issues the WM owners are vitriolic, the DVC ownes grumble, and the FSP owners barely notice.

In the case of FSP, it's perhaps because the owners are too busy worrying about erosion in other facets of the program, vis a vis changes in cancellation policy, VIP benefits, etc.


----------



## cotraveller (Apr 9, 2008)

lorinrandy said:


> Hi All!
> I used to own 10k WM credits, and sold them after a divorce. My new husband and I are looking to buy again, on the resale market However, we're super skeptical after reading many posts here that are super negative about WM after the sale to Wyndham, and after hearing some not-so-glowing accounts of trying to book time (bonus or otherwise).



WorldMark still works for us today too, just as it has for the past 7 years that we have been owners.  You have to remember that there are nearly 300,000 WorldMark owners now.  Someone reported a while back that around 80 of the TUG BBS registered users list WorldMark as a resort they own.  Maybe 20 of those post much at all and not all of those posters are negative about WorldMark.

So is Perry right in what he has said in some of his posts?  Is the negativity of a very few owners dragging down WorldMark and driving potential owners away?  It sounds like you are considering not buying because of those negative comments.  

WorldMark is still a good system, don't let the negativity of a few scare you away.


----------



## Bill4728 (Apr 9, 2008)

cotraveller said:


> WorldMark still works for us today too, just as it has for the past 7 years that we have been owners.  You have to remember that there are nearly 300,000 WorldMark owners now.  Someone reported a while back that around 80 of the TUG BBS registered users list WorldMark as a resort they own.  Maybe 20 of those post much at all and not all of those posters are negative about WorldMark.



FYI:  Currently there are 109 TUG bbs members who list Worldmark as a resort they own.



> Also, Perry's posts are so anti-Worldmark...wow! Yeah, I know the resorts are nothing fancy (we're staying in WM Victoria right now - it's super clean but on the outside looks like "The Projects"



I think that on a whole Perry posts about WM are that it is a great value.  Sure he posts things which aren't nice but on many of his posts he says that his WM points get him to all the places he wants to go at a great price.


----------



## lorinrandy (Apr 10, 2008)

*Re: my original question*

Thanks for the replies (although I had no clue what some of them were about - lots of mysterious acronyms flying around!). I guess my primary question is - has WM taken a dive since it was bought by Wyndham?

Why can long-time owners (my father in law) get into Kauai, calling the full _13 months out???_

Is the system more "user-_un_-friendly" now?

Thanks.R


----------



## cotraveller (Apr 10, 2008)

lorinrandy said:


> Thanks for the replies (although I had no clue what some of them were about - lots of mysterious acronyms flying around!). I guess my primary question is - has WM taken a dive since it was bought by Wyndham?


That is a subjective question and will receive different answers from different people.  One of the complaints you will hear is the higher credit values that some of the newer resorts require for booking.  San Diego is one of the often quoted examples at 15,000 credits for a 1 bedroom unit.  The new resorts are being booked though, so not all owners see it as a problem.

On a positive note, we now have direct booking access to 10 of the Wyndham resorts that we did not have before Wyndham entered the picture.  Only a few units in each (2 to 6) but those are opportunities that did not exist before.  Having just had a very nice stay at the Wyndham Nashville which I booked directly through WorldMark with my WorldMark credits, I see that as a very positive development.



lorinrandy said:


> Why can long-time owners (my father in law) get into Kauai, calling the full _13 months out???_


I think you meant Can Not get into Kauai at 13 months.  What happens is that owners will book more than one week.  They might have booked a 2 week stay which fills the resort beyond the start of the 13 month window for any given date.  Or, since you can combine reservations at multiple resorts, they might have book a few extra days in an offseason studio unit in front of the Hawaii week they want.  That's what's called throw away days.  If you want a reservation at one of the Hawaii resorts that is often a necessary thing to do.  You have to call a few days before the 13 month window opens and be willing to spend some extra credits to get those weeks. That's not a Wyndham problem, it is inherent in any points system that does not have home resorts with priority booking.



lorinrandy said:


> Is the system more "user-_un_-friendly" now?



Another yes and no answer.  The online booking system can be frustrating at times when it goes through some of the glitches that still exist.  But it is more friendly in the way credits are handled with no limit on how many you can have in your account and with the FIFO implementation that normally assures that your oldest credits are used first.

Most of the people at the Vacation Planning Center I have talked to when making reservations by phone or when asking questions about my account are still as friendly and helpful as always.

I'll repeat what I said in my earlier post, WorldMark is still a good system, don't let the negativity of a few scare you away.


----------



## rhonda (Apr 10, 2008)

No, I don't believe it has taken a dive.  

Two possible reasons your FIL couldn't get Kauai at 13 mos:
Inventory hadn't been loaded into the system.  (Doubtful -- but it has been known to happen.)  
The unit type he wanted was already fully booked.  Since owners may call in 13 months from the _start_ of their intended stay -- someone beat him to the inventory by calling a few days or weeks ahead.    Example:
I'll book a unit for 2 weeks running May 10, 2009 - May 24, 2009 (13 mos from today).  Let's pretend there is a major event going on during that period and many owners phoned in consuming the same period ... for all available units.  What is left for the owner who waited 13 mos prior to May 17, 2009?  Nothing.

Post 4,5,6,7&10 discuss reservation competition issues across Disney Vacation Club (DVC), Worldmark and Wyndham Fairshare Plus (FSP).


----------



## rhonda (Apr 10, 2008)

lorinrandy said:


> Is the system more "user-_un_-friendly" now?


Points I consider as increasingly _friendly_...
Expanding the former "60-day" red season rule to 90 days gives more lead time for booking partial weeks in high season.
The waitlist, which I'd recommend for your FIL's Kauai reservation, works well.  I like that the reservation staff will indicate your "ranking" to set some level of expectation; you have your choice of notification methods (phone/email) and 24 hours to respond.  All my level 1 and 2 requests have pulled through so far.
Customer service continues to impress me.  Yesterday my folks lost their flight to New Orleans and had to cancel their WM reservation at the very last minute.  WM graciously returned their points -- above and beyond expectations!


----------



## lorinrandy (Apr 10, 2008)

*Thank you!*

Thanks for all the replies. I just find this all quite confusing! I'm a pretty well-educated person but there just seems to be layers and layers of knowledge necessary to work the system; the learning curve seems pretty steep! You all really seem to know your stuff and I appreciate your time. 

If a "Timeshares for Dummies" existed, I'd be the first in line to buy it!:whoopie: 

~Lori


----------



## drguy (Apr 10, 2008)

lorinrandy said:


> Thanks for the replies (although I had no clue what some of them were about - lots of mysterious acronyms flying around!). I guess my primary question is - has WM taken a dive since it was bought by Wyndham?
> 
> Why can long-time owners (my father in law) get into Kauai, calling the full _13 months out???_
> 
> ...


WorldMark, The Club was not purchased by any company.  It remains an independent Company.  Its manager and developer, Trendwest, WAS purchased by Cendant a few years ago.  Cendant split into several companies and Trendwest was included in the company named Wyndham.
So, the answer to your question is no as Wyndham did not buy WorldMark.
Guy


----------



## mshatty (Apr 10, 2008)

lorinrandy said:


> Thanks for all the replies. I just find this all quite confusing! I'm a pretty well-educated person but there just seems to be layers and layers of knowledge necessary to work the system; the learning curve seems pretty steep! You all really seem to know your stuff and I appreciate your time.
> 
> If a "Timeshares for Dummies" existed, I'd be the first in line to buy it!:whoopie:
> 
> ~Lori



I suggest you go to visit cotraveller's website that is at the bottom of his post in this thread.  He has good information on how WM's program works with tips and tricks to get the most out of your ownership.


----------



## LLW (Apr 13, 2008)

lorinrandy said:


> One of our family members is a long-time WM owner who began calling for time in Kauai at 6 a.m. on day one of the 13-month window. He was told "nothing is available," day after day.
> Lori & Randy



When hs is told "nothing is available" on day one of the 13-month window, he should immediately put himself on the waitlist. That way the next availability that comes up because of cancellations will be his. That's the easiest. Many WM reservations get cancelled, because of WM's liberal cancellation policy. 

I think Hawaii has always been tight. What dates does he try? Is this a new problem since Wyndham, or is he just starting to book popular dates for Hawaii now?


----------



## LLW (Apr 14, 2008)

lorinrandy said:


> Thanks for all the replies. I just find this all quite confusing! I'm a pretty well-educated person but there just seems to be layers and layers of knowledge necessary to work the system; the learning curve seems pretty steep! You all really seem to know your stuff and I appreciate your time.
> 
> If a "Timeshares for Dummies" existed, I'd be the first in line to buy it!:whoopie:
> 
> ~Lori



Since you ask  :

The WorldMark for Dummies literature is readily available for systematic and starting-from-the-basics learning and practical experience sharing. I recommend reading in the following order:

Chapter 1. Club Guidelines, Exhibit 4 of Owner Education Handbook:
http://www.worldmarktheclub.com/education/pdfs/basic_owner_ed_handbook.pdf
Chapter 2. The body of the Handbook itself
Chapter 3. Sticky threads on the Timeshare Tips & Tricks forum on www.wmowners.com:
http://www.wmowners.com/forum/viewforum.php?f=32
Chapter 4. Reading the rest of the threads on the Timeshare Tips & Tricks forum, mixed with practical training in playing with the Worldmark system and the joy of vacationing through the WM system

You may stop anywhere along the above study plan, and just retain what you have learned to date. But most people will not want to.


----------



## cruisin (Apr 15, 2008)

lorinrandy said:


> Thanks for the replies (although I had no clue what some of them were about - lots of mysterious acronyms flying around!). I guess my primary question is - has WM taken a dive since it was bought by Wyndham?
> 
> Why can long-time owners (my father in law) get into Kauai, calling the full _13 months out???_
> 
> ...




Hawaii is a popular place. There are probably twice as many owners  now than when the Hawaii properties opened. I think the system is user friendly, but booking prime spots at prime times will always be really hard in any timeshare system that lets every single owner book every single day. Of course, it is also great that we can book anywhere any day


----------



## GrayFal (Apr 19, 2008)

janej said:


> Don't know much about WM.  But I own DVC.  My home resort is OKW.  I don't think DVC has much point creep problem.  The new AKV studio requires the same points as OKW studio.  The Beach Club and Boardwalk requires more points.  But that is just due to the location.  Actually these are the hardest resorts to get into.  You have to own there if you want to stay there sure.



I personally think that DVC was going the same way as all the others BUT THEY LISTENED to their owner/members and now have 'backed down' and made the points equitable again - u r still out of luck for BC and BW - but can go to SSR and AKV.

And the location as a reason for higher points?  
Disney owns all the land - what would be the difference? :annoyed: 
It was just plain greed on their part - but I do applaud   them for reversing the trend to diminish their points value - their loyal owners deserve it.


----------



## bnoble (Apr 19, 2008)

> and now have 'backed down' and made the points equitable again - u r still out of luck for BC and BW - but can go to SSR and AKV.


Huh?  SSR costs more points than OKW in all seasons, but is in many ways less desirable---the units are generally smaller, and SSR is a few minutes farther from the parks than is OKW.


----------



## FLYNZ4 (Apr 20, 2008)

rhonda said:


> The DVC version of the argument: "SSR is too big!  It has created _too many new owners!_  No SSR owner really wants to stay at SSR -- they all want my time at BCV/VWL/BWV ..."
> 
> Sound familiar?



Rhonda,

This is a good comparison... except that it understates the percieved concern at WM.   A better comparision would be the exact situation that you describe... EXCEPT adding in the additional factor of BCV/BWV/VWL/etc owners losing their home booking advantage.

With WM... there is no home booking advantage... so when new resorts with an "undesireable perception" (justified or not) are brought into the system... the new owners have equal priority to the existing properties.   If that was the case with DVC... you could certainly bet that the existing owners would be screaming bloody murder.

/Jim


----------



## GrayFal (Apr 20, 2008)

bnoble said:


> Huh?  SSR costs more points than OKW in all seasons, but is in many ways less desirable---the units are generally smaller, and SSR is a few minutes farther from the parks than is OKW.


That was my point - DVC continuing to increase points at the newer resorts for the same size units...I thought SSR was 'closer' to OKW then the others.... but they have now made their newest project equitable to the original.


----------



## bnoble (Apr 20, 2008)

The value units at AKV are lower, but everything else is a notch up, IIRC.  Those value units are all along the front wing of the old hotel; half of them have parking-lot views, though the other half have pool or savannah views.  They are also smaller than the units in the two "main wings", which were converted from the hotel's larger 'deluxe' (i.e. larger) cash rooms.


----------



## GrayFal (Apr 20, 2008)

rhonda said:


> No, I don't believe it has taken a dive.
> 
> Two possible reasons your FIL couldn't get Kauai at 13 mos:
> Inventory hadn't been loaded into the system.  (Doubtful -- but it has been known to happen.)
> ...


This is an interesting comment - Marriott allows Multiple week owners to call in at 13 months and book consecutive (or concurrent) weeks BUT they only allow 50% of units to be booked that way - the other 50% are held for the 'usual' 12 month booking window - thus allowing single week owners an equal chance of getting their desired reservation.


----------



## GrayFal (Apr 20, 2008)

bnoble said:


> The value units at AKV are lower, but everything else is a notch up, IIRC.  Those value units are all along the front wing of the old hotel; half of them have parking-lot views, though the other half have pool or savannah views.  They are also smaller than the units in the two "main wings", which were converted from the hotel's larger 'deluxe' (i.e. larger) cash rooms.


So then they are not equitable   - and DVC is just as guilty of 'creeping' as the other systems.
I thought better of the Mouse


----------



## cruisin (Apr 20, 2008)

FLYNZ4 said:


> Rhonda,
> 
> This is a good comparison... except that it understates the percieved concern at WM.   A better comparision would be the exact situation that you describe... EXCEPT adding in the additional factor of BCV/BWV/VWL/etc owners losing their home booking advantage.
> 
> ...



It would be nice if I could buy SSR and have the same booking priority into Beach Club as Beach Club owners did. With Worldmark, The developer does not have to build nice properties, they just have to create credits, then they can sell them at many of the nice existing resorts. Could you imagine Wyndham/Marriott/Disney building resorts of lower construction quality in poor locations and trying to sell there. 

Worldmark is a 2 edged sword, it  is great because you can buy resell today and book the best unit in the best season just like anyone else, but many times you are competing with 250,000 owners  for 2-4 units. This would be true to a great degree even if all the new properties that came on board were fantastic.


----------



## cruisin (Apr 20, 2008)

GrayFal said:


> So then they are not equitable   - and DVC is just as guilty of 'creeping' as the other systems.
> I thought better of the Mouse



Just for fun, here is the worst example of credit creep in the Worldmark system, the downtown sandiego Worldmark, with tiny rooms and no amenities, came in at credit values almost 200% higher than traditional. 

I was trying to think of what it would look like for DVC.....    

Take a room at All-Star Sports, because it has to be very small, and all rooms are 1 bedroom this size.  take away the pools and hottubs, take away parking, but you can pay $100 a week for parking off site, place the resort next to Magic Kingdom( the location will justify the cost). Every week is magic season, so the cost for this room exactly as described is 408.75 DVC points a week 52 weeks a year. (based upon current OKW point values for 1 bedroom magic season) 

1/2 the room value for twice the cost???  But look at the location!!

I would love to hear the DVC owners response when the details of this new resort is announced  

Any guesses FLYNZ4? 

Please feel free to tweak my example if I got carried away. I thought placing the new resort next to magic Kingdom was very generous!!!


----------



## cotraveller (Apr 20, 2008)

cruisin said:


> Just for fun, here is the worst example of credit creep in the Worldmark system, the downtown sandiego Worldmark, with tiny rooms and no amenities, came in at credit values almost 200% higher than traditional.



The upside for the San Diego resort is that it is proving to be popular.  For 2007, the first full year it was open, it operated at a 91% occupancy rate, well above the WorldMark overall occupancy rate of 84% for all WorldMark resorts.  That occupancy rate works out to a total of about 2,200 units that were vacant for one night during the year.

Compare that to a resort such as WorldMark Seaside, an Oregon coast location, which operated at a 92% occupancy rate.  Due to the larger size of the Seaside resort it had over 7,000 units that were vacant.

The San Diego resort is popular with the owners and is being well utilized.  The higher credit values are not keeping owners away.  With only 2,200 vacant nights out of over 300,000 total for all of the WorldMark resorts it is definitely not creating a burden on the system.


----------



## FLYNZ4 (Apr 20, 2008)

cotraveller said:


> The upside for the San Diego resort is that it is proving to be popular.  For 2007, the first full year it was open, it operated at a 91% occupancy rate.


Fred,

I have not personally been following the San Diego property closely... but I know that others have.   The criticism that I have heard is that the resort is heavily booked via bonus time or other cash methods, versus consuming owner credits.    Furthermore... there was significant concern that the developer was booking units using developer (vs owner) vacation credits... just to kill the perception that the resort was underutilized using owner vacation credits.

I think that you know me well enough to understand that I like to do factual analysis rather than emotional analysis.    I believe that you share this same attribute... it must be the engineer in both of us.

I have personally asked Wyn several times, including at BOD meetings to replace the absolutely meaningless "vacancy report" with a more meaningful "usage report" that broke down resort usage by every possible usage category including:
- owner vacation credits (the only one that really matters)
- bonus time
- inventory specials
- developer credits
- party weekends
- sales incentives
- etc, etc etc
- vacant rooms

The feedback was "this is a great idea"... except that they never once supplied the data.    Then I understand (but I have not verified) that a similar request was discussed at the owner advisory council (which you are a member)... and that the final response from Wyndham is that owners don't need to see such data (or some other such condescending response).

If in fact that WYN does not plan to provide such a response... the only practical conclusion that I  can imagine is that they are trying to hide some type of data... so that we cannot see the honest and true picture of usage.   I think that my request for the data is an honest and fair one... so that a legitimate analysis could be made of the actual owner usage of all of our properties.    I personally am very disappointed that this information is being withheld... and I can only assume it is for reasons of PR control.

Personally... I am even more concerned with properties such as Galena and Grand Lake OK.   Even from the skimpy data that I have seen on OK... it seemed that only 16% (completely from memory) of the units were being booked using credits... which means that the credits that were generated there are causing an over subscription of the other WM properties.   This has to be an alarming statistic for anyone who owns WM... and is probably the true reason why we are being denied factual data on our resort usage.

/Jim


----------



## FLYNZ4 (Apr 20, 2008)

cruisin said:


> 1/2 the room value for twice the cost???  But look at the location!!
> 
> I would love to hear the DVC owners response when the details of this new resort is announced
> 
> Any guesses FLYNZ4?


Cruisin,

To make this analysis complete... you need to factor in the fact of no home booking advantage... so that anyone who bought your newly proposed "All Star Kingdom" resort would be able too book BWV/BCV/VWL/OKW GV's/AKL Concierge/etc with the exact same priority as people who originally bought at those resorts... thereby destroying the existing DVC program in the process.

To be fair... the "no home resort" attribute is a weakness in the Worldmark system... not a problem with Wyndham per se.  As a result, WYN has MORE responsibility to protect the integrity of the program by ensuring that new resorts at brought in at equitable quality and point values.   The problem is that WYN appears to be exploiting this system loophole in the WM system which has the affect of growing WYN profit at the expense of owner equity.

To imagine how bad it can get... looking at this in the limit (for those of us who can remember calculus)... there is nothing stopping WYN from putting up a single trailer on a vacant lot in [pick your favorite dump]... and charging a billion credits/night for occupancy... and then using those credits to over-sell the existing WM properties 100:1.   The ONLY thing that seems to prevent that behavior is corporate business integrity... which is exactly why so many people are concerned.

/Jim


----------



## cotraveller (Apr 20, 2008)

FLYNZ4 said:


> Fred,
> 
> I have not personally been following the San Diego property closely... but I know that others have.   The criticism that I have heard is that the resort is heavily booked via bonus time or other cash methods, versus consuming owner credits.    Furthermore... there was significant concern that the developer was booking units using developer (vs owner) vacation credits... just to kill the perception that the resort was underutilized using owner vacation credits.
> 
> ...



Jim,

The Occupancy and Credit Utilization report lists the occupancy, the portion of that occupancy booked with credits, the portion booked with Inventory Specials and Bonus Time, and the portion from things such as distressed rentals.  San Diego shows 91% occupancy, 90 % of that from credit bookings, and 10% from Bonus Time.  I do not believe that San Diego was on Inventory Special in 2007.  That indicates that it is being predominately being booked with credits.

As for the concern that some have expressed about the developer booking units or witholding data for some devious purposes, as you said, I prefer factual rather than rumored or emotional analysis.

I agree about Galena and Grand Lake, they continue to be grossly underutilized.  I have not been to Grand Lake so I cannot comment on it.  We have visited Galena several times.  It is a nice resort in nice area that is a bad location for WorldMark demographics.  With a predominately western ownership the location does not appeal to a majority of the WorldMark owners.  I was told that a sales office is now operating in Galena and more midwest owners are entering the WorldMark system but it is a slow process.  A few more resorts in the midwest would help, perhaps in a location such as Door County, Wisconsin, but any such additions would create more cries of "why there"?

On the plus side, for those who do live or travel in the area it makes a nice getaway location.  With little competition from all of the west coast owners we can usually book it quite easily, although even Galena is showing  few unavailable nights for this coming summer.


----------



## FLYNZ4 (Apr 20, 2008)

cotraveller said:


> As for the concern that some have expressed about the developer booking units or witholding data for some devious purposes, as you said, I prefer factual rather than rumored or emotional analysis.


Fred,

I agree 100% which is why I was asking for the data.  It is WYN who is being occused of foul play... It is WYN who has the data... it is WYN who is choosing to withhold the data.   When I see that type of behavior... it makes me ask WHY?   All I want is the data so I can make a factual analysis.  Doesn't that make sense?

/Jim


----------



## cotraveller (Apr 20, 2008)

FLYNZ4 said:


> Fred,
> 
> I agree 100% which is why I was asking for the data.  It is WYN who is being occused of foul play... It is WYN who has the data... it is WYN who is choosing to withhold the data.   When I see that type of behavior... it makes me ask WHY?   All I want is the data so I can make a factual analysis.  Doesn't that make sense?
> 
> /Jim



I see it as part of "the developer is evil" syndrome that is exhibited time and time again.  You see it in many threads on this bbs, not just with regards to Wyndham but to developers in general.  If a company (or an individual) begins responding to rumors and trash talk it leads nowhere.  Since the developer is evil there is no answer that will appease those making the accusations.

San Diego is bad because it has high credit values.  Oh, the data shows that it is being utilized, and being utilized with credits?  That obviously means that the developer is intentionally skewing the data.  

I believe that we still operate under a principle of innocent until proven guilty, not guilty until proven innocent.  Unless you are a timeshare developer, then you operate under different rules.


----------



## cruisin (Apr 20, 2008)

I was just trying to show the extreme case of credit "creep", I am not arguing about utilization, developer,owner etc....

Does anyone that owns DVC want to book a 1 bedroom at the All Star Kingdom resort in september for 408.75 points?

I am sure that the DVCers look at 408.75 points for this type of unit, and think this is far fetched, ridicuolous, and probably not a realistic comparison. It was certainly real for Worldmark  owners. Wyndham is lucky that they have 2 choices for resorts. I will bet that this downtown Sandiego was never considered for the WVO side. $30,000 for a 400 square ft 1 bedroom with no amenities would have been impossible to sell as deeded weeks.

Des any WVO owner want a deeded week in a 400 sq ft 1br at this real resort, that has no amenities for $30,000?

Guilty if proven guilty


----------



## bnoble (Apr 20, 2008)

Regarding DVC: we'll see when the KTV point charts are published.  I expect them to be spendy.

Regarding Wyndham: FSP has a very similar resort in San Diego: Wyndham Harbor Lights.  No parking with the unit, parking is $25/day.  It does have a sauna and steam room, but no pool---very limited amenities.  

This resort is all studios, with a single 1BR unit.  The "normal" point value for a red studio in FSP is 70K.  The "normal" point value for a red 1BR in FSP is 105K.  The point values for this no-amenity san diego resort?  203K for a studio in prime time, and 231K for the 1BR.  *More* than double.  At current retail pricing, a studio week woudl run $35K+.  The 1BR week would be  $40K+.

As far as I can tell, the only thing different between WM and the others are there is no home resort booking advantage in WM, while there is in DVC and FSP.  Otherwise, the resort systems seem to behave in exactly the same way, yet the WM owners for some reason are the quickest to cry foul.


----------



## cruisin (Apr 20, 2008)

Just pointing out the tremendous credit "creep" that has occurred, I am sure that  no one is expecting the new dvc values to be 408 points for a 1 bedroom that is  1/2 the room, 52 weeks out of the year.


----------



## LLW (Apr 21, 2008)

bnoble said:


> As far as I can tell, the only thing different between WM and the others are there is no home resort booking advantage in WM, while there is in DVC and FSP.  Otherwise, the resort systems seem to behave in exactly the same way, yet the WM owners for some reason are the quickest to cry foul.



*That home resort advantage is the big difference*, as you said in post #10 above. New owners who bought 7,000 credits generated from one of the new resorts with 1BRs that are worth 15,000 credits a week are going to see that many of the older resort 1BRs can be had for 8,000 credits a week, and they can book at the same time old owners can, because there is no home resort advantage. Now there is a lot more competition for the older resorts, which is why the father-in-law in post #1 is facing challenge booking at the earliest moment he is allowed to book.

That's why educated WM owners cry foul.  

The Developer does this not only because it is easier to sell credits at a lower price while selling more credits, but also because the they can collect higher maintenance fees (for which there is a cap in the governing documents for increases) based on more credits.

Notwithstanding all these, WM is still one of the best systems amongst timeshares. That's why educated WM owners also are buying more credits or increasing their access to WM in other ways, with their eyes open.    That, however, does not negate the fact that the Developer is confiscating owners' equity in the older resorts.

By the way, are you a WM owner? If you are, there is a lot more detailed info on another web site.


----------



## bnoble (Apr 21, 2008)

> for which there is a cap in the governing documents for increases


Is this really a benefit?  While it's nice to know there is a limited downside, I can also imagine that, if resort costs escalate for some legitimate reason, MFs might no longer be sufficient to maintain the resort at the level which the owners expect.

No, I'm not a WM owner---living in Eastern Time, WM isn't as useful to me as other opportunities.  I'm a buy-where-I-can-drive kind of guy, so my ownerships are in FSP and a couple of summer Wisconsin weeks.

Watching from the outside, my impression is that WM owners are a bit quicker to take offense than many others.  And, given the amount of kvetching that FSP owners do, that's saying something.

But, that's an outsider's perspective, so take the opinion for all you paid to obtain it.


----------



## LLW (Apr 21, 2008)

bnoble said:


> Is this really a benefit?  While it's nice to know there is a limited downside, I can also imagine that, if resort costs escalate for some legitimate reason, MFs might no longer be sufficient to maintain the resort at the level which the owners expect.



This is regular maintenance, not special assessment. Ben Bernanke et al have been feverishly trying to keep inflation under 5%.  

In any case, because in WM's case the Developer is also the manager and the Board of Directors, there are a lot of ways to get around it. The Developer and Manager naturally has business objectives that are in conflict with owners', who are represented by the Board of Directors. And because the Developer is in perpetual development for WM, where there is no home resort, there is no end to it.   



bnoble said:


> Watching from the outside, my impression is that WM owners are a bit quicker to take offense than many others.  And, given the amount of kvetching that FSP owners do, that's saying something.
> 
> But, that's an outsider's perspective, so take the opinion for all you paid to obtain it.



Are you saying that the fact that WM owners are organized is a bad thing, and that it is good for other timeshare owners to not speak up?


----------

