# Premier Destinations Stumbles Early



## PerryM

Good grief - are my predictions for the DC industry already happening?

Click here.....

P.S.
Then there's My Global Playground ...

If you count the founding DC club (Can't remember it's name) that's 3 out of 25 listed on Helium that are dead or dying.  *So are we looking at a 12% failure rate now for DCs?*


----------



## Kagehitokiri

looks like helium report scooped me for that. >
http://www.tugbbs.com/forums/showpost.php?p=412919&postcount=7
like theyve done with other posters on other occasions IIRC.

this is the 2nd thread this has come up in after i originally posted in the membership numbers thread.

neither club really launched in the first place. personally, couldnt care less.

only one poster shared your extreme concern for the DC industry >


range_life said:


> We were just about to take the plunge with trial membership at HCC, when we read about "Premier Destinations" suspending its activities. This is the second destination club to run into problems in two years.
> 
> Does anyone have any thoughts about how to evaluate the risks of an HCC membership? Since it is unsecured, aren't you really just rolling the dice and hoping for the best?


----------



## GOLFNBEACH

PerryM said:


> Good grief - are my predictions for the DC industry already happening?
> 
> [/B]



Chicken Little - big difference between existing clubs and new clubs that never got off the ground.  

Launching a new club in a competitive market is extremely difficult.  New entries have resorted to desperate ideas that result in excessive risk - like refunding members deposits in 3 days.

No DC (or any business) is risk free.  Do some due diligence and pick a club with solid business practices and good management.  The sky isn't falling.


----------



## Steamboat Bill

PerryM said:


> If you count the founding DC club (Can't remember it's name) that's 3 out of 25 listed on Helium that are dead or dying.  *So are we looking at a 12% failure rate now for DCs?*



Premier Destinations and My Global Playground NEVER launched, thus I would not  view this as gloom and doom or a failure. It simply means that it is MUCH harder for a start-up company to create a new Destination Club and try to compete with the established players.

My criteria for a DC failure is when a member actually LOSES their deposit and can't use any properties. So far, this has not happened yet.

Tanner & Haley did declare bankruptcy (well documented) and was bought by Ultimate Resorts. Although this may sound bad, the members were not affected like an investor in Enron (that lost everything) as they can now use the UR properties and may actually be in a better situation than when they were with T&H.


----------



## Kagehitokiri

OTOH, there were ~150 T&H members that did not join UR, and also those that did had to pay if they wanted to upgrade past the plan they were given as part of the deal, although IIRC it was at somewhat of a discount.


----------



## timeos2

*Six  now and a dozen later?*



PerryM said:


> Good grief - are my predictions for the DC industry already happening?
> 
> Click here.....
> 
> P.S.
> Then there's My Global Playground ...
> 
> If you count the founding DC club (Can't remember it's name) that's 3 out of 25 listed on Helium that are dead or dying.  *So are we looking at a 12% failure rate now for DCs?*



If ever there was a legal, big dollar industry that borders on a pyramid scheme the destination clubs with all their convoluted ongoing sales, refund and buy back clauses fit the bill. Usually this type of thing depends on the fact that for the buyers this is (hopefully) discretionary income and if it all falls apart the buyers shake their heads and say "what was I thinking".  The history thus far does not bode well for the long term survival of any of these groups. Perry - I'm in your camp on this one.


----------



## Kagehitokiri

Crescendo "is a fully compliant, Regulation D securities offering" and therefore "cannot advertise nor generally solicit new investors"

Distinctive Holiday Homes allows members, in effect, to resell their memberships.

the most exclusive private concierge is Preferred. it only has 30 member/clients. each has a net worth of over $100MM. the minimum annual fee, simply to remain a member, is $24K.

more allegations about DCs >
http://www.tugbbs.com/forums/showthread.php?p=410196#post410196
http://www.tugbbs.com/forums/showthread.php?p=409974#post409974


----------



## RLG

Steamboat Bill said:


> Tanner & Haley did declare bankruptcy (well documented) and was bought by Ultimate Resorts. Although this may sound bad, the members were not affected like an investor in Enron (that lost everything) as they can now use the UR properties and may actually be in a better situation than when they were with T&H.



You've made this inaccurate claim before.  I only wish it were true, since I was a Private Retreats/Abercrombie & Kent/Tanner & Haley member.

Let me assure you that we are not better off than before the bankruptcy.

 Previously Tanner members had a contractual right to get back their $250,000/$500,000/$1,000,000 deposit subject to X in 1 out.  Now they don't.   If they don't want to belong to the club anymore, they get zero.  That's the same percentage loss as the Enron investors - 100%.

Ultimate did offer a discounted plan to former T&H members.  They got the right to buy 14 days annual usage for $10,000 or $15,000 per year depending on their original plan.  (They also got a discount if they upgraded to a higher priced Ultimate plan.)   That's $715 or $1071 per night, i.e. not much savings versus the cost of renting the same properties.  

Rather than rehash my prior posts on the subject I'll just link them here:

http://www.tugbbs.com/forums/showthread.php?p=282631#post282631

http://www.tugbbs.com/forums/showthread.php?p=283004#post283004

http://www.tugbbs.com/forums/showthread.php?p=316320#post316320


----------



## Bourne

*What you are making is an inaccurate claim. *

For someone who stood to lose a quarter of a million at the minimum, you should have known better.

Ultimate Resorts offer was...

Tanner & Haley members who join Ultimate Resort and remain in good standing for at least five years will be allowed to cancel their membership and redeem their deposit on a “three-in, one-out” basis. In other words, three new members must join the club before you are allowed to leave. The deposit redemption amounts are as follows: 

After 5 years of membership, 60% of the then current membership fee
After 6 years of membership, 70% of the then current membership fee
After 7 years of membership, 80% of the then current membership fee


----------



## Kagehitokiri

bourne, isnt that referring to those who paid a NEW deposit to UR? and then it would only refund (based on) that, and not that plus their T&H deposit?


regardless they did also lose unlimited use (like LRW did post merger)

example of T&H plans >
http://web.archive.org/web/20051028080121/www.tannerandhaley.com/become/our-clubs-pricing_4.1.shtm


----------



## RLG

Bourne said:


> *What you are making is an inaccurate claim. *
> 
> For someone who stood to loose a quarter of a million at the minimum, you should have known better.



I'm not sure what this is referring to.  If it's that I should have known better than to join a destination club so I wouldn't lose a quarter of a million plus,  then we're in agreement.  (BTW, note the correct spelling of the word "lose".)

If it's that I didn't discuss the contingent payout when I pointed out that T&H members were much worse off than before the bankruptcy, you are correct.  Instead of saying that T&H members lost their entire deposit, I should have said that they lost their entire deposit subject to a highly contingent and limited redemption option in the future.  (Enron investors also have some contingent payouts from the various litigations, so they may still get more than T&H). 

The problem with the redemption option is that with over 600 former T&H members being able to exercise at the same time, no one knows how many years or decades it could take to cash people out given the 3:1 ratio.  How much would you be willing to pay me now to buy my redemption claim?

However, that doesn't change my principal point that Bill continues to claim that T&H members came through the bankruptcy OK and may even be better off.  (See my linked threads for another example of him making this claim.)  This is so far from the truth it's laughable.


----------



## Kagehitokiri

RLG, can you clarify - isnt bourne's post referring to those who paid a NEW deposit to UR? and then it would only refund (based on) that, and not that plus their T&H deposit?


----------



## RLG

Kagehitokiri said:


> isnt that referring to those who paid a NEW deposit to UR? and then it would only refund (based on) that, and not that plus their T&H deposit?



Bourne's description of the redemption option was correct.  Those who continued as dues paying members but didn't upgrade, still get the ability to get in the redemption queue after 5 years and get x% of whatever Ultimate is selling the "bronze" memberships for at the time.  That's subject, of course, to the 3:1 ratio and the hope that membership sales are very brisk to work off what could be hundreds of members in the queue.




Kagehitokiri said:


> regardless they did also lose unlimited use (like LRW did post merger)



Correct.  Of course to the destination club cheerleaders, they are better off than before the bankruptcy.


----------



## Kagehitokiri

oh right. i forgot about that. so you can hopefully make up some/all of your original deposit, down the road. the pricing has already gone up some, and theyve said they expect ~30% increase after PE merger is complete. and there might be merger potential with HCC, which would also mean an increase.

also in response to some of your other past comments >

1. deposit security - dont know about T&H, but here is some info on other clubs http://www.tugbbs.com/forums/showpost.php?p=413495&postcount=67
(in effect - none for T&H)

2. bad T&H business practices 
* leased 2/3 of their properties
* paid for accommodations when no club availability 
* risked and lost corporate holdings (presumably including money from deposits) on failed ventures
http://www.heliumreport.com/archives/328-tanner-haley-files-for-chapter-11-bankruptcy
(in effect - T&H spent spent spent)

3. AFAIK/IIRC T&H didnt have any independent audit on financials/policies, nor any real transparency for members
(in effect - none for T&H)


----------



## RLG

Kagehitokiri said:


> oh right. i forgot about that. so you can hopefully make up some/all of your original deposit,



If you believe that will happen, I've got a bridge (or a destination club) to sell you. 



Kagehitokiri said:


> 1. deposit security - dont know about T&H, but here is some info on other clubs http://www.tugbbs.com/forums/showpost.php?p=413495&postcount=67
> (in effect - none for T&H)



ER, Ultimate, PE and HCC represent substantially all of the members of destination clubs.  I don't see anything on your links that contradicts my assertion that membership deposits in those clubs represent a deeply subordinated unsecured loan to an extremely highly leveraged company with very little equity.  T&H was no different than the others in that respect.




Kagehitokiri said:


> 2. bad T&H business practices
> * leased 2/3 of their properties
> * paid for accommodations when no club availability
> * risked and lost corporate holdings (presumably including money from deposits) on failed ventures



The most favorable characterization of T&H management is that they were incompetent.  Since there was no meaningful equity to absorb the losses from their bad decisions, the members did.  

Most other DC's also have little or no equity and high operating costs.  If membership sales slow and/or property values fall there will be a problem.




Kagehitokiri said:


> 3. AFAIK/IIRC T&H didnt have any independent audit on financials/policies, nor any real transparency for members
> (in effect - none for T&H)



DC's still provide much less disclosure than a business would normally have to in order to get me to fund what's essentially the junior most part of their capital structure.  Has anyone seen the P&L for ER?  

BTW, I'm not convinced that this disclosure would be that helpful to existing members anyway.  Suppose a club's next disclosure said "sorry, because of real estate market declines, the value of all of the properties is now insufficient to pay off all the membership deposits."  What could existing members do about it?


----------



## Kagehitokiri

5 years - 60% then current
6 years - 70% then current
7 years - 80% then current

in order to get 100% refund of original $275K >

5 years - $460K price 
6 years - $395K price
7 years - $345K price

current price - $125K
post PE merger price ~ Nov 15 ~ $165K

inflation could also be added as a variable.


----------



## Bourne

RLG said:


> I'm not sure what this is referring to.  If it's that I should have known better than to join a destination club so I wouldn't lose a quarter of a million plus,  then we're in agreement.  (BTW, note the correct spelling of the word "lose".)
> However, that doesn't change my principal point that Bill continues to claim that T&H members came through the bankruptcy OK and may even be better off.  (See my linked threads for another example of him making this claim.)  This is so far from the truth it's laughable.



Too loose with the lose. Point taken and fixed. 

The point that I make on this site regarding T&H is similar to Bill's. When he and I say that T&H members came out okay after the bankruptcy, it effectively means that they did not lose EVERYTHING. 

T&H had a flawed business plan. Buying into it meant members did not do enough due diligence. The risk was too great compared to what was being offered. Period. 

To expect anything more than what UR offered to T&H members is asking for too much. IMHO, UR did not have to offer anything besides usage for ongoing dues.


----------



## Steamboat Bill

My point about T&H is that the members can still use UR's destination club properties and thus, still have some value in membership, unlike Enron stock that is worth nothing.

I am not sticking up for T&H...please...they have caused the largest black eye to affect the DC industry and makes all potential new members think twice before joining.

T&H leased many properties and overpromised guaranteed locations. This was a recipe for disaster. All the current DCs have learned from the T&H meltdown and have made corrections. Can it happen again? Perhaps. 

Either way, my HCC membership was less than 20% of the cost of a T&H membership and I feel that this provides me tremendous value.

I still think the Destination Club experience is far superior to a Timeshare experience.

I would be interested in buying a T&H redemption claim if it offred me a bargain to join UR...send me a PM with details.


----------



## Kagehitokiri

theyre not transferable are they?


----------



## Bourne

PerryM said:


> Good grief - are my predictions for the DC industry already happening?
> 
> Click here.....
> 
> P.S.
> Then there's My Global Playground ...
> 
> If you count the founding DC club (Can't remember it's name) that's 3 out of 25 listed on Helium that are dead or dying.  *So are we looking at a 12% failure rate now for DCs?*



My risk level is *20%*. Same in the stock market and same for DCs.

Let two or more DCs fail and I'll consider calling HCC to get my money back. Shoot. They may not give me my money back as there would be hundreds more lining up for the same. 

There goes *30K* down the drain.  I should have listened to you when you predicted it earlier.


----------



## RLG

Steamboat Bill said:


> members can still use UR's destination club properties and thus, still have *some* value in membership



I certainly would not dispute that the members who chose to accept UR's offer felt that it was better than nothing.  BTW, 200 members disagreed and chose not to accept.

However, that claim is a LOT different than your previous statements implying that no one got hurt.  See below:



Steamboat Bill said:


> the T&H members have been absorbed by another DC that bought them out for over $100 million. Thus, the disaster has been *solved*.






Steamboat Bill said:


> the members were not affected like an investor in Enron (that lost everything) as they can now use the UR properties and may actually be in a *better situation *than when they were with T&H.





Although I don't like the shaky financial underpinnings of the industry, I can wholeheartedly agree with this comment:



Steamboat Bill said:


> I still think the Destination Club experience is far superior to a Timeshare experience.


----------



## PerryM

*Connecting those pesky dots .......*



GOLFNBEACH said:


> Chicken Little - big difference between existing clubs and new clubs that never got off the ground.
> 
> Launching a new club in a competitive market is extremely difficult.  New entries have resorted to desperate ideas that result in excessive risk - like refunding members deposits in 3 days.
> 
> No DC (or any business) is risk free.  Do some due diligence and pick a club with solid business practices and good management.  The sky isn't falling.



Do we not have 3 instances where the phones were disconnected, names changed, memberships in limbo and perhaps bankruptcy?

Do we ignore those pesky dots that everyone loves to talk about after a calamity hits?  I won't ignore these.

I suggest that we classify 3 instances of DCs going out of business and membership benefits in doubt.


----------



## Steamboat Bill

RLG said:


> I certainly would not dispute that the members who chose to accept UR's offer felt that it was better than nothing.  BTW, 200 members disagreed and chose not to accept.
> 
> However, that claim is a LOT different than your previous statements implying that no one got hurt.




OK...I admit that I may have overestimated the gravity of the T&H situation and I agree that many people are probably NOT able to get their membership deposit back (which I assume was promised to them). I am satisified that UR stepped up to the plate and bought the homes and offered some type of membership plan to T&H members, thus it was not a total loss.

What are the 200 people doing with their T&H contract?

Are you able to buy their &H contract to join UR?

Why didn't you join UR?


----------



## Steamboat Bill

PerryM said:


> I suggest that we classify 3 instances of DCs going out of business and membership benefits in doubt.



I believe that only ONE DC has gone bust. 

If two companies attempted to launch ad DC, but could not sign up any members, then it is a non-event. This would be like a pre-construction sign going up on a vacant lot advertising a condo-hotel that never gets built and classifying it as a sign that condo-hotels are bad business.

If you ever start your own DC (the Perry Club) and decide to fold after 6-12 months, then that should not be a black mark on the DC industry, like the T&H with 900 members in limbo.


----------



## PerryM

*RIP DCs*



Steamboat Bill said:


> I believe that only ONE DC has gone bust.
> 
> If two companies attempted to launch ad DC, but could not sign up any members, then it is a non-event. This would be like a pre-construction sign going up on a vacant lot advertising a condo-hotel that never gets built and classifying it as a sign that condo-hotels are bad business.
> 
> If you ever start your own DC (the Perry Club) and decide to fold after 6-12 months, then that should not be a black mark on the DC industry, like the T&H with 900 members in limbo.



I agree, but is this what happened?  Or, did at least one member sign up?

If we must guess at the answer we should chose the most conservative guess which is to assume that the fledgling DCs did sign up at least one member.  

Although I agree its a hard decision to make to ignore 2 DCs who started and found it a bust should be a signal that has some significance.

Hopefully Helium or someone else will take the time to investigate.

Me; I'm counting 3 DCs that have gone bust in various ways; there are 25 DC's total listed in Helium:

*RIP DCs:​
Tanner & Haley (2006)
Premier Destinations (2007)
My Global Playground (2007)
*
If someone can confirm that NO member signed up for #2 and/or #3 I will gladly remove them from my infamous RIP list.


----------



## Bourne

What about the four others that got merged because they could not scale. 

I am not talking about PE and UR merger. 

That makes it 7. 

Close the doors. No, Run for the hills. Call SEC. Take DNA samples. Anything. Anything.


----------



## GOLFNBEACH

PerryM said:


> *RIP DCs:​
> Tanner & Haley (2006)
> Premier Destinations (2007)
> My Global Playground (2007)
> *
> .



Any idea how many timeshares have failed.  Do you have a timeshare RIP list?

There is some risk associated with all investments.  Determine if the risk / reward trade-off is acceptable to you.  Simple.


----------



## Steamboat Bill

I don't want to continue this debate much further, but I still believe that only ONE Destination Club can truly be considered a failure and that was T&H. 

T&H started in 1999 and was bought by UR in 2006. T&H had a 7 year run and members were given an option to join UR, but they did not live up to their original promise and members did lose deposits. T&H overpromised and underdelivered and that is why they failed.

To classify Premier Destinations and My Global Playground in the same category is a disservice to all Destination Clubs as they tried to jump on the destination club bandwagon, but couldn't make it.

Perry has posted dozens of times about how easy and quick it would be to start a new DC (overnight), but the current market conditions indicate that this may be MUCH harder than he or anyone else realizes. Starting a DC may be easy, but growing it is obviously much harder.

Thus, I only consider T&H to be included on the RIP list and because 600 or so members transfered to UR, I would hardly consider that a Titanic disaster. Of course, there are about 200 or so individuals that may not have fared so well.

The stock market crashed in 1929 and 1987, and was clobbered in 2000-2002 but people are still buying stocks (including DIA).

It is highly doubtful that Exclusive Resorts (the largest DC with 3,000 DC memebrs) would ever go bust.


----------



## PerryM

GOLFNBEACH said:


> Any idea how many timeshares have failed.  Do you have a timeshare RIP list?
> 
> There is some risk associated with all investments.  Determine if the risk / reward trade-off is acceptable to you.  Simple.



I'm sure a number of "Mom and Pop" timeshares have done a Dinosaur too - but there is a HUGE difference here - a timeshare owner is an owner with a deed and can continue to use the timeshare as long as the HOA decides to continue.

A DC is a completely different animal - there is NO ownership of these 3 DCs and they may or may not continue and the members may or may not have the same membership rights.

Again, I am willing to remove any deceased DC from the RIP list if that DC had NO members but the founders.  If we can't determine that we should err on the side of caution and include the DCs.

I have not doubt that starting a DC is a weekend project and that there will be hucksters out there that take advantage of the fact that there are NO laws to protect DC owners.  Perhaps the 2 DCs in question fall into this category - a con and why should they not be in the RIP list?


----------



## Bourne

There is a lot of misinformation being posted here. 

IMHO, there are 7 on the RIP list. I am not settling for 3. 

Make it 7.


----------



## vineyarder

Bourne said:


> There is a lot of misinformation being posted here.
> 
> IMHO, there are 7 on the RIP list. I am not settling for 3.
> 
> Make it 7.



Actually, I thought about starting one, but was too lazy to continue, so make it 8.


----------



## GOLFNBEACH

vineyarder said:


> Actually, I thought about starting one, but was too lazy to continue, so make it 8.



Ditto.  Make it 9.


----------



## Tedpilot

He he...you all are killing me.  I wonder if there are any official statistics on "businesses" that were never started but considered failures?  

Uh, No...because they weren't business failures, they were business ideas that never came to fruition.


----------



## GOLFNBEACH

PerryM said:


> I'm sure a number of "Mom and Pop" timeshares have done a Dinosaur too -



So you consider Sunterra (Timeshare) with 300,000 customers a "Mom and Pop"?  Yes, they filed for backruptcy.  

And why don't you consider Premier Destinations and My Global Playground "Mom and Pops"?


----------



## vineyarder

GOLFNBEACH said:


> So you consider Sunterra (Timeshare) with 300,000 customers a "Mom and Pop"?  Yes, they filed for backruptcy.
> 
> And why don't you consider Premier Destinations and My Global Playground "Mom and Pops"?



Because it wouldn't fit the fallacy:

All apples are purple.
This apple is red.
Ergo, this is not an apple.


----------



## Steamboat Bill

GOLFNBEACH said:


> So you consider Sunterra (Timeshare) with 300,000 customers a "Mom and Pop"?  Yes, they filed for backruptcy.



This is new news to me...I don't follow Sunterra...but 300,000 customers is a lot!


----------



## GOLFNBEACH

Steamboat Bill said:


> This is new news to me...I don't follow Sunterra...but 300,000 customers is a lot!



Sunterra declared bankrupty in May 2000 with $850 million in debt.  The company was delisted from the New York Stock Exchange that summer.

And yes...they made a comeback.


----------



## Kagehitokiri

Kagehitokiri said:


> another gone. website is down.
> http://www.premierdest.com/
> http://www.heliumreport.com/archives/322-interview-with-premier-destinations-ceo-vicki-vorhees
> looks like they only had 1 property and needed 20 members to launch 9 more properties, and they only got to 15.





Kagehitokiri said:


> was just reminded of something while looking, im pretty sure oyster circle's miami property was acquired from my global playground.



there are a number of other clubs that went nowhere. im not going to look them up. although i believe one was called emperor's club. one could search helium report, and use waybackmachine. bill also mentioned a couple here IIRC. 

worldwide private residences looks like the next to go, unfortunately. i really like their model. they went from 3 properties down to 2. so they cant have any more than 20 members right now.

any comments on this point based club *PerryM*? >


Kagehitokiri said:


> another thing that comes to mind, from what youre talking about is a club theyve got in australia with homes, cars, yachts, etc - more like a car club with other stuff. (point based) ill try and find it again and link it. again, not something im really interested in personally, because usage of the high value stuff is so limited. although i really dont remember what i worked out for the daily costs etc.. here it is >
> http://www.limitededition.com.au/



ive got some unique ideas for a DC, but itll be a while before i can get the kind of capital i would need


----------



## Steamboat Bill

Anybody can create any type of list they want. I simply think that classifying a start-up DCs that never launched into the same category as a up and running DC is a disservice. There are dozens of DC clubs that are in the planning stage and one is in Ft Lauderdale (Abundant Life I think) but they may never reach critical mass. I believe there are different types of risk for a start-up DC vs an established DC. If T&H never went bankrupt, we would never have these conversations.

The failure to launch for new DCs is actually a good signal for the industry as this means it is harder for a new company to enter the market.

I have always advised sticking with the top DCs in terms of membership numbers.


----------



## Kagehitokiri

and again just look at T&H's business practices.. no security, no transparency, so they blew all the deposit money gambling, rather than buying properties. 

compared to, for example, ER. ER has sold (and replaced) a number of properties already, and they could always flip some of the ones they bought in bulk to make quite a bit, basically instantly. for things like Poro Poro, they could sell to a developer who could then expand, and charge whatever they wanted for the homes.


----------



## Steamboat Bill

The Destination Club Association was formed in 2006 created a Code of Conduct and Best Practices for the Destination Club Industry. 

Current DCA members include - High Country Club, Solstice, Private Escapes, Ultimate Resort, Exclusive Resorts, and Quintess.

Not that this is any guarantee, but I would only recommend someone joining a club that is a member of the DCA.


----------



## RLG

Kagehitokiri said:


> and again just look at T&H's business practices.. no security ...



I'm curious what you mean by the word "security". 

Membership deposits are an unsecured obligation at all of the big clubs.  In fact, since all of the clubs have mortgage debt encumbering their properties, the membership deposits are actually subordinated debt.


----------



## RLG

GOLFNBEACH said:


> Sunterra declared bankrupty in May 2000 with $850 million in debt.  The company was delisted from the New York Stock Exchange that summer.




Unless I missed something, this case illustrates how DC members have a financial risk that timeshare owners don't have. 

The principal impact of the bankruptcy was on the creditors of Sunterra, i.e. the entity that managed and developed the timeshares.  Because timeshare purchasers bought deeded property, the owners continued to own the same real estate they owned before the developer/managing agent went bankrupt.

That's a significant difference versus the treatment of DC "members" when a DC goes under.  The "members" are close to the bottom of the capital structure and get wiped out unless there's something left after the secured creditors that have liens on the properties have been paid.


----------



## PerryM

RLG said:


> Unless I missed something, this case illustrates how DC members have a financial risk that timeshare owners don't have.
> 
> The principal impact of the bankruptcy was on the creditors of Sunterra, i.e. the entity that managed and developed the timeshares.  Because timeshare purchasers bought deeded property, the owners continued to own the same real estate they owned before the developer/managing agent went bankrupt.
> 
> That's a significant difference versus the treatment of DC "members" when a DC goes under.  The "members" are close to the bottom of the capital structure and get wiped out unless there's something left after the secured creditors that have liens on the properties have been paid.




This is/was my point - timeshares are protected with hundreds of real estate laws spread over 50 states and that deed really means something - ownership.

A DC is just a pile of paper inflated with salesrep's promises.  Not one law to protect a DC owner, not one bureaucrat to insure the i's were dotted and the t's crossed, not one real estate lawyer to make money by insuring that the paperwork was filed correctly with the state - nothing.


----------



## vivalour

RLG said:


> Unless I missed something, this case illustrates how DC members have a financial risk that timeshare owners don't have. .



Seems to me the financial risks are different. TS ownership does not guarantee TS owners the ability to resell -- you're at the mercy of the marketplace. As well, TS owners have limited  -- or no control on MFs, which can be jacked up out of sight. OTOH "investment" in most DCs involves a significant one-time membership fee ($30,000+++) and on-going dues, with no legal protection beyond the contract with the club. However, a few high-end DCs are designed to give members legal entitlement to a share of the club's properties. It really depends on the particular DC's business model.


----------



## GOLFNBEACH

PerryM said:


> This is/was my point -
> .



Perry - let's look at the facts.  You indicated that a number of "Mom and Pop" timeshares may have gone through bankruptcy.  I supplied facts that Sunterra, one of the largest timeshares with 300,000 customers filed for bankruptcy back in 2000 with $850MM in debt.

Last week it was misinformation about Dow Diamonds and their performance compared to the S&P 500.  I supplied you with the correct facts and historical graphs to prove it.

It might be easier to make your points with accurate information.


----------



## GOLFNBEACH

RLG said:


> Unless I missed something, this case illustrates how DC members have a financial risk that timeshare owners don't have.
> 
> The principal impact of the bankruptcy was on the creditors of Sunterra, i.e. the entity that managed and developed the timeshares.  Because timeshare purchasers bought deeded property, the owners continued to own the same real estate they owned before the developer/managing agent went bankrupt.
> 
> That's a significant difference versus the treatment of DC "members" when a DC goes under.  The "members" are close to the bottom of the capital structure and get wiped out unless there's something left after the secured creditors that have liens on the properties have been paid.




Good point, however, both timeshare "owners" and DC "members" have significant risks in the event of a bankruptcy.

Real estate law is very complicated and there are differenet types of timeshare contracts, and various forms of bankruptcy.  Rules vary by country and state.  Disclaimer...I am not a RE or bankruptcy lawyer.  Nuff said.

A timeshare may also be "deed/title" or a "right to use."  With a right to use, you are generally out of luck if the develper goes out of business.

Even with a deed there is significant risk.  A timeshare developer often uses timeshare purchase money or receivables to fund the construction, often as collateral for loans.  If the develper goes bankrupt the project may never be finished.  

A timeshare contract may or may not have "escrow,"  "non-disturbance" or "non-performance" clauses.  Look these up and understand them.

With a completed project a deed does provide some security, however, it may also make the owner responsible for a lot of debt not paid by the management/resort.  A deed carries responsibility to pay for the cost to operate the resort.  Special assessments may be required to help pay for unexpected maintenance, repairs, taxes, lawsuits, etc.


----------



## Steamboat Bill

The DC vs TS debate will probably never end on this bbs when it comes to the security of a deed (TS) vs the security of a contract (DC).

The interesting thing is that DCs model very closely to private golf clubs and I wonder how many people lose money as a result of a private golf club closing down.

Several private golf clubs have membership fees well over $100k.


----------



## Kagehitokiri

IIRC in Japan in the 80s, golf memberships sold above the $5MM mark.

theyre coming back now, read an article recently, dont remember what the current ceiling is like.

im very much a "club" person, not so much in terms of country clubs or private clubs, but in terms of things that have membership benefits. sometimes you can do better by joining something with access to multiple clubs etc, rather that joining a particular club directly. thats kind of how i view the difference between fractionals and DCs. 

i really like the DC model in general. i also like WPR's model (being basically "free"). and i also like onekey's model, offering discounted rentals.


----------



## PerryM

GOLFNBEACH said:


> Perry - let's look at the facts.  You indicated that a number of "Mom and Pop" timeshares may have gone through bankruptcy.  I supplied facts that Sunterra, one of the largest timeshares with 300,000 customers filed for bankruptcy back in 2000 with $850MM in debt.
> 
> Last week it was misinformation about Dow Diamonds and their performance compared to the S&P 500.  I supplied you with the correct facts and historical graphs to prove it.
> 
> It might be easier to make your points with accurate information.



I don't know what you are talking with DIA - must have missed that one.

My point was and is very simple - DCs are totally unsecured and offer NO sort of consumer protection what so ever.  This compared to timeshares.

Show me ONE I say ONE timeshare where the owners have lost their deeds - their access to the units they bought.

Just one is all I'm asking for - just one.

DC's have NO protection at all.

That's my point.


----------



## Bourne

and my point is that a deed buys me nothing...

Speaking of timeshares, HGVC has the audacity to offer me 9K on something that I bought for 18K from them and they are currently selling it for 26K. To them, it is a different department. 

*My point is that you can be blinded by a deed and not see the true value. If the price is overinflated, a deed gives you nothing but the ability to exercise the option to sell what you own at a highly discounted price.* 

I would rather have an unsecured membership with a DC that is well run than a timeshare that is deeded but is overinflated by 100-150%. 

To me, it is same as my investments in Pre IPO Private Equity placements.


----------



## PerryM

Bourne said:


> and my point is that a deed buys me nothing...
> 
> Speaking of timeshares, HGVC has the audacity to offer me 9K on something that I bought for 18K from them and they are currently selling it for 26K. To them, it is a different department.
> 
> *My point is that you can be blinded by a deed and not see the true value. If the price is overinflated, a deed gives you nothing but the ability to exercise the option to sell what you own at a highly discounted price.*
> 
> I would rather have an unsecured membership with a DC that is well run than a timeshare that is deeded but is overinflated by 100-150%.
> 
> To me, it is same as my investments in Pre IPO Private Equity placements.




I still have my challenge open - show me ONE timeshare where the owners lost the use of their unit with that deed in hand.

A deed to your house does mean something to our court system - so too that timeshare deed.

Blanket statements like "All deeds mean nothing" is specious at best.


----------



## Bourne

PerryM said:


> Blanket statements like "All deeds mean nothing" is specious at best.



 

The same goes for DCs too. A DC membership means something too. It's not hot air.


----------



## PerryM

Bourne said:


> The same goes for DCs too. A DC membership means something too. It's not hot air.



Ok, it's worth the paper it was written on.  There are no precautions like simple checks to insure that a condo/home isn't over saturated with membership sales.

Is there a single DC out there that addresses this simple question - if the DC says 8 full memberships comprise each unit that 8 full memberships are verified by a CPA?

I don't think so.  I know of no protection, either in state statutes or CPA opinions that verify this simple concept - no over selling of units.

Maybe I'm wrong - in fact I'd love to be proven wrong.  I do, one day, want to become a DC member.  If some of my concerns are satisfied.


Timeshares have this simple precaution normally - a deed is recorded by the state and it keeps track of how many owners per unit.


----------



## Kagehitokiri

maybe a DC member can post details on the audit/etc data theyve seen, if there is no NDA? or let us know which clubs other than Crescendo have NDAs, etc.

"If some of my concerns are satisfied." >
http://www.tugbbs.com/forums/showthread.php?p=413833#post413833


----------



## Bourne

PerryM said:


> Ok, it's worth the paper it was written on.  There are no precautions like simple checks to insure that a condo/home isn't over saturated with membership sales.
> 
> Is there a single DC out there that addresses this simple question - if the DC says 8 full memberships comprise each unit that 8 full memberships are verified by a CPA?
> 
> I don't think so.  I know of no protection, either in state statutes or CPA opinions that verify this simple concept - no over selling of units.
> 
> Maybe I'm wrong - in fact I'd love to be proven wrong.  I do, one day, want to become a DC member.  If some of my concerns are satisfied.
> 
> 
> Timeshares have this simple precaution normally - a deed is recorded by the state and it keeps track of how many owners per unit.



You don't think so. Hah!!

Yes. A CPA does verify it. That's what the Asset Test is implicitly all about. 

The PPM does detail the information regarding the assets and the allocation of those assets across various line items of the Balance sheet. 

IMHO, the train has left the station. The price point that you want a DC membership at does not exist anymore. It did before...


----------



## Kagehitokiri

i dont think perrym ever gave a price range for a DC that he felt had a "good guarantee" or whatever..

im also kind of curious why he didnt get into more of a financial/business model discussion with nick from DHH. maybe because he just wasnt interested in DHH specifically.


----------



## Bourne

PerryM said:


> As I’ve said many times before, someday we will buy a DC membership – I suspect that when that happens that DC will be considerably different than the model currently used, or a new one will come around and my “throw away” tolerance of $35k will have us in a club that offers at least 2 holiday weeks per year.  I can’t guess which will come first.
> 
> I also suspect that we will be in units that are a bit better than high end Westins/Marriotts but not above $1 M.
> 
> Until then I’ll keep reading the exploits of DC owners.



Not once but multiple times...


----------



## Kagehitokiri

i seem to recall him saying either ~$35K "throwaway" for X, or a DC run by some big hotel company that he has confidence in or something. and not saying what he would pay for the latter.


----------



## PerryM

Bourne said:


> You don't think so. Hah!!
> 
> Yes. A CPA does verify it. That's what the Asset Test is *implicitly* all about.
> 
> The PPM does detail the information regarding the assets and the allocation of those assets across various line items of the Balance sheet.
> 
> IMHO, the train has left the station. The price point that you want a DC membership at does not exist anymore. It did before...



Implicitly - is this like AssUme - you know makes an ass out of U and me?

Implicitly assuming that the books have been audited to insure that if the DC owns 100 properties no more than 800 full memberships have been verified by the CPA and is clearly stated is what I'm after.  That's exactly what all 50 states do with timeshares - no more than 52 owners per condo if Deeds are involved.

Somebody show me the wordage to the fact that anyone is explicitly doing this in an audit.  I've yet to read about this...


----------



## PerryM

Kagehitokiri said:


> i seem to recall him saying either ~$35K "throwaway" for X, or a DC run by some big hotel company that he has confidence in or something. and not saying what he would pay for the latter.




What I've said is that if a new DC comes around and a full membership costs $35k and I like the units they offer that I would consider this a "Throw away" investment and probably become a member.  Beyond that I'd need the DC industry to grow up and act like adults.

There is no reason not to assume this can't happen in the future and supply me with units that rival the best Marriotts and Westins - I would be happy.


----------



## TarheelTraveler

I would think that most DCs have audited financial statements with the information that Perry wants (i.e., number of members (or in some cases, the equivalent number of full members) and properties)).  That should not be hard to satisfy.

However, while there will be further evolvement in the DC industry to address the issues that Perry has raised, I doubt he'll ever see the price that he is looking for.


----------



## GOLFNBEACH

PerryM said:


> My point was and is very simple - DCs are totally unsecured and offer NO sort of consumer protection what so ever.  This compared to timeshares.



Well we both agree that a timeshare deed provides some protection, however, don't get fooled into thinking a deed covers everything.

Here is a cut and paste from my previous post on the subject.

Even with a deed there is significant risk. A timeshare developer often uses timeshare purchase money or receivables to fund the construction, often as collateral for loans. If the develper goes bankrupt the project may never be finished. 

A timeshare contract may or may not have "escrow," "non-disturbance" or "non-performance" clauses. Look these up and understand them.

With a completed project a deed does provide some security, however, it may also make the owner responsible for a lot of debt not paid by the management/resort. A deed carries responsibility to pay for the cost to operate the resort. Special assessments may be required to help pay for unexpected maintenance, repairs, taxes, lawsuits, etc.


----------



## Tedpilot

Perry - A number of years ago I looked into timeshares.  Specifically, I was interested in some south of Cancun.  I never bit on the deal because all I had was some half-ass'd Mexican paper that was not a deed because US citizens cannot own own Meican property along the coasts.  AKA - NO DEED.  Now, given that in Mexico, I wonder how many timeshares outside of the US, and inside for that matter, that do not have any deed whatsoever, but simple right to use clauses for a given period.  That to me is nothing more firm than what I have as a contract with my DC.

BTW, do all of your timeshares have deeds?  Within the TS industry, do you knwo what percentage of them are deeded vs right to use?


----------



## vineyarder

Tedpilot said:


> Now, given that in Mexico, I wonder how many timeshares outside of the US, and inside for that matter, that do not have any deed whatsoever, but simple right to use clauses for a given period.  That to me is nothing more firm than what I have as a contract with my DC.



Marriott Custom House is right to use until approx. year 2057.


----------



## jerseygirl

PerryM said:


> I still have my challenge open - show me ONE timeshare where the owners lost the use of their unit with that deed in hand.



_SPECIAL REPORT: Ski Side Village In The Poconos, Pennsylvania, Learns The Hard Way
March 9, 2001
The Timeshare Beat
Owners at the 57-unit Ski Side Village in Pocono Township, Monroe County, Pennsylvania, a deeded-weeks property, have learned the hard way the importance of keeping tabs on their TOA/HOA.

Owners at this resort have been sending in their maintenance fees regular as clockwork for years, and part of those maintenance fees were supposed to go toward paying property taxes, as detailed in their contracts. Yet in late 1998 Monroe County and a court-appointed custodian were in the process of trying to collect some $700,000 in owed taxes from the 1,750 shocked timeshare owners, who were naturally concerned that they are being asked to pay property taxes twice-- once to the homeowner's association and now again to the court-appointed custodian.

The director of Monroe County Tax Claim Bureau said her office had made agreements with the Owners Association, controlled by realtor Frank Carr III, to collect $500,000 in back taxes and Carr "defaulted on the agreements." Carr denied the allegation. Ivan J. Krouk, a Philadelphia lawyer who is the current court-appointed custodian, contends that the shortfall is due to the fact that Carr never billed himself for the timeshares he owns, reportedly some 29 percent of the total inventory.

Krouk's appointment by Common Pleas Judge Jerome P. Cheslock early in 2000 arose from a suit brought on behalf of timeshare owner Heddy Ann Vymazel of York, PA. Krouk's report charges

Vymazal said she learned in 1999 that taxes on her property had not been paid since 1995 despite the fact that she had paid her $275 maintenance fee for her one-week share every year, plus a one-time $50 special assessment for real estate taxes, ever since buying her timeshare in 1986.

Because it is the HOA/TOA that is notified by the County of taxes due, not the individual owners, neither she nor other owners ever knew that the taxes were not being paid.

The County tried to auction off all the units at a tax sale in 1998, but was unsuccessful. On September 21, 1999, *the County did indeed sell off one entire unit (Unit 30), which was purchased by Charlie and Victoria Keller-- who operate as Greenwood Trust, Inc.* It was sold for $4,269.83; the deed was issued on June 23, 2000. Frank Carr allegedly owned 13 weeks in Unit 30._


Result of appeals:

http://www.aopc.org/OpPosting/Supreme/out/872mal2002.pdf


----------



## vivalour

So much for blanket assertions, huh? They sure can come back and bite you in the ahem.....


----------



## timeos2

*3 out of 25 failed (so far) vs maybe 6 out of thousands. Do the math*



vivalour said:


> So much for blanket assertions, huh? They sure can come back and bite you in the ahem.....



One case, and that of lax control and management, out of thousands of timeshare resorts for a week that, purchased at resale as all timeshares should be, cost a couple thousand at most with a deed VS 3 (or more) collapses of high cost paper operated by slick managements who, undoubtedly,  got out well paid after the mere byers got hosed for tens of thousands of dollars.  The percentage of loss and failure is astronomical for the DC vs the nearly non-existent percentage of deeded timeshare failures. 

It isn't only the likelihood of failure, the pyramid style resale promise or the lack of anything resembling ownership beyond a promissory note but the level of  investment required to buy in that makes the whole DC program concept a shaky one no matter how you cut it. If you can afford to laugh off such a loss then it's a fun risk to take.  If you need to watch your pocketbook even a little it's one I'd steer clear of.


----------



## vivalour

<<If you need to watch your pocketbook even a little it's one I'd steer clear of.>>
__________________
I agree.  Renting is the "safest" way to go for the faint of pocketbook. 
I have to say though, that a TS isn't my thing for its complications and risks, even at a few thousand a pop. At the same time, I have lost many tens of thousands in "secure" investments that went sour -- and not for lack of due diligence (gold, property, blue chip stocks) when I was under the age of 40. Now I understand that everything has its risks and you can't take your $$$ with you to the great DC/'TS in the sky, so enjoy and don't worry!


----------



## tombo

People keep touting that this is set up like country clubs. Country clubs go broke quite often. I payed to join the Capstone Club as a charter member  near Birmingham Alabama about 10 years ago. As membership didn't grow as they had hoped (or needed), they delayed building the pool and tennis courts. As time went on I heard throught the grapevine that the club was for sale. After not finding any buyers they filed bankruptcy for this course and 6 others that they owned. We had reciprocal agreements at the other 6  courses per our membership.

 A new company bought our course from the bankruptcy courts and ended all previously signed contracts. They informed all current members that we could remain members under the new owners terms terms for the time being, but that all membership agreements with the previous owners are now null and void. We no longer have the ability to use the other 6 courses. The pool and tennis courts are still not built or even planned. I have friends who payed an extra $10,000 to become founding members which gave them  unlimited free golf cart usage, free lockers, reserved parking, and several other benefits for the additional fee. That $10,000 is totally gone because the new owners are not honoring any of those benefits any more. When they joined, they would never have to pay for a cart rental again according to the salesman. New owners and guess what, they pay the same cart fees non founding members pay. Even worse, non members (people who never payed anything to join) can play by paying green fees so the new owners can make more money.

If a membership based club is sold or goes bankrupt, your membership is worthless because you never owned anything. The new owners decide the rules, who the new members are, and what membership entitiles them to.


----------



## Transit

Everyone has thier own risk level. If I bought some vacation club on ebay for $300.00 and it turned out to be worthless no big deal I wouldn't be happy but no harm done if I get great vacations out of it fantastic. To some a $300,000 DC would work the same way. Good luck to those who can afford the risk level I hope it works well. The idea of how these DC's work is interesting it sounds like a great way to vacation.I would like to see it done on an even more affordable scale and see what happens. If the entry level at HCC turns out in the next few years to be a supurb vacation arrangement many who read about it here on TUG and could have tolorated the risk factor will be disapointed they bought that expensive timeshare.


----------



## Bourne

Transit said:


> Everyone has thier own risk level. If I bought some vacation club on ebay for $300.00 and it turned out to be worthless no big deal I wouldn't be happy but no harm done if I get great vacations out of it fantastic. To some a $300,000 DC would work the same way. Good luck to those who can afford the risk level I hope it works well. The idea of how these DC's work is interesting it sounds like a great way to vacation.I would like to see it done on an even more affordable scale and see what happens. If the entry level at HCC turns out in the next few years to be a supurb vacation arrangement many who read about it here on TUG and could have tolorated the risk factor will be disapointed they bought that expensive timeshare.



Could not have put it better.  

It is about risk. DC's are more riskier than TS in many ways than one due to infancy of the industry. It is also about the dollar amount you are willing to take a risk with. 

The only thing I question on this forum is a blanket statement that the industry is doomed for failure.


----------



## vineyarder

PerryM said:


> Implicitly assuming that the books have been audited to insure that if the DC owns 100 properties no more than 800 full memberships have been verified by the CPA and is clearly stated is what I'm after.  That's exactly what all 50 states do with timeshares - no more than 52 owners per condo if Deeds are involved.
> 
> Somebody show me the wordage to the fact that anyone is explicitly doing this in an audit.  I've yet to read about this...





> Quote:
> I guess I've given everyone enough time to respond to my challenge of ANY DC verifying that they are NOT overselling their memberships with a CPA statement of the fact.
> 
> PE does do this annually, and also publishes (on the members-only website) quarterly updates on memberships sold, ratio of members to homes, and occupancy rates for the quarter, and includes a link to download the quarterly financials and minutes of the board of directors minutes. In addition, the statutory board (as well as an advisory board) has member representation.



The above was posted in the "VRBO" thread on October 29th; as usual, you simply ignore any posts that contradict the fallacies that you depend upon to support your assertions.  

Your M.O. of making an outrageous statement (or a 'bold challenge') and then simply ignoring any facts to the contrary, is getting as old and tiresome as your numerous fallacious arguments ('the strip mall where I go to karate has had n+5 tenants in the last n years, therefore, >90% of businesses fail in the first year, regardless of what SBA studies have shown..."


----------



## NeilGoBlue

PerryM said:


> I don't know what you are talking with DIA - must have missed that one.
> 
> My point was and is very simple - DCs are totally unsecured and offer NO sort of consumer protection what so ever.  This compared to timeshares.
> 
> Show me ONE I say ONE timeshare where the owners have lost their deeds - their access to the units they bought.
> 
> Just one is all I'm asking for - just one.
> 
> DC's have NO protection at all.
> 
> That's my point.



Perry,

I've posted several times that your statements though maybe generally true regarding protection aren't true.  Bellehavens and Crescendo provide equity protection.

My request is that you stop lumping these two clubs into your generalizations.  It's flat out inaccurate and does a disservice to those clubs.


----------



## Steamboat Bill

FYI - I should post this in a new thread, but it applies here.

I am typing this from a suite at the Hard Rock Hotel in Orlando. I am coordinating a school trip for about 200 people and I am relaxing in the suite after throwing a party by the pool for everyone. Interestingly, one of the dads there is a member of Quintess (founding equity member) and we talked for over 30 minutes about DCs and his love of Quintess and my love of HCC. He is an extremely successful attorney and not once did the topic of risk come up. In fact, he agrees with me that DCs represent the future of upscale travel for affluent families. This is the second Quintess member I have met that has kids in the same school as my kids and they really love this DC.


----------



## PerryM

jerseygirl said:


> _SPECIAL REPORT: Ski Side Village In The Poconos, Pennsylvania, Learns The Hard Way
> March 9, 2001
> The Timeshare Beat
> Owners at the 57-unit Ski Side Village in Pocono Township, Monroe County, Pennsylvania, a deeded-weeks property, have learned the hard way the importance of keeping tabs on their TOA/HOA.
> 
> Owners at this resort have been sending in their maintenance fees regular as clockwork for years, and part of those maintenance fees were supposed to go toward paying property taxes, as detailed in their contracts. Yet in late 1998 Monroe County and a court-appointed custodian were in the process of trying to collect some $700,000 in owed taxes from the 1,750 shocked timeshare owners, who were naturally concerned that they are being asked to pay property taxes twice-- once to the homeowner's association and now again to the court-appointed custodian.
> 
> The director of Monroe County Tax Claim Bureau said her office had made agreements with the Owners Association, controlled by realtor Frank Carr III, to collect $500,000 in back taxes and Carr "defaulted on the agreements." Carr denied the allegation. Ivan J. Krouk, a Philadelphia lawyer who is the current court-appointed custodian, contends that the shortfall is due to the fact that Carr never billed himself for the timeshares he owns, reportedly some 29 percent of the total inventory.
> 
> Krouk's appointment by Common Pleas Judge Jerome P. Cheslock early in 2000 arose from a suit brought on behalf of timeshare owner Heddy Ann Vymazel of York, PA. Krouk's report charges
> 
> Vymazal said she learned in 1999 that taxes on her property had not been paid since 1995 despite the fact that she had paid her $275 maintenance fee for her one-week share every year, plus a one-time $50 special assessment for real estate taxes, ever since buying her timeshare in 1986.
> 
> Because it is the HOA/TOA that is notified by the County of taxes due, not the individual owners, neither she nor other owners ever knew that the taxes were not being paid.
> 
> The County tried to auction off all the units at a tax sale in 1998, but was unsuccessful. On September 21, 1999, *the County did indeed sell off one entire unit (Unit 30), which was purchased by Charlie and Victoria Keller-- who operate as Greenwood Trust, Inc.* It was sold for $4,269.83; the deed was issued on June 23, 2000. Frank Carr allegedly owned 13 weeks in Unit 30._
> 
> 
> Result of appeals:
> 
> http://www.aopc.org/OpPosting/Supreme/out/872mal2002.pdf



I'm going on reading a follow up post from years ago but I believe the judge used common sense and threw out the case...the owners got back their units and the HOE got the boot.


----------



## PerryM

vineyarder said:


> The above was posted in the "VRBO" thread on October 29th; as usual, you simply ignore any posts that contradict the fallacies that you depend upon to support your assertions.
> 
> Your M.O. of making an outrageous statement (or a 'bold challenge') and then simply ignoring any facts to the contrary, is getting as old and tiresome as your numerous fallacious arguments ('the strip mall where I go to karate has had n+5 tenants in the last n years, therefore, >90% of businesses fail in the first year, regardless of what SBA studies have shown..."



I simply asked for the EXACT wordage (and a link would be nice) and not second or third hand recounts of rumors.

The Internet is full of rumors...


----------



## PerryM

*It's your money...*

There is a market for everything mankind can dream up to sell – I remember the “Pet Rock” one year for Christmas was the hottest thing going.

Tulip bulbs were a hot commodity in the Netherlands back in the 1600’s – cost more than their weight in gold.

For those of you who have bought a DC I understand the pressure to posture and defend your decision – I do it too – I’m human.  So I’m not accusing any DC owner of buying a DC.  I have stated that I can be temped into buying one at my “Throw away” price of $35k – the same price as a Marriott week and I would not lose sleep in losing that money.  I would not get a lawyer or start consumer activism against the DC – I’d just walk away if need be.

*But to compare a DC to a timeshare is lunacy in my book.*  As I’ve stated many times the Perry’s definition of a DC is:

*“A bunch of folks buying a condo for a rich guy and then paying him rent to use it”.*

You can’t use that definition for a timeshare where ownership is usually part of the deal.  So are real estate courts and laws and lawyers and state real estate boards and thousands of bureaucrats.

A DC has none of this – it’s the wild west of the real estate industry.
I’m hoping that folks doing their due diligence read my warning posts and if they decide to go ahead with a DC I won’t judge them.  If I somehow have suggested that I am judging you for buying one I apologize – it’s your money to do with anyway you want.


----------



## vineyarder

PerryM said:


> I simply asked for the EXACT wordage (and a link would be nice) and not second or third hand recounts of rumors.
> 
> The Internet is full of rumors...



Here you go again - retroactively changing the question when you don't like the answer!  You did NOT ask for exact wordage; here is your initial question:



> Is there a single DC out there that addresses this simple question - if the DC says 8 full memberships comprise each unit that 8 full memberships are verified by a CPA?



I answered yes on October 29th; as this was not the answer you wanted to hear, you ignored it.  When answered again, you attempt to retroactively change the question - do you really think that people will be fooled by these games?  In any case, this is not a 'rumor', as I have read the document personally; I cannot / will not provide the 'exact wordage' as that is confidential information.  Of course, having grown accustomed to your unique style of 'debate', even if I did provide the exact verbiage, your response would either be to ignore it or to make some totally outrageous and unfounded accusation, such as "for all we know, this CPA is really Jack the Ripper".  If, however, you were serious about joining PE, I am sure that they would share it with you.


----------



## jerseygirl

PerryM said:


> I'm going on reading a follow up post from years ago but I believe the judge used common sense and threw out the case...the owners got back their units and the HOE got the boot.



I provided the results of the appeal in the earlier post:  http://www.aopc.org/OpPosting/Supreme/out/872mal2002.pdf

You asked for one example, was there a prize for providing it?


----------



## Steamboat Bill

jerseygirl said:


> I provided the results of the appeal in the earlier post:  http://www.aopc.org/OpPosting/Supreme/out/872mal2002.pdf
> 
> You asked for one example, was there a prize for providing it?



http://images.search.yahoo.com/sear...=2&tt=1,560,565&oid=bdcf3f8b5ea983d6&ei=UTF-8


----------



## jerseygirl

Thank you Bill.  I'm honored.


----------



## PerryM

jerseygirl said:


> I provided the results of the appeal in the earlier post:  http://www.aopc.org/OpPosting/Supreme/out/872mal2002.pdf
> 
> You asked for one example, was there a prize for providing it?



But as far as I remember NO timeshare owner lost anything - it was thrown out of court by the judge...

If you think this is not correct I'll do some research for you and send you the bill - is that OK?


----------



## PerryM

vineyarder said:


> Here you go again - retroactively changing the question when you don't like the answer!  You did NOT ask for exact wordage; here is your initial question:
> 
> 
> 
> I answered yes on October 29th; as this was not the answer you wanted to hear, you ignored it.  When answered again, you attempt to retroactively change the question - do you really think that people will be fooled by these games?  In any case, this is not a 'rumor', as I have read the document personally; I cannot / will not provide the 'exact wordage' as that is confidential information.  Of course, having grown accustomed to your unique style of 'debate', even if I did provide the exact verbiage, your response would either be to ignore it or to make some totally outrageous and unfounded accusation, such as "for all we know, this CPA is really Jack the Ripper".  If, however, you were serious about joining PE, I am sure that they would share it with you.



I don't know what debating style you seem to feel comfortable with - Molotov cocktails isn't going to move the debate forward.

If you want me to slow down and speak louder I'd be glad to debate any related topic.

So pick a topic and start a new thread and I'd be glad to participate.  I can type slower....


----------



## vivalour

<<Of course, having grown accustomed to your unique style of 'debate', even if I did provide the exact verbiage, your response would either be to ignore it or to make some totally outrageous and unfounded accusation, such as "for all we know, this CPA is really Jack the Ripper". >>

Hey guys, how about a Battle of the Bands for charity???  This is so entertaining I am now going to plunk down my TUG membership.


----------



## Bourne

PerryM said:


> But as far as I remember NO timeshare owner lost anything - it was thrown out of court by the judge...
> 
> If you think this is not correct I'll do some research for you and send you the bill - is that OK?



I''ll offer to foot the bill. 

Let me know how much it is. Downside is that, if I am correct, you owe me a few grand. 

Just a small wager. Let's put our money where our mouth is.


----------



## PerryM

Bourne said:


> I''ll offer to foot the bill.
> 
> Let me know how much it is. Downside is that, if I am correct, you owe me a few grand.
> 
> Just a small wager. Let's put our money where our mouth is.



Ok, give me a week to find the second part of the story - the one where the judge threw out the case and the owners got back their ownership.

My fee is high - one Krispy Kreme to the winner.


----------



## Bourne

It's on.

Noon Sun Nov 18th


----------



## GOLFNBEACH

Bourne said:


> It's on.
> 
> Noon Sun Nov 18th




Shootout at High Noon.:whoopie:


----------



## vineyarder

PerryM said:


> If you want me to slow down and speak louder I'd be glad to debate any related topic.
> 
> So pick a topic and start a new thread and I'd be glad to participate.  I can type slower....



Yet another classic Perryism (def: "technique whereby an individual evades the issue when proven wrong, often by ignoring the facts presented and throwing out irrelevant platitudes").

You won't win any arguments by insulting my intelligence.  This may come as a surprise to you, but when you post on this forum, the posts remain readable even several days later, so that others can actually look back and see the earlier post.  Therefore, when you ask a question, then claim you asked a different question, or when you promise to join a DC if they meet certain criteria, then claim the criteria were different (or that you didn't say that), or when you challenge someone to find "just one" instance of something and then try to deny reality, or when you claim people are putting words in your mouth when they are in fact quoting a previous quote verbatim, or when you make ridiculous assertions about Jack the Ripper, or when you claim that your experience with a smoothie shop in a strip mall in Missouri outweighs large studies by the SBA, etc., people can actually follow the threads and see that you are constantly contradicting yourself, making ridiculous assertions, and refusing to acknowledge when you are proven wrong.  

Trying to detract from these issues by insulting my intelligence simply makes you appear immature and petty.  If you send me a PM with your mailing address, I will gladly send you an excellent book on logic, as well as a copy of Miss Manners Guide to Etiquette, two books that you obviously need quite desperately.


----------



## Steamboat Bill

Here is the prize


----------



## Kagehitokiri

what happens if the prize gets eaten before a winner is declared?


----------



## Tedpilot

"what happens if the prize gets eaten before a winner is declared?"

Rematch!!!


----------



## PerryM

vineyarder said:


> Yet another classic Perryism (def: "technique whereby an individual evades the issue when proven wrong, often by ignoring the facts presented and throwing out irrelevant platitudes").
> 
> You won't win any arguments by insulting my intelligence.  This may come as a surprise to you, but when you post on this forum, the posts remain readable even several days later, so that others can actually look back and see the earlier post.  Therefore, when you ask a question, then claim you asked a different question, or when you promise to join a DC if they meet certain criteria, then claim the criteria were different (or that you didn't say that), or when you challenge someone to find "just one" instance of something and then try to deny reality, or when you claim people are putting words in your mouth when they are in fact quoting a previous quote verbatim, or when you make ridiculous assertions about Jack the Ripper, or when you claim that your experience with a smoothie shop in a strip mall in Missouri outweighs large studies by the SBA, etc., people can actually follow the threads and see that you are constantly contradicting yourself, making ridiculous assertions, and refusing to acknowledge when you are proven wrong.
> 
> Trying to detract from these issues by insulting my intelligence simply makes you appear immature and petty.  If you send me a PM with your mailing address, I will gladly send you an excellent book on logic, as well as a copy of Miss Manners Guide to Etiquette, two books that you obviously need quite desperately.



Just pick a topic...


----------



## jerseygirl

PerryM said:


> But as far as I remember NO timeshare owner lost anything - it was thrown out of court by the judge...
> 
> If you think this is not correct I'll do some research for you and send you the bill - is that OK?



Where do I send the bill for finding "just ONE" example?


----------



## PerryM

jerseygirl said:


> Where do I send the bill for finding "just ONE" example?



The Drive-By Media uses this same tactic all the time - report half the story.

I'll sniff around for a week to find that second part of the same story - the one where the judge in the same case threw out the judgement and gave the units back to the original owners.

If I can find that second article then no case has yet been found.

Don't give up folks - even if I find that second part to the story.  I've never heard of a single timeshare deed holder losing usage of their unit except for attachments to their deed for other court actions against that one owner.  (Child support, etc.)

So keep on looking and any new cases found you will receive a Krispy Kreme from me.  (1 per new case - first come first served)


----------



## jerseygirl

PerryM said:


> The Drive-By Media uses this same tactic all the time - report half the story.



I anxiously await the results of your research.  I've already furnished the appeal denial by Pennsylvania's court of last resort.  I'm relatively certain this never went to the Supremes, but will gladly eat my words if you can find proof of their reversal.    

By the way, my favorite is the chocolated iced kreme filled.


----------



## Bourne

PerryM said:


> TFor those of you who have bought a DC I understand the pressure to posture and defend your decision – I do it too – I’m human.  So I’m not accusing any DC owner of buying a DC.  I have stated that I can be temped into buying one at my “Throw away” price of $35k – the same price as a Marriott week and I would not lose sleep in losing that money.  I would not get a lawyer or start consumer activism against the DC – I’d just walk away if need be.
> 
> *But to compare a DC to a timeshare is lunacy in my book.*  As I’ve stated many times the Perry’s definition of a DC is:
> 
> *“A bunch of folks buying a condo for a rich guy and then paying him rent to use it”.*



You know what's funny. 

You are the one comparing a DC to a timeshare. None of the DC owners have said that a DC is is like a timeshare. 

Far from it. 

With respect to risk vs reward, I would recommend everyone to search for posts made by you on DCs and Redweek deposits. Keep a sharp eye on the post update date.


----------



## Bourne

Wow...

another 100 post thread with lots of fun...

Let me wait for a few days and start another one.... :annoyed:


----------



## Steamboat Bill

jerseygirl said:


> Where do I send the bill for finding "just ONE" example?



I am a "Bill"


----------



## PerryM

*Uncle....uncle....(What the heck does Uncle mean?)*

I was wrong – I apologize to everyone for my error.

I finally figured out what I had read – I crossed two stories a year ago and assumed the second story was related to the first – my error.


The original article in March 9, 2001 was about Ski Side Village the second article I read in Jan of 2007 was for another project that I mixed up with the previous article from 2001.

Thank you, LadyCody, for finding the second, totally unrelated article that I now remember reading.  No wonder I couldn’t find the article.  Thanks Dave for the research.

So there are some timeshare owners (have no idea how many) that have lost their usage of their deeded timeshare.  Nearly 4% of the US households own a timeshare, 4,400,000 in 2006   I don’t know the percentage but I’m guessing it’s very very small.

Ok, so now to settle up the bet:


A single glazed Krispy Kreme costs 84¢ with tax at my nearest store.
To send it USPS Priority Mail would be $4.60 for a Flat Rate Envelope (I believe the donut would fit in it)

That’s a total of $5.44.

I guess I could award this to the winner (You’d pick the winner) but that would be a waste of money.

Instead, I’ve taken the liberty to donate $25 to my favorite charity the USMC’s Toy’s for Tots.  

That way TUG will make one more child’s eyes open with wonder this holiday season who would normally have not.  I found no way to say the gift was from TUG, so we will just have to remember it ourselves.

I’ve attached the PayPal eMail confirmation.


The great thing here is that the $25 came from my PayPal account that I use for renting timeshares!  Some other non-timeshare person paid for my bet - is this great or what!

Hope this settles my debt to everyone’s satisfaction.


----------



## saluki

Nicely done, Perry.


----------



## Steamboat Bill

PerryM said:


> I was wrong – I apologize to everyone for my error.
> 
> Hope this settles my debt to everyone’s satisfaction.



Wow...that is very cool.

Perry, you are a man of your words.


----------



## travelguy

Perry,

Props for your integrity!! 

The Krispy Kremes are on me if we should happen to meet in our travels!


----------



## Transit

Perry your posts are always entertaining no matter what direction  they lead to .Very commendable.


----------

