# Oceana Palms Update ( March 2011 )



## jerseyfinn (Mar 19, 2011)

We recently complete a 2 week visit to Oceana Palms resort.

What a difference a year makes. The resort looks pretty much as it did last year when it opens for business. The rooms are spacious and impeccable, the associates always smiling and assidusously assisting guests. And the beach . . .  well it too looks like the beautiful beach that it is.

But the difference is that the resort is now more peopled. This year, more owners are now on resort along with an array of DC guests, Interval traders, and Marriott.com people ( and these folks have money in their pockets to pay the $560 to $590 per night room rate  ). Occupancy rates are in the high 90% ranges and *demand for the resort is popping*.  

So things are more peopled, and yet the resort does not feel elbow to elbow with people. It's a 19 story building with 3 elevators where two out of three times you travel to and from your floor by yourself and otherwise another person may join you for the ride. I'd like to think that I made Palms history when 8 of us jam into one elevator as this is a rare occurance. I actually mention this to the other guests who laugh and echo my observation that it is so quiet and and indeed they have never seen so many people on the elevator at once.

While we are there, the first phases of *construction of the second building begins *as they stake off the grounds and heavy equipment begins to appear in anticipation of laying foundations. So, yes Virginia, there is a Marriott product out there that people still believe in and Oceana Palms is living proof of this. Condolances to those TUG soothsayers and timeshare mystics who proudly insist that timeshare is dead and Marriott is incompetent or even evil.   Life goes on with or without us, and so too does Marriott. 

What I think is happening at Oceana Palms is more a *product of location and demand *at that location than a signal that America's economy is back on track ( hi-rise, directly on-the-beach, astride West Palm & Palm Beach which itself remains a busy destination even if Madoff "made off" with some of the peoples' money here ). But it is encouraging to see that Marriott, which ceases all other timeshare-related expansion, is breaking out the shovels at Oceana Palms because demand exists and money is to be made. Hopefully it is an assertion that some of the other Marriott resorts will also begin to thaw. It most definitely emphasizes the importance of location and season owned for we MVCI legacy folks desperate to get a finger on the pulse of our resort weeks and to gain some sign that value is returning to some of our weeks.  

Phase II of Oceana Palms means a second 19 story building behind the first building ( actually the buildings go up to the 20th floor as there is no 13th floor -- It's always fun mentioning to folks staying on 12 or 14 that one of them is on 13 depending upon whether one counts floors the way Europeans or Americans do  ).  The units in the second building ( 78 in total ? ) will all be side units with floor to ceiling windows in the bedrooms and they will have views of the ocean and the inland waterway. The units number 6 to a floor. The gym/exercise/sauna rooms will migrate to this building and a grill area will be relocated between the two buildings.

The interesting thing about Oceana Palms is that these buildings are state of the art construction. They're built with the newest hurricane code technologies, are green eco buildings in terms of materials used and energy technologies deployed ( the GM can control the environmentals with a phone call to a computerized engineering system ) and even the elevators are run on computer programs which deploy them in ready states to minimize guest waiting times ( while using algorithms to minimize energy consuption ). Lots of behind the scene stuff going on here. 

Tall bulidings always create *aerodynamic issues *with air flow and winds. Presently the south-east corner of the building where the bar/grill is located is a wind tunnel. They've put up canvas barricades to stem the wind blasts into the bar/grill area. This in turn effectively seals off the pool to bar/grill access save for one labrinth entrance to the pool and the door entrance from the Market Place. I'm told that right now the resort is actually in an aerodynamic imbalance because resort construction was predicated upon aerodynamic studies which factor in two buildings. The completion of the second building should take care of wind tunnel effect in this front corner of the building as the air-flow dynamics will change and with it, some of the wind shears created by the building. The ultimate plan is to remove the static canvas archway covers and to install retractable doors which can be deployed on windy days and retracted on calm days to allow unobstructed views of the pool deck. Technology in action. 

*Other tid bits​*
We spent two weeks at Oceana Palms, arriving the Saturday at the end of Presidents Week. Of course the car rental companys still charge the higher President's Week rate of $550 per week for a compact. Since my wife and I are not crazy ( or in dire need of a car ), we use a taxi to the resort and we eschew completely a car rental. The resort directs us to a *limo service *that can do airport pick up as well as taking you grocery shopping or out to a restaurant. The limo service charges the same rate as a taxi, but you get a nice car to ride in. Likewise, the driver, Mario, is a wonderful man is both polite and prompt. Oceana Palms owners should most definitely avail themselves of Mario's fine service ( folks at Ocean Pointe could also benefit ). Our limo ride to Publix was $15 each way, the same cost as a cab, and $40 to the airport.  Eschewing a rental car can work out economically if you plan your trips carefully. Also allows you to drink in the bacchanal way without worrying about the drive home. If anyone wants the limo contact number, PM me.

*Spring breakers* are beginning to find this neck of the woods to come down to. Most are staying at other locations and they meander towards our part of the beach because our resort bar/grill is open to the public. The beach concession guy instructs them on the rules of our resort ( bar/grill use only; no using the pool ) and the kids we see are all well behaved if perhaps a little tipsy as the day goes on. It all brings back the whimsy of youth which we older guys now relive through the bikinis we count on the beach.   But the spring breakers we encounter are good kids who are not causing problems in our resort or on the beach. A few gals actually stay at the resort - perhaps their parents help with the $569 per night room rate, or perhaps given that the apartments are  2 BR with two queens in the second BR makes for a way for them to divide costs and turn their visit into a really nice spring break.

MVCI owners are given an *owner VIP card *which confers 10% discounts off at certain restaurants and other venues. This includes the resort's own *Reflections Bar & Grill *and the *Marketplace*. Also at the *Marriott Palm Beach Resort *some 300 yard up the beach one can receive a discount at the hotel spa and dinner discounts at *3800 Restaurant *and lunch discounts at their *Ocean Grill*. For those of you who used to go to Noches, I'm sorry to announce that it was closed. It's still operated by Carmine, but is now the *Umi Fishbar* where we MVCI owners can use our 10% off card. There's also a discount availible for an on-site massage, and discounts at *Abacoa Golf Club *and discounts for golf lessons at the *North Palm Country Club*. A place which is not on the discount list, is the *Riveria Beach Marina Tiki Bar *( take Blue Heron west , left on Broadway, left on 13th stree to the water ). A nice place for lunch or dinner. Also has live entertainment.

In terms of local eating within walking distance; we hiked over to Ocean Pointe a couple of night for drinks and a burger -- one need to be an owner there to gain access.   Ocean Pointe folks could invert this and come visit us for a drink at Reflections. *Johnny Longboats *remains a nice place to do lunch or dinner as they have some nice selections and the atmosphere is always energized and relaxed. There will soon be a *Mexican grill *opening in the mostly vacant Ocean Mall ( to be run by the owners of Johnny Long Boats ). As much as we love the atmosphere at Sailfish Marina, we have been disappointed by the menu a few times, so we limit ourselves to walks through Palm Beach Shores and a stop at the marina, but not the restaurant. Likewise Max and Eddies makes great pizza, but we eschew the main menu as the portions are too massive for us & we've had a couple of so-so meals. There's a *small grocery store *on the main road near the curve by the gas station where one can get Boars Head lunchmeats. Finally, be aware that Johnny Longboats also does breakfast starting at 7A. Some creative omlets here as well as a chance to see the place less crowded with the sunrise streaming in through the windows which light the giant crab hanging from the ceiling. Oceana Palms guests might also want to walk over to the Marriott Palm Beach Resort for their buffet breakfast ( we *Marriott MVCI folks can charge our food here to our resort tab *). You Ocean Pointers could also walk up the beach on a nice morning for breakfast at the Palm Beach Resort Marriott as well as the exercise would do you good and you get in a 2 mile round trip walk. :whoopie: 

Hope you find this info useful. We ourselves had a great time.  I do have new photos taken during this latest visit, but I have not yet posted them as I do photography and video and I have a mountain of stuff to parse through. Then again, this stuff is a labor of love for me. When I get some photos up, I'll let you know.

Barry


----------



## JPrisco (Mar 19, 2011)

Great info.  Thanks

We are scheduled to go late October - do you think the construction will impact our vacation?


----------



## 6scoops (Mar 19, 2011)

*update Oceana Palms*

Love all the great info from you, Thanks.  I will be there with my family in July for the first time, and I can't wait!!  Also, I really enjoy your photo's.  Keep them coming!!


----------



## pedro47 (Mar 19, 2011)

I really enjoyed your slideshow starting in 2008 to 2011.  The resort looks like no one have stay at this resort.  Thanks for sharing your updates.

I agree automobile rental are now sky high.


----------



## jerseyfinn (Mar 19, 2011)

JPrisco said:


> Great info.  Thanks
> 
> We are scheduled to go late October - do you think the construction will impact our vacation?



The construction will be "felt" by all because the resort is already on such a small land parcel and the building is going to be a hi-rise located between the street entrance and the first building. I suspect it will be more about an untidy/cluttered look as you drive in. The reception area will sit astride the construction. You should most likely see the full scope of the project when you arrive in October. ( they project 2013 occupancy of the new building ). When they put the first building up, one could walk close to the construction site and while things looked messy, they had their own order. ( I've got some construction photos of the 1st bulding up on my picutre site ).

As to room views, we will all have unobstructed views of the ocean or the inlet. Hard to say what the noise will be like. But I think that most guests will find that aside from seeing the barricades every time they come onto the property, your actual vacation experience which occurs either poolside in the first building, or on the beach will be minimally impacted.

People coming to Ocean Pointe or to Ocean Palms for the rest of this year are going to find they are confronted by *various construction projects*. There remains re-decking construction on the Blue Heron bridge as well as some sort of trench digging along Blue Heron out towards Broadway and beyond. Both are already creating traffic jams at different times of the day. Those who try to come in via PGA ( north of Blue Heron ) will also encounter significant road construction with delays on PGA as well as the drawbridge on that end of town. Throw in already on-going construction of new sewer/water lines on Ocean Blvd in Riveria Beach ( the road between the Blue Heron Bridge and PGA to the north via Singer Island ) and all of us are in for colossal road construction headaches.   I anticipate that turning in and out of the resort will be "interesting" at times as presently the water/sewer line construction is directly in front of the resort -- hopefully they will move up the road by the time the Palms second building is in full construction mode.

Barry


----------



## jimf41 (Mar 19, 2011)

Barry,
Great report. The info was useful but I really liked the way you wrote it. It's nice to hear someone speak of MVCI in positive tones once in awhile. I was there last November and they were saying that construction on the second bldg would be starting this year. I didn't believe them. I don't usually like being wrong but I'm happy about it this time.

Again, great report.


----------



## dioxide45 (Mar 19, 2011)

Thanks for the great report. Even though we are unenrolled legacy owners, we will take a stab at a trade there sometime in the future.



jerseyfinn said:


> So, yes Virginia, there is a Marriott product out there that people still believe in and Oceana Palms is living proof of this. Condolances to those TUG soothsayers and timeshare mystics who proudly insist that timeshare is dead and Marriott is incompetent or even evil.   Life goes on with or without us, and so too does Marriott.



If Marriott didn't have to complete the build, they wouldn't be. It isn't so much that Marriott wants or needs the extra inventory. Marriott is committed to local governments to complete the construction at Oceana Palms by a certain date (the same is true at Marco Island).

Marriott isn't completing the build at Oceana Palms because they want to, rather their approvals required it. I am sure they would rather be holding on to that cash than investing it in to more inventory that they clearly don't need.

Condolences are not necessary  .


----------



## jerseyfinn (Mar 19, 2011)

dioxide45 said:


> . . . If Marriott didn't have to complete the build, they wouldn't be. It isn't so much that Marriott wants or needs the extra inventory. Marriott is committed to local governments to complete the construction at Oceana Palms by a certain date (the same is true at Marco Island).
> 
> Condolences are not necessary  .



I'm gonna say this in all sincerity. I'm not trying to stir people up. But given the trials and tribulations of things Marriott over the past year, I think that the thing most MVCI owners aspire at this moment is clarity. And if I'm being perfectly honest, it's getting awfully difficult to find clear, concise, and accurate information in some of these TUG threads as some folks prefer to pursue theoreticals and conditionalisms which take us further away from the facts and closer to Pluto or some other fuzzy point in outer space. 

So I think I speak for many when I say that I'm more than a little tired of this banal attitude of Marriott bashing. It serves no tangible purpose other than throwing up more virtual smoke which takes we MVCI owners further from the clarity we aspire for our ownership decisions -- and we each have a lot of difficult decisions facing us as we try to work out things MVCI and DC. The good news is that most earnest TUGgers know who is who even if they continue to have difficulty determining what is what. We are each a product of what we post and one makes their own virtual bed ( and is free to wet it if they so choose   )

So I gotta respectfully call you out when a non-Oceana Palms owner who has never set foot on the resort can post such an absolutist statement asserting something which is wholly speculative and subjective in nature. :deadhorse:

You've not been on the resort, you have not attended an owners meeting, you've not heard the detailed resort updates given to we owners and you have not looked the resort GM square in the eye and shook his hand, nor have you ever asked him a direct question about anything remotely related to what you allege. This is not about me being right or you being wrong. It is about people thinking before they hit the send button.

I too make my share of virtual missteps, but one thing I am very careful about is sharing information provided to myself and other owners with the express purpose of contributing knowledge and insight to other owners, some of whom are very adroit and extremely experienced, and others who are either new to MVCI or too fearful and confused by the rapid pace of events that have been rocketing past all of us these past few months.

Now this message is not a virtual shoot out at the OK corral, and I'm not Doc Holiday shooting you in the back nor am I the Lone Ranger trying to be the hero. I'm an MVCI owner who is trying to help other owners make their way through difficult times with Marriott in this wretched economy.

Marriott is spending millions of dollars to construct a building ( the only MVCI resort undertaking new construction ) because demand at the resort is growing and Marriott can justify the expense/reward imperatives. Our resort GM is a dedicated guy who is absolutely enthusiastic about the resort's future, and I and many of my fellow co-owners agree with him. That's what it is all about. No more, no less.

The good news for MVCI owners who do not own at Oceana Palms is that although the economy is still laggard, and our destination travel resorts continue to drift in limbo, Oceana Palms ( and by implication Ocean Pointe ) are resorts in a beleagured region where some good news is finally to be found. I'm not suggesting that "all is well", but I do suggest that time is on our side as we ride these next several years out waiting for discretionary spending to pick up and put some water beneath our stranded MVCI timeshares.

A bit of an unusual Barry response here, but we live in unusual times and I'm here to be part of the solution and not part of the problem. I too am  a product of my posts.

respectfully,

Barry


----------



## dioxide45 (Mar 19, 2011)

jerseyfinn said:


> So I gotta respectfully call you out when a non-Oceana Palms owner who has never set foot on the resort can post such an absolutist statement asserting something which is wholly speculative and subjective in nature.



Hmmm. I am not sure what being an owner or not an owner at the resort has anything to do with it. I guess if one is not an owner they can't speak to a resort or construction requirements. This sounds a lot like the whole Aruba thread.

Marco island has the requirement that it is to complete its build by a certain date. Marriott has already gone back to the City of Marco Island to have those construction deadlines extended (check it out here). Cities don't want endless construction or brown construction sites around their cities and regularly place requirements when issuing permits that place a completion date to the construction. If the developer wants to change that they have to go back to the city/county and ask for an amendment. The local authorities don't have to approve those changes.

While I can't search the Palm Beach County Planning Commission website (their search function is busted), there is no reason to believe they are different than just about every other county or city in the country.

Looking at the Recorded Trust Documents thread there were approximately 22 units (almost complete units) conveyed to the initial trust. This indicates that 25% of the resort was not sold as of March of 2010. Marriott doesn't have an inventory issue here also given the number of owners that possibly converted to MRPs.

You gushed about it being all about demand. That was an opinion. I don't doubt that the resort isn't in demand. Additional construction is a good thing as it puts more units out there for MVCI owners to have access to. A resort manager isn't going to come out and say "MVCI has to build by x date, so we are building away". They have an obligation to keep a positive image for the resort.

That said, I don't understand why someone can't come along to offer a different perspective. If we only heard one side to something, there wouldn't be much to talk about, would there? Or perhaps only those on the "pro Marriott" side can have an opinion here? I use "pro Marriott" in quotes because I am by no means anti Marriott. I was only offering another perspective based on regular and customary building regulations, not pure speculation. This is more about being realistic in what is happening and not having our head in the clouds.


----------



## jimf41 (Mar 20, 2011)

Barry,

Well said. I too sometimes tire of the nattering nabobs of negativism.


----------



## Lardan (Mar 20, 2011)

It was refreshing to read this.  I have visited the resort and took the "tour".  We were definitely impressed with the unit interiors, but enjoyed the grounds and pools at Ocean Pointe better. 

So we are owners at Ocean Pointe. The important thing is for owners to be happy with their selection when purchasing. Personally we must be easy to please because I just don't see us having anything but a wonderful vacation at any Marriott Resort.

Anyway, thanks for posting this.


----------



## tlwmkw (Mar 20, 2011)

Jerseyfinn and dioxide,

You are both right.  The resort is popular and beautiful and thriving but the build is continuing because Marco Island  requires that it be done by a certain time.  I don't think saying this is a negative against Marriott.  They are smart and wouldn't be building anything new unless they had to- that is not a negative that is a business reality and also show that the local government was smart when they gave approvals (a plus for your resort since they will be looking out for your interests in the future when other development occurs along the beach there).  Frankly I would be upset if Marriott wasn't responding appropriately to economic factors- if they didn't then the entire company would go belly up pretty quickly which would be very bad for all of us.  They aren't doing anything wrong here so don't take the comments made as a negative.

Remember, with the new points it doesn't matter how popular a particular resort is or how high the demand is for that resort because they aren't selling that resort they are selling points that are not attached to any resort (as the sales force say "Your home resort is every resort") so they can use cheap bronze weeks from some other resort to create the points and then promise everyone that they can stay at Oceana.  I think this is one of the problems with the DC points- personally I prefer the DVC model where you have a home resort with a finite number of points and a home advantage in booking.  We all know why MVCI didn't go this route but we don't have to like it.

tlwmkw


----------



## wof45 (Mar 20, 2011)

I understand that you are being nice, but what you are saying about points reflects the misconception that many people who dislike the new system don't understand.

It really does matter what is in the system, and the system has the underlying rules to make it work for everyone.  The first requirement is to stop thinking about someone who thinks of vacations in weeks.  And to start thinking of vacations using a new currency.

MVC has a lot of inventory, and most of it is not bronze weeks or silver weeks, because it is from new resorts that are mostly platinum and gold weeks.

They evaluate all of the weeks as the price they would need to rent all of the weeks, so the really good weeks cost a lot and the really bad weeks cost a little.  All of this becomes the total that they can collect in a year.  Since they have hotel experience, they also know that since they are renting days at a resort, there will be a certain number of the days that will not be rented, so that is reduced from the total.

They now have that amount of the new currency, points, that they can sell.
They can also figure out the MF per point, since they already know the total MF that they spend today.

There are many ways that they can set a value to the points that they then sell.  In the long run, they probably use the value that they could sell the best weeks pre-points, divided by the number of points it would take to rent that week.

They have rules that allow them to change the number of points needed to rent a day at any resort, so they can correct any imbalance in their estimates, and in changes to owner's desires reflected in what they would pay.  If they are wrong on the selling price, they can change it to reflect sales conditions, as they used to when selling weeks.

MVC wants this to be a viable long term business, so it is in their best interests to hold down MF so that people continue to buy points into the future.  It is also in their best interest to develop resorts in great locations that people want to use all the time, so that all the points and days are used.

I don't know if they can legally add to the trust, but the same rules for ROFR would apply as to building new locations.  They would want to add weeks with low MF per rental points - so basically platinum and gold weeks with lower percentage MF.

Bad news for existing MVC owners s that as more points are sold, there will be less unsold inventory going to II, so less upgrading on trades, and more inventory available in the last few months.

Good news for existing MVC owners is that they can enroll old weeks in the DC exchange and play in the new currency and get to the new resorts.  this will be easier and easier as more points are sold.


----------



## dioxide45 (Mar 20, 2011)

wof45 said:


> II don't know if they can legally add to the trust, but the same rules for ROFR would apply as to building new locations.  They would want to add weeks with low MF per rental points - so basically platinum and gold weeks with lower percentage MF.



I don't know why you would think there is a limitation to adding to the trust, they did it once already in October of 2010.



> Good news for existing MVC owners is that they can enroll old weeks in the DC exchange and play in the new currency and get to the new resorts.  this will be easier and easier as more points are sold.



As more points are sold, it reduces the supply going in to the exchange company. It also increases demand. So I don't know how this makes it easier for enrolled or even trust owners to get what they want.


----------



## dioxide45 (Mar 20, 2011)

wof45 said:


> jimf41 said:
> 
> 
> > Barry,
> ...


----------



## wof45 (Mar 20, 2011)

dioxide45 said:


> As more points are sold, it reduces the supply doing in to the exchange company. It also increases demand. So I don't know how this makes it easier for enrolled or even trust owners to get what they want.



If MVC sets the points prices correctly, then the more inventory available means a better chance of getting the week you are willing to pay for in DC points.

The DC exchange will have all of the trust inventory and exchanged for DC points inventory, so supply will increase.  DC is not about making II do exchanges well.  II is something DC points owners can use, but they are then outside of the DC exchange.

I don't believe we have heard about waiting lists for the DC resorts, but at the legacy resorts where owners have not exchanged their weeks for DC points.  I don't see this as a surprise, since legacy owners may get up early to make 12 or 13 month reservations, but I doubt that they are getting up early to exchange their weeks for points at 12-13 months.

IMO, MVC can also fix this by raising the DC points costs for legacy weeks that are not exchanged to balance supply and demand.  I'm sure that then we will hear even more complaints about skim.  I believe they will change the allocations of weeks 12 and 13 months out to account for legacy enrollees who have not made a decision about their weeks.


----------



## OldPantry (Mar 21, 2011)

jerseyfinn said:


> I'm gonna say this in all sincerity. I'm not trying to stir people up.
> ...
> So I gotta respectfully call you out when a non-Oceana Palms owner who has never set foot on the resort can post such an absolutist statement asserting something which is wholly speculative and subjective in nature. :deadhorse:
> 
> ...


Barry, that's some rant from somebody who's not trying to stir people up and is "respectful."  
I'm a Ko Olina owner, but I wouldn't knock somebody who, in good faith, makes an observation, even if negative, about my home resort.  And frankly, your looking a GM "square in the eye" hardly increases my faith that you are particularly well informed about Oceana.  Your emphasis on new construction as meaning that the timeshare world is looking up is ... your opinion.  But, that new construction has little to do with your existing ownership (I assume you're a legacy owner, you stress it enough): it goes into the trust, for better or worse.  The positive benefit to existing owners is speculative.  If somebody points out that Marriott might not be doing the construction unless they had to, I hardly think they're deserving of such heavy scorn.  Maybe you might think twice about that send button yourself.


----------



## wof45 (Mar 21, 2011)

the whole argument is not black and white.  In this business environment, we have all seen construction delayed or canceled, and MVC could do the same thing.

the only legal requirement to build is that there are approved planning and zoning board agreements.  the cost to Marriott of not building would be to have to go back again to get the approval dates changed.  In today's environment, there can be a lot of bluster, but in the end the plans are changed because the alternative of a developer not building and not adding to the tax rolls does not work for local government.

so, if MVC is building a 10-20 million dollar building, it is because they would rather spend the 10-20 million than spend 100-200,000 going back to the planning board.  besides, construction costs and interest rates are also very low now.

it is nice to see them building.  IMO, they want to build at Oceanna Palms since it will be a major sales center for MVC points and the construction will support sales activity.


----------



## dioxide45 (Mar 21, 2011)

wof45 said:


> it is nice to see them building.  IMO, they want to build at Oceanna Palms since it will be a major sales center for MVC points and the construction will support sales activity.



One building or two, it doesn't change anything about sales at the sales site. They can still have a sales site there selling. I don't see how additional construction will help sales there more than anywhere else.


----------



## OldPantry (Mar 21, 2011)

dioxide45 said:


> One building or two, it doesn't change anything about sales at the sales site. They can still have a sales site there selling. I don't see how additional construction will help sales there more than anywhere else.


Well, I CAN see how the new buildings will spur sales at the Oceana site.  The heart of Marriott's sales approach in the past has been to parade buyers past the latest exciting location and encourage them to imagine years of future enjoyment there.  I think a certain number of them will bite.  That being said, there's a likelihood of deception inherent in the situation.  Points buyers will have no particular access to Oceana, as their points are not site specific.  However, they will be encouraged to think they will have such access.  You know this will happen.  Just think back to the indirect assurances we all received when buying legacy weeks (upgrades galore, Marriott points by the bucketful), only to learn that they were ... steadily less than met the eye.


----------



## thinze3 (Mar 21, 2011)

The news today states that Florida leads the nation with an 18% vacancy rate. You heard that correctly, 18% of ALL homes in Florida are vacant. The articale states that the the overbuilding at all the high rent districts is the main cause of this and that it may take 20 years to absorb the inventory enough to get prices back to their peak levels.

I know this is apples and oranges, homes/condos vs timeshares, but I too believe there is more to the equation than simple supply and demand at work here, although I do believe it could be PART of the equation.


----------



## wof45 (Mar 21, 2011)

it's true.
we settle on our retirement condo in the keys on Friday, paying about half what the seller paid 6 years ago.

we'll let the kids worry about selling it.

it may or may not be the time to buy TS, but it sure is a good time to buy a FL condo.


----------



## jerseyfinn (Mar 22, 2011)

dioxide45 said:


> Hmmm. I am not sure what being an owner or not an owner at the resort has anything to do with it. I guess if one is not an owner they can't speak to a resort or construction requirements. This sounds a lot like the whole Aruba thread.



Every resort owner can and should hold an opinion and offer a point of view. But one should think twice about making pronouncments or accusations about another resort when they themselves have no vested ownership interest or lack full knowledge about a specific resort.  Maybe in the past this did not matter as much, but if you're paying close attention to TUG, lots of MVCI owners are exasperated and desperately trying to figure out their ownership options. Lots of folks panic and sell their weeks at rock bottom prices the last couple of years. TUGgers need accurate information. If all we want is negativity bad news, we'll watch the national networks or Jersey Shore ( no relation to jerseyfinn  ). 

It's a pretty lame tactic on your part to throw out that straw man argument about Aruba. Then again, this tends to be the modus operendi folks employ to crowd the TUG bandwitdth with their one-dimensional wisdom.  I'm just puzzled as to why you or others try to hijaak/divert a thread on the progess of Oceana Palms which is intended to assist other owners and just happens to say something positive about MVCI ownership. This feels like . . . . .  er . . .  ahhh . . . . . . Wisconsin except the other side won't go away  

All I did is give you a pushback on the ceaseless anti-Marriott sentiment which floods these threads. Get over it, there's lots of us who are tired of it . . .  I simply decide to say something about it this time because TUG threads are getting overgrown with virtual weeds with this meandering, off-topic sentiment. It's nothing to do about saying folks can't hold other opinions. It's a question of when and where to say it. And you TUGgers who have PM'd me to voice your sentiments precisely know what I mean.




dioxide45 said:


> . . . Cities don't want endless construction or brown construction sites around their cities and regularly place < blah, blah blah  :zzz: >



Once again you beat around the bush and obfuscate because a feisty Finn ruffles your feathers. Let's talk *FACTS *and not speculate about what goes on around Oceana Palms resort.

The real deal in the City of Riviera Beach Florida is that for several years there has been intense debate, dialogue and discussion about how to develop the city. Several years back, hundreds of millions of dollars are appropriated by state and federal bodies to develop Riveria Beach which itself is a city of both low-income/high unemployment working folks and well off retirees living in the hi-rises on the ocean. The reality is that two disparate groups are working together to figure out what to do for the interest of all.

It takes several years and several local elections to create a political coalition which gives the nod to more development on the wealthier ocean side along with more infrastructure spending on the mainland side. The negotiations for Marriott and and every other developer are difficult and convoluted. Several times developers are found and plans prepared, but things fall through as the private sector and local government can't reach a concord (Marriott was once to be the developer of a project at the Ocean Mall, but that falls through ). But a deal is finally reached and Oceana Palms grows out of the sands with lots of strings attached. Marriott is itself a good neighbor and it acquires the Marriott resort up the beach and it continues to look at other land parcels and development projects. The idea here is development, construction jobs , and long term employment for locals. Deadlines are established, promises made, and the Recession marches into town. We MVCI folks know all too what what this does to our product.

I honestly do not know if Marriott has a deadline gun to it's head or if it must act in good faith to assuage a local government who is given assurances during the rocketing economy. The Ocean Mall developer was himself behind projected completion schedule and I never hear any furor over this or the fact that he sits on a mall that is 70% unoccupied. As an owner who occupies his multiple weeks at Oceana Palms, I do know that the community has a good opinion of Marriott and our resort because some of these folks set foot on the property and have a drink at the bar from time to time -- it's called personal eyeball-to-eyeball contact and plain and simple neighborliness. And Marriott very much wants to foster a good relationship with the community ( Ocean Pointe owners can attest the strong relationship Marriott has with the Village of Palm Beach Shores ).

But my take and your take on human interactions are Oceana Palmes are completely different aren't they?



dioxide45 said:


> . . . You gushed about it being all about demand. That was an opinion. . .



More than an opinion. It is an *informed opinion* which comes from spending time with the resort GM, asking lots of questions, and taking the time to determine who he is and what he is about. Same thing applies to every manager and associate with whom we speak every day. My wife and I try to do this at each resort we own at. Oceana Palms is in high demand for whatever reason. Both the demographic of demand and the extent of demand has been a pleasant surprise for Marriott. Our management team advises of this and many other things.

I'm not trying to 'one up' you here. I'm trying to ilustrate that some of us take MVCI ownership seriously and we put the time and effort in to learn about our resorts and the community they are located in. This obligation/need has not changed just because Marriott deep-sixes the MVCI product ( save for Europe ) and creates Destinations. If anything, the creation of Destinations increases our MVCI ownership obligations as we must throroughly learn the two programs and posit where and when they will collide.

But that is a subject for another thread as the purpose of this thread was to discuss the progress of Oceana Palms.



dioxide45 said:


> . . .If we only heard one side to something, there wouldn't be much to talk about, would there? Or perhaps only those on the "pro Marriott" side can have an opinion here? . . .




Back to that straw man argument tactic again, but I've already said that, haven't I?  Perhaps better to quote Ronald Reagan: " There you go again ! "  

Better to let this thread stand as a discusion on Oceana Palms news. Take the convoluted discussions about DC etc. to other threads. Come to think of it, a lot of threads here are getting choked off by this sort of stuff, aren't they?

I may be a bit prickly, but I still sign off :

respectfully,

Barry


----------



## jerseyfinn (Mar 22, 2011)

jimf41 said:


> . . .  I too sometimes tire of the *nattering nabobs of negativism*.



Jim,

That's *alliteration* and this makes you the official _TUG Poet Laurete_  

Barry


----------



## SueDonJ (Mar 22, 2011)

Wow.  Barry, like you I am really impressed with the Marriott resorts where we own, and I'm enthusiastic about every improvement and further development that they make wherever it may be.  I also don't like to see the same old tired negativity against Marriott from the same old TUG names.

But respectfully (honestly, not sarcastic here) I think you're going way overboard in criticizing Dioxide45 for his posts in this thread.  You wrote a wonderful post after visiting your resort, the kind of post that we've come to expect from you that contains a wealth of personal observances and resort-specific information.  His very first response to you was, "Thanks for the great report," with a remark that quite possibly the further development at the resort was being fueled by construction commitments.  That's the kind of post we've come to expect from him, too, because he seems to have an expertise with various legal filings.

I honestly can't figure out how you read a criticism of Marriott in Dioxide's response.  And believe me, I'm firmly in the camp of TUGgers who are tired of seeing negativity toward Marriott when there's no basis for it.  But saying that Marriott is obligated by legal commitments isn't a criticism of any sort, so why begin the argument of whether there's a basis to criticize Marriott this time around?!  I'm so confused.

I suppose none of these comments supporting or questioning you will matter in the grand scheme of things because we all seem to read TUG with a perspective that certain people will always fall firmly for or against Marriott.  I just think it's important that we make sure we're attributing the right perspective to the right TUGgers, and that we take time to read the actual words, too.  And on a personal note, since you mentioned that you've received PM's supporting you here, I wanted a chance to say that I've sent Dioxide a PM telling him that I think he "took an undeserved hit" here.


----------



## radmoo (Mar 22, 2011)

I could be way off base here but perhaps this may explain some of what goes on:

Some folks purchas MVCI directly from developer and pay quite handsomely to do so.  Others proudly display their bargain purchases on TUG.  Good for them but they shouldn't be surprised when the parent company tries to clamp down in order to protect its interest.  Those of us who purchased from developer should be entitled to greater benefits, at least IMHO that is how I see it. Bargains are great, I LOVE bargains, but no one should be surprised if the bargain comes with Caveat attached.


----------



## windje2000 (Mar 22, 2011)

jimf41 said:


> Barry,
> 
> Well said. I too sometimes tire of the *nattering nabobs of negativism*.



That's gotta be the first Spiro T. Agnew quotation ever seen on TUG.   

And we all remember what happened to him


----------



## rsackett (Mar 22, 2011)

radmoo said:


> I could be way off base here but perhaps this may explain some of what goes on:
> 
> Some folks purchas MVCI directly from developer and pay quite handsomely to do so.  Others proudly display their bargain purchases on TUG.  Good for them but they shouldn't be surprised when the parent company tries to clamp down in order to protect its interest.  Those of us who purchased from developer should be entitled to greater benefits, at least IMHO that is how I see it. Bargains are great, I LOVE bargains, but no one should be surprised if the bargain comes with Caveat attached.



I do not want to turn this into another Developer vs Resale discussion, but another way to look at it is:

1) All weeks were sold as developer weeks 
2) All original weeks owned are resold (at some point), some by Marriott some through other sources.
3) All owners at a resort pay Marriott the same amount of money to manage the OWNERS property.
4) Marriott offers purchase incentives to entice buyers to buy from them, that is when buyer perks should come in.

Just my thoughts.

Ray


----------



## Superchief (Mar 22, 2011)

*Oceana Palms Needs a TUG member on BOD*

I also own at Oceana Palms and love the resort, as well as Ocean Pointe. I have a concern with ownership representation on the board, since this resort has majority ownership by the trust. The key current BOD member is a long-term Marriott employee, and the other board members have limited experience. With MF fee increases of over 20% last year and several itemized costs significantly higher than Ocean Pointe (1 mile away), legacy owners need to strive for better representation on the board. 

I recently received the information regarding applying for board membership and am considering volunteering, but I'm not sure what my job situation will be next year. I hope Barry and other TUG member owners will consider applying for the board.


----------



## dioxide45 (Mar 22, 2011)

jerseyfinn said:


> Every resort...



I won't take the time to pick apart your post as as any direct responses on my part won't put out any fires. It wouldn't do much good anyway as you seem to have your predetermined notions about "what side I am on". I still don't understand that. I am however rather put off by the condescending and elitist attitude that you expressed in your most recent posts.

I respond to many thread here and believe that my input assists many people that come here looking for help with their MVCI ownership. Do I achieve that? I like to think I do, but who knows. Do I feel the DC program is a benefit to us? Not really. Do I like MVCI and their product? Absolutely. We love our Marriott resort stays, and wouldn't trade those experiences for anything. I believe that is something we both share.

Edited to Add: If you are looking for someone to blame for "high-jacking" your thread, I thing you should look at yourself first before casting any stones. My OP was on topic, this thread didn't go awry until you responded to it.


----------



## tlwmkw (Mar 23, 2011)

Bottom line that everyone agrees on here (and looking at the positive side):

1.  Oceana is a beautiful resort and becoming very popular.  Has great amenities ,staff, location, etc.

 and 

2.  The second tower will be built (despite the current economy and drop off in timeshare sales) which I would say is a plus for owners and non-owners alike (regardless of why it is happening) because there will be more inventory available.  The only gripe I have is I'm a legacy owner and have no intention of buying points so that new tower will be out of my reach (wrong bucket)... Oh well    I'll have to try and get in via II or the Marriott exchange site (DC).

Frankly, if you look back at Dioxide's history you will see that he is not a Marriott naysayer, and while you may think that was done on this thread I don't think it was meant in a negative way at all.


----------



## amisco (Mar 23, 2011)

*Ford would like to have the same terms that Marriott wants on resale...*



radmoo said:


> I could be way off base here but perhaps this may explain some of what goes on:
> 
> Some folks purchas MVCI directly from developer and pay quite handsomely to do so.  Others proudly display their bargain purchases on TUG.  Good for them but they shouldn't be surprised when the parent company tries to clamp down in order to protect its interest.  Those of us who purchased from developer should be entitled to greater benefits, at least IMHO that is how I see it. Bargains are great, I LOVE bargains, but no one should be surprised if the bargain comes with Caveat attached.



O.K..... This is where I think some of the craziness is with Marriott.  They sell a timeshare, make a handsome profit and manage the properties on a profitable basis (Think a hotel with guaranteed occupancy).  Hilton's program does NOT treat resale buyers as second class citizens.. they can trade for Hilton Honors points and have the same access to the HGVC inventory as the original buyers.  What "interest" is MVCI trying to protect?  Nothing has been taken away from the original developers.... what if Ford treated buyers used cars differently than they treat the original buyers?  IMHO the reason that Marriott timeshares are being dumped on the resale market and uniformly sell for less than a comparable HGVC property has everything to do with their policies and programs.  If Marriott wants to control the resale inventory they should do what HGVC is doing right now... exercise their ROFR.... Hilton has budgeted $27 million this year for buying back Platinum weeks...the result is that the market for these properties has tightened and sales prices continues to rise.  The beneficiary of this practice is to protect the resale value of current owners properties.

Don't get me wrong ... I love the Marriott product as it has been historically managed operationally... I think they have let the marketing and sales departments run amok with their tactics and "punishment cures" for their mistakes.  The latest game "Hide the Availability of Inventory Unless You Buy Points"...heard that one this week at a Sales Presentation.


----------



## OldPantry (Mar 23, 2011)

radmoo said:


> I could be way off base here but perhaps this may explain some of what goes on:
> 
> Some folks purchas MVCI directly from developer and pay quite handsomely to do so.  Others proudly display their bargain purchases on TUG.  Good for them but they shouldn't be surprised when the parent company tries to clamp down in order to protect its interest.  Those of us who purchased from developer should be entitled to greater benefits, at least IMHO that is how I see it. Bargains are great, I LOVE bargains, but no one should be surprised if the bargain comes with Caveat attached.



Yeah, I think it's safe to say you're way off base here.  Look, we all (or almost all) bought developer weeks at one time.  Part of the pitch was that it was deeded property, ours to own and use, and ours to sell when and as we wished.  That was a major part of the appeal.  Now, you seem to be implying that a freely negotiated resale should mean the buyer has somehow gamed the system, and deserves lesser "benefits".  Exercising considerable restraint, I would say that's lacking in wisdom.  Imagine owning a house (most of us do).   Many of us bought from a builder.  Should the person we sell to have fewer ownership rights than the original buyers?  Even if the price of things has dropped like a stone (remember 2008)?  The answer is (or should be) pretty obvious.  Turning a resale purchaser into a second class citizen would be unfair, and pretty stupid, as it would further trash the value of what is being sold.  That would hurt precisely the folks you like.

Fortunately, I think you're dead wrong that resale purchasers are being treated less well, aside from the fact that post-June resales are denied entry into the vacation club.  Since the club didn't exist when the timeshare was created, they haven't lost anything.   Like all legacy weeks owners, they are entitled to occupy their resort in season, and trade into II for other possibilities.  Now, there is a real question as to whether weeks owners (of every kind) are about to be treated less fairly vis a vis exchanges.  It a hotly debated topic, of course (there are threads all over the place about this). 

I'm sure you don't want the original owners to suffer this new unfairness, but apparently you're happy to see it happen to the resale newbies.


----------



## chriskre (Mar 24, 2011)

Can't we all just get along. :ignore:


----------



## OldPantry (Mar 24, 2011)

jerseyfinn said:


> But one should think twice about making pronouncments or accusations about another resort when they themselves have no vested ownership interest or lack full knowledge about a specific resort.  ...
> It's a pretty lame tactic on your part to throw out that straw man argument about Aruba. Then again, this tends to be the modus operendi folks employ to crowd the TUG bandwitdth with their one-dimensional wisdom.  I'm just puzzled as to why you or others try to hijaak/divert a thread on the progess of Oceana Palms which is intended to assist other owners and just happens to say something positive about MVCI ownership. ...
> overgrown with virtual weeds with this meandering, off-topic sentiment.
> 
> ...



I think the worst thing about this expanded rant is that you still say "respectfully."  It is not remotely respectful.  You dump on somebody who, correctly or incorrectly, thinks Marriott might be building at Oceana for reasons other than intense optimism about the future of timeshares.  Then you accuse that person of hijacking YOUR thread.  Apparently you want only a chorus of praise for "feisty Finn" (one of the most pompously self-congratulatory phrases I've ever read in TUG). To top it all off, you admit total ignorance regarding the very point that Dioxide45 made originally.  That makes your ridicule of him as "having no vested ownership interest in or full knowledge of a specific resort" repellently hypocritical.  A whole string of folks have objected (pro-Marriott, Marriott-critical, neutrals), but you spew on.


----------



## radmoo (Mar 24, 2011)

As for reference to Real Estate transactions, specifically purchasing a home that is not brand new, in many parts of the country the new owners pay much higher taxes than did the original owners.  Many communities have gone to level taxing, I'm venturing that some have not. Also not fair as the town services and property values are equal. All I'm saying is that when you buy something "second hand" you don't always get all the benefits of buying new. In some cases it's a warranty and in others it's "the perks."


----------



## windje2000 (Mar 24, 2011)

radmoo said:


> I could be way off base here but perhaps this may explain some of what goes on:
> 
> Some folks purchas MVCI directly from developer and pay quite handsomely to do so.  Others proudly display their bargain purchases on TUG.  Good for them but they shouldn't be surprised when *the parent company tries to clamp down in order to protect its interest.*
> 
> ...




Suppose we have a resort with two buildings, D and R.

The D building owners are exclusively developer purchased and owned units.

The R building owners are exclusively purchased resales.  

I just don't see how the 'parent company' has a greater or even a different 'interest to protect' in the R building than the D building, and any reason to accord greater benefits to the owners of D building v. R building.

Correct me if I am reading your post incorrectly, but it appears you assume that the all resales are 'bargain' purchases.  They aren't.  I remember when my FIL sold some Marriott TS for a small profit over what he paid the developer.  How should the 'parent company' treat those resale owners?  They didn't pay the 'bargain prices' you allude to.  They paid more than the original developer buyer.

What additional or different 'interest' would the 'parent company' have to protect and 'clamp down' where the resale was made at a price in excess of what the original purchaser paid the developer?   Why does the price paid (or the seller name on a deed) even enter into the discussion of owner benefits.


----------



## OldPantry (Mar 24, 2011)

radmoo said:


> As for reference to Real Estate transactions, specifically purchasing a home that is not brand new, in many parts of the country the new owners pay much higher taxes than did the original owners.  Many communities have gone to level taxing, I'm venturing that some have not. Also not fair as the town services and property values are equal. All I'm saying is that when you buy something "second hand" you don't always get all the benefits of buying new. In some cases it's a warranty and in others it's "the perks."



You're right, a few places (most notably California) enacted two-tier taxation by freezing taxes for existing residents, then bumping them up (sometimes hugely) upon resale.  Note, that was not about new/old construction (weakening your point, I think).  At any rate, do you think that was a good idea, or remotely fair?  It certainly hurt many communities, whose tax receipts were badly affected.  Housing resales also experienced downward pressure.

Keep in mind that you (or your heirs) might yourselves want to sell someday.  Wouldn't you want the property you're offering to have some real value to the purchaser?  They'd pay more, wouldn't they?

As to perks: yes, resales do not qualify for Marriott points (something I neglected to mention), and the new ones don't qualify for the VC.  Any resale owner complaining of this "loss" does deserve a wag of the finger, because neither was ever promised.  So, what other perks should be taken from a slybones who has gamed the system by buying cheap?  

By the way, how cheap is too cheap?  On that bright day when YOU might consider buying again, would you gobble up a bunch of VC points for $50-60G to snag usage that used to cost much less, go to a (non-Marriott) developer for a full-price perk-rich beauty, go to Redweek and offer a price above the asking because you don't want to cheat, or try to get the lowest price you can negotiate?  Really, what would YOU do?


----------



## windje2000 (Mar 25, 2011)

OldPantry said:


> You're right, a few places (most notably California) enacted two-tier taxation by freezing taxes for existing residents, then bumping them up (sometimes hugely) upon resale.  Note, that was not about new/old construction (weakening your point, I think).  At any rate, do you think that was a good idea, or remotely fair?  It certainly hurt many communities, whose tax receipts were badly affected.  Housing resales also experienced downward pressure.
> 
> Keep in mind that you (or your heirs) might yourselves want to sell someday.  Wouldn't you want the property you're offering to have some real value to the purchaser?  They'd pay more, wouldn't they?
> 
> ...



When you bought from a developer and received the right to exchange occupancy for MRP, you simply purchased an option on an added exchange avenue.  It represents a nontransferable additional right, nothing more.  Not unlike free oil changes for the _original_ owner of a new car.

Is that added right is worth paying the difference between 'resale' and 'developer' prices?  Is the ability to participate in DC worth the additional cost of buying points occupancy equivalent to a desired resale week?

Opinions vary, . . . and that's what makes a market.  You pays your money and you makes your choice.  (Assuming the participants are sufficiently well informed to be aware of the existence and pricing of that choice.  Which in many if not most all cases is a bad assumption.)


----------



## Smooth Air (Mar 25, 2011)

Radmoo, Why shd those who purchased from Marriott  be entitled to "greater benefits" than those who purchased resale?


----------



## jimf41 (Mar 26, 2011)

Wasn't this thread supposed to be about Oceana Palms? Maybe I should look at the threads for SKIM, ROFR, enrolled vs unenrolled, resale vs developer and Spinco  if I want to get information about a resort from a trip report.


----------



## Lardan (Mar 26, 2011)

As I stated on a previous reply in this thread I was not impressed that much with the grounds there.  I just thought it was a little small and the pool design was not that great to me.  The salesperson giving us the tour said that Marriott had not made a decision yet if a second pool would be added when the second building was built, I really didn't like that answer.

We were at the time staying at Ocean Pointe. Of all the weeks we have spent at various resorts we spent more time actually at the resort itself while at Ocean Pointe.  I don't mean that in a bad way, we enjoyed it so much  we are now owners there.  But, those two resorts are somewhat more "secluded" than any others we have visited, and that is why the grounds of both made such an impression on us.


----------

