# Worldmark sweet spot?



## Captron (Jul 8, 2009)

We are a family of five with kids just starting school so our travel window will be restricted for years to come. I have several Starwood units in SVN and also own  a SoCal week at Carlsbad but I do not know the pure points systems well. I have had RCI points units in the past. 

Being in SLC I like the availability of the western locations of Worldmark and am interested in their program. We travel to western coastal areas frequently, both south and north.

Any recommendations of what point level would be required for a 2 and/or 3 BR unit in the western US during the "high" period with Worldmark? School breaks are going to be our window for a while so I assume we would need the highest available season. I know from other places here that the point values for the "new" resorts have gone up so what is a good threshold? Is there a better home resort? MF are based on points range so I don't know what else would come into play here. Are special assessments spread across the system or should I look to a newer location, for example?

I have read John's guide for Worldmark and 12,000 points looks like a nice spot to look for, but want to know if things have changed since early 2007 too. Any general recommendations or points on the Worldmark system, strengths/weaknesses, good/bad, great TUGers tips etc. WELCOME AND APPRECIATED!!!

Does anyone has a Worldmark points chart they can send ma the link for or email, fax, or mail to me? PLEASE?????

Thanks in advance!!! Come visit me on the Starwood board anytime!


----------



## ecwinch (Jul 8, 2009)

Captron said:


> We are a family of five with kids just starting school so our travel window will be restricted for years to come. I have several Starwood units in SVN and also own  a SoCal week at Carlsbad but I do not know the pure points systems well. I have had RCI points units in the past.
> 
> Being in SLC I like the availability of the western locations of Worldmark and am interested in their program. We travel to western coastal areas frequently, both south and north.
> 
> ...



10,000 annual credits would be a good starting point. With WM it is very easy to "add" credits by renting them from another owner. 

10,000 credits will get a week at most resorts with WM. New resorts require more credits, some up to 16,000 credits per week. But 10k is a good starting point. You can expand your membership at a later date if you consistently need more credits.

WM is the most flexible timeshare system available.

There is no home resort. To some degree this is negative with regard to WorldMark. A home resort normally provides owners of that resort with a priority window for making reservations. No such thing with WM. Equal competition for every resort.


----------



## wayzer (Jul 8, 2009)

Captron said:


> We are a family of five with kids just starting school so our travel window will be restricted for years to come. I have several Starwood units in SVN and also own  a SoCal week at Carlsbad but I do not know the pure points systems well. I have had RCI points units in the past.
> 
> Being in SLC I like the availability of the western locations of Worldmark and am interested in their program. We travel to western coastal areas frequently, both south and north.
> 
> ...



I don't have much to contribute as far as advice, however it is just my opinion not to focus on when the kids are in school. I too have a young family just starting school and I feel as though I will add more to their learning by traveling. A week away during school will be good for them and won't hurt their progress at all. Again, just my feeling on the whole traveling during school thing. 

Happy Travelling!


----------



## rhonda (Jul 8, 2009)

Two links of interest:
Resort Information and Point Charts.  A Point Chart is provided at the bottom of each resort's info page.
Owner Education with downloadable Basic Owner's Ed Handbook


----------



## Lisa P (Jul 8, 2009)

We homeschooled and so our schedule was often flexible (they're now grown and tied to college calendars).  However, many school systems in the U.S. have very strict anti-truancy laws which require counties and municipalities to go after parents who permit their children to miss more than 3 consecutive days of school for a non-medical reason and without a medical note.  Also, once they reach middle school and courses are chosen to fit the student's ability (i.e., more challenge where needed) and extra-curricular activities and sports teams increase, many parents find that missing more than a day or two is very stressful for students.  I think it's wise to _plan_ for travel over school breaks, even if you don't end up _needing_ it.

Another question:  Suppose one person owns a single contract for 20,000 WM credits and another person owns two contracts, each for 10,000 WM credits.  Do they pay the same in maint fees?  Are there other similar scenarios that should be considered when buying with WM, if one wants to plan to have enough for a 2BR week in highest season at ANY resort each year?


----------



## Rent_Share (Jul 8, 2009)

There are tips and tricks to locking in the peak periods - even ways to get a jump on the higher demand weeks  - www.wmowners.com

I just used 10K for a Fourth of July week and have 20K (2 weeks ) in reserved travel during the "school" summer vacation season for 2010 with a 6000 point membership.

In my tenure at tug since 2004 I have seen the ebay pricing move from 85 cents a point to the mid 40's to very low 50's- including all the added "closing" costs and usually striped down to a single year's points. I bought in the mid 60's, The general economy and the inflation of required points for the newest properties have pushed the pricing down faster than it had been declining previously.

Since I rent continually just went through the math to see if it would make sense to move up to 12K versus renting as needed

 Maintenance Fee 2009
10 - 12 K     $   678.40 
  5 - 7.5      $   462.68 



> *CORRECTION* Maintenance fees for 10 K are now $570.54, 10,001 are 678.40 YMMV



Cost of 6 K        215.72 Additional annual Maint fee of 12K vs 6K Account 

Cost to Rent 6K $420.00 - Used 7 cents 6 is current market

Difference          204.28

Current Market Price 6 K Account ~2500 (including all add ons)

Years to Break Even 2500/204.28  =  12.28 Years

The rental price is a function of maintenance fee equation, the purchase price is a sunk cost

A 6 K account maintenance fee is 7.7 cents / point
  12K account maintenance fee s  5.7 cents/  point
  40K                                       4.9 cents/  point

Most of the rented points are from large account balances, 

Left out inflation of the maintenance fees and the rental costs since they would tend to cancel each other out, albeit the maintenance fees have continually increased up to the maximum allowable under the agreement, (5 %) pretty much guaranteed to double every 14 - 16 years

The open market rental credit prices have been more stable than the maintenance fees.

Am I glad I bought yes - Should you buy - If you are restricted to the 3 month window and will be for a number of years 

YES   IF

1. You are willing to lock in a seven day trip 13 months in advance for the most popular destination(s)

All destinations are available 13 months out, if you use that as your standard you shouldn't be disappointed,  there are a couple of tricks that allow the more experienced users and sneak in and grab the first couple of days ahead of the thirteen day window - That takes a while to master and the willingness to burn a housekeeping token, or share  . . ..   That's another whole thread . . . .​
2. You are willing to forget about flexchanges, last calls., getaways and evaluate the membership at the upfront costs plus the mandatory annual fees and cost of renting additional points for prime time long range planned events. These are there but not viable in the your stage of life​




When doing vacation economics, the time share salesman doesn't even include maintenance fee as an annual cost


----------



## LLW (Jul 10, 2009)

Lisa P said:


> Another question:  Suppose one person owns a single contract for 20,000 WM credits and another person owns two contracts, each for 10,000 WM credits.  Do they pay the same in maint fees?



Each account pays a separate $139.10 for account maintenance and other incidentals. Current MF schedule and formula:

http://www.wmowners.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=21585


----------



## LLW (Jul 10, 2009)

Rent_Share said:


> Am I glad I bought yes - Should you buy - If you are restricted to the 3 month window and will be for a number of years
> 
> YES   IF
> 
> ...



There is a saving grace:

WM has a very liberal cancellation policy. Reservations made 13 months in advance may be cancelled up to 30 days before check-in, with no penalty. Therefore there are a lot of cancellations. Therefore there is a waitlist system which works wonders, if you learn how to use it.

One can take advantage of last minute opportunities, e.g. those highlighted above, by
1. Booking a WM or hotel reservation that's cancellable up to pretty close to check-in date.
2. Book airtickets, ask for vacation dates, etc.
3. Watch for Flexchange, etc. Once an opportunity arises before your cancellation date in 1. above, book the Flexchange and cancel the WM or hotel reservation.


----------



## cotraveller (Jul 10, 2009)

Lisa P said:


> Another question:  Suppose one person owns a single contract for 20,000 WM credits and another person owns two contracts, each for 10,000 WM credits.  Do they pay the same in maint fees?





> Each account pays a separate $139.10 for account maintenance and other incidentals.



Which means the answer to the question posed is no.  You pay an extra $139 to have two accounts.  In terms of absolute dollars (pennies intentionally excluded) it is $1002 for a 20,000 credit account and $1141 for two 10,000 credit accounts


----------



## Lisa P (Jul 10, 2009)

Thanks for the info.  It seems to make sense getting a suitable amount of points upfront rather than to try to add many smaller contracts together.


----------



## LLW (Jul 11, 2009)

Lisa P said:


> Thanks for the info.  It seems to make sense getting a suitable amount of points upfront rather than to try to add many smaller contracts together.



You can combine the contracts, but each combine costs $150.


----------



## Lisa P (Jul 11, 2009)

Do I understand correctly?  If you pay a one-time fee of $150 to combine contracts, after that, your ownership (initially 2 contracts for 10K apiece) would be billed for maint fees as if it was a single 20K contract?  Interesting.


----------



## Stressy (Jul 11, 2009)

Lisa P said:


> Do I understand correctly?  If you pay a one-time fee of $150 to combine contracts, after that, your ownership (initially 2 contracts for 10K apiece) would be billed for maint fees as if it was a single 20K contract?  Interesting.



Yes.

I held two smaller accounts for a while. That afforded me the ability to book bonus time on both accounts and an extra HK token (one each per account) But in the end-it was just easier to do the combine (seemed like I was getting a MF bill every month-LOL. They are billed quarterly)

I just "stripped" one account (transfered all my usuable credits to the account I wanted to keep) The account you are "losing" will be frozen during the process.


----------



## bookworm (Jul 11, 2009)

Worldmark does sound very interesting. One thing that would concern me is the possibility that they take away the ability to rent credits to each other. The parent company has successfully accomplished this with Wyndham. Is there anything in documents guaranteeing the transfer of points between owners in the future? A smaller points account would be seriously hampered by that.


----------



## cotraveller (Jul 11, 2009)

Shhhh. Don't give them any ideas.  There is nothing in the documents that I know of that guarantees the transfer of credits between owners.  Nor have I heard any talk or rumors of changing the transfer process.


----------



## BocaBum99 (Jul 11, 2009)

bookworm said:


> Worldmark does sound very interesting. One thing that would concern me is the possibility that they take away the ability to rent credits to each other. The parent company has successfully accomplished this with Wyndham. Is there anything in documents guaranteeing the transfer of points between owners in the future? A smaller points account would be seriously hampered by that.



I give it a 40-50% probability that WorldMark by Wyndham will eliminate credit transfers.  They did it for Wyndham.  Why not for WorldMark?

The reason it isn't 100% is because of the following:

1) Wyndham needed to do it because it had a huge loophole where Platinum VIPs get 50% discount on vacations booked less than 60-days prior to check in.  WorldMark has no such discount window.

2) VIPs don't pay housekeeping.  WorldMark had no housekeeping accounts.  Those accounts have been capped in terms of credits usable with no housekeeping.  So, WorldMark has already solved its housekeeping problem using a different approach.

3) WorldMark owners imminent revolt.  The WorldMark owner community is much more in tune with their rights and organization toward legal action.  The WorldMark bylaws gave too much power to the owners.  If WorldMark by Wyndham tries to take it away, there will probably be a huge legal fight that ensues.

4) Security can't be the reason used for taking it away.  WorldMark has a good security model for transfer of credits.  A signed transfer form must be faxed to WorldMark by Wyndham.  The audit trail makes it easy to reverse any hanky panky.

5) WorldMark by Wyndham uses owner to owner credit rentals to get maintenance fee delinquencies paid up.  I'm sure that this helps offset past due accounts and get additional revenue into the company.  I don't think WBW wants to take that away.

6) WorldMark by Wyndham uses this exact same credit transfer facility to run the FAX program and their own rental program.  Can't kill the owner program without putting their own program at risk.

So, on balance there is enough of a threat and not enough incentive to change the credit rental policy that I think they will keep it in place as is.

The 40-45% is because they may just get greedy and do it anywhere.  There is always that possibility.  And, commercial renting, which isn't that widespread yet, could force them to clamp down on it.


----------



## Rent_Share (Jul 11, 2009)

Until they block the rental I cannot see any reason to invest in any more reale contract points that are declining (not as low or as fast as Wyndamn Points (former fairshare))

When I started lurking 85 cents was the norm bought two + years ago just under 65 -  My gut says the current eBay norm for a 6K is 42 to48 cents +/- including all fees.

PerryM predicted 20 cents would be the floor when he was still on the fringe of WM Points - I don't see anything in the short term economic conditions and the actions of the management board to stop that slide, short of a repurchase program by the developer to swallow up points that can be resold at less than their development costs which would put stabilize the resale market at around the current levels  NOT GONNA HAPPEN IN MY LIFETIME


----------



## BocaBum99 (Jul 11, 2009)

Rent_Share said:


> Until they block the rental I cannot see any reason to invest in any more reale contract points that are declining (not as low or as fast as Wyndamn Points (former fairshare))
> 
> When I started lurking 85 cents was the norm bought two + years ago just under 65 -  My gut says the current eBay norm for a 6K is 48 cents +/- including all fees.
> 
> PerryM predicted 20 cents would be the floor when he was still on the fringe of WM Points - I don't see anything in the short term economic conditions and the actions of the management board to stop that slide, short of a repurchase program by the developer to swallow up points that can be resold at less than their development costs which would put stabilize the resale market at around the current levels  NOT GONNA HAPPEN IN MY LIFETIME



It's possible that in your lifetime WorldMark by Wyndham creates a buyback program for cheap credits which stabilizes credit prices at around 50-75% of development costs.  It would be foolish for them not to do it.


----------



## BocaBum99 (Jul 11, 2009)

In fact, what I would do if I were Wyndham is I would create a new product to replace the old FSP program.  Call it something like Club Wyndham Plus or something like that.  Buy back all the best original Fairfield properties and put them into a trust so that they are only accessible by Club Wyndham Plus members.  Charge a conversion fee to convert current points into the new trust.

Then, make access into Club Wyndham Plus by WorldMark owners who buy from the developer.  Make it a Travelshare or TEN feature.

Drive the original Fairfield and WorldMark credits to zero so that they can buy them back cheap and put them into the new trust where those points have ROFR that gets regularly exercised to keep prices high in that trust.


----------



## cotraveller (Jul 11, 2009)

Fortunately you are not Wyndham.  If Wyndham were to purchase all of the WorldMark credits they would be obligated to pay WorldMark dues on those credits every year.  At 270,000 owners with an average account size of just over 10,000 credits that would cost them north of $154,000,000 per year.  I doubt they would take on that obligation.


----------



## BocaBum99 (Jul 12, 2009)

cotraveller said:


> Fortunately you are not Wyndham.  If Wyndham were to purchase all of the WorldMark credits they would be obligated to pay WorldMark dues on those credits every year.  At 270,000 owners with an average account size of just over 10,000 credits that would cost them north of $154,000,000 per year.  I doubt they would take on that obligation.



They wouldn't need to purchase them all.  All they would have to do is rent enough credits from owners at or below the cost of their maintenance fees to put the reservations into the new Club.

If Wyndham really wanted to screw owners, they could really do it.  Since they haven't yet, I can only conclude that they are trying to balance the needs of owners with their own needs.


----------



## RichM (Jul 12, 2009)

BocaBum99 said:


> 6) WorldMark by Wyndham uses this exact same credit transfer facility to run the FAX program and their own rental program.  Can't kill the owner program without putting their own program at risk.



This is the deal-killer and the reason why it won't happen.  Wyndham uses these transferred credits in various credit monetization schemes that give them ridiculous rates of return (just look at the "cruise for credits" program) By claiming "owner" status when utilizing FAX credits, they could never eliminate owner-to-owner credit transfers without jeopardizing a large part of their business model.

___________________
WorldMark Owners' Community -      
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




      - www.wmowners.com


----------



## BocaBum99 (Jul 12, 2009)

RichM said:


> This is the deal-killer and the reason why it won't happen.  Wyndham uses these transferred credits in various credit monetization schemes that give them ridiculous rates of return (just look at the "cruise for credits" program) By claiming "owner" status when utilizing FAX credits, they could never eliminate owner-to-owner credit transfers without jeopardizing a large part of their business model.
> 
> ___________________
> WorldMark Owners' Community -
> ...



I used to think that, too.  Except that they did it for Wyndham.  They claimed that for security reasons, they needed to take the transfer feature away from general owners.  So, instead, only Wyndham can do transfers and their points monetization schemes are still in place. 

There isn't enough potential net gain to take it away right now.  So, it's like to stay.  However, you never know.


----------



## mshatty (Jul 12, 2009)

BocaBum99 said:


> In fact, what I would do if I were Wyndham is I would create a new product to replace the old FSP program.  Call it something like Club Wyndham Plus or something like that.  Buy back all the best original Fairfield properties and put them into a trust so that they are only accessible by Club Wyndham Plus members.  Charge a conversion fee to convert current points into the new trust.
> 
> Then, make access into Club Wyndham Plus by WorldMark owners who buy from the developer.  Make it a Travelshare or TEN feature.
> 
> Drive the original Fairfield and WorldMark credits to zero so that they can buy them back cheap and put them into the new trust where those points have ROFR that gets regularly exercised to keep prices high in that trust.



Ha ha.  Very funny.  Except for the Travelshare/TEN exchange, Wyndham has done this.


----------



## ecwinch (Jul 12, 2009)

BocaBum99 said:


> 6) WorldMark by Wyndham uses this exact same credit transfer facility to run the FAX program and their own rental program.  Can't kill the owner program without putting their own program at risk.



I think this is the main protection against credit transfers being dropped. Unlike Wyndham FSP/Club, the WorldMark declarations provides a few more restrictions on how the Developer can operate. Like Rich said, killing credit transfers would significantly hamper their ability to offer out-of-network opportunities, and their ability to rent credits to existing owners. 

It is not the same as the Wyndham experience. 

I think their is far more risk in regard to a transaction fee, or a program providing on-demand access to combined WM and Wyndham network properties. And that program being the "new" club we hear rumors about.


----------



## Amy (Jan 22, 2010)

Rent_Share said:


> There are tips and tricks to locking in the peak periods - even ways to get a jump on the higher demand weeks  - www.wmowners.com
> 
> I just used 10K for a Fourth of July week and have 20K (2 weeks ) in reserved travel during the "school" summer vacation season for 2010 with a 6000 point membership.
> 
> ...



I'm digging up this old post because I'm trying to figure out whether it is more fiscally responsible (and better for long term) to stick with my 7000 credits and keep renting additional credits  (as I pretty much always need at least a 2BR and travel during school vacations) or whether it makes sense to shop for 3000 more points to bump up to 10,000.  I was hoping to find a formula somewhere to help  me assess the cost.  

So if I did this correctly, using the formulas you used above, it would take roughly 16 years for me to break even on the sunk cost of purchasing the additional 3000 credits?  (Assuming cost ~$1,500 total to purchase the 3,000 even though market suggests I can get it for less and rental at 6 cents per credit even though I'm currently renting others' points at 5.7 cents per credit.)  Did I do my math right?  If in fact it would take that long to break even, then it seems foolish in this market for me to spend more money upfront on more credits, even though the purchase price looks so attractive and my cost/credit based on m/fs would be lowered with a higher credit contract.

But is that the only way to look at this?  Am I missing something?  I feel like there must be really good reasons why folks are buying higher contracts to cover what they need without renting from others constantly.  And it isn't as if I expect the WM contract to be worth nothing if at some point down the road I end up selling it.  So does it make sense to consider the number of years for break even on the sunk cost?  My head is getting a bit fuzzy now.


----------



## Rent_Share (Jan 22, 2010)

The only reason to buy more is to reduce the "hassle" factor of renting, since it's a less than perfect market place

Apply your reduced numbers to the rent and buy side and the breakeven will remain approximately the same. If not longer since point contract pricing has dropped faster than rental pricing.

One other thing to consider is that Worldmark has made the split transaction way more painful than it should be, tedious and time consuming, when the points were trading at near 80 cents you would see add ons available, your 3000 point balance will be very hard to find at todays market price.

I am seriously looking at dropping back down to 5 K


----------

