Wyndham is closing a handful of legacy resorts - dedicated chart/tracker located in the first post for this unfolding set of events

[TUGBrian]

Hot takes on todays Glade Stane castle HOA meeting:

Stone castle HOA meeting was interesting. One owner was upset that the real estate company estimate did not value the units at over 100k per unit. claiming that we should get a substantial amount per week, much less per unit. He felt cheated that he was not getting an amount close to what he paid. I guess he has not looked at the resale market.

I have asked for copies of the slide decks used and will post them here if I receive them.

I confirmed with the Wyndham rep that the current owners will receive the 2026 Maint. fee refund even if we take the CWA swap. They said 2026 CWA maint. fee is $8.13 per thousand not including program fee.

The most interesting information is that the timeshare has a termination date in Jan 2026, so would still be voting on what to do.

Bankruptcy is the best way to facilitate a sale according to K&L. They have extensive experience selling resort type properties through bankruptcy according to them. sale options are Unanimous consent vote, state partition or federal Bankruptcy. -- It appears that the bankruptcy strategy is not a new one as has been speculated in this thread. (Including by me) They stated Bankruptcy still requires them to ask all owners but allows for the court to order the sale of reluctant or non-responsive intervals.

Hilco claims extensive experience in selling resort type properties that have gone the bankruptcy route. They say 90% of the time they complete the sale within 120 days of court approval.

Hilco estimates $10 million sale price but could be more (of course) by my math that works out to about $400 per week, not accounting for unit size variation, plus any remaining reserve payout.

Maint fee delinquency is increasing, and Wyndham does not want to take on more ownership which has rescued the resort till now. That seems to be the driving force here. Wyndham owns 73%, but that is split between CWA and club Wyndham. The club Wyndham contracts are mostly unsold, so Wyndham is paying maint fees for years on those with little return.

Also said occupancy is less than 60%.

Preliminary results of vote:

1045 registered to vote. as of end of meeting 11AM
item 1 chapter 11 filing 1032 yes 2 no
item 2 retention of K&L and Hilco 1033 yes 1 no
item 3 2026 operations 1031 yes 3 no (closing 12/27/2025, refunding 2026 maint fees and using reserves to cover expenses till sale)
item 4 empowering association to take actions going forward 1032 yes 2 no

Edit to add vote closes at 1pm est

thank you for this summary, it is extremely enlightning! (400/week...whew...betting a ton of people were expecting a whole lot more than that)

 

[comicbookman]

I wonder what percentage of yes votes was Wyndham. And what number of possible intervals didn't vote or designate a proxy

No way of knowing as they did not give a vote total for Wyndham, just the 73% ownership number. There were maybe a dozen people on the zoom call including me.

 

[Greg G]

So if anyone has the voting documents for the Wyndham Star Island bldgs bankruptcy, can you post them, as I'd like to see what reasons were stated.

 

[bnoble]

400/week

That does seem low, netting only $20K/condo after costs, etc.

 

[DonnaK]

I don't think anybody knows yet. I'm hoping to find out more on Oct 20. There is at least one other "special meeting" for another Shawnee HOA before that date.

In my opinion, I think the units closer to the rec center (Crestview/Ridge Top) are the most modern and desirable. Some other sections need more work. And the rec center itself needs a major upgrade.

There is also a meeting on Sat Oct 18th at Shawnee for the River Village Assn.

 

[TUGBrian]

would imagine a significant % of the sale price will go to legal fees and other such items that reduce the total payout per interval to such a miniscule amount.

 

[CO skier]

Maint fee delinquency is increasing, and Wyndham does not want to take on more ownership which has rescued the resort till now. That seems to be the driving force here. Wyndham owns 73%, but that is split between CWA and club Wyndham. The club Wyndham contracts are mostly unsold, so Wyndham is paying maint fees for years on those with little return.

That confirms the speculation on Day 2 (July 11) of this thread:

Having "votes in (their) bag" comes at a price. Wyndham has been paying maintenance fees on non-performing deeded weeks at these resorts for years. Not all the weeks are non-performing, but many are, and those $359/week RCI Last Call vacations certainly do not cover the maintenance fees. After the property partition and sale, each owner receives a proportional share of the sales price less attorneys fees, brokerage commission, and any other costs -- maybe something around $1,500-$2,000/interval. Each owner puts whatever proceeds in their bank account.

Net-net, Wyndham probably does not come close to the breakeven point versus the maintenance fees paid over the years for the non-performing/under-performing weeks intervals.

 

[dioxide45]

At least from the initial vote tallies you've shared, it seems like it's almost unanimous already, so this fact likely favors the court overriding a handful of reluctant interval owners. Advantage Wyndham.

The problem is it is close to unanimous among those that voted. The state requirements are often based on the entire ownership. Unresponsive owners can kill a vote to dissolve under state regulation. Even HOA owned units can cause issues. Thus why the court may be willing to override them. Do we know how many voting interests there are in this association? The paperwork sent to owners seems to list the number of units and buildings in the bottom as a footnote.

 

[dioxide45]

would imagine a significant % of the sale price will go to legal fees and other such items that reduce the total payout per interval to such a miniscule amount.

Legal fees and a lot of other fees. All those mailings to owners cost money too. Is Wyndham providing any kind of additional services for which they will get paid for?

 

[CO skier]

Hopefully whatever happens actually benefits the system, and this corporate windfall isn't used to pay out huge bonuses to the "C-Suite" and shareholders... at our (owners) expense

Hilco estimates $10 million sale price but could be more (of course) by my math that works out to about $400 per week, not accounting for unit size variation, plus any remaining reserve payout.

Not much of a "corporate windfall" considering the years of $1,000+/week maintenance fees paid by Wyndham.

 

[comicbookman]

That does seem low, netting only $20K/condo after costs, etc.

It is based on the estimated sale price of $10 million for the entire property. even at 5 times that ($50 million) it would only be $2k per. the sale price will be low for a couple of reasons:
first the remediations and upgrades required will total more than just the base figure of 5.5 million, since those are minimum estimates. Second if they are resold individually, you are flooding the market with 450+ units at once. Legal fees and the 4% realtor fee should be covered by existing reserves.

 

[comicbookman]

The problem is it is close to unanimous among those that voted. The state requirements are often based on the entire ownership. Unresponsive owners can kill a vote to dissolve under state regulation. Even HOA owned units can cause issues. Thus why the court may be willing to override them. Do we know how many voting interests there are in this association? The paperwork sent to owners seems to list the number of units and buildings in the bottom as a footnote.

No footnote with totals on the Stone Castle paperwork. They did flash the total number of units on property, but it was not on screen for long. I believe it was 450+ (waiting for the slide deck to confirm) That is the number used to get the aprox. $400 per week estimate.

 

[comicbookman]

Not much of a "corporate windfall" considering the years of $1,000+/week maintenance fees paid by Wyndham.

No windfall at all. The HOA said Wyndham was not interested in taking on more deeds and that Maint. fee delinquencies were increasing (presumably not Wyndham itself) So even without taking on more deeds WYndham was going to have to pay more Maint every year. Combined with a 60% occupancy rate and a hard to sell location, it appears Wyndham has been losing money on Glade (assuming the stats are comparable for the other HOA's) for a while. That makes this move much more understandable. So I guess technically it is a windfall in that it will cut Wyndhams yearly losses at this property.

 

[comicbookman]

Something else I failed to convey. Of the dozen or so owners present or watching on Zoom (a couple were physically present) I got the sense that I was one of if not the only, owner with Wyndham points. More than one asked how CWA worked and what it actually was, and several talked about buying right after or during construction.

 

[ANewMe]

I confirmed with the Wyndham rep that the current owners will receive the 2026 Maint. fee refund even if we take the CWA swap. They said 2026 CWA maint. fee is $8.13 per thousand not including program fee.

My question: Are Maintenance fees collected a year in advance? Does this mean that we will be refunded the fees we paid monthly in 2025?

 

[comicbookman]

for converted fixed weeks maint fees are paid a year ahead. For CWA it is my understanding that they are paid in the year they are due. The Wyndham rep and the lawyers at the meeting said the 2026 fees would be refunded soon, since that was specifically voted on.

 

[Rolltydr]

Notes from Fairfield Glade (Laurel Ridge) Special HOA Meeting, 10/9/2025
Following upgrades must be done next year if resort isn't sold:
- ADA upgrades needed next year ~ $5M dollars
- Structural repairs due to age ~$1M
- Upgrades required to meet current fire code ~2M

Members would receive more money from sale of entire property than by selling piecemeal. Easiest way to do that is through ch. 11 bankruptcy. The longer it takes to sell, the more reserves have to be used, leaving less money for owners and creditors from the sell.

Expected proceeds from sell is $10M.

Points can be transferred to CWA. Fixed week ownerships are still being determined. VIP benefits will remain the same.

Approximately 30 days from today, owners will receive email explaining options. If CWA swap isn’t accepted, owners will receive pro rata share of proceeds following sale.

Resort is operating at 60% occupancy. A large special assessment would be required if property not sold. 15-20% of members stop paying mf’s following large special assessments, meaning mfs must be increased for other owners.

This year MF's are $9.18/1000 FG/Laurel Ridge. $8.63/1000 CWA.

Votes open until 4pm CT today. Final results available upon request.

Vote count on all 5 questions:
Yes =1,738
No = 6

 

[dioxide45]

No footnote with totals on the Stone Castle paperwork. They did flash the total number of units on property, but it was not on screen for long. I believe it was 450+ (waiting for the slide deck to confirm) That is the number used to get the aprox. $400 per week estimate.

Nothing like this at all near the bottom of the first page of paperwork provided? So far, most if not all, the ones I've seen have something like this. Not sure why it would be different for Stone Castle if they are all using some kind of templated documentation.

 

[Rolltydr]

Something else I failed to convey. Of the dozen or so owners present or watching on Zoom (a couple were physically present) I got the sense that I was one of if not the only, owner with Wyndham points. More than one asked how CWA worked and what it actually was, and several talked about buying right after or during construction.

Same thing in the Laurel Ridge meeting.

 

[dioxide45]

Notes from Fairfield Glad Special HOA Meeting, 10/9/2025
Following upgrades must be done next year if resort isn't sold:
- ADA upgrades needed next year ~ $5M dollars
- Structural repairs due to age ~$1M
- Upgrades required to meet current fire code ~2M

What association is this for? There are multiple at Fairfield Glade. The first post already has these four identified. Not sure if there are more.

1. Laurel Ridge
2. Oak Knoll Property Owners Association, Inc.
3. Wellington Place Condominium Property Owners Association, Inc.
4. Stone Castle in Fairfield Glade

 

[CO skier]

Yes, but they've also been renting that inventory via EH, AirBnB, and various other platforms, and/or using them for exchanges, so it's not really outright non-performing per se. Point being, it's likely a wash in costs vs revenue - which if you've got a longer term plan in place to offload a subset of resorts and you want a "sure thing", the more I think about it, the more this approach makes sense to me at least. You offset your increasing costs via increasing rentals/exchanges, until it's time to exit the property. Either that, or they figured they could rent all of the recovered inventory at these legacy/older properties, but as you said, subsequently determined that they couldn't make enough money on the rentals/exchanges, and therefore now it's time to make an exit.

Wyndham owns 73%, but that is split between CWA and club Wyndham. The club Wyndham contracts are mostly unsold, so Wyndham is paying maint fees for years on those with little return.

Also said occupancy is less than 60%.

Now that we have some actual numbers to work with:

Wyndham owns 73% of the whole resort year round.

Occupancy is less than 60%, but that includes owners in Club Wyndham who stay there.

Does this not mean that more than 40% of the 73% that Wyndham owns (equal more than 25% of the whole resort for the whole year) is totally non-performing? Wyndham pays the maintenance fees for each interval, no one rents and stays there for 40+% of those weeks, so no revenue.

This and other such resorts are a money pit for Wyndham.

 

[comicbookman]

Nothing like this at all near the bottom of the first page of paperwork provided? So far, most if not all, the ones I've seen have something like this. Not sure why it would be different for Stone Castle if they are all using some kind of templated documentation.
View attachment 116879

actually, there is, but it was smudged so I initially ignored it. after working with the smudge as best I could, I think it says there are 28 units in 6 buildings. most of the bottom off that page was smudged, I assume it got wet at some point. So if I deciphered that correctly, there would be 1456 possible votes of which about 1063 are cast by Wyndham. so total of 1034 cast as of 11am would mean that Wyndham did not cast all of their votes. That makes me think the 73% figure is for the whole resort not the stone castle HOA.

 

[comicbookman]

Now that we have some actual numbers to work with:

Wyndham owns 73% of the whole resort year round.

Occupancy is less than 60%, but that includes owners in Club Wyndham who stay there.

Does this not mean that more than 40% of the 73% that Wyndham owns (equal more than 25% of the whole resort for the whole year) is totally non-performing? Wyndham pays the maintenance fees for each interval, no one rents and stays there for 40+% of those weeks, so no revenue.

This and other such resorts are a money pit for Wyndham.

The implication was the 60% occupancy number was an absolute number, not just owner occupancy. So a serious money pit.

 

[hjsweet2002]

I wonder what percentage of yes votes was Wyndham. And what number of possible intervals didn't vote or designate a proxy

There are many unhappy Bentley Brook owners. We attended an owners gathering there in September which included the two owners who are in the HOA board. Wyndham controls the other three HOA board members. My understanding is that Wyndham controls 67% of votes at BB.

 

[HitchHiker71]

There is also a meeting on Sat Oct 18th at Shawnee for the River Village Assn.

This was already documented in our tracker, just for reference: