2026 Trust MF's Proposed Increase 6.3%

[vol_90]

Things may change before finalized:

 

[DanCali]

But the CEO said

"And while not part of our expected $150 million to $200 million EBITDA benefit, early indications suggest maintenance fees on our points-based products may be flattish next year, partially due to our modernization initiatives, which enhances the overall value proposition for our owners, as well as our first-time buyers.?

https://ir.marriottvacationsworldwide.com/static-files/b835f4ed-1998-47df-9276-129f44d0544d (page 4)

I guess 6.3% is "flattish" compared to 2023 and 2024....

 

[Fasttr]

You posted the version with no waiver of fully funding. Historically, it has gotten waived. See my post below.... which supports the "flattish" comments.

"Flattish" Maintenance Fees in 2026

So, apparently, sometime during the Q2 earnings call today it was mentioned in the prepared remarks that maintenance fees should be "flattish" in 2026. I can't actually find those remarks by one of the MVW execs and only heard it referenced during the Q&A. Anyway, that might be some good news...

tugbbs.com

 

[vol_90]

You posted the version with no waiver of fully funding. Historically, it has gotten waived. See my post here.... which supports the "flattish" comments.

"Flattish" Maintenance Fees in 2026

So, apparently, sometime during the Q2 earnings call today it was mentioned in the prepared remarks that maintenance fees should be "flattish" in 2026. I can't actually find those remarks by one of the MVW execs and only heard it referenced during the Q&A. Anyway, that might be some good news...

tugbbs.com

Just sharing what they sent via e-mail today with a note that changes may occur before finalized. Let the 2026 maintenance fee discussions begin

 

[Fasttr]

Just sharing what they sent via e-mail today with a note that changes may occur before finalized. Let the 2026 maintenance fee discussions begin

Look at the Alternative Budget in the same email. That is the one that has historically been approved.

 

[kozykritter]

Alternative budget is 0.4% increase on the financial chart but the text of the email says 0.3% increase to add 1 cent to current fees and new rate 82 cents per point. They don't want to seem to deal with fractions but they will charge us the full rate with fractions in the end. They are raising the Club Fee for the third year in a row...another $10 on Executive.

 

[kozykritter]

Dear MVC Trust Owner:

A regular meeting of the Board of Directors of MVC Trust Owners Association, Inc. is scheduled for 9:00 a.m., Eastern time, on September 4, 2025, at Marriott’s Lakeshore Reserve, Stanza Italia, 11248 Lakeshore Reserve Drive, Orlando, Florida 32837 (see Agenda).

At this meeting, the Board of Directors will consider the MVC Trust Owners Association, Inc. budget and approve the resulting assessments for the 2026 fiscal year.

Please carefully review the reserve funding line item on the enclosed “Proposed Budget”. Florida law requires MVC Trust Owners Association, Inc. to submit a Proposed Budget that includes “fully funded” reserves based on statutory formula, unless a majority of the Owners vote to waive or reduce the reserve funding as permitted by the State of Florida.

As such, the Proposed Budget includes reserves of $11.95 per beneficial interest, ensuring compliance with the statutory formula. If MVC Trust Owners do not waive the fully funded requirement, the Association is required to fully fund the difference between a component association’s fully funded reserve amounts and that component association’s waived reserves. In 2025, the underlying component associations’ Owners waived fully funding within their budgets, and the “Proposed Budget” reserves estimate is based on the 2025 actual difference of fully funding plus an inflation factor for 2026.

Also enclosed is an “Alternative Budget” that is not officially proposed but will be considered should MVC Trust Association Owners elect to waive fully funding. The Board is authorized to potentially lower the reserve funding amount below the amount shown in the Proposed Budget only if a majority of Owners vote “yes” to waive or reduce the “fully funded” reserve funding shown in the Proposed Budget. The Board may also determine to provide increased reserve funding in the final budget.

The Board of Directors reviews the Association’s reserve funding needs on a regular basis and will do so again at this meeting. The goal has been and remains to maintain a balanced approach in reserve contributions versus projected expenditures for the Association.

For 2026, the “Proposed Budget” and “Alternative Budget” for the MVC Trust Owners Association reflect a maintenance fee payable from the MVC Trust Owners Association to the underlying component associations with a 0.8% increase over 2025, reflected in the “Component Expense” line item. The 0.8% increase in component expenses underscores the Management Company’s commitment to controlling cost and minimizing the financial impact to Owners. The line item “Component Expenses” of the “Alternative Budget” is approximately 86% of the total budgeted expenses for MVC Trust Owners Association. The increase per beneficial interest is offset by a surplus return and lowered administrative costs.

Thus, the projected increase to the MVC Trust Owners’ maintenance fees in the “Alternative Budget” is $0.01 per point, resulting in a $0.82 per point annual maintenance fee which represents a 0.3% increase.

 

[dioxide45]

Can owners attend the annual meeting?

 

[rickandcindy23]

I thought fees were going to be "flattish" for 2026. This is not flattish. I always cringe a little while opening our MF statements, whether online or in the mail.

 

[daviator]

I thought fees were going to be "flattish" for 2026. This is not flattish. I always cringe a little while opening our MF statements, whether online or in the mail.

The budget that’s likely to be adopted (without fully funded reserves) is flattish with only a 0.3% increase, 1¢ per point.

FWIW, I voted for fully funded reserves, but most people usually vote the other way.

 

[aklausing]

I'll admit I am not well versed in how the trust MF's work, but I've always wondered how the MF's can be set for Abound Points before the MF's are finalized for the individual resorts? Isn't the trust inventory made up of weeks put into the trust back in 2010 an/or weeks purchased or deed back since then, and the MF's for none of those weeks have been finalized.

 

[Fasttr]

I'll admit I am not well versed in how the trust MF's work, but I've always wondered how the MF's can be set for Abound Points before the MF's are finalized for the individual resorts? Isn't the trust inventory made up of weeks put into the trust back in 2010 an/or weeks purchased or deed back since then, and the MF's for none of those weeks have been finalized.

They estimate the underlying Component Expenses, and true up the following year. That said, I’m sure they have a good feel for where they are steering the individual resort MF’s before the proposed Trust budget is released.

 

[frank808]

Can owners attend the annual meeting?

I would also like to know as I will be able to attend the meeting. Have only ever attended the annual meeting for MKO owners. Would think that there would be a bunch of Abound points owners at this meeting if open to owners. Is there a meeting room at Lakeshore large enough for 50 people?

Sent from my SM-S928U using Tapatalk

 

[CalGalTraveler]

So much for "flattish" The Alternative budget to reduce reserves is not a sustainable nor wise approach. Reserves are for a reason.

 

[dioxide45]

So much for "flattish" The Alternative budget to reduce reserves is not a sustainable nor wise approach. Reserves are for a reason.

It may be the last year for the waiving of reserves due to the Florida law changes. Though I understand they can still waive reserves but just not for certain structural items. The trust is confusing when it comes to waiving reserves as each resort the trust owns in Florida has the same vote. I don't really understand it all but all the Florida Marriott properties have been waiving reserves every year since their inception. I think only one year did Cypress Harbour not vote to waive reserves. None of them have yet had a special assessment. They use different ways to calculate reserve funding than state mandated requirements.

 

[daviator]

It may be the last year for the waiving of reserves due to the Florida law changes. Though I understand they can still waive reserves but just not for certain structural items. The trust is confusing when it comes to waiving reserves as each resort the trust owns in Florida has the same vote. I don't really understand it all but all the Florida Marriott properties have been waiving reserves every year since their inception. I think only one year did Cypress Harbour not vote to waive reserves. None of them have yet had a special assessment. They use different ways to calculate reserve funding than state mandated requirements.

It always seemed to me that waiving reserves was kicking the can forward so that future owners would be forced to pay for today's wear and tear and depreciation. I have always voted against waiving reserves but the waiver always passes. Most people only care about this year's MFs I guess. To me, waiving is irresponsible.

 

[Mlvnsmly]

I would also like to know as I will be able to attend the meeting. Have only ever attended the annual meeting for MKO owners. Would think that there would be a bunch of Abound points owners at this meeting if open to owners. Is there a meeting room at Lakeshore large enough for 50 people?

Sent from my SM-S928U using Tapatalk

There's a decent sized meeting room if you go to the second floor in the main building and walk towards where the treehouse kids club used to be. Not sure of the capacity.

 

[dioxide45]

It always seemed to me that waiving reserves was kicking the can forward so that future owners would be forced to pay for today's wear and tear and depreciation. I have always voted against waiving reserves but the waiver always passes. Most people only care about this year's MFs I guess. To me, waiving is irresponsible.

But what have the consequences been of waiving? I know for some Florida condo HOAs it has been detrimental because they waived to the point where they don't have sufficient reserves to fulfill capital improvements. I don't think that is the case for our branded timeshare resorts. Compare the reserves for a resort like Canyon Villas to Grande Vista. Are they really that different? Compare them if you fully fund the Grande Vista reserves per the state requirements. Does Grande Vista really require such a high reserve amount?

 

[daviator]

But what have the consequences been of waiving? I know for some Florida condo HOAs it has been detrimental because they waived to the point where they don't have sufficient reserves to fulfill capital improvements. I don't think that is the case for our branded timeshare resorts. Compare the reserves for a resort like Canyon Villas to Grande Vista. Are they really that different? Compare them if you fully fund the Grande Vista reserves per the state requirements. Does Grande Vista really require such a high reserve amount?

I agree that MVC's waiver doesn't seem to put reserves into dire financial straits. But in the event of a big unexpected expense or several unexpected expenses occurring in quick succession, the likelihood that a special assessment would be necessary is greater if full reserves have been waived.

I'd rather put what the law requires into reserves, even if it makes my MF's rise by $50 or $100, and know that the property can cover itself in 98% of possible scenarios. I'm admittedly conservative on such issues. I also think it's most fair that current owners pay the true costs of their ownership, and those costs include paying fully into reserves for the very real depreciation of the properties which occurs little by little every day.

If the elevators need replacing five years earlier than planned because of corrosion due to salt air, the people who should have paid that expense are the owners over the past 15 years (or however long it's been since the last replacement), not the folks who happen to own when the bill comes due. Full funding of reserves is the best system we have for making it work that way.

 

[dioxide45]

I'd rather put what the law requires into reserves, even if it makes my MF's rise by $50 or $100,

It's more than $50 or $100. I recall it being something like $350 vs. $1000 for reserves.

If the elevators need replacing five years earlier than planned because of corrosion due to salt air, the people who should have paid that expense are the owners over the past 15 years (or however long it's been since the last replacement), not the folks who happen to own when the bill comes due. Full funding of reserves is the best system we have for making it work that way.

I think they have this already in the plan. This could actually be where the state mandated reserves fall short. Marriott HOAs do regular reserve studies and the new requirements around inspections has made them more aware of what is needed structurally. I don't have any issue with waiving fully funded reserves.

 

[daviator]

It's more than $50 or $100. I recall it being something like $350 vs. $1000 for reserves.


I think they have this already in the plan. This could actually be where the state mandated reserves fall short. Marriott HOAs do regular reserve studies and the new requirements around inspections has made them more aware of what is needed structurally. I don't have any issue with waiving fully funded reserves.

The difference between fully funded and not fully funded is nothing like $1000, but $350 might be accurate for some of the highest MF properties like Maui.

For example, the fully funded budget for Abound posted at the beginning of this thread shows something like a $14/BI increase from 2024 (which wasn't fully funded) if fully funded, and the not-fully-funded budget rises something like $1.30. That tells me that the difference between fully funded and not fully funded is roughly $13/BI. So the impact on something like Maui Ocean Club – worth 6200 Abound points, or almost 25 BIs, would be $325ish. Most properties would see a much smaller impact per week. (I'm spitballing here and recognize that the Abound point value of a property doesn't directly connect to what it's MF for an owned week would be. But it's probably good enough for guesstimating.)

Unless I'm screwing the math up somehow or misinterpreting the budget.

 

[dioxide45]

The difference between fully funded and not fully funded is nothing like $1000, but $350 might be accurate for some of the highest MF properties like Maui.

For example, the fully funded budget for Abound posted at the beginning of this thread shows something like a $14/BI increase from 2024 (which wasn't fully funded) if fully funded, and the not-fully-funded budget rises something like $1.30. That tells me that the difference between fully funded and not fully funded is roughly $13/BI. So the impact on something like Maui Ocean Club – worth 6200 Abound points, or almost 25 BIs, would be $325ish. Most properties would see a much smaller impact per week. (I'm spitballing here and recognize that the Abound point value of a property doesn't directly connect to what it's MF for an owned week would be. But it's probably good enough for guesstimating.)

Unless I'm screwing the math up somehow or misinterpreting the budget.

I am looking specifically at Florida resorts where fully funded vs. waived applies. It doesn't apply to properties outside of Florida. So using Maui as an example doesn't really apply. You are watering down the reserve difference by taking all BIs in the trust into account when it is only the Florida properties impacting fully funded reserves.

For the 2025 budget year fully funded reserves at Grande Vista for a 2BR would have been $1,101.53. The actual reserve funding was $449.38. So the difference was over $650! Fully funding reserves at the resort level has a HUGE impact on overall fees. Not just $50 or $100.

Let's also compare the same at Grande Vista to a similar resort that doesn't go through the fully funded reserves waiver shenanigans. Newport Coast Villas is a similar resort in structure, buildings though perhaps not size. NCV has 200 fewer units. NCV has a 2025 replacement reserve of $492.04 for a 2BR unit. I would assume that is fully funded? What makes the cost to fully fund the reserves at Grande Vista more than double that of Newport Coast Villas? If we are okay with the reserves at NCV being $492.04 then why would we not be okay with the reserves of a similar property in Florida being close to the same? This shows that there is something odd about the state mandated fully funded calculation of reserves in Florida that over collects for certain capital projects.

It could also be that NCV is due for a big special assessment if they have been shorting reserves?

 

[daviator]

You're right that it's only Florida. But If they're leaving $650/week of reserves unfunded, to me that goes back to my earlier post. It's irresponsible. It means that if something goes wrong, there is going to be a special assessment, and those former owners who voted for waiving full reserves managed to screw the future owners who are left holding the bag. I won't vote for that, even though I know I'm in the minority. Yes, I was once a boy scout. Lol.

 

[daviator]

I am looking specifically at Florida resorts where fully funded vs. waived applies. It doesn't apply to properties outside of Florida. So using Maui as an example doesn't really apply. You are watering down the reserve difference by taking all BIs in the trust into account when it is only the Florida properties impacting fully funded reserves.

For the 2025 budget year fully funded reserves at Grande Vista for a 2BR would have been $1,101.53. The actual reserve funding was $449.38. So the difference was over $650! Fully funding reserves at the resort level has a HUGE impact on overall fees. Not just $50 or $100.

Let's also compare the same at Grande Vista to a similar resort that doesn't go through the fully funded reserves waiver shenanigans. Newport Coast Villas is a similar resort in structure, buildings though perhaps not size. NCV has 200 fewer units. NCV has a 2025 replacement reserve of $492.04 for a 2BR unit. I would assume that is fully funded? What makes the cost to fully fund the reserves at Grande Vista more than double that of Newport Coast Villas? If we are okay with the reserves at NCV being $492.04 then why would we not be okay with the reserves of a similar property in Florida being close to the same? This shows that there is something odd about the state mandated fully funded calculation of reserves in Florida that over collects for certain capital projects.

It could also be that NCV is due for a big special assessment if they have been shorting reserves?

I think California lets properties basically decide for themselves what reserves are appropriate, whereas Florida, in the aftermath of collapsed buildings which were not maintained, has specific standards they have to adhere to. So I'd say Florida is extra conservative about reserves, which is a reaction to a tragedy or two. That could happen in California if a building falls down.

But I'd also note that California largely disallows tall buildings along the coast, while Florida is overrun with them.

 

[igopogo]

I don’t get the math. How is a 1c increase 0.3%? Seems like 1.2%.