Any Guess

[rickandcindy23]

I don't see any insult or harm intended in that basic statement. In fact, I think it's good that Wyndham is being transparent in boldly stating on the website that there's good reason to be aware of the recent changes that impact owner rentals.

Admittedly I don't know Wyndham, only what I've been able to understand from reading TUG. But as a Marriott owner who recognizes that our right to rent our intervals is expressly stated in the governing docs, I wish that Marriott would selectively enforce the "commercial activity" prohibition that's also in the governing docs. It's very vaguely worded, intentionally, and they have the right to enforce it in some cases while not enforcing it in others. Even knowing that as a recent owner/renter such an enforcement might negatively impact me, I still would prefer enforcement that puts limitations on the largest mega-renter businesses.

But that doesn't mean that I hate all the TUGgers who have rental businesses - in fact I use one of them to rent my Marriotts! It just means that I simply want owners who intend to personally use their ownerships for themselves or their direct family members to be prioritized over owners who rent to the public, and I'm in favor of Marriott taking whatever legal steps they can to make that happen.

Any time you are renting ANY date and ANY timeshare, you could be taking it away from another owner. This is my entire point. So this could end up as a bone of contention for Marriott owners at some point, if Marriott does this as well. I won't be a happy camper, but I at least will have had this lousy Wyndham experience to prepare me.

And by the way, we cannot add anyone to our reservations, no matter what resort and what date. We are blocked from adding names. They are automatically cancelled. So this warning on the website doesn't cover those of us who cannot add any names to anything.

So many owners are having to deed back and give away timeshares that are worth less than zero after this change. Your Marriott weeks will never be less than zero, and mine won't either. I can always use them for great exchanges, and I honestly don't even rent Marriott, but I do rent Sheratons, which is now Marriott. I don't expect Marriott to go down this rocky road. (That makes me want ice cream!)

 

[troy12n]

Man, some of you just can't give it up... so defensive of your "turf". Entitled to make money at the expense of others.

And no, we aren't in the minority in this opinion. Maybe we are here, where so many are the disciples of the "pied piper of Wyndham timeshares"... but maybe it's good that TUG is no longer a "safe space" for charlatans such as them.

Even now, he shall not be named admits no fault. lol...

 

[troy12n]

Literally this whole thread is about 2 people playing the victim... outrageous

The one who started this thread isn't even allowed to be an owner anymore because of his transgressions, so literally he's just stirring up stuff

 

[chapjim]

Literally this whole thread is about 2 people playing the victim... outrageous

The one who started this thread isn't even allowed to be an owner anymore because of his transgressions, so literally he's just stirring up stuff

Troy -- You have made your point ad infinitum, ad nauseum. It should no longer be necessary to trot out the same vile schtick every time someone posts something you don't like. Give yourself (and the rest of us) a break.

 

[am1]

I don't see any insult or harm intended in that basic statement. In fact, I think it's good that Wyndham is being transparent in boldly stating on the website that there's good reason to be aware of the recent changes that impact owner rentals.

Admittedly I don't know Wyndham, only what I've been able to understand from reading TUG. But as a Marriott owner who recognizes that our right to rent our intervals is expressly stated in the governing docs, I wish that Marriott would selectively enforce the "commercial activity" prohibition that's also in the governing docs. It's very vaguely worded, intentionally, and they have the right to enforce it in some cases while not enforcing it in others. Even knowing that as a recent owner/renter such an enforcement might negatively impact me, I still would prefer enforcement that puts limitations on the largest mega-renter businesses.

But that doesn't mean that I hate all the TUGgers who have rental businesses - in fact I use one of them to rent my Marriotts! It just means that I simply want owners who intend to personally use their ownerships for themselves or their direct family members to be prioritized over owners who rent to the public, and I'm in favor of Marriott taking whatever legal steps they can to make that happen.

So you are against capitalism?

 

[ronparise]

I'm game, but I doubt you will ever convince the other guy to stop posting about his defunct rental business experiences from 6 years ago.

im done

Someone paid $7k for it, and I think they are going to get their money's worth. They could book four weeks here in the summer.

I just watched a video by @Clifbell of a unit at this resort. I think this resort is in a great location, and I'd love to stay here in the future when I enroll my daughter in a surfing camp that takes place within walking distance of this resort.

I think that there are two things that drive the price of these things. one is ARP and if a person wants a month at this resort, $7000 is cheap. It gives you the opportunity to stay a months in a 2 bedroom unit on the Southern Ca coast for $5000. A 2 bed in a a nearby Marriott Residence Inn, not on the water would be $350 a night ( $10000+)

but forget vacationing in Oceanside. I always thought the best way to use points would be to buy at the resorts with the lowest mf per 1000 points (like Bali Hai, National Harbor, Panama City, etc) and use those points at the resorts with the lowest price (expressed in points.) This Oceanside contract with an mf of $5/1000 comes close to the very low mf resorts.. so use those 1,000,000 points for vacations at Wyndham's legacy resorts, where a 2 bedroom is 154000 points or my favorite way to stretch points is to do 5 night vacations, Sunday through Thursday in a two bedroom at the legacy resorts ( 90000 points.).. do 11 such "weeks" for you million points

 

[lotus921v]

Any time you are renting ANY date and ANY timeshare, you could be taking it away from another owner. This is my entire point. So this could end up as a bone of contention for Marriott owners at some point, if Marriott does this as well. I won't be a happy camper, but I at least will have had this lousy Wyndham experience to prepare me.

And by the way, we cannot add anyone to our reservations, no matter what resort and what date. We are blocked from adding names. They are automatically cancelled. So this warning on the website doesn't cover those of us who cannot add any names to anything.

So many owners are having to deed back and give away timeshares that are worth less than zero after this change. Your Marriott weeks will never be less than zero, and mine won't either. I can always use them for great exchanges, and I honestly don't even rent Marriott, but I do rent Sheratons, which is now Marriott. I don't expect Marriott to go down this rocky road. (That makes me want ice cream!)

That is craziness that you can’t add ANYBODY. I would’ve expected they would’ve limited your guest reservations if anything

 

[Jan M.]

That is craziness that you can’t add ANYBODY. I would’ve expected they would’ve limited your guest reservations if anything

Starting in late winter/early spring of 2021 continuing to the present owners Wyndham identified as engaging in commercial renting have been receiving a certified letter warning them there would be consequences if they continued to rent. Most owners who received a certified letter took the warning seriously.

Owners who decided not to need the warning and continued to rent stays got a second letter notifying them that their account was being blocked from adding guest names to any reservations for a period of 90 days. Although we have heard reports of 4-6 months. Also those owners upcoming reservations with guest names on them were cancelled.

 

[CO skier]

I think you're in the vast minority on this one. Let it go...

Not from what I have heard from salespeople and managers who have tugbbs in their "Favorites" folder. They find the Club Wyndham forum quite entertaining (and informative) over the years. Yeah, a lot of them read here on TUG.

 

[comicbookman]

Not from what I have heard from salespeople and managers who have tugbbs in their "Favorites" folder. They find the Club Wyndham forum quite entertaining (and informative) over the years. Yeah, a lot of them read here on TUG.

are you seriously using timeshare salesman as your source for information?

 

[CO skier]

are you seriously using timeshare salesman as your source for information?

No, my comment was that a number of timeshare salespeople I have met in updates are familiar with the TUG Club Wyndham forum. Maybe they use it as a source of information.

 

[comicbookman]

No, my comment was that a number of timeshare salespeople I have met in updates are familiar with the TUG Club Wyndham forum. Maybe they use it as a source of information.

That is not what you said. You said the salesman's interpretation of what they have read on Tug and facebook as to what is or is not a minority opinion disagrees with pagosajim said. That still sounds like you are using something a timeshare salesman said to bolster your point.

 

[CO skier]

That is not what you said. You said the salesman's interpretation of what they have read on Tug and facebook as to what is or is not a minority opinion disagrees with pagosajim said. That still sounds like you are using something a timeshare salesman said to bolster your point.

Regardless of your interpretation, this is the exchange that was posted

I'm game, but I doubt you will ever convince the other guy to stop posting about his defunct rental business experiences from 6 years ago.

I think you're in the vast minority on this one. Let it go...

Minority? Salesman's interpretation? Anyone, salesperson or otherwise, who has regularly read the TUG Wyndham forum over the past 10 years knows that my statement is absolutely true .

 

[comicbookman]

Regardless of your interpretation, this is the exchange that was posted




Minority? Salesman's interpretation? Anyone, salesperson or otherwise, who has regularly read the TUG Wyndham forum over the past 10 years knows that my statement is absolutely true .

So if anyone Knows your statement is true (it is an opinion presented as fact) Then those that disagree must be lying? That is not how opinions work. You are entitled to your opinion, but so is everyone else.

 

[pagosajim]

Regardless of your interpretation, this is the exchange that was posted




Minority? Salesman's interpretation? Anyone, salesperson or otherwise, who has regularly read the TUG Wyndham forum over the past 10 years knows that my statement is absolutely true .

Boy did you convolute my response to you!

The minority opinion I suggest you are a part of was in response to your statement :

"I'm game, but I doubt you will ever convince the other guy to stop posting about his defunct rental business experiences from 6 years ago. "

and had nothing at all to do with salesmen or anything of the sort. It was the "I'm game..." part of your response that suggested you were willing to let this go, but doubted "the other guy" would do the same. You continue to demonstrate that you're not game...

I see Ron almost exclusively posting about his rental experiences in response to provocation/invitation by a couple of personalities on this board. I believe most here don't mind, and in fact, many even enjoy hearing of the experience when prompted. If you don't like hearing about it, stop trying so hard to be "right", have the last word, and be so contentious overall.

Alternatively, make use of the ignore feature on this board.

Again, let it go...

 

[ronparise]

Boy did you convolute my response to you!

The minority opinion I suggest you are a part of was in response to your statement :


and had nothing at all to do with salesmen or anything of the sort. It was the "I'm game..." part of your response that suggested you were willing to let this go, but doubted "the other guy" would do the same. You continue to demonstrate that you're not game...

I see Ron almost exclusively posting about his rental experiences in response to provocation/invitation by a couple of personalities on this board. I believe most here don't mind, and in fact, many even enjoy hearing of the experience when prompted. If you don't like hearing about it, stop trying so hard to be "right", have the last word, and be so contentious overall.

Alternatively, make use of the ignore feature on this board.

Again, let it go...

Thanks for noticing. I started to post the same thing, ie, My posts are generally responding to someone's question, or an "attack" but I didnt want to start another tit for tat

But I will go back to my original post. I asked if there were any guesses as to the final bid on a particular ebay auction. That $5/1000 mf contract sold for for $7000

Heres another to consider. What do we think this will sell for 1,110,000 points deeded at Cypress Palms. MF on this contract is almost $8/1000

My guess is ... less than $1000 perhaps less than $100

 

[MaryBella7]

Thanks for noticing. I started to post the same thing, ie, My posts are generally responding to someone's question, or an "attack" but I didnt want to start another tit for tat

But I will go back to my original post. I asked if there were any guesses as to the final bid on a particular ebay auction. That $5/1000 mf contract sold for for $7000

Heres another to consider. What do we think this will sell for 1,110,000 points deeded at Cypress Palms. MF on this contract is almost $8/1000

My guess is ... less than $1000 perhaps less than $100

I was giving away a property with 6 per 1000 MF -just pay cost of transfer and got no takers

 

[bnoble]

Heres another to consider. What do we think this will sell for 1,110,000 points deeded at Cypress Palms. MF on this contract is almost $8/1000

I think that is a tough one. According to the MF spreadsheet, Cypress Palms is only a little bit higher than CWA. I suspect you could make the case that fees have been growing more slowly than CWA has, and the latter will pass it in the next year or two, which puts it back in the black for me. The resort has zero value for ARP---it's the third-best resort in Orlando. Maybe. Then you have the large-contract-penalty that narrows the addressable market. $8K/year carrying costs is no joke for a lot of people.

I think it might sell. I think getting to $1,000 (including closing costs) would be the absolute upper bound, and would definitely take the under on that if I were a betting man.

 

[CO skier]

But I will go back to my original post.

Thank goodness, and what a first.

 

[Sloane S]

Hello new member here living in new york join the forum to learn about hunting.

Welcome, but I don't think you will get much info about hunting here.

 

[paxsarah]

I think our new hunting enthusiast friend falls under #5 in this list of forum spam techniques - the good thing being that TUG only allows editing for a couple days, so he'll probably fail.