mepiccolo
TUG Member
Actually this thread reminds us of another story:
One about a certain emperor who spent the kingdom's fortune on a "special" wardrobe that only the wise and privileged could see...
-
The TUGBBS forums are completely free and open to the public and exist as the absolute best place for owners to get help and advice about their timeshares for more than 30 years!
Join Tens of Thousands of other Owners just like you here to get any and all Timeshare questions answered 24 hours a day! -
TUG started 31 years ago in October 1993 as a group of regular Timeshare owners just like you!
Read about our 31st anniversary: Happy 31st Birthday TUG! -
TUG has a YouTube Channel to produce weekly short informative videos on popular Timeshare topics!
Free memberships for every 50 subscribers!
Visit TUG on Youtube! -
TUG has now saved timeshare owners more than $23,000,000 dollars just by finding us in time to rescind a new Timeshare purchase! A truly incredible milestone!
Read more here: TUG saves owners more than $23 Million dollars -
Wish you could meet up with other TUG members? Well look no further as this annual event has been going on for years in Orlando! How to Attend the TUG January Get-Together!
-
Sign up to get the TUG Newsletter for free!
Tens of thousands of subscribing owners! A weekly recap of the best Timeshare resort reviews and the most popular topics discussed by owners! -
Our official "end my sales presentation early" T-shirts are available again! Also come with the option for a free membership extension with purchase to offset the cost!
All T-shirt options here!
Change in SVN ELITE benefits
- Thread starter duke
- Start date
Actually this thread reminds us of another story:
One about a certain emperor who spent the kingdom's fortune on a "special" wardrobe that only the wise and privileged could see...
mepiccolo
TUG Member
Correct me if I'm wrong since I'm not an elite, but don't the elites only pay maintenance fees for the first three intervals owned? If that is true with that math Starwood loses significant revenue compared to if each of those additional units were sold to separate people.
My guess would be that after the sales of units alcohol is the big revenue generator for the resort and, as a resale buyer, I'd be willing to bet that my husband has purchased more $5.00 beers at the resort than most of the elite members. Unless of course one can make the argument that elite members tend to be drunks and perhaps that explains their decision to buy and buy and buy at a premium from the developer.
Jersey girl, we like the way you think and we'll take you up on the free drink!
My guess would be that after the sales of units alcohol is the big revenue generator for the resort and, as a resale buyer, I'd be willing to bet that my husband has purchased more $5.00 beers at the resort than most of the elite members. Unless of course one can make the argument that elite members tend to be drunks and perhaps that explains their decision to buy and buy and buy at a premium from the developer.
Jersey girl, we like the way you think and we'll take you up on the free drink!
Elite members pay MF the same as anybody else. It is the SVN membership fee that gets waived for the third interval and above.
mepiccolo
TUG Member
It still points out the fact that unfortunately you didn't purchase what you really wanted. We also have two little ones so we knew it would be several years before it would be safe to have our children in the separate lock-off unit. With that in mind we have planned to take friends and relatives with us for the next several years and in the future the lock-off will be great for our family's needs. It once again makes me glad we never sat in a 3-4 hour brain washing timeshare presentation before we made any of our purchases. We researched it and were clear on what we were getting and are guaranteed to get each time we vacation when we made our resale purchases.
Last edited:
Fredm
TUG Member
Way too interesting
At the risk of joining the flamed, this is way too interesting to not comment on. My perspective is not of an elite owner. I just sell the stuff. In this respect it is far easier to simply butt-out. But, it does provide a perspective a bit different than what is being voiced. I have no ax to grind, nor am I defending/justifying any particular point of view.
Starwood indeed has the right to change the program as they wish, at any time. All who lose sight of that, do so at their peril. It says so in plain English.
As a reseller, my personal interest is in supporting the requal program. No doubt about it. But, the moment that Starwood relaxed its qualification and eligibility criteria by allowing requals, and eoy's to qualify annuals, etc. red flags should have been flying high. Anyone who thinks that an "elite" program can remain "elite" when qualification is played fast and loose is crazy. At the very moment that caution should have been exercised, is when it was blown to the wind. Those early "true" elite members made their purchases based on their belief that the status would be protected. At the very least, they assumed qualification would be the same, if benefits would not. Even if they were not entirely correct in their assumption, it was a reasonable one.
I have a perspective on this. I have a client who listed their Marriott timeshares with me. Their objective in liquidating, was to attain TRIPLE 5* Elite. One for themselves, and one for each of two children. TRIPLE! They did. They spent over $300,000! I am grateful to have the loyalty of several such clients. When they found out that they could have purchased Mission Hills resale, and re-qualified with some Maui direct purchases, they were speechless. Literally speechless. They were in my office, looked at me, and their faces turned red. I mean, they could have saved 100k! But, more importantly, they realized that what they attained was being manipulated. They felt manipulated. Not good for Starwood's image and credibility. Stawood is playing badly advised games, in my opinion. No matter how much money one has, $100,000 is not chump change. Especially when it represents a sense of being taken advantage of.
On a lesser scale, this holds true for every elite owner who purchased under the original guidelines. The moment that others qualified on terms other than they did, was the time to shout the roof off. Those are the owners who have a beef , if anyone does. Although the program would still be subject to change, it could be credibly argued, that the changes just announced would not have otherwise been necessary if the floodgates were not opened to benefit a short term sales quota objective. Those that do not believe this motivated the loosening, well, we do have a bridge in Brooklyn for sale.
Those that bought for their own reasons, attained elite because of it, and did so with eyes wide open, are not the ones vocal here best I can tell. Others did so with eyes wide shut, congratulating themselves for gaming it, under the then applicable rules. Where did common sense go? Perhaps they really thought that the relaxed elite qualifications were made especially for them, THEN would remain unchanged. Reminds me of the last to buy in a residential development. Once there, they want to raise the drawbridge so others will not enter and spoil what they have attained. Somehow, they view themselves as special. Once the next subdivision is approved, they are the first to City Hall to cry about the ruination of their quality of life. They never stopped to think that what they purchased is subject to change. Or, more humbly, what if the person just before them raised the bridge so they couldn't get in? Instead of saying, as did WC Fields, any club that would have me as a member is not worth joining, they could not get the money together fast enough. Nothing wrong with gaming the rules.The rules were obviously set-up to be gamed. Just do not lose sight of who is gaming whom.
Meanwhile, my triple five * family has not uttered another word about it. They will simply proceed with life, placing Starwood in an appropriate category when occasion arises to speak of them. There is no pretense, or righteous indignation. As an interesting aside, I heard the husband say to his wife, in passing, Marriott would never do such a thing to its Black (highest level) cards. They are right about that. Marriott treats its special relationship customers like gold, and trip over themselves to show it. They are also careful to not promise too much.
On this point, back in 1994 I was employed by Marriott. They released a package of "gold" benefits to all timeshare buyers, packaged in a beautiful black and gold casing. Within 4 or 5 months the entire program was dismantled at the direct order of Bill Marriott Jr., whose approval was not initially required to implement it. He believed that it would set unrealistic expectations. Further, it was his view that if the product was not salable without it, there was a larger problem involved that needed fixing.
I never forgot that. That was the real beginning of Marriott's VO growth. Desert Springs Villas I was just sold-out. Villas II had not yet begun construction. The only resorts in the Marriott system were in Hilton Head, Orlando (and Longboat Keys), and Vail. Marriott had not built any of them, although Park City Utah and Cypress Harbor in Orlando were under construction. That was only 13 years ago.
I am not posting to champion the Marriott system. I left their employ when I was personally unable to justify charging up to 50% more than it could be bought for elsewhere. I decided to be among the elsewhere. I merely wish to make a point by comparison. Say what you will about Marriott's 13 month reservation rules. I am not defending it either. However, it's origins were motivated by 2 principles; allowing the multi-share owner to book consecutive or concurrent weeks with the least hassle, and encouraging owners to buy additional weeks for this purpose. Regardless of your view of this reservation policy: right, wrong, or indifferent, Marriott has steadfastly adhered to it for more years than Starwood has been in the VO business. Owners have come to rely on its implementation, and thus far have not been whip-sawed. Its implementation is what it has always been. This is true of both direct and secondary market purchases, without distinction, period. I do not wish to launch yet another leg of this discussion by that statement. It is not one that can be argued with, and only serves to lose sight of my meaning.
Those who pursued elite status at the time the qualification rules were relaxed, allowed themselves to believe that the change which helped them, was the only change they could expect. Really now, try to be objective about it. Ask yourself, If you did not act on it then, and the issue was posed academically, would your response be the same? I think not. No one likes to be gamed. To think that the one who writes the rules is being gamed, is not one to be argued with in any case.
At the risk of joining the flamed, this is way too interesting to not comment on. My perspective is not of an elite owner. I just sell the stuff. In this respect it is far easier to simply butt-out. But, it does provide a perspective a bit different than what is being voiced. I have no ax to grind, nor am I defending/justifying any particular point of view.
Starwood indeed has the right to change the program as they wish, at any time. All who lose sight of that, do so at their peril. It says so in plain English.
As a reseller, my personal interest is in supporting the requal program. No doubt about it. But, the moment that Starwood relaxed its qualification and eligibility criteria by allowing requals, and eoy's to qualify annuals, etc. red flags should have been flying high. Anyone who thinks that an "elite" program can remain "elite" when qualification is played fast and loose is crazy. At the very moment that caution should have been exercised, is when it was blown to the wind. Those early "true" elite members made their purchases based on their belief that the status would be protected. At the very least, they assumed qualification would be the same, if benefits would not. Even if they were not entirely correct in their assumption, it was a reasonable one.
I have a perspective on this. I have a client who listed their Marriott timeshares with me. Their objective in liquidating, was to attain TRIPLE 5* Elite. One for themselves, and one for each of two children. TRIPLE! They did. They spent over $300,000! I am grateful to have the loyalty of several such clients. When they found out that they could have purchased Mission Hills resale, and re-qualified with some Maui direct purchases, they were speechless. Literally speechless. They were in my office, looked at me, and their faces turned red. I mean, they could have saved 100k! But, more importantly, they realized that what they attained was being manipulated. They felt manipulated. Not good for Starwood's image and credibility. Stawood is playing badly advised games, in my opinion. No matter how much money one has, $100,000 is not chump change. Especially when it represents a sense of being taken advantage of.
On a lesser scale, this holds true for every elite owner who purchased under the original guidelines. The moment that others qualified on terms other than they did, was the time to shout the roof off. Those are the owners who have a beef , if anyone does. Although the program would still be subject to change, it could be credibly argued, that the changes just announced would not have otherwise been necessary if the floodgates were not opened to benefit a short term sales quota objective. Those that do not believe this motivated the loosening, well, we do have a bridge in Brooklyn for sale.
Those that bought for their own reasons, attained elite because of it, and did so with eyes wide open, are not the ones vocal here best I can tell. Others did so with eyes wide shut, congratulating themselves for gaming it, under the then applicable rules. Where did common sense go? Perhaps they really thought that the relaxed elite qualifications were made especially for them, THEN would remain unchanged. Reminds me of the last to buy in a residential development. Once there, they want to raise the drawbridge so others will not enter and spoil what they have attained. Somehow, they view themselves as special. Once the next subdivision is approved, they are the first to City Hall to cry about the ruination of their quality of life. They never stopped to think that what they purchased is subject to change. Or, more humbly, what if the person just before them raised the bridge so they couldn't get in? Instead of saying, as did WC Fields, any club that would have me as a member is not worth joining, they could not get the money together fast enough. Nothing wrong with gaming the rules.The rules were obviously set-up to be gamed. Just do not lose sight of who is gaming whom.
Meanwhile, my triple five * family has not uttered another word about it. They will simply proceed with life, placing Starwood in an appropriate category when occasion arises to speak of them. There is no pretense, or righteous indignation. As an interesting aside, I heard the husband say to his wife, in passing, Marriott would never do such a thing to its Black (highest level) cards. They are right about that. Marriott treats its special relationship customers like gold, and trip over themselves to show it. They are also careful to not promise too much.
On this point, back in 1994 I was employed by Marriott. They released a package of "gold" benefits to all timeshare buyers, packaged in a beautiful black and gold casing. Within 4 or 5 months the entire program was dismantled at the direct order of Bill Marriott Jr., whose approval was not initially required to implement it. He believed that it would set unrealistic expectations. Further, it was his view that if the product was not salable without it, there was a larger problem involved that needed fixing.
I never forgot that. That was the real beginning of Marriott's VO growth. Desert Springs Villas I was just sold-out. Villas II had not yet begun construction. The only resorts in the Marriott system were in Hilton Head, Orlando (and Longboat Keys), and Vail. Marriott had not built any of them, although Park City Utah and Cypress Harbor in Orlando were under construction. That was only 13 years ago.
I am not posting to champion the Marriott system. I left their employ when I was personally unable to justify charging up to 50% more than it could be bought for elsewhere. I decided to be among the elsewhere. I merely wish to make a point by comparison. Say what you will about Marriott's 13 month reservation rules. I am not defending it either. However, it's origins were motivated by 2 principles; allowing the multi-share owner to book consecutive or concurrent weeks with the least hassle, and encouraging owners to buy additional weeks for this purpose. Regardless of your view of this reservation policy: right, wrong, or indifferent, Marriott has steadfastly adhered to it for more years than Starwood has been in the VO business. Owners have come to rely on its implementation, and thus far have not been whip-sawed. Its implementation is what it has always been. This is true of both direct and secondary market purchases, without distinction, period. I do not wish to launch yet another leg of this discussion by that statement. It is not one that can be argued with, and only serves to lose sight of my meaning.
Those who pursued elite status at the time the qualification rules were relaxed, allowed themselves to believe that the change which helped them, was the only change they could expect. Really now, try to be objective about it. Ask yourself, If you did not act on it then, and the issue was posed academically, would your response be the same? I think not. No one likes to be gamed. To think that the one who writes the rules is being gamed, is not one to be argued with in any case.
jerseygirl
TUG Member
- Joined
- Jun 6, 2005
- Messages
- 3,327
- Reaction score
- 0
Great post Fred.
Just a couple of observations:
). I'm going to spend my vacation dollars (you know, add cheese to my burger and buy pina coladas at the pool!) with companies I respect and companies that appreciate my business even after the initial sale is made.
(Okay, I'm not selling my Harborside. I guess my principles are only so strong.)
Just a couple of observations:
- Starwood allowed reqauls WAY before the Elite Program was announced, and used to permit buyers to bring in as many resale units as they owned (with the purchase of a silver EOY, no less.) In fact, they directly hit their resale buyers up with that proposition. Eventually, they started permitting only one for one, but actively promoted the EOY option (buy your first at 60% to get the first resale in, and your second at 40% to get the second one in).
- When the Elite Program was first announced, they forgot to exclude those owners who had purchased all necessary units to qualify via the resale market. Eventually, the legal people got around to excluding them in the promotional material and official rules, and an effort was made to remove the elite status from these buyers. I personally know two who used the initial documentation to successfully retain their status -- I'm sure there are lots more.
- With regard to Marriott -- I think you're absolutely correct except for one point. TUG is full of single-week owners who were not told about the reservation advantage for multiple-week owners when they initially purchased. Perhaps they didn't ask the right questions, but I think there's a reason the term "lie by omission" was created. If I remember my early Catholic school education, this could arguably be classified as a venial sin vs. Starwood's "voluntary resort" practices, but it's wrong in my book nonetheless.
- Back to Starwood -- I think your clients are 100% spot on with regard to Starwood's treatment of its clients. I got that feeling from the very start -- has anyone ever read the initial letter you receive (a welcome letter, I guess!!) when you buy a voluntary resort in the resale market? It's hilarious, and I am certain that anyone who wrote a letter like that in my company would be escorted to the door immediately! I realized that if Starwood was so willing to completely screw their owners who might need or want to sell someday with the whole "voluntary resort" program, that they would eventually get around to screwing everyone else too. (Had the same feeling when RCI Points was created with obvious advantages over RCI weeks -- knew it was only a matter of time until RCI got around to screwing the Points owners too!). And, that's why I've never requalified any of my Starwood units. Some might argue that I can't afford to p), but actually it's always boiled down to refusing to line the pockets of a company who very obviously had no interest in protecting my "investment."
). I'm going to spend my vacation dollars (you know, add cheese to my burger and buy pina coladas at the pool!) with companies I respect and companies that appreciate my business even after the initial sale is made.(Okay, I'm not selling my Harborside. I guess my principles are only so strong.)
Fredm
TUG Member
jereseygirl
As mentioned, I am not defending or advocating Marriott's policy re: 13 month reservations. I understand the issues.
Venial sins get you to purgatory, but, my Sisters of Charity were never quite clear about how long?
My comments had more to do with consistency of policy.
Regarding your principles being only so strong, and Harborside; I believe that is only a veniel sin. Not everyone can be God, and have their principles and actions be exactly alike. Self-serving, without harming others, is more than most can boast.
As mentioned, I am not defending or advocating Marriott's policy re: 13 month reservations. I understand the issues.
Venial sins get you to purgatory, but, my Sisters of Charity were never quite clear about how long?
My comments had more to do with consistency of policy.
Regarding your principles being only so strong, and Harborside; I believe that is only a veniel sin. Not everyone can be God, and have their principles and actions be exactly alike. Self-serving, without harming others, is more than most can boast.
calgarygary
TUG Member
- Joined
- Feb 13, 2007
- Messages
- 1,025
- Reaction score
- 0
jereseygirl
As mentioned, I am not defending or advocating Marriott's policy re: 13 month reservations. I understand the issues.
Venial sins get you to purgatory, but, my Sisters of Charity were never quite clear about how long?
My comments had more to do with consistency of policy.
Regarding your principles being only so strong, and Harborside; I believe that is only a veniel sin. Not everyone can be God, and have their principles and actions be exactly alike. Self-serving, without harming others, is more than most can boast.
Following up a very informative post with this post deserves two
jerseygirl
TUG Member
- Joined
- Jun 6, 2005
- Messages
- 3,327
- Reaction score
- 0
Kazakie
TUG Member
24% of what owners? Can't be all owners as not all resorts are mandatory, and some of the Sheratons (Myrtle Beach, Orlando, etc) were purchased and those owner's can't convert. Would it be that 24% of 5* owners convert ONE of their numerous weeks? (that would get you down to a much more reasonable ~5% conversation rate).
Kazakie
TUG Member
The idea of upgrading ahead of time seems rather ridiculous from a business point of view. Would you prefer upgrades at checkin or no upgrades at all?
nodge
TUG Member
I agree that Starwood, like all other timeshare companies, would sellout its customers to protect its own interests. I think the shock, at least for me, is the speed with which Starwood did it and the relatively minor benefit SVN obtained (reduced administrative costs in dealing with elite’s phone requests) in exchange for what it has cost them (severely compromising SVN’s good will among its best customers.)
SVN has sent me the following two messages with its latest antics:
1) Screw-you current customer, we’ve already got your money, and were doing so well selling units to fresh, know-nothing, meat off the street, we no longer need to keep our promises we made to you when you purchased from us last year (or yesterday in the case of at least one tugger here). Moreover, our marketing machine is so vast and complete, we don’t even need your word of mouth recommendations. In fact, feel free to post your discontent on a publically available web site. Our fresh meat customers NEVER check there anyway; and,
2) You know everything that we’ve ever told you about our product – StarOptions, StarPoints, “Platinum For Life,” etc.? Well if we can outright cancel the best (non-5 star) elite benefit at the drop of a hat, just think how quickly we can AND WILL, and way, way sooner than you can possibly imagine, change all of THOSE benefits too.
In light of SVN’s bold new direction, the only question that I really have is why does it still have a “Vice President of Owner Services” or even an “Owner Services” department at all? I guess they still need someone to send out all of those luggage tags.
-nodge
SVN has sent me the following two messages with its latest antics:
1) Screw-you current customer, we’ve already got your money, and were doing so well selling units to fresh, know-nothing, meat off the street, we no longer need to keep our promises we made to you when you purchased from us last year (or yesterday in the case of at least one tugger here). Moreover, our marketing machine is so vast and complete, we don’t even need your word of mouth recommendations. In fact, feel free to post your discontent on a publically available web site. Our fresh meat customers NEVER check there anyway; and,
2) You know everything that we’ve ever told you about our product – StarOptions, StarPoints, “Platinum For Life,” etc.? Well if we can outright cancel the best (non-5 star) elite benefit at the drop of a hat, just think how quickly we can AND WILL, and way, way sooner than you can possibly imagine, change all of THOSE benefits too.
In light of SVN’s bold new direction, the only question that I really have is why does it still have a “Vice President of Owner Services” or even an “Owner Services” department at all? I guess they still need someone to send out all of those luggage tags.
-nodge
Last edited:
- Joined
- Mar 10, 2007
- Messages
- 6,792
- Reaction score
- 317
- Location
- 'burbs of Cincinnati, OH
- Resorts Owned
- Used to own: WKORV-N; SVV - Bella
I am a resale buyer at WKORV-N. Thanks to the fine folks here who took their valuable time to share their knowledge and experiences, to the very nice salesman from Marriott who spent over an hour explaining the ins and outs of their system and helping me compare it honestly to Starwood's, and to some very helpful real estate agents, I bought a unit that I have no regrets about buying. I bought the view that I wanted (OF) at the property I wanted (WKORV-N) and I am looking forward to many years of relaxing vacations at a great location.
I completely understand the bitterness that elite owners are feeling towards Starwood. You paid thousands,in some case tens of thousands of dollars, in premiums for a benefit that has been taken away under the guise of a congratulatory letter. That is completely outrageous and very poor form, Starwood.
What I don't understand is the hostility displayed towards resale owners. Whether you are a retail or a resale buyer, we are all essentially subjects of King Starwood. And if the King continues to renege on promises, it is a bad deal for ALL owners. From the scrapping of the lazy river at WKORV-N to the dissolution of elite upgrades, it is dishonest to market something, and take people's money based on that, if you do not deliver it.
Starwood management had to know months ago that the elite upgrade program was not working. They could have frozen that benefit at any time in order to protect it for existing 5* owners. Yet, not only did they not grandfather the benefit for existing 5* owners, but they continued to market this benefit up until the day that the program change was announced! We have one poster who just recently became a 5* elite. I can't imagine the anger and frustration he/she is feeling.
I don't care if you paid $69k or $18k for your unit or if you're a retail or resale owner. You should get what Starwood promised. And we should all unite together to hold Starwood management accountable for the program they marketed, whether we will personally benefit or not. The integrity of the program should matter to all of us.
I completely understand the bitterness that elite owners are feeling towards Starwood. You paid thousands,in some case tens of thousands of dollars, in premiums for a benefit that has been taken away under the guise of a congratulatory letter. That is completely outrageous and very poor form, Starwood.
What I don't understand is the hostility displayed towards resale owners. Whether you are a retail or a resale buyer, we are all essentially subjects of King Starwood. And if the King continues to renege on promises, it is a bad deal for ALL owners. From the scrapping of the lazy river at WKORV-N to the dissolution of elite upgrades, it is dishonest to market something, and take people's money based on that, if you do not deliver it.
Starwood management had to know months ago that the elite upgrade program was not working. They could have frozen that benefit at any time in order to protect it for existing 5* owners. Yet, not only did they not grandfather the benefit for existing 5* owners, but they continued to market this benefit up until the day that the program change was announced! We have one poster who just recently became a 5* elite. I can't imagine the anger and frustration he/she is feeling.
I don't care if you paid $69k or $18k for your unit or if you're a retail or resale owner. You should get what Starwood promised. And we should all unite together to hold Starwood management accountable for the program they marketed, whether we will personally benefit or not. The integrity of the program should matter to all of us.
Last edited:
jerseygirl
TUG Member
- Joined
- Jun 6, 2005
- Messages
- 3,327
- Reaction score
- 0
I couldn't agree more LisaRex. Fred said it best when he talked about Marriott's consistency and the ability to sell their product without a bunch of ever-changing gimmicks (... if the product was not salable without it, there was a larger problem involved that needed fixing...).
Starwood changes the rules of the game whenever it suits THEM -- the interests of their owners couldn't be more subordinated. As long as you understand that, buy where you want to go and you'll be happy. It would be very foolish to base your happiness on anything other than the week(s) and unit(s) you own ... no matter how much money you've spent.
Starwood changes the rules of the game whenever it suits THEM -- the interests of their owners couldn't be more subordinated. As long as you understand that, buy where you want to go and you'll be happy. It would be very foolish to base your happiness on anything other than the week(s) and unit(s) you own ... no matter how much money you've spent.
tomandrobin
TUG Member
This thread has been very interesting, very informative and very deverse in opions. Most of these new changes do not effect me since I am a single unit Starwood owner. Eliteless you could say. Moving up the Elite status chain has been a goal of ours, but may not be as important now for us to achieve. So far as an owner we have been pleased with our Westin Kierland purchase.
There were three big reasons for us buying our Kierland unit. First, we loved the resort. Two, we love Starwood properties and like the ability to exchange into other Starwood properties. And third, the Staroption program that enables us to do number two.
If the Staroption program went away, that would pretty much end our ownership or future ownership with Starwood. We almost bought into Marriott for or first unit, but felt the Starwood system was better for our use. I like the direction Starwood has been going with thte new resorts they are planning/developing. Looking forward to both Cancun and Aruba once they are complete.
If I was a 5* Elite owner I would be upset and I do sympathize with them on thier "possible" lost. (Since only 10% got the upgrade, 90% didn't lose anything). On the upside, as a 5* owner most of you still own some pretty nice weeks in some really nice resorts.
And Fredm....What a great post on your part...Thank You for putting an excellent perspective from the other side of the fence.
There were three big reasons for us buying our Kierland unit. First, we loved the resort. Two, we love Starwood properties and like the ability to exchange into other Starwood properties. And third, the Staroption program that enables us to do number two.
If the Staroption program went away, that would pretty much end our ownership or future ownership with Starwood. We almost bought into Marriott for or first unit, but felt the Starwood system was better for our use. I like the direction Starwood has been going with thte new resorts they are planning/developing. Looking forward to both Cancun and Aruba once they are complete.
If I was a 5* Elite owner I would be upset and I do sympathize with them on thier "possible" lost. (Since only 10% got the upgrade, 90% didn't lose anything). On the upside, as a 5* owner most of you still own some pretty nice weeks in some really nice resorts.
And Fredm....What a great post on your part...Thank You for putting an excellent perspective from the other side of the fence.
Henry M.
TUG Member
I don't think there's any hostility towards resale owners. The problem is with the requal program itself. I think resale owners are smart to save some money and take advantage of something clearly allowed by SVO practices. The discussion is whether these practices should be allowed or not, not about those who take advantage of them.
Any Elite program relies on being limited in the number of participants. For example, the problem with the upgrade perk is that there are too many people eligible to take advantage of it. Requals make it easier for more and more people to participate and thus dilute the benefit. The expectations set are also such that this program becomes a dissatisfier when people don't get the upgrade instead of being a benefit.
I don't know how real the problem is since I have no idea of how many people are using requals to reach Elite levels vs. how many reach them buying from the developer. I could well be a non-issue or it could be a huge problem. In any case, even through regular sales, the more people join in, the less that can be reasonably offered. The benefits need to be carefully planned up front, assuming a certain growth rate and a certain number of eligible members. It appears something went wrong with Starwood's setup for the plan and now they're struggling to figure out what to do. It certainly is not the fault of resale buyers getting requals. It all lies squarely at the feet of Starwood for their poor planning and/or execution. Any dissatisfaction is a result of them having set expectations too high.
I don't know how real the upgrade dissatisfaction issue is for most owners. I never expected that I HAD to get an upgrade but felt happy when I did. I assume most people would feel like that, but I've also witnessed many abusive owners at WKORV demanding upgrades. I would rather have a 10% chance of being upgraded than having none at all.
- Joined
- Mar 10, 2007
- Messages
- 6,792
- Reaction score
- 317
- Location
- 'burbs of Cincinnati, OH
- Resorts Owned
- Used to own: WKORV-N; SVV - Bella
One poster compared resale owners to party crashers who weren't invited to the party. I'd say that's an inappropriately hostile attitude.
Don't forget the "lower class" comparison. That one was my favorite.
KOR5Star said:
Ah, there's at least one on every message board. Oh well, I have found these boards to be greatly informative, if not a little rude at times.
Back to subject - I'm just curious, how many of the owners on this board would actually be willing to pay for a more concrete "Elite" program, with benefits in writing? If it was elective, would you shell out $ every year to be part of it?
tomandrobin
TUG Member
I agree, the requal program is the biggest flaw with the elite program. If it had been left untouched, there would definately be less of an issue here. Then the only members affected by the change are the owners who bought all developer weeks.
If the number of 5* elites are/were fixed then the opposite would happen. If there are 2000 5* Elite members and Starwood keeps adding resorts/rooms the odds/percentage of getting an upgrade should increase. If the number of resorts and rooms were static then I can see how it availability to upgrrade would decrease as more members became 5* Elite status.
Loriannf
TUG Member
An "Elective" Benefits program
My decision would be based solely on the benefits. I'm currently a lowly 3 star elite and wasn't really receiving an benefits from the prior program. We own 3 bedroom weeks at WSJ - what are they going to upgrade us to? The units don't lock out, so there's no option to split and use half. We've had no success trading for anything outside WSJ, so no benefits at check-in have ever been an issue.
What would I pay for? How about getting on a wait list WITHOUT giving up my home resort reservation - now available to 4 and 5 star, but I'd pay for that in a heartbeat, especially if the long-term cost is less than another unit. Being able to make a reservation at 8 1/2 or 9 months instead of 8 - yes again, I'd pay for that. Also, early check-in and late check-out, WSJ airport transfers without charge, and the ability to use "bonus" weeks (i.e, rent at a reduced cost inventory unlikely to sell out). What I wouldn't pay for are luggage tags, SPG gold status (so easy to get, so worthless), or anything else which should be given free of charge to Elite members anyway.
Just my two cents.
Lori
My decision would be based solely on the benefits. I'm currently a lowly 3 star elite and wasn't really receiving an benefits from the prior program. We own 3 bedroom weeks at WSJ - what are they going to upgrade us to? The units don't lock out, so there's no option to split and use half. We've had no success trading for anything outside WSJ, so no benefits at check-in have ever been an issue.
What would I pay for? How about getting on a wait list WITHOUT giving up my home resort reservation - now available to 4 and 5 star, but I'd pay for that in a heartbeat, especially if the long-term cost is less than another unit. Being able to make a reservation at 8 1/2 or 9 months instead of 8 - yes again, I'd pay for that. Also, early check-in and late check-out, WSJ airport transfers without charge, and the ability to use "bonus" weeks (i.e, rent at a reduced cost inventory unlikely to sell out). What I wouldn't pay for are luggage tags, SPG gold status (so easy to get, so worthless), or anything else which should be given free of charge to Elite members anyway.
Just my two cents.
Lori
tomandrobin
TUG Member
The only benefit we have seen from our "gold" staus has been the seperate check-in line at the Swan & dolphin Hotel in Disney during Christmas week.
Henry M.
TUG Member
I was actually the one that wrote that, and in retrospect it didn't quite properly convey what I was trying to say. I've previously said in other threads that I would tell people to alternate resales and developer purchases to get the most benefit out of the system. Perhaps the analogy should have included one of the owners of the venue inviting others in that were not part of the original guest list of the party. Sorry if I came across as hostile - I am certainly not hostile towards resale/requal owners.
The point was supposed to be that the program is set up for a certain number of people and making it easier to get in diminishes the benefits that can be given to the those that have really invested in the system. There are apparently over 14,000 Elites, maybe 1,300 5*, and no limit on any of the numbers. The 2000 5* limit mentioed is for SPG Platinum membership, not the number of 5*.
As long as the percentage of Elite owners with respect to the number of weeks available remains steady, then everything should be OK. If suddenly there is a way for everyone to get to Elite levels through very cheap requals, the the whole program is diminished for everybody. I do agree that the Mandatory/Voluntary situation is not good. I think the ability to exchange within the system is for everybody's benefit and that there should be some way for voluntary property owners to be able to get back into SVN for exchange purposes.
KOR5Star
newbie
Holy smokes! I guess if someone says something you don't agree with, they become that "one on every message board" you speak of. I'm surprised you find only "one".
You talk of rude? You may not agree with my premise, but that does not give you license to take my words out of context and damn me with them. That's the only rude thing going on here.
In that SAME EXACT post, I wrote the following:
"Now please! Don't read what I just wrote and think that I believe the wealthier person is a better person. That's not what I'm saying at all. All I'm saying is the wealthier person tends to spend more money on vacation... therefore generating more income for Starwood... therefore enticing Starwood to "sweeten the pot" and try to attract that type of clientele with an "elite" program."
But you chose to completely ignore those words. Why? I can't imagine that you didn't read them as well. What makes it difficult for you to contemplate an opposing point of view without getting rude and resorting to character assassination?
My use of the phrase "class distinctions" was clearly not meant in the way you imply. It was meant to designate between groups of people with significantly different spending habits, not to imply one group was "better" than the other. That's YOUR assumption. Several of you on this thread have equated having money with the quality of the person. I think that shows a profound ignorance of the nature of people.
I knew I'd get flames. Some people on the site have shown there is no room for dissenting opinions... and they will not be tolerated.
For the record, I am not against anyone that has taken advantage of the requal loophole. I AM against the loophole itself for the reasons I've already stated. If you've misinterpreted those statements as being somehow insulting to you, sorry, but that's due to your own mind's workings, not mine.
In reality, all I did was present an opinion which was cleary counter to your own. Being different from your opinion didn't make it insulting, condescending or arrogant. It was just different.
In answer to your question. Yes, I would pay for Elite. If you read my other posts, I suggested a country club model. There would be a substantial buy-in (say $50K+) plus an annual fee and mandatory spending minimums. In return, there should be extra perks like first access to desirable tee times, etc...
Members would be able to recoup some or all of their initial investment (whatever the market would bear) when they sell their membership to the next qualified (by Starwood) person on the list. The number of memberships would need to be a set fraction of the number of Starwood units or membership could be limited by the size of the buy-in.
Last edited:
KOR5Star
newbie
And I would like to point out that the above statement is condemning an entire "class" of customer. It is clear that you, sir, are the one with a malicious bias, not I.
I was simply categorizing people by their spending habits. You condemn them by how much money they have.
...and you speak of others being "rude"?
To set the record straight, there are rude people and cheap tippers in all financial categories.
Last edited: