Getting feet wet with a SVV purchase

[LisaRex]

*I think it would be a major mistake for Starwood to market the availability of reserving OF Villas with Staroptions, because the demand would FAR exceed the supply, to the point of fraud.

Who cares if demand exceeds supply? If there's no supply, then they can't offer it up for exchange. That is no different than the current inventory issue exchangers (and owners) experience now in trying to get HRA, WKORV and WSJ in the summer. Besides, no inventory is actually a really good thing for Starwood because if exchangers are continually frustrated by not being able to get the exchange of their choice, then that gives them added incentive to buy there.

And I don't understand your fraud comment. For every deeded OF owner, there is one OF week available. Only if an OF owner surrenders their home resort week (by exchanging into another resort or failing to pay their MFs) is their week available for SVN exchangers. No OF conversion, no OF inventory to grab. There's no chance for fraud here... unless Starwood sold more deeds than they have weeks. And that would impact home resort owners more than exchangers.

If they allowed OF exchanges, the only difference is that the unit would cost more SOs. Once again, this is a GOOD thing for Starwood because currently they are upgrading exchangers to OF for free (see Hypnotic's thread). It gives incentive for current 148,100 single week owners to either buy another unit (good for Starwood) or to bank their SOs...which means another $99 banking fee in Starwood's pocket, plus opportunity for Starwood to "hoover" the days/weeks associated with those banked points.

Speaking of hovering weeks, SVO would still have a HUGE advantage in this game because at WKORV, the entire year is platinum plus season. So if an OF owner surrenders their week, they can simply throw fall and early winter weeks into the pool. Having OF available might encourage more exchangers to actually travel in low season, which would spread out the demand more. PLUS they are squeezing more SOs out of owner, to guarantee an OF unit, that they might have assigned for "free" in prior years.

 

[SMHarman]

Time will tell, but I will be really surprised if you are going to be able to reserve WKORV-N/S Ocean Front with Staroptions.

I believe Staroption reservations will continue to be Floating View reservations.

I think Starwood wants those OF units for their rental pool - allowing people to book them with Staroptions would limit the number of OF units they can hoover up.

Starwood / HOT may but remember they will soon be primarily an asset of Vistana.

Sent from my LT26i using Tapatalk

 

[Helios]

I don't understand this statement - ALL Staroption reservations are floating view, and Starwood has complete authority to assign any unit they want, so there is no logical reason for them to "give away" Ocean Front units now, or in the future.

Many people are assuming that Starwood is going to start allowing people to make Oceanfront Staroption reservations, because they changed the number of Staroptions that owners RECEIVE. I don't that that's what's going to happen. I believe they changed it so that there would be parity between owners at the 3 Maui resorts - in the number of Staroptions they RECEIVE, not to allow Ocean Front Staroption reservations.



Not at all - at 60 days before check-in, Starwood can and does confiscate any unreserved owner inventory and puts it in their (Starwood) rental pool, and puts the funds in their (Starwood's) pocket. That's how Starwood wrote the terms...

So, it is in their best interest to leave Staroptions reservations as floating view reservations. That way, they are not obligated to use Ocean Front units for Staroptions exchanges, and they can assign any unit they want to Staroption exchangers. Thereby allowing them to Hoover up and rent any Ocean Front units that were converted to Staroptions...

Anything is possible, I suppose... At WSJ, they raised the SOs (twice for VG and once for BV) for both owners to use elsewhere and for exchangers. That's my logic. I tried to convey that if they charge more SOs for OF, some owners (perhaps just me) may use the extra SOs for the security of having OF. That instead of getting OF (YMMV) because of status would make sense for Starwood. I think they would rather charge more SOs than upgrade elites, that's all. Also, it would benefit all owners who want OF locked in and have the SOs now that banking is allowed.

Regarding Starwood confiscating at 60 days...OK, but wouldn't that mean that potentially nothing would be available after 60 days. I have made unbelievable reservations within 60 days of arrival...

 

[Helios]

Who cares if demand exceeds supply? If there's no supply, then they can't offer it up for exchange. That is no different than the current inventory issue exchangers (and owners) experience now in trying to get HRA, WKORV and WSJ in the summer. Besides, no inventory is actually a really good thing for Starwood because if exchangers are continually frustrated by not being able to get the exchange of their choice, then that gives them added incentive to buy there.

And I don't understand your fraud comment. For every deeded OF owner, there is one OF week available. Only if an OF owner surrenders their home resort week (by exchanging into another resort or failing to pay their MFs) is their week available for SVN exchangers. No OF conversion, no OF inventory to grab. There's no chance for fraud here... unless Starwood sold more deeds than they have weeks. And that would impact home resort owners more than exchangers.

If they allowed OF exchanges, the only difference is that the unit would cost more SOs. Once again, this is a GOOD thing for Starwood because currently they are upgrading exchangers to OF for free (see Hypnotic's thread). It gives incentive for current 148,100 single week owners to either buy another unit (good for Starwood) or to bank their SOs...which means another $99 banking fee in Starwood's pocket, plus opportunity for Starwood to "hoover" the days/weeks associated with those banked points.

Speaking of hovering weeks, SVO would still have a HUGE advantage in this game because at WKORV, the entire year is platinum plus season. So if an OF owner surrenders their week, they can simply throw fall and early winter weeks into the pool. Having OF available might encourage more exchangers to actually travel in low season, which would spread out the demand more. PLUS they are squeezing more SOs out of owner, to guarantee an OF unit, that they might have assigned for "free" in prior years.

100 % Agree...

 

[okwiater]

Speaking of hovering weeks, SVO would still have a HUGE advantage in this game because at WKORV, the entire year is platinum plus season. So if an OF owner surrenders their week, they can simply throw fall and early winter weeks into the pool.

I have never seen any evidence that Starwood lopsidedly cherry-picks weeks for their own use to the detriment of owners/exchangers. My anecdotal experiences actually suggest that the opposite is true -- for instance, I have used StarOptions to exchange into a winter holiday week at Steamboat Springs that rents for over $1K per night on spg.com.

 

[LisaRex]

I have never seen any evidence that Starwood lopsidedly cherry-picks weeks for their own use to the detriment of owners/exchangers. My anecdotal experiences actually suggest that the opposite is true -- for instance, I have used StarOptions to exchange into a winter holiday week at Steamboat Springs that rents for over $1K per night on spg.com.

I was never able to get a ski week, though I have to say I tried only from about 8 months to 5 months out. And when I called to book a President's Day week a few years ago at WKORV-N at exactly 12 months out, 9am, it was already sold out. That suggested to me that Starwood might have grabbed their weeks before the reservation window opened for regular owners. However, I'll concede that it could be that multi-week exchangers and fixed week owners grabbed them.

We'll never know, of course.

 

[silentg]

When you say you own EOY does it mean you only pay maintence fee for that year? I own summer Bay EOY but pay yearly Maintenence fee and you have to pay RCI every year too!

 

[okwiater]

When you say you own EOY does it mean you only pay maintence fee for that year? I own summer Bay EOY but pay yearly Maintenence fee and you have to pay RCI every year too!

With EOY you still pay a maintenance fee every year -- but it's only half the normal amount (for most resorts). So you are essentially paying 1 full maintenance fee every 2 years, which is the same frequency you get use of the unit.

When it comes to the Club memberships -- SVN, RCI, II -- you have to pay that membership fee every year, irrespective of whether you have an annual or EOY ownership.

 

[okwiater]

I was never able to get a ski week, though I have to say I tried only from about 8 months to 5 months out. And when I called to book a President's Day week a few years ago at WKORV-N at exactly 12 months out, 9am, it was already sold out. That suggested to me that Starwood might have grabbed their weeks before the reservation window opened for regular owners. However, I'll concede that it could be that multi-week exchangers and fixed week owners grabbed them.

Hmmm... it's certainly possible that they are doing that. Would it be illegal for them to reserve inventory earlier and using a different process than Owners? I'm not familiar with what's legally permissible. Are there any lawyers left in the forum or are they all banned?

 

[SMHarman]

I have never seen any evidence that Starwood lopsidedly cherry-picks weeks for their own use to the detriment of owners/exchangers. My anecdotal experiences actually suggest that the opposite is true -- for instance, I have used StarOptions to exchange into a winter holiday week at Steamboat Springs that rents for over $1K per night on spg.com.

Similarly I have 10 nights in a 2 bed at WSJ on SO in Feb booked. Primo time for a trip there.

Sent from my LT26i using Tapatalk

 

[SMHarman]

Hmmm... it's certainly possible that they are doing that. Would it be illegal for them to reserve inventory earlier and using a different process than Owners? I'm not familiar with what's legally permissible. Are there any lawyers left in the forum or are they all banned?

Starwood own TS weeks and at 12 month's can book them in the same way you or I do and potentially can treat them as fixed weeks (though most resorts have a cap on the number of sales of a specific week that can be fixes)



Sent from my LT26i using Tapatalk

 

[lizap]

I agree with Lisa as well. If you have the requisite SOs and it is available, you will likely be able to reserve OF..

Who cares if demand exceeds supply? If there's no supply, then they can't offer it up for exchange. That is no different than the current inventory issue exchangers (and owners) experience now in trying to get HRA, WKORV and WSJ in the summer. Besides, no inventory is actually a really good thing for Starwood because if exchangers are continually frustrated by not being able to get the exchange of their choice, then that gives them added incentive to buy there.

And I don't understand your fraud comment. For every deeded OF owner, there is one OF week available. Only if an OF owner surrenders their home resort week (by exchanging into another resort or failing to pay their MFs) is their week available for SVN exchangers. No OF conversion, no OF inventory to grab. There's no chance for fraud here... unless Starwood sold more deeds than they have weeks. And that would impact home resort owners more than exchangers.

If they allowed OF exchanges, the only difference is that the unit would cost more SOs. Once again, this is a GOOD thing for Starwood because currently they are upgrading exchangers to OF for free (see Hypnotic's thread). It gives incentive for current 148,100 single week owners to either buy another unit (good for Starwood) or to bank their SOs...which means another $99 banking fee in Starwood's pocket, plus opportunity for Starwood to "hoover" the days/weeks associated with those banked points.

Speaking of hovering weeks, SVO would still have a HUGE advantage in this game because at WKORV, the entire year is platinum plus season. So if an OF owner surrenders their week, they can simply throw fall and early winter weeks into the pool. Having OF available might encourage more exchangers to actually travel in low season, which would spread out the demand more. PLUS they are squeezing more SOs out of owner, to guarantee an OF unit, that they might have assigned for "free" in prior years.

 

[czar]

I'm sure they're not doing anything illegal, and I, too, was able to book WSJ Pres week using SO last year; however, I was not able to book spring break (April) this year but was able to use my Explorer package during that time, and they were more than happy to offer me extra nights at $675/night. They own their own inventory and are smart enough to use weeks to their advantage, and I am certain they (like all of us, when we can) do. If I were a shareholder I would expect nothing less than that.

 

[sjsharkie]

Hmmm... it's certainly possible that they are doing that. Would it be illegal for them to reserve inventory earlier and using a different process than Owners? I'm not familiar with what's legally permissible. Are there any lawyers left in the forum or are they all banned?

I've read the club rules in the past which governs the operations of the club. This is my interpretation based on my reading of the rules. Club rules govern all reservations for all resorts -- the CC&Rs for each resort I suspect delegate governance of reservations to the club rules (although I have not actually read each CC&R for each resort).

I do not believe that they can withhold weeks for their own use in competition for other owners except inside 60 days. They have specific priorities for float home resort owners -- home resort preference follows premium/ultrapremium/fixed/event week owners. It comes before SVN reservations (SVN Float Period) and the inside 60 day period (SVN Priority Period) .

SVN is allowed to withhold weeks during home resort period for deposit in II or SPG point conversion based on anticipated demand. But I believe those weeks can only be held for those purposes -- and then those weeks must be committed to II/SPG. I don't believe they are allowed to reserve them for themselves later if they are following the rules as written. I do not think they are allowed to pull any other weeks from the pool during home resort period.

For weeks owned by the HOA/Starwood, I believe they are only entitled to that fixed week in the underlying deed. Simply put, SVN does not commit these to the SVN pool, therefore they are not subject to reservation rules.

Inside 60 days, all bets are off. SVN can reserve for maintenance, rental, etc.

Again this is my interpretation of what I have read. I do not know if it is 100% true, but it certainly makes sense from what I have seen.

-ryan

 

[LisaRex]

For weeks owned by the HOA/Starwood, I believe they are only entitled to that fixed week in the underlying deed. Simply put, SVN does not commit these to the SVN pool, therefore they are not subject to reservation rules.

Well, okay. Let's say Starwood chose to retain 500 weeks for their own purposes (about 1 week per villa at WKORV), and they know that they'll be restricted to the week written on the deed. IOW, they cannot float it.

Which weeks do you suppose they chose? If it were me, I'd disproportionately choose the most popular weeks of the year. Wouldn't you?

With 500 units, they could still play by the rules (assuming that they aren't exceeding the number of fixed units, blah blah blah) and withhold something like this:

Christmas week 50 units
New Year's week 50 units
July 4th week 50 units
President's Day week 50 units
Thanksgiving week 25 units
1st week of February 25 units
3rd week of February 25 units
4th week of February 25 units
1st week of March 25 units
2nd week of March 25 units
2nd week of June 25 units
3rd week of June 25 units
4th week of June 25 units
1st week of July 25 units
2nd week of July 25 units
3rd week of July 25 units

Once again, they wrote the rules, so it wouldn't surprise me at all if they exploited them to their advantage.

 

[sjsharkie]

Well, okay. Let's say Starwood chose to retain 500 weeks for their own purposes (about 1 week per villa at WKORV), and they know that they'll be restricted to the week written on the deed. IOW, they cannot float it.

Which weeks do you suppose they chose? If it were me, I'd disproportionately choose the most popular weeks of the year. Wouldn't you?

With 500 units, they could still play by the rules (assuming that they aren't exceeding the number of fixed units, blah blah blah) and withhold something like this:

Christmas week 50 units
New Year's week 50 units
July 4th week 50 units
President's Day week 50 units
Thanksgiving week 25 units
1st week of February 25 units
3rd week of February 25 units
4th week of February 25 units
1st week of March 25 units
2nd week of March 25 units
2nd week of June 25 units
3rd week of June 25 units
4th week of June 25 units
1st week of July 25 units
2nd week of July 25 units
3rd week of July 25 units

Once again, they wrote the rules, so it wouldn't surprise me at all if they exploited them to their advantage.

Club rules do not dictate how weeks are sold.

My assumption is that how deeded weeks are sold is covered in the condo governing docs or in each HOA's contract with Starwood.

They could not withhold event weeks anyway. Fixed ultra premium, premium or event weeks must have the corresponding underlying week anyway so your example of withholding Christmas or new years is not relevant except for those properties where these were sold as part of a floating season.

I understand your point but I actually don't think there is a diabolical scheme to withhold specific deeded weeks.

Ryan



Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G900A using Tapatalk

 

[SMHarman]

Well, okay. Let's say Starwood chose to retain 500 weeks for their own purposes (about 1 week per villa at WKORV), and they know that they'll be restricted to the week written on the deed. IOW, they cannot float it.

Which weeks do you suppose they chose? If it were me, I'd disproportionately choose the most popular weeks of the year. Wouldn't you?

With 500 units, they could still play by the rules (assuming that they aren't exceeding the number of fixed units, blah blah blah) and withhold something like this:

Christmas week 50 units
New Year's week 50 units
July 4th week 50 units
President's Day week 50 units
Thanksgiving week 25 units
1st week of February 25 units
3rd week of February 25 units
4th week of February 25 units
1st week of March 25 units
2nd week of March 25 units
2nd week of June 25 units
3rd week of June 25 units
4th week of June 25 units
1st week of July 25 units
2nd week of July 25 units
3rd week of July 25 units

Once again, they wrote the rules, so it wouldn't surprise me at all if they exploited them to their advantage.

Let's say they are doing this.
The Christmas ans NY would have an upfront impact on the project ROI as those weeks won't be sold to generate cash.

The rest (split IV/OF/OV) they get before owners at 12 month's. Organized owners on here seem to have success at booking those weeks if they want to use them so supply ~ demand.

Starwood not doing that increases inventory by 25-50 units so they are sold out at 9.30EST not 9.20?

Sent from my LT26i using Tapatalk

 

[elleny76]

That's great!... I wish I can get offers like that ..looking for key west LO 2 bed...

Last year I purchased two SVV 2 bdrm units in Bella and Key West (67,100 SOs each) for $1000 total. I offered $1000 on one in Bella and posted a note on the BB as to whether it was a good deal. Within an hour I got a message from another Tug member offering a similar unit in Key West. We've been using the units through SVO for WKORV studios where we already own, but have been renting them. We closed the sales through LT Transfers at less than $200 each.