Jackson Hole Towncenter owners voted to dissolve

[northwoodsgal]

This past week, the Jackson Hole Towncenter (Jackson, WY) owners voted to dissolve the timeshare. We were notified late last year that the JHTC was significantly short on money to operate. Owners were basically given the option of paying steep maintenance fees or disbanding. 75% of owners needed to approve it but the board was able to cast a vote on a significant number of those due to owners in default. The property will be put up for sale shortly and, hopefully, will sell at a good price.

Capital was the management company.

 

[Passepartout]

Good for them. We stayed there some years ago - iirc, MROP owned a few intervals. It was a remodeled motel, and had strange floorplans, but the location was unbeatable! About 2 Blocks to the 'Town Lift', and a couple blocks the other way to the Silver Dollar Bar, and town park with its antler gates
I hope those that held out get a handsome payoff.

Jim

 

[dioxide45]

It'll probably take a few years before owners see any payout and legal and consulting costs will eat into quite a bit of it.

 

[rcdcowner557]

This is the future of properties where the owners can actually do this and are independent of the timeshare operator. However, in locations where the timeshare operator still has a hand in governance (all that is needed is one seat on the board for insight) and where the location is desirable, the timeshare operator will scoop up delinquencies and put them in a trust where unsuspecting "points owners" will pay the maintenance fees. The timeshare operator will eventually take over the board of the property and any legacy owners will be at the mercy of the exorbitant fees the timeshare operator pays itself. Eventually all of the legacy owners will give their deeds back, and the timeshare operator will have perfected its plan of having dupes pay the development costs of the hotel it will operate thenceforward. The "timeshare" thing is just a play by developers to fund the development costs. The operation fees are what keeps them going, and as long as people buy the resales and are willing to pay those fees, then it is all good for the new owners and operator/developer. The losers are those who buy from the developer, which is the overarching message of this TUG. Seriously, this forum is amazing to the extent it facilitates second-hand purchasers' enjoyment of timeshares. It will be interesting to see how these things evolve as legacy owners step off. I have not dug into it, but I suspect the points model is a ponzi scheme that might well continue to yield the timeshare operators quite a profit. Resale buyers won't care about reselling themselves; they may just turn the deeds back in cold. I have not looked at the price of points and how that price has changed over the years. If it is increasing, then the operators have hit upon a winning business model.

 

[northwoodsgal]

The property should be on MLS within the next month but it will take time to close any deal due to clearing owner titles. As far as I know, JHTC was a weeks only resort and never converted to a points system.

TOWB (Joe Takacs) was contracted to handle the dissolution under the board's directions and decisions. A lot of time and effort had been put in prior too last week's meeting (locating owners, setting up multiple virtual meetings, etc.).

 

[5finny]

This is the future of properties where the owners can actually do this and are independent of the timeshare operator. However, in locations where the timeshare operator still has a hand in governance (all that is needed is one seat on the board for insight) and where the location is desirable, the timeshare operator will scoop up delinquencies and put them in a trust where unsuspecting "points owners" will pay the maintenance fees. The timeshare operator will eventually take over the board of the property and any legacy owners will be at the mercy of the exorbitant fees the timeshare operator pays itself. Eventually all of the legacy owners will give their deeds back, and the timeshare operator will have perfected its plan of having dupes pay the development costs of the hotel it will operate thenceforward. The "timeshare" thing is just a play by developers to fund the development costs. The operation fees are what keeps them going, and as long as people buy the resales and are willing to pay those fees, then it is all good for the new owners and operator/developer. The losers are those who buy from the developer, which is the overarching message of this TUG. Seriously, this forum is amazing to the extent it facilitates second-hand purchasers' enjoyment of timeshares. It will be interesting to see how these things evolve as legacy owners step off. I have not dug into it, but I suspect the points model is a ponzi scheme that might well continue to yield the timeshare operators quite a profit. Resale buyers won't care about reselling themselves; they may just turn the deeds back in cold. I have not looked at the price of points and how that price has changed over the years. If it is increasing, then the operators have hit upon a winning business model.

So do you think Capital is taking advantage of this situation?

The property should be on MLS within the next month but it will take time to close any deal due to clearing owner titles. As far as I know, JHTC was a weeks only resort and never converted to a points system.

TOWB (Joe Takacs) was contracted to handle the dissolution under the board's directions and decisions. A lot of time and effort had been put in prior too last week's meeting (locating owners, setting up multiple virtual meetings, etc.).

Or Helping?

 

[rapmarks]

Lakewood resort in Osage beach Missouri sold to a developer to be torn down and used for a massive project.
Someone on this site posted he walked away with $14400. I cannot find anything verifying this.

 

[rcdcowner557]

So do you think Capital is taking advantage of this situation?

Or Helping?

Neither - where there is no Turst points system and it is deeded weeks only, owned entirely by individual owners, those owners are in control and the land plus whatever is on it will go to the highest bidder.

 

[dsalomon]

This past week, the Jackson Hole Towncenter (Jackson, WY) owners voted to dissolve the timeshare. We were notified late last year that the JHTC was significantly short on money to operate. Owners were basically given the option of paying steep maintenance fees or disbanding. 75% of owners needed to approve it but the board was able to cast a vote on a significant number of those due to owners in default. The property will be put up for sale shortly and, hopefully, will sell at a good price.

Capital was the management company.

Interesting, I stayed at a two-bedroom unit at JHTC in 2022, located on 325 W. Broadway. Great location. This is sometimes the problem with some US TS’s, and many built 2 decades ago. No rehabilitation or upgrade to the units, as discussed above but increasing MF’s to the owners. So not surprised. I wonder how many older(20 yrs plus) US TS are on the verge of dissolution, because of minimum maintenance, but increasing MF’s.

 

[WaikikiFirst]

operators have hit upon a winning business model

I agree with most of what you said, and not sure about some, but I have to ask: IF the TS biz model is so good then why have the stocks done so badly. I'm not looking up stock tickers now, and I'll quote things as I saw them a couple of wks ago, but as of then
Hotels: MAR & HIL have done well, stocks are up about 100% over last 3 or 4 yrs (I forget the Begin Date I looked at)
TSs: TNL & HGV are completely flat over same time period & MVC is lousy, down 50% over same period

So, either the stock mkt is clueless or there's some other big problem for TS companies, at least the big ones, and I doubt the indies are doing better than the big ones are ... less you know differently

 

[jp10558]

I agree with most of what you said, and not sure about some, but I have to ask: IF the TS biz model is so good then why have the stocks done so badly. I'm not looking up stock tickers now, and I'll quote things as I saw them a couple of wks ago, but as of then
Hotels: MAR & HIL have done well, stocks are up about 100% over last 3 or 4 yrs (I forget the Begin Date I looked at)
TSs: TNL & HGV are completely flat over same time period & MVC is lousy, down 50% over same period

So, either the stock mkt is clueless or there's some other big problem for TS companies, at least the big ones, and I doubt the indies are doing better than the big ones are ... less you know differently

I tend to think the stock mkt is clueless. There's no hype for TS and they're not getting any passive investing flows either as they're probably not large enough to hit like a S&P500 kind of fund. Also, most people are negative on TS.

Alternatively, and equally plausible is all the marketing from the companies and ARDA around increasing markets and profits is bull.

 

[dioxide45]

I agree with most of what you said, and not sure about some, but I have to ask: IF the TS biz model is so good then why have the stocks done so badly. I'm not looking up stock tickers now, and I'll quote things as I saw them a couple of wks ago, but as of then
Hotels: MAR & HIL have done well, stocks are up about 100% over last 3 or 4 yrs (I forget the Begin Date I looked at)
TSs: TNL & HGV are completely flat over same time period & MVC is lousy, down 50% over same period

So, either the stock mkt is clueless or there's some other big problem for TS companies, at least the big ones, and I doubt the indies are doing better than the big ones are ... less you know differently

I think the difference is that hotel companies are still growing and adding new properties. Most of the timeshare systems are just regurgitating existing and reacquired inventory. So not much of a forecast for growth and the market is always concerned about growth. Nothing wrong with trudging along and providing steady dividends, but the market doesn't usually reward that with higher stock price.

 

[jp10558]

Interesting, I stayed at a two-bedroom unit at JHTC in 2022, located on 325 W. Broadway. Great location. This is sometimes the problem with some US TS’s, and many built 2 decades ago. No rehabilitation or upgrade to the units, as discussed above but increasing MF’s to the owners. So not surprised. I wonder how many older(20 yrs plus) US TS are on the verge of dissolution, because of minimum maintenance, but increasing MF’s.

I agree - I think location is important, but it has to be at least good enough for people to want to trade into or rent too. If you're a good trader, you can get people to buy mostly for trading - you don't have to be the place someone wants to go yearly. And those people will pay the MFs as long as they can get trades or rent it. If you're doing what Villa Roma does, which apparently is nothing for maintenance and just surviving on the people who have been coming there for like 40 years - well, that's not sustainable, you eventually have to attract new people.

 

[dsalomon]

I think most of the observations, as I detailed before, are for US TS.

 

[northwoodsgal]

So do you think Capital is taking advantage of this situation?

Or Helping?

Capital doesn't seem to be doing much other than making sure weeks aren't deposited for exchange. Personally, I think they were part of the reason the resort failed (lack of online information, lack of offering units for rent at competitive prices). It's the board and the Takacs that have done the heavy lifting, though the board isn't being paid and the Takacs will be.

 

[northwoodsgal]

No rehabilitation or upgrade to the units, as discussed above but increasing MF’s to the owners.

In hindsight, having slightly higher maintenance fees years earlier would have helped. But, the biggest issue is the cost of labor. I believe it was $300-$400/week just for cleaning the units after stays. Many workers can't afford to live in Jackson and commute from out of the county.

 

[northwoodsgal]

Also, most people are negative on TS.

We're told it's very much the younger generations don't want the commitment of a timeshare and would rather VRBO. There's just more options available than there was 20 years ago.

 

[Dori]

Around 2010, the owners of our Ontario timeshare, Harbour Inn, voted to sell the resort. We had bought resale in 1990, purchasing 2 weeks. Our first week was a red Christmas week, ($2000) and then we snagged an April week for $1. We exchanged all over with these weeks. In 2013, the resort was sold to Knights Inn and after all the disbursements etc. were settled, we received a cheque for about $1300. 20 years of timeshare travelling with these weeks wa such a wonderful experience!

Dori

 

[theo]

<snip>... 75% of owners needed to approve it but the board was able to cast a vote on a significant number of those due to owners in default. <snip>

I am intrigued by this particular line. I know that it is not uncommon for independent timeshare CC&R’s to require 75% of owners to approve, by formal vote, a termination of the underlying timeshare plan. I’ve seen that requirement clearly reflected in numerous “Termination” sections of several different independent resorts, including two at which we own a few weeks.

That said, I was not (and am not) aware or convinced that a Board can actually vote HOA-owned weeks. I am not challenging the accuracy of your statement, I am merely expressing my great surprise. I have always believed (and still do believe) that HOA-owned weeks at an independent timeshare resort had no vote at all, since all such weeks are essentially owned equally by ALL owners and not by just a few individual Board members.

Does anyone else here have direct, first hand knowledge or experience with the voting status of HOA-owned weeks when such “timeshare termination” votes occur at independent (non-chain) timeshare properties? No real clarity on this particular detail is evident in my brief look at our own CC&R’s.

 

[dioxide45]

Does anyone else here have first hand knowledge or experience with the voting status of HOA-owned weeks when such “timeshare termination” votes occur at independent (non-chain) timeshare properties? No real clarity on this particular detail is evident in a brief look at our own CC&R’s.

No first hand knowledge, but it is also possible that they couldn't vote on those units but unless someone challenges it legally, then it doesn't really matter.

 

[theo]

No first hand knowledge, but it is also possible that they couldn't vote on those units but unless someone challenges it legally, then it doesn't really matter.

OP overtly indicated that the 75% threshold was reached by the Board voting weeks whose owners were currently in default, if I correctly understood her post. That could matter a great deal statistically, depending on just how many such weeks were “used” by the Board to vote, no?

 

[dioxide45]

OP overtly indicated that the 75% threshold was reached by the Board voting weeks currently in default, if I correctly understood her post.

Yes, I understood that too. Unless someone challenges the boards votes, it likely won't make a difference.

 

[theo]

All is well if, in the end, the owner majority view has prevailed. I am nonetheless intrigued by the notion that a very few individuals on the Board of an independent timeshare could potentially “appropriate” and apply a significant number of votes on a “timeshare termination” matter, potentially undermining the owner majority.

Maybe the mere mention of slimy Capital Vacations piqued my curiosity / suspicions here, although OP indicated CV not being involved, other than as being the (soon-to-be-former) mismanagement entity.

 

[rickandcindy23]

This is the future of properties where the owners can actually do this and are independent of the timeshare operator. However, in locations where the timeshare operator still has a hand in governance (all that is needed is one seat on the board for insight) and where the location is desirable, the timeshare operator will scoop up delinquencies and put them in a trust where unsuspecting "points owners" will pay the maintenance fees. The timeshare operator will eventually take over the board of the property and any legacy owners will be at the mercy of the exorbitant fees the timeshare operator pays itself. Eventually all of the legacy owners will give their deeds back, and the timeshare operator will have perfected its plan of having dupes pay the development costs of the hotel it will operate thenceforward. The "timeshare" thing is just a play by developers to fund the development costs. The operation fees are what keeps them going, and as long as people buy the resales and are willing to pay those fees, then it is all good for the new owners and operator/developer. The losers are those who buy from the developer, which is the overarching message of this TUG. Seriously, this forum is amazing to the extent it facilitates second-hand purchasers' enjoyment of timeshares. It will be interesting to see how these things evolve as legacy owners step off. I have not dug into it, but I suspect the points model is a ponzi scheme that might well continue to yield the timeshare operators quite a profit. Resale buyers won't care about reselling themselves; they may just turn the deeds back in cold. I have not looked at the price of points and how that price has changed over the years. If it is increasing, then the operators have hit upon a winning business model.

This is a good point. I think this is happening to us at Hono Koa.

 

[northwoodsgal]

This is how the voting came out. At the last meeting, there were several owners who seemed uniformed until recently about the potential change and were quite verbal about it. With the last big jump in maintenance fees, there was a huge increase in owners not paying. Maintenance fees in 2022 were $579, 2023 $844 and 2024 $1,640.

The results of the vote were to approve the plan for termination. The numbers were as follows:

Vote required – 75% (942)
Votes for termination by owners in good standing - (547)
Votes against termination by owners in good standing - (19)
Votes for termination by Board Association owned unit weeks - (234)
Votes for termination by Board for delinquent unit weeks (320)

Total Votes
1,101 in favor