-
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!
Marriott Aruba Ocean Club Owners Being Ripped Off By Marriott - READ IF AN OWNER
- Thread starter marksue
- Start date
Sorry for not responding in a while but I am just finishing up a cruise and will be spending a few more days relaxing before heading home. While I was gone a got an email from Frank Knox which sounded like all the other Marriott composed emails. As soon as I can I will get it posted.
As to the question about other relevant data in the process of selecting candidates we had to supply resume, why we want the position, and any Real estate or board qualifications as well as area of expertise (Finance, engineering etc). We are checking the bylaws to see if we can get a right in candidate and will communicate with the over 1300 owner sold units who have signed up so far. We continue to grow that list as people go to Aruba and meet others at the Ocean Club they share what we are doing and they sign up.
Recently when in Aruba one of the nominees, who's name will be revealed later went around saying, without realizing he was talking to some of the people on this effort, that those people making noise are trouble makers and should be stopped and should let the board do what it needs to. If in fact he is on the list, there will be an effort to keep him off.
I hope to have the special meeting called prior to the board meeting.
Will provide more on my return home.
As to the question about other relevant data in the process of selecting candidates we had to supply resume, why we want the position, and any Real estate or board qualifications as well as area of expertise (Finance, engineering etc). We are checking the bylaws to see if we can get a right in candidate and will communicate with the over 1300 owner sold units who have signed up so far. We continue to grow that list as people go to Aruba and meet others at the Ocean Club they share what we are doing and they sign up.
Recently when in Aruba one of the nominees, who's name will be revealed later went around saying, without realizing he was talking to some of the people on this effort, that those people making noise are trouble makers and should be stopped and should let the board do what it needs to. If in fact he is on the list, there will be an effort to keep him off.
I hope to have the special meeting called prior to the board meeting.
Will provide more on my return home.
Last edited:
Frank Knox's email
March 2009
Dear Marriott’s Aruba Ocean Club Owner:
Ten Year Renovation
After almost 10 years of extremely hard use (over 94% average occupancy – the highest within Marriott Vacation Club® International), the Aruba Ocean Club will undergo its first major villa renovation beginning this summer. Led by Board Member, Steve Richards, who has a background in construction management and 12 years experience in the hospitality industry, the Board has been working diligently over the past 18 months to ensure that we will receive maximum value for every dollar spent on the upcoming renovation. The overall cost of the project as initially estimated by the Marriott design team has been reduced by almost $2 million by reducing the overall scope of work. For example, we saved 30% on the cost of new appliances (the largest single purchase within the renovation) by simply substituting off-white GE Profile appliances instead of stainless steel appliances. We also ensured that the new look of our resort will be more in keeping with our Caribbean surroundings and that the Ocean Club will have a more distinctive, home-like feel by substituting several custom features to the lobby and in the villas not found at other Marriott Vacation Club International properties.
Marriott’s initial plans called for no work to be done to the villa bathrooms other than a fresh coat of paint. As we all know, our bathrooms desperately need to be upgraded to better utilize what little space there is. The renovation of the bathrooms will include:
1.
Adding a double sink to most bathrooms; more durable granite counter tops
2.
Adding more storage space including drawers to the bathroom vanities
3.
Changing the doors so they swing into the bedroom rather than swing into the bathroom blocking the entrance to the shower
4.
Rebuilding the shower enclosures so they are more functional and do not leak
The Board’s decision to completely renovate all bathrooms added to the overall cost of the project because of the extensive demolition and reconstruction work required to bring our bathrooms up to acceptable standards.
Few Owners are aware that Marriott is providing a direct financial contribution approaching $2,000,000 to our 10-year renovation. Marriott has waived fees that they are entitled to collect as part of their management agreement with the Association and they have offered up their rooms that they would otherwise rent or use for exchange within Marriott Vacation Club International and Interval International®. As a result, Owners who wish to use the property during the period of the renovation will not be turned away.
Future updates will provide additional details specifically about the villa and lobby renovation but here are some specifics about the overall plan:
Because of the current economic conditions, the Board made the decision to split the assessment for the renovation between 2009 and 2010 to ease the burden on Owners. Because the funds to pay for the renovation will be split between two years, the renovation must be accomplished in two phases. 90% of the work including all construction will be done this summer and fall during the first phase while the second phase will be complete in early 2010.
The 2009 renovation begins in mid July 2009 and is anticipated to be completed by Thanksgiving 2009. This phase includes renovation of all villas, hallways, common spaces and the lobby.
During phase one, approximately 18 villas (one entire hallway on one wing of one floor) will be taken out of service for approximately 21 days. When complete, those villas will be put back into service and the next 18 villas will go under renovation until all villas are complete.
Phase Two will occur in early 2010 which include replacing all appliances as well as several other smaller items that will not require that villas be taken out of service.
Because Marriott is absorbing the loss of room inventory during the renovation from the weeks that they own/control, Ocean Club Owners will not be disadvantaged as a result of the renovation.
The lobby renovation will be accomplished as early as possible during Phase One.
Hurricane Omar
Damage caused by last summer’s Hurricane Omar has been repaired at a cost of approximately $100,000 which is far less than originally expected. While the Association carries insurance on the property, the cost of repairs did not reach the level of our deductible so expenses were paid from our maintenance reserves. Similar to the insurance premium on your own home or automobile, you pay an escalated premium for a lower deductible and in Aruba’s southernmost location in the Caribbean, paying that much higher premium is not a sound business decision.
Window Replacement
As you may have seen during visits to Aruba the past several years, many of the double pane, energy efficient windows in the Ocean Club had become cloudy because of broken seals. The original window manufacturer provided replacement windows under warranty. Marriott agreed to pay for the installation of the new windows and to purchase an additional 500 windows should they be needed in the future. To date, over 500 windows have been replaced at no cost to the association (since Marriott absorbed the cost) and we have sufficient windows on hand to replace others that might fail in the future... a benefit that was also paid for by Marriott.
2009 and 2010 Maintenance Fees
Last December the Board e-mailed responses to a number of questions frequently being asked by Owners. One of the updates explained the reasons for the significant increase in 2009 Maintenance Fees compared to prior years. As you may recall, 2009 Maintenance Fees were driven by significant increases in the cost of both electricity and water (up 43% and 22% respectively over 2007 rates), the growing cost of labor in Aruba, a 35% increase in shipping costs, fees and taxes and the cost to repair Hurricane Omar water damage not covered by insurance.
Last September, the cost per kilowatt hour (KWH) of electricity was $.29. The cost of water was $7.24 per unit. These were the rates used by the Board in October to set the 2009 budget which dictated the significant increase in 2009 maintenance fees. With the falling price of oil, the cost of utilities in Aruba has dropped substantially over the past three months. In December, electricity had dropped from $.29 to $.15 per KWH and water was down from $7.24 to $4.16 per unit.
Each year in October the Board sets the maintenance fee for the coming year based on year-to-date actual expenses and other known expenses for the coming year. In October 2008 the Board had no choice but to assume that utility rates in 2009 would be the same, if not more than in 2008. The Board also had to recover a substantial 2008 deficit resulting from unbudgeted increases in utilities and labor as well as unexpected repair and maintenance costs. Later this year, the Board will set the maintenance fee for 2010. If utility rates continue at or near the current level the Board anticipates a year-end surplus.
Look for the next Owner’s Update in March where we will provide more details about the upcoming renovation and a final report on the recently completed roof replacement.
Bon Dia!
And remember those magnificent Aruba sunsets.
March 2009
Dear Marriott’s Aruba Ocean Club Owner:
Ten Year Renovation
After almost 10 years of extremely hard use (over 94% average occupancy – the highest within Marriott Vacation Club® International), the Aruba Ocean Club will undergo its first major villa renovation beginning this summer. Led by Board Member, Steve Richards, who has a background in construction management and 12 years experience in the hospitality industry, the Board has been working diligently over the past 18 months to ensure that we will receive maximum value for every dollar spent on the upcoming renovation. The overall cost of the project as initially estimated by the Marriott design team has been reduced by almost $2 million by reducing the overall scope of work. For example, we saved 30% on the cost of new appliances (the largest single purchase within the renovation) by simply substituting off-white GE Profile appliances instead of stainless steel appliances. We also ensured that the new look of our resort will be more in keeping with our Caribbean surroundings and that the Ocean Club will have a more distinctive, home-like feel by substituting several custom features to the lobby and in the villas not found at other Marriott Vacation Club International properties.
Marriott’s initial plans called for no work to be done to the villa bathrooms other than a fresh coat of paint. As we all know, our bathrooms desperately need to be upgraded to better utilize what little space there is. The renovation of the bathrooms will include:
1.
Adding a double sink to most bathrooms; more durable granite counter tops
2.
Adding more storage space including drawers to the bathroom vanities
3.
Changing the doors so they swing into the bedroom rather than swing into the bathroom blocking the entrance to the shower
4.
Rebuilding the shower enclosures so they are more functional and do not leak
The Board’s decision to completely renovate all bathrooms added to the overall cost of the project because of the extensive demolition and reconstruction work required to bring our bathrooms up to acceptable standards.
Few Owners are aware that Marriott is providing a direct financial contribution approaching $2,000,000 to our 10-year renovation. Marriott has waived fees that they are entitled to collect as part of their management agreement with the Association and they have offered up their rooms that they would otherwise rent or use for exchange within Marriott Vacation Club International and Interval International®. As a result, Owners who wish to use the property during the period of the renovation will not be turned away.
Future updates will provide additional details specifically about the villa and lobby renovation but here are some specifics about the overall plan:
Because of the current economic conditions, the Board made the decision to split the assessment for the renovation between 2009 and 2010 to ease the burden on Owners. Because the funds to pay for the renovation will be split between two years, the renovation must be accomplished in two phases. 90% of the work including all construction will be done this summer and fall during the first phase while the second phase will be complete in early 2010.
The 2009 renovation begins in mid July 2009 and is anticipated to be completed by Thanksgiving 2009. This phase includes renovation of all villas, hallways, common spaces and the lobby.
During phase one, approximately 18 villas (one entire hallway on one wing of one floor) will be taken out of service for approximately 21 days. When complete, those villas will be put back into service and the next 18 villas will go under renovation until all villas are complete.
Phase Two will occur in early 2010 which include replacing all appliances as well as several other smaller items that will not require that villas be taken out of service.
Because Marriott is absorbing the loss of room inventory during the renovation from the weeks that they own/control, Ocean Club Owners will not be disadvantaged as a result of the renovation.
The lobby renovation will be accomplished as early as possible during Phase One.
Hurricane Omar
Damage caused by last summer’s Hurricane Omar has been repaired at a cost of approximately $100,000 which is far less than originally expected. While the Association carries insurance on the property, the cost of repairs did not reach the level of our deductible so expenses were paid from our maintenance reserves. Similar to the insurance premium on your own home or automobile, you pay an escalated premium for a lower deductible and in Aruba’s southernmost location in the Caribbean, paying that much higher premium is not a sound business decision.
Window Replacement
As you may have seen during visits to Aruba the past several years, many of the double pane, energy efficient windows in the Ocean Club had become cloudy because of broken seals. The original window manufacturer provided replacement windows under warranty. Marriott agreed to pay for the installation of the new windows and to purchase an additional 500 windows should they be needed in the future. To date, over 500 windows have been replaced at no cost to the association (since Marriott absorbed the cost) and we have sufficient windows on hand to replace others that might fail in the future... a benefit that was also paid for by Marriott.
2009 and 2010 Maintenance Fees
Last December the Board e-mailed responses to a number of questions frequently being asked by Owners. One of the updates explained the reasons for the significant increase in 2009 Maintenance Fees compared to prior years. As you may recall, 2009 Maintenance Fees were driven by significant increases in the cost of both electricity and water (up 43% and 22% respectively over 2007 rates), the growing cost of labor in Aruba, a 35% increase in shipping costs, fees and taxes and the cost to repair Hurricane Omar water damage not covered by insurance.
Last September, the cost per kilowatt hour (KWH) of electricity was $.29. The cost of water was $7.24 per unit. These were the rates used by the Board in October to set the 2009 budget which dictated the significant increase in 2009 maintenance fees. With the falling price of oil, the cost of utilities in Aruba has dropped substantially over the past three months. In December, electricity had dropped from $.29 to $.15 per KWH and water was down from $7.24 to $4.16 per unit.
Each year in October the Board sets the maintenance fee for the coming year based on year-to-date actual expenses and other known expenses for the coming year. In October 2008 the Board had no choice but to assume that utility rates in 2009 would be the same, if not more than in 2008. The Board also had to recover a substantial 2008 deficit resulting from unbudgeted increases in utilities and labor as well as unexpected repair and maintenance costs. Later this year, the Board will set the maintenance fee for 2010. If utility rates continue at or near the current level the Board anticipates a year-end surplus.
Look for the next Owner’s Update in March where we will provide more details about the upcoming renovation and a final report on the recently completed roof replacement.
Bon Dia!
And remember those magnificent Aruba sunsets.
tlwmkw
newbie
Marksue,
I just read this e-mail from Frank Knox and it all seems to make good sense- you haven't really commented on this and I wonder what your take on it is? I was interested to hear that the board had actually increased the costs over what Marriott has proposed.
Also, you said you are close to getting your quorum for the special meeting/election- what exactly do you plan to do if you get control of the board? Is your intention simply to stop the renovation altogether or do you just want to make it cheaper than the current proposal? Or do you want to oust Marriott and not have the Marriott affiliation at all? I know you feel Marriott has been dishonest and opaque but how will you change things? These are all things you must consider if you achieve your goal.
The reason I mention this is that some friends own at another Carribean timeshare which was managed on the cheap for some years (no renovations, no reserves, poor overall upkeep) and they now have a new manager who was brought in to bring the place back up to being a good quality resort that people would want to visit. This was the choice of the owners since the resort had gotten so bad, however the new manager is proposing upgrades and major expenses in order to achieve this. The problem is that you can't have a cheap and world class resort- you have to make a choice of one or the other. If you aren't careful you may get in the same boat and have even higher expenses later just to keep the place habitable. The building/roof repairs have to be done as do the weather proofing so that seems an unavoidable expense and if you do oust Marriott you would also lose the 43% that they have pledged toward the roof as well as all their corporate discounts on appliances/furniture/etc. I do think you need to consider this because you may end up costing yourself more money than even what is currently on the table (and if you get lawyers involved the expense will skyrocket exponentially).
Just my 2 cents- I wish you well no matter what happens but am concerned about the unintended consequences that may result in the future.
tlwmkw
I just read this e-mail from Frank Knox and it all seems to make good sense- you haven't really commented on this and I wonder what your take on it is? I was interested to hear that the board had actually increased the costs over what Marriott has proposed.
Also, you said you are close to getting your quorum for the special meeting/election- what exactly do you plan to do if you get control of the board? Is your intention simply to stop the renovation altogether or do you just want to make it cheaper than the current proposal? Or do you want to oust Marriott and not have the Marriott affiliation at all? I know you feel Marriott has been dishonest and opaque but how will you change things? These are all things you must consider if you achieve your goal.
The reason I mention this is that some friends own at another Carribean timeshare which was managed on the cheap for some years (no renovations, no reserves, poor overall upkeep) and they now have a new manager who was brought in to bring the place back up to being a good quality resort that people would want to visit. This was the choice of the owners since the resort had gotten so bad, however the new manager is proposing upgrades and major expenses in order to achieve this. The problem is that you can't have a cheap and world class resort- you have to make a choice of one or the other. If you aren't careful you may get in the same boat and have even higher expenses later just to keep the place habitable. The building/roof repairs have to be done as do the weather proofing so that seems an unavoidable expense and if you do oust Marriott you would also lose the 43% that they have pledged toward the roof as well as all their corporate discounts on appliances/furniture/etc. I do think you need to consider this because you may end up costing yourself more money than even what is currently on the table (and if you get lawyers involved the expense will skyrocket exponentially).
Just my 2 cents- I wish you well no matter what happens but am concerned about the unintended consequences that may result in the future.
tlwmkw
My 2 cents
Hi
In response to your inquiries to Marksue, I think its important for you to know that the supporters are not looking to walk away from Marriott. We want to make sure we are appropriately represented on the board and that we receive accurate and timely information. We want to make sure we are only charged what we are responsible for. I am sure everyone that owns in this timeshare wants a quality product.
Others feel free to weigh in as I know you will.
Hi
In response to your inquiries to Marksue, I think its important for you to know that the supporters are not looking to walk away from Marriott. We want to make sure we are appropriately represented on the board and that we receive accurate and timely information. We want to make sure we are only charged what we are responsible for. I am sure everyone that owns in this timeshare wants a quality product.
Others feel free to weigh in as I know you will.
ecwinch
TUG Member
- Joined
- Jun 6, 2005
- Messages
- 3,737
- Reaction score
- 1,125
- Location
- San Antonio
- Resorts Owned
- Marriott Harbour Point (HP), Kauai Beach Villas, Riverside Suites, WorldMark Pts (WM), Wyndham Pts
Hi
In response to your inquiries to Marksue, I think its important for you to know that the supporters are not looking to walk away from Marriott. We want to make sure we are appropriately represented on the board and that we receive accurate and timely information. We want to make sure we are only charged what we are responsible for. I am sure everyone that owns in this timeshare wants a quality product.
Others feel free to weigh in as I know you will.
If this a modification of your groups position, I think that is a great thing. And I think these are things that most owners would want, and we would all support.
But I do think you have to keep in mind that in course of this long thread, your group has accused Marriott of conduct that is at the least unethical, if not criminal, and mostly commonly under the threat of potential legal action. I do not see how you would not think that separation from Marriott would be a natural by-product of the manner in which you have encouraged owners to support the cause. You have made them out to be a manipulating, dishonest, unethical corporation only concerned with gouging the owners and increasing their profit margins. Why would you continue to do business with them?
And as a business owner, I certainly would not want customers who think of me in that fashion.
And if you stop viewing every BOD response to your concerns through that same prism, I think you will find that MVCI has made significant contributions to the challenges at OC. Likewise the BOD has been attempting to communicate, but every effort has been slammed as being more MVCI provided drivel. I agree with tlwmkw, it would interesting to hear the response to Frank Knox's letter. It's tone and appearance, would seem to be what you have asked for.
Last edited:
tlwmkw
newbie
Lovearuba,
I'm not challenging you guys, or your efforts, I'm just asking what your feelings are about the recent e-mail and also what you plan to do to change things at the OC. I don't see how you can avoid many of the expenses- the only ones you can really get rid of are the renovation and having Marriott as the manager of the resort. If you do stall the renovation then it may be more expensive in the future and also make the resort less desirable. I would imagine many owners would be upset if the resort became tired and had lots of old, broken appliances. Ditto if Marriott is gone (that would save you their 10% but new managers will also charge a fee so I don't know how much you will actually save- not to mention the corporate discounts that you get with a large company like Marriott).
The other good news was that some of the anticipated expenses are decreasing- you may find your expenses won't be as high as you originally thought. What do you and marksue think about all this?
tlwmkw
I'm not challenging you guys, or your efforts, I'm just asking what your feelings are about the recent e-mail and also what you plan to do to change things at the OC. I don't see how you can avoid many of the expenses- the only ones you can really get rid of are the renovation and having Marriott as the manager of the resort. If you do stall the renovation then it may be more expensive in the future and also make the resort less desirable. I would imagine many owners would be upset if the resort became tired and had lots of old, broken appliances. Ditto if Marriott is gone (that would save you their 10% but new managers will also charge a fee so I don't know how much you will actually save- not to mention the corporate discounts that you get with a large company like Marriott).
The other good news was that some of the anticipated expenses are decreasing- you may find your expenses won't be as high as you originally thought. What do you and marksue think about all this?
tlwmkw
ecwinch
This thread has appropriately addressed many concerns from timeshare owners. I'm not sure if you own at the ocean club or not, its unclear since you do not list them.
My input has been provided and it is my input. You really do not need to agree with me or disagree. You also dont need to challenge everything a supporter of taking action has to say. You are entitled to your opinion as we are ours.
Have a great day
This thread has appropriately addressed many concerns from timeshare owners. I'm not sure if you own at the ocean club or not, its unclear since you do not list them.
My input has been provided and it is my input. You really do not need to agree with me or disagree. You also dont need to challenge everything a supporter of taking action has to say. You are entitled to your opinion as we are ours.
Have a great day
ecwinch
TUG Member
- Joined
- Jun 6, 2005
- Messages
- 3,737
- Reaction score
- 1,125
- Location
- San Antonio
- Resorts Owned
- Marriott Harbour Point (HP), Kauai Beach Villas, Riverside Suites, WorldMark Pts (WM), Wyndham Pts
I have never understood how the issue of owning at Ocean Club is a factor. But to answer the question directly, I own at MVCI Harbour Point. If that somehow diminishes my opinion, so be it.
As I pointed out in post #514, I think it is important to the dialog to have some balance to the discussion. Your group has engage in a deliberate campaign to discredit the actions of your duly elected BOD. Every communication they provide is posted here, and followed up with a biased interpretation of that communication. That demagoguery cries out for balance.
You have a better day.
Last edited:
The intent of the owners effort is to put in place a board that is an owner friendly board and will look out for the owner’s interests and be more transparent. Marriott has walked all over this board and the actions of the board indicate they are following Marriott’s directions. the current board is operating in a dark room and no one knows what they are doing. We want to work with Marriott but with an arms length relationship. We want the board to represent the owners interests and work hard with Marriott to meet those needs or come up with a liveable solution for both parties.
I do believe Marriott was deceptive in the way they sold the Ocean Club. They never told anyone the story of the building and that it stood open to the elements for over 5 years. I know in my discussions when I bought I mentioned the reason I bought was Marriott was known for quality. If I knew they did not build the building I would have done more investigation.
As per Franks letter, most of what he has in there is the same stuff we have been hearing. He says they made the decision to split the assessment due to the economic conditions. I happen to know that Allan and I were speaking about the assessment prior to the severe economic downturn. In fact Frank wanted to have the assessment due with the annual dues for 2009 but owners were already told it would be in June. Instead they are moving it to April and next year will be with the dues, which once again is against what was previously told to owners. We have always questioned why the board has not pushed Marriott to pay for the waterproofing and the damage caused by TS Omar. Once again that is not addressed. The questions owners have been asking the board for months have yet to be answered.
When he talks about charging less than Marriott suggested is not the truth. I had a conversation a while back with MVCI and they mentioned that what the board wanted to do for the renovations was 5m more than what Marriott recommended. Based on Frank’s letter about the bathroom I believe Marriott over Frank. The bathrooms were quite efficient and just painting would have been fine. The kitchen is what was recommended by Marriott. But if this is what the owners want, let the woners know what the costs are and then look for a final decision. Today these decisions are made without any owners input.
Why did Steve have to purchase hand blown chandeliers put in the lobby? Off the shelf lighting would have been fine and Marriott was trying to stop Steve from purchasing the custom made chandeliers.
We the owners are not looking to pull away from Marriott or do things are the cheap, but we do want the owners to have more transparency and say regarding their property.
Why did the board refuse to listen to Allan when he suggested letting the owners decide if they wanted to put off the renovations 1 year due to economic conditions. Frank and the board has locked Allan out of all conversations and decisions because he is friendly to the owners.
Even the nomination committee was done with a hidden agenda. One of the people selected was not qualified last year, yet a person who was quite qualified was not even spoken to. The difference, the person selected, believes in the lack of transparency.
I do believe Marriott was deceptive in the way they sold the Ocean Club. They never told anyone the story of the building and that it stood open to the elements for over 5 years. I know in my discussions when I bought I mentioned the reason I bought was Marriott was known for quality. If I knew they did not build the building I would have done more investigation.
As per Franks letter, most of what he has in there is the same stuff we have been hearing. He says they made the decision to split the assessment due to the economic conditions. I happen to know that Allan and I were speaking about the assessment prior to the severe economic downturn. In fact Frank wanted to have the assessment due with the annual dues for 2009 but owners were already told it would be in June. Instead they are moving it to April and next year will be with the dues, which once again is against what was previously told to owners. We have always questioned why the board has not pushed Marriott to pay for the waterproofing and the damage caused by TS Omar. Once again that is not addressed. The questions owners have been asking the board for months have yet to be answered.
When he talks about charging less than Marriott suggested is not the truth. I had a conversation a while back with MVCI and they mentioned that what the board wanted to do for the renovations was 5m more than what Marriott recommended. Based on Frank’s letter about the bathroom I believe Marriott over Frank. The bathrooms were quite efficient and just painting would have been fine. The kitchen is what was recommended by Marriott. But if this is what the owners want, let the woners know what the costs are and then look for a final decision. Today these decisions are made without any owners input.
Why did Steve have to purchase hand blown chandeliers put in the lobby? Off the shelf lighting would have been fine and Marriott was trying to stop Steve from purchasing the custom made chandeliers.
We the owners are not looking to pull away from Marriott or do things are the cheap, but we do want the owners to have more transparency and say regarding their property.
Why did the board refuse to listen to Allan when he suggested letting the owners decide if they wanted to put off the renovations 1 year due to economic conditions. Frank and the board has locked Allan out of all conversations and decisions because he is friendly to the owners.
Even the nomination committee was done with a hidden agenda. One of the people selected was not qualified last year, yet a person who was quite qualified was not even spoken to. The difference, the person selected, believes in the lack of transparency.
Last edited:
OCsun
TUG Member
I felt like the letter from Marriott showed that they have heard our complaints and are trying to move in the right direction. I was pleasantly surprised that Marriott has looked at the cost of appliances and decided to use off white, rather than the more expensive Stainless Steel. If they work toward reducing our maintenance fees, I will be even happier! There are many things I love about the Ocean Club but like everyone these days, keeping costs to a reasonable level is a big priority. JMHO
tlwmkw
newbie
OCsun,
Are you an owner at the OC? I assume that you are by you screen name but was just curious. I only ask because I was wondering what owners had thought of the e-mail that was posted above and you were the only one who really has addressed that. It does seem that whether owners like it or not the expenses of doing business in Aruba are high and I don't know how the board (or Marriott, or anyone) can lower those prices. As I said you can delay or stop the renovation but I would imagine many owners would be upset by that too. It's a very difficult situation and I think one that all Marriott owners are watching with interest to see how it resolves.
tlwmkw
Are you an owner at the OC? I assume that you are by you screen name but was just curious. I only ask because I was wondering what owners had thought of the e-mail that was posted above and you were the only one who really has addressed that. It does seem that whether owners like it or not the expenses of doing business in Aruba are high and I don't know how the board (or Marriott, or anyone) can lower those prices. As I said you can delay or stop the renovation but I would imagine many owners would be upset by that too. It's a very difficult situation and I think one that all Marriott owners are watching with interest to see how it resolves.
tlwmkw
TLW.. There are ways that cost could have been curtailed. Previously there was a shared resource between the OC and SC. This year the board decided to have a dedicated resource for the OC. It is fine they decided to have a dedicated resource, but why did they also have to hire an assistant for him. When they looked at the energy costs and inflation they used June numbers vs the Sept numbers which were dramatically different. If Marriott paid for damages due to the defective building they sold to owners maint costs would have been lowered. No one is saying that the majority of the increase is valid, but where was the financial responsibility with some of the items where there were opportunities to control the costs.
It is hard to justify a 1 bedroom in the OC costing more than a 2 bedroom in the SC. I know this is the case because I own a 1 bedroom in the OC and a 2 in the SC. Many of these questions regarding flexible costs have been asked of the board with no response.
It is hard to justify a 1 bedroom in the OC costing more than a 2 bedroom in the SC. I know this is the case because I own a 1 bedroom in the OC and a 2 in the SC. Many of these questions regarding flexible costs have been asked of the board with no response.
ecwinch
TUG Member
- Joined
- Jun 6, 2005
- Messages
- 3,737
- Reaction score
- 1,125
- Location
- San Antonio
- Resorts Owned
- Marriott Harbour Point (HP), Kauai Beach Villas, Riverside Suites, WorldMark Pts (WM), Wyndham Pts
Marksue
Hindsight is always 20/20. It is always easy to second guess their actions, and most of the points you raise here have been explained.
For the newcomers, MarkSue knows that the BOD has considered legal recourse to address the defective building claim, and decided instead to pursue a strategy of working with MVCI to address the issue. The 43% offer is a result of that strategy.
So if your special meeting efforts lead to a new slate of directors (though according to the by-laws it is not certain that could happen), and the new BOD comes to the same conclusion to not sue MVCI, are you going to be satisfied? Or are you going to then claim that MVCI subverted the special meeting process?
Is your real agenda to find grounds to force MVCI to buyback your unit, because you enjoy the SC more?
Hindsight is always 20/20. It is always easy to second guess their actions, and most of the points you raise here have been explained.
For the newcomers, MarkSue knows that the BOD has considered legal recourse to address the defective building claim, and decided instead to pursue a strategy of working with MVCI to address the issue. The 43% offer is a result of that strategy.
So if your special meeting efforts lead to a new slate of directors (though according to the by-laws it is not certain that could happen), and the new BOD comes to the same conclusion to not sue MVCI, are you going to be satisfied? Or are you going to then claim that MVCI subverted the special meeting process?
Is your real agenda to find grounds to force MVCI to buyback your unit, because you enjoy the SC more?
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jun 6, 2005
- Messages
- 15,822
- Reaction score
- 1,767
- Resorts Owned
-
Grandview At Las Vegas
[triennial - points]
Unfortunately, Hindsight Is Not Always 20-20.
With luck, our hindsight will be 20/20 & we can learn from an experience no more & no less wisdom than the experience teaches.
The trouble is, sometimes people don't see clearly even after the fact, & they just keeping on making the same mistakes over & over.
So it goes.
We can hope that it is.
With luck, our hindsight will be 20/20 & we can learn from an experience no more & no less wisdom than the experience teaches.
The trouble is, sometimes people don't see clearly even after the fact, & they just keeping on making the same mistakes over & over.
So it goes.
-- Alan Cole, McLean (Fairfax County), Virginia, USA.
Eric there are many things that we want with the new BOD. I have never stated I am looking to have MVCI buy back my unit and that is not the intent. The intent is to provide transparency to the owners and bring back a bod that will focus on owner rights vs giving in to Marriott. Let the owners have a say on items that will impact them financially now or in the future, it is their property that is being impacted.
There is no confidence in the board today and there is also no trust in the existing board. When it was presented to give the owners a say on some key decisions that had major financial impacts, it was 4 - 1 against the decision to let the owners have a vote.
If there is confidence in the board what ever decisions are made and there is transparency by keeping the owners informed and taking their input then many of us will accept the decisions of the new board.
The fact the board refuses to speak with owners since the forcing out of Allan tells you a lot about the current board. Having a Marriott employee answering questions to the board, tells you a lot about the current board. The board has a fiduciary duty to the owners and they have failed at that responsibility.
There is no confidence in the board today and there is also no trust in the existing board. When it was presented to give the owners a say on some key decisions that had major financial impacts, it was 4 - 1 against the decision to let the owners have a vote.
If there is confidence in the board what ever decisions are made and there is transparency by keeping the owners informed and taking their input then many of us will accept the decisions of the new board.
The fact the board refuses to speak with owners since the forcing out of Allan tells you a lot about the current board. Having a Marriott employee answering questions to the board, tells you a lot about the current board. The board has a fiduciary duty to the owners and they have failed at that responsibility.
ecwinch
TUG Member
- Joined
- Jun 6, 2005
- Messages
- 3,737
- Reaction score
- 1,125
- Location
- San Antonio
- Resorts Owned
- Marriott Harbour Point (HP), Kauai Beach Villas, Riverside Suites, WorldMark Pts (WM), Wyndham Pts
I understand your view of the current BOD. While you see items from a certain perspective, I simply see it differently.
Putting refurbishment issues to a vote would result in the not insignificant expense of having a vote, further delay in executing the plan, and circumvents the entire purpose for having a BOD.
And if the vote is unfavorable, then what is the BOD to do? The vote does not diminish the need for the refurbishment. This leads to a whole different set of problems. For once you have that vote, how do you move forward? With another vote the next time? Then do you vote on every significant decision that is normally within the authority of the BOD? That path undermines the authority of the BOD, and sets a precedence for the future.
And I do not have a copy of the by-laws, but typically a vote would be subject to quorum rules. So if not enough owners vote, then a second vote would typically be required to move forward.
And given the disinterested nature of most timeshare owners, there is no assurance that any vote would result in a course of action that would represent the will of the majority of owners or the fiduciary responsibility of the BOD.
Putting refurbishment issues to a vote would result in the not insignificant expense of having a vote, further delay in executing the plan, and circumvents the entire purpose for having a BOD.
And if the vote is unfavorable, then what is the BOD to do? The vote does not diminish the need for the refurbishment. This leads to a whole different set of problems. For once you have that vote, how do you move forward? With another vote the next time? Then do you vote on every significant decision that is normally within the authority of the BOD? That path undermines the authority of the BOD, and sets a precedence for the future.
And I do not have a copy of the by-laws, but typically a vote would be subject to quorum rules. So if not enough owners vote, then a second vote would typically be required to move forward.
And given the disinterested nature of most timeshare owners, there is no assurance that any vote would result in a course of action that would represent the will of the majority of owners or the fiduciary responsibility of the BOD.
Last edited:
cant blame people for trying to get change
Seems some people won't stick their necks out for change and what's right and others will. Those of us who support the movement on this thread believe that change is needed. Others that are owners and who decide not to pursue it either are afraid of Marriott repurcussions or do not care to change things either way. I respect both opinions and I'm glad this thread was opened to bring attention to a serious issue.
Seems some people won't stick their necks out for change and what's right and others will. Those of us who support the movement on this thread believe that change is needed. Others that are owners and who decide not to pursue it either are afraid of Marriott repurcussions or do not care to change things either way. I respect both opinions and I'm glad this thread was opened to bring attention to a serious issue.
Nature of the Beast
Timeshares in general,especially years ago, were a vehicle for prepaid vacations where if used to their max usually broke even if purchased in full ,at about 7 years.
Due to the aging of these resorts, money is needed to update every once in a while.
Costs keep on escalating in everything.
Now, due to the over abundance of resorts compounded with the bad economy, the costs of maintaining has reached levels in excess of renting.
Lesson taught to all of us that have owned for many years has been that the savings we enjoyed for a time- It's now Time to pay the Piper.
And what a time.
Like the subprime situation sort of.
The choices are to walk away,pay it and shut up,or try to change things.
For new prospects who are looking to buy, obviously DON"T. just rent without the liability.
What about the rest of us?
How are we going to change things for the better and still maintain a luxury resort?
My opinion has been that Marriott take more charge in sharing more of our costs since it is their name on the building and that is why we bought in the first place.
That would encourage new buyers due to their showing integrity.
If new potential buyers see the costs why would they buy the cow for the glass of milk.
I feel that we are in limbo.
We personally will continue to go to the OC with the regret of having purchased our weeks.
I do not want the quality to suffer though.
Timeshares in general,especially years ago, were a vehicle for prepaid vacations where if used to their max usually broke even if purchased in full ,at about 7 years.
Due to the aging of these resorts, money is needed to update every once in a while.
Costs keep on escalating in everything.
Now, due to the over abundance of resorts compounded with the bad economy, the costs of maintaining has reached levels in excess of renting.
Lesson taught to all of us that have owned for many years has been that the savings we enjoyed for a time- It's now Time to pay the Piper.
And what a time.
Like the subprime situation sort of.
The choices are to walk away,pay it and shut up,or try to change things.
For new prospects who are looking to buy, obviously DON"T. just rent without the liability.
What about the rest of us?
How are we going to change things for the better and still maintain a luxury resort?
My opinion has been that Marriott take more charge in sharing more of our costs since it is their name on the building and that is why we bought in the first place.
That would encourage new buyers due to their showing integrity.
If new potential buyers see the costs why would they buy the cow for the glass of milk.
I feel that we are in limbo.
We personally will continue to go to the OC with the regret of having purchased our weeks.
I do not want the quality to suffer though.
It's not Marriott's resort - it's the OWNERS resort. Why treat it differently?
This is a totally wrong view of how/what a timeshare operation really is - fostered in part by the "need" to be a "XXX" (in this case Marriott but it could be Hilton, DVC, DRI, whatever). The only thing that name offers is the initial style and cost of the development while it truly belongs to company "XXX". They develop the concept and sell the dream. Once that process is complete - the resort is basically completed and sold out - then the owners are the individual buyers of each of those intervals. The problem starts when the original builder / seller hangs on as the management. The tendency is they act like, and many owners incorrectly feel like, they are the resort owners / operators but all they really do is operate the resort for the individual owners. The management do not and SHOULD NOT be making decisions on how things operate, what costs are and certainly not putting money into the operation as they are employed by - not owners of - the complex. It is a mess, as you see right here, when the lines get all blurred and expectations are incorrect. Responsibilities are ignored (by the real owner /operators) and handled by the wrong group (non-owner, management who should merely be implementing the owners directions). Add in perceived or actual control of the BOD - which should be the ultimate owner watchdog and entity responsible for operations and maintenance - by the developer and things are completely out of hand.
That is why my ideal timeshare is built with quality in a desirable area by a reputable developer who sets up the proper documents, sells the dream and turns over the operation to the owners. I'd take another step to have those owners - through the dully elected BOD - obtain the very best management company (or handle it in house IF they can) as their agents to operate and maintain the resort to the standards THEY, the owners, desire and THEY are responsible for the costs. Done correctly that model - which just happens to be the exact model envisioned by 98% of all timeshare documents - results in a satisfied ownership that knows the true cost of operation/maintenance/improvements. Far too many - and this resort certainly seems to qualify - seem to think of the original developer as the "owner" and somehow responsible like a parent for the resort even to the point of paying for things they have no business being involved with anymore. Having the developer hang around as management fosters that and leads to highly undesirable situations as we see in this thread. No matter how good a name an organization has the best people to handle 10,25,50+ years of operation, maintenance and upgrade of the resort are the individual owners of that resort through the extremely powerful and accountable elected BOD. Trusting that to a profit based developer over the long run - even just to keep the "name" on the project - is a mistake IMO. Let the resort be the best it can be on its own, let the owners have the pride of ownership and the shoulder the costs of operation and ultimately the resort will be what the majority desire. That, rather than artificially inflated expenses and overhead for a "name", is a far better outcome. If you have problems with the management boot them. Get professionals in, get a Board you have faith in and make the resort the best you as a collection of owners can afford. The rest is fluff and needless expense that leads to high expenses, dissatisfaction and the very problems this thread so perfectly documents. Stand on your own, run the place to your standards and enjoy. It would be far better to run things for 20-30% less yet have as good or better quality than paying the overhead for name "XXX" which is only sizzle not the steak. It's the resort - not the name - that is really important.
This is a totally wrong view of how/what a timeshare operation really is - fostered in part by the "need" to be a "XXX" (in this case Marriott but it could be Hilton, DVC, DRI, whatever). The only thing that name offers is the initial style and cost of the development while it truly belongs to company "XXX". They develop the concept and sell the dream. Once that process is complete - the resort is basically completed and sold out - then the owners are the individual buyers of each of those intervals. The problem starts when the original builder / seller hangs on as the management. The tendency is they act like, and many owners incorrectly feel like, they are the resort owners / operators but all they really do is operate the resort for the individual owners. The management do not and SHOULD NOT be making decisions on how things operate, what costs are and certainly not putting money into the operation as they are employed by - not owners of - the complex. It is a mess, as you see right here, when the lines get all blurred and expectations are incorrect. Responsibilities are ignored (by the real owner /operators) and handled by the wrong group (non-owner, management who should merely be implementing the owners directions). Add in perceived or actual control of the BOD - which should be the ultimate owner watchdog and entity responsible for operations and maintenance - by the developer and things are completely out of hand.
That is why my ideal timeshare is built with quality in a desirable area by a reputable developer who sets up the proper documents, sells the dream and turns over the operation to the owners. I'd take another step to have those owners - through the dully elected BOD - obtain the very best management company (or handle it in house IF they can) as their agents to operate and maintain the resort to the standards THEY, the owners, desire and THEY are responsible for the costs. Done correctly that model - which just happens to be the exact model envisioned by 98% of all timeshare documents - results in a satisfied ownership that knows the true cost of operation/maintenance/improvements. Far too many - and this resort certainly seems to qualify - seem to think of the original developer as the "owner" and somehow responsible like a parent for the resort even to the point of paying for things they have no business being involved with anymore. Having the developer hang around as management fosters that and leads to highly undesirable situations as we see in this thread. No matter how good a name an organization has the best people to handle 10,25,50+ years of operation, maintenance and upgrade of the resort are the individual owners of that resort through the extremely powerful and accountable elected BOD. Trusting that to a profit based developer over the long run - even just to keep the "name" on the project - is a mistake IMO. Let the resort be the best it can be on its own, let the owners have the pride of ownership and the shoulder the costs of operation and ultimately the resort will be what the majority desire. That, rather than artificially inflated expenses and overhead for a "name", is a far better outcome. If you have problems with the management boot them. Get professionals in, get a Board you have faith in and make the resort the best you as a collection of owners can afford. The rest is fluff and needless expense that leads to high expenses, dissatisfaction and the very problems this thread so perfectly documents. Stand on your own, run the place to your standards and enjoy. It would be far better to run things for 20-30% less yet have as good or better quality than paying the overhead for name "XXX" which is only sizzle not the steak. It's the resort - not the name - that is really important.
ecwinch
TUG Member
- Joined
- Jun 6, 2005
- Messages
- 3,737
- Reaction score
- 1,125
- Location
- San Antonio
- Resorts Owned
- Marriott Harbour Point (HP), Kauai Beach Villas, Riverside Suites, WorldMark Pts (WM), Wyndham Pts
TimeOS
I think there are different timeshare models for different people. I personally would not want your "ideal" timeshare, as it would require too much involvement on my behalf. And I think a lot of timeshares start on that path and over time just become a second rate resort where keeping costs low becomes the primary driver. IMHO - the ones who manage to maintain their quality are the exception rather than the rule. And those that do succeed usually are run by a small core of dedicated owners (i.e. Cypress Pointe for one), which may not be a sustainable or scalable model.
That is why I choose the name-brand chains. I want professionals in charge. I want them to enforce and maintain high quality standards to ensure a consistent vacation experience. I want to have multiple locations to choose from, with new ones added regularly. I am comfortable that I am going to pay a premium for those benefits.
There is nothing wrong with your "ideal" timeshare, it just is not right for me.
I think there are different timeshare models for different people. I personally would not want your "ideal" timeshare, as it would require too much involvement on my behalf. And I think a lot of timeshares start on that path and over time just become a second rate resort where keeping costs low becomes the primary driver. IMHO - the ones who manage to maintain their quality are the exception rather than the rule. And those that do succeed usually are run by a small core of dedicated owners (i.e. Cypress Pointe for one), which may not be a sustainable or scalable model.
That is why I choose the name-brand chains. I want professionals in charge. I want them to enforce and maintain high quality standards to ensure a consistent vacation experience. I want to have multiple locations to choose from, with new ones added regularly. I am comfortable that I am going to pay a premium for those benefits.
There is nothing wrong with your "ideal" timeshare, it just is not right for me.
Last edited:
The lines must be clear and the value defined
Eric - I know what you mean as I too belong to a "non-ideal" system with Wyndham. I accept the fact that I must live with their control as I realized it operates that way from day 1. "The Professionals" of that group seem far less able than the third party management our independent resort pays. The Marriott issue is a little less clear as they truly have no business being involved with operations as a decision maker after the first initial sell out years. If they would act (and owners treat them) as simply a management under the control of the BOD there wouldn't be a problem. It would be the free choice and perceived value of that BOD - representing all the owners - that any extra charged brings in value desired and worth paying for. But, in almost every case I've looked at, the management seems to feel they are in control (and if they have the BOD in hand maybe they are!) and that leads to this type of problem. Certainly nothing wrong with wanting the resort tied to "XXX" brand of quality / reputation. If the owners see the value that's all that matters - it's their resort and call. But company "XXX" calling the shots can easily lead to abuses and that worries. me. I find myself torn over MarkSue's approach as I'm all for owners rights and applaud the willingness to take on what may be seen as a problem situation. But then I read some of the "ideas" and fixes proposed and can tell they are unrealistic and completely improper given the history, age and responsibilities of a owner operated timeshare which for many years OC has been. It is high time the BOD represents the owners and tells Marriott how things will be - not the other way around. But it is also far past the time when it is reasonable to expect big checks from Marriott tp pay for real or imagined problems as those are - and have been for over half a decade - the responsibility of the Association / BOD. Marriott has been the hired help and nothing more for a long time. Put the responsibility, costs and planning where it belongs. It's not (or at least shouldn't be) in Marriott's hands anymore. A responsible, independent elected BOD would handle that and ensure that the owners desires are met. A BOD under a developers thumb will always bastardize the system and that can't lead to anything good. As always this sure is an interesting story and I enjoy hearing the progress and updates. I really hope it shakes out for the best of the owners and everyone sees it as a good result.
Eric - I know what you mean as I too belong to a "non-ideal" system with Wyndham. I accept the fact that I must live with their control as I realized it operates that way from day 1. "The Professionals" of that group seem far less able than the third party management our independent resort pays. The Marriott issue is a little less clear as they truly have no business being involved with operations as a decision maker after the first initial sell out years. If they would act (and owners treat them) as simply a management under the control of the BOD there wouldn't be a problem. It would be the free choice and perceived value of that BOD - representing all the owners - that any extra charged brings in value desired and worth paying for. But, in almost every case I've looked at, the management seems to feel they are in control (and if they have the BOD in hand maybe they are!) and that leads to this type of problem. Certainly nothing wrong with wanting the resort tied to "XXX" brand of quality / reputation. If the owners see the value that's all that matters - it's their resort and call. But company "XXX" calling the shots can easily lead to abuses and that worries. me. I find myself torn over MarkSue's approach as I'm all for owners rights and applaud the willingness to take on what may be seen as a problem situation. But then I read some of the "ideas" and fixes proposed and can tell they are unrealistic and completely improper given the history, age and responsibilities of a owner operated timeshare which for many years OC has been. It is high time the BOD represents the owners and tells Marriott how things will be - not the other way around. But it is also far past the time when it is reasonable to expect big checks from Marriott tp pay for real or imagined problems as those are - and have been for over half a decade - the responsibility of the Association / BOD. Marriott has been the hired help and nothing more for a long time. Put the responsibility, costs and planning where it belongs. It's not (or at least shouldn't be) in Marriott's hands anymore. A responsible, independent elected BOD would handle that and ensure that the owners desires are met. A BOD under a developers thumb will always bastardize the system and that can't lead to anything good. As always this sure is an interesting story and I enjoy hearing the progress and updates. I really hope it shakes out for the best of the owners and everyone sees it as a good result.
ecwinch
TUG Member
- Joined
- Jun 6, 2005
- Messages
- 3,737
- Reaction score
- 1,125
- Location
- San Antonio
- Resorts Owned
- Marriott Harbour Point (HP), Kauai Beach Villas, Riverside Suites, WorldMark Pts (WM), Wyndham Pts
TimeOS,
I agree with the point that if owners do not like the way MVCI is running the resort, they should replace them. I am for owner rights.
Likewise if MVCI does not think a BOD/resort is maintaining standards, I want MVCI to dis-associate with them (as they have done with other resorts). I do not want to go a MVCI property, and find that the owners have decided to defer needed refurbishment to save money, and the resort is run down.
For that reason, MVCI needs to "tell the owners how things will be". It is their brand, they have every reason to want to maintain control over a branded resort. They have to extert more control then a non-branded resort. No business is going to allow their brand to be managed by individual local owners. If owners do not want to do that, then exercise your owner rights and end the management contract.
The problem is when owners want it all. When they want the benefits of the MVCI brand, but do not want the heavy hand that entails.
I agree with the point that if owners do not like the way MVCI is running the resort, they should replace them. I am for owner rights.
Likewise if MVCI does not think a BOD/resort is maintaining standards, I want MVCI to dis-associate with them (as they have done with other resorts). I do not want to go a MVCI property, and find that the owners have decided to defer needed refurbishment to save money, and the resort is run down.
For that reason, MVCI needs to "tell the owners how things will be". It is their brand, they have every reason to want to maintain control over a branded resort. They have to extert more control then a non-branded resort. No business is going to allow their brand to be managed by individual local owners. If owners do not want to do that, then exercise your owner rights and end the management contract.
The problem is when owners want it all. When they want the benefits of the MVCI brand, but do not want the heavy hand that entails.
Last edited:
You've nailed it perfectly
We are in total sync. There is a cost for a perceived value in a brand - that's why brands command higher prices vs generic - and if unwilling to pay that premium a resort and the name brand are better off parting ways. Even if Marriott left / was booted the quality could go down - or up - based on what the owners wanted and are willing to pay for. What the units look like isn't changed by the name but by what quality is utilized. But looking for Marriott levels as they demand them at a discount isn't a model that has much chance of success.
We are in total sync. There is a cost for a perceived value in a brand - that's why brands command higher prices vs generic - and if unwilling to pay that premium a resort and the name brand are better off parting ways. Even if Marriott left / was booted the quality could go down - or up - based on what the owners wanted and are willing to pay for. What the units look like isn't changed by the name but by what quality is utilized. But looking for Marriott levels as they demand them at a discount isn't a model that has much chance of success.
tlwmkw
newbie
timeos and ecwinch,
I like both of your analysis of this situation- and that's what the owners at the OC need to think long and hard about. If this group of owners gets the control of the BOD that they want then how will they use it? If they oust Marriott then they will save some money on directors fees but they also lose the "brand" name and perhaps some perks that come with it (43% of the roof repairs is not an inconsiderable amount, also the buying power and negotiating power of a large corp. like Marriott does save you money on new appliances/fixtures/etc.). As you have said it can be made to work if you go that route but the owners will need to take far more responsibility. Even then they will still have unhappy owners- there are always some.
As you said it's very interesting to see how this unfolds.
tlwmkw
I like both of your analysis of this situation- and that's what the owners at the OC need to think long and hard about. If this group of owners gets the control of the BOD that they want then how will they use it? If they oust Marriott then they will save some money on directors fees but they also lose the "brand" name and perhaps some perks that come with it (43% of the roof repairs is not an inconsiderable amount, also the buying power and negotiating power of a large corp. like Marriott does save you money on new appliances/fixtures/etc.). As you have said it can be made to work if you go that route but the owners will need to take far more responsibility. Even then they will still have unhappy owners- there are always some.
As you said it's very interesting to see how this unfolds.
tlwmkw