Marriott Aruba Ocean Club Owners Being Ripped Off By Marriott - READ IF AN OWNER

[SueDonJ]

... Until we see the financials I cant tell you or anyone else where there could be additional savings...

All MVCI resorts include an Operating Budget with the annual maintenance fee billings to the owners. Are you expecting that your BOD should provide owners with more than that standard? If so, how do you intend to force MVCI to provide such a thing if they're not legally required to do so? In fact if they have or can specifically forbid the BOD to release financials other than the Operating Budget, you have no recourse to make the demand.

 

[modoaruba]

ebay

1BR gold justsold for $8,600 on ebay.
If I sell one of our weeks for that we could rent from Redweek for about 15 years (if you add in the other fees )without the liabilities and all this BS.

Just venting.

 

[qlaval]

1BR gold just sold for $8,600 on ebay.
...

That's more then some previous transactions, see Dioxide ROFR list.
The last two were sold $7,000 and $7,600. (on that list...)
We don't know about the rest so probably more for those.

I would say that the value for a Gold week with an annual $1,200 maintenance fee is quite good.
More how many owners are really aware of what's going on except for higher MF?
Not many so the influence on the market is probably not very high...

 

[m61376]

Given the market today, that isn't that surprising a price for a 1BR. Like most resorts, I think the 2BR's are better values. What is surprising was the relatively small activity the last few hours of the auction, with the final bid quite awhile before the end. Although it did more than double in the last few hours- for awhile I thought it might set a new record low.

And I agree. Likely most buyers are unaware of the special assessment and are looking at it as an amazing deal. Hey, not too long ago people paid close to double for that week (I am not sure what the 1BR's went for, but I am assuming 18K is pretty close to the developer price). When you look at it that way, despite some of the other Marriott's going for as low as 25%, the OC is still holding about 50% value. It seems to me the Aruba weeks have "only" taken about a 10-15% hit in this economy, and considering what's happening elsewhere, that's not too bad.

 

[marksue]

I just got a call from an owner who is now in Aruba. A friend of thiers went to a sales presentation today and was told by a gentleman named Eugene, one ofthe sales guys, that 60% of the owners of the Ocean and Surf Club want to integrate the properties. He also said Marriott is looking to integrate all 3 properties. So Marriott is telling this to all potential purchases yet we are being told it wont happen. I wonder who is lying.

 

[billymach4]

I know Eugene and he is very honest! He would never lie.

 

[iamnotshopgirl]

I just got a call from an owner who is now in Aruba. A friend of thiers went to a sales presentation today and was told by a gentleman named Eugene, one ofthe sales guys, that 60% of the owners of the Ocean and Surf Club want to integrate the properties. He also said Marriott is looking to integrate all 3 properties. So Marriott is telling this to all potential purchases yet we are being told it wont happen. I wonder who is lying.

As an owner at SC this is the first I am hearing of this. I would think that with 60% of owners in the know it would be plastered all over Tug. I can not recall any thread even mentioning this. I wanted to be clear on the usage of the word "integrate" as used in marksue post. From the dictionary:

Main Entry: in·te·grate
Function: verb
Pronunciation: 'in-t&-"grAt
Inflected Form(s): -grat·ed ; -grat·ing
Etymology: Latin integratus, past participle of integrare, from integr-, integer
transitive senses
1 : to form, coordinate, or blend into a functioning or unified whole : UNITE
2 : to find the integral of (as a function or equation)
3 a : to unite with something else b : to incorporate into a larger unit
4 a : to end the segregation of and bring into equal membership in society or an organization b : DESEGREGATE <integrate school districts>
intransitive senses : to become integrated


If marksue's post is correct I think there would be a lot of "discussion" from people who frequent this board on the subject. IMHO

bob

 

[modoaruba]

integrate

I could see 60%+ Who would like to integrate from the SC.
Anyone from the OC who would like to see this should have their head examined.

 

[ecwinch]

I just got a call from an owner who is now in Aruba. A friend of thiers went to a sales presentation today and was told by a gentleman named Eugene, one ofthe sales guys, that 60% of the owners of the Ocean and Surf Club want to integrate the properties. He also said Marriott is looking to integrate all 3 properties. So Marriott is telling this to all potential purchases yet we are being told it wont happen. I wonder who is lying.

Obviously, I am a known critic of this cause. But really Marksue, is this what you have resorted to - passing on rumors from timeshare sales people? On this board?

On TUG, what is the number one rule of information from sales people?

Is this any way to get support for your efforts? You know who is lying. It is not Marriott, and you know better than this.

I have a certain amount of respect for what you have achieved. Do not eliminate it by passing on rumors from salespeople.

And I am not suggesting that the rules of heresy apply, but this is information from a friend of a friend, about the statements from a timeshare sales person.

What's next? Rumors from the pot dealers on the beach?

 

[m61376]

What I find curious is that on this Board there are several OC and SC owners, yet none of us have posted that we were asked whether we would favor such integration. Yet 60% of those polled are supposedly in favor. Hmmm...why not 100%, since the poll seems either to be non-existent or very limited in scope.

Two years ago this discussion was plastered on the forums and both OC and SC owners had correspondence with their respective BODs. From my understanding at the time (although I could be wrong), a lot of OC owners wanted to be able to use the SC pool and while the pools were being shared, there were many more OC owners at the SC's pool than vice versa. However, OC owners did not want to share their palapas and wanted to retain complete rights to their beach facilities. Thus, the sharing was somewhat one-sided and SC owners did not want to continue this arrangement. There were OC owners who did not want sharing of any facilities and OC owners who were angered at no longer having access to the SC pool, but there was no support for sharing the beach facilities in compensation for access to the SC's pool facilities. From what I heard there were a lot of complaints from SC owners and, in order to be fair to both parties, since owners weren't supportive of sharing everything the respective BODs decided to share nothing.

The final separation was the hiring of resort specific management and the SC's exclusion from the OC's very nice website.

I think Eugene has a vivid imagination....

 

[modoaruba]

by the way

When we were presented with a pre construction opportunity to buy at the SC, once seeing the enormity of the complex (which some refer as the tenements) our concern was the amount of beach front would never be sufficient for such a huge complex.
The reply we got from the sales staff was that most owners would be at the Lazy River.
Also was assured at that time that the OC would have the only rights to the OC beach front.
Over built and over sold. We just love corporate America.
As little time we have to spend on vacation, it is a horror to see the fights on the beach with who is entitled to what hut, which beach, and what time you left the hut unattended.
Marriott created this monster by over building the SC.
The OC should not have to pay for the greed by giving up our ocean front.
Enough said.

 

[m61376]

Modoaruba- while I don't agree with your assessment of the SC (and, in fact, prefer it over the OC for several reasons), I can understand OC owners not wanting to relinquish any part of their facilities. I think the two BODs did the only fair thing- if the majority of owners couldn't agree to share all, they should share none and remain distinct. One sided sharing is inequitable; neither party should be forced to share their better facility. Giving owners at each property access to what they purchased and keeping the facilities distinct is a fair solution to all.

Personally, even though I never saw the poll which was referenced, I'd vote in favor of all three properties sharing facilities (and not because I am an unhappy SC owner; quite the opposite- I love the facilities). I am not sure the majority of SC owners would and, if the voices here are representative of OC owners in general, I surmise there would only be a minority in favor of integrating the properties. As such, keeping them separate, despite the cost savings, seems the only practical solution.

The reality is the best way to cut costs and reduce MF's is to integrate the facilities. Overlapping personnel costs, supply costs, unified laundry and other services, etc. could be curtailed and each facility would likely enjoy a substantial savings (which, after all, is a bit pertinent to this thread). But these potential savings come at a cost that it appears, at least, most OC owners would rather not accept.

 

[tlwmkw]

Clearly it was the salesman who did it....

I don't think all you Surf Club and Ocean Club owners need to worry. This seems to just be a rumor put out by a salesman who is obviously not telling the truth. As Eric says above this is just a red herring and didn't need to be brought into this thread. Again there is the implication that Marriott put this out but clearly since no one else has reported anything remotely along these lines (and the clear split between the two resorts is reinforced by the hiring of the new GM for the OC) it is just a single sales guy who put this out there in one conversation with one person. I wouldn't worry about this at all.

 

[lovearuba]

Recent letter from the board

Hi
I do think this is the appropriate thread to post information from this since it is one of the items Marriott outlined in their recent letter to owners. I'm not sure why people would object to that concern. Its one of the concerns I wanted in our list of questions to the board. They did respond to it so I would like to believe it means something. Guess time will tell.

 

[Dean]

I just got a call from an owner who is now in Aruba. A friend of thiers went to a sales presentation today and was told by a gentleman named Eugene, one ofthe sales guys, that 60% of the owners of the Ocean and Surf Club want to integrate the properties. He also said Marriott is looking to integrate all 3 properties. So Marriott is telling this to all potential purchases yet we are being told it wont happen. I wonder who is lying.

I'm not an owner there and my only real interest is simply in how Marriott handles themselves. However, a second hand report of something told by a salesperson during a presentation is not "Marriott is telling this to all potential purchases". It is valid to report that the salesperson stated such but hardly constitutes real information. I don't think that Marriott could combine the management without a vote of the members but I'd have to see the legal documentation from there to be more certain.

As for sharing amenities, I'd agree it should be all or none. Very unreasonable and childish to think that the pools should be shared but not the beach facilities. The Beach itself is public in Aruba.

 

[ecwinch]

I'm not an owner there and my only real interest is simply in how Marriott handles themselves. However, a second hand report of something told by a salesperson during a presentation is not "Marriott is telling this to all potential purchases".

Unfortunately it is characteristic of the tactics that have colored this crusade since the beginning. Take one questionable fact, and extrapolate it into "evidence" the demonstrates the MVCI conspiracy.

i.e. Owners meeting is scheduled the same day Mr. Marriott is on the island = MVCI mgt is trying to keep owners from meeting with Mr. Marriott.

And why do we even find it pausible that a billion dollar corporation like MVCI would engage in such unseamly tactics for a small resort like the Ocean Club. The risk/reward ratio just does not make sense.

I am glad that some reasonable owners are starting to see the fallacy of logic involved here. Letting the vocal minority take control can place you on a path that you may not like. Again, check out the HGVC Shell Island thread for a case in point.

 

[Sunbum]

What I find curious is that on this Board there are several OC and SC owners, yet none of us have posted that we were asked whether we would favor such integration. Yet 60% of those polled are supposedly in favor. Hmmm...why not 100%, since the poll seems either to be non-existent or very limited in scope.

Two years ago this discussion was plastered on the forums and both OC and SC owners had correspondence with their respective BODs. From my understanding at the time (although I could be wrong), a lot of OC owners wanted to be able to use the SC pool and while the pools were being shared, there were many more OC owners at the SC's pool than vice versa. However, OC owners did not want to share their palapas and wanted to retain complete rights to their beach facilities. Thus, the sharing was somewhat one-sided and SC owners did not want to continue this arrangement. There were OC owners who did not want sharing of any facilities and OC owners who were angered at no longer having access to the SC pool, but there was no support for sharing the beach facilities in compensation for access to the SC's pool facilities. From what I heard there were a lot of complaints from SC owners and, in order to be fair to both parties, since owners weren't supportive of sharing everything the respective BODs decided to share nothing.

The final separation was the hiring of resort specific management and the SC's exclusion from the OC's very nice website.

I think Eugene has a vivid imagination....

During the Sales presentations at the Ocean Club, back in the early 2000's, they started making us aware that the Surf Club was going to be built. Owners were not happy about it. The Sales people then told us that the owners at the O.C. could use the Lazy River, that would help offset the inconvience and over crowding of the area.

I think that is why you initially saw O.C. owners at the Lazy River. And then they went back on their word and said O.C. owners could no longer use it. Yes, it was a one sided deal, they made it that way to quiet the O.C. owners for a few years while they built/sold the S.C.

INHO keep them seperate, they are unique properties and each have there own benefits.

 

[lovearuba]

Sunburn

During the Sales presentations at the Ocean Club, back in the early 2000's, they started making us aware that the Surf Club was going to be built. Owners were not happy about it. The Sales people then told us that the owners at the O.C. could use the Lazy River, that would help offset the inconvience and over crowding of the area.

My experience was the same. I was also told that we would be sharing everything except the beach. That included the pools at all three places (hotel, surf club and ocean club). I would also like to keep them separate.

 

[m61376]

It is unfortunate that OC owners were initially promised that everything but the beach would be shared. I think what happened is that they miscalculated the relative demand, assuming equal numbers of SC owners would like to enjoy the OC facilities as OC owners who wanted to enjoy the Lazy River. It became a very one sided influx into the SC's pool and SC owners objected to accommodating OC guests without enjoying equal compensation.

Although they may have been later told they would have access to the SC pool, the only fair thing is to give each owner what they bought into, which is use of their own facilities, unless they are willing to share all facilities. I think it would be nice if all Marriott properties shared facilities, but I know others don't agree, so I am fine with that. I think the Boards were wise to recognize that sharing can't be one-sided; although that wasn't their initial intent, in reality that's what had happened and is why they made the change.

 

[ecwinch]

I thought the beaches in Aruba were public. So they promised that you would share everything but the one thing that you legally are obligated to share.

I do not even see how MVCI could make that obligation without some form of agreement between the two HOA's. And even that agreement could be subject to cancellation by either BOD. Which is what I thought happened here.

I am not doubting that some salesperson somewhere said that.

 

[modoaruba]

sharing

Yes Aruba's beaches are all public.
We have seen numerous people from other resorts or even off cruise ships utilize the beach.
No complaints there.
It's when the palalpas are taken by others is where the concern is.
We have to get up early to get a palapa.
If they were shared by the resorts it would be a nightmare.
At full capacity, the OC at times runs out of palapas.
Now imagine both resorts at full capacity sharing.
That is a concern unless someone can tell us something different.Are we missing something?

 

[luvmypt]

From the first row of palapas to the resort is not public beach. That stretch of sand is included as resort property when they're built. Only the beach in front of the first row of palapas to the sea is public. That goes for all resorts. If the beach from the sea to the resort's back door was public, then the resorts couldn't build the palapas to begin with.

 

[lovearuba]

aruba beach public

I thought all of Arubas beaches were public and that anyone could just bring their own chair and sit anywhere they wanted to. This is why I worry when I looked at that huge condo going up across from the surf. All those folks would have access to the beach. It would just be out of hand with overcrowding and not make sense to go to the Marriott. I guess the developers must have run out of money and had to stop building. As for the people of Aruba, they should have access to the beaches, its their island.

 

[m61376]

I thought all of Arubas beaches were public and that anyone could just bring their own chair and sit anywhere they wanted to. This is why I worry when I looked at that huge condo going up across from the surf. All those folks would have access to the beach. It would just be out of hand with overcrowding and not make sense to go to the Marriott. I guess the developers must have run out of money and had to stop building. As for the people of Aruba, they should have access to the beaches, its their island.

I thought that was the case also. Have they completely stopped building? When I was there in Feb. they were working on it, although there seemed to be minimal construction staff.

I have wondered if they made any arrangement with the Holiday Inn, which is right in front of them. I had heard rumors to that effect, but nothing substantiated. I did notice that there were lots of cabanas, presumably rentals, further back by the bar/restaurant behind the pier. I was wondering if they were setting that up for future use for condo owners and/or cruise ship passengers, but I only saw them used occasionally the week I was there.

 

[Dean]

It is unfortunate that OC owners were initially promised that everything but the beach would be shared. I think what happened is that they miscalculated the relative demand, assuming equal numbers of SC owners would like to enjoy the OC facilities as OC owners who wanted to enjoy the Lazy River. It became a very one sided influx into the SC's pool and SC owners objected to accommodating OC guests without enjoying equal compensation.

Although they may have been later told they would have access to the SC pool, the only fair thing is to give each owner what they bought into, which is use of their own facilities, unless they are willing to share all facilities. I think it would be nice if all Marriott properties shared facilities, but I know others don't agree, so I am fine with that. I think the Boards were wise to recognize that sharing can't be one-sided; although that wasn't their initial intent, in reality that's what had happened and is why they made the change.

The question is who promised and was it in writing. If only a salesperson promised it means absolutely nothing as we all know. It's only what's in writing that has meaning and even much of that can change later.