• 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 30 years ago in October 1993 as a group of regular Timeshare owners just like you!

    Read about our 30th anniversary: Happy 30th 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 $21,000,000 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 $21 Million dollars
  • Sign up to get the TUG Newsletter for free!

    60,000+ 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!
  • A few of the most common links here on the forums for newbies and guests!

no more renting-transferring of Wyndham pts. between owners

massvacationer

TUG Review Crew: Veteran
TUG Member
Joined
May 10, 2008
Messages
737
Reaction score
1
Points
378
Location
MA
Points are now much less attractive

It seems to me that all of the recent changes (the increase in fees and especially the prohibition on transferring or renting points) will discourage current owners from:

1. Buying more points (why get more when you have lost the flexibility to transfer them to friends/family or rent out the extra)

2. “Upgrading their memberships” (as Wyndham calls it)

3. Recommending Wyndham Fairshare points to friends and family


Will this not hurt future sales of the product? Wyndham points were attractive to me simply because they were so flexible and scalable and they have so many resorts. The “flexible and scalable” feature is fast disappearing.
 

ace2000

TUG Member
Joined
Dec 17, 2006
Messages
5,032
Reaction score
152
Points
498
Remember all those timeshare eBay ads for $1? You'll see a lot more Wyndham/Fairfield point contracts going for that amount - guaranteed. Renting points was one of the greatest distinctions between Wyndham and the others. It was so easy and convenient, to buy or sell.

This will hurt the value for sure.

And what's hilarious, is the fact that Wyndham is presenting this as some sort of benefit to current owners (because we have requested this).
 

BocaBum99

TUG Member
Joined
Jun 7, 2005
Messages
6,651
Reaction score
4
Points
323
Location
Boca Raton, FL
Based on this action, I am not sure if it makes sense to purchase any more Wyndham timeshares. Just recently, I recommended buying a small package and renting points because I never expected Wyndham to discontinue the practice of transferring points between accounts. I was wrong about that one.

Given this new action, there are literally hundreds of thousands of worthless ownerships. Anyone paying $1 would be over paying. This could lead to a massive default of worthless Wyndham timeshares. I think Wyndham may be making a huge business mistake with this move.

I think this actually may bring value to the PCC business model. It may be worth paying money to get rid of a Wyndham timeshare nobody will buy and the resort won't take back.

I think the situation with Wyndham is going to get uglier before it gets better.
 

bnoble

TUG Member
Joined
Nov 14, 2006
Messages
11,631
Reaction score
5,367
Points
798
Location
The People's Republic of Ann Arbor
I'm not so sure. It's not clear to me how many people cared about or used this feature. I care about it, and I use it, but I'm also a member of several online timeshare communities. Those of us in that boat are but a small fraction of the total ownership.

If most owners don't know other owners, and have no idea that an open points rental market exists, then this won't matter to them one whit. Boca, I know that these changes in policy have really played havoc with your model for Wyndham. But, owners who buy strictly for personal use may not see this as more than a minor annoyance given the presence of borrowing and the credit pool. Hopefully, my guess is wrong, and the ownership as a whole will rise up. As I've said, it will be interesting to see if this sticks. I certainly hope it doesn't, but I'm betting it will.
 

cphamaz

newbie
Joined
Mar 12, 2008
Messages
6
Reaction score
0
Points
1
Location
Tucson, AZ
What should we do at this point?

As owners, what can we do at this point to reverse this new rule? Anyone has any suggestion? Any legal action we could take?
 

ace2000

TUG Member
Joined
Dec 17, 2006
Messages
5,032
Reaction score
152
Points
498
I'm not so sure. It's not clear to me how many people cared about or used this feature. I care about it, and I use it, but I'm also a member of several online timeshare communities. Those of us in that boat are but a small fraction of the total ownership.

Maybe this is true if you count percentages of actual owners on a one-by-one basis... But, if you do this by percentage of total points, I'm betting that this feature was known by a lot more people. And it'll be those that own a significant number of points that will be the first to bail...

The ones that will NOT be inclined to bail will be the people that have what they need for their personal use. The former category will be VERY significant. Just start watching eBay, and watch the prices plummet!
 

ace2000

TUG Member
Joined
Dec 17, 2006
Messages
5,032
Reaction score
152
Points
498
As owners, what can we do at this point to reverse this new rule? Anyone has any suggestion? Any legal action we could take?


We need an organized group, in my opinion. I don't think the individual emails are going to be the solution. There is too much potential revenue at stake here for Wyndham. It's very easy to see why they've made this decision.

It's going to take some sort of organized user group or class action. I've never been very keen on the class action route, because I feel they mostly benefit the attorney's involved.
 

bnoble

TUG Member
Joined
Nov 14, 2006
Messages
11,631
Reaction score
5,367
Points
798
Location
The People's Republic of Ann Arbor
Maybe this is true if you count percentages of actual owners on a one-by-one basis... But, if you do this by percentage of total points,
Even that I don't believe---back-of-the-envelope doesn't support it.

WVO claims 800,000 families. That might include WM, I don't know. Let's assume it does. Let's assume that that means 400,000 families. WM is smaller, but I don't know by how much---so, lets be conservative.

Let's assume that the average "family" owns about 150K. Could be more, (and it probably is) but that seems like a fair number.

So, that's about 60B points in total, and probably more.

Glenn keeps track of board stats over at atozed. He's got a little over 4,000 registered members---let's assume all of them are owners (they aren't). That's about 1% of the 400,000 families. A quick look at Glenn's points owned stats looks like maybe 1-2B points. So, you're still talking about no more than 3%. And that's with a lot of conservative assumptions. The real number is probably lower.

Edited to add: Don't get me wrong. I think this policy stinks like last week's fish. And, I really hope it gets reversed. But, we have to acknowledge that our view of "the collective ownership" is probably not representative.
 
Last edited:

ace2000

TUG Member
Joined
Dec 17, 2006
Messages
5,032
Reaction score
152
Points
498
Even that I don't believe---back-of-the-envelope doesn't support it.

Watch what happens to the resale price market on points over the next couple of months... We can revisit it then.

Edit: I know that I've got a lot of points (over a million now)... and I've not updated Glenn's database. I'm sure there are a lot of others. If it hasn't been significant, why do you think they made they change?
 
Last edited:

bnoble

TUG Member
Joined
Nov 14, 2006
Messages
11,631
Reaction score
5,367
Points
798
Location
The People's Republic of Ann Arbor
I know what's going to happen to the resale market. A few mega-renters will flood the market, and make points impossible to sell for a while.

But most owners don't know about that either. If they did, Wyndham wouldn't be able to sell anything. The set of buyers in that market is relatively small, due to market inefficiency. If most owners had even half a clue, then you'd have a Wyndham that you wouldn't even recognize.

As an aside, I believe that many mega-renters will just adjust their business models and move on. I believe some already have. I expect that to continue.
 

bnoble

TUG Member
Joined
Nov 14, 2006
Messages
11,631
Reaction score
5,367
Points
798
Location
The People's Republic of Ann Arbor
Here's what I mean by changing the business model. Prior to the Guest Fee changes, most of the megas made their money by washing rented points through PtVIP accounts, getting upgrades and discounts, often for Sun-Thu stays, providing extremely cheap rental inventory to bargain hunters. As long as the supply of rental points at or below $5/K was plentiful, they were in business, because they'd be paying about $2-$2.5 per K for the discounted reservations, and invested no capital acquiring those points. Frankly, it was a pretty sweet deal for the mega-renter.

The GC fee took away part of the model---cheap, short rentals aren't as easy to turn a profit on anymore, because the fixed costs are higher. The elimination of transfers takes away the other half---the source of cheap points with no capital invested.

So, that means they can no longer effectively serve their markets. What's a mega-renter to do?

In the Brave New World, the mega-renter has fewer points to play with, and larger fixed costs per rental. The smart mega-renter is going to look for very high value weeks with low point costs to poach at the 10 month mark, and market the hell out of them, selling upscale rather than bargain. For example, Bonnet Creek inexplicably has Easter Week in Value Season this year. 112K gets you a 2BR that is in prime prime time for that market.

A few will throw their hands up in disgust, and walk away, fire-saling the points they have and calling it a day. I'm betting that most wont---they're not going to recover the capital they invested getting to PtVIP. So, they're going to make a go of it under the high-value model, and try to develop a new market there.

The end result for the rest of us? Wyndham has effectively convinced the commercial owners to stop going for last-minute distressed inventory, and start poaching the really prime weeks. So, we lose.
 

BocaBum99

TUG Member
Joined
Jun 7, 2005
Messages
6,651
Reaction score
4
Points
323
Location
Boca Raton, FL
Here's what I mean by changing the business model. Prior to the Guest Fee changes, most of the megas made their money by washing rented points through PtVIP accounts, getting upgrades and discounts, often for Sun-Thu stays, providing extremely cheap rental inventory to bargain hunters. As long as the supply of rental points at or below $5/K was plentiful, they were in business, because they'd be paying about $2-$2.5 per K for the discounted reservations, and invested no capital acquiring those points. Frankly, it was a pretty sweet deal for the mega-renter.

The GC fee took away part of the model---cheap, short rentals aren't as easy to turn a profit on anymore, because the fixed costs are higher. The elimination of transfers takes away the other half---the source of cheap points with no capital invested.

So, that means they can no longer effectively serve their markets. What's a mega-renter to do?

In the Brave New World, the mega-renter has fewer points to play with, and larger fixed costs per rental. The smart mega-renter is going to look for very high value weeks with low point costs to poach at the 10 month mark, and market the hell out of them, selling upscale rather than bargain. For example, Bonnet Creek inexplicably has Easter Week in Value Season this year. 112K gets you a 2BR that is in prime prime time for that market.

A few will throw their hands up in disgust, and walk away, fire-saling the points they have and calling it a day. I'm betting that most wont---they're not going to recover the capital they invested getting to PtVIP. So, they're going to make a go of it under the high-value model, and try to develop a new market there.

The end result for the rest of us? Wyndham has effectively convinced the commercial owners to stop going for last-minute distressed inventory, and start poaching the really prime weeks. So, we lose.

Very insightful analysis. I agree with your conclusions.
 

ace2000

TUG Member
Joined
Dec 17, 2006
Messages
5,032
Reaction score
152
Points
498
Here's what I mean by changing the business model. Prior to the Guest Fee changes, most of the megas made their money by washing rented points through PtVIP accounts, getting upgrades and discounts, often for Sun-Thu stays, providing extremely cheap rental inventory to bargain hunters. As long as the supply of rental points at or below $5/K was plentiful, they were in business, because they'd be paying about $2-$2.5 per K for the discounted reservations, and invested no capital acquiring those points. Frankly, it was a pretty sweet deal for the mega-renter.

The GC fee took away part of the model---cheap, short rentals aren't as easy to turn a profit on anymore, because the fixed costs are higher. The elimination of transfers takes away the other half---the source of cheap points with no capital invested.

So, that means they can no longer effectively serve their markets. What's a mega-renter to do?

In the Brave New World, the mega-renter has fewer points to play with, and larger fixed costs per rental. The smart mega-renter is going to look for very high value weeks with low point costs to poach at the 10 month mark, and market the hell out of them, selling upscale rather than bargain. For example, Bonnet Creek inexplicably has Easter Week in Value Season this year. 112K gets you a 2BR that is in prime prime time for that market.

A few will throw their hands up in disgust, and walk away, fire-saling the points they have and calling it a day. I'm betting that most wont---they're not going to recover the capital they invested getting to PtVIP. So, they're going to make a go of it under the high-value model, and try to develop a new market there.

The end result for the rest of us? Wyndham has effectively convinced the commercial owners to stop going for last-minute distressed inventory, and start poaching the really prime weeks. So, we lose.

Very interesting... and in the next year or two, we'll know if the new model will be worth their time and expenses or not.
 

BocaBum99

TUG Member
Joined
Jun 7, 2005
Messages
6,651
Reaction score
4
Points
323
Location
Boca Raton, FL
If you just look at the shear numbers, even with the elimination of transferred points, it is possible to make decent money with Wyndham rentals.

Let's say a Platinum VIP owner has MF and FSP of about $4/1000. And, they have a blended average profit margin of $4/1000. That would mean that 60-day rentals would cost $6/1000. Prime reservations would cost $8/1000 plus the $99 guest fee. It would take about 25M Wyndham Points to make $100,000/year gross profit per year. That is a substantial income for only one small initiative.

Let's assume that they acquire points at $.005/point including closing costs by purchasing low maintenance fee per point contracts. Their capital cost would be $125,000.

So, the gross return on invested capital is 80%. This is still a fanastic return even when accounting for the other potential risks.

It could be that megarenters now decided to purchase cheap resale packages to own 25M points or more they use for rental purposes.
 
Last edited:

bnoble

TUG Member
Joined
Nov 14, 2006
Messages
11,631
Reaction score
5,367
Points
798
Location
The People's Republic of Ann Arbor
why do you think they made they change?
I missed this question---it got added after I responded to the original post.

I think there are a couple of reasons. #1: I think Extra Holidays wants to try to eliminate competition. #2: I think sales is looking at all the VIP discounts they are paying for, recognizing that a lot of them are washed points from transfers, and wanting to put a stop to it.

If I had to bet, I'd bet reason #2 is actually the real reason, because Sales is the bread and butter of WVO, not Extra Holidays. Sales pays the bills.

As a bit more food for thought: in addition to the mega-renters out there, I personally know of several people who don't have much of a visible rental business, but will quietly offer to wash a non-VIP-owner's points through their own PtVIP accounts, passing along the discounts, but minus a "small fee." That's just money directly out of Sales' pockets, with no benefit to the company.

So, if you're Wyndham, and you want to get a handle on all these resale points getting comped discounts, what do you do? You have two options. One: you can tell all VIP owners that only developer-purchased points (or, maybe, non-transferred points) count for VIP discounts/upgrades. Two: you can eliminate transfers.

Approach #1 is more direct, but also more complicated. If you go the no-resale-point route, it affects more "regular" owners, making them unhappy---bad news, because current satisfied owners are easier to sell to than fresh tour meat, and much much easier to sell than current dissatisfied owners. Either way you go, approach #1 also requires a complete re-write, again, of the reservation software, and they've already demonstrated that they aren't competent enough to pull that off without spending a ton of money and burning up a bunch of goodwill.

Approach #2 is indirect, but easier. It doesn't fundamentally change the reservation system. And, if my hypothesis is correct, it doesn't impact too many owners. True, it also doesn't solve the entire problem, but if the majority of washed points are also transferred points, it solves most of the problem at low cost.
 

BocaBum99

TUG Member
Joined
Jun 7, 2005
Messages
6,651
Reaction score
4
Points
323
Location
Boca Raton, FL
I missed this question---it got added after I responded to the original post.

I think there are a couple of reasons. #1: I think Extra Holidays wants to try to eliminate competition. #2: I think sales is looking at all the VIP discounts they are paying for, recognizing that a lot of them are washed points from transfers, and wanting to put a stop to it.

If I had to bet, I'd bet reason #2 is actually the real reason, because Sales is the bread and butter of WVO, not Extra Holidays. Sales pays the bills.

As a bit more food for thought: in addition to the mega-renters out there, I personally know of several people who don't have much of a visible rental business, but will quietly offer to wash a non-VIP-owner's points through their own PtVIP accounts, passing along the discounts, but minus a "small fee." That's just money directly out of Sales' pockets, with no benefit to the company.

So, if you're Wyndham, and you want to get a handle on all these resale points getting comped discounts, what do you do? You have two options. One: you can tell all VIP owners that only developer-purchased points (or, maybe, non-transferred points) count for VIP discounts/upgrades. Two: you can eliminate transfers.

Approach #1 is more direct, but also more complicated. If you go the no-resale-point route, it affects more "regular" owners, making them unhappy---bad news, because current satisfied owners are easier to sell to than fresh tour meat, and much much easier to sell than current dissatisfied owners. Either way you go, approach #1 also requires a complete re-write, again, of the reservation software, and they've already demonstrated that they aren't competent enough to pull that off without spending a ton of money and burning up a bunch of goodwill.

Approach #2 is indirect, but easier. It doesn't fundamentally change the reservation system. And, if my hypothesis is correct, it doesn't impact too many owners. True, it also doesn't solve the entire problem, but if the majority of washed points are also transferred points, it solves most of the problem at low cost.

Another excellent insight. You are on a roll Brian.
 

bnoble

TUG Member
Joined
Nov 14, 2006
Messages
11,631
Reaction score
5,367
Points
798
Location
The People's Republic of Ann Arbor
It could be that megarenters now decided to purchase cheap resale packages to own 25M points or more they use for rental purposes.
I would expect this to happen slowly for most of them. They have to build a premium rental market, abandoning their current bargain-hunters. That takes time. Also, owning the points carries a lot of extra risk, because you have to pay that $4/K MF whether rentals are running well or not. In the current economic environment, the "old-style" mega just acquires fewer rental points, and puts up with a year of down income. However, the "new-style" mega, who owns the points, is potentially facing a negative cash-flow year.

Also, you have to be wondering in the back of your head how long it will be before Wyndham finally says "VIP discounts using developer-purchased points only." The 25M mega is now stuck with 24M resale points whose cost basis just doubled overnight.

You are on a roll Brian.
Thanks. I turned in grades last night, and shipped my last funding proposal for '08 to the Natl. Science Foundation a few hours ago, so I've got a little decompression coming. Thinking about this has been fun.
 

BocaBum99

TUG Member
Joined
Jun 7, 2005
Messages
6,651
Reaction score
4
Points
323
Location
Boca Raton, FL
I would expect this to happen slowly for most of them. They have to build a premium rental market, abandoning their current bargain-hunters. That takes time. Also, owning the points carries a lot of extra risk, because you have to pay that $4/K MF whether rentals are running well or not. In the current economic environment, the "old-style" mega just acquires fewer rental points, and puts up with a year of down income. However, the "new-style" mega, who owns the points, is potentially facing a negative cash-flow year.

Also, you have to be wondering in the back of your head how long it will be before Wyndham finally says "VIP discounts using developer-purchased points only." The 25M mega is now stuck with 24M resale points whose cost basis just doubled overnight.


Thanks. I turned in grades last night, and shipped my last funding proposal for '08 to the Natl. Science Foundation a few hours ago, so I've got a little decompression coming. Thinking about this has been fun.

I agree with your characterization of risks. That's why the expected return and payback period is important. At an 80% gross return on invested capital, it would take less than 2 years for a 100% payback of initial capital. That is a very good risk adjusted return on investment.

This logic is the same that I've used as a recommendation for how resort developers can firm up the resale market. If they cut costs to a level where maintenance fees were so low that it was relatively easy to turn a rental profit, then investors would load up on timehares and rent them out. That would effectively put a floor on the prices of timeshares. I doubt they will listen to my recommendation. But, it would help.
 

bnoble

TUG Member
Joined
Nov 14, 2006
Messages
11,631
Reaction score
5,367
Points
798
Location
The People's Republic of Ann Arbor
Agreed---provided you already have PtVIP for other reasons. If you don't, getting the first 1M points is the killer. Even if you negotiate well, that doubles your capital invested to $250K, cuts your return in half, and doubles your payoff period to a little under three years. At that point, you're racing Wyndham to the day that the 24M "extra" points don't count.

I don't think it will take them three years to restrict VIP benefits to developer points. I suppose you could cut the time needed by PIC and fixed week conversions, but those rules could well change in the middle of the game too.
 

BocaBum99

TUG Member
Joined
Jun 7, 2005
Messages
6,651
Reaction score
4
Points
323
Location
Boca Raton, FL
Agreed---provided you already have PtVIP for other reasons. If you don't, getting the first 1M points is the killer. Even if you negotiate well, that doubles your capital invested to $250K, cuts your return in half, and doubles your payoff period to a little under three years. At that point, you're racing Wyndham to the day that the 24M "extra" points don't count.

I don't think it will take them three years to restrict VIP benefits to developer points. I suppose you could cut the time needed by PIC and fixed week conversions, but those rules could well change in the middle of the game too.

It's for this reason I never did it. Too much upfront capital risk.
 

ace2000

TUG Member
Joined
Dec 17, 2006
Messages
5,032
Reaction score
152
Points
498
That would effectively put a floor on the prices of timeshares. I doubt they will listen to my recommendation. But, it would help.

Boca and Brian, thank you both for the thought put into this.

Why would the resort developers even care where the bottom of the resale market ends up? I mean, there is so much difference between the prices of new and resale now, the best way for them to make a sale is the ingnorance of the buyer. No matter how low the resale prices go, that model will not change.

So, what's the incentive for resorts to keep resale prices up? I'm sure if given the two choices, they'd prefer them to stay up, but what is the incentive to actually make an effort to do so???
 

BocaBum99

TUG Member
Joined
Jun 7, 2005
Messages
6,651
Reaction score
4
Points
323
Location
Boca Raton, FL
Boca and Brian, thank you both for the thought put into this.

Why would the resort developers even care where the bottom of the resale market ends up? I mean, there is so much difference between the prices of new and resale now, the best way for them to make a sale is the ingnorance of the buyer. No matter how low the resale prices go, that model will not change.

So, what's the incentive for resorts to keep resale prices up? I'm sure if given the two choices, they'd prefer them to stay up, but what is the incentive to actually make an effort to do so???

That's a good question. My belief is that there is still legs in selling to the unknowlegable masses who make a large purchase on impulse. I would have guessed 5-10 more years prior to this credit meltdown. I think its longevity will shrink due to the credit crunch since government regulation will actually rule out sales to certain demographics who should have never qualfied for a timeshare loan in the first place. With the ever increasing expansion of the internet especially with the younger generation, it will continue to get more difficult to find people who don't have the opportunity to check the internet prior to completing a purchase. They can do it right there on their iPhone. Or, they can send a text message to their social network to check out an idea before jumping in all real time while sitting at the sales presentation table waiting for closing documents.

So, assuming ever increasing numbers of people who have rapid access to pricing alternatives and advice, pricing for resales and from resort developers should converge over time. If that convergence happens, resort developers need to do something about it. Wyndham has chosen to try to create a differentiated product. But, those features are very very pricey and not worth it using any economic analysis. Another way is to exercise ROFR and prop up resale purchase prices. A far superior, long term sustainable model would be to create a product that has an intrinsic and quantifiable value. Buy vs. rent analysis is what I believe will do it. I've believe that from the first day I got into timesharing. I still believe it today.
 

mtribe

newbie
Joined
Aug 7, 2005
Messages
79
Reaction score
0
Points
6
Location
http://www.marci4worldmark.com
It seems to me that all of the recent changes (the increase in fees and especially the prohibition on transferring or renting points) will discourage current owners from:

1. Buying more points (why get more when you have lost the flexibility to transfer them to friends/family or rent out the extra)

2. “Upgrading their memberships” (as Wyndham calls it)

3. Recommending Wyndham Fairshare points to friends and family


Will this not hurt future sales of the product? Wyndham points were attractive to me simply because they were so flexible and scalable and they have so many resorts. The “flexible and scalable” feature is fast disappearing.

Unfortunately they also control communication with owners and fight at all costs owners ability to share information. Wyndham feeds on uninformed owners. Far too many owners go on their vacation and then never think about their timeshare again till next year. They do not even learn about the many ways they are being hosed. Slowly more and more owners are finding places like Tug and www.wmowners.com (for worldmark by wyndham) and are begining to learn but it is a very slow process. Spread the word about their poor business practices when you are on vacation. the more people we educate the sooner they will stop pulling this crap.
 

GeNioS

TUG Member
Joined
Aug 3, 2008
Messages
101
Reaction score
0
Points
16
Location
Salt Lake City
I subscribed to Boca's view that buying a small package and renting the difference was the way to go. Who could foresee this was going to happen.....

I've already bought the timeshare, just waiting for the transfer....so now what? I guess I'm looking at these options:

1) Live with the contract I have...84,000 points...if I want more, rent the difference I need from Wyndham? How much are those?

2) Buy another 77k contract to get me more points but lock myself into more maintenance fees

3) Attempt to sell the timeshare.....I paid $10.50. Maybe someone will take it...hehe

4) Walk away if possible? I signed and faxed a quasi contract but expected formal closing documents to come. But I've already received an e-mail that they're getting the deed switched over...sounds like I don't need to do anything else.....

I don't know....I guess it feels like I was just a little late to the party and the cops already showed up.
 
Top