Pahio Kauai Beach Villas board election

[ecwinch]

Here's a small point, but it annoys me and it's symtomatic of the bigger issues: On our last trip to KBV, we had to do a sales pitch to get arm bands for the hotel pool. It ticks me off, that I have to drive to Princeville, waste half a day, and endure a high pressure sales pitch, to use the hotel pool! If Wyndham wasn't there, exploiting the pool use situation to feed the sales machine, I feel that GPR would be able to negotiate a mutually beneficial agreement for timeshare owners and condo-hotel owners - as we have in the past.

IMNSHO, Wyndham's first priority is clearly SALES, which is why they should not be the resort management company.

Denise - and I absolutely agree with you that SALES is their main priority. But that does not bother me. In the broader context, I think that is the deal we make with the developer to enjoy the benefits of their involvement.

 

[ecwinch]

Eric, think of it this way. They now own 20% of the KBV timeshare deeds. They are represented by at least 60% of the IOA Board of Directors. Does that seem fair and/or a good idea?

Secondly, the BOD at the time thought that Wyndham would make an honest effort in reselling the deeds. Instead, they have used the deeds to force a BOD takeover. Is that an example of a management company doing good work for the owners?

Thirdly, if they had done a better job of maintaining and upgrading the resort (compare their 10 years with Grand Pacific's 1 1/3rd years), and if they done due diligence with reselling the the deeds, why do you think that we'd be in the same boat as we are now? Don't you think the value of the resort for resales would have been better? And don't you think that there would have been, then, a decent number of resales meaning that new excited KBV owners would have been generated in place of all of these deeds in Wyndham's hands? And if there were more actual independent, excited KBV owners using their deeds, there'd be more positive energy and buzz surrounding KBV?

Fourthly, Grand Pacific generated $800,000 in rentals last year (2017) compared to about $100,000 by Wyndham in 2016. If Grand Pacific had been here in charge of the rentals for even 5 of the years that Wyndham was here, that could have been 5.6 million dollars more generated for KBV owners to pay for improvements and offset the need for raised maintenance fees. That's a LOT of moolah. Wyndham's MO is SALES, not great caretaking. If they had really put in the same effort into renting as they do into their sales, we would have been in MUCH better shape. Now, Wyndham owns the Clubhouse and we have to go through their 2-3 hour sales presentation for their Bali Hai resort, including the mandatory trip up to the North Shore to do it, in order to get a wristband that will allow us to use the pools at the hotel next door.

Does all of this sound like a company that has our best interests at heart??

Jeff

Jeff - I think it is revisionist to say what someone thought when making a deal 10+ years ago.

Today weeks at KBV have marginal value on the open market, and it is unlikely that will change. As I noted, believing that that is a better deal to try to sell them is not something other resorts have had success with. And it is not an issue of quality of the resort. Point me to a legacy resort that has a good resale value and low bad debt expense. For every one you find, I can probably find 10 that suffer. Even the high quality Marriott resorts can be purchased for a $1 on ebay.

We see this on TUG all the time - timeshares simply have little to no value. How is someone going to be excited to buy a unit with a view of the lagoon when similar resorts are a dime a dozen. It is just systemic to the business model.

I have no illusions about Wyndham's intent. It really is a binary issue - either you feel that the resort benefits from Wyndham's involvement - or you don't. I am firmly in the camp that feels we do benefit.

 

[ecwinch]

Aloha,
While this statement is a minor detail within Jeff's post, I would like to use it as an opportunity to manage the expectations of those folks who have read my lengthy analysis.
The value of the majority of timeshares plummeted to negligible or negative several years ago. Unconverted KBV weeks are not part of a major brand mini-system, some of which have retained some positive value. It is likely that informed aftermarket buyers would compare KBV to near equivalent units in Kauai or other Hawaiian Islands. Until total demand for Hawaiian resale units exceeds availability, there is little reason to expect resale prices for KBV to materially increase. What I do believe is possible is to increase the relative desirability of KBV ownership among informed buyers of resales. A price premium of $1 to a couple of hundred over comparables would not change an informed buyers calculations by much. A price premium over comparables of a couple of thousand could easily impact a buyer's calculations.
If the marketing approach I advocate is adopted and succeeds, current KBV owners who want to sell should be able to successfully exit their ownership without suffering scams or negative impacts to their credit rating.
I have no expectation that such sellers will net any substantial cash; it is possible that they will have to continue to pay some or all of the transactions costs.
Jack
BTW - I have begun outlining what a marketing plan might look like. If there are any KBV owners reading this that want to participate (i.e. trade emails outside of TUG) in its development please PM me.

As much as I agree with portions of your thoughtful analysis, the reality is the only the Oceanfront units have any value. I purchased my three Oceanfront weeks for less than $2000 dollars and it included a year of pre-paid maintenance fees.

And how viable is it to ask existing owners to fund a marketing program that at best offers them the hope that they will get out in the future. What does a budget for that project look like on an annual basis and is that a good ROI? 100k? 200k?

If GPR's rental program is going like gang-busters as Jeff opines, then it seems like the right solution is to offer a deedback program and just rent the weeks out. Unless the rental program is offering rates below what we pay in dues.

 

[Jeff From Salem]

Denise - and I absolutely agree with you that SALES is their main priority. But that does not bother me. In the broader context, I think that is the deal we make with the developer to enjoy the benefits of their involvement.

But Wyndham wasn't the developer, Eric. David Walters and the company he formed, PAHIO, was the developer. He developed KBV along with a couple others in Kauai (the Makai Club, for one). David Walters brought in Wyndham as the resort and property manager. Wyndham essentially has three companies. 1) They have a company that develops their own company properties/hotels. 2) They have a company that manages a vacation subscription program (Club Wyndham). People pay a membership fee to Wyndham, Wyndham allots them points for which the people can exchange those points annually in order to go to one of Wyndham-affiliated properties. 3) Finally, they have a property management company which other resorts can hire. For those resorts, Wyndham can take care of the property buildings and grounds, as well as facilitate sales and rentals for them. The normal charge for such services is 10% off the top of the maintenance fees paid by the users of the resort. The latter is what David Walters did several years after he created PAHIO. Originally, owners who bought into a PAHIO property could exchange into another PAHIO property for little or no charge (if I recall correctly). This stopped when Wyndham was hired to come into the picture as property and timeshare manager. At one point, Wyndham bought RCI, as well as Shell Vacations, to really create a monopoly in the timeshare world.

But let's try another analogy, Eric. Say you are fortunate enough to be able to hire a company to take care of your spacious home and grounds. You find several years later that the company that has been taking care of your property found a loophole that gives them majority ownership of your property. You still live there and own partially, but the management company controls all decisions about what gets done. They even give themselves a raise as the property manager, and your maintenance fees go up, while the condition of the property goes gradually down. The situation you're in, in that your share of the ownership and the too high maintenance fee makes your ability to resell the property very difficult, and if you do, you will take a large loss. Would you feel okay about any of that?

What you're possibly not on top of is that Wyndham and another company called Diamond Resorts (unrelated) have been notorious for wheedling and weaseling their way into resorts by first being hired as property managers, then finding ways to get control of enough deeds to take over the board and permanently take over the resort.

Jeff

 

[jacknsara]

. . . And how viable is it to ask existing owners to fund a marketing program that at best offers them the hope that they will get out in the future. What does a budget for that project look like on an annual basis and is that a good ROI? 100k? 200k?

If GPR's rental program is going like gang-busters as Jeff opines, then it seems like the right solution is to offer a deedback program and just rent the weeks out. Unless the rental program is offering rates below what we pay in dues.

Aloha Eric,

I revived this thread and included the following in post 67 (direct link: https://www.tugbbs.com/forums/index...las-board-election.240675/page-3#post-2107216 )

. . . A key decision is whether the current ownership wants to realistically accept the challenge of remaining independent. Assuming they do, then the IOA (led by its BoD) needs to develop and implement strategies to increase the market demand to own KBV timeshares. To my knowledge, the IOA has never had a budget line for marketing.

However, if the majority of the owners do not want to financially commit to addressing the aftermarket challenge, then the consequences of that need to be fully communicated. . . .​

I believe that a realistic plan needs to be developed and shared with the ownership and their buy-in solicited. If the ownership does not want to support the initial “investment” (a $10 - $40 increase in MFs), then, as previously stated, the consequences of that need to be fully communicated.

I understand that much of what I write does not get remembered. One of the reasons I like using TUG and this particular thread as a campaign tool is to put information on the record for reference when appropriate.

To the extent my detail plan exists it is still quite preliminary. I’ll accept your annual cost numbers as a reasonable range. Technically, the costs would be expenses of the period, but we can certainly think of them as an investment with a need to forecast an ROI. That requires establishing the baseline to compare with. At this point all I will say about the appropriate baseline based on what little extra insight I have been provided as a candidate is that one should not assume that the approximately steady bad debt levels of the past will not deteriorate in the not too distant future. I can think of ways a board member can improve information regarding this question.

Taking the optimistic case, let us assume that the bad debt level will remain at current levels indefinitely until some board action is taken that reduces it (note: mere repossession of units in default does not change the impact of the bad debt level but may move the impact from one budget line to another). Further assume that a successful marketing program would likely take more than one year to demonstrate material improvement and might take over two. For ROI calculations, let us assume it takes two years to achieve. Rather than predict what the reduction would be, let us calculate how long it takes to break even. If the marketing program costs $150K per year every year (forever for this calculation) then a reduction of $200K in bad debt beginning in the third budget year (and holding there forever for this calculation) means that it would be the ninth year before the strategy is profitable. For the same costs, if there is a reduction of $250K beginning in the third year, then the strategy becomes profitable in the sixth year. If there is a reduction of $300K beginning in the third year, then the strategy becomes profitable in the fifth year.

There are metrics that might provide early indication of failure but discussion of that is beyond what I care to attempt in this forum.

I’ve written before why reliance on rentals during an economic downturn is very risky. Let us hope that rentals remain strong enough for long enough for marketing strategies to kick in. I prefer to not speculate about the potential severity of the impacts if we soon experience another downturn like we did a decade ago.

Regarding the value of ocean front units versus non ocean front units we've had that discussion before. I consider your response as viable an alternative as my example
https://www.tugbbs.com/forums/index...letter-from-board-member.254729/#post-1996108

Jack

 

[ecwinch]

Jeff - Wyndham holds the developer rights previously held by Pahio, it is part of what they acquired (see press release below). And while your history lesson is entertaining, it is inaccurate. They are not just the manager at resort, nor did David Walters just bring them in with a management contract. Wyndham acquired PAHIO, and Pahio held the management contract at KBV. Wyndham's acquisition of Pahio's rights is what gave them the management contract.

As noted in the press release - consider the expansion at Bali Hai - that was done with the development rights acquired from Pahio.

And your analogy is flawed. First, no single interest owns KBV. Secondly, Wyndham also acquired the developer held inventory from Pahio, so became an owner at KBV concurrent with assuming the mgt contract and developer rights. And while you want to cast dispersions on Wyndham, this trend of declining resorts and increasing maintenance fees is happening through out the timeshare industry - even independent resorts where the developer has exited the picture. BoD's feeling that keeping m/f dues low is what owners want lead to declining resorts, leading to more owners not seeing the value and defaulting, which just increases the burden on everyone else. Wyndham is not the causation of that trend, it is systemic to the business model.

You also are conflating ownership with control. The developer - be it Pahio or Wyndham - has always called the shots at the resort.

Take a step back for a moment and try to see the forest for the trees. You decry the fact they are taking over the resort by acquiring deeds from defaulting owners. If Wyndham was not paying dues on those 20% of units, where would the resort be? I think it is naive to believe that those 20% of the units would be in hands of paying owners.


KAUI, HI— Wyndham Vacation Ownership, Inc. has acquired Hawaii-based PAHIO Resorts, Inc. and PAHIO Vacation Ownership, Inc. Wyndham Vacation Ownership will assume property management, sales and marketing operations for Bali Hai Villas, Ka Eo Kai, Kaui Beach Villas, Shearwater and Makai Resorts, all located here. Additionally, Wyndham Vacation Ownership has entered into an exclusive relationship with developer David Walters to expand the Bali Hai Villas resort, adding more than 125 vacation ownership units. PAHIOs five resorts have approximately 20,000 owners and consist of more than 400 vacation ownership units. The acquisition will provide Wyhndam Vacation Ownership with an enhanced presence in the Hawaiian Islands.

 

[ecwinch]

To the extent my detail plan exists it is still quite preliminary. I’ll accept your annual cost numbers as a reasonable range. Technically, the costs would be expenses of the period, but we can certainly think of them as an investment with a need to forecast an ROI. That requires establishing the baseline to compare with. At this point all I will say about the appropriate baseline based on what little extra insight I have been provided as a candidate is that one should not assume that the approximately steady bad debt levels of the past will not deteriorate in the not too distant future. I can think of ways a board member can improve information regarding this question.

Jack

Jack - IMHO the plan is either genius or crazy. I say that because I cannot think of any resort that is doing this. Which I believe is either the hallmark of genius or crazy.

 

[Jeff From Salem]

Jeff - Wyndham holds the developer rights previously held by Pahio, it is part of what they acquired (see press release below). And while your history lesson is entertaining, it is inaccurate. They are not just the manager at resort, nor did David Walters just bring them in with a management contract. Wyndham acquired PAHIO, and Pahio held the management contract at KBV. Wyndham's acquisition of Pahio's rights is what gave them the management contract.

As noted in the press release - consider the expansion at Bali Hai - that was done with the development rights acquired from Pahio.

And your analogy is flawed. First, no single interest owns KBV. Secondly, Wyndham also acquired the developer held inventory from Pahio, so became an owner at KBV concurrent with assuming the mgt contract and developer rights. And while you want to cast dispersions on Wyndham, this trend of declining resorts and increasing maintenance fees is happening through out the timeshare industry - even independent resorts where the developer has exited the picture. BoD's feeling that keeping m/f dues low is what owners want lead to declining resorts, leading to more owners not seeing the value and defaulting, which just increases the burden on everyone else. Wyndham is not the causation of that trend, it is systemic to the business model.

You also are conflating ownership with control. The developer - be it Pahio or Wyndham - has always called the shots at the resort.

Take a step back for a moment and try to see the forest for the trees. You decry the fact they are taking over the resort by acquiring deeds from defaulting owners. If Wyndham was not paying dues on those 20% of units, where would the resort be? I think it is naive to believe that those 20% of the units would be in hands of paying owners.


KAUI, HI— Wyndham Vacation Ownership, Inc. has acquired Hawaii-based PAHIO Resorts, Inc. and PAHIO Vacation Ownership, Inc. Wyndham Vacation Ownership will assume property management, sales and marketing operations for Bali Hai Villas, Ka Eo Kai, Kaui Beach Villas, Shearwater and Makai Resorts, all located here. Additionally, Wyndham Vacation Ownership has entered into an exclusive relationship with developer David Walters to expand the Bali Hai Villas resort, adding more than 125 vacation ownership units. PAHIOs five resorts have approximately 20,000 owners and consist of more than 400 vacation ownership units. The acquisition will provide Wyhndam Vacation Ownership with an enhanced presence in the Hawaiian Islands.

Eric, they acquired the marketing of the resort. Makai has already succeeded in pushing Wyndham out, by the way. The individual still own the timeshare resort, itself. It's with most timeshare resorts. I don't think you have the relationship of the owners to the resort correctly. Olympic Village Inn in California successfully booted Wyndham from the BOD. And what you say about resorts going downhill and maintenance fees going up, that's not a rule. Sure, there are some resorts that have not been managed well in the longterm. I own at two other resorts and they both keep their maintenance fees down and,having bought them on the secondary market, their value has kept even in the case of one resort, and gone up in the other. It may not be the rule, but there ARE examples of resorts that are well run, kept in the hands of a BOD comprised of individual owners, and done well.

The history of Wyndham taking over resorts is not good in terms of their track record. Makai is much better off now that Wyndham is out of the picture. The owners are MUCH happier.

Regarding our resort, well, yes, David Walters did most of the decision-making. Even as Wyndham was brought in, the BOD individually admit that they assumed that they didn't need to provide close oversight. They discovered that they do. The question still is whether a resort designed to be owned by individual owners, with decisions about its running made by a BOD comprised by individual owners, should be run by individual owners. While Wyndham has raped other resorts in the manner they're trying to do it in their past, we have recent examples of owners fighting back and winning. I mentioned the Olympic Village Inn. There was also a Diamond Resort in Poipu which got great publicity.

You seem to have a blind spot for supporting Wyndham. Do you read the publication, TimeSharing Today? You ought to, if you haven't. It's a great window onto the industry.

Could a sizable percentage of the deeds be in the hands of more individual owners? Why not? And if it were to be the case, we'd be stronger. Again, Wyndham's history is to weaken the consolidarity of the owners at large.

When PAHIO itself was managing the property, we got somewhat regular updates. When Wyndham was in charge, we got almost none. I had brought the idea up to the BOD to edit an online newsletter for the owners. At the last minute, someone on the Board said that she would do it herself (I forgot who it was). And then she abandoned the idea.

It's partly why I chose to create one on the Yahoo Groups. (KBV Owners).

Jeff

 

[jacknsara]

Jack - IMHO the plan is either genius or crazy. I say that because I cannot think of any resort that is doing this. Which I believe is either the hallmark of genius or crazy.

Or maybe both KBV might have a first mover advantage (among independent Hawaiian timeshares) if we start soon. If we wait until the economy turns south, it may be to late for any plan to work.

 

[ecwinch]

Jeff - I read Timesharing Today, it is interesting.

I dont think the final chapter has been written about OVI..... give it some time.

 

[Rsiggy]

First of all I want to express my appreciation to Jeff and Jack for their willingness to run for the BOD.

I’ve read Jack’s analysis regarding his plan to save KBV and Jeff’s history of the genesis of the deterioration after Wyndham took over.
Here’s my simplistic view regarding objectives for the new BOD: 1. Retention of present owners
2. Enhancement of the units, the grounds (landscaping-compare to Kauai Coast Resort at the Beachboy) and amenities. Jeff and Jack recognize how pool access is desirable.
3. On site personnel: all play an important part in making ones stay pleasant. We’ve found almost all encounters MOST pleasant but while the front office were friendly however they were somehow ‘handcuffed ‘ when it came to trying to meet accommodating requests-a brushoff.

Jack identifies our location and beach walkways as a couple of the positive features.

I hope they can build on these ideas so that current owners still continue and renters wish to become owners.
Budgeting is the biggest problem: How to accomplish this while keeping MF’s competitive? Doing more with the same amount or even less revenue? Cost Control?

It’s good to see that these two men are willing to work in the best interests of us owners and of our investment in KBV as opposed to the best interest of a corporation.

 

[Jeff From Salem]

Jeff - I read Timesharing Today, it is interesting.

I dont think the final chapter has been written about OVI..... give it some time.

Hey, they threw Wyndham off. No living story is ever complete, right? But their effort was HUGE and SUCCESSFUL.

I hope you're not rooting for them to lose.

Jeff

 

[Jeff From Salem]

First of all I want to express my appreciation to Jeff and Jack for their willingness to run for the BOD.

I’ve read Jack’s analysis regarding his plan to save KBV and Jeff’s history of the genesis of the deterioration after Wyndham took over.
Here’s my simplistic view regarding objectives for the new BOD: 1. Retention of present owners
2. Enhancement of the units, the grounds (landscaping-compare to Kauai Coast Resort at the Beachboy) and amenities. Jeff and Jack recognize how pool access is desirable.
3. On site personnel: all play an important part in making ones stay pleasant. We’ve found almost all encounters MOST pleasant but while the front office were friendly however they were somehow ‘handcuffed ‘ when it came to trying to meet accommodating requests-a brushoff.

Jack identifies our location and beach walkways as a couple of the positive features.

I hope they can build on these ideas so that current owners still continue and renters wish to become owners.
Budgeting is the biggest problem: How to accomplish this while keeping MF’s competitive? Doing more with the same amount or even less revenue? Cost Control?

It’s good to see that these two men are willing to work in the best interests of us owners and of our investment in KBV as opposed to the best interest of a corporation.

Thank you for your acknowledgement.

As I have mentioned, Grand Pacific's work at increasing rental income resulted in going from ~$115,000 Wyndham's previous year as timeshare manager to ~$800,000 in their first year as timeshare manager. That's a big deal, but more has to be done to keep MF's down. Still, that increase from their work has allowed the resort to implement upgrades to the units which, I believe, are slated to begin later this year. I know that owners updates will soon include a showcase of the upgrades. So your money is starting to make a real concrete difference. Grand Pacific is really trying to earn their keep. Unlike with Wyndham, when they were given a 10 year contract, the timeshare management company is being given 3 year contracts. We need to make sure that individual owners are in the majority on the board so that if GP continues to do a great job, they will be allowed to continue their work. Again, Wyndham is gunning to end GP's contract no matter what, and install themselves back as the management company.

If any of you haven't visited it yet, please go to the website saveKBV.org. Make sure you go to the Wyndham's Smoking Gun page, which contains a real internal memorandum from Wyndham outlining their plan to oust anti-Wyndham people from the AOAO Board Of Directors and install pro-Wyndham people in order to retain the management contract.

Mahalo,

Jeff

 

[ecwinch]

Hey, they threw Wyndham off. No living story is ever complete, right? But their effort was HUGE and SUCCESSFUL.

I hope you're not rooting for them to lose.

Jeff

No, I am not hoping for them to lose. I think it is great that the owners have been re-energized and that the BoD is investing more time/energy in focusing on the long-term financial stability of the resort.

 

[Jeff From Salem]

No, I am not hoping for them to lose. I think it is great that the owners have been re-energized and that the BoD is investing more time/energy in focusing on the long-term financial stability of the resort.

GTK!

 

[KYHOME]

Thanks, Jack. You've hit on the high points, and I will absolutely agree that I may well be mis-remembering things. My recollection is that I was told by a former female Manager in the Front Office during an Owner's Update one year that the extra funds had been collected specifically to do a big pool remodel. I recall hearing the term "lazy river" being kicked around, because at that point I had never seen one. I agree they had repeated excuses about why things weren't ever started - the one that made me laugh out loud was because there were no construction crews to hire - everybody was too busy. And then, (again, my recollection), being told the money had been shifted to Bali Hai, to help in the construction up there, and that was why the pool remodel was being scaled down so far. The mini-remodel they later did on the pool area was pretty dissatisfying after that. The second remodel was better. But truth be told, I never put a toe in the pool while I owned at KBV. So maybe it's a lot of anxiety over nothing, but it was always a bone of contention for me, as an owner.

Dave

I can explain about the pool at KBV. First of all, the pool is not controlled by the timeshare owners/KBV IOA, it's part of the AOAO (Association of Apartment Owners). The AOAO represents owners who purchased a unit outright. Some of these owners live in them, others rent them themselves. The IOA is responsible for the interiors of the timeshare/IOA units. The AOAO is responsible for the exterior, grounds, etc. So, the pool at KBV is the AOAO's responsibility. They had to raise the money for the pool and surrounding area remodel. There has never been any money from KBV IOA that has been shifted to Bali Hai during my tenure.

 

[DeniseM]

Welcome KYHOME - Thanks for weighing in - what is your source for this info?

 

[Jeff From Salem]

Welcome KYHOME - Thaks for weighing in - what is your source for this info?

Copy that.

 

[Rsiggy]

Re: DeniseM’s vote.

Assigned my proxy votes to Karen Blackford earlier this evening.
Hopefully Jack gets enough to get elected.

 

[KYHOME]

Was so glad to receive Lou Columbo's email today regarding the upcoming KBV election. Not sure why some feel the need to impugn the character and integrity of someone who volunteers to donate his time and energy to make KBV a great resort.

I think it says more about the people making the accusations than anything else. I know where my votes will go - and not to someone playing the whisper game against their fellow owners.

Lou Columbo (he is on the ballot) is not a bad guy. He came to the board by appointment when another Board member (Wyndham employee) resigned. He is an independent owner. He appears to want to do what is best for the resort. However, Jack Goodstein and Jeff Bellin are Passionate independent owners. We feel they would be better representatives of independent owners.

 

[DeniseM]

Hi KYHOME - Thank you for posting. Please introduce yourself, so that we know the source of the Info you are providing.

 

[KYHOME]

Copy that.

I did meet Lou at the Board Meeting in 2017. Also, we exchanged an email a few months back and I have read his communications as well as his bio. As I said before, Jack Goodstein and Jeff Bellin are Passionate independent owners. I highlighted passionate on purpose. I believe that is where the candidates are different. I believe Jack and Jeff would be more vocal and stand up better for independent owners.

 

[KYHOME]

Hi KYHOME - Thank you for posting. Please introduce yourself, so that we know the source of the Info you are providing.

KYHOME is Karen Blackford. I live in KY - - a hint to why I choose the name. . I served on the KBV Board of Directors for 6 years, 5 of them as treasurer. If you are interested in my credentials, I have an Accounting Background and Director experience at a Fortune 100 company. For those of you familiar with ISO - - I was also a certified ISO auditor. In addition, I was the Administrator of an 80,000 square foot, 24/7 medical facility with 5 satellite offices. I want to use my experience and knowledge as your former Board member to make a positive contribution to this group!

 

[DeniseM]

Hi Karen - Thank you so much for posting on TUG! Welcome!

 

[ecwinch]

Lou Columbo (he is on the ballot) is not a bad guy. He came to the board by appointment when another Board member (Wyndham employee) resigned. He is an independent owner. He appears to want to do what is best for the resort. However, Jack Goodstein and Jeff Bellin are Passionate independent owners. We feel they would be better representatives of independent owners.

Karen - thanks for that insight. While I would agree that passion is desired element in a perspective BoD member, I would also add - all things in moderation. When you are so blinded by passion that you think it is acceptable to engage in a whisper campaign against a fellow owner - I would say that your passion is clouding your judgement. Not something I want to see in a BoD member.