Voyager Questions and June 2017 Owner Update Report

[MartinK]

Edit: as pointed out below, often when I use the term "Voyager" it should say "Access." That is my fault in mixing up the terminology
----
Just got back from a 3-night vacation at Wyndham Oceanside. Took their 60-min owner update in exchange for $75 Amex gift card and hot breakfast for our party of 9 (which was actually a "hot" b-fast of eggs/sausage/waffles. In past years at other resorts the only thing hot was coffee or if you put the danish in the microwave.)

My parents owned 330k annual developer-purchased VIP grandfathered and 168k bi-annual odd year resale points. I inherited these in early 2015. I am very familiar with Wyndham Plus points system from working with my parents planning vacations and attending some sales presentations with them.

Didn't vacation much in the past 2 years and declined any owner updates when I did. This one was about the new Voyager so I wanted to hear about it, plus had the time.

Here are several things I was told in my sit-down with the sales rep:

1) 80% of owners have bought into Voyager. (Really? They told me minimum was 105k points at $20k to get in -- I find that 80% figure hard to believe.)

2) Now because of Voyager I do not have access to all units because some of that inventory is available ONLY to Voyager people. My rep explained if I have ever been on the reservation website and had a room be green and then when I click on it and no room comes up, that is because that is Voyager only. (I've had that happen)

3) my rep showed me a sheet with all my numbers crammed together. My maintenance fees at National Harbor are very low. I'm paying $159/mo now for 414k annual points. He showed me on the sheet that my 2018 maintenance fees are projected to be $236/mo because "there are less owners paying into it (because they have gone into Voyager) so the remaining people have to pick up the slack." WHOA, wait a minute. My MF have gone up 3% annually the last several years and now they are going to jump almost 50% in one year? So what if Owners have moved to Voyager? They are paying MF too ... shouldn't a fair portion of that be coming to National Harbor keeping my MF about the same?

Anyway, I'm not too happy about 2 & 3 above. Now I'm not able to reserve what I would have been able to reserve in my reservation window if Wyndham is excluding me from certain rooms.

If my MF really go up that high in one year I will be irate. Right now the rep said it was the "predicted" rate so I need to wait and see ... but I think I'll look into this more ... do I have any recourse for this high of a jump in my MF?

On my check-out day the sales manager called me to see if I was still wanting to get into Voyager. I said not at $20k ... I asked if I could pay a processing fee to get in and keep my current points. He said they could sell me 28k points for $7,000. (Gee, what happened to 105k being the minimum?) Still too high for me as not only do I have enough points already, my MF will also increase if I add more points, and $7,000 doesn't grow on trees.

Any feedback to the above comments is appreciated. I'm still traveling the next few days so will respond when I can.

 

[T-Dot-Traveller]

Wyndham owners / Tug Members will give detailed answers to your listed points

BUT - after reading / IMO - mostly TS sales BS .

As I recently saw on a TUG post - " 99% of TS sales gives the others a bad name .

 

[bnoble]

All completely bogus.

 

[55plus]

Typical sales weasels taking advantage of piece of crap website with lies to make a sale.

 

[Jan M.]

I don't see one single thing they told you that is true! That Voyager stuff is the most ridiculous made up crap I've heard to date. You don't buy into Voyager. You buy Club Wyndham Access or Club Wyndham Plus points. Voyager is Wyndham's name for the new website.

 

[Wolf&Sprite]

If you replace the word Voyager with Access it makes more sense. It's still not true. Very unlikely that your MF will go up more than usual. And if you are confusing Access with Voyager, even 105K points would not really help get you more availability.

 

[55plus]

I don't see one single thing they told you that is true! That Voyager stuff is the most ridiculous made up crap I've heard to date. You don't buy into Voyager. You buy Club Wyndham Access or Club Wyndham Plus points. Voyager is Wyndham's name for the new website.

The post should read: Voyager is Wyndham's name for the new piece of crap website that is not user friendly and designed to cheat owners out of prime locations and timeframes.

 

[MartinK]

Some of that may be my wrong terminology. The 30-min presentation was on Voyager and then I met for 30 min with a sales rep. I suppose it was Club Wyndham Access they were trying to sell me into. So that is my fault. They didn't name it -- just asked me if I was in the new system. I originally said "yes" because I signed up for the new website and thought that is what they meant. Then the sales rep quickly discovered I was not "in the new system" and tried to get me in and sell me.

 

[cayman01]

Reallly? The salesman said Voyager? Pretty clueless salesperson. As someone else mentioned it would make more sense if he was saying Club Wyndham Access. But not really as there is zero chance of your MF'S going up 50%. 80 % have bought into Voyager eh? Does that mean 20% of owners STILL don't have online access? That might be the only truth in those statements.

 

[Pathways]

Not worth the time to go point by point - NONE of that is true. If you own at Nat Har, then it IS true the fee increase could be slightly higher if Wyndham has been subsidizing the dues, but it should still be one of the lowest in the system.

If you trade and join CWA (Club Wyndham Access) then your dues will go WAY up. (Again, assuming you own NH)

 

[T-Dot-Traveller]

Reallly? The salesman said Voyager? Pretty clueless salesperson. As someone else mentioned it would make more sense if he was saying Club Wyndham Access. But not really as there is zero chance of your MF'S going up 50%. 80 % have bought into Voyager eh? Does that mean 20% of owners STILL don't have online access? That might be the only truth in those statements.

Maybe the sales weasel meant - 20% of owners are still using FIXED WEEKS & paying LESS PER WEEK / so no real need for online access

and based on TUG posting since Voyager "roll out " / more than 20% who have points can't use them via online access

 

[ronparise]

Not worth the time to go point by point - NONE of that is true. If you own at Nat Har, then it IS true the fee increase could be slightly higher if Wyndham has been subsidizing the dues, but it should still be one of the lowest in the system.

If you trade and join CWA (Club Wyndham Access) then your dues will go WAY up. (Again, assuming you own NH)

Wyndham dosent subsidize fees in the sense that the fees are low because Wyndham subsidizes them

What wyndhan does is what every condo developer does and that is until the property is sold out they make up the difference between mf collected and the budget. And dosent reduce the fees

National harbor fees are low for a number of reasons, not the least of which is that there are no grounds to maintain and the hoa collects rent from CVS and the other businesses on the ground floor

 

[buckor]

Wyndham dosent subsidize fees in the sense that the fees are low because Wyndham subsidizes them

What wyndhan does is what every condo developer does and that is until the property is sold out they make up the difference between mf collected and the budget. And dosent reduce the fees

National harbor fees are low for a number of reasons, not the least of which is that there are no grounds to maintain and the hoa collects rent from CVS and the other businesses on the ground floor

Yes, in a technical sense, they do not subsidize the fees. However, as they are selling the resort they also control 100% of the HOA. The HOA sets the budget for the resort, which then translates into MFs.

The initial budgets are really "guesses" (proformas) based on operating results at other resorts. Additionally, it will cost less to operate the new resort. However, if any of those guesses are wrong because the new resort doesn't operate as planned (higher electricity bills, water bills, etc), then those expenses have to be made up in future years.

That said, I do know Wyndham has subsidized costs at Panama City. Not the MFs specifically, but items that would hit the MFs maintenance line. The example I know of was an additional outlay of $100k on the escalators when they got clogged up with sand end of 2015. Wyndham took the hit so the owners wouldn't have to. While not a direct MF subsidy, it is indirectly, therefore keeping MFs at PCB artificially lower than they should have been, even if just a little bit.

Of course, once the resort is sold out all the real maintenance issues start and MFs truly start rising to ensure maintenance reserves are adequate.

So yes, Wyndham does not subsidize MFs directly, but the have done so indirectly, and benefit from the low MFs they are contractually obligated to pay during the initial selling phase of the resort.

Which begs the question: why do you think Wyndham likes the new Just-in-Time model of resort development? Because they aren't on the hook for any MFs they haven't taken possession of. And they don't take possession until they are ready to sell....win-win-Wyn.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-J320AZ using Tapatalk

 

[ronparise]

Yes, in a technical sense, they do not subsidize the fees. However, as they are selling the resort they also control 100% of the HOA. The HOA sets the budget for the resort, which then translates into MFs.

The initial budgets are really "guesses" (proformas) based on operating results at other resorts. Additionally, it will cost less to operate the new resort. However, if any of those guesses are wrong because the new resort doesn't operate as planned (higher electricity bills, water bills, etc), then those expenses have to be made up in future years.

That said, I do know Wyndham has subsidized costs at Panama City. Not the MFs specifically, but items that would hit the MFs maintenance line. The example I know of was an additional outlay of $100k on the escalators when they got clogged up with sand end of 2015. Wyndham took the hit so the owners wouldn't have to. While not a direct MF subsidy, it is indirectly, therefore keeping MFs at PCB artificially lower than they should have been, even if just a little bit.

Of course, once the resort is sold out all the real maintenance issues start and MFs truly start rising to ensure maintenance reserves are adequate.

So yes, Wyndham does not subsidize MFs directly, but the have done so indirectly, and benefit from the low MFs they are contractually obligated to pay during the initial selling phase bof the resort.

Which begs the question: why do you think Wyndham likes the new Just-in-Time model of resort development? Because they aren't on the hook for any MFs they haven't taken possession of. And they don't take possession until they are ready to sell....win-win-Wyn.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-J320AZ using Tapatalk

I understand the benefits of just in time delivery of the condos at new developments. But wouldn't that reduce what Wyndham pays toward maintenance of a new resort to almost zero. The maintenance at the just in time resorts is paid by the developer that wyndham is buying from so certainly no subsidies at Clearwater for example

I understand Wyndham controls the budgets at the new resorts that aren't "just in time" and that they can be kept artificially low by cheating a little with the reserve account. And of course less maintenance is needed at a new place than one with a few years on it. But a little cheating isn't what we are taking about. We are talking about the opposite of cheatingi just don't believe Wyndham is putting money in when they don't have to

And I don't believe low mf helps the sales effort. It would if an honest discussion of maintenance fees weee part of the sales presentation. I know it is at national harbor and Canterbury because fees are low. But generally sales ignores fees because low fees don't justify the $220/1000 points sales price. If they did the purchase price for national harbor points would be more than Bonnet Creek or CWA. And they are not

i wasn't familiar with the elevators at pcb but if I understand correctly this was after the resort had a hoa. It seems to me that if there was a design issue
any hoa would look to the developer to pay for the fix? The way I see it, that incident wasn't a case of Wyndham doing something out of the goodness of their heart, rather it was fixing a problem that they were responsible for as the developer

But the fact is when I say fees at national harbor aren't being subsidized by Wyndham to make sales easier, I really don't know for sure, I come to my conclusion through deductive reasoning
The maintenance fee rate was lower here than at most other Wyndham resorts when the place first opened and the fee rate here is still low. If Wyndham had been helping the sales effort early on I would have expected to see a period of rapidly rising annual fees to "catch up" with reality. That hasn't happened

I usually argue that low fees aren't low at all, rather it the fee rate that's low because the points allocation is high. But the points allocation here falls in the same range as a lot of resorts with higher rates. So I go looking for possible explanations And what I see is no grounds maintenance, and rental income other places don't have.
Could subsidies be the reason? Sure. But that wouldn't be the Wyndham we all know and love. I thought making money on the backs of us owners was the way they do business.
subsidies run counter to that model

 

[buckor]

I understand the benefits of just in time delivery of the condos at new developments. But wouldn't that reduce what Wyndham pays toward maintenance of a new resort to almost zero. The maintenance at the just in time resorts is paid by the developer that wyndham is buying from so certainly no subsidies at Clearwater for example

I understand Wyndham controls the budgets at the new resorts that aren't "just in time" and that they can be kept artificially low by cheating a little with the reserve account. And of course less maintenance is needed at a new place than one with a few years on it. But a little cheating isn't what we are taking about. We are talking about the opposite of cheatingi just don't believe Wyndham is putting money in when they don't have to

And I don't believe low mf helps the sales effort. It would if an honest discussion of maintenance fees weee part of the sales presentation. I know it is at national harbor and Canterbury because fees are low. But generally sales ignores fees because low fees don't justify the $220/1000 points sales price. If they did the purchase price for national harbor points would be more than Bonnet Creek or CWA. And they are not

i wasn't familiar with the elevators at pcb but if I understand correctly this was after the resort had a hoa. It seems to me that if there was a design issue
any hoa would look to the developer to pay for the fix? The way I see it, that incident wasn't a case of Wyndham doing something out of the goodness of their heart, rather it was fixing a problem that they were responsible for as the developer

But the fact is when I say fees at national harbor aren't being subsidized by Wyndham to make sales easier, I really don't know for sure, I come to my conclusion through deductive reasoning
The maintenance fee rate was lower here than at most other Wyndham resorts when the place first opened and the fee rate here is still low. If Wyndham had been helping the sales effort early on I would have expected to see a period of rapidly rising annual fees to "catch up" with reality. That hasn't happened

I usually argue that low fees aren't low at all, rather it the fee rate that's low because the points allocation is high. But the points allocation here falls in the same range as a lot of resorts with higher rates. So I go looking for possible explanations And what I see is no grounds maintenance, and rental income other places don't have.
Could subsidies be the reason? Sure. But that wouldn't be the Wyndham we all know and love. I thought making money on the backs of us owners was the way they do business.
subsidies run counter to that model

Ron, to be sure my comments weren't directed at you, specifically, I just quoted your comments.

I agree that for the most part it doesn't seem to make sense that Wyndham subsidize MFs. And yes, the just in time development model keeps HOA contractual expenses to almost zero.

That said, I do think Wyndham understands the value of low MFs for several years at New resorts. Hence the escalator issue at PCB. It wasn't a design flaw in that the escalators were installed improperly, etc., but sand kept causing problems with the escalators. How many hotels/resorts do we know of on the beach with escalators? I can't think of any except Wyndham's PCB....and Wyndham didn't develope that resort. They bought the rooms in the one tower from the developer (with the rooms in the "developer owned" tower contractually paying 85% (if I remember correctly) of the facility MFs, which has been the cause of the stand still for building the 3rd tower)).

Interestingly, Wyndham had sold 70% of NH within 9 months of resort opening.

Regarding Wyndham making money off the backs of the little guy, I don't think Wyndham is keeping MFs artificially low for the express purpose of sales, etc. But, Wyndham is the beneficiary of extra sales from people who view low MFs as a priority, and Wyndham is the beneficiary of any proforma mistakes with the HOA budgets...at least if they can sell the resort quickly.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-J320AZ using Tapatalk