Westin St. John [Master Thread]

[NerdAlert]

I think you being a little "flip."

Your answer doesn't really address whether the ending of the WSJ developer subsidy a good or a bad thing?

I thought I asked a serious question. I thought I'd get a less frivolous answer. ... eom

I thought it was obvious that free money from Starwood was a good thing. And I did answer your other question. Starwood will get the budget differences from us owners, with no obvious reciprocal benefits. I am simply conveying the common theme of WSJ owners of our frustration at what's going on. Why do people need to bust chops constantly on this bulletin board?

 

[SDKath]

I thought it was obvious that free money from Starwood was a good thing. And I did answer your other question. Starwood will get the budget differences from us owners, with no obvious reciprocal benefits. I am simply conveying the common theme of WSJ owners of our frustration at what's going on. Why do people need to bust chops constantly on this bulletin board?

It's just the poster. Don't let him get to you. I have him on my ignore list so unless you quote him, I don't ever see anything he posts. Makes my time on TUG much more fun and relaxing.

 

[jarta]

Here's the whole original reply. I stand by it.

"nerdAlert, ... "That's an easy one Jarta, just tap the "bottomless wallets" of us owners for the difference. And, oh yeah, through in the costs of all the deadbeats, but don't let the owners have any benefits in return...like rental income, usage priorities, or chances at ownership of those weeks."

I think you being a little "flip." If there is a reason for a developer subsidy of $2.9M in 2 years to balance the books at WSJ, there is something quite wrong in Paradise. Some more from the calendar 2008 audit (p. 15):

Budgeted MF: $5,716,105 Actual MF: $5,715,889 Difference: $216.

Budgeted Developer Subsidy: $2,194,770 Actual Developer Subsidy: $1,978,206 Difference: $216,564.

Your answer doesn't really address whether the ending of the WSJ developer subsidy a good or a bad thing? Or, how the bills are going to be paid without the subsidy? Or, one I didn't specifically ask: Why in the world is there a subsidy at all?

Maybe I'm missing something. Could you enlighten me? I was seriously considering buying something there, but if the development needed $1-1.5M every year to stay afloat and it's no longer there, why do it? Maybe I'd be better off taking my chance and trading into BV (or maybe Hillside if something turns up) using Staroptions from a lower MF resort.

I thought I asked a serious question. I thought I'd get a less frivolous answer. ... eom"

These questions remain unanswered: Whether the ending of the WSJ developer subsidy is a good or a bad thing for the owners? How are the bills are going to be paid without the subsidy? Why in the world was there a need for such a large subsidy at all? ... eom

 

[DavidnRobin]

Sweet Plantains is closed? Thats news to me, where did you hear this DavenRobin? We will be there in 2 weeks and was possibly looking to eat there one night

I posted a link - I read a most of the STJ news and blogs on a regular basis.
I have listed these previously.

 

[DavidnRobin]

I thought it was obvious that free money from Starwood was a good thing. And I did answer your other question. Starwood will get the budget differences from us owners, with no obvious reciprocal benefits. I am simply conveying the common theme of WSJ owners of our frustration at what's going on. Why do people need to bust chops constantly on this bulletin board?

IMO - it is not 'people' - it is generally a single person who obviously does not play well with others - who doesn't even own WSJ (but is looking - too bad for STJ IMO) - that seems to enjoy throwing grenades and twisting words (as those in this profession are trained at - and prosper obviously). Others seem to play well with others IMO on this thread and SVO TUG in general - even when they have differences of opinion. (and the ignore function works well except for quoting... as Kath points out)

I listed the subsidy payments (relative to my 2Bd TH) - it is what it is. I move forward not expecting SVO subsidy for WSJ-VG MFs. I do not care about their historic reasonings (and suppostions of 'payback' which is just plain ignorant and non-productive). As noted - and I stand by my previous post - the why and consequences is up to SVO not us and teh subsidy is relatively small relatively to the overall MFs.

What concerns me - as well as all/most OWNERS - is the future MFs beyond the SA, and the transparency of the revenues and expenditures listed in the MF. Hopefully - Bob and Phil will have forward momentum with this - I believe they are. I have met Phil more than once - and I generally have a good read on people - I believe his intentions are both honorable and balanced given the situation. We have had some small victories in this sense - and hope to have more. But it is up to concerned Owners to pull together - and be UNIFIED in one coliation - whether their opinions are aligned or not. IMO - It is diversity of thought, good leadership, transparency, reasonable expectations and proper decision making that will triumph in the long run (my company excelled at this and their success proved this - and hopefully will continue). I try and do my part as I can - I hope other Owners will do as well.

best

 

[jarta]

David, ... "teh subsidy is relatively small relatively to the overall MFs."

There have been bitter complaints posted here about the current MF at WSJ VG.

There are 92 units comprising 4,692 unit-weeks at WSJ VG. The developer subsidy over 2007 and 2008 was almost $3M - or about $1.5M per year. Now, it's completely gone.

$1.5M / 4,962 amounts to $319.70 per unit-week per year.

Even with the special assessment ending after 2011, WSJ VG owners who post here are extremely unhappy about their underlying yearly assessments.

I don't think the owners would be happier about paying an additional $319.70 per year to fill the void due to the ending of the developer subsidy. But, how will the WSJ VG owners avoid having to "eat" the additional $319.70 each year? When revenue goes down, either expenses have to go down further than the revenue loss or the assessments have to go up.

As you say: "What concerns me - as well as all/most OWNERS - is the future MFs beyond the SA." As a potential buyer at WSJ, it's what concerns me, too. That's why I have asked the questions.

Do you think that the new board members will be able to squeeze out/save $319.70 in yearly expenditures? It seems that even if they were able to do that, everyone would be right where they were financially for 2009. And, they would remain quite unhappy with the yearly MF at WSJ VG.

Is there something wrong with my math?

I have stayed at WSJ. I currently have a 3-br reservation there just before Christmas of this year. I love the ambience and beauty of the island and the resort. But, given the turmoil, unhappiness and uncertainty at WSJ VG, why would anyone risk buying there until the dust settles? ... eom

 

[jarta]

Excerpts from the 12/31/08 audited report:

From Note 1:

"Virgin Grand Villas - St. John Condominium Owners Association (the "Association") was incorporated on March 10, 1998, under the laws of the United States Virgin Islands to operate and manage the Virgin Grand Villas - St. John Condominium (the “Condominium”), an interval ownership condominium consisting of 92 units (4,692 unitweeks, which include 92 maintenance weeks), located at Great Cruz Bay, St. John, United States Virgin Islands. The owners of all unit-weeks in the condominium are the only members."

From Note 4:

"During the years ended December 31, 2008 and 2007, the amount of maintenance fees assessed to the developer for operations and replacements were $580,994 and $75,079, and $538,846 and $64,231, respectively. Total cash payments made to the Association by the developer, for these assessments were $656,073 and $603,077 in 2008 and 2007, respectively. In addition, the developer elected to voluntarily subsidize specified line items in the budget resulting in developer subsidy revenue of $1,978,206 and $892,090 for the years ended December 31, 2008 and 2007, respectively. The Association derived approximately 31% and 22% of its revenue from the developer during the years ended December 31, 2008 and 2007, respectively."

... eom

 

[Ken555]

FWIW, I think Jarta's got a point here. Those of you who don't see his posts are missing a justifiable viewpoint, IMO.

 

[DavidnRobin]

FWIW, I think Jarta's got a point here. Those of you who don't see his posts are missing a justifiable viewpoint, IMO.

sorry - don't care... I take a totally different mode of rlaying info and opinion - but that is me... I take a 3 strikes approach (and it has been about 5 with a couple of HBPs) - anyone who doesn't like what I have to say or my approach can put me on ignore as well. I have made my TS choices - and plan to make the best of it - while at the same time trying to prevent others fro making bad decisions, and trying to be informative as possible w/o playing distraction ball - and take some fantastic vacations (and share my experiences and opinions). All my posts are consistent in this approach.

best to you Ken... feel free to summarize them if you want... I have more important things to deal with.

can we get back to an informative WSJ Thread... this is why I started it in the 1st place - and I am very proud of it. If someone wants to make a subsidy thread - go for it. IMO the subsidy is over for WSJ - time to move on...

 

[DavidnRobin]

speaking of which - excellent rookie thread of WSJ/STJ visit.
http://www.tugbbs.com/forums/showthread.php?t=127227

 

[Ken555]

sorry - don't care... I take a totally different mode of rlaying info and opinion - but that is me... I take a 3 strikes approach (and it has been about 5 with a couple of HBPs) - anyone who doesn't like what I have to say or my approach can put me on ignore as well. I have made my TS choices - and plan to make the best of it - while at the same time trying to prevent others fro making bad decisions, and trying to be informative as possible w/o playing distraction ball - and take some fantastic vacations (and share my experiences and opinions). All my posts are consistent in this approach.

best to you Ken... feel free to summarize them if you want... I have more important things to deal with.

can we get back to an informative WSJ Thread... this is why I started it in the 1st place - and I am very proud of it. If someone wants to make a subsidy thread - go for it. IMO the subsidy is over for WSJ - time to move on...

David,

I really don't understand why you felt it necessary to post this comment. It certainly doesn't help the conversation.

I also have no desire to summarize a post that's on the forum, which you choose not to read for your own reasons. The post in question is part of this thread. If you have any interest, you'll change your settings and read it. Otherwise, think twice in future about asking for someone to spend time on your behalf summarizing when the ability to read the original is entirely up to you.

Ken

 

[DavidnRobin]

sorry - duplicate

 

[DavidnRobin]

I posted it for very clear reasons - and was responding to your post about some supposed valid argument being made. Sorry if you feel wronged in some way - that was not intended that way - but typical of the tangent and grenades that the subject being discussed seems to cherish (as we are still discussing this...). I have been on TUG many years - before the 'distraction ball' posting started. I am keeping the WSJ on track. If someone wants to ignore me - they have that ability - as I do.

I made my point crystal clear (keeping within TUG rules and request by Mods). I wasn't asking you to summarize - I said that for me to read them, then feel free to summarize (or anyone for that matter). I made the mistake of removing the ignore function already (twice actually) - shame on me - I do not need the headache, aggravation, etc.

I spent the time digging through my files to summarize the subsidies in terms of a per VOI cost (real data). Not that impactful anymore compared to the overall MFs and RRs, deliquencies, etc. As stated - the subsidy is reported as over - I am moving on. I was curious of the numbers. If others want to chime in on WSJ subsidy feel free - I think there will be silence.

If one wants to start a thread on the consequences of SVO subsidies - I think it is a great idea, and worth its own thread since it impacts all of SVO subsidized resorts. Perhaps that is a better venue than here?

Take care Ken - I have always enjoyed you posts - try not to get dragged in (IMO). But please do not expect me to respond to this further here - if you want to PM me - please feel free.. I am not wired to speculate on things I cannot impact. I believe my impacts and views have been pretty postive for the most part - and feel good when people PM me thanking me (makes it all worth it).

I am looking forward to my next WSJ visit, but 1st OF in Maui...

"if you plant ice - you will harvest wind"
I prefer sunlight... it is the best disinfectant.

 

[Ken555]

Sorry if you feel wronged in some way - that was not intended that way - but typical of the tangent and grenades that the subject being discussed seems to cherish (as we are still discussing this...). I have been on TUG many years - before the 'distraction ball' posting started.

I've been on TUG longer than you. I remember those days quite well.

I wasn't asking you to summarize - I said that for me to read them, then feel free to summarize (or anyone for that matter).

This was an implied request.

I made the mistake of removing the ignore function already (twice actually) - shame on me - I do not need the headache, aggravation, etc.

I think it's fair to say the regulars know your opinion of the individual in question.

I spent the time digging through my files to summarize the subsidies in terms of a per VOI cost (real data). Not that impactful anymore compared to the overall MFs and RRs, deliquencies, etc. As stated - the subsidy is reported as over - I am moving on. I was curious of the numbers. If others want to chime in on WSJ subsidy feel free - I think there will be silence.

The issue, as I see it, is whether or not the subsidy impacts the MFs on an on-going basis, and whether or not the subsidy artificially adjusted the MF to encourage sales. I would have expected most WSJ owners to be concerned about this issue. FWIW, my only interest is as a fellow SVN owner, as I see what's happening at WSJ as precursor to what may happen at other resorts.

If one wants to start a thread on the consequences of SVO subsidies - I think it is a great idea, and worth its own thread since it impacts all of SVO subsidized resorts. Perhaps that is a better venue than here?

I think it's great that you continue to try to keep this thread on target, based on how you see it. But that's not typical, as we both know. Tangents happen. Get used to it.

Take care Ken - I have always enjoyed you posts - try not to get dragged in (IMO). But please do not expect me to respond to this further here - if you want to PM me - please feel free.. I am not wired to speculate on things I cannot impact. I believe my impacts and views have been pretty postive for the most part - and feel good when people PM me thanking me (makes it all worth it).

Don't get me wrong, I think your posts are great. But I don't agree that your one-sided viewpoint here is fair, by any definition. Keep in mind this latest round was a short post of mine which stated that IMO Jarta's post has some validity. You could have ignored it, but didn't. I wouldn't have posted again, but felt it necessary to respond to your subsequent post, for obvious reasons.

And by all means, if you feel it necessary to communicate privately, you may send me a PM or email at any time. Given the tenor of the thread, I believe it more appropriate to reply here so everyone can read it.

 

[NerdAlert]

USVI Draft of Timeshare Valuations is available

Just poking around the USVI Tax Assessor website and found a draft of the proposed rules for valuation of timeshares.
See if link works:
http://ltg.gov.vi/images/stories/Draft.Rules.Valuation.Timshares.pdf
Let's hash it out

 

[whitebeachsand]

Westin NO Longer Wait Lists

What's happening on the lawsuit front? Starwood keeps making it more and more difficult to use the week. Every year the game changes. Now they are no longer taking wait lists. SVO is doing everthing they can to push the owners out.

 

[DavidnRobin]

What's happening on the lawsuit front? Starwood keeps making it more and more difficult to use the week. Every year the game changes. Now they are no longer taking wait lists. SVO is doing everthing they can to push the owners out.

Could you be more specific with this - hard to respond w/o more detail. Phase, week, owner, SVN, elite status, etc?

 

[DavidnRobin]

Just poking around the USVI Tax Assessor website and found a draft of the proposed rules for valuation of timeshares.
See if link works:
http://ltg.gov.vi/images/stories/Draft.Rules.Valuation.Timshares.pdf
Let's hash it out

My understanding is that 2007 bills will be sent late 2010 based on 1998 rate.

The new evaluation - from previous mailing - will ~double.

I will look at link to confirm if same as Tax that was halted by Legal action in part by STJ residents (also getting hit) - TS owners on STJ getting double wham.

 

[GeneNWendy]

2006 Tax Bills

Hi DavidnRobin,

I received my 2006 tax bills by caling the USVI Tax Assessor's office directly. I also heard from Starwood that they would be sending them out to owners in the next few weeks. The amount of the taxes are virtually unchanged from what they were in the 2005 bills. I guess that makes sense if they are using the old 1998 rates.

Regards,
GeneNWendy

 

[DavidnRobin]

Hi DavidnRobin,

I received my 2006 tax bills by caling the USVI Tax Assessor's office directly. I also heard from Starwood that they would be sending them out to owners in the next few weeks. The amount of the taxes are virtually unchanged from what they were in the 2005 bills. I guess that makes sense if they are using the old 1998 rates.

Regards,
GeneNWendy

The previous Owner got mine for week 23 - and sent it to me (luckily we stay in contact). I never received our week 24 Tax bill - even though I received the week 24 one that was halted by Legal Action (2 years ago?).

I like paying ethe 1998 rate - hopefuuly that will last thru 2007 and beyond, but likely it will be resolved befor the 2008 bill (IMO).

 

[NerdAlert]

The new (2010) 2006 tax bills are using the 1998 rate which is: 0.0125*0.6*AV, where AV is the assessed value. So on a TS assessed at $23,600 the tax is: $177. This looks lower than the previous 2006 bills from 2008. The draft I mentioned above is very important for us because it shows how the VI is going to establish the assessed values of TS in the future. It roughly looks like they're going to use 50% of an original developer week value, and 65% value of a resale. This appears better than before. One of of my developer weeks, they pinned the assessment at 62%. More importantly, as the values are dropping on resales, they appear to be helping us out by using only 65% of it as long as it is an arms-length deal. Hopefully it will be immediate, like upon deed recording. It is hard for me to believe, though, if you buy a week for like $3000, they'll assess it at $1950. I guess they can always jiggle the tax rate, as usual. Any other thoughts?

 

[DavidnRobin]

The new (2010) 2006 tax bills are using the 1998 rate which is: 0.0125*0.6*AV, where AV is the assessed value. So on a TS assessed at $23,600 the tax is: $177. This looks lower than the previous 2006 bills from 2008. The draft I mentioned above is very important for us because it shows how the VI is going to establish the assessed values of TS in the future. It roughly looks like they're going to use 50% of an original developer week value, and 65% value of a resale. This appears better than before. One of of my developer weeks, they pinned the assessment at 62%. More importantly, as the values are dropping on resales, they appear to be helping us out by using only 65% of it as long as it is an arms-length deal. Hopefully it will be immediate, like upon deed recording. It is hard for me to believe, though, if you buy a week for like $3000, they'll assess it at $1950. I guess they can always jiggle the tax rate, as usual. Any other thoughts?

I tend to agree, but I am see-it-believe-it mode. The SA may increase the value as well. The TS tax increase fight is only slightly supported by ARDA (iirc), and very strong from STJians due to the perceived imbalance. I do believe it will take sometime for USVI to deal with it - in the meantine they need money to run gov't. I think the 2007 bill would be the same 1998 rate. Beyond that - I am expecting a doubling of my tax rate (less I will be happy, more I will be upset).

 

[islandguy]

Fire Pirates

Just read that the Fire Pirates are leaving St. John and the Westin. They are headed to Virgin Gorda full time. Wonder what Westin is going to do now that they are gone or soon to be with the weekly waterfont show.

Saw them over 4 or 5 times at the beach during their evening performances and was at their first one they did at the Westin St. John.

Going to miss the fire breathing team. Got three trips coming up (Nov, Jan and Feb) to SJT -- may just have to go to bars down in Cruz Bay. Or may just have stay the night in Virgin Gorda to see their act again.

Island Guy

 

[DavidnRobin]

Tropical Storm Earl to skirt USVI
http://www.wunderground.com/tropical/tracking/at201007.html

with an Invest close behind (possibly).

 

[olivias dad]

We just returned (thank god) great weather, great times, what would happen if we were at the WSJ this week? Would WSJ refund us?