Wyndham is closing a handful of legacy resorts - dedicated chart/tracker located in the first post for this unfolding set of events

[Arimaas]

So

I don't know that I'd rely on a local reporter to make the distinction between "Club Wyndham" the corporate entity or "Club Wyndham" the management at the timeshare resort at Fairfield Glade.

I concur. Very plausible. But Club Wyndham the corporate entity should jump on a correction then. Either way, I guess it's all wait and see.

 

[CO skier]

Possibly but I've also heard that they are planning on putting better resorts in some of these locations. That might mean they are buying other resorts, or another resort system.

That would still be trading old dots for new dots, and lets the air out of all the "massive changes" and "monumental changes" pronouncements.

 

[CO skier]

I was kind of hoping Flagstaff Ridgewood was on the list. That one is 40 years old and the MF are high. Also, there is a vote in a few months to decide if they want to continue with the timeshare program. Wyndham doesn't have a controlling interest there, according to what I heard at the HOA meeting in May. So Wyndham cannot force the vote to go either way. It would make things so much easier if it was on the list.

If enough of your fellow owners share the same opinion, the owners can put is on the list with a termination vote.

 

[Fido Chuckwagon]

I own at Fairfield Glade and I haven’t received any such email.

That’s strange that we’ve now got two owners posting that they did not receive this “e-blast.”

 

[Richelle]

I never got a statement in an email message. Maybe gmail bounced it to spam, but i never saw it. First saw the article in the Facebook group, and then of course came here to discuss, because you can't post anything of substance there, and if your grammar is off, they ban you for life.

As anyone. Despite the college edumacation, Im terible at gramer and speling. Im stil her 11 yrs l8er.

 

[Richelle]

That’s strange that we’ve now got two owners posting that they did not receive this “e-blast.”

Let me check the Book of Face and get back to you. Someone should have seen this email if it exists.

 

[paxsarah]

I find it interesting that if everyone were to take the CWA trade-in (I know they won't), we have the same number of individual owners now vying for a smaller number of units annually. I would guess the slack is made up through a decrease in Wyndham's rental business of the inventory it owns (because it will own less CWA inventory)? Is there another possibility I'm missing?

That's kind of funny to me because the optics to the owner base are that we'll have the same/similar number of owners competing for less total inventory, which seems pretty bad, and the explanation for why it won't be a problem is probably along the lines of "Don't worry - we were renting a crapton of units ourselves, but now we'll only be renting a half a crapton!" Which also sounds bad, because it would require Wyndham to talk about its own rental business.

 

[Richelle]

If enough of your fellow owners share the same opinion, the owners can put is on the list with a termination vote.

The problem is getting people to vote. Prior to all this, I was worried they wouldn't get enough votes to continue, simply because people ignore the letter or assume others will vote the way they want them too. I don't know what will happen if it's terminated simply because they didn't get enough voters to vote. I don't know if I will qualify for the same CWA swap deal.

 

[HitchHiker71]

That’s strange that we’ve now got two owners posting that they did not receive this “e-blast.”

Which tells us all what we need to know about how accurate the quotes in that article are in the first place. I bet there was no email blast - probably just to the employees at this point, but the article got that wrong most likely because it sounds better and is more sensational to say the entire membership received an email. It was written by a local reporter who is likely pretty clueless about the difference between Wyndham corporate and the Wyndham branded resort. To them it’s just Club Wyndham. I doubt the reporter even understands the details of the structure that exists between resorts and the developer in the first place. The use of the term “Club Wyndham” is meant to refer to the local resort HOA, not Wyndham corporate. Had Wyndham corporate wanted to issue a formal statement, it would be on their own website.

I maintain that we still have no formal statement from Wyndham corporate. If we did, I would know, as I am waiting to be directly informed from Wyndham corporate when it is released, and have seen the draft statement with my own eyes and provided direct feedback on it already. Is that clear enough?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[TUGBrian]

Just sayin... if some of the individuals I spoke to directly that "may or may not have confirmed all this but cant confirm the confirmation yet" were wrong given their positions in the industry...id be pretty shocked. if this story were a fabrication, it would have been nipped in the bud almost at the start.

that said if i were a betting man, id say the truth lies somewhere between "no changes" and "wyndham is shutting down 20 resorts!!!!" =)

 

[Richelle]

Is that clear enough?

Let me grab a decoder ring, and I'll get back to you

 

[Arimaas]

Which tells us all what we need to know about how accurate the quotes in that article are in the first place. It was written by a local reporter who is likely pretty clueless about the difference between Wyndham corporate and the Wyndham branded resort. To them it’s just Club Wyndham. I doubt the reporter even understands the details of the structure that exists between resorts and the developer in the first place. The use of the term “Club Wyndham” is meant to refer to the local resort HOA, not Wyndham corporate. Had Wyndham corporate wanted to issue a formal statement, it would be on their own website.

I maintain that we still have no formal statement from Wyndham corporate. If we did, I would know, as I am waiting to be directly informed from Wyndham corporate when it is released, and have seen the draft statement with my own eyes and provided direct feedback on it already. Is that clear enough?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Clear as mud.

I concur that that is highly plausible re: the misinterpretation by the reporter. That being said, Wyndham should have corrected any misinformation out there, but maybe they will Monday AM. This news did drop late Friday PM.

 

[HitchHiker71]

What many people likely are not taking into account here is that it may have been, at least in part, the actual owners that encouraged this outcome. What I mean is that Wyndham has had a deedback program for a long time now. The data from Ovation/CE inevitably helped Wyndham to determine which resorts to exit. Chances are a lot of older inventory for these same resorts has been handed back in via the deedback programs over the past years, along with foreclosures. A lot of these older resorts were likely owned by older folks who have aged out of timesharing altogether and either sold the inventory third party or just handed it back in to Wyndham and exited.

This is likely how Wyndham is able to easily determine that owner occupancy is low at these resorts in the first place. If they hold enough of the inventory to control the votes, then they hold over 50% of the inventory or close to it, so by definition that means it’s a low owner occupancy resort since Wyndham holds a majority of the inventory now. So CE likely helped Wyndham to come to this decision over time - because owners were handing back older resort inventory all along. Enough owners handed in older resort inventory via CE that Wyndham noticed at some point that owners weren’t interested in owning these resorts like in times past, at which point a decision was made to start acquiring additional owner inventory via third parties in addition to CE and foreclosures to accelerate this process. If anything, once Wyndham saw the data pattern, they stepped on the gas a bit, but the pattern was already pointing in this direction.

Pure speculation on my part of course.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Roger830]

What many people likely are not taking into account here is that it may have been, at least in part, the actual owners that encouraged this outcome. What I mean is that Wyndham has had a deedback program for a long time now. The data from Ovation/CE inevitably helped Wyndham to determine which resorts to exit. Chances are a lot of older inventory for these same resorts has been handed back in via the deedback programs over the past years, along with foreclosures. A lot of these older resorts were likely owned by older folks who have aged out of timesharing altogether and either sold the inventory third party or just handed it back in to Wyndham and exited.

This is likely how Wyndham is able to easily determine that owner occupancy is low at these resorts in the first place. If they hold enough of the inventory to control the votes, then they hold over 50% of the inventory or close to it, so by definition that means it’s a low owner occupancy resort since Wyndham holds a majority of the inventory now. So CE likely helped Wyndham to come to this decision over time - because owners were handing back older resort inventory all along. Enough owners handed in older resort inventory via CE that Wyndham noticed at some point that owners weren’t interested in owning these resorts like in times past, at which point a decision was made to start acquiring additional owner inventory via third parties in addition to CE and foreclosures to accelerate this process. If anything, once Wyndham saw the data pattern, they stepped on the gas a bit, but the pattern was already pointing in this direction.

Pure speculation on my part of course.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I would like to add another concern for owners is old fixed deeds have low trading power with rci.

Years ago prospects were told that they didn't have to use their deeded week but could exchange it for units all over the world. Pictures of big resorts on tropical islands were shown. Good trades were obtained on rci for dog weeks. Now all that they get is high mf and exchange fees.

 

[Fido Chuckwagon]

that said if i were a betting man, id say the truth lies somewhere between "no changes" and "wyndham is shutting down 20 resorts!!!!" =)

lol, that’s a fairly large standard deviation.

 

[dioxide45]

Just sayin... if some of the individuals I spoke to directly that "may or may not have confirmed all this but cant confirm the confirmation yet" were wrong given their positions in the industry...id be pretty shocked. if this story were a fabrication, it would have been nipped in the bud almost at the start.

that said if i were a betting man, id say the truth lies somewhere between "no changes" and "wyndham is shutting down 20 resorts!!!!" =)

I'm not sure anyone is questioning the authenticity of the rumor, I was just wanting to see the full contents of the email that was sent out to the members of FG via e-blast that was apparently quoted in the news article. It seems no email went out.

 

[Lisa P]

I'm wondering how this would be handled at resorts that are partly managed by Wyndham and partly managed by another company, like Star Island or Lake Lure. What would Wyndham do with owners who purchased a fixed (then converted) week, back when the entire resort was Wyndham/Fairfield-managed but subsequently, part of the resort split off and changed management companies?

We have a converted, fixed week contract in a section of Club Wyndham at Fairfield Harbour in New Bern, NC called Sandcastle Cove. When this section switched to VRI as their management company, we retained our CWS points (then called Fairfield Plus points). If these points were to become eligible for swap to CWA, we'd be very happy. Our MFs have risen substantially and we'd welcome such a change.

While CW at Fairfield Harbour is NOT on the currently posted list, I still wonder how they'd be able to shut down a similar, divided-management resort, like Star Island or Lake Lure. Would the CWS points owners whose deeded units are not managed by Wyndham be given the same options? Thoughts?

 

[Richelle]

I know Patriots Place is closing
Daniel

Are you an owner there? Did you receive a notice from the HOA? If so, please share with one of the admins, and they will update the list.

 

[Lisa P]

BTW, we also have a converted, fixed week at CW at Fairfield Glade. No, we have not received any kind of notice, not by mail nor email.

I just spoke to someone at the resort today to tell them we have a change of address. I asked about changes coming to the resort's operations at the end of the year. They said they had not heard of anything.

 

[Richelle]

BTW, we also have a converted, fixed week at CW at Fairfield Glade. No, we have not received any kind of notice, not by mail nor email.

I just spoke to someone at the resort today to tell them we have a change of address. I asked about changes coming to the resort's operations at the end of the year. They said they had not heard of anything.

Interesting. Maybe the reporter jumped the gun on saying the email blast went out. Maybe they were planning on sending it, but had not sent it. I guess we will find out in the next week or two.

 

[dioxide45]

I'm wondering how this would be handled at resorts that are partly managed by Wyndham and partly managed by another company, like Star Island or Lake Lure. What would Wyndham do with owners who purchased a fixed (then converted) week, back when the entire resort was Wyndham/Fairfield-managed but subsequently, part of the resort split off and changed management companies?

We have a converted, fixed week contract in a section of Club Wyndham at Fairfield Harbour in New Bern, NC called Sandcastle Cove. When this section switched to VRI as their management company, we retained our CWS points (then called Fairfield Plus points). If these points were to become eligible for swap to CWA, we'd be very happy. Our MFs have risen substantially and we'd welcome such a change.

While CW at Fairfield Harbour is NOT on the currently posted list, I still wonder how they'd be able to shut down a similar, divided-management resort, like Star Island or Lake Lure. Would the CWS points owners whose deeded units are not managed by Wyndham be given the same options? Thoughts?

I am sure there are some messy arrangements. For some resorts, does Wyndham just manage certain units where at other properties there may be a separate HOA? How is it at Star Island? Do they own entire buildings as part of a separate HOA, or does Wyndham "own" certain units that are mixed in with the other units but it is all one HOA?

The way I understand it, a converted week is just a week that is enrolled in the Club Wyndham Select program. There is still an underlying deeded week, but you get points every year for your week instead of using the week. It isn't necessarily "converted" per se, as the week is still there. Club Wyndham has two options, close the resort and everything goes away and owners are paid out a residual (unless they have some arrangement to allow conversion to CWA) or they can just drop the affiliation or enrollment in Club Wyndham Select. If the latter happens, the week goes back to being a week in a season at a resort. The owner can use the week or exchange it through an affiliated exchange company (RCI or II).

If Star Island is a single HOA, does Wyndham control enough total units there to control the outcome of the entire resort, even those that are not in Club Wyndham? If so, they could just shut the whole thing down and sell the land. Not sure how much the land there would be worth. I suspect a developer could buy it and build apartments or something. There are lots of new corporate apartment buildings popping up all over Orlando, but then there is also a lot of empty land that probably has lower building costs than something that needs torn down first.

 

[CO skier]

While CW at Fairfield Harbour is NOT on the currently posted list, I still wonder how they'd be able to shut down a similar, divided-management resort, like Star Island or Lake Lure.

The HOAs affected would be determined by the weeks in the HOA, not the management company.

 

[paxsarah]

I'm not sure anyone is questioning the authenticity of the rumor, I was just wanting to see the full contents of the email that was sent out to the members of FG via e-blast that was apparently quoted in the news article. It seems no email went out.

I feel like I saw a comment on Facebook (not sure I can find it again - there are a zillion and search function kinda sucks there) from someone who also owns a home at Fairfield Glade that it's the whole owners who received the email, not necessarily the timeshare owners.

Edit - here it is! "I live in Fairfield Glade, TN and I own Wyndham timeshare and we received an email today from our Fairfield Glade Community Board stating that our timeshare location will be closing the end of December 2025. We used this location to come and visit before we bought and retired here. There are a lot of units here and a lot have been remodeled, so I hope they don’t just sit here empty."

 

[rickandcindy23]

Inn at the Park is with Shell, and maybe they are going to move out of that one, which shouldn't cause much of a problem.

I wonder if Wyndham is thinking of dumping a bunch of resorts in CA that were Shell.

The Wyndham Fairfield in Villa Rica Georgia has seen better days. The part we were in was old and in dire need of updates.

 

[CO skier]

Edit - here it is! "I live in Fairfield Glade, TN and I own Wyndham timeshare and we received an email today from our Fairfield Glade Community Board stating that our timeshare location will be closing the end of December 2025. We used this location to come and visit before we bought and retired here. There are a lot of units here and a lot have been remodeled, so I hope they don’t just sit here empty."

Knowing that, the statement, "The community club released a written statement provided by Club Wyndham to its membership via e-blast." now makes sense. The e-blast did not go out to everyone in the Fairfield Glade Community (including timeshare owners), it was blasted only to those members of FFG to whom the Board is responsible (that is the meaning of "its membership"; the "its membership" does not refer to the Wyndham members). I guess the community Board figured Wyndham would tell their timeshare members, or already did, so no point e-blasting them.

The fault lies with the reporter and the editor. The correct statement and punctuation should have read, "The community club released a written statement, provided by Club Wyndham, to its membership via e-blast." Instead of reading as, "The community club released a written statement provided by Club Wyndham to its membership, via e-blast."

BIG difference.