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

[Arimaas]

There are two problems with timeshares of this vintage, and both are happening simultaneously. Problem One: The buildings are aging and becoming more expensive to maintain. Problem Two: the owners are also getting older, and defaulting in increasing numbers.

Wyndham solves Problem Two by offsetting some of the foreclosure costs, and folding the acquired inventory into CWA, making that inventory "productive" again, where "productive" means "someone is paying the fees on that interval." However, the first problem is still there and only getting worse. And it does not matter how well you maintain a structure, because you cannot prevent everything. What's more, older resorts' popularity fades. Yes, there are long-time families who go back year after year, but look around---there are fewer of them every year, because of Problem Two. The next wave of timeshare buyers are not beating down the doors to stay at any of these resorts, they are more interested in newer, shinier places that are often in better locations.

Eventually, every resort is going to reach the end of its serviceable life. You can try to put that day off by pouring more and more money into it, but at some point the line is crossed. Reasonable people can disagree about whether we are at that point with any of these resorts, but I don't think closing any of them is unequivocally wrong.


Timeshares are sold by lots of one-liners like this, and most of them are not entirely accurate. However, Wymdham is honoring this part of the deal. At least, they are for points owners. If you want to keep vacationing, take the swap. Yes, the fees are probably more than you're paying now, but that was going to happen sooner or later no matter what, because of Problem One.

Wyndham is far from the only management company/developer facing these questions. You can't swing a dead cat on TUG without hitting a discussion about a resort that (a) has an eye-watering special assessment to fix some serious maintenance issue or bring it up to brand standard, (b) is dropped from the brand by refusing, (c) has fees skyrocketing due to an ever-increasing share of non-performing weeks, (d) is trying to consolidate owners into a smaller section of the resort and selling off the remaining buildings, or (e) liquidating. Given the history of resort development, we are going to see more of this in the next ten years, not less, and there is an entire management company (Lemonjuice) whose business model is "Let us take the reins of your dying resort, and we'll figure out the best path forward." Resorts who take Lemonjuice on don't always close right away. But no one hires Lemonjuice on a winning streak.

I wonder the long term solution is then. All CWA? Right to use with a sunset clause like DVC? I don't think this is it, quite frankly. But then again, I'm just a resale owner, so I guess I'll just let the execs in the industry figure out a better way.

 

[dioxide45]

Is there a better exit plan than this,

I don't know that there is or was a better way. While I was initially critical of the bankruptcy path, I think for Wyndham it was the path that made the most sense. It worked for them because they had enough control of the HOA to force it through. There are really only a few options available for a responsible HOA/Management Company to take.

1. Option 1 - Sell management to another company to figure it out - This is what Hilton recently did with eight resorts. They sold management rights to Lemonjuice Solutions. A company that helps distressed timeshare resorts to get on a better path forward. I've yet to hear of Lemonjuice taking resorts through bankruptcy. They tend to try and collapse the timeshare scheme, convert units to full residential condominiums and sell the properties as part of a new development. In some cases they may do a partial conversion or even keep the property as is but help monetize defaulted units through rent, foreclosure, and resell. Wyndham probably didn't want to ceed control to another entity like this while they had such a large ownership stake. Lemonjuice Solutions probably wouldn't have wanted to take on that inventory if they took over management.
2. Option 2 - Bankruptcy. This can only work if you get enough owners to agree. Wyndham had over 50% control. So this worked. It could work with less than 50% control, but they would have to get a certain number of other owners on board. That gets expensive trying to get owners on board. Most owners would be skeptical of the management company approaching them for such a scheme.
3. Option 3 - Approach all owners and try to get a vote to sunset the timeshare scheme and sell the resort or do what Lemonjuice does and convert to whole ownership condominiums. Same problem exists with Option 2 if they don't own a controlling interest. How do they force the vote.

Wyndham had the benefit of controlling interest in all the properties. Lack of controlling interest in others (like Vacation Break) is why we didn't see them vote to close them down. I think this is also why we don't see many other timeshare properties go through bankruptcy like this. There isn't one single entity that can steer it in this direction. If we start to see them heavily taking back deeds at some other older resorts through Certified Exit, then that might be a predictor of what resorts might be next.

 

[Floridaman76]

I don't see how inserting a sunset clause into existing ownerships would or could work. In addition to the real property piece of our ownership (at least deeded) we also have perpetual ownership in the fairshare points entity.

I don't see how they could unilaterally, or even via some sort of vote convert the perpetual ownership to some sort of sunset clause thing. Access would face the same issues. It's perpetual.

And was sold as perpetual, "locking in the cost of travel" sales pitch that was part of every presentaiton. They would be forced to disclose those videos in discovery.

 

[shawnee83]

Keep in mind, Wyndham/T&L should be able to manipulate these losses into tax write-offs.

 

[Aicken]

Our point exactly!

Which... wait for it... is WYNDHAM

(9 we

Keep in mind, Wyndham/T&L should be able to manipulate these losses into tax write-offs.

wondered how long it would take for the conspiracy theorists to strike!

 

[bnoble]

I wonder the long term solution is then. All CWA? Right to use with a sunset clause like DVC? I don't think this is it, quite frankly. But then again, I'm just a resale owner, so I guess I'll just let the execs in the industry figure out a better way.

From where I am sitting, it looks like the long term solution is recognizing that nothing lasts forever.

 

[Floridaman76]

From where I am sitting, it looks like the long term solution is recognizing that nothing lasts forever.

Which is fine for new owners, or them selling a new product, but for everyone else, that's called "bait and switch". Especially when the product has a resale value of $0.

We paid for a multi-generational product. A product marketed and sold with the intent of being able to be passed on to future generations, perpetually. All while "locking in the cost of travel to today's prices".

That was literally the pitch. The product was built on that premise.

 

[dioxide45]

Keep in mind, Wyndham/T&L should be able to manipulate these losses into tax write-offs.

I'm no accountant, but for the asset impairments (which was the bulk of the amount) they can't take a tax write off on just the impairment. They need to divest the asset for the tax write-off to taken. I would think, maybe in some cases they could make money on the asset? They acquired many deeds for close to $0 but the asset has a value on their books. They write the asset value down but then sell the asset for cash. That could result in a net positive for revenue purposes. Kinda like depreciation on equipment or real estate for a company. They can take depreciation for a tax write-off but if they later sell the asset any difference between the depreciated value and the sales price is potential revenue. The only difference here is they probably can't take the write-off on just the impairment.

As for other charges, like employee related costs (likely severance packages and retention bonuses), they will certainly take full advantage of the tax code. As would any other company.

 

[Arimaas]

I don't know that there is or was a better way. While I was initially critical of the bankruptcy path, I think for Wyndham it was the path that made the most sense. It worked for them because they had enough control of the HOA to force it through. There are really only a few options available for a responsible HOA/Management Company to take.

1. Option 1 - Sell management to another company to figure it out - This is what Hilton recently did with eight resorts. They sold management rights to Lemonjuice Solutions. A company that helps distressed timeshare resorts to get on a better path forward. I've yet to hear of Lemonjuice taking resorts through bankruptcy. They tend to try and collapse the timeshare scheme, convert units to full residential condominiums and sell the properties as part of a new development. In some cases they may do a partial conversion or even keep the property as is but help monetize defaulted units through rent, foreclosure, and resell. Wyndham probably didn't want to ceed control to another entity like this while they had such a large ownership stake. Lemonjuice Solutions probably wouldn't have wanted to take on that inventory if they took over management.
2. Option 2 - Bankruptcy. This can only work if you get enough owners to agree. Wyndham had over 50% control. So this worked. It could work with less than 50% control, but they would have to get a certain number of other owners on board. That gets expensive trying to get owners on board. Most owners would be skeptical of the management company approaching them for such a scheme.
3. Option 3 - Approach all owners and try to get a vote to sunset the timeshare scheme and sell the resort or do what Lemonjuice does and convert to whole ownership condominiums. Same problem exists with Option 2 if they don't own a controlling interest. How do they force the vote.

Wyndham had the benefit of controlling interest in all the properties. Lack of controlling interest in others (like Vacation Break) is why we didn't see them vote to close them down. I think this is also why we don't see many other timeshare properties go through bankruptcy like this. There isn't one single entity that can steer it in this direction. If we start to see them heavily taking back deeds at some other older resorts through Certified Exit, then that might be a predictor of what resorts might be next.

Yeah, I didn't mean a better way for this specific instance. In this instance, their options were severely limited. I meant a better way going forward.

I don't see how inserting a sunset clause into existing ownerships would or could work. In addition to the real property piece of our ownership (at least deeded) we also have perpetual ownership in the fairshare points entity.

I don't see how they could unilaterally, or even via some sort of vote convert the perpetual ownership to some sort of sunset clause thing. Access would face the same issues. It's perpetual.

And was sold as perpetual, "locking in the cost of travel" sales pitch that was part of every presentaiton. They would be forced to disclose those videos in discovery.

I would think they could sunset clause anything newly sold and constructed. Current ownership, no, but anything new? Sure.

And they wouldn't be forced to disclose anything LOL. They lie al lthe time in sales pitches. Only matters what's in the four corners of the contract. They were trying to sell me timesahre in Atlantic City in August of 2025, They weren't telling anyone they were closing.

 

[dioxide45]

Yeah, I didn't mean a better way for this specific instance. In this instance, their options were severely limited. I meant a better way going forward.

But I don't think the options really change. Some may be better than others but all are kinda ugly.

 

[Arimaas]

But I don't think the options really change. Some may be better than others but all are kinda ugly.

I mean for all future projects and sales. Not what ownership is already out there. Should they transfer all real property in inventory into CWA? Should they only sell right to use or some sunset clause in new developments if it's not all CWA?

 

[Floridaman76]

I mean for all future projects and sales. Not what ownership is already out there. Should they transfer all real property in inventory into CWA? Should they only sell right to use or some sunset clause in new developments if it's not all CWA?

They could certainly sell any new developments as CWA only, but inside of the Club Wyndham points system, I think it would be difficult to impossible to restrict Club Wyndham Select (deeded) owners from using inventory inside of 10 months. Restricting them to only being able to use their home resort, period, is not what we bought into.

I think the path of least resistance would be to just grandfather everyone in, and eventually we will all die off or our kids don't want it, or cant afford it, and it would be a non-issue.

 

[FL Guy]

I think it would be difficult to impossible to restrict Club Wyndham Select (deeded) owners from using inventory inside of 10 months. Restricting them to only being able to use their home resort, period, is not what we bought into.

I've been told multiple times by salespeople that eventually resale deeded owners will only be able to book with resale deeded points at their home resort. I've always considered it sales BS to sell CWA.

 

[PeterS]

So many questions on how Wyndham will handle the close outs!
Will they burn up the funds and short the owners or max the funds for owners?
I was a long time OIRC owner and watching to see how they settle my old resort out.
The auction was completed and the sale approved on 5/5/2026 yet still no word on what each owner may get..
This should have been closed and settled already. Anyone have any info?
This is could give us a better idea of how all of these closures will proceed.. Thanks!

 

[shawnee83]

For my part, I’ve maintained that a RTU leasing model is the future... Sign on for 5-10 years and then the contract ends.

Here's some background on Right To Use (RTU) timeshare arrangements: https://www.timesharesonly.com/blog/rtu-timeshare

It does sound like a more attractive arrangement with a defined off-ramp, as compared to these open-ended timeshares. But it seems like the many short-term rentals web sites like AirBnb, Vrbo and the like are really the way to go.

 

[Floridaman76]

Here's some background on Right To Use (RTU) timeshare arrangements: https://www.timesharesonly.com/blog/rtu-timeshare

It does sound like a more attractive arrangement with a defined off-ramp, as compared to these open-ended timeshares. But it seems like the many short-term rentals web sites like AirBnb, Vrbo and the like are really the way to go.

It very well may be more lucrative. And also the cost to entry may be significantly less. But for existing owners (at least retail owners), the cost to entry was high, under the premise that this was a perpetual right to ownership, transferrable generationally. If they want to go a different route for new owners, that's fine, but they must accomodate existing owners.

 

[Arimaas]

It very well may be more lucrative. And also the cost to entry may be significantly less. But for existing owners (at least retail owners), the cost to entry was high, under the premise that this was a perpetual right to ownership, transferrable generationally. If they want to go a different route for new owners, that's fine, but they must accomodate existing owners.

They would have to. They can’t unilaterally change existing contracts (unless of course they bankrupt every existing deeded HOA).

 

[ANewMe]

My first Wyndham purchase was an RTU El Cid resale deed that I bought on Ebay. I picked it because it had an expiration date. I figured if I hated it at least it would eventually go away. I liked it and over time added 5 more resale contracts. Two of those were at closing resorts. I decided not to take the CWA swap as my maintenance fees would go up and I thought it would be better for me to just let them go. It is a bit of a shock to lose that chunk of points and I'm having to adjust my way of traveling, but I think it was the right choice.

 

[HitchHiker71]

Added a SWAP ELIGIBILITY to the OP Tracker Table today - please note the following four resorts are no longer swap eligible:

Wyndham Overlook
OIRC
Wyndham Skyline
Wyndham Star Island

For anyone still interested in the CWA swap - you can fill out the form for the impacted resort (apart from the four above - which no longer have an active forms link) here: https://clubwyndham.wyndhamdestinations.com/us/en/owner-guide/resources/portfolio-refresh-swap

 

[HitchHiker71]

*** MODERATOR POST ***

At the request of a few forum members, I took the liberty to remove the "leasing" centric posts that became an unnecessary subtopic within this main thread and moved them to the debate thread. You can now find that prior content in the dedicated debate thread so it doesn't further muddy up the main thread.

 

[Aicken]

Hooray!!!

 

[nibble4bits]

You keep saying "Wyndham has hired and is paying for the lawyers involved" That is false. The HOA reserve funds are paying for the lawyer. Although Wyndham is the majority owner at all of the resorts (more so after the Access swaps) that does not change the facts. Of course it is better for them long term, and as majority owner they have vested interest. Duh.. For most of the owners it is better long term. The fact that Wyndham owned a majority shows the resorts were mostly slowly failing. Better to close them now, in an orderly way that at least extracts some value, than let them collapse under their own weight in the future.

They were failing because Wyndham cut all the reselling resources that the interval owners were actively using (at least at Shawnee). They did this to steer people who wanted an out, to coax them into their points system. It gave them bodies into the points program and ownership stock to make available to the program.

Their entire focus was, and always has been, the points system. It's way more profitable for them, as points can expire at their whim and less entitlements are required to be provided to the subscribers vs. interval owners.

 

[comicbookman]

They were failing because Wyndham cut all the reselling resources that the interval owners were actively using (at least at Shawnee). They did this to steer people who wanted an out, to coax them into their points system. It gave them bodies into the points program and ownership stock to make available to the program.

Their entire focus was, and always has been, the points system. It's way more profitable for them, as points can expire at their whim and less entitlements are required to be provided to the subscribers vs. interval owners.

You mean the HOA cut the resources that owners were using because it was more cost effective to let Wyndham pick up the abandoned units and pay Maintenance while Wyndham tried to resell them. The cut off happened before Wyndham had control of the HOA's. This strategy kept maintenance fees down and allowed the resorts to last far longer than they otherwise would have. It was in Wyndham's best interest to keep the resorts going, until the default rate exceeded their ability to resell intervals (as points) Points do not expire any faster than intervals do, yearly. I also don't see how points owners get less entitlements (other than always the same week) than interval owners. Wyndham does many bad things but blaming them for things that are against their own interest seems a bit farfetched. Wyndham will not make any money from the closings. They will lose money. However, it will cut future losses.

 

[Aicken]

Its so much easier to find someone to blame. Facts are the market no longer supports a timeshare model for shawnee. Its been a sliwly emerging reality but it should be obvious when annual ooccupancy was down to less than 65%.

 

[bnoble]

I also don't see how points owners get less entitlements (other than always the same week) than interval owners.

A converted fixed week has exclusive ARP rights into that week. So if that’s what you want, converting to points does not prevent you from having it.