They vote with their feet - meaning a good subset of these resorts have low owner occupancy - so yes - they care about staying in older resorts that don't deliver the same quality as the newer/larger resorts in better areas. As I've repeatedly stated, Wyndham is basing these decisions on a variety of factors, including the fact that a majority of owners have indicated they don't particularly like staying at these older resorts that aren't kept up as well as some of the newer/larger tourist related locations. TUG does not represent the majority of Wyndham timeshare ownership viewpoints, as I've also repeatedly indicated over many years. TUG represents timeshare "superusers" for the most part, which are by definition very much the minority of the ownership base.
Yes, but without exception every one of the resorts you just listed are either in major metro areas where tourism is popular, and there's a ton of activities surrounding the resort itself. You're making my point here.
Since the ownership base pays for those MFs via the local HOAs at each resort, I'd argue it's both/and. It's both a problem for Wyndham, and for the owners that hold contracts at these locations.
The resistance to change on the TUG forums is palpable. Let's ask it this way, what would everyone prefer Wyndham do to remove older less popular resorts with low owner occupancy? Apart from 100% transparency, which we all know isn't legally permissible for various reasons especially in advance of HOA votes? Is the answer simply not to do so? If so, that's burying you head in the sand and practicing resistance to change over the long term, which is never a sound business plan. So let's hear your proposals as to how to remove older less popular resorts with low owner occupancy without upsetting at least a minority of the ownership base in the process. No matter what Wyndham does, they cannot make everyone happy. I for one am not going to demonize Wyndham for at least trying to manage change and innovate in the timeshare space. If I don't like where this is all going, I can always use other timeshare systems instead, or exchanges, for my vacations. I can even exit via CE if needed, if I'm really unhappy with their path forward. There are options for everyone involved here in other words.
How is investing alongside SI embezzlement exactly? Be specific. Is this any different from Wyndham investing with Margaritaville to produce a subset of MVC resorts? Do you really think a company as large as Wyndham, with it's own army of lawyers, isn't going to ensure they are doing this properly?