Pure point TS companies & Mugwamp Swamps

[Bill4728 Super Moderator Find all posts View Profile Close Bill4728]

TS companies which are pure point, such as Worldmark, Club Intrawest and Monarch Grand, are at the mercy of their developer.

Here is an example of what I mean.

… there are several forum members who appear to have a misunderstanding of how it works when TW adds another resort to WM. Allow me to exaggerate to make my point.

For simplicity, let's use smaller numbers....say that WM consists today of 10 condos in Depoe Bay (highly desirable). Rounding to 50 weeks and assuming all are equal number of credits, 500 owners share those fully owned (debt free) 10 condos. Pretend there is no TW/developer in the picture. The 500 owners form a homeowners' association and set their own maintenance fees budget and the resort functions quite well. Now (eggagerating) pretend Bubba's TS Developmetn Company wants to maximize their profits and approaches the WM HOA with a proposal: we just built 10 condos in Mugwamp Swamps (that's a trademarked name, by the way) we'll "give" these 500 units/weeks to the WM club "debt free", you merely allow us to sell 500 more memberships into the WM Club. Everybody wins! (or do they?). After the expansion, each of the 500 original members owns a diluted share in the original desirable units, and a comparable share in the undesirable units. When the new membeships are sold, there potentially is twice the demand to get into the good units and no demand for the undesirables. In theory, everyone should go to Depoe Bay every other year and to Mugwamp every other year. That could work, and be a viable club, but it may not be what you originally wanted.

Someone above said "why do we owners care?; TW builds them and gives them to us debt free". Yes, they come in debt free, but the original 500 owners now effectively have a share in only 5 condos at Depoe Bay...they've effectively "sold" 5 condos at Depoe Bay (to the 500 new members via Bubba) and "bought" 5 condos at Mugwamp....they traded. So, WM owners should care...when the new resorts cause the 180,000 current owners to go to 200,000 owners, the current owners just 'traded' 10% of their club for an equivelent ownership in the new resort...

In fairness, the same numbers above will look differently if Bubba builds and offers to trade credits for condos in something we (as the homeowners association) perceive is equal to or better than the current club's holdings. If Bubba builds goldcrowns ocean view in Maui, we as the HOA will likely be happy when we trade 5 condos in Depoe Bay for 5 condos in Maui. We might even trade 6 condos in Depoe Bay for 5 condos in Maui (read: 10k credits vs. 12k credits for a week). In this view we'd have to rename the developer as "Santa", not Bubba!

SO, my real point is...the HOA board should be allowed to reject Mugwamps and allow and encourage comparable or better resorts...we're trading our existing ownership for the new resort. Let's not concede that Bubba or Santa gets to have the only vote at our HOA meetings.

Again, I apologize if my exaggerating offended anyone. I was being faciscouis to make my point. And I'm not intending to badmouth TW's development department...maybe the rest of you would vote to accept the new resorts...I'm just one guy with a set of preferences...I selfishly want my preferences enhanced and I feel diluted when we trade 10% of my Whistler/Steamboat/Tahoe/Hawaii condos for a condo in Orlando or Chicago that I don't desire to use. In fact, I don't care to use LasVegas either...why don't we sell the whole resort and buy more ski condos?

As someone wiser than me said "it's a good thing we don't all like the same, exact things...there'd be an awfully long line!"

So, hope that helps someone....happy vacationing.
Hatrack

Any of the pure point TS companies (were you own points with no underlying deeded week) are at the mercy of their developer. If the developer builds a great resort in a high demand location then your points value may go up. But, if they buy a failing TS and add it to the inventory then your points maybe devalued.

So far the newest TS in CI is doing a great business, but the newest in Monarch (a older Palm Springs TS) isn't pulling its weight. Hopefully the new MGV TS in Cabo will be a big hit.

[BocaBum99 Super Moderator Find all posts View Profile Close BocaBum99]

Bill,

I completely agree. That's why the fight for the independent board is so important.

WorldMark is one of the best systems in the industry. owners are very concerned about what Trendwest is doing to it.

[Jya-Ning Silver Contributor Find all posts View Profile Close Jya-Ning]

I think it is better to have some owners on the board. However, the developer has to sell the product. And it will involve future owner and current owner. And current owner may have no interesting or an vision willing to attract future owner. To assume developer will intend to destroy the current product without thinking that they actually have a bigger stack in that product will be a mistake.

Jya-Ning

[BocaBum99 Super Moderator Find all posts View Profile Close BocaBum99]

I think it is better to have some owners on the board. However, the developer has to sell the product. And it will involve future owner and current owner. And current owner may have no interesting or an vision willing to attract future owner. To assume developer will intend to destroy the current product without thinking that they actually have a bigger stack in that product will be a mistake.

Jya-Ning

Ah, therein lies the answer to the paradoxical question of how I can be for an independent board at WorldMark while I still support strongly the non-independent board at Bluegreen.

Bluegreen is in the expansion phase of its business. So, it needs to create a product that is attractive to owners to purchase. That product exists today.

In the future, as they move into more of an ongoing management phase, they will be incented to milk the cow rather than invest for the future. When that day comes, I would be more in favor of an independent board.

It's always best to get into a situation in its upswing rather than the start of its downswing. The key is to know where it's at and align your interests accordingly.

[WFAr Junior Member Find all posts View Profile Close WFAr]

Ah, therein lies the answer to the paradoxical question of how I can be for an independent board at WorldMark while I still support strongly the non-independent board at Bluegreen.

Bluegreen is in the expansion phase of its business. So, it needs to create a product that is attractive to owners to purchase. That product exists today.

In the future, as they move into more of an ongoing management phase, they will be incented to milk the cow rather than invest for the future. When that day comes, I would be more in favor of an independent board.

It's always best to get into a situation in its upswing rather than the start of its downswing. The key is to know where it's at and align your interests accordingly.

I was just wondering if WM is in a downswing still. Is BG new venture in Las Vegas going to hurt the members Ya' think?

[BocaBum99 Super Moderator Find all posts View Profile Close BocaBum99]

I was just wondering if WM is in a downswing still. Is BG new venture in Las Vegas going to hurt the members Ya' think?

I wouldn't say that WorldMark is in a downswing. I would say that WorldMark is in a battle for its future.

There is a rather large group of users on the wmowners board. They have access to senior people at Trendwest and they watch everything Trendwest does like a hawk. This is very good for owners because they keep them informed on their interpretations of what is happening to WorldMark.

The issue is that Trendwest dominates the board and they appear to be doing things that are hurting current owners. So, the more they do, the more that some owners believe they are getting hurt.

Trendwest is owned by Cendant which also owns Fairfield. Fairfieild is what WorldMark owners fear most. The CEO of Fairfield, Franz Hanning, has created a timesharing juggernaut in Fairfield. They are a sales and marketing machine. Something to be marvelled at. The problem is that they have created such a convoluted system, in my opinion, just to maximize sales opportunities rather than protect owners assets. What I mean is that Fairfield probably has the highest ratio in the industry of developer price to resale price. Their gimmicks such as VIP causes an 80% drop in the value of a timeshare purchased from the developer the day that the recission period passes. Ultimately, this will result in their comeuppance some day. It can't continue forever. We shall see how long. And, Franz Hanning also runs Trendwest.

In any event, back to the future of WorldMark. Current owners want to see a club that is substantially similar to the one they originally bought into with careful expansion. They believe this can occur with an independent board.

So, what all the noise is about is owners trying to prevent WorldMark from becoming Fairfield. I wholeheartedly agree.

[melschey Junior Member Find all posts View Profile Close melschey]

I think it is better to have some owners on the board. However, the developer has to sell the product. And it will involve future owner and current owner. And current owner may have no interesting or an vision willing to attract future owner. To assume developer will intend to destroy the current product without thinking that they actually have a bigger stack in that product will be a mistake.

Jya-Ning

Trendwest/Cendant officers have a fiduciary responsibility to make decisions that will maximize profits for Cendant. If I owned Cendant stock and found out they were making decisions based on what is best for WM owners instead of what is best for Cendant shareholder’s I would be very upset.

The majority of the WM BOD gets their paycheck from Cendant so their primary responsibility is to Cendant and not to WM owners. I feel that this is a serious conflict of interest.

I am not anti-TrendWest/Cendant I don’t want to get rid of TrendWest as our developer. I just want an Independent BOD to oversee what kind of job TrendWest is doing for us. I don’t see how we can trust a BOD where the majority of the BOD has a fiduciary responsibility to look out for Cendant’s shareholders to look out for the interests of WM owners. One side is going to come up on the short end and in this case it seems to be the WM owners that come short.

[coatrack Member Find all posts View Profile Close coatrack]

The Worldmark Board makeup

"The majority of the WM BOD gets their paycheck from Cendant so their primary responsibility is to Cendant and not to WM owners. I feel that this is a serious conflict of interest."

I have seen this and other statements posted on several boards. I called and asked several questions and here are the answers:

The majority of the WM BOD DOES NOT receive a paycheck from Cendent. 2 work for TW and the other 3 do not. I understand Jack USED TO but is retired. Gene USED to work for TW but doen't anymore. THEY ARE ALL OWNERS JUST LIKE YOU AND ME. I would think that would weigh in on their voting as they would be hurting themselves too. I am not debating what some might think their votes would be on issues brought before the board, that is another subject.

Here is the breakdown:

Peggy Fry works for TW who is owned by Cendent so she DOES get a paycheck from them.

John Henley works for TW South Pacific who is owned by Cendent so he DOES get a paycheck from them.

Gene Hensley DOES NOT work for TW or Cendent and DOES NOT get a paycheck from them or the WM board for his participation there.

Jack McConnell DOES NOT work for TW or Cendent and DOES NOT get a paycheck from them or the WM board for his participation there.

John Walker DOES NOT work for TW or Cendent and DOES NOT get a paycheck from them or the WM board for his participation there.

[coatrack Member Find all posts View Profile Close coatrack]

"There is a rather large group of users on the wmowners board. They have access to senior people at Trendwest and they watch everything Trendwest does like a hawk. This is very good for owners because they keep them informed on their interpretations of what is happening to WorldMark."

I have been reading on the wmowners forum, TUG, the Worldmark forum, and here trying to decifer what is factual information and what is someone's interpretation that is posted as factual. I think you have posted above why there is a problem for a majority of owners.

1. In reading on the wmowners board I find there are only about 30 or so owners active there from looking at those that post regularly. On that forum some have put a lot of time in getting factual information from the company....some have put a lot of time in spinning information to prove a point and is ONLY THEIR interpretation....some have scared the daylights out of me asking owners for proxy votes to vote the way they want....AND OWNERS BLINDLY GIVING THEIR VOTES AWAY INSTEAD OF VOTING THEMSELVES - YIKES . There is NOTHING to stop someone from getting the proxies and running for the board and voting for themselves! THAT....is real scary.

2. TUG has some interesting people posting there....they seem to come from ALL the different boards and so you don't have one view. I find here that you get down to what is factual and what isn't with a majority of WM owners posting there.

3. I read the Worldmark forum but as you know it does not allow the kind of conversations that owners want. It is wonderful to get resort information and ask questions about vacationing.

4. I joined this forum in December, 2005 as it allows you more freedom to make your point than any of the other forums....things don't seem so one-sided.

I intend to vote my votes myself for the best candidate I THINK can work WITH the board, not be at odds with them.
I would like to see Jack McConnell leave the board and an owner replace him. I do not know all the candidates that are running so must wait to see who would be the best fit.

Wow, this is the longest post I've ever made on here.

[BocaBum99 Super Moderator Find all posts View Profile Close BocaBum99]

Coatrack,

Very nice and thoughtful post. You seem to be a very knowledgeable WorldMark owner. Terrific.

It nice to hear from an independent party their thoughts about our openness here on Timeshareforums. Believe it or not, getting equal airtime for all sides of an issue is one of the founding principles of this site. I am happy to hear that it is shining through.

Regarding wmowners, I don't post there very often because it's so depressing. I do check it out every now and then because they do get good facts and information. It's the intrepretation of those facts and the ensuing feeding frenzy that makes it so negative there.

In all fairness, those owners are more active than any other small group I've seen in timesharing. They are really trying to effect change in their club and participating in board meetings and reading bylaws and declarations. 30 people can do a lot. I think that's about what we have here on TS4Ms in terms of volunteers.

PA's strategy for winning board control doesn't scare me because I know and trust him. He wants board independence because he can illustrate clear devaluing of our ownerships through actions Trendwest has taken. The introduction of San Diego at those credit rates was very alarming to me.

And, this mugwamp swamps example is clearly what Trendwest is pursuing.

In any event, we don't have WorldMark forum here because so few people seem to discuss WorldMark here. If we got a core group of 5-10 WorldMark posters, I think we can create a WorldMark forum.

Anyone up for a WorldMark forum?

[BoardGirl Senior Member Find all posts View Profile Close BoardGirl]

... Is BG new venture in Las Vegas going to hurt the members Ya' think?

Not at all! In fact, quite the opposite! Expansion is good. Westward expansion is VERY GOOD. My getting to stay in Vegas without an exchange fee is FABULOUS!

The other thing is that BG doesn't just go willy-nilly collecting resorts. They do their homework. This Vegas thing has been in the works for some time now.

[coatrack Member Find all posts View Profile Close coatrack]

Boca,

1. Has PA ever attended a board meeting? There were several candidates previously that attended meetings before putting their names in the hat to see what REALLY takes place when voting occurs or issues are brought up.

I know he ran last year and lost and seems to be very negative about other board members...this does not sit well for earning trust in my opinion. You must be able to work well with others on the same board and calling them liars and incompetent isn't the right way to accomplish this.

I wish they would announce all the candidates running soon - I don't think it is right for some to start the campaign early. I see many with vote for Jim Pappas in their signatures.

2. Have you met him?

'mugwamp swamps' is that person's INTERPRETATION spin....it is interesting reading and food for thought though.

The one issue bothering me is people interpreting WM and TW documents....people view this as fact when it is ONE spin on them....some of the threads I have read I have gone back and read the documents and don't walk away with the same view....

The thought that sticks in the back of my head when I read about all these owners taking someone's interpretation for fact is....Jim Jones had followers too and they did not bode well. Ok, maybe that is a bit drastic but you have to admit if this person is soliciting proxies and then turns around and runs for a position on the board AFTER receiving proxies from people that 'trust' him, unbeknownst to the followers, THAT is a grave abuse of trust to me.

I guess we will see....

I do enjoy your posts....you seem to have your own opinion rather than just follow along.

I think Jya-Ning has given the issue great thought:
" think it is better to have some owners on the board. However, the developer has to sell the product. And it will involve future owner and current owner. And current owner may have no interesting or an vision willing to attract future owner. To assume developer will intend to destroy the current product without thinking that they actually have a bigger stack in that product will be a mistake."


Yes, this would be a great place for a WM timeshare....you don't have the people running it all WM owners (or are they? LOL).

[melschey Junior Member Find all posts View Profile Close melschey]

"The majority of the WM BOD gets their paycheck from Cendant so their primary responsibility is to Cendant and not to WM owners. I feel that this is a serious conflict of interest."

I have seen this and other statements posted on several boards. I called and asked several questions and here are the answers:

The majority of the WM BOD DOES NOT receive a paycheck from Cendent. 2 work for TW and the other 3 do not. I understand Jack USED TO but is retired. Gene USED to work for TW but doen't anymore. THEY ARE ALL OWNERS JUST LIKE YOU AND ME. I would think that would weigh in on their voting as they would be hurting themselves too. I am not debating what some might think their votes would be on issues brought before the board, that is another subject.

Here is the breakdown:

Peggy Fry works for TW who is owned by Cendent so she DOES get a paycheck from them.

John Henley works for TW South Pacific who is owned by Cendent so he DOES get a paycheck from them.

Gene Hensley DOES NOT work for TW or Cendent and DOES NOT get a paycheck from them or the WM board for his participation there.

Jack McConnell DOES NOT work for TW or Cendent and DOES NOT get a paycheck from them or the WM board for his participation there.

John Walker DOES NOT work for TW or Cendent and DOES NOT get a paycheck from them or the WM board for his participation there.

Link to WM BOD profiles
http://www.worldmarktheclub.com/owne...irectors.shtml

From the official WM site

Jack (John) McConnell
Lives in: Orlando, Florida
WorldMark owner since: 2002
Current term expires: 2006
E-mail: Jack.McConnell@Cendant-TRG.com

Experience:
B.S., Accounting
Executive in the timeshare industry since 1986
Former CEO of Fairfield Resorts
Currently Non-Executive Chairman of Cendant Timeshare Resort Group

In my opinion I don't feel that chairman of Cendant Timeshare Resort Group qualifies as an Independant BOD member, others might not agree with me though

[BustAGroove Junior Member Find all posts View Profile Close BustAGroove]

<<<snip>>

Anyone up for a WorldMark forum?

Hey can I get 2 for the price of admission? I'm a WorldMark/TrendWest-FairField owner

I admire the openess of this forum. I've only been a member for a few days (I think) and learned so by reading. It's encouraging to see the exchange of ideas between senior and junior members.

I've Google'd till my fingers cramped, and couldn't find the nitty gritty timeshare information, until I landed here.

[coatrack Member Find all posts View Profile Close coatrack]

melschey,
That profile was put on the Worldmark forum about 2 years ago. Not sure what the term non-executive means there either. Would be interesting to see if the email address even works anymore.