Tweet
I posted a mildly negative comment on TUG after I saw a few people asking about purchases at Vistana. I wanted the poster to note that Vistana may be GC, but all of the areas of Vistana do not deserve GC because they are not as nice as many of the other resorts that get that rating. I compared the older parts of the resort to Orbit One and High Point, two respectable resorts that deserve their Hospitality ratings.
I offended a new owner who bought her resort sight unseen--she has yet to stay there. She was very angry that I would insult her resort, but I was only expressing my opinion. She said I called her resort and everyone who owned their second class. That was not my intent. My entire argument is that each of the sections should probably be judged on their own merits, not on the whole. I believe that if the individual parts are not brought to GC rating, the entire resort could slip to Silver or below. I questioned whether II and RCI would be able to do that because of the politics and money involved in catering to a mega resort like that.
Cypress Point stepped forward and upgraded all of their units to gain back their GC status. We stayed there just months before the upgrade began and I thought the resort was a 9+ before the updates. Vistana Fountains units were about a 6.5 when we stayed 2 1/2 years ago, yet they rate GC?
When our niece and nephew stayed at Vistana last month, they were assigned to a unit in Fountains and were very disappointed that the kitchen was not functional and lacked many cooking utensils that are standard in most resorts. They also noted the old, dirty furniture, stained carpet and older-styled kitchen cabinets that have seen better days. Jen was excited when she made her exchange and emailed a link to Starwood's site so I could see the resort. I warned her that the unit she is assigned may not look like the pictures. She asked for Lakes or Cascades at check in, but she got Fountains. The website is misleading.
My question: How are they keeping that GC rating?
Fountains at Vistana is older, has outdated everything, including the furniture that has to be at least ten years old by now, because we stayed in 1999 and had the same furniture, and it was not new even then. In 2004, it was the same old tannish/gold sofas.
Now in 2006, same old stuff again.
A link was provided by one of our favorite posters here
to Vistana's website. Of course, the pictures were only of Lakes and Cascades, not of the older parts of the resort. There is no mention of the older areas. If a picture is worth a thousand words, what is the absence of a picture worth? I think it says volumes about the resort as a whole.
When we checked into Vistana, we were originally assigned to a unit that was nicer, had a large jacuzzi tub in the master and the king bed was set into the corner of the room, near a window. Our second unit had a tub in a hall bathroom that was not as large and luxurious as the first. The furniture was the tan colored stuff and the kitchen cabinets were not in great condition. I liked that unit better because the tub was nicer, but hubby couldn't sleep with the traffic noise, so we moved to a unit that was a little worse than the first, although the second unit had slightly better kitchen cabinets. The first unit was on the main level, so we imagined perhaps wheelchairs caused some of the damage to the first floor unit. I have no idea if the first area was Fountains II or if they were both Fountains.
My point: I think Vistana owners would rise to the occasion if each area was judged on its own merit and rated independently. If Fountains owners (and all other parts of the resort) lost their GC ratings, they would have to take action. If the older areas were sitting away from Vistana, they would never get GC. RCI and II just let them keep their GC ratings as a mega resort, which is the same for OLCC. All of the above can be said about OLCC. You never see pictures of the bathrooms on their website that lack jacuzzi tubs, only the newest, nicest units. It is false advertising, in my opinion.
I offended a new owner who bought her resort sight unseen--she has yet to stay there. She was very angry that I would insult her resort, but I was only expressing my opinion. She said I called her resort and everyone who owned their second class. That was not my intent. My entire argument is that each of the sections should probably be judged on their own merits, not on the whole. I believe that if the individual parts are not brought to GC rating, the entire resort could slip to Silver or below. I questioned whether II and RCI would be able to do that because of the politics and money involved in catering to a mega resort like that.
Cypress Point stepped forward and upgraded all of their units to gain back their GC status. We stayed there just months before the upgrade began and I thought the resort was a 9+ before the updates. Vistana Fountains units were about a 6.5 when we stayed 2 1/2 years ago, yet they rate GC?
When our niece and nephew stayed at Vistana last month, they were assigned to a unit in Fountains and were very disappointed that the kitchen was not functional and lacked many cooking utensils that are standard in most resorts. They also noted the old, dirty furniture, stained carpet and older-styled kitchen cabinets that have seen better days. Jen was excited when she made her exchange and emailed a link to Starwood's site so I could see the resort. I warned her that the unit she is assigned may not look like the pictures. She asked for Lakes or Cascades at check in, but she got Fountains. The website is misleading.
My question: How are they keeping that GC rating?
Fountains at Vistana is older, has outdated everything, including the furniture that has to be at least ten years old by now, because we stayed in 1999 and had the same furniture, and it was not new even then. In 2004, it was the same old tannish/gold sofas.
Now in 2006, same old stuff again.A link was provided by one of our favorite posters here
to Vistana's website. Of course, the pictures were only of Lakes and Cascades, not of the older parts of the resort. There is no mention of the older areas. If a picture is worth a thousand words, what is the absence of a picture worth? I think it says volumes about the resort as a whole. When we checked into Vistana, we were originally assigned to a unit that was nicer, had a large jacuzzi tub in the master and the king bed was set into the corner of the room, near a window. Our second unit had a tub in a hall bathroom that was not as large and luxurious as the first. The furniture was the tan colored stuff and the kitchen cabinets were not in great condition. I liked that unit better because the tub was nicer, but hubby couldn't sleep with the traffic noise, so we moved to a unit that was a little worse than the first, although the second unit had slightly better kitchen cabinets. The first unit was on the main level, so we imagined perhaps wheelchairs caused some of the damage to the first floor unit. I have no idea if the first area was Fountains II or if they were both Fountains.
My point: I think Vistana owners would rise to the occasion if each area was judged on its own merit and rated independently. If Fountains owners (and all other parts of the resort) lost their GC ratings, they would have to take action. If the older areas were sitting away from Vistana, they would never get GC. RCI and II just let them keep their GC ratings as a mega resort, which is the same for OLCC. All of the above can be said about OLCC. You never see pictures of the bathrooms on their website that lack jacuzzi tubs, only the newest, nicest units. It is false advertising, in my opinion.
Comment