WorldMark^® Words

Here's one of those services that very few if any should make use of. According to an announcement on the WorldMark web site you can now make one time payments on your WorldMark account (dues or loan payments) via the Western Union web site. Fast, easy, convenient and available most any time. Just log into your WorldMark account online and follow the links to this service.

What's the catch? (There's always a catch.) It's right there in the announcement. "A convenience fee applies to each transaction." Here's a link to the announcement if you want to see all the details.

Why would you pay a fee to do something online that you could do free with a simple phone call? Unless something has changed, you can call WorldMark on the phone and make your payments via credit card for no charge. You can only call during normal business hours but I doubt if a payment made online at night would be posted any faster than one made the next morning via a phone call. Unless there is something I'm missing I'll put this one in the same category as the charge the baseball team ticketing agency wants to impose for printing my tickets at home. Thanks but no thanks.

WorldMark (and Wyndham) talk about their Go Green campaign. Energy savings, recycling, and other environment friendly approaches. For example, at the St George resort they have separate bins for trash, paper, plastic, and other recyclables. St George would get high marks for their Go Green efforts.

On the other hand, the Las Vegas Boulevard resort would get low marks. If there is any recycling done it is not apparent. There are no separate recycling containers; everything ends up in the big dumpsters that that are regularly picked up by one of the local trash hauling companies. It is possible that the trash company does the recycling but there is no indication of that.

Inside the Las Vegas Boulevard unit we recently occupied, all of the lights were incandescents, no CFL bulbs to be seen. I know Spencer Street uses the lower energy bulbs but that trend has not spread to the larger Boulevard resort. Maybe it's on the to do list, but in the meantime the Las Vegas Boulevard resort is not very high on the Go Green list.

I received the May issue of the Destinations magazine earlier this week. It contains articles featuring three different resorts, Red River, Fiji, and Daytona Beach. Other items included a couple of pages detailing the recent awards that have been presented to various WorldMark resorts; an announcement of the next photo and essay contest; and an article featuring a WorldMark owner. Owner education received one page, listing the upcoming classes. There are a couple of more locations for the classes then there were a year ago but it is still a pretty sparse list.

The best feature of this issue? It was printed on paper and delivered to our house by mail. I still don't like the electronic editions. It just isn't the same as having the hardcopy that I can pick up any time I want and page through or review. I can file it in the folder with the other back issues I have, building a repository of information. Will all due respect to the Kindle and/or iPad, electronic books and magazines are not my cup of tea. If I was in charge we'd dump the electronic format and revert back to all printed issues.

Here's an item from the Notes from the WorldMark Board section of the February, 2010 Destinations Magazine.

"The board discussed the desire to increase the number of board directors. Proposed language to appear on the ballot will be discussed at the March board meeting."

An increase in the board size has appeared on the ballot several times in the past few years. WorldMark has over 70 resorts with over 4,400 total units and an annual budget approaching a quarter of a billion dollars. It's makes sense to have more than five board members to oversee an operation that large. Implementing the change requires a bylaw change which is why it needs to be on the ballot.

The "we hate Wyndham" crowd will probably rail against this change, perhaps based on nothing more than their sometimes stated attitude of "if they're for it, we're against it". Hopefully the majority of owners will see the merit of an increase in the board size and it will pass, it is something that is long overdue.

As long as we are talking about bylaw changes, another change that is long overdue is to eliminate the cumulative voting provision that is in the bylaws. You get one vote for each open position on the Board of Directors. If three directors are being elected you get three votes. Cumulative voting lets you cast all of those votes for a single candidate rather than one vote for each of three different candidates.

The problems with cumulative voting far outweigh any theoretical benefits. Cumulative voting makes it easy for disruptive, fringe, and single-issue candidates to get on the board and makes it difficult to remove a bad director. It's a concept that allows a candidate to claim much more support than they actually have by pointing towards the highly skewed number of votes they receive due to people casting all of their available votes for a single candidate rather than spreading their votes equally among the number of open board positions. Cumulative voting is a concept that needs to go.

Here's some additional information to go along with the rentals information I posted last week. It seems the local governments have noticed all of the private rentals that are taking place and want their tax money that those rentals should generate. Quoting from an article in the February 12, 2010 Denver Post:

"Under-the-radar renters are a growing problem for Colorado's resort communities. As ski towns wrestle with withering tax revenue and skyrocketing numbers of people hawking their homes on the Web, the push to find and tax private rentals has become a priority.

They are essentially hotels, and they need to be paying taxes like hotels," said Telluride's town manager, Frank Bell."

The article was talking about people who own homes or condos in the ski area towns, not timeshares, but with a ski season timeshare rental going for $1,200 or more per week you can bet they will be taking notice of those too. Colorado charges 12.4% tax on hotel rooms. 12.4% on a $1,200 timeshare rental is$ 148.80. A month's worth of those rentals would be generate $600 for the state and local governments.

The local governments already have people looking at advertisements for vacation rentals of homes. It's pretty easy to envision them extending that to include rentals of timeshare units. This quote from the newspaper article illustrates the effectiveness of their actions.

"Right now, most towns struggle to keep abreast of private rentals in their area. Telluride is watching about 400 private rental homes. Late last year, Steamboat Springs reached 450 private renters; today, all but about 30 have begun paying taxes. Breckenridge recently counted as many as 600 and found about 100 were not licensed or paying taxes."

So if you decide you want to make a few extra bucks by renting out a WorldMark timeshare unit be aware that the state or local governments might be watching. In addition to being liable for any damage to the unit that your renters might cause, you could also be facing a tax bill on your rental income. You can read the entire newspaper article by clicking on this link.

The opening ceremonies for the 2010 Winter Olympics are tomorrow in Vancouver, Canada. WorldMark has three resorts in the vicinity of the Olympics and at least two others that are reasonably close. Special booking restrictions were placed on those resorts during the Olympics time period. Here's a comment I posted about the Olympics over a year ago.

"But even with the special booking restrictions I wonder how many of those units will be used by owners and how many will show up on the rental market. Seems there are always some owners who are out to make a profit at the expense of other owners."

Based on the advertisements I have seen, quite a few of those units were picked up by owners intent on renting them out. Even at this late date there are still a number of them being listed for rent. It is possible that some of those listings are for units that have already been rented. Some of them are probably going to sit empty though because the would be profit makers overestimated the demand for units at the price they are offering.

I don't know what others think, but in some ways I am glad to see that. I DON'T LIKE RENTALS of WorldMark units where the only intent is to make money. Typically those rentals suck off prime units that other owners would be sure to book for their own use if they were available. It's not just for the Olympics, you will see prime summer weeks at locations such as Depoe Bay on the rental market too. I'm not alone in my dislike for rentals, I hear from other owners who feel the same.

There shouldn't be an outright ban on rentals, that could end up backfiring. Owners need to be able to do things such as book units for a family or friends gathering with the cost shared among all attending. A rental ban could have the undesired side effect of prohibiting that type of thing.

For now there is nothing that can be done about it, the right to rent is in the governing documents. But if enough owners start to notice and complain about the rentals things could change. There are ways to make it more palatable to all the owners. At least to all except maybe those who are out to do nothing more than make a buck without regard for their fellow owners.

The first issue of the new electronic format of the Worldmark Destinations Magazine is available online. That blue text is a clickable link that will take you to it. Let's see what is in this new "interactive and dynamic format" that was announced last month. Animation, video movies with sound, travelogues, background music? Those could all be interactive and dynamic content.

First Item: Your 2010 Destinations Calendar. A description and calendar for the coming years issues that shows which issues will be electronic and which will be printed. Nothing interactive or dynamic there, it looks about the same as it would on a printed page.

Second Item: Meet the Newest Members of Your Board of Directors. A discussion of the election results. Pretty much a replay of the information that has been on the WorldMark web site for some time now. Nothing interactive or dynamic there, it looks about the same as it would on a printed page.

Third Item: WorldMark's 20th Anniversary Celebration Continues. A rehash of the WorldMark Celebration information that has been on the WorldMark web site for some time. Nothing interactive or dynamic there, it looks about the same as it would on a printed page.

Do you see a trend yet? Let's check a few more items.

Fourth Item: Book Online and Win Sweepstakes. A description of the continuation of the book online incentive program. There is some new info describing a new grand prize and an increase in the monthly prize to 10,000 one-time-use credits. But there is nothing interactive or dynamic there, it looks about the same as it would on a printed page.

The centerline items aren't showing the new interactive and dynamic format, maybe the resort feature articles will.

First Resort Feature Article: Awesome Australia! A description of the Flynns Beach and Cairns resorts in Australia and the Rotorua resort in New Zealand. The article does include some clickable links to surrounding attractions, maybe that's the interactive and dynamic part. But that is information that should be available at all times in the web site resort gallery, not just in a monthly article where it will get shuffled into the background.

Second Resort Feature Article: Coffs Harbour Treetops. A description of the Coffs Harbour resort in Australia. This one doesn't even have links to surrounding attractions. Once again nothing interactive or dynamic there, it looks about the same as it would on a printed page.

That pretty much covers the content. There is some advertising included in the electronic edition but I didn't look at that. I doubt if most owners will either. If the advertisers wise up to that they will request very low advertising rates.

If you get the idea that I am not impressed with this first issue of the "new and improved" electronic Destinations, you are right. Not impressed is a gross understatement, I am very disappointed. If all it is going to be is an electronic version of printed material the least they could do is make it PDF format so it would be downloadable and could be retained locally. PDF handles links as well as web format does so nothing would be lost.

It's the first issue, maybe things will get better as time progresses. It's supposed to be an exciting new interactive and dynamic format, printed material doesn't meet that criteria. Nor does providing a few links. Instead of an electronic form of a written description of a resort, how about a narrated video tour through the resort? Instead of a little printed blurb about owners education, how about an owners education video showing a demo of online booking? Come on folks, let's not use new technology for old concepts. Let's really make it interactive and dynamic. Let's make it jump out at the owners and get their attention.

Here's a snippet from something I posted way back in 2006. "The WorldMark forum is down for some currently unexplained reason so there are no discussions occurring there. There hasn't been an interesting WorldMark discussion on TUG for a long time."

Today the situation is much the same. The Coffee Shop portion of the WorldMark forum where you used to find WorldMark discussions was closed a few months after I made the above post and there are still very few discussions on TUG concerning WorldMark. If anyone asks a WorldMark question on TUG the most common response is a diversion to the "We Hate Wyndham" forum where you may get the question answered or you may just hear how bad Wyndham is. That suits their purposes, it minimizes dissenting opinions and directs potential converts for their cause to their site. (I'm assuming everyone knows that Wyndham is the Developer and Manager for WorldMark.) If there is a discussion of any WorldMark issue on TUG it more than likely to consist of 3 or 4 of the regulars from the aforementioned place talking among themselves.

So what can you do if you want some information about WorldMark? You can call the Vacation Planning Center or Owner Services, they do have a lot of information. But what if you don't want the official response, what if you want to hear from other owners? You can try the WorldMark forum if your question is about a specific resort. The forum is not as popular as it once was, but several of the resort sections are actively monitored by owners and for those your question will probably be answered. But other than that, your options are very limited.

There has been some talk of setting up a means for owners to ask other owners questions and get those questions answered, but so far nothing has happened. Maybe we need to start asking management to get on the ball concerning this issue. We won't get another Coffee Shop type of forum, but even something as simple as a FAQ (Frequently Asked Questions) section with a means of submitting additional questions and answers would be an improvement over what exists now. There's a contact link on the WorldMark web site; how many inquires asking about owner to owner questions and answers would it take to get some response and make something happen? Click on that link; submit your request for owner to owner communication; let's find out what it takes.

It's common practice for people to look ahead and predict what significant events the new year will bring. It's not only a new year; it's a new decade, so I figured what the heck, go with the flow. Here are a few WorldMark predictions for the decade of the 2010's, not in any particular order. If I'm as good as the fortune telling gurus I should get at least one of them right.How many of these predictions will come true? Only time will tell. Remember, they are predictions for the next decade, not the next year. By the end of the decade these predictions will be long forgotten, so it doesn't really matter how many I hit or miss.

In the meantime, enjoy your WorldMark vacations and Happy New Year everyone. Thanks for visiting my sites.

You can pick up some interesting things from the WorldMark election results. For example, the totals listed show that Wyndham (the developer) had 79,390 votes for the election of the directors. That's a lot of voting power, but it comes at a price.

The developer votes are based on the number of accounts the developer holds. With an average account size of just over 10,000 credits, there are two votes per developer account which means that the developer holds 39,695 accounts.

Wyndham pays annual maintenance dues on those accounts to WorldMark. The maintenance dues each of those accounts is $678 per year. That means that for 39,695 accounts Wyndham pays annual dues of almost $27 million. At the annual owners meeting it was reported that the expected management fee paid to Wyndham for 2009 will be $22.5 million. The Wyndham maintenance fees are higher than the management fee they receive. Essentially Wyndham is paying WorldMark $4.5 million for the privilege of managing the WorldMark resorts. What a system! Who else could we find to pay us to manage the resorts?