- Destinations
- United States
- New York
- New York City
- The Manhattan Club
- Discussion Forum
- Manhattan Club Lawsuit
Manhattan Club Lawsuit
The 9 month rule works. I book all 4 of my weeks every year for exactly the dates I want. The 9 month rule didn't work for your June example because June is not 9 months or more away. June is only a few months away. If your plan is to book time 2 or 3 months out, expect a lot of pain in the world of timeshare. None of us like this reality but it is what it is. With or without Eichner, this will always be the case. We need him ousted so we can gain control of our real estate and its management. The other things are pipe dreams.
chrisv126 wrote:mazarati wrote:The 9 month rule is not the problem here. It's other things. The 9 month rule is important as those needing a full week must have that opportunity or there would be nothing but fragmented weeks available. Every timeshare on earth that allows less than one week stays has the 9 month rule because it's absolutely necessary.The problem is that almost all timeshares who offer less than one week reservations are flawed. Timeshare only really works well for those who want whole weeks AND can plan ahead. If you ask timeshare to give you 3 nighters and on short notice, you will be very disappointed (as you are). Most timeshare experts in places such as Red Week or TUG know this. It's not what people want to hear but unfortunately it's reality.
What we really need at the MC is control of the board. If we get that, we can address the abnormally high management fees etc and get our annual maintenance fees back down below $2000 per year. Maybe even down to $1800 or so. We need to have control like other projects. Eichners built in a clause saying as long as he owns one single MC ownership, he has board control. Normally after about 60% sellout, owners gain control. This is the problem.
say what you will about the "nine month rule" (which i think is bull****). when we bought our 2 weeks at TMC, we were told by the manipulated, lying sales person that TMC was our "home away from home in new york city." by all standards, we owners should be totally homeless for the time we bought at TMC. your point about reserving one week vs a day or two at a time might have a bit of merit, but not in light of what i just stated above. we were defrauded, lied to and scammed from the first moment of the bull****, lying and misrepresenting sales presentation. yesterday, i tried to get a reservation at TMC for june 7 and was told i would be put on TMC famous wait list...........what a total joke, sham and fraud. i went to booking.com, and was able to make a reservation for june 7 about 5 minutes after hanging up with TMC reservation clerk who was rather snotty to boot! so there goes your "9 month rule" when it comes to paying extra to get a reservation..........i.e., on top of my outrageously high maintenance fees.
Chris M.
Jonathan and others considering attorneys - I am interested in finding a good attorney to represent our personal losses and free us from the Manhattan nightmare, but not interested in paying lawyers to support the AG in his case... because that won't benefit the owner's recovery. If anything - the state of NY would get a ton of money for real estate fraud and it will empty the accounts of any cash to go towards the real victims. If you are talking personalized cases for personal recovery or a class action lawsuit then I am interested.
Colleen P.
mazarati wrote:The 9 month rule is not the problem here. It's other things. The 9 month rule is important as those needing a full week must have that opportunity or there would be nothing but fragmented weeks available. Every timeshare on earth that allows less than one week stays has the 9 month rule because it's absolutely necessary.The problem is that almost all timeshares who offer less than one week reservations are flawed. Timeshare only really works well for those who want whole weeks AND can plan ahead. If you ask timeshare to give you 3 nighters and on short notice, you will be very disappointed (as you are). Most timeshare experts in places such as Red Week or TUG know this. It's not what people want to hear but unfortunately it's reality.
What we really need at the MC is control of the board. If we get that, we can address the abnormally high management fees etc and get our annual maintenance fees back down below $2000 per year. Maybe even down to $1800 or so. We need to have control like other projects. Eichners built in a clause saying as long as he owns one single MC ownership, he has board control. Normally after about 60% sellout, owners gain control. This is the problem.
I disagree. For many of us, the 9-month rule IS the problem here. It was not a rule when I purchased my timeshare in 2005. For the first few years I could book a room with just 2 or 3 months notice. Then it got longer, and now it's 9 to 12 months (you are not guaranteed to get your choice with only 9 month's notice). It is NOT standard everywhere and should NOT be affected by split weeks. I have a number of friends with timeshares other than TMC and they all said they've never heard of booking 9 months in advance. Most of us don't have the luxury of knowing with certainty when we can plan a getaway that far in advance. So as far as I'm concerned, the 9-month rule IS the problem here, and the reason TMC shareholders are complaining that they never get to use their units.
Sally W.
sallyw109 wrote:mazarati wrote:The 9 month rule is not the problem here. It's other things. The 9 month rule is important as those needing a full week must have that opportunity or there would be nothing but fragmented weeks available. Every timeshare on earth that allows less than one week stays has the 9 month rule because it's absolutely necessary.The problem is that almost all timeshares who offer less than one week reservations are flawed. Timeshare only really works well for those who want whole weeks AND can plan ahead. If you ask timeshare to give you 3 nighters and on short notice, you will be very disappointed (as you are). Most timeshare experts in places such as Red Week or TUG know this. It's not what people want to hear but unfortunately it's reality.
What we really need at the MC is control of the board. If we get that, we can address the abnormally high management fees etc and get our annual maintenance fees back down below $2000 per year. Maybe even down to $1800 or so. We need to have control like other projects. Eichners built in a clause saying as long as he owns one single MC ownership, he has board control. Normally after about 60% sellout, owners gain control. This is the problem.
I disagree. For many of us, the 9-month rule IS the problem here. It was not a rule when I purchased my timeshare in 2005. For the first few years I could book a room with just 2 or 3 months notice. Then it got longer, and now it's 9 to 12 months (you are not guaranteed to get your choice with only 9 month's notice). It is NOT standard everywhere and should NOT be affected by split weeks. I have a number of friends with timeshares other than TMC and they all said they've never heard of booking 9 months in advance. Most of us don't have the luxury of knowing with certainty when we can plan a getaway that far in advance. So as far as I'm concerned, the 9-month rule IS the problem here, and the reason TMC shareholders are complaining that they never get to use their units.
i agree w ur disagreement of the 9 mo "rule".....it's total bull****. it may be true of some timeshare presentations which were probably up front about it during their sales presentations. however when we purchased 2 weeks about 10 years we were told that this FRAUD-RIDDEN TIMESHARE would be our "new york city home away from home', NO MENTION OF ANY 9 MONTH RULE FOR RESERVATIONS. in addition, we were never told about the rise of percentage rates of our inflated, intolerable and exorbitant maintenance fees which are forcing many owners to literally give away their shares rather than continue to be squeezed for more and more of these obscene fees. can we really even imagine simply giving away our hefty investment in the SCAMMING MANHATTAN CLUB? is that the only FAIR alternative that we're left with? NO, NO, NO. WE NEED TO COME TO GRIPS WITH THIS UNBEARABLE AND NONSENSICAL SITUATION AND TAKE THE PROVERBIAL BULLS (EICHNER AND GANG) BY THE HORNS AND HAVE THEM ALL TOSSED OUT OF POWER. WRITE TO THE OTHER BOARD OF DIRECTOR MEMBERS (THEIR EMAILS ARE LISTED ON THE MANHATTAN CLUB'S WEBSITE.) LET THEM WORK FOR US.......WHICH IS THEIR PRIMARY FUNCTION, NOT TO BE PAWNS OF EICHNER AND BOW TO HIS COMMANDS. ALSO KEEP SENDING THE NEW YORK STATE ATTORNEY GENERAL, ERIC SCHNEIDERMAN, OUR COMPLAINTS AGAINST THE MANHATTAN CLUB FOR HIM TO PRESENT AS PART OF HIS CASE AGAINST THE CLUB IN COURT. we should not be giving THE MANHATTAN CLUB. any leeway as mazarati has given.........almost forgiving THE MANHATTAN for the so-called nine month rule is accepting their fraud. forgiving is somewhat merciful; THE CURRENT BOARD MEMBERS, NAMELY EICHNER AND GANG MERIT NO MERCY OR FORGIVENESS. LET'S GET OFF THAT FORGIVENESS TACK AND ON TO GETTING WHAT WE OWNERS DESERVE.......WHAT WE PAID FOR AND ARE CONTINUING TO PAY FOR THROUGH OUR MAINTENANCE FEES, AND LOSS OF RESERVATION TIME BECAUSE OF THE "9 MONTH RULE" AND THE FACT THAT EICHNER IS RENTING OUT MANHATTAN CLUB ACCOMMODATIONS THROUGH booking.com, orbit.com and other similar websites.........hey guys he's double dipping and using our funds/money/fees to do so. FORGIVENESS? I THINK NOT.
Chris V.
We agree with what your saying about nine months notice....we bought into the flex plan. Using one, two, or three nights at a time throughout the year. We were told anytime weeknights through the year except for a few black out dates. We understood those certain terms and it was not a problem to work around that. In first few years we tried to do that, but could never get the additional nights to complete the use of the total seven nights. It never happened that way. We could not use our seven night for two years when we tried to use it in that way as Owners. After that, traded it into RCI for other vacation plans as not to have to deal with the stress and aggravation at TMC. This is not what we signed up for when purchasing the flex timeshare at TMC.
Vanessa S.
The system is broken, it cannot be fixed. HAS ANY ONE USE SIMPLE MATHEMATIC TO SOLVE THE ISSUE OF THE MC. MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT THE MAXIMUN AMOUNT OF UNITS AT THE MC IS 286 AT CAPACITY. MR. EICHNER SOLD 20 UNITS TO AN OUTSIDE SOURCE, LEAVING 266 ROOMS AVAILABLE TO THE OWNERS ( CHRISTMAS AND NEW YEAR CANNOT BE BOOKED PREMIUN WEEK FOR MR. EICHNER) 266X51=13566 WEEKS. I KEEP HEARING THAT THERE ARE OVER 18000 MEMBERS. HERE LIES THE DILEMMA.
David H.
Read your docs. The 9 month rule has been a part of the use plan since day 1. I would never have considered the MC if it didn't because I would never be able to get full weeks without this built in provision. Without this rule, all the weeks would be fragmented and getting a full 7 nights would be impossible. This is why ever timeshare has this provision. Some are 8 months and some are 10 months but they all have it. Fairfield, Worldmark, Hilton etc etc. The MC simply copied the use plan being used by all major timeshare companies in the world.
Getting rid of the corrupt Eichner board will lower our HOA fees and will provide some other benefits but it will not solve the fact that booking short stays never works well in the timeshare world. The only way this will improve a bit, is if it is proven that Eichners oversold or is mishandling inventory in some way. Hopefully the AG is looking into this as part of their investigation. If they determine Eichner is simply using his owned time to book reservations and is then renting his time to recoup his HOA fees, we are screwed because he has the right to do this just as we all do. I just want to be sure he is paying 100% HOA on each of his ownerships and has to abide by the same exact booking procedures as we regular owners do. If he owns the time, pays the fees, and books like us, he has done nothing wrong. If he is not paying 100% fees or has booking advantages, he should be hammered. With all of these people bragging about giving their weeks back, one can only imagine how many MC he controls and can therefore rent out on various websites. Anyone know if Eichner is paying 100% fees on all MC weeks he controls ? Anyone know if he has to follow the same booking procedures as the rest of us?
Chris M.
Every one seems to be stuck on the 9 months booking. There are TOOOOO many members for it to work, NOW. His original premises of splitting your week into 7 weekend/year was good till he changed the plan after you purchased, now "you have to stay at least an additional day" to include a Friday or Saturday. bringing it to 3 weekends a year, as he added more member to the formula the booking make it to 9 months policy. It worked for a while till more members were added and he started to bring more reservation with advertisement. When I purchased my unit, I was told that ONLY MEMBER were allow to reserve space at the MC. I think greed has played a role in what is happening. And, we as consumers are paying for it.
David H.
davidh1203 wrote:Every one seems to be stuck on the 9 months booking. There are TOOOOO many members for it to work, NOW. His original premises of splitting your week into 7 weekend/year was good till he changed the plan after you purchased, now "you have to stay at least an additional day" to include a Friday or Saturday. bringing it to 3 weekends a year, as he added more member to the formula the booking make it to 9 months policy. It worked for a while till more members were added and he started to bring more reservation with advertisement. When I purchased my unit, I was told that ONLY MEMBER were allow to reserve space at the MC. I think greed has played a role in what is happening. And, we as consumers are paying for it.
davidh, "i think greed has played a role in what is happening,"
dear david, GREED IS THE ONLY MOTIVE INVOLVED HERE. EICHNER IS HELL BENT ON BUILDING A REAL ESTATE EMPIRE WHICH HE SEEMS TO BE DOING MIGHTY SUCCESSFULLY!. and you're right on the mark concerning the bull****9 month rule. mazarati continues to compare THE MANHATTAN CLUB with other much larger franchises such as hilton and marriott that he says has this 9 month thing. that may be so, but the comparison fails concerning THE MANHATTAN CLUB, in light of the fact that all purchasers were lied to and scammed at the very beginning of the sales presentation. they were led to believe that reservations would be made on availability, notwithstanding any 9 month rule. my agreement with mazaratti is only that it appears to be easier to book a whole week than it to book 1,2,three nights at a time, which makes the nine month rule an even weaker issue. OWNERS DESERVE AVAILABLE TIME, WITHOUT HAVING TO BOOK 9 MONTHS, SOMETIMES MORE, OUT. OWNERS DESERVE BETTER THAN THIS. also our maintenance fees should be no higher (and probably much lower) than $2,000+++++per week. the current obscene, immoral and exorbitant fees are lining the pockets of thieves and owners are seeing little, if any, benefit from paying them. we need to be more creative in our attempts to oust those who control THE MANHATTAN CLUB BOARD OF DIRECTORS, and build it with people who care about owners' interests rather than with those who are content to continue to defraud us and to be concerned only to satisfy their own greedy agendas.
Chris V.
vanessa175 wrote:We agree with what your saying about nine months notice....we bought into the flex plan. Using one, two, or three nights at a time throughout the year. We were told anytime weeknights through the year except for a few black out dates. We understood those certain terms and it was not a problem to work around that. In first few years we tried to do that, but could never get the additional nights to complete the use of the total seven nights. It never happened that way. We could not use our seven night for two years when we tried to use it in that way as Owners. After that, traded it into RCI for other vacation plans as not to have to deal with the stress and aggravation at TMC. This is not what we signed up for when purchasing the flex timeshare at TMC.
vanessa, you're soooooo right. i wish we could convince mazaratti of that since he appears to accept the nonsensical "9 month rule" as gospel. what we were told at that sham, fraud-ridden sales presentation was just about what you described above.
Chris V.
We must remember that there are many, many different plans and sets of 'features' and procedures that we were sold at the time we bought. Be careful not to delegitimize peoples' complaints. There have been 80+ modifications to documents that none of us have seen. It's a big mess, and the NYSAG is also having difficulty getting documentation from Eichner, so he can figure out what the truth is, and what legal violations and remedies might be possible.
Dennis C.
Here is a letter from Mr. Wasser that I think explains the purpose of our group and what we are trying to accomplish. Please let me know at jdp441@... if you would like to join the cause. Jonathan
Hi Jonathan - You asked that I describe my conversations with Manhattan Club time share owners who call and ask about our group. I get about 2/3 calls per week, and I spend about 20+ minutes each with them (and don’t charge that time to the group.) The first thing I tell callers is that we’d love to have them as part of our group. And then I describe what our group hopes to strategically accomplish.
I make it clear that we have no current plans to commence a suit against the sponsor. We don’t have the resources for such a suit. At least one previous privately brought action has been dismissed by the Courts.
I have long believed, even before the current NY Attorney General action, that the best and most cost-efficient way towards relief was through the NY Attorney General's office. The Attorney General has the resources and the full weight of government to go toe-to-toe with the Manhattan Club sponsor. It took a while for the Attorney General to get up to speed, but I think that for the past year they have been doing a bang-up job and have kept the sponsor on his heels.
Will the Attorney General action continue? Will the Attorney General arrange things so that relief will be awarded to all time share owners? Will all time share owners equally participate in any award of relief?
Time share owners understandably want answers to those questions. But there is no way that anyone can give an answer these questions in good conscience. We just don’t know. I think it's clear that fraud has occurred. I also think that at the end of the day, the Attorney General will compel some relief. Who will benefit and how much? No one can say at this point.
However, all time share owners are the victims of fraud, and that provides common ground.
Our group was created in the hope that we could establish some sort of relationship with the Attorney General's office. We've communicated certain things to Attorney General over the past few months which we’ve learned from our group members and which we hope will factor into the Attorney General’s view of the case. Also, the larger our group becomes then the larger the feelers we will have to put out, and the bigger the information net we can make available for the benefit of the Attorney General.
If our group becomes large enough then I'm hoping that we might even be consulted if the Attorney General seeks owner feedback on a settlement proposal - though I can't promise that.
Finally, we keep track of the Attorney General’s filings in the pending Court case as it progresses, and report to the group members as to these filings.
Doug
Jonathan P.
jonathan2 wrote:Here is a letter from Mr. Wasser that I think explains the purpose of our group and what we are trying to accomplish. Please let me know at jdp441@... if you would like to join the cause. JonathanHi Jonathan -
You asked that I describe my conversations with Manhattan Club time share owners who call and ask about our group. I get about 2/3 calls per week, and I spend about 20+ minutes each with them (and don’t charge that time to the group.)
The first thing I tell callers is that we’d love to have them as part of our group. And then I describe what our group hopes to strategically accomplish.
I make it clear that we have no current plans to commence a suit against the sponsor. We don’t have the resources for such a suit. At least one previous privately brought action has been dismissed by the Courts.
I have long believed, even before the current NY Attorney General action, that the best and most cost-efficient way towards relief was through the NY Attorney General's office. The Attorney General has the resources and the full weight of government to go toe-to-toe with the Manhattan Club sponsor. It took a while for the Attorney General to get up to speed, but I think that for the past year they have been doing a bang-up job and have kept the sponsor on his heels.
Will the Attorney General action continue? Will the Attorney General arrange things so that relief will be awarded to all time share owners? Will all time share owners equally participate in any award of relief?
Time share owners understandably want answers to those questions. But there is no way that anyone can give an answer these questions in good conscience. We just don’t know. I think it's clear that fraud has occurred. I also think that at the end of the day, the Attorney General will compel some relief. Who will benefit and how much? No one can say at this point.
However, all time share owners are the victims of fraud, and that provides common ground.
Our group was created in the hope that we could establish some sort of relationship with the Attorney General's office. We've communicated certain things to Attorney General over the past few months which we’ve learned from our group members and which we hope will factor into the Attorney General’s view of the case. Also, the larger our group becomes then the larger the feelers we will have to put out, and the bigger the information net we can make available for the benefit of the Attorney General.
If our group becomes large enough then I'm hoping that we might even be consulted if the Attorney General seeks owner feedback on a settlement proposal - though I can't promise that.
Finally, we keep track of the Attorney General’s filings in the pending Court case as it progresses, and report to the group members as to these filings.
Doug
This has been very helpful as a timeshare owner myself. I am trying to donate it and in process found deed not recorded with correct unit number and more! Actually it is not legal and must be resigned by both parties and be recorded in the county clerk office. Interesting? I would love to join the group but also plan to try and donate or sell it for $100.00. I want to help if can and stay informed. Thanks ESA
E. A.
TO.......... ALL MANHATTAN CLUB OWNERS WITH COMPLAINTS (I ASSUME THAT INCLUDES EVERYONE PARTICIPATING ON THIS REDWEEK FORUM!!) TODAY, I SPOKE WITH SALVATORE REALE, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF OPERATIONS (AN EMPLOYEE).....AND A MANHATTAN CLUB BOARD MEMBER, WHO TOLD ME THAT HE WORK FOR US OWNERS.....A LAUGH IN AND OF ITSELF. WE DISCUSSED, AMONG OTHER ISSUES, THE OUTRAGEOUSLY EXORBITANT MAINTENANCE FEES AND THE DIFFICULTY OF GETTING EVEN CLOSELY DESIRED RESERVATION TIME. HE HAD READY ANSWERS FOR EACH OF THESE ITEMS, ALL IN FAVOR OF KEEPING THESE ISSUES IN PLACE, JUST THE WAY THEY ARE. HE ALSO ADVISED ME THAT HIS DOOR AND HIS PHONE ARE ALWAYS OPEN TO ALL OWNERS WHO WISH TO EXPRESS THEIR COMPLAINTS TO HIM; HE ASKED ME TO INVITE ALL OWNERS TO CALL HIM DIRECTLY WITH ISSUES THAT THEY WOULD LIKE TO DISCUSS WITH HIM. OWNERS, DO IT. CALL SALVATORE REALE AT HIS OFFICE AT THE MANHATTAN CLUB ON WEST 56 ST., NYC. (VISIT HIM THERE AT HIS OFFICE IF YOU PREFER, OR DO BOTH............CALL AND VISIT SALVATORE REALE WITH ALL OF YOUR CONCERNS) KEEP HIS PHONE LINES BUSY FLOODING THEM WITH YOUR CALLS AND LEGITIMATE COMPLAINTS. I ASKED HIM ABOUT HIS OPINION CONCERNING THE LAWSUIT: NYS ATTORNEY GENERAL VS THE MANHATTAN CLUB. HIS ANSWER WAS THAT IT WASN'T THE BOARD'S RESPONSIBILITY TO COMMENT SINCE THE SUIT IS AGAINST "THE DEVELOPER, NOT THE BOARD." HE SAID THIS 3 TIMES. WHEN I FINALLY ASKED "WHO IS THE DEVELOPER?" HE RESPONDED "IAN BRUCE EICHNER".................................HIS BOSS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! (WHO APPEARS TO BE BUILDING A REAL ESTATE EMPIRE.) WHO'S KIDDING WHO? OWNERS, GET ON THE PHONE FIRST THING TOMORROW. KEEP CALLING SALVATORE REALE (AT HIS "GENEROUS" INVITATION!) VOICE YOUR COMPLAINTS AND NEGATIVE ISSUES ABOUT THE MANHATTAN CLUB TO HIM. DON'T LET UP. GET OTHER OWNERS INVOLVED IN MAKING PHONE CALLS TO HIM. AGAIN, HE INVITED ME TO EXTEND HIS INVITATION TO CALL HIM TO ALL OWNERS, SO I MUST ASSUME THAT HE WANTS TO HEAR FROM ALL OF US....................................................................... LOUD AND CLEAR.
WILL THIS HELP OUR CAUSE FOR FAIRNESS AND CEASING FRAUD AND SCAM ISSUES? I'M NOT SURE, BUT I AM SURE IT'S WORTH A TRY.
CALL SALVATORE REALE, THE MANHATTAN CLUB EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF OPERATIONS, WHO CLAIMS TO WORK FOR OWNERS' BEST INTERESTS, A CLAIM YOU CAN FIND OUT ABOUT FOR YOURSELF AFTER SPEAKING WITH AND LISTENING TO HIS UNAPOLOGETIC COMMENTS, NONE OF WHICH (IN MY OPINION) SMACKED OF WORKING IN OWNERS' BEHALF.
PLEASE PASS THIS ON TO ALL OTHER OWNERS THAT YOU KNOW, AND COMMENT ABOUT YOUR CALLS TO HIM IN THIS FORUM
CHRIS
Chris V.
I also received a call from Sal. We discussed the same issues. I questioned him not only on the high maintenance fees but also the fact that the board is stacked in the owner's favor. Sal acknowledged that Eichner appoints 4 of the 7 members and he did not know when or whether Eichner would ever relinquish control of the board. Nevertheless, he assured me that he (Sal) is working for all the owners and that I should call him directly if I ever have a concern. As I told him, my main concern is being able to get rid of the week I own so that I am not further encumbered with increasingly high maintenance fees. (I tried to do so last year but I couldn't even give it away when the other person found out about the litigation.) Anyhow, Sal promised to send me a letter about our conversation. I received what was clearly a form letter from him a week later. Anyone else who speaks to him will probably get the same letter. I suspect he is going down the list, talking to as many owners as he can, disgruntled or otherwise, and trying to pacify us.
Paul D.
pauld623 wrote:I also received a call from Sal. We discussed the same issues. I questioned him not only on the high maintenance fees but also the fact that the board is stacked in the owner's favor. Sal acknowledged that Eichner appoints 4 of the 7 members and he did not know when or whether Eichner would ever relinquish control of the board. Nevertheless, he assured me that he (Sal) is working for all the owners and that I should call him directly if I ever have a concern. As I told him, my main concern is being able to get rid of the week I own so that I am not further encumbered with increasingly high maintenance fees. (I tried to do so last year but I couldn't even give it away when the other person found out about the litigation.) Anyhow, Sal promised to send me a letter about our conversation. I received what was clearly a form letter from him a week later. Anyone else who speaks to him will probably get the same letter. I suspect he is going down the list, talking to as many owners as he can, disgruntled or otherwise, and trying to pacify us.
paul, salvatore reale has a way of circumventing the truth, a euphamism i admit. he's a company man who's out for himself and others within the upper eschelon of THE MANHANHATTAN CLUB ORGANIZATION, and he works only for IAN BRUCE EICHNER, HIS BOSS, AND THE MAIN PERSON IN THE NEW YORK STATE ATTORNEY GENERAL'S LAWSUIT. if salvatore reale "is working for owners" why are the maintenance fees so over- inflated? (he'll tell you about labor union contracts and refurbishing sections of the MANHATTAN CLUB building as high expense items; ask him about his salary and the salaries of other executives in THE MANHATTAN CLUB. he told me, in effect, that upper management personnel salaries constitute an insignificant effect on the maintenance fee increases............over 200% within 10 short years.....LUDICROUS, OUTRAGEOUS AND EXORBITANT.) ask salvatore about the difficulty facing owners getting reasonably desired reservation time, while strangers get almost immediate reservations from websites like booking.com, etc. he told me that offering accommodations online to strangers (the monies derived therefrom) help to keep owners' maintenance fees down. HEY FOLKS, WHO'S KIDDING WHO? COME ON SALVATORE, BE HONEST AND REAL. THE PRINCIPALS OF THE MANHATTAN CLUB ARE USING OUR TIME AND MONEY TO DOUBLE DIP..............LETTING STRANGERS GET ACCOMMODATIONS AND COLLECTING THE RENTALS FEES, IN EFFECT, TWICE...................FOR THE RENTAL AND IN THE FORM OF OUR EXORBITANT MAINTENANCE FEES. sal couldn't care less if you can't dump your MANHATTAN CLUB TIMESHARE, even by donating it for nothing. he's interested only in collecting your maintenance money since that's where his over-inflated salary comes from. by the way, he also begged the question when i brought up the scam/fraud and lies at the initial sales presentation, offering the prospective buyers the world and giving them next-to-nothing in return for outrageously escalating maintenance fees. as prospective purchasers at the sales presentation, we were never made aware that maintenance fees would rise more than 200% with no future cap.
keep calling salvatore reale. make him give you realistic and truthful answers to your legitimate complaints especially about the outrageously high maintenance fees and the difficulties getting reasonably desirable reservation time (and any other issues you may have concerning THE MANHATTAN SCAM/CLUB.)
Chris V.
How about a little more fuel for your fire? Juicy Brucy also owns or has a major interest in the Cosmopolitan in Las Vegas, so is old Juicy co-mingling the funds from TMC to Vegas? Maybe it's time to start digging a much deeper trench into the life of this what appears to be a "Fraudster" and what is really going on. The understanding is, the reputation also has followed him to Vegas as well. More here than has been uncovered so far. Could this turn into a "Federal" investigation? That would now move all TMC owners into the arena.
The T.