Interesting newsletter.
£60 levy suggested to make future refurbs possible.
Does anyone know if this levy will apply to all owned weeks ? Eg : perpertuity and also term ownership, which have different rates set into an earlier contract.
Sale’s mentioned and as anticipated probably hard to sell in general unless recently upgraded, hence the proposed levy.
No sales figures in the newsletter which I can see, although these should be available at the AGM presumably.
Maintenance fees + Leisure fees + levy , is now what’s needed to stay solvent it seems.
Thoughts anyone ?
OCTOBER 2023 Newsletter
This info was sent to the accountant for their input.
Is this the same accountant who said everything was fine and dandy?
In the absence of accounts it is difficult to make a decision whether this is the right path to solvency.
There has been too much of " spending owners funds" for the wrong reasons and futile projects over the years and this has resulted in this situation.
Continual capitalisation has not helped either.
The first thing we should be looking at right now is not what owners can pay to bail out the Club, but how can we save money?
I can think of a few cost savings,but would prefer other owners to come up with ideas .
Any suggestions?
Is this the same accountant who said everything was fine and dandy?
In the absence of accounts it is difficult to make a decision whether this is the right path to solvency.
There has been too much of " spending owners funds" for the wrong reasons and futile projects over the years and this has resulted in this situation.
Continual capitalisation has not helped either.
The first thing we should be looking at right now is not what owners can pay to bail out the Club, but how can we save money?
I can think of a few cost savings,but would prefer other owners to come up with ideas .
Any suggestions?
Agree entirely. I see that LRHC are entered for the Prestige Hotel awards 2024 despite not remotely being a hotel and having been awarded nothing at the awards this year. I note that there is a category for “ best self catering of the year award ” included in the 2024 awards but is this entry actually necessary, what will the cost amount to and what benefit will it be to the club?
To enter the awards is free but what was the cost to the club for the representation at the 2023 award ceremony and how much is it expected to cost in 2024.?
All relevant in view of the financial position of LRHC
To enter the awards is free but what was the cost to the club for the representation at the 2023 award ceremony and how much is it expected to cost in 2024.?
All relevant in view of the financial position of LRHC
Last edited by THOM042 on Thu Nov 02, 2023 8:31 am, edited 1 time in total.
I have read the accountants reasoning behind the levy and it is glaringly apparent, the eventual outome is flawed on many different levels.
The refurbishment options summary is contrived on every level.
It is based on a 5 year plan prepared by one person, maybe with the help of others without approaching the owners although this has been suggested and requested on many occasions.
To say " on the balance of all the information available to us"- a quote from accountants could be perceived as a get out clause due to minimal information and facts provided, and on reading, I can totally understand.
If studios and apartments provide 40% of rental income what is this in cash after all other expenses?
The newsletter is emotional blackmail for many owners already affected by high cost of living increases and I think their emotional ties to Rannoch could well be loosened when you consider annual increases of more than 15% per annum when you include this levy!!!!!
I could suggest we could reduce the salary bill by the same percentage which would create the same result, but would create a potential uproar and yet owners remain the cash cow?
A consultation process should have been undertaken long before now in relation to studios and apartments sale.
Capitalisation has been grossly overused in recent years and any further increases in this area and depreciation again create future issues not accounted for.
As suggested already the absence of any proper costings to owners at this time make a decision at an AGM seem rushed.
It is a proven fact that the income generated from the rental of studios and apartments has not delivered the desired profits required once you factor in the extra salaries and other expenses as highlighted in the budgeted figures delivered in July of this year.
The figures quoted then were for all units and more detail would be required to enable any decision.
And with a wage bill of more than 50% of all income in those budgeted figures and with record staff numbers at the club, more justification and hard facts/ figures are a necessity.
Owners have already paid out a one off levy as were told during Covid, now we are expected to subsidise the Club again when salary costs are astronomical and other costs such as IT, leasing of electric vehicles etc over the past 5 years have been through the roof.
We have to have more accountability rather than creating a so called reserve/ sinking fund to be wasted once again.
Maybe we as a Club have to realise that the Timeshare model has changed in the past 50 years and just maybe 85 units is too much to maintain and manage.
Maybe we should be thinking less is more because I'm struggling to think of any other timeshare with that number of units.
It would also be interesting to know the other Club with which we were compared with as if it is where I think, maybe we have a problem.
The refurbishment options summary is contrived on every level.
It is based on a 5 year plan prepared by one person, maybe with the help of others without approaching the owners although this has been suggested and requested on many occasions.
To say " on the balance of all the information available to us"- a quote from accountants could be perceived as a get out clause due to minimal information and facts provided, and on reading, I can totally understand.
If studios and apartments provide 40% of rental income what is this in cash after all other expenses?
The newsletter is emotional blackmail for many owners already affected by high cost of living increases and I think their emotional ties to Rannoch could well be loosened when you consider annual increases of more than 15% per annum when you include this levy!!!!!
I could suggest we could reduce the salary bill by the same percentage which would create the same result, but would create a potential uproar and yet owners remain the cash cow?
A consultation process should have been undertaken long before now in relation to studios and apartments sale.
Capitalisation has been grossly overused in recent years and any further increases in this area and depreciation again create future issues not accounted for.
As suggested already the absence of any proper costings to owners at this time make a decision at an AGM seem rushed.
It is a proven fact that the income generated from the rental of studios and apartments has not delivered the desired profits required once you factor in the extra salaries and other expenses as highlighted in the budgeted figures delivered in July of this year.
The figures quoted then were for all units and more detail would be required to enable any decision.
And with a wage bill of more than 50% of all income in those budgeted figures and with record staff numbers at the club, more justification and hard facts/ figures are a necessity.
Owners have already paid out a one off levy as were told during Covid, now we are expected to subsidise the Club again when salary costs are astronomical and other costs such as IT, leasing of electric vehicles etc over the past 5 years have been through the roof.
We have to have more accountability rather than creating a so called reserve/ sinking fund to be wasted once again.
Maybe we as a Club have to realise that the Timeshare model has changed in the past 50 years and just maybe 85 units is too much to maintain and manage.
Maybe we should be thinking less is more because I'm struggling to think of any other timeshare with that number of units.
It would also be interesting to know the other Club with which we were compared with as if it is where I think, maybe we have a problem.
Last edited by LAMO003 on Thu Nov 02, 2023 8:54 pm, edited 4 times in total.
I think that EV’s have their use for short journeys in mild climates but they are inadequate for longer journey’s in sub zero temperatures just as many operators and drivers have found out. The batteries just don’t cope with extreme cold and rapidly drain when using the heater etc in sub zero temperatures.
Exhaust pollution from petrol/ diesel engines is minimal in wide open environments like Rannoch.
It would be interesting to learn how the EV vehicles at LRHC have worked out in the monetary sense in contrast to the cost of the original vehicles used.
Exhaust pollution from petrol/ diesel engines is minimal in wide open environments like Rannoch.
It would be interesting to learn how the EV vehicles at LRHC have worked out in the monetary sense in contrast to the cost of the original vehicles used.
I am not against EV as such, but we have a Rav 4 which only a chosen few appear to drive. This flagship vehicle is akin to a status symbol and in my opinion will be expensive to lease and in reality, a non asset unless it can be proven otherwise
The actual vans used in site are a necessity.
The actual vans used in site are a necessity.
Vans are definitely essential for transportation of goods / supplies etc.
it seems to be that a review of what is necessary and what’s not is desirable in view of the financial report in the October newsletter.
Other organisations have had to cut back for similar reasons.
it seems to be that a review of what is necessary and what’s not is desirable in view of the financial report in the October newsletter.
Other organisations have had to cut back for similar reasons.
The motion proposed on the levy should be suspended to such times when all owners are provided with all the facts, not assumptions at a future date OR committee put forward another motion to consider the sale of studios and apartments.
To have those 2 motions at same time enables a more balanced vote however I do personally feel it would be wrong of both to be put forward without all the proper facts and information.
OR
All of the options suggested should have been given the opportunity to be voted on.
This creates a fair reflection of the overall ownership.
We cannot have owners voting blindly based on the assumptions by an accountant who admits he is basing his decision on " the context of a 5 year plan" prepared by an individual and when rhe accountant states " without a consultation process with all owners of studios and apartments".
He has also stated there are variables and unquantifiable more than once.
What we don't need is a rushed vote which will have potentially negative implications not just to the Club, but the dwindling number of owners.
To have those 2 motions at same time enables a more balanced vote however I do personally feel it would be wrong of both to be put forward without all the proper facts and information.
OR
All of the options suggested should have been given the opportunity to be voted on.
This creates a fair reflection of the overall ownership.
We cannot have owners voting blindly based on the assumptions by an accountant who admits he is basing his decision on " the context of a 5 year plan" prepared by an individual and when rhe accountant states " without a consultation process with all owners of studios and apartments".
He has also stated there are variables and unquantifiable more than once.
What we don't need is a rushed vote which will have potentially negative implications not just to the Club, but the dwindling number of owners.
I totally agree with all the previous owners have said, as this Motion as presented by the Committee is undemocratic offering Owners no alternative Motions to Vote on, when there are patently obvious other choices that could and should be voted on. Therefore the Committee should remove this Motion and have a complete rethink as it is based on flawed assumptions by the Accountant.
At a very basic level one has to remind the Committee that at no time since I, and a great many other owners, bought into Time Share at Rannoch have I ever been asked as an Owner to vote on the LRHC changing it`s Business Model from Time Share only to T/M + short Turnover Rentals on a permanent basis. Whilst I appreciated that as the result of Covid Closures the Club was desperate for Funds and thought that this new short term business might add to our coffers, and perhaps result in increased Sales levels, unfortunately it has become glaringly obvious, particularly when one looks at the July Accounts, that Rentals have NOT generated the necessary profits to make this a viable proposition. Particularly when one considers the Club has had to engage additional Employees at a 50% increase in salaries to cope with the necessary quick turnovers not to mention the Wear & Tear, resulting in additional costs for Bedding; Towels and Furnishings of each Unit. LRHC is a Time Share Club and NOT a B&B or Hotel! It seems now to be modelled on the Dunalistair Hotel/Self Catering Suites, but at Rannoch it is the OWNERS who are subsidising the impact of `short stays/weekend breaks` by being asked yet again by the Committee to pay a LEVY to have THEIR OWN LONG AWAITED UNITS REFURBISHED as our Maintenance Fees and the many `Additional Refurbishment Levies` have apparently had to be used on `other Projects`.
I am astonished that the Club`s Accountant`s `Comprehensive Analysis of Financing Alternatives` did not apparently draw the Committee`s attention to the SIGNIFICANT ELEPHANT missing from his own analysis ie the StudioApartments Block. It has been noted for some considerable years by Owners of these Units and also by the significant numbers of negative Rental Reviews, that the whole Building is in need of extensive repair to the Roof; Exterior Cladding; Common Stairways; Internal Parking Bays; Rewiring; not to mention the Total Internal Refurbishment all of which is not in the least financially realistic given that the costs would use up most, if not all, of the Committee`s 5 year Financial Plan and to state otherwise would be disingenuous! The Accountant should also have taken into account the number of weeks actually owned by the Club within this Block and the realistic concept that as a Club we should be dispensing with the HIGH NUMBER of Units we presently own which will vastly increase over the coming decade as original owners number reduce due to age/death. Therefor it is IMPERATIVE if we get a good offer from the LR Hotel to purchase this block, (which they will likely demolish and rebuild) we should grab it with both hands, as this would help reduce this `lead weight` (ie number of Club owned Weeks) from around the Club/Owner`s necks, and at the exact same time the monies received would help us take a massive leap forward in our Refurbishment Programme of the more viable Units.
I think it is UNREASONABLE for the Committee to assume that the Owners will YET AGAIN dig deep into their pockets for a further 5 years to pay a Refurbishment Levy when the obvious compromise to sell off the Studio/Apartments Block is an obvious no brainer to any Business minded person.
The Third compromise as some other owners suggest is a reduction of employee numbers at ALL levels which would of course require the Short Term Rentals to be fully reviewed plus Rentals of ALL but the most necessary Vehicles; Staff Promotional Days Out for `HOTEL?` Awards etc dispensed with. Monies then saved would result in the Levy not having to be applied at a time when Owners themselves are having to tighten their belts and may feel on being asked for yet another Levy `NO! Enough is enough!
Ronnie R.
At a very basic level one has to remind the Committee that at no time since I, and a great many other owners, bought into Time Share at Rannoch have I ever been asked as an Owner to vote on the LRHC changing it`s Business Model from Time Share only to T/M + short Turnover Rentals on a permanent basis. Whilst I appreciated that as the result of Covid Closures the Club was desperate for Funds and thought that this new short term business might add to our coffers, and perhaps result in increased Sales levels, unfortunately it has become glaringly obvious, particularly when one looks at the July Accounts, that Rentals have NOT generated the necessary profits to make this a viable proposition. Particularly when one considers the Club has had to engage additional Employees at a 50% increase in salaries to cope with the necessary quick turnovers not to mention the Wear & Tear, resulting in additional costs for Bedding; Towels and Furnishings of each Unit. LRHC is a Time Share Club and NOT a B&B or Hotel! It seems now to be modelled on the Dunalistair Hotel/Self Catering Suites, but at Rannoch it is the OWNERS who are subsidising the impact of `short stays/weekend breaks` by being asked yet again by the Committee to pay a LEVY to have THEIR OWN LONG AWAITED UNITS REFURBISHED as our Maintenance Fees and the many `Additional Refurbishment Levies` have apparently had to be used on `other Projects`.
I am astonished that the Club`s Accountant`s `Comprehensive Analysis of Financing Alternatives` did not apparently draw the Committee`s attention to the SIGNIFICANT ELEPHANT missing from his own analysis ie the StudioApartments Block. It has been noted for some considerable years by Owners of these Units and also by the significant numbers of negative Rental Reviews, that the whole Building is in need of extensive repair to the Roof; Exterior Cladding; Common Stairways; Internal Parking Bays; Rewiring; not to mention the Total Internal Refurbishment all of which is not in the least financially realistic given that the costs would use up most, if not all, of the Committee`s 5 year Financial Plan and to state otherwise would be disingenuous! The Accountant should also have taken into account the number of weeks actually owned by the Club within this Block and the realistic concept that as a Club we should be dispensing with the HIGH NUMBER of Units we presently own which will vastly increase over the coming decade as original owners number reduce due to age/death. Therefor it is IMPERATIVE if we get a good offer from the LR Hotel to purchase this block, (which they will likely demolish and rebuild) we should grab it with both hands, as this would help reduce this `lead weight` (ie number of Club owned Weeks) from around the Club/Owner`s necks, and at the exact same time the monies received would help us take a massive leap forward in our Refurbishment Programme of the more viable Units.
I think it is UNREASONABLE for the Committee to assume that the Owners will YET AGAIN dig deep into their pockets for a further 5 years to pay a Refurbishment Levy when the obvious compromise to sell off the Studio/Apartments Block is an obvious no brainer to any Business minded person.
The Third compromise as some other owners suggest is a reduction of employee numbers at ALL levels which would of course require the Short Term Rentals to be fully reviewed plus Rentals of ALL but the most necessary Vehicles; Staff Promotional Days Out for `HOTEL?` Awards etc dispensed with. Monies then saved would result in the Levy not having to be applied at a time when Owners themselves are having to tighten their belts and may feel on being asked for yet another Levy `NO! Enough is enough!
Ronnie R.
Dear All,
Thank you for sharing your thoughts and concerns in this detailed post. I'd like to address some of the points you've raised to provide clarity and insight into our recent decisions and future plans.
1. Public Image and Press Coverage: Our participation in awards like the Prestige Hotel Awards is strategic. The recent awards and recognitions have indeed shifted the focus of press articles about our club. This change in media presence is essential for attracting new buyers and guests. Fresh press coverage showcasing our achievements helps in creating a positive image, crucial for the long-term success and sustainability of the club.
Here are some of the recent awards we have won as a Club:
31/01/2022 Traveller Review Award - Booking.com
07/04/2022 Scottish Thistle Award Nomination
06/06/2022 Resort and Retreat Awards 2022 -Best Family Friendly Resort- Scotland
19/08/2022 Hotels Combined Recognition of Excellence
05/09/2022 TripAdvisor Travellers' Choice Awards
02/11/2022 Global 100 Best Family Friendly Resort - UK
13/01/2023 Corporate America Annual Awards 2023-Best Family Friendly Resort 2023
13/01/2023 Corporate LiveWire - Family Resort of the Year
14/03/2023 Travel Myth Awards 2023 Most Dog Friendly Property Award
14/03/2023 Prestige Hotel Awards- Scotland's Best Family Resort nomination
23/03/2023 Scotland Prestige Awards 2023/24 - Scenic Accommodation of the Year
27/03/2023 Scottish Thistle Awards Nomination
04/04/2023 Resort Retreat Awards 2023-Best Family-Friendly Resort 2023 - Scotland
22/05/2023 IE100 Awards- Family Friendly Resort of the Year 2023
17/08/2023 Corporate LiveWire - Family Resort of the Year - Scotland
2. Leasing of Electric Vehicles: Regarding the fleet, we've reduced our vehicles from four to three, aligning with our cost-saving initiatives. The switch to electric vehicles is not just an eco-driven decision; it's a practical one. Diesel vehicles proved unsuitable for our short-distance journeys, leading to issues like clogged DPF filters. Electric vehicles are more efficient for our needs. All 3 vehicles were bought used (2/3 year old) and on hire purchase instead of leasing which was not favourable when comparing our resell values due to low mileage use given our setup.
3. 24-Hour Emergency Number and Vehicle Use: The "flagship" vehicle you mentioned is part of our operational necessity. Whoever is on-call for emergencies carries the 24-hour phone and uses this vehicle. This approach ensures that we can transport guests or staff safely and in compliance with insurance regulations, which is not feasible with personal vehicles. We get around 10 callouts on average/ month. These often happen in the early hours in the morning.
4. Proposed Levy and Lodge Refurbishments: We believe this approach is a viable way to achieve what many members desire: refurbished lodges within a reasonable timeframe. It's a structured plan to enhance the value and experience for all members while managing the club's financial health responsibly. The proposed levy is part of a well-considered plan to refurbish our lodges within a reasonable timescale. This initiative reflects our commitment to enhancing the overall experience for our members and guests. The motion was proposed after thorough deliberation, considering the club's current financial situation and the need for continuous improvement.
5. Studio and Apartment Rentals: The concerns about the profitability and maintenance of our studios and apartments are noted. While these units contribute significantly to our rental income, we are continuously evaluating their performance and considering all options, including potential sales. The financial and operational implications of such decisions are complex and will be approached with the utmost care and consideration for the club's future.
Best wishes,
Richard
Thank you for sharing your thoughts and concerns in this detailed post. I'd like to address some of the points you've raised to provide clarity and insight into our recent decisions and future plans.
1. Public Image and Press Coverage: Our participation in awards like the Prestige Hotel Awards is strategic. The recent awards and recognitions have indeed shifted the focus of press articles about our club. This change in media presence is essential for attracting new buyers and guests. Fresh press coverage showcasing our achievements helps in creating a positive image, crucial for the long-term success and sustainability of the club.
Here are some of the recent awards we have won as a Club:
31/01/2022 Traveller Review Award - Booking.com
07/04/2022 Scottish Thistle Award Nomination
06/06/2022 Resort and Retreat Awards 2022 -Best Family Friendly Resort- Scotland
19/08/2022 Hotels Combined Recognition of Excellence
05/09/2022 TripAdvisor Travellers' Choice Awards
02/11/2022 Global 100 Best Family Friendly Resort - UK
13/01/2023 Corporate America Annual Awards 2023-Best Family Friendly Resort 2023
13/01/2023 Corporate LiveWire - Family Resort of the Year
14/03/2023 Travel Myth Awards 2023 Most Dog Friendly Property Award
14/03/2023 Prestige Hotel Awards- Scotland's Best Family Resort nomination
23/03/2023 Scotland Prestige Awards 2023/24 - Scenic Accommodation of the Year
27/03/2023 Scottish Thistle Awards Nomination
04/04/2023 Resort Retreat Awards 2023-Best Family-Friendly Resort 2023 - Scotland
22/05/2023 IE100 Awards- Family Friendly Resort of the Year 2023
17/08/2023 Corporate LiveWire - Family Resort of the Year - Scotland
2. Leasing of Electric Vehicles: Regarding the fleet, we've reduced our vehicles from four to three, aligning with our cost-saving initiatives. The switch to electric vehicles is not just an eco-driven decision; it's a practical one. Diesel vehicles proved unsuitable for our short-distance journeys, leading to issues like clogged DPF filters. Electric vehicles are more efficient for our needs. All 3 vehicles were bought used (2/3 year old) and on hire purchase instead of leasing which was not favourable when comparing our resell values due to low mileage use given our setup.
3. 24-Hour Emergency Number and Vehicle Use: The "flagship" vehicle you mentioned is part of our operational necessity. Whoever is on-call for emergencies carries the 24-hour phone and uses this vehicle. This approach ensures that we can transport guests or staff safely and in compliance with insurance regulations, which is not feasible with personal vehicles. We get around 10 callouts on average/ month. These often happen in the early hours in the morning.
4. Proposed Levy and Lodge Refurbishments: We believe this approach is a viable way to achieve what many members desire: refurbished lodges within a reasonable timeframe. It's a structured plan to enhance the value and experience for all members while managing the club's financial health responsibly. The proposed levy is part of a well-considered plan to refurbish our lodges within a reasonable timescale. This initiative reflects our commitment to enhancing the overall experience for our members and guests. The motion was proposed after thorough deliberation, considering the club's current financial situation and the need for continuous improvement.
5. Studio and Apartment Rentals: The concerns about the profitability and maintenance of our studios and apartments are noted. While these units contribute significantly to our rental income, we are continuously evaluating their performance and considering all options, including potential sales. The financial and operational implications of such decisions are complex and will be approached with the utmost care and consideration for the club's future.
Best wishes,
Richard