Smugglers notch resort

Do you get access to all of the amenities at the Smuggler's notch resort by renting one of these timeshares? For example, could we participate in all the Smug Notch resort activities and use the water parks?

In order to get access to all the amenities in summer, you will need to purchase a Smuggs pass ($280 +tax) which covers all the people staying in the unit for the entire week. This gets you free access to the Mountainside and Notchville waterparks in addition to access to other amenities and discounts for other services. The complete details of what is included with the pass can be seen here: http://www.smuggs.com/pages/summer/rci/summerBenefits.php

If you only want to use the waterparks for a day or so , a one day pass to Mountainside or Notchville is about $40 per person.

In addition, each building has a pool or pool complex for which you only need to be staying in that building.

is it possible to rent a condo for 3 night or do you need to stay the week?

edwardf52 wrote:

is it possible to rent a condo for 3 night or do you need to stay the week?

Hi,

Most timeshares are rented by the week but please contact the owers to ask if a shorter period of time can be worked out.

Thanks, Marty

any one have ski passes for sale? i am going the week of jan 17,

Our family went to Smuggs on RCI exchange so I may not be the best to answer question. I will say my experience with the Smuggs travel planners through their web site contact email has always been very good and they should answer your question.

With RCI exchange we purchased a week family Smuggs Pass for 179 dollars. Your family will be entered in computer so their are now discounts for about everything you do, plus several free activities. We have gone in the 2nd week of Jan the last 2 years and Smuggs is quiet. Ski camps are great for the kids but was majority of cost of our whole trip however I highly recommend.

Do pay attention to charges as not all staff is up to speed. Some do not know what a Smuggs Pass was, but if you purchase, it appears that they will treat you like a full paying regular time share guest. It saved our family of four after paying for smuggs pass, maybe 100 dollars or so based on ski lift discounts, Camp discounts(this saved us as we had 2 kids with 15% camp discount, over 4 days) Otherwise without doing camp, the discount may have not been worth it other than they treat you a little better. We purchased some store items in the Mountain Outfitters and received discount there.

So to answer your question, I would enquire about the Smuggs Pass if you rent privately and see if it is an option. If so, I would think it might be the way to go just to have easy access to all activities and just make sure you are aware of the discount rates so you get what is available.

On a side note, My wife and I love the Stella Notte Restaurant across the street. Great food and Atmosphere.

R Bailey Auburn AL.

Smugglers has really gone down hill since the resort tried to stick it to the homeowners and the lawsuit was filed. God only knows when the courts will settle this and if the resort will even survive. The tension in the air is just no place for kids.

http://dockets.justia.com/docket/court-vtdce/case_no-1:2008cv00186/case_id-17009/

This is only my opinion, but it has really ruined the place and I intend to dump my place this year after our week is used.

Do you even know what this law suit is about? I believe there is a contract dispute between the full owners and management about their agreement regarding rentals, maintenance responsibilities and other obligations of both parties towards the other. I see no reason that this should have an impact on the resort activities especially because club owners and share owners (the majority of the owners) are not affected by it.

If the resort activities have been curtailed, it is because of the economic situation. It is hard to pay a giant staff to serve very few guests and I believe they are doing the best they can in this environment.

That is not what I am hearing. You sound like you work for the resort or something. It sounds like you know exactly what the dispute is about and even know the breakdown of the various homeowner classes.

When I was there all people were talking about was how unfair the resort was and how upset the staff were about what was going on.

I am sure the economy is not helping, but if the homeowners have resorted to class action lawsuits it can't be good. I am not saying don't go there, but it is something that I did not know about and shoudl be shared.

This affect the value of resort in my opinion. You are of course entitled to your opinion.

kathy2500 wrote:

Do you even know what this law suit is about? I believe there is a contract dispute between the full owners and management about their agreement regarding rentals, maintenance responsibilities and other obligations of both parties towards the other. I see no reason that this should have an impact on the resort activities especially because club owners and share owners (the majority of the owners) are not affected by it.

If the resort activities have been curtailed, it is because of the economic situation. It is hard to pay a giant staff to serve very few guests and I believe they are doing the best they can in this environment.

I fail to see how a lawsuit by a few full owners will affect the vacation experience of people in units owned by thousands of others?

Like I said everyone is entitled to their opinion. What I heard was that there were over 300 full time homeowners and that there was a war going on. You can think whatever you want, but this is what I heard first hand and I find it curious that you find it difficult to believe.

I am not saying that the mouse dude is going to get tarred and feathered, but I will not make an investment in the place and I am concerned about their viability given the market conditions.

People are upset and I don’t want to be around upset people talking about settlements and lawsuits on vacation.

Once again. Do you get paid by the resort for posting these messages? If you do and you split your fee I will change my tune.

Well - this has been interesting reading. I have vacationed at Smuggs the past 3 years and last year purchased a week. My family has enjoyed the time there and I have found the facilities clean, the activities well run and the time together priceless! I am aware of "additional cost" when you rent vs exchange. However I have not experienced any problems.

I am very interested in the law suit discussed. I have been unable to find any information about it. Can someone please include some links to inform the other readers?

Thanks -

I don't have complete details (I do not work for the resort nor do I have any interest in this), but the lawsuit grew out of a contract dispute between the resort management and the full owners, i.e., owners of homes in the village that are owned 52 weeks a year. There had been a management contract between the parties that was being renogotiated. However, there was not much progress so the resort management decided to force the issue and terminate the existing contract with something like 18 months notice. I don't think they have been able to come to an agreement on a new contract. The owners have sued the resort saying that they don't have to have an agreement with the resort management but should be able to contract with another party, hence the anti-trust suit. I have no idea how that is progressing--the information is not available as far as I know.

Please understand that this does not affect club owners (1 week owners) or share owners (multi-week owners) as we have a separate management contract that is not part of this dispute.

Hope this helps.

Thanks. I did find some information regarding the dispute between the "full time owners" and Smuggs. I think there are good points on both sides of many of the issues I read. As an RCI member, I did not find anything that would impact trades or extra vacation offers that RCI provides. If someone has experience with Smuggs not honoring "vacation week owners" use of the facility or charging extra during their vacation - I would be very interested in hearing about that.

There was very little talk about the suit when I was up there this summer. Most weeks owners that have even heard of it understand it involves the full owners and has no effect on the weeks owners. The staff seemed great when we were there. They said their hours were cut back because of the low turnout but they said management did that instead of laying people off.

Also there is a new dedicated BBS for Smuggs that started this week: http://www.smuggsbbs.com

Dear Homeowner,

The SNHA Board email on Friday June 10th came as no surprise to us. We could have written their predictable response ourselves. Once again they prove to us that they do not wish to join in respectful dialogue or work in a collaborative manner to improve the relationship between the Owners and Smugglers;. The fact of the matter is that not all owners agree with the SNHA Board. The members of OACS in particular have voiced their disagreement by pulling out of the Association after the Board began their litigation 2 ½ years ago.

Frankly we would much rather continue to focus on being ;The Best Resort for Family Fun Anywhere; rather than engage in the tiresome back and forth emails that have characterized communications the past three years. However, we are advised not to allow factual misstatements to stand.

#1) The Board implies you can be ;fooled into signing contracts you are under no obligation to sign;. I believe Smugglers; Owners are very savvy and will not be ;fooled; into signing anything if not in their best interest to do so. My cover letter with the contracts made it clear that Owners had no obligation to sign the proposed agreements. I know you can understand the benefits and do not need to be dictated to by either Smugglers; or the SNHA Board.

#2) The Board refers to draft contracts presented to them in May of 2008. Following that presentation significant changes were negotiated with the Board and many of those changes remain in the newly offered contracts. These are by no means the same contracts as presented in May of 2008. However, we have returned to a 30 year commitment to provide rental services that the Board demanded we take out of the current contract.

#3) The Board complains that we have distributed the new Agreements proving that OACS is Smugglers; creation and exists only for Smugglers; benefit. The new agreements we printed and mailed to you are agreements between yourself and Smugglers;. It would have been entirely inappropriate for OACS to mail these agreements on our behalf. In addition, while the negotiations were held on behalf of the OACS members, having completed these new agreements, it would also have been entirely inappropriate not to make them available to all of the full owners for consideration. We do not support OACS financially, but we do support the OACS positive approach to the Smugglers;/Owner relationship. OACS prefers principled negotiations over confrontational lawsuits and so does Smuggs.

#4) The Board asks where have the OACS owners been the last 12 months. We might ask the same of the SNHA except for the prosecution of the lawsuit and letters designed to continue the negative atmosphere between the Board and Smugglers;. For the last 12 months OACS has been in confidential negotiations with us. Given the stalemate with the SNHA Board, we were approached by OACS with a proposal to substantially improve our de facto agreements on behalf of their members. The successful negotiation has resulted in the offering of new optional contracts to all Owners.

The Board expresses criticism over my efforts to ;convince you; of something 12 months ago. I don;t know what that item was but I think I have been trying to convince the Owners of a wide variety of things for 24 years. I do intend to keep trying whenever I believe it is in our mutual best interest to do so. Owners can always decide for themselves what they do or do not want to do

#5) Again, these agreements were negotiated confidentially and respectfully by the OACS Executive Committee solely on behalf of their members. Their interest is in providing significantly improved arrangements for their members. OACS has members from nearly every regime who have quietly left the SNHA and joined OACS to get away from the environment created by the SNHA Board. It was Smugglers; and not OACS who insisted that the same contracts be made available as an option to all Owners.

The Board claims that I am ;frustrated by my inability to receive a rubber stamp approval for practices which take financial advantage of each and every homeowner.;

That is simply an untrue and unsubstantiated statement.

There is one statement made by the Board that I agree is correct. The Board writes ;How can it be in the best interest of the homeowners for a splinter group to exist, serving to divide the homeowner group;. I do not believe it is in the best interest of Smugglers; or the Homeowners for two Homeowner organizations to exist. However, it was the behavior of the Board and not Smugglers; that spawned OACS.

The Board;s closing implores you not to be fooled by the wolf seeking to gain control of your coop. I agree with the metaphor but believe the roles are reversed. In my opinion, It is the Board trying to gain control of Smugglers; future.

In closing, we ask only that you take the time to read the new agreements. Feel free to contact us if you have any questions. To opt for the Long Term Renter Agreement or the Village Fee Agreement, you just need to sign and return the signature pages in the envelope provided by September 30, 2011. The choice to participate in these new agreements is entirely up to you. Your current agreements and the fees will remain in effect if you choose not to sign these new agreements. If you opt in, we hope you will also consider joining OACS.

Sincerely, Bill Stritzler Managing Director