Mark Warner's Cygnaski Hotel is being sold!

A snowHead

I think we were lucky, but the difference is, we would have been happy to go elsewhere and understood their situation.

I don't see how MW have 'mucked up'.

A snowHead

I'm amazed that Mark Warner have a contract that allows this. Surely they must have paid a deposit etc already. If you tried to sell in the UK, you'd effectively have sitting tenants who would have the right to see out their contract??

Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?

welshflyer, They are indeed facts and not in dispute. However, what do you think of Marmot's last paragraph?

iainm, I imagine there is a clause somewhere stating that the lease is cancelled if the owners sell the chalet. Besides, it would probably be a nightmare to fight it. A lawyer would better answer this one coz I can't imagine how the owners could get away with this without somekind of compensation for loss of business to MW.

You need to Login to know who's really who.

I reckon MW will have got a nice payoff for the Hotelier's buyer buying them out of their contract, most of which goes str8 to the bottom line - some of which goes to getting Piccadilly, nicer flights!

Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.

ALQ I can't see why Mark Warner can't be held responsible by us for the situation. I can't see that there is anyone else WE can hold responsible. They advertised a property as being available. They took our money six months ago on the basis that it was available. Surely we can now expect Mark Warner to resolve the problem to our satisfaction. If they can't, I believe we have every right to feel dissatified with them. If you feel differently you are entitled to your opinion. But I am also entitled to my opinion. A similar thing happened to us in 2010 with a Meribel property and Crystal. Crystal's handling of the situation was terrible. They offered nothing that was even close to being equal to our original booking. I do not have a high opinion of the holiday and travel industries based on my actual experiences. I do not think I am being harsh in my judgement.

Piccadilly I don't care if you feel my reply to your 'suggestions' was 'pissy'. I didn't ask for suggestions for alternatives. We are quite capable of choosing where we want to stay ourselves. Members of our group have stayed in Tignes and at the Moris in previous years. They don't meet our needs, so we didn't book these right from the start. We would gladly accept the ChaletHotel Val d'Isere as a substitute. They have room available for 18 people. But they want us to pay the difference in price. They didn't ask you to pay any more. But they expect us to pay. Do you consider that to be fair? I don't see that it matters that we are a group of 18. It is the same cost to them, per person for you, as it is for us. If you think the Moris is an acceptable alternative, why didn't you take it?

You'll need to Register first of course.

Mr Marmot, sorry I didn't mean to cause offence, I often forget how difficult large groups can be, I'm so used to travelling on my own. Sad

Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...

RichardB you have caused me no offence.

I appreciate that a forum such as this gives us the opportunity to make points of view and discuss our experiences. Other peoples points of view are always valid but I don't have to agree with them.

By the way, whilst Mark Warner have currently joined Crystal on my list of those TO who have disappointed me with their service, I think it is only right to confirm that the group has travelled with Mark Warner previously and been exceedingly happy with everything, and that we also travelled as a group with Inghams to ChaletHotel Verbier last year and we have nothing but high praise for the staff at the hotel and how Inghams handled our booking.

Things don't always go wrong, but it is how you handle them when they do that marks out the good from the bad, in my opinion.

After all it is free

Mr Marmot, I can very well understand your frustration; you're getting something less than you expected. But things can and do go wrong and it's not really MW's fault. I'll leave the question of responsibility to the lawyers.
Anyway, hope you get something that satisfies you (i.e. the same free upgrade as Piccadilly) and you have a good trip.

welshflyer Thanks for the link to Les Chardons...it's a bit pricey, but looks good and no single supps Very Happy

*Ski* the Net with snowHeads

Mr Marmot - I'd be pretty cheesed off in your position. Firstly you would expect Mark Warner to have a contract with the Hotel owner at the time they take your money. Secondly they appear to have offered an upgrade of hotel and flight to one customer but have not offered other customers the same. I would be surprised if they are happy to risk losing your party of 18 this year (plus your potential custom in future years)

I would go back and start by reminding them that you are repeat customers and politely request the chalethotel you want in Val D'Isere at no extra cost. snowHead

I have not yet used Mark Warner (although sometimes get their brochure) so have a neutral opinion on them. However this thread is not giving them the best publicity.

snowHeads are a friendly bunch.

Piccadilley, So no blame whatsoever falls on Mark Warner for our situation?

snow reports

Snowymum, Mark Warners have offered alternatives of a lower quality or in a different resort. They want us to pay extra for something they have available of slightly better quality in the same resort. We are obviously trying to negotiate with them. The problem is that when a group of 18 have voted on their choice back in April ( to ensure the best choice) it is difficult to make agreements involving extra cost on behalf of people who confirmed their maximum budget at the outset.

I think you'd be surprised how little repeat custom means to TO, in my experience. Crystal didn't seem to be concerned about the money they lost from our group's bookings in the past few years ( and we must be talking about 30k plus)

ALQ,

The price for Les Chardons are on a par with those for the Cygnaski.

If you want cheaper accommodation YSE have a cheaper chalet for up to 18 people.

You know it makes sense.

Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:

Piccadilly, our 'contract' is with Mark Warner not the hotel's owners. We can only blame Mark Warner for the situation.
There is no bad feeling on my part that you have received the resolution that would also be acceptable to us. Good luck to you. What you need to understand is the greater difficulties, problems such as these cause a group. Canvassing the views of the group, finding and offering options and voting on them is onerous. There is the possibility that some will decide to drop out causing further problems. I can assure you that choice will also be limited at this point. That is why we book and give th TO our deposit money some 9 months before the holiday.
We will get something sorted, of course. But it won't be easy, so I get irritated by comments from those who surely don't really understand the difficulties. I blame MW for causing these difficulties.

A snowHead

Mr Marmot, Doesn't sound that bad to me. It's probably quite difficult for MW to find comparable alternative accommodation for a group of 18 in February, but they're offering you what sounds to me like reasonable alternative options. I'm sure there are plenty of operators who would just cancel and refund the whole package, then you'd be really stuffed! And although you don't seem to like TO's, if you'd opted for a DIY package you'd now be utterly stuffed!! At least they're doing the legwork to try and sort it out, and the skiing will still be fantastic wherever you (and your 17 mates) end up staying.

A snowHead

Mr Marmot, everyone understands the problems with a group which is why most of us run away from organising them unless given dictatorial power. Obviously you won't get anywhere if every altenative offered has to be put to a public vote. Far better to say to your mob - this is the level of compromise I suggest if you can't take that then you're a refund and on your own. Cruel to be kind.

Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?

Perhaps the way forward is for Mr Marmot to just ditch all his mates and get MW to upgrade him to the BA/Chalethotel Val d'Isere option along with Piccadilly ...

You need to Login to know who's really who.

CathS,

they could share an Austrian twin

Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.

You'll need to Register first of course.

Due to the number of SmugHeads and DickHeads to be found on this forum hiding amongst the true SnowHeads, I can't be bothered to continue to report our progress in this matter anymore. Those interested in what happens in our sort of situation can instead find out themselves, when it possibly happens to them sometime in the future. I finish by saying that a group of 18 skiers (from a skiing club started in the 70's) no longer have a high regard for Mark Warners.

Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...

Charming.

After all it is free

Oh well, one less AngryHead rolling eyes

ok bye

*Ski* the Net with snowHeads

Mr Marmot, I don't think I was trolling...just offering a different perspective. At least you can still go skiing and haven't lost any money like some of the school trips I read about last year.

I must say that I'm impressed your ski club has been going since the 70s. You should set up a FB page or website with trip reports & photos of all your club trips. It would make for a good historical view of how things have evolved over the years.

snowHeads are a friendly bunch.

ALQ, we started our own club website some 10 years ago and included photographs and reports for virtually every annual ski trip since the very first at Wangs Pizol. It took some effort getting it all together and included input from founder members now living in Australia and New Zealand. Some of the early photographs of the ski gear and lifts were amazing! Unfortunately, due to a lack of reports and photographs over the past few years, the 'webmaster' gave up and took the website down. The current members argue they are too busy skiing and apres skiing to think about keeping a website up to date. There have been hundreds of club members over the years and one current member has been on every trip for over 30 years. One member who had been on the very first trip, joined us for his last trip a few years ago to celebrate his 80th birthday. This years group will include a 20 year old and a 67 year old.

snow reports

The reason so many UK TO's (and Crystal and MW are not the only ones to pursue this practise - they have just been caught out) is because the UK market insists on going on sale very early, often before accommodation negotiations with hoteliers have even started, let alone concluded. Even multi year contracts often have a 'get out' clause if the hotelier changes his mind. So there is risk involved - another TO might gazump the incumbent, the hotelier might have found a buyer or some long awaited planning permission might have arrived. The business of developing in France does not, unfortunately, restrict itself to dates that coincide nicely with the launch of UK TO's programmes. So they take a flyer on it. It is extremely rare for a hotel to be on the property market and for the TO to be unaware of this fact. Often the hotelier will approach the incumbent TO first as a potential buyer.

In practise it is very rare to lose an accommodation and hoteliers are usually quite upfront with TO's (if the relationship has been nurtured) when their property is on the market or changes are imminent and will suggest to the TO that it is excluded from early bird brochures etc or held off sale until the contract is signed and a TO will risk assess. The biggest risk to the TO is that the price might be hiked way over expectations. They have to swallow this when it happens meaning the early booking customer effectively is getting a bargain. Often happens when properties get refurbed. It can happen after contracts are signed too but this is more likely to be construction which hits problems and is often identified as a problem much closer to the season start.

So it's a calculated risk taken by the TO and their T&C's give them some leeway legally. The good ones rise to the top in the manner that they deal with it, and that includes not putting themselves into administration over the consequences, which also benefits no-one. The majority of customers are usually offered a decent alternative and sweetener over and above the legal minimum requirement. My advice would be to negotiate calmly and without emotion but very clearly set out what your 'must have' criteria are and be open minded about resort choice - it might be a great chance to try somewhere new and go back to this one the following season.

I hope all those impacted by this pretty significant loss are eventually happy with the alternatives they ultimately agree on. Everybody knows how disappointing this can be but with the possible exception of NY the UK and European calender dates are kind enough this year that demand is pretty evenly spread so there are more options than might usually be available.

Wishing you all a great holiday wherever you stay.

Help!!

Mark Warner's Cygnaski Hotel is being sold!

snowHeads Forum Index >>> The Piste