Still more of the same . . .

For those who may have missed it, the General Manager’s latest excuse for providing less financial information at the monthly open board meetings is his proud declaration, “we just don’t want to bore you too much”. (1) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TWBKZ51RTjw at 16:10  Seriously, our well compensated GM just said that.

Perhaps he has never actually participated in a board meeting prior to his tenure with Big Canoe? Had he done so, he would have surely realized that detailed financial discussions of an organization are ordinarily centerpieces of any board meeting.

Well this is different. This is Big Canoe.

Instead, as emphasized by the GM, detailed information can be found by delving through the financial reports and information posted to the POA website. Well then. Here goes.

More deception by omission (2) . . .

One of the key slides now omitted from the GM’s financial presentation is the amenity performance slide which effectively hides any specific dollar reference to the actual performance of the individual amenities. With the omission of this detail, the GM is able to utilize only his August Financial Summary  (3) and YTD through August Financial Summary  (4) slides as vague references to his ramblings which generally focus on variances to budget only.

For example, the GM attributed much of the amenity variance to budget to the clubhouse/food and beverage (“F&B”) function while noting that F&B staff had been fully compensated (to include the loss of tip income) during the transition from the Bistro to the newly renovated clubhouse.

Big Canoe is a very generous employer.

However, without the amenity performance slide, it is doubtful that any property owner could begin to fathom that the actual F&B loss for the month of August totaled a staggering $124,830 with year to date losses now totaling $556k. (5a) That information can only be determined by reviewing the August financial package posted to the POA website following the board meeting.

But keep in mind, the GM did not want to bore the property owners too much.

Obviously, $148k in payroll expenses against revenue of only $111k contributed significantly to the massive loss for the month. Further, the cost of goods sold (COGS) also contributed significantly despite the POA Treasurer’s previous assurances to this writer (6) that this metric would improve as the new Chef had improved ordering procedures and renegotiated contracts with the food suppliers. Unfortunately, it has not. If anything, it has worsened.

However, from all accounts, the newly renovated clubhouse is impressive with accolades coming in for the food quality and service. Kudos to the F&B team for that.

Meanwhile, the GM assures us that we will be pleased with the F&B results next month. This writer for one is looking forward to that revelation.

Redefining the narrative . . .

But for now, to be fair, it is important to acknowledge that there are those who disagree with this writer’s concern regarding the continued exorbitant F&B losses. These individuals include two board candidates that have advanced to the general election who prefer to define the huge losses as a “subsidy” rather than address the problem. (8)

In fact, one candidate’s own blog site includes two posts on the subject of F&B losses at (7) and (8) https://poa.rogerhackler.com/the-clubhouse-debate-clearing-the-air/ wherein he states:

Calling this a “loss” is misleading. It’s a subsidy, and it’s a conscious choice communities like ours make.”

However, the candidate’s analysis contains a fatal flaw.

Breaking down the F&B enigma . . .

Specifically, it is critical for all property owners to recognize that the F&B losses posted by management are not all-inclusive as other costs and expenses have been excluded from the computation and from the candidate’s discussions. These exclusions have been discussed on many occasions on this site. (9) https://bcmatters.org/renew-big-canoe-the-financials/

However, with over 800 property owners new to Big Canoe in the last three years, (10) perhaps it would be appropriate to refresh that discussion.

• • Contrary to virtually every other restaurant in the universe, the posted clubhouse losses do not include any line item for rent or other allocation of the cost for the facility, furnishings and equipment. Instead, these costs have been contributed by each and every property owner via assessment dollars and/or debt regardless of the owner’s patronage to the facility.

For example, depreciation expense and even the associated interest expense on the clubhouse portion of the debt (@ $260k for the first year) is reflected administratively on the income statements rather than included in the F&B amenity totals.

Note:  Previous requests by this writer for copies of the depreciation schedules were denied, therefore it is impossible to determine the precise dollar amount of depreciation expense attributed to the clubhouse/F&B function. However, depreciation allocated to all amenities during 2024 totaled a significant $1.7 million. (11)

• • Clubhouse losses also do not include housekeeping expenses presently estimated at $132k per year. (12) This expense is likewise shared by each and every property owner regardless of their patronage to the facility.

  • Loss totals do not include a proportionate share of the salary of the clubhouse manager as this is accounted for under amenity management. (Note: This expense was acknowledged in the candidate’s discussion.)

  • And finally, clubhouse losses do not include insurance and property taxes as these expenses are accounted for administratively and shared by all property owners.

The importance of this exercise is to recognize that actual F&B losses far exceed those allocated to the function by management. Further, and most importantly, all of these additional costs and expenses are generously shared by each and every property owner.

Considering all of the above, one must immediately wonder how is it even possible for the F&B function to sustain such staggering losses given all the additional expenses that have been excluded from the loss computation.  Are we giving food away?  Obviously, something is amiss.

Therein lies the call by many for a forensic audit.

It only makes sense.

Keep in mind that identifying the problem is half the solution.

As for that alternate narrative . . .

With all due respect to those who disagree, property owners already “subsidize” the clubhouse/F&B function generously through capital improvements, interest expense, housekeeping, taxes and insurance. They should not be expected to “subsidize” it further operationally as suggested in the candidate’s posts.

Call it what it is. It is a loss. Not a subsidy.

Note: Apparently this is a shared perspective as it was noted in the candidate’s analysis (8) that a “friend and fellow POA candidate . . . “ had written a paper supporting the subsidization of food and beverage losses. The two board candidates referenced both currently sit on the Finance/Audit Committee and if elected will join two other finance committee alumni who likely share the same point of view.

It is unknown where the two remaining candidates stand on this issue.

Additional note: This post is not intended to be a for or against one particular candidate. It is merely a discussion of facts on all sides of a specific issue. Kudos to any property owner with the courage and commitment to run for a board position.

Comparative balance sheet remains AWOL . . .

And then there’s that balance sheet which provides a snapshot view of the assets and liabilities of the Association which has been missing from the General Manager’s financial presentation since October 2023. Truly, how is that acceptable?

Instead, the property owner must again look to the financials posted to the POA website after the monthly board meetings in order to determine that debt and leases now total $15.8 million (5b) as compared to only $5.4 million (13) one year ago. That is quite a hefty increase.

While it is unlikely that the community would have the newly renovated Clubhouse and Choctaw course without the additional debt, it is important for the property owners to have accurate and current information at all times especially when making any future decisions about the community’s path forward.

Meanwhile, yet another trademark update . . .

As noted in a previous post on this site (14), the Association now has seventeen trademark applications in the pipeline. Since that last post, ten applications have been assigned to an examiner with six presumably advancing thus far without issue. Perhaps any issues with the remaining four will be resolved albeit with additional legal expense.

Note: A search site of pending applications can be found at https://tmsearch.uspto.gov/search/search-information by entering the search term “Big Canoe”.

However, it is particularly noteworthy to mention that the trademark registration for “Big Canoe Brokerage, LLC” and “Big Canoe Brokerage” will now require a disclaimer of the word or terminology “Brokerage” and/or “LLC” (15) in order to be registered leaving only the term “Big Canoe” standing and enforceable.

Note: These two applications were discussed and questioned extensively by this writer in a previous post. (16)

Again one must ask, why are property owner assessment dollars being used to fund application and attorney fees to trademark the name of a corporation licensed and owned by someone else (Mike Rhodes)?

Perhaps the answer to that question can be found in the secretive trademark purchase agreement between the Association and Rhodes.

Regardless, as the “Big Canoe” wording was already trademark protected for “real estate brokerage” uses, it appears that the required disclaimer renders the entire process as yet another waste of property owner assessment dollars.

Nothing but crickets . . .

And finally, for the record, it should be noted that no single candidate has stepped forward in support of open meetings as challenged in the previous post on this site. (14) Given their pledges of transparency, this is most disappointing.

Still waiting.

A message now in closing . . .

• • For those who are satisfied with less financial information, be silent.

  • For those who are satisfied with the significant clubhouse/F&B losses year over year, stay silent.

  • And for those who are satisfied with the continuance of closed door meetings, remain silent.

    But for those who are not, do stand up and let leadership hear you loud.

. . . . .

Lest there be any confusion, this is and always has been an independent blog site created exclusively by this property owner to serve as a platform for the distribution of information and facts perceived as vital to the Big Canoe community. From there, the reader, armed with current, accurate and referenced detail, has been at liberty to form his or her own opinion regarding the management of this beautiful place so many of us call home.

And as always, feel free to contact me directly at thepcrosses@gmail.com for questions or further discussion. Meanwhile, take care, stay safe and thank you for your readership.

Patricia Cross

10438 Big Canoe

References:

1) Big Canoe POA board Meeting, September 25^th, 2025, video on you tube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TWBKZ51RTjw at 16:10

2) “Lines in the sand”, August 19^th, 2025, bcmatters.org, https://bcmatters.org/lines-in-the-sand/

3) August Financial Summary slide

4) YTD through August Financial Summary slide

5) August 2025 Financial Package, a) Summary of Income from Operations, pg. 9; b) Comparative Balance Sheet, pg. 2 (POAwebsite>login>POA>financials>2025>August)

6) AskThePOA Response#17967

7) https://poa.rogerhackler.com/the-clubhouse-more-than-food-beverage/

8) https://poa.rogerhackler.com/the-clubhouse-debate-clearing-the-air/

9) “Renew Big Canoe: The financials”, July 22^nd, 2023, bcmatters.org, https://bcmatters.org/renew-big-canoe-the-financials/

10) December 2024 Big Canoe POA Administrative Report, pg. 4 (POAwebsite>login>POA>meetings>AdminReports>2024>December)

11) 2024 Audited Financial Statement, dated June 27^th, 2025, by Mauldin and Jenkins, Note 10, Allocation of Functional Expenses, Pg. 24 (POAwebsite>login>POA>financials>AuditedFinancials>2024

12) AskThePOA Request#18354

13) August 2024 Financial Package, Comparative Balance Sheet, pg. 2 (POAwebsite>login>POA>financials>2024>August)

14) “Fairy tales: An Update”, September 23^rd, 2025, bcmatters.org, https://bcmatters.org/fairy-tales-an-update/

15) https://tsdr.uspto.gov/documentviewer?caseId=sn99189619&docId=NFIN20251008142601&linkId=1#docIndex=0&page=1

https://tsdr.uspto.gov/documentviewer?caseId=sn99196165&docId=EXAMA20251008170739&linkId=3#docIndex=2&page=1

16) “An albatross”, May 27^th, 2025, bcmatters.org, https://bcmatters.org/an-albatross/