Branded ResidencesRegister

Los Cabos review sheet

#ProjectStageBest source DeveloperConfidence ResidencesConfidence PriceConfidence Map positionSources
1 Conrad Residences at Oleada Planned Direct sources Parks Hospitality Holdings Stated by a party 43 Stated by a party — — A stand-in position 5
2 Rosewood Residences, Old Lighthouse Planned Direct sources Pueblo Bonito Group (Coppel family) Stated by a party 144 Stated by a party — — A stand-in position 3
3 The Residences at St. Regis Los Cabos Under construction Direct sources Pueblo Bonito Group (Coppel family) Stated by a party 74 Stated by a party USD 4.5M – 13.5M+ Stated by a party A stand-in position 6
4 Waldorf Astoria Los Cabos Pedregal — Residences Operating Direct sources Walton Street Capital Mexico Trade press — Inferred — — Its own mapped site 5
5 The Cape Residences Operating Direct sources Black Palm (BPBI) Trade press 32 Stated by a party USD from ~800,000 Trade press Its own mapped site 3
6 Park Hyatt Los Cabos Residences Under construction Direct sources SOMA Stated by a party 19 Stated by a party USD from 5,475,000 Stated by a party A stand-in position 6
7 Esperanza Private Residences Operating Direct sources SV Capital Stated by a party 28 Stated by a party — — Its own mapped site 9
8 Four Seasons Residences, Cabo del Sol Operating Direct sources Oakmont Corporation Stated by a party 61 Stated by a party USD 7M – 8M+ Stated by a party A stand-in position 5
9 Soho Residences Los Cabos Under construction Direct sources SOMA · FibraSOMA (BMV-listed REIT) Stated by a party 50 Stated by a party — — A stand-in position 5
10 Montage Residences Los Cabos Operating Direct sources Ohana Real Estate Investors · Thor Urbana Stated by a party 52 Stated by a party USD from 3.95M Stated by a party Its own mapped site 5
11 Chileno Bay Resort & Residences Operating Direct sources SV Capital Stated by a party — Inferred — — Its own mapped site 6
12 The Residences at Solaz Operating Direct sources Grupo Olarena Hospitality Trade press 21 Stated by a party — — A stand-in position 6
13 Las Ventanas al Paraíso — Residences Operating Direct sources Not recorded — ~30 Inferred USD to ~10M Trade press Its own mapped site 3
14 Viceroy Los Cabos — Residences Operating Direct sources Rodina Group Trade press 50 Trade press — — Its own mapped site 3
15 Nobu Residences Los Cabos Operating Direct sources RCD Hotels Trade press 60 Stated by a party — — Its own mapped site 6
16 The Reserve Residences at Zadún Operating Direct sources Grupo Questro Trade press 27+ Stated by a party — — Its own mapped site 4
17 Four Seasons Private Residences Operating Direct sources Costa Palmas · Irongate Trade press — Inferred USD 700,000 – 8,000,000+ Stated by a party Its own mapped site 4
18 Amanvari — Aman Residences Under construction Direct sources Costa Palmas · Irongate Trade press ~42+ Trade press — — A stand-in position 5
19 Delano East Cape — Residences Planned Direct sources Not recorded — 60 Trade press — — A stand-in position 2
20 Raffles East Cape — Residences Planned Direct sources ONE Development Group Trade press 46 Trade press — — A stand-in position 2
21 TROBBU Los Cabos Under construction Direct sources TRATER Stated by a party 32 Stated by a party MXN from 1,037,000 per fraction Stated by a party A stand-in position 3

Fields still being confirmed

Review

Open questions on this market

Where two sources disagree, or where one name might be two different parties, both readings are recorded rather than one being picked quietly. 10 open questions, 5 settled. Two spellings are kept as two records until a source shows they are one: merging them wrongly is far harder to notice afterwards than leaving a duplicate in place.

  1. Name clashOpen

    The SOMA / FibraSOMA / Sordo Madaleno group is written six ways across this market. How many entities is it?

    Projects
    Also bears on
    Distinct roles, deliberately distinct strings
    Each string records a different capacity: FibraSOMA is the BMV-listed REIT that owns, SOMA develops, Sordo Madaleno is the architecture practice, and Sordo Madaleno Design does interiors. Collapsing them would credit the REIT with designing buildings.
    One group, six labels
    All six resolve to the same corporate family. Sordo Madaleno also appears as architect in the Riviera Maya, so the split spans markets and splits the national view.
  2. Name clashOpen

    Is Irongate a co-developer at Costa Palmas, and should it hold a credit of its own?

    Projects
    Also bears on
    Recorded as reported
    The Costa Palmas projects credit two developers, Costa Palmas and Irongate, and name Costa Palmas alone as owner. "Costa Palmas · Irongate" is how two credits are written out together, not the name of one company.
    Irongate holds no credit of its own
    Irongate holds a developer credit of its own on the Costa Palmas projects and appears in the registers and on its own record page. What no opened source settles is whether the co-developer role is correct: it rests on trade press, and the developer’s own pages name Costa Palmas alone.
  3. Name clashOpen

    Whether `SOMA · FibraSOMA · Sordo Madaleno` should exist as a single registry record when its three members each hold their own.

    Projects
    Also bears on
    A false positive, not a clash
    A partnership credits each company separately, and the middle dot is only how they are written out together. One combined record survives on its own, which no project now credits — its three members are each credited individually.
    But a composite does not join its members
    A composite string is one entity record, so a project crediting it does not credit the partners named inside it. Each partner reaches the register only where a project credits it separately, and a partner named nowhere else is invisible to every register.
  4. ScopeOpen

    Whether Nobu Residences Los Cabos was ever sold as deeded whole ownership alongside its right-to-use club weeks.

    Projects
    Right-to-use club weeks
    The resale market offers 'Annual floating week' interests running to 2053 with RCD membership tiers, which conveys use rather than title to a unit.
    sellmytimesharenow.com ↗
    No deeded sale recorded
    Nobu's own residence collection describes 60 homes and residents welcomed in 2023, but states no purchase or ownership terms, and no whole-ownership sale of a unit is recorded here.
    nobuhotels.com ↗
  5. Name clashOpen

    Are TRATER and TROBBU Developments the same company?

    Projects
    Also bears on
    One company, two names
    The destination pages at trater.mx carry TRATER as the company behind the TROBBU brand; the brand's own investment site names the developer as TROBBU Developments for the same 32 villas.
    trobbuinvestments.com ↗
    Not established
    No page opened names both strings together or states the relationship between them.
  6. ScopeOpen

    Whether Misiones del Cabo, Solaz and Las Ventanas name master-planned developments, or the resorts the residences stand in.

    Projects
    Recorded as a master plan
    This register records each as the development its project sits in.
    No opened source names it as one
    No project's own sources uses its value to describe a planned community; both name a resort that holds the residences. This register cannot tell a master-planned landholding from a single resort's own name without a page that says which, and it has not opened one.
  7. Name clashOpen

    Is TRATER the corporate parent of TROBBU, or the developer that owns and sells it?

    Projects
    Also bears on
    Recorded as a company in its own right
    This register records TROBBU as the company behind the TROBBU brand and ties it to TRATER as an affiliate. TRATER is also the developer of the project, so the same corporate family stands behind the brand and builds the scheme.
    TROBBU may be the product rather than a company
    TROBBU is also the brand on the project. No opened source names a company called TROBBU distinct from TRATER, so the company recorded behind the brand may be the brand name a second time rather than a separate company.
  8. Source conflictOpen

    How many residences does The Residences at Solaz hold — the approximately seven the record carries, or the approximately 21 its own unit note attributes to trade detail?

    Projects
    Also bears on
    Approximately seven
    The record carries a count of seven, displayed as "~7 across three towers (floor-plate + garden + penthouses)", at inferred confidence. It is the figure every aggregate here adds.
    Approximately 21
    The same field’s own provenance note states "~21 residences across three towers per trade detail; carried approximate." Seven per tower across three towers gives 21, so the two may be one figure counted two ways.
    Neither cited page states a count today
    The brokerage source opens and describes the residences as a Luxury Collection resort operated by Marriott International, with no residence count and no architect named. The second source, the Snell Real Estate Solaz page, redirects to a general subdivisions index that does not mention Solaz.
    caborealestateservices.com ↗
  9. Thin recordOpen

    No developer page has been opened for the Viceroy, Delano or Raffles records, and no developing company is recorded on any of them.

    Projects
    Also bears on
    Viceroy Los Cabos names no developer
    A branded-residence guide’s Baja page gives the project name, its sub-market and an active status; the brand’s own 2018 release gives the opening, the residence count and Rodina Group’s December 2017 purchase. Neither names a developing company, and no developer page has been opened.
    guide.lprluxury.com ↗
    Delano and Raffles are known from the brand side only
    Both records cite a Mexico News Daily survey of Los Cabos openings 2025-2030 for their figures — "the Delano East Cape will have 117 guestrooms and 60 residences", Raffles "will offer 80 guestrooms and 46 residences" — corroborated by Ennismore’s and Accor’s own signing releases. No developer page has been opened for either, and neither release names a developing company.
    mexiconewsdaily.com ↗
  10. Source conflictOpen

    Esperanza's Las Casonas villas are described on the resort's whole-ownership page and again on a fractional programme page, and no opened page states which of them sell which way.

    Projects
    Las Casonas sells whole
    The sales site's whole-ownership page names Las Casonas beside Las Villas and Las Residencias, states that it offers whole ownership, and describes the collection as three and four bedroom villas. It states no count for them and names no fractional programme.
    esperanzarealestate.com ↗
    Three Las Casonas villas sell in shares
    The Las Casonas Ownership Program page on the same site offers three four-bedroom villas in twelfths and twenty-fourths. It describes the same collection, at the same resort, under the same name.
    esperanzarealestate.com ↗
    Split by size: three-bedroom whole, four-bedroom in the programme
    The two pages agree on four-bedroom villas at Las Casonas, and only the whole-ownership page names three-bedroom ones, so the collection could divide by size. No opened page states that division, and it is recorded nowhere in this register: the whole product counts Las Villas alone and the fractional product carries no count.
  11. Name clashResolved

    Are Pueblo Bonito Group and Quinta del Golfo de Cortez the same Coppel ownership?

    Projects
    Also bears on
    Two distinct lines
    Pueblo Bonito Group is the Coppel family hotel group behind the Rosewood and St. Regis residences at Quivira. Quinta del Golfo de Cortez, the owner at Solaz, is a separate Coppel-linked line. They are held apart deliberately.
    Surname similarity is not evidence
    No source joins them. This pair is the reason this register never auto-merges on a shared surname; it is recorded here as the standing precedent rather than as an unanswered question.

    Resolved: Kept separate. Two distinct Coppel lines with no source joining them. This is the cautionary case the no-auto-merge rule was written for.

  12. Name clashResolved

    Should Pueblo Bonito Group carry the (Coppel family) qualifier in every field, or only where it owns?

    Projects
    Also bears on
    Qualified where it owns
    Both projects record the owner as Pueblo Bonito Group (Coppel family) and the developer as Pueblo Bonito Group. The qualifier names the controlling family, which is the point of recording ownership.
    One string everywhere
    Written two ways, one company reads as two in a national list of owners.

    Resolved: Settled: Pueblo Bonito Group (Coppel family) is one company record under one full name carrying the qualifier, and 'Pueblo Bonito Group' is recorded as another way of writing it. Each market references the one company record, so the qualifier renders identically in every field. The separate Coppel line at Quinta del Golfo de Cortez remains a distinct entity.

  13. Name clashResolved

    RLH Properties is recorded with its ticker qualifier as owner and without it as developer on the same project.

    Projects
    Also bears on
    Same company, two strings
    Four Seasons Cabo del Sol records the owner as RLH Properties (BMV: RLH) and the developer as RLH Properties. There is no doubt these are one company; the qualifier names its Mexican Stock Exchange listing.
    The register is already correct
    Both markets now name one company record, whose full name carries the ticker, so the national list shows one RLH entry wherever a project credits it.

    Resolved: Settled: RLH Properties (BMV: RLH) is one company record under one full name, and 'RLH Properties' is recorded as another way of writing it. Every market names that one record, so the ticker can no longer appear in one place and not another.

  14. Name clashResolved

    Discovery Land Company is recorded with and without its founder qualifier on the same project.

    Projects
    Also bears on
    Same company, two strings
    Chileno Bay records the owner as Discovery Land Company and the developer as Discovery Land Company (Mike Meldman). No source distinguishes them; this is one company written two ways within a single record.
    Low risk, still a split
    Unlike the Coppel pair there is no chance these are different entities, so this is a formatting decision rather than a factual one — but it still produces two rows wherever owner strings are counted.

    Resolved: Both credits on Chileno Bay name one company record, and the founder’s name moved to the credit’s own note — a fact about this project’s relationship to the firm, not part of the company’s canonical name.

  15. Name clashResolved

    Should a project carrying a Montage brand record Montage International or Montage Hotels & Resorts as the company behind the brand?

    Projects
    Also bears on
    Only Montage International is named as a company
    Montage International's groundbreaking release describes "Montage International, the hospitality management company founded by Alan J. Fuerstman", which "features the ultra-luxury brand Montage Hotels & Resorts, the contemporary luxury hospitality brand Pendry Hotels & Resorts, Montage Residences, Pendry Residences". The two named brands are described as brands, not as companies.
    prweb.com ↗
    Montage Hotels & Resorts is a collection, and dates from before the parent
    The same release describes it as "Founded in 2002, Montage Hotels & Resorts is an artistic collection of distinctive hotels, resorts, and residences", alongside "Pendry Hotels & Resorts, founded in 2014". Both predate the parent structure that now holds them.
    prweb.com ↗
    The brand axis already carries the distinction
    Montage Residences Los Cabos records brand "Montage" and Pendry Residences Punta Mita records brand "Pendry". Recording the brand a second time as the company behind it would collapse the gap between the brand and the company that runs it rather than fill it.

    Resolved: The company that runs a brand is recorded against the brand, and the company above it separately — Marriott International against Marriott, Rosewood Hotel Group against Rosewood, Aman Group against Aman. Los Cabos previously recorded Montage Hotels & Resorts, a brand string, and now records Montage International, matching Montage Punta Mita and Pendry Punta Mita. The Montage and Pendry brands stay distinguishable in the brand field.