Reservations for a Premier Plus - Trust Point owner

All,

TUGgers will recall that a good friend of mine purchased 15K of Trust Points when he was at Maui last year. He kept the purchase even after talking with me at length about recission/points rentals/etc.

What is interesting is that he called last week to make his reservation for Maui Ocean Club for June 2014.

Naturally, he got his 2BR OF reservation because it is early and Trust is pretty deep for MOC-Lahaina/Napili, but the VOA asked him if he had a specific room that he would like to request, and that she expected that he would get it.

I thought this was interesting -- and, if this becomes a pattern (and he gets his room), that it suggests Marriott is trying to find new ways to make their pure Trust Point owners (who are PP) happy. It certainly makes sense to me, but it would remove one more High Floor or Ground Floor floating unit from the potential rooms assignable to traditional week owners.

Best,

Greg

Very interesting. However, have you tried calling yourself an asking rather than booking online? I only call them now o transfer points.

Not sure we should read so deeply into an isolated statement from a single agent. When recently asking one of my DC reservations ( and I made dozens of calls recently) I was asked if I had any specific requests. Maybe the reservation agent just went a little further and expressed it differently. And stating that she expected him to get it might have been one cs rep's way of being nice to her customer, and might not really mean anything.

Hmmmm. I'm also interested to see how this develops. But, no surprise, if it develops the way it's stated here I will not be a happy camper. It simply is not a fair system if certain owners are always given a priority placement over all others for the cream of the crop units. It's the "always" that makes it unfair, and IMO the few resorts that get it right use a rotational system in addition to published Priority Placement lists. IMO this new thing not only "doesn't get it right," it completely "gets it wrong."

Plus, Marriott hasn't ever implemented a quasi-guarantee of any floating unit placements prior to check-in. (Except maybe for Marriott family members or big-wigs, but even then we're not TOLD that such a policy exists.) What makes DC Trust Members - regardless of status - any more deserving in this respect than any Weeks Owners have ever been?! Nothing, that's what. I don't like it, and I'll complain about it forever if it comes to fruition.

Perhaps the agent was booking your friend in to a fixed unit and they had several to pick from? Perhaps they keep people in the actual unit owned by the trust or deposited in to the DC Exchange Company. That would possibly explain why they were given an option. Not any special treatment, but rather booking a fixed unit in the trust?

SueDonJ said:

Hmmmm. I'm also interested to see how this develops. But, no surprise, if it develops the way it's stated here I will not be a happy camper. It simply is not a fair system if certain owners are always given a priority placement over all others for the cream of the crop units. It's the "always" that makes it unfair, and IMO the few resorts that get it right use a rotational system in addition to published Priority Placement lists. IMO this new thing not only "doesn't get it right," it completely "gets it wrong."

Plus, Marriott hasn't ever implemented a quasi-guarantee of any floating unit placements prior to check-in. (Except maybe for Marriott family members or big-wigs, but even then we're not TOLD that such a policy exists.) What makes DC Trust Members - regardless of status - any more deserving in this respect than any Weeks Owners have ever been?! Nothing, that's what. I don't like it, and I'll complain about it forever if it comes to fruition.

Click to expand...

I realize you don't believe in preferences, but 'Priority Placement' should be an additional benefit added to the Premiere PLUS level.

It's no different than AAdvantage GOLD status members getting a FREE UPgrade to a Main Cabin Extra seat.

Or the COMPLIMENTARY room upgrade Marriott Rewards gives to GOLD status members.

rpgriego said:

I realize you don't believe in preferences, but 'Priority Placement' should be an additional benefit added to the Premiere PLUS level. ...

Click to expand...

I don't know where you get the idea that I, "don't believe in preferences." It's good, IMO, that Marriott has an established Priority Placement system, even better at the too-few resorts where they implement it with the rotational system that prevents the same owners from consistently getting the "best" units. I've been told that supposedly DC Trust Members are being integrated, according to status levels, into that published system and IMO that's also a good thing. It's a FAIR thing.

But that's not what Greg is talking about in this thread, I don't think. He said that his friend was told that if he requested a specific unit when making a reservation, then as a pure DC Trust Member with Premier Plus status his request would be practically guaranteed.

I don't know how anyone except pure DC Trust Members with Premier Plus status could be in favor of that. According to my Weeks docs and what's published by Marriott and my resorts' GM's and BOD's, each owner/member is as eligible for a specific unit as any other owner/member. The system Greg related here would effectively remove the "best" units at the resorts from the reach of Weeks Owners and non-PP Trust Members, especially as time goes on and more DC Trust Members come into the system. I don't like that.

rpgriego said:

It's no different than AAdvantage GOLD status members getting a FREE UPgrade to a Main Cabin Extra seat.

Or the COMPLIMENTARY room upgrade Marriott Rewards gives to GOLD status members.

Click to expand...

It's completely different. The examples you gave are perks/benefits of membership in loyalty programs, in which the providers are able to add/subtract components practically unfettered. What Greg posted is contrary to the published t&c's for a program that requires a purchased ownership/membership, which effectively lessens the stipulated t&c's for certain owners.

dioxide45 said:

Perhaps the agent was booking your friend in to a fixed unit and they had several to pick from? Perhaps they keep people in the actual unit owned by the trust or deposited in to the DC Exchange Company. That would possibly explain why they were given an option. Not any special treatment, but rather booking a fixed unit in the trust?

Click to expand...

That might be more palatable if all pure DC Trust Members, and not just Premier Plus, are also able to request certain fixed-unit intervals in advance when they're making their reservations. I still don't like it because it goes against their usual policy of not guaranteeing any certain unit placements prior to check-in, but at least it doesn't go against any t&c's if they can prove that they're correlating those requests to certain conveyed fixed Week/Units.

SueDonJ said:

I don't know where you get the idea that I, "don't believe in preferences." It's good, IMO, that Marriott has an established Priority Placement system, even better at the too-few resorts where they implement it with the rotational system that prevents the same owners from consistently getting the "best" units. I've been told that supposedly DC Trust Members are being integrated, according to status levels, into that published system and IMO that's also a good thing. It's a FAIR thing.

But that's not what Greg is talking about in this thread, I don't think. He said that his friend was told that if he requested a specific unit when making a reservation, then as a pure DC Trust Member with Premier Plus status his request would be practically guaranteed.

I don't know how anyone except pure DC Trust Members with Premier Plus status could be in favor of that. According to my Weeks docs and what's published by Marriott and my resorts' GM's and BOD's, each owner/member is as eligible for a specific unit as any other owner/member. The system Greg related here would effectively remove the "best" units at the resorts from the reach of Weeks Owners and non-PP Trust Members, especially as time goes on and more DC Trust Members come into the system. I don't like that.

Click to expand...

I definitely respect your position, but I like the idea of reserving the "best" units at each resort for Premiere PLUS or introducing a new tier, Premiere ULTRA. It's no different than AAdvantage holding the best First Class seats for its Platinum members. Or Marriott holding its best corner or view rooms for Platinum members. It builds loyalty to each company.

Not to mention, MVW shareholders would see enhancing Premiere PLUS or introducing Premiere ULTRA as a strong sales tool.

Just imagine, the CONSIDERATION, existing owners would give to upgrading knowing they can secure the best. Now of course, supply would be limited just like airline seats and hotel rooms.

You have to admit a lot of existing owners have bought small packages of points to achieve Platinum to Platinum PLUS status.

SueDonJ said:

It's completely different. The examples you gave are perks/benefits of membership in loyalty programs, in which the providers are able to add/subtract components practically unfettered. What Greg posted is contrary to the published t&c's for a program that requires a purchased ownership/membership, which effectively lessens the stipulated t&c's for certain owners.

Click to expand...

Are " t&c's " the same as a HOA's R&Rs (Rules & Regulations)?

rpgriego said:

I definitely respect your position, but I like the idea of reserving the "best" units at each resort for Premiere PLUS or introducing a new tier, Premiere ULTRA. It's no different than AAdvantage holding the best First Class seats for its Platinum members. Or Marriott holding its best corner or view rooms for Platinum members. It builds loyalty to each company.

Not to mention, MVW shareholders would see enhancing Premiere PLUS or introducing Premiere ULTRA as a strong sales tool.

Just imagine, the CONSIDERATION, existing owners would give to upgrading knowing they can secure the best. Now of course, supply would be limited just like airline seats and hotel rooms.

You have to admit a lot of existing owners have bought small packages of points to achieve Platinum to Platinum PLUS status.

Click to expand...

We'll have to agree to disagree. Even as someone who would be eligible for what you're proposing (if you're including status from enrolled Weeks and not just pure DC Trust Points) and as a shareholder, I'm completely against the unfairness of it. IMO if published it's as likely to alienate existing owners/members and shareholders as it's likely to appeal to a minority number of eligible owners/members.

rpgriego said:

Are " t&c's " the same as a HOA's R&Rs (Rules & Regulations)?

Click to expand...

Yep, "terms and conditions" specifically. The governing docs contain quite a bit of language related to the floating timeshare concept of all like owners being eligible for all like units.

SueDonJ said:

But that's not what Greg is talking about in this thread, I don't think. He said that his friend was told that if he requested a specific unit when making a reservation, then as a pure DC Trust Member with Premier Plus status his request would be practically guaranteed.

I don't know how anyone except pure DC Trust Members with Premier Plus status could be in favor of that. According to my Weeks docs and what's published by Marriott and my resorts' GM's and BOD's, each owner/member is as eligible for a specific unit as any other owner/member. The system Greg related here would effectively remove the "best" units at the resorts from the reach of Weeks Owners and non-PP Trust Members, especially as time goes on and more DC Trust Members come into the system.

Click to expand...

Sue,

I've bolded the key points above -- very well said, this is what I was trying to communicate.

As others have already pointed out, this is an isolated instance, therefore we don't know if this is a true policy, or some rogue VOA and/or confused Trust Point owner.

Interesting stuff...

Best,

Greg

Greg - well said! Wile I agree with Sue, I don't think the isolated report is cause for concern.. More than likely it was a single agent either being over solicitous or perhaps being a little too vague in her wording, and an owner perhaps hearing what he'd like to hear. Even a " we'll try our best to accommodate you" can be misinterpreted to mean " most likely..." by some. Lets see if we get further reports about this before sounding the alarms, but it is something as owners we should all be very wary of.

This is not a rewards program, which is an earned perk for business; inherent in that is that the expectation that not all members will be treated equally, since it is a reward program for business. Ownership of entities bought under certain T&C's is an entirely different matter, and investors have the right to expect the terms of their ownership contracts to be adhered to in perpetuity, not just as suits the business plan of the timeshare company to foster additional business.

That would, IMHO, be no different than Marriott turning around and saying that all DC point reservations will have best unit placement, or selection of the premium weeks in the season. Even PP members ought to be alarmed IF there was actually such a policy, because once the door is nudged open a little, it is apt to open wider, and clearly once the playing field is change, there is no security for anyone down the road.

When Marriott introduced the 13 months in advance reservation perk to two or more week owners, I feel that one week owners are the step children because there are less chances to get a good vacation week for that group.

It is no longer a fair game because the more weeks you own the better chance you will have to get the most popular dates. There seem to be an average of more than one week per owner so the odds are against the one week owner.

Perks are great but not when some owners are left behind. If this will happen again with the best views too then that would be just as unfair.

The difference between a loyalty program such as ff miles or hotel rewards and timeshare ownership is you are a member of one but an owner of the other.

Membership in a rewards program is voluntary. Status must be earned each year

A timeshare is a cash purchase without regards to annual status adjustment based on usage. You OWN the right to use the timeshare.

Status has been a component of timeshare ownership for some time now. Mult week owners have had preference with unit location in almost every system plus a few additional perks. Typically those perks haven't been considered worth the additional cost of buying at developer prices.

Selecting a specific room is a new twist on preferential treatment and adds a new level of difficulty foe resorts making room assignments. What happens if a specific room is promised one year in advance but, the reality is, with partial,weeks and maybe a premier plus owner that trumps the previous owner in status wants the same room foe at least ONE of those days? Which premier plus owner do you tick off?

Selecting and being promised a specific room far in advance probably isn't practical. I believe, in this case at least, the advisor spoke put of turn. There is little chance they an reserve a specific room unless there is a very limited number of those rooms AND the system allows that room to be blocked for those specific dates in a system set up with floating ownership.

Now, if Marriott wants to change the system to something akin to cruise ships, where guests reserve a specific stateroom or, airlines where guests reserve specific seats based on status, then I could see it. As it is there are rules set in place that would either need to be voted on and changed or it's not likely to happen.
I really think this is a case of poor training and a rep. that has misspoken. Hopefully they get it corrected before to many owners are told the same thing, then chew out the front desk personnel when they aren't given what a phone rep promised.

SueDonJ said:

According to my Weeks docs and what's published by Marriott and my resorts' GM's and BOD's, each owner/member is as eligible for a specific unit as any other owner/member. The system Greg related here would effectively remove the "best" units at the resorts from the reach of Weeks Owners and non-PP Trust Members, especially as time goes on and more DC Trust Members come into the system. I don't like that.

Click to expand...

Technically they could get away with it and still be in compliance as you are eligible, but if they put someone in front of the line and it is taken, not much you can do about it. It is not any different from wanting a certain week and it is unavailable when you call in to book it - you were eligible but it got filled before you got on the line.

It's a bit of a grey area to say the least. But certainly the jumping to the front of the line could certainly tick a few people off.

dougp26364 said:

.

Selecting a specific room is a new twist on preferential treatment and adds a new level of difficulty foe resorts making room assignments. What happens if a specific room is promised one year in advance but, the reality is, with partial,weeks and maybe a premier plus owner that trumps the previous owner in status wants the same room foe at least ONE of those days? Which premier plus owner do you tick off?

Selecting and being promised a specific room far in advance probably isn't practical. I believe, in this case at least, the advisor spoke put of turn. There is little chance they an reserve a specific room unless there is a very limited number of those rooms AND the system allows that room to be blocked for those specific dates in a system set up with floating ownership.

.

Click to expand...

I agree. With the increase in shorter stays, I don't see how a resort can individual rooms for a specific check-in date. I think the greatest challenge of the new program is inventory management. Previously, a majority of villas were available for a Saturday check-in for a 7 night stay. During my recent stay at Oceana Palms, only 3 rooms became vacant on Saturday for check-in.

I think the rep was just trying to show a high level of service but probably can't really deliver. I have premier status (no plus) and when I reserved a unit at GC last year, she asked me the same thing. I told her I had never been there but to put us on a high floor away from the construction noise. When we checked in a year later, we received a low floor and the construction was outside one of the bedroom windows.

All,

I can close out my own thread here.

My friend (the 15K Trust Point purchaser) requested highest floor possible, Lahaina Tower.

He was given 2nd floor in Napili. He was pretty unhappy about it, but a Mai Tai helped him get over it.

So.....I guess being a Trust PP doesn't extend to preferential room assignments at MOC.

Best,

Greg

Oh thank goodness, one less reason to storm the castle. I mean, it's good that specific rooms aren't pre-assigned for PP status prior to check-in - not so good that DC status doesn't appear to be integrated into the resort's placement system at all favorably. There just has to be a middle ground, I'm convinced.

With the way you gush over the resort I'm sure your friend will manage to make the best of things and have a grand time. Were you able to warn him in advance that maybe the rep was speaking out of turn, prepare him for the worst? I hope so.

GregT said:

All,

I can close out my own thread here.

My friend (the 15K Trust Point purchaser) requested highest floor possible, Lahaina Tower.

He was given 2nd floor in Napili. He was pretty unhappy about it, but a Mai Tai helped him get over it.

So.....I guess being a Trust PP doesn't extend to preferential room assignments at MOC.

Best,

Greg

Click to expand...

Greg,

Tell you friend welcome to the homeless Trust Club and keep the Mai Tai's coming he wont remember how to get back to his room.

Greg, I still don't understand why your friend bought 15K in trust points. Wouldn't he have been better to just buy a fixed week, or even floating in weeks. Sure it would have been expensive, but cheaper than $150,000 and I am betting he would get better units and have a "home".

Well...

Makes me feel even better about keeping my $60,000 instead of buying to be Premier Plus.

SueDonJ said:

Oh thank goodness, one less reason to storm the castle. I mean, it's good that specific rooms aren't pre-assigned for PP status prior to check-in - not so good that DC status doesn't appear to be integrated into the resort's placement system at all favorably. There just has to be a middle ground, I'm convinced.

With the way you gush over the resort I'm sure your friend will manage to make the best of things and have a grand time. Were you able to warn him in advance that maybe the rep was speaking out of turn, prepare him for the worst? I hope so.

Click to expand...

I did indeed warn him to take the conversation with some skepticism. I hope he took it to heart.

And MOC does rock! I'm sure he is just fine by now...

Best,

Greg