# Not understanding the negative press about points



## brianl19 (Nov 13, 2010)

I have read all the negative comments and postings about the new points system and upon seeing what my week was valued at, I was also in complete agreement.

Last week, I did the sales webinar over the phone and was given information that I haven’t seen posted here at all (sorry if I missed it).

The sales rep told me that in addition to exchanging my week for points, I can still do the regular trades to other resorts like I currently do thought Interval while enjoying the “simplified” fee structure of the new system.  She said that Marriott manages the trades now, using Interval as the program that runs their system, and the trading will be exactly the same as it was before for me.  I can still lock off my two bedroom and trade it for two weeks at different locations (and even trade up my studio for a one bedroom, etc).

So, if I can still occupy my week any year I choose at my home resort  just as I did before, and I can still trade to other resorts as I did before, and I have the options to use points if I choose, what is so wrong with the new system?  If all that is true, it seems like the annual fees will indeed cost less for the same benefits.

Thank you.


----------



## windje2000 (Nov 13, 2010)

brianl19 said:


> I have read all the negative comments and postings about the new points system and upon seeing what my week was valued at, I was also in complete agreement.
> 
> Last week, I did the sales webinar over the phone and was given information that I haven’t seen posted here at all (sorry if I missed it).
> 
> ...



Suppose you decide to simply continue to pay the higher unbundled fees, because the initiation fee would take a long time to be 'paid back' by the bundled fee savings based on your expected usage?  

Things should continue to be the same as always, right?  

Here's just one recently posted example of what the sales folks will tell you.  There's plenty more, as you have no doubt seen if you have indeed read every post on the board.



TRAVELING FOOL said:


> . . .
> 
> We declined to purchase or join the point system, after which *we were threatened that we would be sorry because we would not be able to trade into other Marriott resorts.* Being legacy owners, this made us feel worthless .
> Not one person we met and discussed the point system with, actually bought into it. We've loved being Marriott owners in the past, but if we are unable to trade into other Marriotts, maybe it's time to get out.BTY, the sales rep. went way over her alotted time. It was supposed to have been 90 min., but we had to stop her and leave after 2 hrs.



IOW, join, . . . or we put out your eyes. 

The new program has both plusses and minusses. A good concise summary can be found here.  LINK 

It works better for some ownership and usage than others, which gives rise to some of the differences of opinion you may have observed on the board.  

The webinar told you about the plan benefits.  But every coin has two sides.

Understand *all* the attributes of the plan, and look before you leap.  That's all this board is about.   

Welcome to TUG


----------



## LUVourMarriotts (Nov 13, 2010)

I wonder which resort brianl19 works at.


----------



## ada903 (Nov 13, 2010)

One that has trouble selling!!  



LUVourMarriotts said:


> I wonder which resort brianl19 works at.


----------



## dioxide45 (Nov 13, 2010)

The problem for us is the very high initiation fee for what is an unproven exchange company. DC is no more than another exchange company. II and RCI don't charge a HUGE initiation fee. Paying the initiation fee doesn't guaranty anything.

I voiced this to a DC rep when we spoke on the phone. He said that when Marriott got in to hotels and hot shot shops they to were unproven. Of course I am sure there are many ventures that Marriott has gotten in to that didn't go well. I know they unloaded their assisted living venture.


----------



## Big Matt (Nov 13, 2010)

I'll give you another reason to think about.

This DC was launched knowing that a good response was 20% conversion rate.  They aren't selling much in the way of new units/points right now due to the economy.  Why would you want to spend a ton of money where only 20% of the legacy units may end up for you to trade for points.  You are basically spending the entry fee on a _promise_ that may or may not come true.

How do you know if Marriott will ever build another resort?


----------



## nygiants11991 (Nov 13, 2010)

I agree the initial fee was costly $600, but included in this fee was 800 DC points.  What did I do with the points, I am using them to stay in an ocean front studio in the new seciton of the Maui Ocean Club.  

I have seen a lot of posts, some negative and some postive.  But what it comes down to is what works best for the individual.  And I think the flexability of the points system will work best for my family.


----------



## alchook (Nov 13, 2010)

I agree with nyg. I haven't been using my Mountainside for years now. By the time I pay the II membership, the lock-off cost, and the exchange fees the points membership is a bargain in comparison.

And the 800 points covers the initiation fee easily.


----------



## DanCali (Nov 13, 2010)

alchook said:


> And the 800 points covers the initiation fee easily.



If this is so trivial and such a great deal, I'm sure Marriott would waive the initiation fee if you will forego the 800 DC bonus points. Surely they must be better off keeping those points and renting those rooms at a higher rate than the initiation fee, no? I'll remember to propose that to them during my next tour...

I bet they won't even give you a $50 discount for those bonus points... that should tell you what they are worth.


----------



## nygiants11991 (Nov 13, 2010)

nygiants11991 said:


> I have seen a lot of posts, some negative and some postive.  *But what it comes down to is what works best for the individual.*  And I think the flexability of the points system will work best for my family.


..........


----------



## alchook (Nov 13, 2010)

DanCali said:


> If this is so trivial and such a great deal, I'm sure Marriott would waive the initiation fee if you will forego the 800 DC bonus points. Surely they must be better off keeping those points and renting those rooms at a higher rate than the initiation fee, no? I'll remember to propose that to them during my next tour...
> 
> I bet they won't even give you a $50 discount for those bonus points... that should tell you what they are worth.



They probably won't waive the initiation fee because Marriott's in the business of selling hotel rooms. 800 points can get 6 nights in a parlor room at KBC. That doesn't cost Marriott $600, but it would probably cost me twice that to buy.

That's the hotel business.


----------



## BocaBoy (Nov 13, 2010)

DanCali said:


> If this is so trivial and such a great deal, I'm sure Marriott would waive the initiation fee if you will forego the 800 DC bonus points....I bet they won't even give you a $50 discount for those bonus points... that should tell you what they are worth.



So the fact that Marriott won't forego the entry fee means the 800 points have no value to the individual?  Getting a room for several nights seems like value to me.  One of Marriott's purposes in giving out these points is to get people to try the system, and it is working.  With all due respect, I am afraid that claiming the 800 points have little or no value does not enhance the credibility of your other posts.


----------



## DanCali (Nov 13, 2010)

BocaBoy said:


> So the fact that Marriott won't forego the entry fee means the 800 points have no value to the individual?  Getting a room for several nights seems like value to me.  One of Marriott's purposes in giving out these points is to get people to try the system, and it is working.  With all due respect, I am afraid that claiming the 800 points have little or no value does not enhance the credibility of your other posts.



Even if you choose to value points at point rental rates they do not "cover the initiation fee easily" as suggested. To me they are worth the discount I get in exchange for foregoing points (zero).

As for your last comment, I will just remind you that you started posting right around June 20 and aroused plenty of suspicion you are a Marriott plant. Nuff said...


----------



## SueDonJ (Nov 13, 2010)

brianl19 said:


> I have read all the negative comments and postings about the new points system and upon seeing what my week was valued at, I was also in complete agreement.
> 
> Last week, I did the sales webinar over the phone and was given information that I haven’t seen posted here at all (sorry if I missed it).
> 
> ...



Brian, what your sales rep told you is correct.  If you enroll your Week it can still be used exactly as you've been using it and the annual fee for the Destination Club will cover the multiple fees you've been paying for locking-off, canceling Marriott reservations, MRP-exchanges, II exchanges, etc.  As well, if you enroll you will have the exact same access and exchange opportunities in II as you've had up to now.

If you only ever reserve your Week for home resort use and never pay any extra fees, and plan to continue that usage pattern forever, then it doesn't make sense to pay the enrollment fee and annual fees for the Destination Club.  But if you play the exchange game then it's correct that your annual usage fees could be reduced and you will have greater flexibility with check-in days and lengths of stays.  

We've chosen to enroll our Weeks and have already converted a 3BR Gold SurfWatch oceanvista to Points.  Combined with the 800 Plus Points for enrollment, we have confirmed exchanges for six nights in a 2BR Plat Grande Ocean oceanside and five nights in a 2BR Silver SurfWatch oceanvista, plus we have extra Points left over for a few more nights before the end of 2011.  Both times before calling to make the reservations I made lists of 3 choices and both of these stays were on the lists - that's "success" to me.  I don't know if I'm getting equal value or being skimmed to the high heavens or making out like a bandit - and I don't care!  All I know is, the stays are exactly what we want, it's more than I'd ever gotten from II for that Week, and it was a simple process with no waiting.  That's enough for me.

It's up to you if you want to bundle the enrollment fee in to your usage fees to figure out a break-even point.  I just looked at that one-time fee as the cost for access to the DC and forgot about it as soon as I paid it.    Don (a CPA) did some figuring and was satisfied with the results, though, so I guess we must come out at least even.    

Considering that the Destination Club isn't going to go away because Marriott isn't going to scrap it after they've invested so much time and money into its implementation (it's been rumored for years, after all,) I just see this as a matter of "it is what it is" and the only question for us was if it could give us anything different/better than what we had been getting.  But the questions are different for all of us so there isn't any one answer that's correct for everyone, as you've learned from all your reading here.

Good luck with your decision.  We've hashed out quite a bit about the DC here on TUG and can point you in the right direction to threads that probably have the specific answers you need to help you out - just ask and we're happy to help.


----------



## brianl19 (Nov 13, 2010)

Thank you all for the information, and a special thanks to Susan for taking the time to type that last message.  Yes, I agree it is based on the individuals travel behavior and I have done more research today deeper in the archives.  I’ve owned at Canyon Villas since 2004.  I’ve only stayed there once since buying with one more stay planned in April 2011.  All other years I have locked-off and traded to Marriott resorts and usually go to Ko Olina for master bedroom to master bedroom trade each year.  Therefore, I’m constantly being dinged by the fees.  This seems like it may be a good fit for me.

I suppose I was most surprised by how negatively the program is perceived.  It has been a few months, since I read posts here, but I remember the anger exhibited by posters and thinking that the MCVI program as I knew it was coming to an end (because I always lock off and trade and get the trades I seek).  Since we can still trade, just as we did in the past, I don’t understand all the anger towards the program, other than it being entirely for the $595 initiation fee.


----------



## jimf41 (Nov 13, 2010)

brianl19 said:


> Since we can still trade, just as we did in the past, I don’t understand all the anger towards the program, other than it being entirely for the $595 initiation fee.



The anger comes from a few folks for whom the DC program doesn't work as well as the old system. Tuggers who are used to getting a 2bdrm in Maui for their Bronze/Silver/Gold lockout portion just can't do that in the points system. Another feature that sets them off is the fact that if you deposit your week for points they don't give you enough to reserve with points. This is true in most but not all cases. Tuggers call it skim and it infuriates them. I honestly don't know why because you can just reserve your week like you used to do with no skim.

For an owner it's $600/$700 to join depending if you own one week or multiple weeks. For those who have resale weeks or a combination of resale and developer weeks the cost to join can be as much as $2000. That's pretty steep but you have to remember that those folks got their resale weeks at a deep discount and MVCI is now going to allow them in the program with full access including the ability to trade for MRP's. Trading for MRP's is not a good deal for me but according to Marriott's stats 33% of owners do it. I should say 33% of developer owners.

Asa SueDonJ has said, the DC program isn't for everyone and everybody has to evaluate it for themselves. So far it's worked fantastically for me. Time will tell if that continues.

One more thing. Don't believe all of the negatives on TUG without checking them out for yourself. There is an awful lot of misleading information being posted on TUG about the DC system. The different "pools of inventory" is the one that comes to mind. When I made my first DC point reservation with legacy points reserving into the trust point pool this was completely debunked as far as I am concerned. I had signed up for the DC program and this information came out on TUG and I rescinded my enrollment. After checking the facts with a few folks at MVCI my fears were allayed enough that I re-enrolled. It's a good thing I did because as I said it's working fantastically as far as I can tell.


----------



## classiclincoln (Nov 13, 2010)

> If you enroll your Week it can still be used exactly as you've been using it and the annual fee for the Destination Club will cover the multiple fees you've been paying for locking-off, canceling Marriott reservations, MRP-exchanges, II exchanges, etc.



*Only* on Marriott to Marriott exchanges.  If you want to go to a non Marriott property, you still need to pay for the exchange.  Also, if you own a non Marriott resort, you need to have a separate II account.  So, as stated before, it's most definitely based on your individual situation.  For me, personally, not worth it.


----------



## SueDonJ (Nov 13, 2010)

classiclincoln said:


> *Only* on Marriott to Marriott exchanges.  If you want to go to a non Marriott property, you still need to pay for the exchange.  Also, if you own a non Marriott resort, you need to have a separate II account.  So, as stated before, it's most definitely based on your individual situation.  For me, personally, not worth it.



That's right, Classic, and thanks for fleshing that out for me - I should have at least been more clear in that paragraph that Brian would get a new (corporate) II account if he enrolls his Week, and the new one would work exactly the same as his old (individual) account as far as exchanging his Marriott week (whether as a single unit or two lock-offs) to other Marriotts.  I can see why it doesn't work for you, but with Brian's latest post he says that he locks off and does II exchanges to other Marriotts, so I think it would work for him.

The other thing, Brian, that should be stressed is that if you convert your Week to Points for DC exchanges, it must be converted as a single unit.  You cannot lock off and convert each separate unit to Points, and you cannot lock off to use/exchange one partial unit and convert the other to Points.  I don't think that converting your one Week to Points would get you the same exchanges that you've been getting with II, but you would definitely save on annual usage fees if you continue to lock off and exchange each unit through your new II account.

(One more correction to my post which I'll edit now - the SW Gold week we converted is oceanvista and not oceanside.  Details ...)


----------



## brianl19 (Nov 13, 2010)

jimf41 said:


> The anger comes from a few folks for whom the DC program doesn't work as well as the old system. Tuggers who are used to getting a 2bdrm in Maui for their Bronze/Silver/Gold lockout portion just can't do that in the points system.



This is interesting and I would like further clarification because it is similar to what I do every year  and something very important for my decision.  I have always had success in trading up my studio room for a one bedroom through II.  What you state here suggests that I can't do that anymore (unless you're basing that statement on point value, not doing trades).  

Are we still able to trade up to something better as we have in the past when only doing trades?  

My primary interest is to continue to trade and occasionally occupy my home resort.  I agree that using points seems like a bad deal and I would definitely get less vacation time going that route.

Thank you for the clarification on non-Marriott trades.  I did understand that, but I almost always stay at Marriotts (I travel a lot for work and they are my primary brand, thus I’m pretty loyal…hitting Lifetime Platinum this year)


----------



## DanCali (Nov 13, 2010)

jimf41 said:


> Another feature that sets them off is the fact that if you deposit your week for points they don't give you enough to reserve with points. This is true in most but not all cases. Tuggers call it skim and it infuriates them. I honestly don't know why because you can just reserve your week like you used to do with no skim.



The ability to book a week in your season with points is irrelevant. People are upset about skim because the result is less trade power than your week is worth (you get less than the average the season is worth). And it's true in ALL cases. 



jimf41 said:


> One more thing. Don't believe all of the negatives on TUG without checking them out for yourself. There is an awful lot of misleading information being posted on TUG about the DC system. The different "pools of inventory" is the one that comes to mind.



Even Marriott salespeople claim there are two pools. Trust points access trust inventory directly. Exchange points don't. They require trust inventory to be deposited in the Exchange Co and doing an exchange. Are you claiming otherwise?


----------



## dioxide45 (Nov 13, 2010)

brianl19 said:


> This is interesting and I would like further clarification because it is similar to what I do every year  and something very important for my decision.  I have always had success in trading up my studio room for a one bedroom through II.  What you state here suggests that I can't do that anymore (unless you're basing that statement on point value, not doing trades).
> 
> Are we still able to trade up to something better as we have in the past when only doing trades?
> 
> ...



Jim was referring to exchanging using points. It would be impossible in most cases to exchange two sides of a lock off in to two 2BRs in Maui. This would still be possible in II in the new program, just not using points. Trading from a Branson or Orlando gold week in to any week in Hawaii is impossible in points. Though I was able to do it using II.


----------



## dioxide45 (Nov 13, 2010)

DanCali said:


> The ability to book a week in your season with points is irrelevant. People are upset about skim because the result is less trade power than your week is worth (you get less than the average the season is worth). And it's true in ALL cases.
> 
> 
> 
> Even Marriott salespeople claim there are two pools. Trust points access trust inventory directly. Exchange points don't. They require trust inventory to be deposited in the Exchange Co and doing an exchange. Are you claiming otherwise?



There is no doubt that there are two pools of inventory. I think early on this was very evident. People calling in on day one had to wait list for resorts that were not sold out where the trust had plenty of inventory.

It seems as time went on though that Marriott has placed some of that trust in to the exchange company. Whether it be trust owner deposits or unsold inventory. They needed to co-mingle the inventory in order to keep those on wait list happy. Why they didn't just dump a bunch of this inventory in to the exchange company before day one is beyond me.


----------



## DanCali (Nov 13, 2010)

dioxide45 said:


> There is no doubt that there are two pools of inventory. I think early on this was very evident.



So why is it "misleading" to talk about 2 types of points and/or 2 inventory pools? 

IMO it's more misleading to say there is no skim (or reverse skim) or that all points are equal...


----------



## dioxide45 (Nov 13, 2010)

DanCali said:


> So why is it "misleading" to talk about 2 types of points and/or 2 inventory pools?
> 
> IMO it's more misleading to say there is no skim (or reverse skim) or that all points are equal...



For the end user the two pools of inventory will be invisible. They should be able to get what they want or wait list for it. They don't know or really care where it comes from as long as they get it. It isn't misleading to explain that there are indeed two pools and as a legacy owner you are at the mercy of Marriott and trust owners to deposit trust inventory to the exchange company.

Is it misleading for sales reps to say 80% of owners are enrolling? Probably true of the owners they are bringing through presentations, but not true of owners as a whole. It is all in how you interpret it. Though I do think this statement is misleading, and on purpose. Though in their heads they don't think they are lying.


----------



## jimf41 (Nov 13, 2010)

DanCali said:


> The ability to book a week in your season with points is irrelevant. People are upset about skim because the result is less trade power than your week is worth (you get less than the average the season is worth). And it's true in ALL cases.
> 
> *It is definitely not true in all cases. My 3bdrm Ocean Pointe (MPB) gives me 4225 points. I usually go to MPB in October and it only requires 4000 points. In addition I can reserve the entire Gold season for 4000 points. In most resorts this does not happen but it does in some. Since I don't own anywhere but MPB and MFC I can't tell you where else it happens. BTW my weeks at MFC all give less then they require to reserve with DC points. I'll just reserve those as weeks, no skim.*
> 
> ...




Recently I booked a week at Oceana Palms and the following week at Lakeshore in a 3bdrm. These weeks were booked 12.5 months out. In order for them to qualify to be booked with "Legacy " points multi week owners at both resorts would have had to reserve multiple weeks 13 months out and then immediately deposit them to DC points or convert them to MRP's. Do you really think there was much of a chance that that happened? It's possible but I'd put the chances at less than .5%. Especially since I had an entire month to choose from at both resorts.


----------



## dioxide45 (Nov 13, 2010)

jimf41 said:


> Recently I booked a week at Oceana Palms and the following week at Lakeshore in a 3bdrm. These weeks were booked 12.5 months out. In order for them to qualify to be booked with "Legacy " points multi week owners at both resorts would have had to reserve multiple weeks 13 months out and then immediately deposit them to DC points or convert them to MRP's.



This isn't necessarily true. You don't have to reserve and deposit in to DC. You just elect points. You can convert your week to either MR or DC points long before you are eligible to make a reservation. This means that legacy inventory can be available long before the 13 month mark.


----------



## classiclincoln (Nov 13, 2010)

To clarify a bit:

I own a gold 3 BR unit at Grande Vista and sasume I only do internal Marriott to Marriott trades.  Currently, I can lock off and get 2 weeks.  At a minimum, I should be able to get at least one week in a 2 BR unit and one week in a studio.  There is a possibility I can get a 3 BR unit for each week.

If I go to the DC  program, I'm gonna get a set amount of points (don't remember the exact amount, let's say 3,000).  I'm pretty much guaranteed not to be able to get 14 days even in a studio.  In fact, the points that I'd get for my 3 BR unit is not even enough to get me a 3 BR unit for the week I have (in the example above, I'd need more than 3,000 points to book a 3 BR unit during gold season at Grande Vista).

So, in my opinion, it's not worth it.  The cost of the flexibility to "short stay" does not offset loosing 2 weeks...not to mention the whole non Marriott trade thing.


----------



## jimf41 (Nov 13, 2010)

dioxide45 said:


> This isn't necessarily true. You don't have to reserve and deposit in to DC. You just elect points. You can convert your week to either MR or DC points long before you are eligible to make a reservation. This means that legacy inventory can be available long before the 13 month mark.



You're right. I didn't think of that. However I still believe that not many owners are thinking further than 13 months out to figure out what to do with their week. Sure there are some, I'm one of them, but enough to make a whole month available at 12.5 months out, in a new resort that all new owners want to try out at least once before trading? 

To give another example I just took advantage of the 1/2 price sale for DC enrollee's and trust owners at Oceana. The resort is only 8 months old with only 76 rooms available for occupancy. The points to get in here had to come from the trust pool. It's inconceivable to me that owners who paid 35-75k with 1k plus MF's would trade their week for MRP's or DC points without ever visiting the resort.


----------



## dioxide45 (Nov 13, 2010)

jimf41 said:


> You're right. I didn't think of that. However I still believe that not many owners are thinking further than 13 months out to figure out what to do with their week. Sure there are some, I'm one of them, but enough to make a whole month available at 12.5 months out, in a new resort that all new owners want to try out at least once before trading?



Don't forget about those borrowing points. They are making legacy inventory availabe to the exchange company as much as three years in advance.



> To give another example I just took advantage of the 1/2 price sale for DC enrollee's and trust owners at Oceana. The resort is only 8 months old with only 76 rooms available for occupancy. The points to get in here had to come from the trust pool. It's inconceivable to me that owners who paid 35-75k with 1k plus MF's would trade their week for MRP's or DC points without ever visiting the resort.



I agree that Marriott is making legacy inventory available to the exchange company. This may not be the case every year or in every season though.


----------



## josh1231 (Nov 14, 2010)

brianl19 said:


> I have read all the negative comments and postings about the new points system and upon seeing what my week was valued at, I was also in complete agreement.
> 
> Last week, I did the sales webinar over the phone and was given information that I haven’t seen posted here at all (sorry if I missed it).
> 
> ...



For me, the primary negative aspect of the points program is the 15-20 year break even versus simply renting the same rooms off of Marriott's web site, not to mention the real beating one would take if you started factoring in renting from current owners. This break even period, takes into account some pretty strong assumptions as well, like Marriott keeping a low level of maintenance fee increases, among others. It also takes into one of the worse case scenarios as far as room rental, which is at Aruba Surf club at $585 a night for a 1-bedroom. 

The entire Marriott timeshare model is based upon providing great vacation accomodations at a price less than if you were to simply book the rooms directly on Marriott's own site. This is simply not the case, and that is my problem with it. Unfortunately, the math just doesn't work. 

This isn't to say people should buy one, but for me the math just doesn't work.


----------



## Big Matt (Nov 14, 2010)

Josh, 
you are assuming that you can just go on line and rent nights from Marriott.  This will never happen during high season at hard to get resorts.  

I agree with your logic for off and shoulder season travel, however.



josh1231 said:


> For me, the primary negative aspect of the points program is the 15-20 year break even versus simply renting the same rooms off of Marriott's web site, not to mention the real beating one would take if you started factoring in renting from current owners. This break even period, takes into account some pretty strong assumptions as well, like Marriott keeping a low level of maintenance fee increases, among others. It also takes into one of the worse case scenarios as far as room rental, which is at Aruba Surf club at $585 a night for a 1-bedroom.
> 
> The entire Marriott timeshare model is based upon providing great vacation accomodations at a price less than if you were to simply book the rooms directly on Marriott's own site. This is simply not the case, and that is my problem with it. Unfortunately, the math just doesn't work.
> 
> This isn't to say people should buy one, but for me the math just doesn't work.


----------



## Clark (Nov 14, 2010)

jimf41 said:


> Another feature that sets them off is the fact that if you deposit your week for points they don't give you enough to reserve with points. This is true in most but not all cases. Tuggers call it skim and it infuriates them. I honestly don't know why because you can just reserve your week like you used to do with no skim.



To charge people a hidden fee (The Skim) and let them believe that there is no "exchange fee" for internal exchanges (or external exchanges for that matter) is just plain dishonest business.

That would upset a lot more people than just informed Tuggers if they understood it.


----------



## BocaBoy (Nov 14, 2010)

LUVourMarriotts said:


> I wonder which resort brianl19 works at.



Here we go again.  Someone likes something about Marriott and he is accused of working for Marriott.  Unbelievable.


----------



## DanCali (Nov 14, 2010)

DanCali said:


> The ability to book a week in your season with points is irrelevant. People are upset about skim because the result is less trade power than your week is worth (you get less than the average the season is worth). And it's true in ALL cases.





jimf41 said:


> It is definitely not true in all cases. My 3bdrm Ocean Pointe (MPB) gives me 4225 points. I usually go to MPB in October and it only requires 4000 points. In addition I can reserve the entire Gold season for 4000 points. In most resorts this does not happen but it does in some. Since I don't own anywhere but MPB and MFC I can't tell you where else it happens. BTW my weeks at MFC all give less then they require to reserve with DC points. I'll just reserve those as weeks, no skim.



Jim - you are choosing to ignore what skim means and paint things rosier than they are. 

Skim means that you get less than the average points in your season. It doesn't matter what you do with the points. You just get less than you deserve (see here that your 3BR OP silver week is worth 4540 points). It affects your trading power and what you do with the points you get. If you had 4540 points you can do more...

And that affects EVERYONE.


----------



## BocaBoy (Nov 14, 2010)

DanCali said:


> Even if you choose to value points at point rental rates they do not "cover the initiation fee easily" as suggested. To me they are worth the discount I get in exchange for foregoing points (zero).
> 
> As for your last comment, I will just remind you that you started posting right around June 20 and aroused plenty of suspicion you are a Marriott plant. *Nuff said*...



Wow.  If someone does not agree with you they are a Marriott plant.  Let it go, Dan.  You are simply unbelievable!

And _by far_ the largest number of owners bought directly from Marriott.  With a $595 or $695 initiation fee, the 800 points clearly does "cover the in itiation fee easily."


----------



## SueDonJ (Nov 14, 2010)

DanCali said:


> Jim - you are choosing to ignore what skim means and paint things rosier than they are.
> 
> Skim means that you get less than the average points in your season. It doesn't matter what you do with the points. You just get less than you deserve (see here that your 3BR OP silver week is worth 4540 points). It affects your trading power and what you do with the points you get. If you had 4540 points you can do more...
> 
> And that affects EVERYONE.



I agree that skim exists as it's defined by TUG but I think the fact that it also exists in II is conveniently ignored.  Besides, when considering the usage value of Weeks in the DC, the comparison shouldn't be made between the Point value that a Week is allotted and what those Points will get you in exchange.  The comparison should be made between what your Week(s) can get you in II exchanges and what they can get you in DC exchanges.

Some folks consistently trade up in II.  For them the new program will not work if they enroll their Week(s) and convert them to Points in the DC to try make the same Marriott-to-Marriott exchanges as they've been consistently making.  But it may work for them if they enroll and continue to do similar exchanging through the new II accounts because the annual usage fees may be reduced depending on how many exchanges they make.

Some folks consistently trade down in II which means they've been experiencing "skim" in that program since long before it was defined here on TUG!  Granted, those folks are the ones who own multiple Weeks in Plat/Gold seasons, non-lock-off 3- or 2-BR units, the best view categories, the high-demand resorts, etc.  But they're also the folks who stand to gain the most usage and flexibility from the new DC program because they can play around with a large number of Points and tailor their vacations to shorter and/or off-season stays, smaller units, different views, the older resorts with less trade value, etc...

There isn't a correct answer that fits everybody!  But it simply isn't true that somebody must be "not knowledgeable" or "ignoring" skim in order to not place an importance on it.  It has relative importance, but it's also a fact of exchanging in both II's and Marriott's systems depending on what you own.


----------



## hotcoffee (Nov 14, 2010)

BocaBoy said:


> Here we go again.  Someone likes something about Marriott and he is accused of working for Marriott.  Unbelievable.



I've been staying out of these discussions lately.  Anti-DC has become something of a political correctness issue here on the Marriott forum.

As has been said over and over, the program is what it is.  If it does not work for you, don't enroll.  It if can work for you, then enroll.  However, in this forum, it seems to me that there is something like an anti-DC evangelism that sometimes goes on.  Some owners who see no advantage to them and do not intend to enroll (which is fine) also seem to try to discourage others from enrolling.


----------



## Superchief (Nov 14, 2010)

SueDonJ said:


> I agree that skim exists as it's defined by TUG but I think the fact that it also exists in II is conveniently ignored.  Besides, when considering the usage value of Weeks in the DC, the comparison shouldn't be made between the Point value that a Week is allotted and what those Points will get you in exchange.  The comparison should be made between what your Week(s) can get you in II exchanges and what they can get you in DC exchanges.
> 
> Some folks consistently trade up in II.  For them the new program will not work if they enroll their Week(s) and convert them to Points in the DC to try make the same Marriott-to-Marriott exchanges as they've been consistently making.  But it may work for them if they enroll and continue to do similar exchanging through the new II accounts because the annual usage fees may be reduced depending on how many exchanges they make.
> 
> ...



+1 Well stated.


----------



## burg1121 (Nov 14, 2010)

I just got 2 nites at ASC ocean side 4/11 seems like it covers my startup cost.


----------



## puckmanfl (Nov 14, 2010)

good afternoon

Please don't forget that in II, you get "skimmed" everytime you trade a unit with a "view" because on the exchange you go to the middle/bottom of the food chain at the resort you exchanged into.  If you have OF at Maui and do an II exchange to Waiohai, you can easily get island view or parking lot view!!!

Using points you can exchange OF for island view and have points left over and actually reverse the "skim"....


----------



## dioxide45 (Nov 14, 2010)

josh1231 said:


> The entire Marriott timeshare model is based upon providing great vacation accomodations at a price less than if you were to simply book the rooms directly on Marriott's own site. This is simply not the case, and that is my problem with it. Unfortunately, the math just doesn't work.
> 
> This isn't to say people should buy one, but for me the math just doesn't work.





Big Matt said:


> Josh,
> you are assuming that you can just go on line and rent nights from Marriott.  This will never happen during high season at hard to get resorts.
> 
> I agree with your logic for off and shoulder season travel, however.



The comparison here isn't neceasarily to being able to book timeshare stays on Marriott.com. The sales pitch is to prepay vacations and being able to stay for less than you can in a hotel or other accomodation. There are is clearly always inventory available year round in peak times and prime locations.


----------



## dioxide45 (Nov 14, 2010)

hotcoffee said:


> I've been staying out of these discussions lately.  Anti-DC has become something of a political correctness issue here on the Marriott forum.
> 
> As has been said over and over, the program is what it is.  If it does not work for you, don't enroll.  It if can work for you, then enroll.  However, in this forum, it seems to me that there is something like an anti-DC evangelism that sometimes goes on.  Some owners who see no advantage to them and do not intend to enroll (which is fine) also seem to try to discourage others from enrolling.



I don't thin that there are any more people here against the DC program than are for the program. Sure there are some outspoken voices against the program, but there are just as many outspoken voices for it.

People who support the program see negative comments and react to them, they think more people are against it. People who don't support the program see positive comments and react to them. They think more people are for the program.


----------



## DanCali (Nov 14, 2010)

BocaBoy said:


> Wow.  If someone does not agree with you they are a Marriott plant.  Let it go, Dan.  You are simply unbelievable!



Did I call you a plant? It is a fact that several people have suggested that in the past. If I recall correctly at some point I defended you. 

http://tugbbs.com/forums/showpost.php?p=959047&postcount=49

Given your attacks at people who raise genuine concerns, I don't know anymore.


----------



## scpoidog (Nov 14, 2010)

*Fight Fight Fight!!!*



DanCali said:


> Did I call you a plant? It is a fact that several people have suggested that in the past. If I recall correctly at some point I defended you.
> 
> http://tugbbs.com/forums/showpost.php?p=959047&postcount=49
> 
> Given your attacks at people who raise genuine concerns, I don't know anymore.



You can always meet in back of the library after school and duke it out.


----------



## scpoidog (Nov 14, 2010)

*Initiation fee and 800 points*



alchook said:


> I agree with nyg. I haven't been using my Mountainside for years now. By the time I pay the II membership, the lock-off cost, and the exchange fees the points membership is a bargain in comparison.
> 
> And the 800 points covers the initiation fee easily.



I am one of those resale buyers who spent $1495 to join the points program.  The 800 points definitely came into my decision making and I borrowed 2011 points to vacation in Sept 2010.  

To Dioxide's point, it is an expensive gamble for an unproven system, but it now I'm in the same boat as the development buyers. 

One negative can be said that since I have EOY, I should be out of points and shouldn't be able to travel until 2013, but with the points left over from my Sept trip + the 800 points, I can now go somewhere in 2011 or 2012 so it's a win for me.  

Just my thoughts.  
I can choose to opt out of the program later or deposit into II (after I pay back my 2011 "loan).


----------



## alchook (Nov 14, 2010)

classiclincoln said:


> To clarify a bit:
> 
> I own a gold 3 BR unit at Grande Vista and assume I only do internal Marriott to Marriott trades.  Currently, I can lock off and get 2 weeks.  At a minimum, I should be able to get at least one week in a 2 BR unit and one week in a studio.  There is a possibility I can get a 3 BR unit for each week.



Keep in mind, of course, that it will cost more than $380 to do so, vs. $165 in the DC program.


----------



## hotcoffee (Nov 14, 2010)

dioxide45 said:


> I don't thin that there are any more people here against the DC program than are for the program. Sure there are some outspoken voices against the program, but there are just as many outspoken voices for it.
> 
> People who support the program see negative comments and react to them, they think more people are against it. People who don't support the program see positive comments and react to them. They think more people are for the program.



The difference is that most of the people here who think the program works for them generally do not try to influence others to enroll.  It appears to me that some of the anti-DC crowd try to influence others not to enroll.

I personally never ask others what I should or should not do on important decisions unless there is just no time to study an issue that I know nothing about.  I am always amazed by the number of "what should I do" questions that are posted in these forums.  I guess if someone asks, he will get an answer.  Might not be the best answer, but he did asked.


----------



## Big Matt (Nov 14, 2010)

I have no idea what this means.  My point was that you can't just compare buying off the rack at marriott.com because there won't be availability.  Thus the value of buying from Marriott vs. renting.



dioxide45 said:


> There are is clearly always inventory available year round in peak times and prime locations.


----------



## saturn28 (Nov 14, 2010)

dioxide45 said:


> This isn't necessarily true. You don't have to reserve and deposit in to DC. You just elect points. You can convert your week to either MR or DC points long before you are eligible to make a reservation. This means that legacy inventory can be available long before the 13 month mark.



You are right because I have already used one of my 2012 weeks to book a 2011 holiday.


----------



## dioxide45 (Nov 14, 2010)

hotcoffee said:


> The difference is that most of the people here who think the program works for them generally do not try to influence others to enroll.  It appears to me that some of the anti-DC crowd try to influence others not to enroll.



I think a lot of this is perspective, I haven't seen anyone try to influence others not to enroll. There are people here that gush about how it works for them and others that gush about how it doesn't. Just because someone gives their opinion that the program doesn't work for them doesn't mean they are trying to influence others.


----------



## scrapngen (Nov 14, 2010)

I think that the DC points option is often not a good fit for those with only one week, as there isn't much difference in fees vs. II, and if you DO use points, you are most likely going to lose a day or two in value. It is also not a good fit if you mostly use your weeks. If you wish to travel in the fall, it also is not a good fit, as you must commit to points before you can see what is available in that case - and may not get what you want, yet you'll be stuck as you've already given up your week.

In general, it works best for those with multiple weeks (the flexibility is a reasonable trade-off with the loss of a few days due to the size of the playing field), those with LO's who trade a lot and prefer Marriott to Marriott exchanges, and those who are not happy with their current choices. Multiple week owners and those with a lot of exchanging/lo fees will come out ahead even if they never choose points - as long as the fees don't increase substantially once the program finds that people are still not using it for points, but just to save fees. (JMHO) 


It seems to me that most of those who have had successful trades and are happy with the program who post here on TUG are those who have multiple weeks - *and have qualified for Premier or Premier Plus status*. Since they are able to reserve anything anywhere at 13 months out if it is available and are savvy users, they have indeed gotten some great usage, and they don't always acknowledge that the average DC purchaser will not be able to get the same availability, as they will only be able to reserve 12 months out and only in blocks of 7 days or more.  

It is reasonable to warn people of the many pitfalls some are finding in the new system, and that it is still unproven. It is also reasonable to explain the benefits and success stories, but I think some clarification of status would be helpful to the person asking for help. I think resale weeks are a great bargain right now. Cheaper MFs than points, and 7 guaranteed days at a guaranteed resort. Will the availability decrease in 4, 5 or 6 years? Well, by that time, you'll still have saved $$ and enjoyed some great vacations...

Personally, it is not a good fit for me - even though I would qualify for Premier status, because I own fixed Plat. Plus weeks that would have to be given up before I could trade for other resorts at the same timeframe - and would not be able to see availability of those, yet would lose my weeks into points. I don't trade enough, and don't own LO's. Instead, we've chosen to purchase a resale week.


----------



## DanCali (Nov 14, 2010)

dioxide45 said:


> I think a lot of this is perspective, I haven't seen anyone try to influence others not to enroll. There are people here that gush about how it works for them and others that gush about how it doesn't. Just because someone gives their opinion that the program doesn't work for them doesn't mean they are trying to influence others.



Well said. I feel exactly the same way.

I've often pointed negatives but also positives (mainly fee savings and the possibility of exchanging for short stays) of the program. I highly doubt anyone could produce a post where I said "don't enroll!"


----------



## classiclincoln (Nov 14, 2010)

> Keep in mind, of course, that it will cost more than $380 to do so, vs. $165 in the DC program.



Yes, Alchook, it would only cost me $165 in the DC program _but_ I am limited to Marriott properties.  If I want to stay at a non Marriott property, I'll still pay the exchange fee _plus_ the annual DC fee.


----------



## josh1231 (Nov 14, 2010)

Big Matt said:


> Josh,
> you are assuming that you can just go on line and rent nights from Marriott.  This will never happen during high season at hard to get resorts.
> 
> I agree with your logic for off and shoulder season travel, however.



I think I have a significantly better chance of booking on Marriott.com than I would of booking a high value week in my season. 

Look at Newport Coast, I'll bet you that a platinum member can't book fourth of July right now, but I can on Marriott.com.


----------



## josh1231 (Nov 14, 2010)

dioxide45 said:


> I think a lot of this is perspective, I haven't seen anyone try to influence others not to enroll. There are people here that gush about how it works for them and others that gush about how it doesn't. Just because someone gives their opinion that the program doesn't work for them doesn't mean they are trying to influence others.



Yes, perfectly stated. The original question was "why all the bad press". Explaining the reasoning behind our approval or opposition of the program does not mean anyone's trying to influence someone else to purchase or not purchase the program.

I for one couldn't care less what anyone else does, but if asked I don't mind providing the reasons behind my dislike of the program, and don't mind hearing about others appreciation of the program.


----------



## dioxide45 (Nov 14, 2010)

Big Matt said:


> I have no idea what this means.  My point was that you can't just compare buying off the rack at marriott.com because there won't be availability.  Thus the value of buying from Marriott vs. renting.



What I was trying to say was that you can compare ownership vs just renting on Marriott.com. While there may not always be timeshare nights available on Marriott.com in a given location, there is likely a nearby hotel that can be booked. When you compare the cost of developer purchase to just renting, it will take a very long time for a developer purchase to come out ahead. There is no such thing as a prepaid vacation as the salespeople want people to believe.


----------



## josh1231 (Nov 14, 2010)

dioxide45 said:


> What I was trying to say was that you can compare ownership vs just renting on Marriott.com. While there may not always be timeshare nights available on Marriott.com in a given location, there is likely a nearby hotel that can be booked. When you compare the cost of developer purchase to just renting, it will take a very long time for a developer purchase to come out ahead. There is no such thing as a prepaid vacation as the salespeople want people to believe.



I think I would go further and say that it is easier to book the exact same timeshare, for the exact same week on Marriott.com versus going through the my-vacationclub site and attempting to book your own week.

As stated above with Newport, you can book any week on Marriott.com, but I'll bet a platinum member would have a problem booking the July 4th week. I don't believe one would have a clear advantage over the other, as far as ease of booking directly into the vacation club properties themselves.

If you went further, as in your posting, and counted all Marriott properties then renting would have an advantage versus attempting to book a timeshare week.


----------



## dioxide45 (Nov 14, 2010)

josh1231 said:


> I think I would go further and say that it is easier to book the exact same timeshare, for the exact same week on Marriott.com versus going through the my-vacationclub site and attempting to book your own week.
> 
> As stated above with Newport, you can book any week on Marriott.com, but I'll bet a platinum member would have a problem booking the July 4th week. I don't believe one would have a clear advantage over the other, as far as ease of booking directly into the vacation club properties themselves.
> 
> If you went further, as in your posting, and counted all Marriott properties then renting would have an advantage versus attempting to book a timeshare week.



I agree with your analogy, but the resort used may not be the best example. Is July 4th week not a platinum plus week there? Though looking at just about any July or early August week, they are an easy find on Marriott.com where they are not easy to get as a home week reservation.

A better example for a resort may be Williamsburg. The July 4th weeks are a tough week to reserve, but I am willing to bet there is always plenty of inventory on Marriott.com.


----------



## alchook (Nov 14, 2010)

classiclincoln said:


> Yes, Alchook, it would only cost me $165 in the DC program _but_ I am limited to Marriott properties.  If I want to stay at a non Marriott property, I'll still pay the exchange fee _plus_ the annual DC fee.



I understand that.

I was responding to the post you wrote in which you said:

_To clarify a bit:

I own a gold 3 BR unit at Grande Vista and sasume *I only do internal Marriott to Marriott trades.*
_


----------



## SueDonJ (Nov 15, 2010)

dioxide45 said:


> I think a lot of this is perspective, I haven't seen anyone try to influence others not to enroll. There are people here that gush about how it works for them and others that gush about how it doesn't. Just because someone gives their opinion that the program doesn't work for them doesn't mean they are trying to influence others.



But you don't often (ever?) see the folks who don't have a problem with Marriott's new system accusing those who do of being II plants or apologists, do you?  Or accusing them of not having the knowledge to make an informed decision whether or not to enroll?  I agree perspective comes into play, but I also agree with hotcoffee's assertion that there are many more attempts to influence a Marriott Weeks owner to not enroll/join in the DC, than to enroll.

FWIW, it's a bias I expect from TUG because a majority of the Marriott owners here have been able to consistently trade up in II, many more than have had to consistently trade down.  As well, the overwhelming majority have purchased external resales (sometimes in addition to developer purchases) and thus are subject to the higher enrollment fees.  A lesser factor might be that for the first time external resale purchasers are being subject to a devaluation of their Marriott product, while developer purchasers have long recognized that Marriott doesn't protect the owners' investment dollars and will make program changes that may negatively impact ownership.


----------



## DanCali (Nov 15, 2010)

SueDonJ said:


> But you don't often (ever?) see the folks who don't have a problem with Marriott's new system accusing those who do of being II plants or apologists, do you?  Or accusing them of not having the knowledge to make an informed decision whether or not to enroll?



Of course not - why would they? It doesn't serve their arguments to do that.

But they quite often accuse them of lacking credibility, posting misleading information (even when they post actual facts), etc... Just see the two exampes below from this thread, the first one happened to be directed at me (and the second one probably too, but indirectly). How about people urging the moderator to suspend me so there "won't be a forum for my rants?"

I admit I am not happy with Marriott's point system. I think it is totally half-baked. It seems quite a few others are not enchanted with it either. And I can say from experience that it seems that the more vocal someone is against Marriott, the more they are attacked personally by others. Maybe you don't see it. Maybe you think they (or me in particular) deserve it. Maybe you choose to ignore it. But it happens quite a bit, and not just to me...




BocaBoy said:


> With all due respect, I am afraid that claiming the 800 points have little or no value does not enhance the credibility of your other posts.





jimf41 said:


> One more thing. Don't believe all of the negatives on TUG without checking them out for yourself. There is an awful lot of misleading information being posted on TUG about the DC system. The different "pools of inventory" is the one that comes to mind.


----------



## rpw (Nov 15, 2010)

*I have a different problem with points that no one has mentioned*

And that is basically once you start taking points, you can't stop without loosing something.

For example, let's say I own at KoOlina (I do) and let's say I don't want to go this year, so I trade for points and go somewhere else.  Let's assume that I have points left over (I went to Orlando, I'm bound to have leftover points).  If I decide the next 2 years I want to go back to KoOlina, those points EXPIRE!  I have now lost the use of the points.

Sure, I could have managed my points better, spent 10days in Orlando instead of 7 (assuming I could get the reservation AND the extra time off of work).  Or drug my family to Grand Chateau for a couple of days to burn them off, but eventually, unless I'm REALLY lucky, I'm going to have points laying on the table that I can't use.

I guess that's what ticks me off about the new program.  In every other points program (not other timeshares but standard credit card points programs) you rarely lose points once you acquired them.  In this points program, you got 2 years.

One other minor point, with everyone having leftover points, doing short stays (and I have to assume most people are going to want to do short stays over the weekend) where are all these weekend rooms coming from?  Shouldn't there be a lot of empty weekday rooms in the resort?


----------



## BocaBoy (Nov 15, 2010)

SueDonJ said:


> But you don't often (ever?) see the folks who don't have a problem with Marriott's new system accusing those who do of being II plants or apologists, do you?  Or accusing them of not having the knowledge to make an informed decision whether or not to enroll?  I agree perspective comes into play, but I also agree with hotcoffee's assertion that there are many more attempts to influence a Marriott Weeks owner to not enroll/join in the DC, than to enroll.
> 
> FWIW, it's a bias I expect from TUG because a majority of the Marriott owners here have been able to consistently trade up in II, many more than have had to consistently trade down.  As well, the overwhelming majority have purchased external resales (sometimes in addition to developer purchases) and thus are subject to the higher enrollment fees.  A lesser factor might be that for the first time external resale purchasers are being subject to a devaluation of their Marriott product, while developer purchasers have long recognized that Marriott doesn't protect the owners' investment dollars and will make program changes that may negatively impact ownership.



Well said, Susan.


----------



## GregT (Nov 15, 2010)

rpw said:


> And that is basically once you start taking points, you can't stop without loosing something.
> 
> For example, let's say I own at KoOlina (I do) and let's say I don't want to go this year, so I trade for points and go somewhere else.  Let's assume that I have points left over (I went to Orlando, I'm bound to have leftover points).  If I decide the next 2 years I want to go back to KoOlina, those points EXPIRE!  I have now lost the use of the points.
> 
> ...



Agree on your point here -- please do note I've referred to this issue previously (see link if I've done it properly) -- the points chart is set up in a way that it almost guarantees point fragments.   

http://tugbbs.com/forums/showpost.php?p=997651&postcount=30

Very interesting decision (as well as others in link) by Marriott to routinely generate point fragments (which will lead to expirations or points redemptions in subsequent year to be able to utilize the points).  

To the OP, the negative press exists (in my view) because, although there are good things about the system (and there are -- I've enrolled), there are a number of unusual things that are distinctly different and unfavorable from other point systems/exchanges.

And the differences feel Marriott-first, versus owner-first (to me, at least).   I own three other point systems and prefer all of them to the current Marriott structure.

What's really interesting about this is that Marriott needs the inventory that is controlled by the existing owners, to make this points exchange effective.  My mistake was in thinking that Marriott would introduce a points system that would *entice *the existing ownership (or at least the Platinum weeks) to want to join.   

But the system is still in its infancy and we need to give it time to mature. It is an open question whether the future of this system is higher fees and usage restrictions (like Wyndham) or fair treatment and owner satisfaction (like Hilton).

Best,

Greg


----------



## SueDonJ (Nov 15, 2010)

rpw said:


> And that is basically once you start taking points, you can't stop without loosing something.
> 
> For example, let's say I own at KoOlina (I do) and let's say I don't want to go this year, so I trade for points and go somewhere else.  Let's assume that I have points left over (I went to Orlando, I'm bound to have leftover points).  If I decide the next 2 years I want to go back to KoOlina, those points EXPIRE!  I have now lost the use of the points.
> 
> ...



About what's bolded - I'm not sure why you're making a comparison to "standard credit card points programs" or other customer loyalty programs.  We should be comparing to other timeshare points programs (that you seem to be discounting) and in some of those the yearly allotments of points do expire if they're not used by a certain date.  (Disney's system is one where I'm certain the Points have a use-or-lose date attached to them.  And admittedly, I do not know if any of the other systems have more- or less-restrictive expiration dates for Points than Marriott's.)

But you are correct that anybody who chooses to enroll and convert Weeks to Points or to buy Points outright, will need to manage those Points very carefully in order to not forfeit them.  I imagine that as time goes on we will be able to remember the usage rules for Points as easily as we have the Weeks rules, but until then it will take a good amount of thinking to manage our Points so that we get the most out of them.

As Greg said in his post after yours, this subject was discussed on TUG in a slightly different manner - that it will be necessary to convert Weeks to Points on a perpetual basis if you're not able to use every one of them during the first Use Year.  Possibly, if you don't have a somewhat flexible plan for using them before you commit to conversion.  That's my plan, anyway, to give myself enough choices before converting so that I have a good chance of not having to forfeit Points.  But I also may be willing to forfeit a SMALL amount of Points every so often if by doing that I am able to travel where and when I want, and I am not locked in to converting Weeks into Points in subsequent Use Years.  (That's certainly not an option that everyone would embrace, but it may work for me on a VERY infrequent basis.)

Of course, all of this goes back to the idea that enrolling Weeks or buying Points in the DC will probably work best for those who have enough Points and enough travel time to play around with different options.



rpw said:


> One other minor point, with everyone having leftover points, doing short stays (and I have to assume most people are going to want to do short stays over the weekend) where are all these weekend rooms coming from?  Shouldn't there be a lot of empty weekday rooms in the resort?



One of the benefits of the Points calendars is that it cost fewer Points to do short-stays on weekdays than weekends.  Again, travel time restrictions come into play, but this is a huge plus for those who can take advantage of it to stretch Points for more stays.  The possibility exists, though, that the Points can be re-allocated across the calendars to reflect true supply and demand, which has been done in DVC's system and possibly others.  If the disparity between weekday and weekend room use turns out to be that large, I would imagine we'd see a re-allocation.


----------



## Big Matt (Nov 15, 2010)

I disagree entirely.

I've stayed there twice in July and once during platinum plus.  All I exchanged each time was my lousy Manor Club.  It cost me my maintenance fees plus exchange fees.  I got both on request first trades within three weeks of the request.





josh1231 said:


> I think I have a significantly better chance of booking on Marriott.com than I would of booking a high value week in my season.
> 
> Look at Newport Coast, I'll bet you that a platinum member can't book fourth of July right now, but I can on Marriott.com.


----------



## classiclincoln (Nov 15, 2010)

Gotcha, Alchook.  Sorry for the confusion.


----------



## Big Matt (Nov 15, 2010)

I agree with you, when you include the other hotels and brands.  



dioxide45 said:


> What I was trying to say was that you can compare ownership vs just renting on Marriott.com. While there may not always be timeshare nights available on Marriott.com in a given location, there is likely a nearby hotel that can be booked. When you compare the cost of developer purchase to just renting, it will take a very long time for a developer purchase to come out ahead. There is no such thing as a prepaid vacation as the salespeople want people to believe.


----------



## gblotter (Nov 15, 2010)

LUVourMarriotts said:


> I wonder which resort brianl19 works at.


My first reaction as well.


----------



## windje2000 (Nov 15, 2010)

SueDonJ said:


> But you don't often (ever?) see the folks who don't have a problem with Marriott's new system accusing those who do of being II plants or apologists, do you?  Or accusing them of not having the knowledge to make an informed decision whether or not to enroll?  I agree perspective comes into play, but I also agree with hotcoffee's assertion that there are many more attempts to influence a Marriott Weeks owner to not enroll/join in the DC, than to enroll.
> 
> FWIW, it's a bias I expect from TUG because a majority of the Marriott owners here have been able to consistently trade up in II, many more than have had to consistently trade down.
> 
> ...



I don't think it's inaccurate to describe you as 'less than enthusiastic' about your experience with II.  My take is you feel you never get sufficient compensation for your 3BR non lockoff at SW.  IMHO you are absolutely correct.

The paucity of 'like-kind' trades for your comparatively rare 3BR nonlockoff is simply the way it is.  There are just so few 3BR non lockoff in the system that it can virtually never get an uptrade and rarely even get a lateral trade.  That is not the fault of II.  Since you clearly trade and bought to trade at least some of the time, you should direct that anger at MVCI.  

Why?  For selling you an ownership interest that is not efficient as a trader.  If trading were a significant ownership objective, you almost certainly would have been better off by purchasing different ownership.  MVCI should have told you that.  

Everyone wants to trade a Chevy or Buick for a Rolls - - and so do you!  But if there's just a few Rolls or Bentleys or other highly desirable cars in the system, more often than not you'll be trading the Rolls for a Bentley or something less. 

I'll be the first to admit I am less than enthusiastic about DClub.  I will join to save on fees, but am unlikely to ever elect points.  Having said that, the ONLY way some of the less attractive aspects of DClub will change is if few legacies elect points. 

You like DClub because you feel it works better for you than the alternative of II.  

Others don't. 

Neither position is universally right, . . . or wrong.  It will be decided by the preponderance of the owners.


----------



## Toppermom (Nov 15, 2010)

My opinion:  

We have joined DC because we have multiple units that we frequently trade/lock off and I believe we will (at least) break even on those costs.  

I recognize that we may or may not benefit from the DC points.  We will utilize that OPTION if we feel it is to our advantage.  In the meantime, there does not seem to be a downside FOR US as we think we can continue to use our weeks--or trade them--as we have always done.

Just our thoughts...


----------



## dioxide45 (Nov 15, 2010)

SueDonJ said:


> A lesser factor might be that for the first time external resale purchasers are being subject to a devaluation of their Marriott product, while developer purchasers have long recognized that Marriott doesn't protect the owners' investment dollars and will make program changes that may negatively impact ownership.



I think however that the devaluation has actually hit 100% of all owners. Not just those buying resale. Some won't see that devaluation for a long time, where resale owners see it today in a higher buy-in cost.

While it may be true that Marriott doesn't protect an owners investment dollars, does it make it right when, and I quote "We have killed all resales"?


----------



## SueDonJ (Nov 15, 2010)

windje2000 said:


> So a system that makes everyone who elects points a skimmee and therefore a downtrader is a good thing?



A good thing overall?  No.  But I'm not debating whether Marriott's new system is good overall or individually for everyone here - there are far too many variables and differences in ownerships for one answer to fit all.  In this particular thread I'm considering the OP's exchange history and trying to answer his questions as they relate to him.  That's how I figured whether or not it would work for me, maybe the same thinking can help someone else who asks.



windje2000 said:


> Having the name of the seller on a real estate deed determine the price of enrollment in an exchange company has no basis in economic logic.



I'm not sure what you're saying here unless you don't like that Marriott is wearing too many hats as resort developer, manager, and seller as well as exchange company?  Maybe, but again, "it is what it is."  I don't know why it's worth complaining about, if there's nothing to be done about it.

If you mean something different here then I'm all ears, but I don't understand how what you're saying relates to what I said about the majority of TUGgers being subject to the higher (external resales) DC enrollment fees.



windje2000 said:


> One can only conclude that you anticipate and consider it 'normal' that Marriott will act to devalue your ownership.



Sure.  They've done it before and most likely they'll do it again.  Anybody who has kept track of Marriott prices, and especially those who realized substantial savings by purchasing an external resale, should know that Marriott doesn't protect purchase dollars and that sometimes they make changes that negatively affect ownership.  But I've tried to explain here many times and am not sure that the idea comes across, that I don't agree with any of the assertions that such actions by Marriott are done with the deliberate intent to devalue ownerships.  It's a byproduct sometimes of the actions they take to strengthen their business model, a byproduct that they may not be all that concerned about, but it's not the sole reason for any of their actions.  For example, I don't believe that they set enrollment fees on a sliding fee to deliberately penalize external resale purchasers - I think they set the fees at the points where their business models told them enough of the owners - who own the intervals that Marriott needs to make their program a success - would be willing to pay (considering their initial purchase prices and the benefits some will realize by enrolling.)  Not punitive, but revenue-driven.  And that's what I expect from any company which has a responsibility to shareholders.



windje2000 said:


> I don't think it's inaccurate to describe you as 'less than enthusiastic' about your experience with II.  My take is you feel you never get sufficient compensation for your 3BR non lockoff at SW.  IMHO you are absolutely correct.
> 
> The paucity of 'like-kind' trades for your comparatively rare 3BR nonlockoff is simply the way it is.  There are just so few 3BR non lockoff in the system that it can virtually never get an uptrade and rarely even get a lateral trade.  That is not the fault of II.  Since you clearly trade and bought to trade at least some of the time, you should direct that anger at MVCI.
> 
> ...



You're exactly right that I do not reap the same benefits from II that most here on TUG do - it's no secret.  But I'm not complaining about that because it's what I was led to expect.  My sales rep told me that my 3BR SurfWatch weeks would be considered prime trade bait that would probably get me some great exchanges in II.  But she also told me that there are very few 3BR units, fewer still that are non-lock-off units, throughout the system so I should be prepared to sacrifice a bedroom or two in order to get where I want to go.  Now you want me to be angry with her and not II because exchanges work in II exactly as she said they would?!  There's no reason for me to be angry with either Marriott or II - the system delivers what was promised.  Again, all I can do now is what everyone can do, which is to compare it to the DC to see which may deliver better exchanges.  In my case the DC is a clear winner but I have never said that my case is the benchmark by which everyone else needs to base their decision.



windje2000 said:


> I'll be the first to admit I am less than enthusiastic about DClub.  I will join to save on fees, but am unlikely to ever elect points.  Having said that, the ONLY way some of the less attractive aspects of DClub will change is if few legacies elect points.
> 
> You like DClub because you feel it works better for you than the alternative of II.
> 
> ...



I agree, neither is right or wrong.


----------



## SueDonJ (Nov 15, 2010)

dioxide45 said:


> I think however that the devaluation has actually hit 100% of all owners. Not just those buying resale. Some won't see that devaluation for a long time, where resale owners see it today in a higher buy-in cost.
> 
> While it may be true that Marriott doesn't protect an owners investment dollars, does it make it right when, and I quote "We have killed all resales"?



Honestly, I just think it's a waste of time to think about whether or not Marriott is "right" when there is absolutely nothing I can do to correct whatever devaluations their actions may cause.  The way I see it, if their actions aren't in violation of the contracts or laws then they hold all the cards.  I didn't worry about timeshare devaluations when I made the conscious, informed decision to make my purchases (and devaluation was certainly occurring back then) and I don't think about it now, because Marriott isn't charged with protecting my purchase dollars.  Some no doubt think that's an irresponsible position to take with respect to financial decisions.  The funny thing is, I agree with them and would never take the same position with a true investment vehicle.  Where we disagree is that they think of timeshares as financial investments and I don't.  They're a vacation lifestyle and as far as I'm concerned, the only "wrong" timeshare purchase is the one that the buyer can't afford (no matter what the price.)

Again, (sorry,) all any of us can do is figure out Marriott's Weeks and Points programs as best we can, so that we can determine how to get the best possible usage value out of our ownerships.  I certainly don't write any of this with the intention that everyone else needs to follow my decision, and in fact have said many times that the decision depends upon what an individual owns.


----------



## windje2000 (Nov 15, 2010)

> Originally Posted by windje2000
> 
> _Having the name of the seller on a real estate deed determine the price of enrollment in an exchange company has no basis in economic logic._



If Marriott's name is on the deed as seller, there's one price to join the exchange co.  

If any other name is on the deed as seller there's another (higher) price.


----------



## SueDonJ (Nov 15, 2010)

windje2000 said:


> If Marriott's name is on the deed as seller, there's one price to join the exchange co.
> 
> If any other name is on the deed as seller there's another (higher) price.



   Thanks, now I get it.

You said there's no economic logic in Marriott charging different prices simply based on how the Week was purchased by the current owner?  Sure there is, if the business models pan out the way that Marriott expects.  It appears that they are correct in at least one aspect: 

Some folks have been told by reps that the expected participation of Weeks owners in the DC is 20%; that's the figure given to me by an exec as the requirement for the system to be successful.  I'm sure that it's more detailed than just a number, though; I think its success is dependent upon certain Weeks intervals being enrolled and it's a given that some of those intervals were sold on the external resale market.  So how does Marriott entice those Weeks owners and boost their revenue as much as can be supported at the same time?  Offer to grandfather MRP-exchanges to enrolled Weeks while charging just enough of an enrollment fee to make them think that their enhanced usage options will cover the purchase dollars.  If Marriott had set an equal enrollment fee for all Weeks then direct-purchasers would have been able to legitimately complain that resale-purchasers were getting more for their enrollment fee.  Marriott may be able to sacrifice participation by a large number of external resale purchasers but the same can't be true of developer purchasers.

Obviously some resale purchasers see the usage value in the higher fee because folks are posting to TUG that they're enrolling their resale Weeks.


----------



## dioxide45 (Nov 15, 2010)

windje2000 said:


> If Marriott's name is on the deed as seller, there's one price to join the exchange co.
> 
> If any other name is on the deed as seller there's another (higher) price.



This is really the only reason we are not enrolling. Not necessarily because we feel we are being treated unfairly by Marriott because we didn't purchase through them, but rather that they priced the enrollment fee out of our price range. It was their decision to charge "bargain hunters" a higher price. I am willing to bet that their is a far lower percentage of resale owners enrolling than direct purchasers. $1500-$2000 isn't something people are easily parted with.

They decided to charge external purchasers a higher enrollment fee. More power to them, but I to have a vote, and that is with me not opening my wallet.


----------



## josh1231 (Nov 16, 2010)

Big Matt said:


> I disagree entirely.
> 
> I've stayed there twice in July and once during platinum plus.  All I exchanged each time was my lousy Manor Club.  It cost me my maintenance fees plus exchange fees.  I got both on request first trades within three weeks of the request.



Actually what we were discussing was attempting to book at a week you own in the platinum season at NCV, though trading into is quite difficult as well.

Though you were able to get a trade on 2 occassions, there is still a possibility that you will not be able to trade in, and a greater possibility that you will not be able to book the platinum week in the summer which you own. Because of this, and the near 100% availability for booking weeks on Marriott's website, I believe it to be much easier.


----------



## josh1231 (Nov 16, 2010)

SueDonJ said:


> But you don't often (ever?) see the folks who don't have a problem with Marriott's new system accusing those who do of being II plants or apologists, do you?  Or accusing them of not having the knowledge to make an informed decision whether or not to enroll?  I agree perspective comes into play, but I also agree with hotcoffee's assertion that there are many more attempts to influence a Marriott Weeks owner to not enroll/join in the DC, than to enroll.
> 
> FWIW, it's a bias I expect from TUG because a majority of the Marriott owners here have been able to consistently trade up in II, many more than have had to consistently trade down.  As well, the overwhelming majority have purchased external resales (sometimes in addition to developer purchases) and thus are subject to the higher enrollment fees.  A lesser factor might be that for the first time external resale purchasers are being subject to a devaluation of their Marriott product, while developer purchasers have long recognized that Marriott doesn't protect the owners' investment dollars and will make program changes that may negatively impact ownership.



Your exactly right. I don't like the program because in the last 2 years, my cheap lock-off week has got me 1 week at Ko Olina, 1 week at Newport, 1 week at Marbella, and 1 week at Paris all in 2 bedrooms, except Hawaii. Of course I would not like the new program because it is not friendly to people who have been able to maximize the value of their timeshare in the past utilizing methods learned here on TUG. I think anytime a change negatively impacts the value of something you own, you are going to dislike the change.


----------



## GregT (Nov 16, 2010)

Whoa!!!!!!!

How about those Chargers, huh?!!

Anything think they can make a run?  Chiefs are struggling (sorry DougP)

And what about those Giants!  Go Giants!  Great season (but I wish it was the Padres).


Just thinking cheerful thoughts -- wishing the best for my TUGging colleagues.....

Let's get back to fun vacation talk.....


----------



## josh1231 (Nov 16, 2010)

GregT said:


> Whoa!!!!!!!
> 
> How about those Chargers, huh?!!
> 
> ...



Hopefully this post isn't directed toward my post. Sometimes I write very directly, when I truly mean nothing by it.

I was just agreeing with Sue that people shouldn't accuse anyone of being a corporate insider, and that I don't like the points system, for my own vacation habits. My posts are never meant to be angry, because I don't care what anyone else does, at all. 

Did I mention I am going to Marbella followed by Paris each for a week with my gold shadow ridge, both in 2-bedrooms so I can take the parents for free.  This is why I enjoy the weeks system. :whoopie: 

The great thing about all of this, is whether you choose to enroll, or choose not to enroll, great vacations are in all of our future's, so its impossible to worry too much about that which we can't control. 

As an eternal optimist/realist, I didn't think the Chiefs would win 3 games this year, so they have out performed my expectations. I have hope for them and the Royals in 2011 and 2012.


----------



## windje2000 (Nov 16, 2010)

SueDonJ said:


> Thanks, now I get it.
> 
> You said there's no economic logic in Marriott charging different prices simply based on how the Week was purchased by the current owner?  Sure there is, if the business models pan out the way that Marriott expects.  It appears that they are correct in at least one aspect:
> 
> ...



A buys a week from Marriott, and Marriott makes $X

B buys 2 of the same week from Marriott and Marriott makes - $X x 2.  Gives one week to a C, a child.  

D buys the same week from Marriott and Marriott makes $X.  Sells it to E.  The price is irrelevant - it could be more or less than what D paid.


Marriott has made exactly the same profit ($X) selling each of the four units.


Marriott starts D Club.  

A,B,C, and E all get the same access to the same club on the same terms but for one.

A, B, C, all can join at one price, but E pays more.  Why?

Did E harm Marriott?  Is E getting something different or incremental than A,B or C?

There is simply no economic logic behind this.


----------



## SueDonJ (Nov 16, 2010)

josh1231 said:


> Your exactly right. I don't like the program because in the last 2 years, my cheap lock-off week has got me 1 week at Ko Olina, 1 week at Newport, 1 week at Marbella, and 1 week at Paris all in 2 bedrooms, except Hawaii. Of course I would not like the new program because it is not friendly to people who have been able to maximize the value of their timeshare in the past utilizing methods learned here on TUG. I think anytime a change negatively impacts the value of something you own, you are going to dislike the change.



And you're exactly right, too!  You won't get the same exchanges from the DC that you've been getting from II, so converting your Weeks to DC Points doesn't improve your usage value.  Nothing wrong with you saying No to Points, at all.  (And I don't know if you've gotten a different impression from me, but I don't think there's anything wrong with the way you've played the II game either - with the majority of Weeks in Marriott's system it is possible to consistently trade up, and the good Marriott reps will advise owners to try to do that.  I'd do it if I could, too, and I'm sure it would affect my decision whether or not to enroll.)

Your exchange history, though, makes you a perfect candidate to answer the OP's question in this thread (paraphrased):  "Was the rep correct?  If so, and you can still do all the same things that you've been doing with your Weeks in II by enrolling them in the DC but not converting them to Points, which will save you money in the annual usage fees, why all the negativity toward enrolling in the DC?"

Instead of accusing the OP of being a Marriott plant or not knowledgeable, you answered that your problem is with the break-even point when you compare Marriott timeshare ownership to renting.  Good, helpful answer, like the others that confirmed for the OP that his rep was correct, or the ones that pointed out that if he exchanges outside Marriotts his fees would not all be covered by the DC, etc ...

Isn't that why the OP came here, to get answers to his questions?  Do we want TUG to be known as the place where every new poster who sees value in the DC is suspected of being a Marriott plant?  It's pretty much a given that the majority of TUGgers will not get enhanced usage value by converting their Weeks to Points in the DC, but I agree with those who say that sometimes the negativity towards a program that will obviously work for some is a bit much here.  If I was a conspiracy theorist, I could say that it exists for one reason - to try to keep as many folks as possible from using their Weeks in the DC because every Week given to the DC is a Week removed from II's pool.  Hmmmmm.


----------



## josh1231 (Nov 16, 2010)

SueDonJ said:


> And you're exactly right, too!  You won't get the same exchanges from the DC that you've been getting from II, so converting your Weeks to DC Points doesn't improve your usage value.  Nothing wrong with you saying No to Points, at all.  (And I don't know if you've gotten a different impression from me, but I don't think there's anything wrong with the way you've played the II game either - with the majority of Weeks in Marriott's system it is possible to consistently trade up, and the good Marriott reps will advise owners to try to do that.  I'd do it if I could, too, and I'm sure it would affect my decision whether or not to enroll.)
> 
> Your exchange history, though, makes you a perfect candidate to answer the OP's question in this thread (paraphrased):  "Was the rep correct?  If so, and you can still do all the same things that you've been doing with your Weeks in II by enrolling them in the DC but not converting them to Points, which will save you money in the annual usage fees, why all the negativity toward enrolling in the DC?"
> 
> ...



I edited my post to you because I was afraid it may be too negative about the points system, but one of the things I took out was where I agreed with you that one should not accuse anyone of being a Marriott plant unless they have evidence to support their claim. 

I can certainly see the point of view of people who like the points system, and if I had multiple weeks would enroll in it myself because of the savings in II fees  and it would also be great for getting into that week which is impossibly hard to exchange into (which I don't experience because I prefer should season travel).


----------



## rsackett (Nov 16, 2010)

In my situation these are the reasons I will not join (in no particular order)

1)	Too much up front money, almost $2000
2)	I do not have lock-offs, so no money to be saved there
3)	Skim, seems dishonest to say _"no nickel and diming you to death"_ then sneak in a hidden fee.  Actually seem worse than a fee because I can no longer get 7 nights at an equivalent resort if I use points.
4)	It would take FOUR of my summer Hilton Head weeks to trade for ANY non-Marriott two bedroom in II.
5)	I pay the exchange fees every year even if I stay at my home resorts.
6)	My membership is non transferable if I sell my week, no residual value to my $2000 investment.
7)	If I buy more weeks I have to have a second II account.
8)	Leftover points expire, somewhat forcing you to convert to points each year or loose more value.
9)	See no benefit in shorter stays for me, kids in school, and no resorts close enough for weekend stays.
10)	If I spent more time thinking I could think of more.

Ray


----------



## DanCali (Nov 16, 2010)

rsackett said:


> In my situation these are the reasons I will not join (in no particular order)
> 
> 1)	Too much up front money, almost $2000
> 2)	I do not have lock-offs, so no money to be saved there
> ...



Some excellent points here. 

You did not mention the two items that bother me the most.

1) There is no "request first". If you can't get an instant exchange and want to waitlist, you need to give up your week (and possibly a prime reservation you can rent), convert to points, and hope for the best.

2) This is not a true "points system". With Starwood I can call at 8 months out and exchange into any unreserved week (analogously, any unreserved week is automatically deposited at 8 months out). Here it's a pure exchange system and you are at the mercy of other deposits. If owners don't actively deposit weeks and/or trust owners (including Marriott) don't actively deposit points into the exchange company there is no inventory. This is not unlike II, but (i) II is a proven exchange system and (ii) II doesn't sell itself as a "points system".

And yes, the $2000 enrollment fee is way too high and out of line with any other exchange company (so is $600).


----------



## SueDonJ (Nov 16, 2010)

DanCali said:


> Some excellent points here.
> 
> You did not mention the two items that bother me the most.
> 
> 1) There is no "request first". If you can't get an instant exchange and want to waitlist, you need to give up your week (and possibly a prime reservation you can rent), convert to points, and hope for the best.



If you want to get the best possible exchange value from II, including extra weeks from AC's and related XYZ's, then "request first" is taken off the table in that system also.

(from the Accommodation Certificate section of the Marriott Timeshare FAQs on this board:  " ... you won't get an AC if you use the request-first method for requesting an exchange, under which you hold onto your week until you get an exchange that's acceptable to you. ...")



DanCali said:


> 2) This is not a true "points system". With Starwood I can call at 8 months out and exchange into any unreserved week (analogously, any unreserved week is automatically deposited at 8 months out). Here it's a pure exchange system and you are at the mercy of other deposits. If owners don't actively deposit weeks and/or trust owners (including Marriott) don't actively deposit points into the exchange company there is no inventory. This is not unlike II, but (i) II is a proven exchange system and (ii) II doesn't sell itself as a "points system".



Although II does use a secret formula whereby they place an unknown currency value on deposits in order to determine whether or not one interval can pull another for exchanging.  I agree that there's a risk in joining a new, unproven exchange system, and that the success of every exchange company is dependent upon owners depositing their intervals.  But I disagree that Marriott sells its new DC as a true points system - in the sense that DVC and similar systems are Points Systems - to Weeks owners.  It's called the Marriott Vacation Club Destinations Exchange Program and owners who enroll their Weeks in it are defined as "Exchange Members."  They clearly sell it to Weeks owners as an exchange program with the currency being points.



DanCali said:


> And yes, the $2000 enrollment fee is way too high and out of line with any other exchange company (so is $600).



No disagreement here, not everyone's budget or usage will support the high enrollment fee.  And some will choose to not enroll for the simple reason that they don't want to give Marriott any more of their money!  Nobody who chooses to balk at the enrollment fee can be faulted no matter why they object to it.


----------



## DanCali (Nov 16, 2010)

SueDonJ said:


> If you want to get the best possible exchange value from II, including extra weeks from AC's and related XYZ's, then "request first" is taken off the table in that system also.



I see you were able to back up your claim about ACs. But why would you include the XYZs in this without any proof to your claim? 

You are correct about ACs.

You are completely wrong about 2-for-1 XYZ deal, and I am saying this from personal experience.

The 2-for-1 is based on a confirmed exchange. It has nothing to do with the deposit method. I traded a NCV 2BR for a MAW 2BR using request first. I then got a 2-for-1 extra week in 2Br at MGC.

More importantly, your post completely brushes away the issue I raised. The point is not that "get the best possible exchange value from II" you need to do a deposit first. The main point is that with II you have the ability to keep your reserved week until an exchange is confirmed via an ongoing request. With Marriott you do not. Either call daily and be at the end of the line after the waitlisters, or get on a waitlist and give up your week. That is a huge difference, especially if your backup plan is to use or rent your week.

I would have been happy with just the NCV --> MAW exchange, which is not even possible using points, especially post-skim. And if I didn't get it, I would have rented the NCV week for about $1000 over MFs. To me that is "the best possible exchange value" ex-ante. Ex-post, the 2-for-1 week is just gravy, but it didn't affect my decision on the deposit method since the option to rent was too valuable in this case.


----------



## kjd (Nov 17, 2010)

Isn't this the time that Marriott should move on and devote their attention to new programs and benefits for owners?  They could do a great deal to turn the timeshare market around if they followed a new and innovative business plan.  Everyone would benefit.  The old timeshare model is broken. It's time for Marriott to revolutionize the industry and not merely offer us a watered down points program which even they admit is aimed at a limited audience.

No, rather they are stuck in a "time warp" still wanting to punish resale buyers of years ago with higher fees and unwarranted deadlines in order to create a second class of ownership. Marriott corp attempts to denigrate resale buyers only takes the focus away from the corp's main mission.  I can't understand why there is any controversy about it.  As a direct purchaser and also a resale owner I certainly harbor no resentment toward any resale owners. Marriott should have simply announced the new program as another alternative for everyone and made all owners eligible to enroll free of charge.  Then they should have moved on.  Just look at the waisted time that has been spent on this relatively insignificant issue.


----------



## Pens_Fan (Nov 17, 2010)

kjd said:


> Marriott should have simply announced the new program as another alternative for everyone and made all owners eligible to *enroll free of charge*.  Then they should have moved on.  Just look at the waisted time that has been spent on this relatively insignificant issue.



I almost peed myself.

Marriott did this to get a new revenue stream.

No way they were going to allow anyone to enroll for free.

If they got 20% of their 400,000 owners to enroll at an average of $1000 per enrollee, that was $80,000,000 they made just for the privilege of joining their system.  That is before they start charging the yearly fees and before they convince one person to buy points.


----------



## Herb33 (Nov 17, 2010)

*Question*

Beyond the enrollment fee, does Marriott derive any benefit from the enrollment of owner weeks if those weeks are never exchanged for DC points?

It cost me nothing to enroll my weeks because I also purchased points.  But _given my particular circumstances_, I'm having a hard time coming up with a good reason to exchange my weeks for DC points.  I'd rather keep using my weeks the way I've always used them.  And use the new points I purchased to supplement that activity.

The only reason I can think of for keeping my DC enrollment is the consolidation of fees.  But given the way we use our weeks, the fee savings over time will be a wash.

So I'm wondering if my disenrollment would hurt Marriott more than it would hurt me.  Hence, my question above.


----------



## Big Matt (Nov 17, 2010)

I'll bet you that this lead balloon will eventually be "free".  My only question is how they are going to pay the folks who already paid up to $1995.  My guess is that they will give out points as compensation.

They have to get enough folks into this DC or it will never work, and selling points right now is no different than selling weeks in the old model, there are just more things to confuse the customer.  The economy stinks and timeshares are luxury purchases for most people.



Pens_Fan said:


> I almost peed myself.
> 
> Marriott did this to get a new revenue stream.
> 
> ...


----------



## SueDonJ (Nov 17, 2010)

DanCali said:


> I see you were able to back up your claim about ACs. But why would you include the XYZs in this without any proof to your claim?
> 
> You are correct about ACs.
> 
> ...



There are two types of XYZ's, right?  The 2-for-1 that you're talking about, and the other one which you can get if the unit you get in an exchange is smaller than the one you gave up.  I don't know what that one is called and that's why I referred to it as the "related" XYZ - it's relative to the value of the exchange.  Supposedly anybody can get a 2-for-1 - if you follow II's magic formula and call on the right day and speak to the right rep - but the other type of XYZ is directly related to the size of the unit you give up and is supposed to be an added-value feature to compensate for trade-downs.

And again, there is no clear winner when you compare abstractly which system will give you the most exchange value.  In both systems it's all dependent upon the particular Week being given up.

In the DC you're correct that there is no "request first" option so you have to either keep calling until your desired interval shows up or give up your confirmed Weeks reservation to go on the DC Waitlist.  But a form of "request first" does exist in the DC - aside from the Waitlist - in that you don't have to commit to converting your Week to Points until the interval you want becomes available.  As well, in the DC you can't Waitlist until 12-mos out (for 7 days or more) or 10-mos out (six days or less) anyway, and so far the few who have reported their results to TUG say that the intervals they wanted showed up (in what appeared to be bulk bankings) during the time period before they were eligible to go on the Waitlist and were calling frequently to check availability.

The advice on TUG about using II's "request first" option usually includes a caveat that you should call in occasionally even if you place a request because the possibility exists for your request to be overlooked.  And I know I've read posts from folks who questioned why when they called in to II the rep was able to find an interval which should have been matched to their ongoing "request first" but wasn't.  I don't think I've ever seen the same complaint made about ongoing "deposit first" requests. 

So here comparing "request first" options in the two systems, it's completely true that II has that named option and the DC doesn't.  But practically, both systems work about the same - if you want to get an exchange that's not available on an immediate basis but you don't want to give up your confirmed reservation, then you're going to have to put some time and effort into checking inventory.  Although you do have a choice with II that you do not have with the DC - you can choose to rely on their reportedly-flawed system to search automatically for you.

As far as renting a confirmed reservation to get good value, many folks do it happily and successfully.  That's not something we want to ever get into but there's a whole lot of folks who do.  And you're right - it can be the perfect solution.  I didn't mention it here, though, because here I'm just comparing II's and Marriott's systems.


----------



## SueDonJ (Nov 17, 2010)

Big Matt said:


> I'll bet you that this lead balloon will eventually be "free".  My only question is how they are going to pay the folks who already paid up to $1995.  My guess is that they will give out points as compensation.
> 
> They have to get enough folks into this DC or it will never work, and selling points right now is no different than selling weeks in the old model, there are just more things to confuse the customer.  The economy stinks and timeshares are luxury purchases for most people.



Anything can happen, but when have we EVER known Marriott to give away something for free?  I doubt it'll happen.

I know it's hard to believe on TUG but there are still folks out there who do see Marriott as a good product but will not buy on the external resale market, and before the DC was introduced the developer pricing for Weeks was astronomical.  One way that selling Points is different from selling Weeks, is that those folks can now choose to buy a small number of Points and take advantage of the banking/borrowing to plan every-other- or every-third-year trips.  That way they're spending less upfront but still getting into the system.  Not for me, not for you, not for most people I'd guess in this economy, but there are folks out there buying Points.


----------



## SueDonJ (Nov 17, 2010)

Herb33 said:


> Beyond the enrollment fee, does Marriott derive any benefit from the enrollment of owner weeks if those weeks are never exchanged for DC points?
> 
> It cost me nothing to enroll my weeks because I also purchased points.  But _given my particular circumstances_, I'm having a hard time coming up with a good reason to exchange my weeks for DC points.  I'd rather keep using my weeks the way I've always used them.  And use the new points I purchased to supplement that activity.
> 
> ...



That's something I'm trying to figure out, too, Herb.  All I can think of is that it has to have something to do with how all of these "buckets" of inventory work.  It's for certain that Marriott is able to pull inventory from II to satisfy DC Points requests - at least I'm certain of it because of the way the rep was able to process my request on the first day that reservations were taken.  Thinking about what dioxide says - that the buckets will eventually be co-mingled to the point where practically it won't matter that there are buckets - I think that all enrolled Weeks play a part in the co-mingling no matter if they're converted to Points or not.

So if you remain in the DC but do not ever convert to Points, yes I think Marriott derives a value from your enrollment in that your Week(s) become a part of the inventory to which DC participants have access.  Not in the way that you would lose home usage of your Week if you didn't convert to Points and/or didn't do an II exchange, but in the way that an interval matching your Week could be accounted for somehow in the DC inventory.  (Perhaps as a like-for-like deposit by Marriott to II?  I dunno.)  And conversely, if you un-enroll, that access is denied.

I think.  But I could be way off base.


----------



## DanCali (Nov 17, 2010)

SueDonJ said:


> In the DC you're correct that there is no "request first" option so you have to either keep calling until your desired interval shows up or give up your confirmed Weeks reservation to go on the DC Waitlist.



At least we agree on this.



SueDonJ said:


> But a form of "request first" does exist in the DC - aside from the Waitlist - in that you don't have to commit to converting your Week to Points until the interval you want becomes available.



Not sure how this is a "request first".  

Assuming you want to exchange, the only way to do what you are describing is to call every day until maybe you get something. This is known as "instant exchange," which II also offers, except you can do it more easily online. 

Can you do an "ongoing request" (not by calling all the time) without a deposit in the DC? I don't believe you can.



SueDonJ said:


> The advice on TUG about using II's "request first" option usually includes a caveat that you should call in occasionally even if you place a request because the possibility exists for your request to be overlooked.  And I know I've read posts from folks who questioned why when they called in to II the rep was able to find an interval which should have been matched to their ongoing "request first" but wasn't.  I don't think I've ever seen the same complaint made about ongoing "deposit first" requests.



Could the common thing have anything to do with people trying to trade a studio into a 2BR-only resort? And this should hold for "deposit first" too... The bigger question is why the reps do give the exchanges to those people - but if they get them more power to them.

As far as I can tell, if you ask for something reasonably "like for like" using request first in II it works great. At least in my short history of exchanging I'm batting 1000...



SueDonJ said:


> So here comparing "request first" options in the two systems, it's completely true that II has that named option and the DC doesn't.  But practically, both systems work about the same - if you want to get an exchange that's not available on an immediate basis but you don't want to give up your confirmed reservation, then you're going to have to put some time and effort into checking inventory.



To me the lack of request first is the #1 reason for not joining. And the difference between what the DC offers and "request first" is a lot more than semantics. If you can brush it aside as a non-issue that's great - but I'm not buying it.


----------



## SueDonJ (Nov 17, 2010)

DanCali said:


> ... Assuming you want to exchange, the only way to do what you are describing is to call every day until maybe you get something. This is known as "instant exchange," which II also offers, except you can do it more easily online.
> 
> Can you do an "ongoing request" (not by calling all the time) without a deposit in the DC? I don't believe you can.



No, but what I tried to say with all those words was that based on the recommendations of savvy TUG exchangers, I wouldn't expect success with using II's "request first" method unless I supplemented it with calling in occasionally to ask the rep to do a real-time search.  And as long as I have to call in either system - DC or II - I really don't see a practical difference.  (Plus, of course knowing that I'm probably going to have to accept a downtrade, I won't give up a Week to II unless they give me an AC, which they won't unless I do a "deposit first" request.)



DanCali said:


> Could the common thing have anything to do with people trying to trade a studio into a 2BR-only resort? And this should hold for "deposit first" too... The bigger question is why the reps do give the exchanges to those people - but if they get them more power to them. ...



I don't know if that's what requires the occasional calls, could be.  All I know is the suggestion is made here on TUG on a routine basis whenever "request first" is explained and not only when an uptrade is requested.

But I wonder why you question the reps giving these trades, Dan.  II is set up so that anyone can get a larger unit if they limit their searches to resorts which only have larger units than the one they're depositing.  "It is what it is."  It's not a scam, certainly, and there's nothing questionable or wrong about taking advantage of the setup if you can. 



DanCali said:


> As far as I can tell, if you ask for something reasonably "like for like" using request first in II it works great. At least in my short history of exchanging I'm batting 1000...
> 
> To me the lack of request first is the #1 reason for not joining. ...



Excellent, I don't blame you for not wanting to give up II - I wouldn't either if my history with them was as successful.  But bringing this back around to the OP, enrolling in the DC does not equate to sacrificing II.  Those of us who have enrolled Weeks see virtually no difference between our old and new II accounts - phantom searches return the same results; several people have reported successful no-fee exchanges in their new accounts; Getaway inventory is exactly the same in the two accounts; there is no evidence that AC's will not be offered to enrolled Weeks (although we'll know for certain if/when II begins offering AC's to Marriott weeks again); and on that crazy morning when a glitch in II's system allowed us to see "XYZ Units" in our lists, they showed up in both accounts.  For those who only exchange among Marriotts and do a fair amount of exchanging, it can be cost-effective to enroll Weeks in the DC and continue to use II if it's advantageous to do so.


----------



## Big Matt (Nov 17, 2010)

I know that there are still people buying points, and there are still even folks financing their purchases, but Marriott has to sell lots and lots of points to unload all of the current supply left over from the weeks progam.  If they don't get moving, I could also see them contemplate getting out of the business entirely.



SueDonJ said:


> Anything can happen, but when have we EVER known Marriott to give away something for free?  I doubt it'll happen.
> 
> I know it's hard to believe on TUG but there are still folks out there who do see Marriott as a good product but will not buy on the external resale market, and before the DC was introduced the developer pricing for Weeks was astronomical.  One way that selling Points is different from selling Weeks, is that those folks can now choose to buy a small number of Points and take advantage of the banking/borrowing to plan every-other- or every-third-year trips.  That way they're spending less upfront but still getting into the system.  Not for me, not for you, not for most people I'd guess in this economy, but there are folks out there buying Points.


----------



## SueDonJ (Nov 17, 2010)

Big Matt said:


> I know that there are still people buying points, and there are still even folks financing their purchases, but Marriott has to sell lots and lots of points to unload all of the current supply left over from the weeks progam.  If they don't get moving, I could also see them contemplate getting out of the business entirely.



I think there are some legitimate concerns about the poor economy and its effect on timeshares, which is why I like that Marriott has introduced a new product that may be more affordable (small Points contract versus Week) for the relatively few new buyers who are out there.  I don't know that the timeshare market will ever come back to what it was in its heyday, but then again I'm shocked at the amount of folks who are out there spending money the way they are these days on everything else.

It is possible that in this climate Marriott may not renew management contracts at some of the older resorts which will need extensive refurbs, where they may have if the contracts were up four years ago.  (I don't know for sure, am just guessing!)  But I don't ever see them getting out of the business entirely, not when they're still getting 10% of the MF as their management fees.  That's a good chunk of change and now with the introduction of Points they don't have to sink capital into new large-footprint stand-alone resorts anymore in order to refresh their inventory for existing and new owners.  Their stated plans are to branch out into converting some hotel spaces into timeshare units, and to get more involved in the sort of travel packages that we're seeing now in the Explorer Collection of the DC.

Marriott is moving away from the Weeks-based timeshare model no doubt, but I see them looking for replacement business and not closing up shop completely.


----------



## Big Matt (Nov 18, 2010)

Susan,
I think that what we've seen with the advent of Ritz Carlton being integrated into the Rewards program goes along with it also.  Your point about them branching out is very important.  When I say that they may get out of the business entirely I was really talking about the land development and real estate part of it.  

My personal belief is that they will ultimately integrate the DC with Rewards and make it all fungible.  Combining it with airfare, adventures, etc. just broadens their audience.  The bottom line is that Marriott is in the hospitality business.  They are excellent at hotel/hospitality management.


----------



## wof45 (Nov 18, 2010)

I don't see Marriott getting out of the resort management business since they make a nice fee for what they do. 

Perhaps they would drop resorts if the owners association becomes combative or if the association decides not to have maintenance fees cover reserves or maintaining standards since they would no longer have to include these in the vacation club.

We have seen with our condos the reluctance of older owners to have fees rise to maintain quality, and that might also happen with timeshare resorts as they age.

I think a bigger problem in the future will be people with bad weeks who just default on their maintenance fees so that everyone else has to pick up their share of unpaid fees.


----------



## pipet (Nov 18, 2010)

For me, what ticked me off the most, was that as a Hawaii owner, Marriott touted the ability to EASILY trade to other Hawaiin locations.  If I convert to points, this is not possible without a view downgrade or a downsize during any of the weeks I can actually travel, and for Maui, I'd have to take a huge downgrade to go.  I know approximately what Maui cost when I bought, and there wasn't such a price differential so I don't feel like it's this massive uptrade that I want (I am excluding the new Maui which was significantly more).   I can get a view downgrade with II but also get bonus weeks (AC, XYZ).  Unless you own Maui or can travel off-peak, DC stinks for Hawaii to Hawaii exchanges.  I focus on HI because that is where my family wants to go all the time!

I agree with the comments that in some cases you can make out with the new program and in others it's not so good.  For those who can save on fees & never convert to points, the math is easy to calculate, although I do wonder if they will increase the annual fee or start adding ala carte fees later.  If you do convert to points, though, you are paying exchange fees even though it seems "free" if you factor in skim.  When I crunched numbers and compared my II fees & trades to the DC program and point/skim fees, the DC program came up very short.  This is even with trying to maximize my high value week with some downtrades (caveat: I only considered places/times I'd go, so no 10 week stay at off-peak Branson).

I initially was pretty excited about the program - being able to buy small chunks, easier to understand valuation of trade power, etc all are great ideas.  Then I saw the numbers.  With II, I avoided some trades because I didn't want to eat a huge downtrade, but the built in DC exchange fee prevents me from doing any better.  The deal-breaker though is not being able to use the DC to exchange to other Hawaiian islands as my use is HI most of the time.


----------



## wof45 (Nov 18, 2010)

Things change --

in our situation, there is a benefit in the DC.
We bought our 5 Marriott weeks many years ago, when there were kids to go to Disney and reasons to travel West to California or Hawaii.

Now that we are older, we don't really want to go to Orlando, we don't want the long flights to CA or HI.

So far, we have been able to use the points from our weeks (two resales) to pick peak time and ocean view when we want to travel.  This used to be a problem with II since we could only trade when someone deposited, and there now seems to be inventory that wasn't available before in II.  

We usually felt we were losing in II, except for flexchange with our lockouts -- We don't mind spending some extra points to get what we really want.


----------

