# Marriott points and internal exchange program - the latest info



## Dave M

This comes from a Marriott insider who has never given me inaccurate info:

The internal points and internal exchange program that I announced on this forum about two years ago as being "in development" is currently scheduled to become operative in about May/June 2010. (Obviously, delays are possible.)

Those who bought directly from Marriott will pay a relatively low fee if they choose to join the points program. Marriott intends to make the fee low enough so that many, many owners will join. Those who bought resale will pay a higher fee, possibly much higher, if they wish to join. I don't know yet whether there will be any partial or full grandfathering for those who purchased resale before a particular unknown date.

Marriott's intent is to make it easy enough for most owners to join so that the points program will work effectively. Note that the overwhelming majority of Marriott owners bought directly from Marriott, so if resale owners don't pay the higher fee to join, Marriott's program will likely still be a big success.

Also, Marriott expects to make it easy enough for most owners to join that the huge majority of available exchange weeks will be exchanged through the internal points system. If successful, there wouldn't be many prime weeks in II inventory because those prime weeks would command a higher exchange value in the internal points program.

This will be a money-maker for Marriott, as anticipated all along. Instead of II getting the exchange fee for those Marriott to Marriott exchanges, Marriott will get it. There are around 700,000 Marriott weeks. If one fourth of those (no idea what the real number is) exchange in the points system to other Marriotts each year, an exchange fee of $100 would mean $17,500,000 in annual revenue that goes to Marriott instead of II. That doesn't count the upfront fees to join the points program.

II would still be used by those who don’t join the points program and by those who want to exchange to non-Marriotts.

We can speculate all we want, but I currently have no additional info (how the points program would work, what the fees would be, how points would be assigned to various individual weeks or seasons, etc.). Thus, don’t ask for more details because I don’t have them!   

If you attend a Marriott sales presentation, you'll likely hear more about this coming program. However, remember that those sales people don't neceesarily have the most accurate info.

There are still a myriad of details to work out before the program goes live, but it’s for real.

If I get any updates, I will edit this post and post a message in this thread regarding the update.


----------



## jimf41

Let me be the first to say  WOW. About a year and a half ago you dropped the bombshell 6 month reservation window for resale owners. I assume that this source is not the same one. IF Marriott is definitely doing this why let it out a year ahead of time. One reason, just like with the 6 month resale res window deal they want to see what the owners reaction is before they do it. 

I bought all my weeks direct and even if they give me free entrance into this system I don't see the benefit to me over the current system. To "buy" into something there would have to be a big advantage over II. From the rumors going around about how it would work, none of them appeal to me.

Can't wait to see the posts on this one.


----------



## Michigan Czar

Dave, thanks for always keeping us informed. Wow, this will be interesting to follow. Let the discussions begin.


----------



## normab

We are so happy with the system that exists, trading our weeks for what we consider to be a reasonable fee.  And we bought a silver week specifically for flexchanging that works well for us in the current system.

I am not sure we would welcome the points system unless it keeps the benefits we now have and would offer us some additional benefit.  It will be interesting to see the specifics--I would imagine the average person would not choose to make a change unless there were some benefit for them, not just Marriott.


----------



## aka Julie

Wonder if II will mount some kind of counter attack/strategy to try to keep a good number of Marriott owners depositing and exchanging thru II, i.e. more ACs, lower exchange fees, etc.   We can only hope.


----------



## thinze3

jimf41 said:


> Let me be the first to say  WOW. About a year and a half ago you dropped the bombshell 6 month reservation window for resale owners. I assume that this source is not the same one. IF Marriott is definitely doing this why let it out a year ahead of time. One reason, just like with the 6 month resale res window deal they want to see what the owners reaction is before they do it.
> 
> I bought all my weeks direct and even if they give me free entrance into this system I don't see the benefit to me over the current system. To "buy" into something there would have to be a big advantage over II. From the rumors going around about how it would work, none of them appeal to me.
> 
> Can't wait to see the posts on this one.



The points sytem makes more sense, as that survey we all took last year was all about points.


----------



## KathyPet

Darn  I just renewed my II membership for 3 years.  i wonder if i can cancel and get a pro rated refund.


----------



## SueDonJ

Thanks for the update, Dave.  Even without all the details, this looks a whole lot better than the Asian-resorts points program that's been mentioned here recently (or at least, it doesn't appear that the costs will be as prohibitive.)

It sure is nice to "know" someone in the know.


----------



## gmarine

KathyPet said:


> Darn  I just renewed my II membership for 3 years.  i wonder if i can cancel and get a pro rated refund.



Yes, you can.


----------



## KathyPet

Thanks GMarine   good to know I can get my money back!


----------



## Ireland'sCall

Guess we will have to just wait until the full scheme is revealed in mid 2010 .
Meantime the uncertainty will drive down even further the resale values .
 In addition would you buy direct knowing that your chances of resale are very much diminished ?

G


----------



## RandR

Perfect timing...I just got my letter today from Marriott that my resale is complete and the unit is in my name.  Let's hope they don't end up doing this after all.  As a resale owner I would be pretty miffed if they put a big punitive fee in for resale owners.  My wife travels a lot for business and it would certainly mean the end of her use of Marriotts.  She is only one person but if many other resale owners do the same thing maybe it will get noticed.  Probably not though.


----------



## KathyPet

Well  Welcome to the world of being "miffed".  You can join those of us who bough direct who get "miffed" every time Marriott devalues our points.  And, yes you are correct about Marriott not caring in the least if you take your hotel business elsewhere.  When they did the last point devaluation under the guise of "System enhancements" there was a huge outcry by Marriott owners and it did absolutely no good whatsoever.  
Marriott made nothing on the units when they are sold on the resale market.  it does not surprise me at all they they will attempt to "stick it to" resale purchasers now.


----------



## gmarine

IMO, Marriott isnt going to do anything to piss off existing owners who bought resale. 
I could see Marriott having a higher fee for resale owners and/or grandfathering in resale buyers but I doubt the fee will be much higher. Marriott wouldnt want to discourage resale buyers from joining the program because they would still want the revenue from the exchanges.

So we wait and see what happens.


----------



## GregT

Fascinating post ---  I would think a Marriott point system (pure speculation) has to lean more towards the Wyndham model than the Worldmark model (apologies that I don't know the other point systems well enough -- can anyone contrast?).

Wyndham has a "home resort" where your points originated, and which determines your MFs -- and you have a booking preference (you can book at your home resort 12 (or 13?) months in advance, whereas a non-owner must wait until 10 months.  In Worldmark, there is no home resort and you pay the same MFs as all other owners (and there are no booking preferences).

In Wyndham, we say "points are points" and buy where the MFs are lowest.  The availability is generally strong enough that you can almost always get where you want, assuming you plan ahead.    I bought at the cheapest MF property I could find (Smoky Mountains in Tennessee) and bought the exact point size I needed to be able to book the property I really wanted to visit(Elysian Beach Resort), which commanded double the MFs in the Caribbean.

Wyndham's resale values have been utterly obliterated due to their on-going battle with their owners to take away owner privileges (not rights).  I bought my Smoky Mountain Wyndham TS for about $100.  I don't see Marriott going to war with its owners like Wyndham. 

However, this may open up an opportunity to "load up" on Marriott points at the lower MF properties and trade into the higher MF properties (such as MOC).    It will be interesting to see how Marriott handles this.

I agree with the Poster who indicated this will put further pressure on resale pricing -- uncertainty always causes concern, and people won't want to be holding an even more illiquid asset that is now having the rules change, especially in this economy.  

I think it will also hurt the retail pricing at the higher-end properties -- why pay $60K at MOC for XXX points when you can buy one or two $20K properties for XX points and get into MOC?    Unless there is a compelling home resort booking advantage...

Dave, thanks for posting!


----------



## PerryM

*Don't buy Marriott now!!!*

The logical reaction should be to not buy Marriott until they introduce their system.

Questions that are up in the air:

1) What is the cost to convert an existing week?  Will existing weeks have to pay much more than new weeks on the day of the release?

2) New units sold after the release might have the conversion fee built in as a sweetener, just like cash discounts and MRPs now.  Wait for the sweetener.

3) Yearly maintenance fee - how much?

4) Transaction fee - how much?

5) When the unit is sold resale the Internal Exchange Points do NOT carry forward to the new owner - the existing Points disappear into Marriott's pocket

6) How will a $35k Platinum week at X exchange for a $35k Platinum week at Y?  

7) Which Marriott unit/week will generate more Points?  Why take a guess and buy now - just wait for the new system

8) Buy Marriott now or buy a resale now and be grandfathered in - that's my guess

9) 13 month reservation window stays/goes?

10) Can Points be rented from one Marriott owner to another - cheaper to rent Points than buy the week

11) Can Points be "rolled forward' to next year or do they just disappear if you can't go on vacation this year?

12) Can Points be borrowed from next year's usage?  If so cheaper to borrow than buy usage

13) Is it still the 8 am mad dash to reserve a week to deposit and get more points or does Marriott just give you a generic week?

14) If few Marriotts make it into II those that do might be able to get 3BRs or Holiday weeks or Ocean Front (new benefit) - II will make it worth your while to deposit your week

15) Must you pledge usage for years in the future?  Will you have to pay a penalty to Marriott if you sell your week?  Can you even sell your week?

For the life of me I can't figure out why a smart company, like Marriott, will keep this rumor going for 3+ years by next year.  What good does 3 years of rumors do for Marriott?

The unknowns are many and the benefits of buying now are what?  Better to wait until Marriott releases this wonderful system - hell, resales might drop so low that you can buy 2 or 3 resale weeks for 1 Marriott week.

P.S.

Make no mistake about it this is a sales gimmick with Marriott getting more than the owners.  You will see for yourself if this system ever sees the light of day.


----------



## NJDave

gmarine said:


> IMO, Marriott isnt going to do anything to piss off existing owners who bought resale.
> I could see Marriott having a higher fee for resale owners and/or grandfathering in resale buyers but I doubt the fee will be much higher. Marriott wouldnt want to discourage resale buyers from joining the program because they would still want the revenue from the exchanges.




In addition, Marriott should not look soley at how much timeshare revenue they may receive when deciding how to treat resale (or any) owners.  If  owners are "totally dissatisifed" with Marriott, they may take their personal and /or business hotel travel over to Starwood, Hilton or other competitors.


----------



## bobcat

NJDave said:


> In addition, Marriott should not look soley at how much timeshare revenue they may receive when deciding how to treat resale (or any) owners.  If  owners are "totally dissatisifed" with Marriott, they may take their personal and /or business hotel travel over to Starwood, Hilton or other competitors.



I do not like points. We were in a system where they  raised M/F's, changed points value and other things. People may cxl. their Marriott cards ?. How will they deal with the view you own?. They could have a points scale from Garden to Ocean front. Too many questions. In the meantime it could kill sales from Marriott and resale. Perry made good points and well as other people. In the meantime, I ask that all owners keep the peace  between direct sales and resale. We all made a choice when we purchased.   Thanks.


----------



## Quimby4

bobcat said:


> I do not like points. We were in a system where they  raised M/F's, changed points value and other things. People may cxl. their Marriott cards ?. How will they deal with the view you own?. They could have a points scale from Garden to Ocean front. Too many questions. In the meantime it could kill sales from Marriott and resale. Perry made good points and well as other people. In the meantime, I ask that all owners keep the peace  between direct sales and resale. We all made a choice when we purchased.   Thanks.



Marriott and Direct Buyers should all be thankful for the resale owners.  We continue to pour our money into the resorts through maintenance fees.  Many other resorts are struggling due to foreclosed units and unpaid maintenance fees.  

The Marriott Resale purchasers should be treated the same as Direct Buyers.    I am willing to spend about $85 to join the Marriott system and $99 to trade, no more than what I am paying for II, which gives me access to 1000's of resorts.

Just had to put my 2 cents in for the people from Marriott reading the board   Looking forward to hearing more details.


----------



## BocaBum99

Dave,

Marriott had contract sales of $212M in the second quarter in its timeshare segment.  If you are correct and Marriott converts 1/4 of its members into points, your annualized revenue of $17.5M is very small.  On a quarterly basis, that is $4.375M or about 2% of sales.  In addition, there will be costs to operate the system that they didn't have before they offered it.  So, the net income contribution is much smaller.  That assumes that Marriott will be able to charge $100 to book an internal exchange.  That is very high for an internal exchange.  $49 is much more reasonable.  At that rate, the revenue contribution is less than 1% of revenues.  Marriott is clearly not doing this for the exchange revenue.  

I believe Marriott is doing it to remain competitive and gain control of inventory.  They need a better story.  I agree that the idea of making it very inexpensive for people who make developer purchases is the right idea to get more folks to convert.  That is the error most other timeshare groups made.  However, even if free, there is no guarantee that owners will convert depending on the program.

Making it so that resale owners need to pay something like a $5000 fee to join is probably something they would do.  I would probably dump my Marriott's when the conversion rate is really high if it ever gets really high.
It's certainly a different approach.  It'll be fun to watch.

Unfortunately for owners, their best option is to do nothing.  If they opt in, they will be immediately devaluing their ownerships by giving Marriott control of what they own.


----------



## dougp26364

Dave M said:


> This comes from a Marriott insider who has never given me inaccurate info:
> 
> The internal points and internal exchange program that I announced on this forum about two years ago as being "in development" is currently scheduled to become operative in about May/June 2010. (Obviously, delays are possible.)
> 
> Those who bought directly from Marriott will pay a relatively low fee if they choose to join the points program. Marriott intends to make the fee low enough so that many, many owners will join. Those who bought resale will pay a higher fee, possibly much higher, if they wish to join. I don't know yet whether there will be any partial or full grandfathering for those who purchased resale before a particular unknown date.
> 
> Marriott's intent is to make it easy enough for most owners to join so that the points program will work effectively. Note that the overwhelming majority of Marriott owners bought directly from Marriott, so if resale owners don't pay the higher fee to join, Marriott's program will likely still be a big success.
> 
> Also, Marriott expects to make it easy enough for most owners to join that the huge majority of available exchange weeks will be exchanged through the internal points system. If successful, there wouldn't be many prime weeks in II inventory because those prime weeks would command a higher exchange value in the internal points program.
> 
> This will be a money-maker for Marriott, as anticipated all along. Instead of II getting the exchange fee for those Marriott to Marriott exchanges, Marriott will get it. There are around 700,000 Marriott weeks. If one fourth of those (no idea what the real number is) exchange in the points system to other Marriotts each year, an exchange fee of $100 would mean $17,500,000 in annual revenue that goes to Marriott instead of II. That doesn't count the upfront fees to join the points program.
> 
> II would still be used by those who don’t join the points program and by those who want to exchange to non-Marriotts.
> 
> We can speculate all we want, but I currently have no additional info (how the points program would work, what the fees would be, how points would be assigned to various individual weeks or seasons, etc.). Thus, don’t ask for more details because I don’t have them!
> 
> If you attend a Marriott sales presentation, you'll likely hear more about this coming program. However, remember that those sales people don't neceesarily have the most accurate info.
> 
> There are still a myriad of details to work out before the program goes live, but it’s for real.
> 
> If I get any updates, I will edit this post and post a message in this thread regarding the update.




I wonder what Marriott considers "low" for a joiner fee? We have two weeks, I consider $100 to be low. My bet is Marriott will consider $500 to be low but, it could be higher.

Still, it's ANOTHER year out before anything happens according to your source. Anything can happen between now and then so, everything remains purely speculation. Since there's little I can do about what Marriott may or may not do, there's little sense in taking this into consideration with our current ownership interest and, should we think we might want to add another Marriott week, there's little reason to do so until AFTER Marriott decides what it wants to do.


----------



## BocaBum99

Here's a problem.  How does Marriott solve it?

There is a well known summer week stock out situation at the Maui Marriott since Marriott over assigned the platinum week at this resort.  if you want a summer week, you've got to fight hard to get one.

Let's say that Marriott creates this new points program and 40% of owners at the Maui Marriott platinum season signs up.  What weeks do they get?  Doesn't there have to be a rule that they get in line with everyone else?  To give points owners preference over summer weeks would result in revolt at that resort.

If Marriott becomes the trustee, would that be like one superowner of those weeks?  There has to be a fair distribution method of the weeks into the program.  It will be interesting to see what they do to solve it.


----------



## BocaBum99

Dave M said:


> This comes from a Marriott insider who has never given me inaccurate info:



Dave,

Didn't your source say that this points program would be rolled out in 2009?  If so, then that is one instance where he gave you inaccurate info.


----------



## PerryM

*Analog or digital?*



BocaBum99 said:


> Here's a problem.  How does Marriott solve it?
> 
> There is a well known summer week stock out situation at the Maui Marriott since Marriott over assigned the platinum week at this resort.  if you want a summer week, you've got to fight hard to get one.
> 
> Let's say that Marriott creates this new points program and 40% of owners at the Maui Marriott platinum season signs up.  What weeks do they get?  Doesn't there have to be a rule that they get in line with everyone else?  To give points owners preference over summer weeks would result in revolt at that resort.
> 
> If Marriott becomes the trustee, would that be like one superowner of those weeks?  There has to be a fair distribution method of the weeks into the program.  It will be interesting to see what they do to solve it.




At the Maui Ocean Club weeks 1 - 51 are all Platinum - this was a major blunder by Marriott but that's water over the levee.

A Points exchange system MUST take into account supply and demand - why have such a system if its no better than weeks?  So now 4th of July week, President's week, and Christmas week are worth more points.

The guy who gets up at 8 am and snags a hot holiday week suddenly has more Points in his account than the guy who got up at 8:01 am!  How can this be - it can't be.

Marriott will be forced to issue generic weeks.  At the Maui Ocean Club your deposit will be the same and another owner's there.  So who gets 4th of July week - why the guy who gets up at 7:59:45 AM since the computer seems to run 15 seconds faster than the phone system.

Same ol' same ol' except owners had to pay to get into this new ol' system.  This new system will simply be the digital version of the current analog system - nothing better.

So Marriott, why not instruct II to lengthen the "Marriott only" window from 24 days to 10 months?  Takes one eMail to do it and 1 minute on II's part.

P.S.
The 13 month/12 month reservations will still have to be honored for those Marriott owners who don't convert - but now the concept of "Home resort advantage" must be added.

What a mess...


----------



## GregT

Perhaps Marriott is rattling the saber about a points sytem to force a concession from II?  Better revenue sharing?  Who knows?  It is a distinct possibility that they are threatening to depart to sweeten the arrangement.


----------



## ecwinch

BocaBum99 said:


> Dave,
> 
> Didn't your source say that this points program would be rolled out in 2009?  If so, then that is one instance where he gave you inaccurate info.



I think that being a tad nit-picky. Lots of companies plans for 2009 changed when the economy melted down. I do not think Dave said his source was a fortune-teller.


----------



## PerryM

*Easy as 1-2-3*



GregT said:


> Perhaps Marriott is rattling the saber about a points sytem to force a concession from II?  Better revenue sharing?  Who knows?  It is a distinct possibility that they are threatening to depart to sweeten the arrangement.



My guess, and it's just that, is that Marriott is spreading rumors because:

1) They are stupid
2) They feel threatened by resales from their own owners
3) They want to have a gimmick that will allow them to sell Bronze, Silver, and Gold weeks much faster

I'd rank them in this order too.


----------



## ecwinch

PerryM said:


> At the Maui Ocean Club weeks 1 - 51 are all Platinum - this was a major blunder by Marriott but that's water over the levee.
> 
> A Points exchange system MUST take into account supply and demand - why have such a system if its no better than weeks?  So now 4th of July week, President's week, and Christmas week are worth more points.
> 
> The guy who gets up at 8 am and snags a hot holiday week suddenly has more Points in his account than the guy who got up at 8:01 am!  How can this be - it can't be.
> 
> Marriott will be forced to issue generic weeks.  At the Maui Ocean Club your deposit will be the same and another owner's there.  So who gets 4th of July week - why the guy who gets up at 7:59:45 AM since the computer seems to run 15 seconds faster than the phone system.
> 
> Same ol' same ol' except owners had to pay to get into this new ol' system.  This new system will simply be the digital version of the current analog system - nothing better.
> 
> So Marriott, why not instruct II to lengthen the "Marriott only" window from 24 days to 10 months?  Takes one eMail to do it and 1 minute on II's part.
> 
> P.S.
> The 13 month/12 month reservations will still have to be honored for those Marriott owners who don't convert - but now the concept of "Home resort advantage" must be added.
> 
> What a mess...



I think you mean the system, as you speculate it will be built, will be a mess. Since we have no firm details.


----------



## ecwinch

gmarine said:


> IMO, Marriott isnt going to do anything to piss off existing owners who bought resale.
> I could see Marriott having a higher fee for resale owners and/or grandfathering in resale buyers but I doubt the fee will be much higher. Marriott wouldnt want to discourage resale buyers from joining the program because they would still want the revenue from the exchanges.
> 
> So we wait and see what happens.



And what about those who bought resale through Marriott? Do you treat them as resale owners, or owners that bought from MVCI?


----------



## PerryM

ecwinch said:


> I think you mean the system, as you speculate it will be built, will be a mess. Since we have no firm details.



The mess is the current rumor mess and the actual exchange system mess and the mess of having 2 diametrically opposite reservation systems up and running at the same time - what a mess.

I don't think that Marriott will acknowledge the fact that within a season, like Platinum, some weeks are worth more than others.  Marriott is stuck with this season approach and can never get rid of it.

Yet that's exactly what a Point system sheds - seasons.  Instead each day of the year has a supply and demand just like rental rates charged by Marriott for the very same villas.

Marriott will have to introduce a half-assed Point exchange system that's only purpose is to make big bucks for Marriott and sell Bronze, Silver, and Gold weeks faster since they can be combined into Points to exchange into bigger and better Marriotts.

If Marriott cared a whit about the owners they would have sent that 1 eMail to II 3 years ago and told them to lengthen the Marriott Only window from 24 days to 10 months.  That would have meant something and cost us nothing.


----------



## Pit

PerryM said:


> If Marriott cared a whit about the owners they would have sent that 1 eMail to II 3 years ago and told them to lengthen the Marriott Only window from 24 days to 10 months.  That would have meant something and cost us nothing.



But, how would Marriott profit from that? 

With this point system, they have:

1) a new revenue stream in entrance fees, exchange fees, etc.
2) a way to differentiate the developer product from the resale product
3) a way to devalue current owner assets for the benefit of new sales (through point inflation at new developments)

This is all goes to the bottom line.


----------



## PerryM

Pit said:


> But, how would Marriott profit from that?
> 
> With this point system, they have:
> 
> 1) a new revenue stream in entrance fees, exchange fees, etc.
> 2) a way to differentiate the developer product from the resale product
> 3) a way to devalue current owner assets for the benefit of new sales (through point inflation at new developments)
> 
> This is all goes to the bottom line.



Instead of spending 3 years spreading rumors we owners could have had an internal exchange system for those 3 years.

They can still work on other schemes to make more money...

If Marriott introduces another exchange system (the rumored one) in the middle of a real estate meltdown they are insane.

At some point a grown-up at Marriott will sit the sales/marketing folks down and explain the facts of business cycles to them.


----------



## m61376

dougp26364 said:


> I wonder what Marriott considers "low" for a joiner fee? We have two weeks, I consider $100 to be low. My bet is Marriott will consider $500 to be low but, it could be higher.
> 
> Still, it's ANOTHER year out before anything happens according to your source. Anything can happen between now and then so, everything remains purely speculation. Since there's little I can do about what Marriott may or may not do, there's little sense in taking this into consideration with our current ownership interest and, should we think we might want to add another Marriott week, there's little reason to do so until AFTER Marriott decides what it wants to do.



Doug- I think it is anyone's guess what Marriott considers "low" for a joiner fee. I think the only concrete example of what Marriott may be considering is to take a look at the Asia-Pacific points program. There their "low" fee was around $5000.

And, IF that program is a precursor to what Marriott rolls out, it seems like there will be more losers here than winners. I think a huge problem for Marriott is that all Marriott owners have gotten used to the week for week concept, as well as at least like for like wrt size. It is going to be a very hard sell if Platinum 2BR's at whatever Marriott deems as lesser properties suddenly exchange only for a studio week elsewhere (and this is a very real possibility, if you look at the Asia Pacific points program as outlined). 

The other very big issues I see is an equalization of MF's and what implications that has for individual resort HOA's and independent decisions. In the Asia Pacific program MF's are based on the number of points owned and are equal across the board, so high cost areas tend to fare better because the cost/risk is spread throughout the system. If resorts are no longer setting MF's (if Marriott opts to have MF's determined by points owned rather than resort specific) what impact will this have on the ability of individual resorts to make budgetary decisions?

As for how Marriott decides to treat resale purchases- that seems to be a question, at least according to Dave's source, that's still up in the air. It will be interesting to see if Marriott takes the high road, so to speak. I still maintain that Marriott has nothing to gain and potentially a lot to lose IF they do not grandfather existing resale owners. I base this on the simple fact that any prior resales have already occurred, so not including past resale purchasers in the program would only serve to be punitive. It would not garner good will, nor would it embrace those owners in the new program that Marriott wants and needs to entice owners to join into. By grandfathering existing resale owners, Marriott stands only to gain- they get the membership fee, they get the important boost in initial membership to get the program rolling, and- perhaps most importantly- they keep their customer base happy.

Although resale owners make up only a small percentage of units sold, I'd venture to guess that most resale owners also own one or more direct purchases AND all resale owners are potential buyers of future properties. IF Marriott opted to be punitive and penalize current resale owners, then a lot of ill will/bad publicity would be generated. *Simply put, it would be bad business for Marriott to antagonize any current owner*, especially since there would be no benefit.

Marriott needs- and wants- people to opt into their new program and needs to preserve their customer base for future properties. That's why I think registered owners as of the date that the plan is announced will be grandfathered in- not just wishful thinking, but because it makes good business sense.

Of course, that brings us to the rest of the question- what impact will this have on inherent residual value? Even though we know that buying a timeshare is not an investment, most buyers (even knowledgeable ones) have bought Marriott properties in the past confident that when they sold they would be worth something. I think we just need to look at Starwood for the long term implications of a points program which excludes future resale purchases. Voluntary units at the same locations are worth a fraction of what the mandatory resort units are. But, at least in Starwood's case, units were so classified from the get-go, so buyer knew from the outset that they would have limited resale value. In Marriott's case, they have sold very expensive properties and if a point system doesn't include future resale buyers, the current owners will be owning relatively worthless properties. I think even the most loyal Marriott supporter would be hard pressed to shell out $40,000 or so for a Platinum Cancun week (I am using that as an example because that's the next property online for release) if they knew that it would be immediately worth pennies on the dollar on the resale market because it could not be included in any Marriott exchange program, losing the benefit of any Marriott ownership).

With respect to how future resales may or may not be included I think Marriott has a more difficult decision to make; they will have to weigh the potential impact on being able to make sales against the potential loss of revenue due to resales being made on the open market. Let's face it though, Marriott cannot absorb and resell all the units owners need/want to sell, and the resale market helps sustain the timeshare model. regardless of what spin they put on things, I think sales would be negatively impacted if people didn't think they had any recourse in the future should their needs change. People would hesitate to buy if they felt they couldn't sell.

So, not that my opinion is worth much, IF Marriott ultimately chooses to roll out a points based internal trading program, I really think current resale owners will be grandfathered in because, as I've stated above, there is no benefit to Marriott if they are not included and there is the downside to bad will and less revenue for Marirott. I think they will want to maintain the perception of fairness. I think there is a good chance they will exclude or strongly penalize future resale buyers because they will want to encourage direct purchases and the issue of ill will is less here because people would be knowing what they were buying into and any limitations of the program beforehand. While it may be good in the short term for Marriott's bottom line, encouraging developer purchases in the future, I am not sure how it will impact sales overall; the problem remains that excluding future resale purchases from any program devalues everyone's ownership immediately. Given the fact that Marriott is reportedly planning on rolling out a program presumably when they anticipate the economy starting to recover, excluding future resales from any such program might just provide the devastating blow which would prevent any price recovery from the current economic downturn and would permanently cripple Marriott resales. Common sense dictates that, over time, this would likely impact future Marriott sales since people take comfort knowing that they can sell what they buy.

Dave- we appreciate your posts even if we don't particularly like the information. But it is good to be kept informed. I sadly fear Marriott is going down a dangerous path and, especially given the current instability, I can't understand why they are bent on changing something that is already working and has been so profitable over the years. Marriott's weeks system is a good model and, while I recognize there are those that would prefer more flexibility, most owners are happy with what they bought into (or there wouldn't be so many repeat buyers) and, given the current state of affairs in general, I personally think that making major changes over the next few years as the economy hopefully recovers is a bad move on their part. Adding uncertainty especially during a period of economic instability can't be good for business. I think Doug's point is a good one- all these MAY happen rumors aren't good for any business and can be disastrous at a time when businesses are just hanging on.


----------



## m61376

Pit said:


> But, how would Marriott profit from that?
> 
> With this point system, they have:
> 
> 1) a new revenue stream in entrance fees, exchange fees, etc.
> 2) a way to differentiate the developer product from the resale product
> 3) a way to devalue current owner assets for the benefit of new sales (through point inflation at new developments)
> 
> This is all goes to the bottom line.



True- but once Marriott focuses solely on its bottom line we're all in trouble. 

#1 is obvious and, depending on how it is set up, can be sensible.
#2 is only important IF Marriott concedes that the ability to trade for points for those wonderful vacation packages isn't nearly as valuable as they tout, so that it is insufficient to differentiate between direct and resale purchases.
If that benefit is as good as advertised then there isn't a big threat to direct sales and a new system isn't needed
#3 is a very dangerous thought and potentially would cripple the whole system as we know it. Actually, that was my biggest problem as I read through the details of the Asia Pacific program, which I have been told by good authority that this program was going to emulate. Marriott as a system grew, in my opinion at least, because all owners felt they had the potential to trade into every other Marriott property. In fact, many if not most of the lesser season sales were generated on the promise of being able to trade elsewhere. 

While buyers up front would know what the real value of their purchase was today (which may or may not be good for the buyer since they couldn't be sold on expectations that might not be realized), I would think it would be hard for salespeople, who could no longer tantalize people with the potential for upgraded trades. The real danger here is that, akin to the devaluation in the points program, the usage of the timeshare itself would be subject to the same type of devaluation over time. While owners didn't like the points devaluation, at least it was devaluation of a perk and not of the purchased usage itself.

When one purchased a Marriott timeshare in the past (both direct and resale buyers alike) they bought with the guarantee of usage at their home resort for one week in their season. They also bought with the expectation of trading their unit for a week at a similar property. Although most buyers recognize that not all weeks are created equal, it is commonly assumed that a Platinum week at least at one locale would exchange into a Platinum week at another locale in the same sized accommodations. 

To switch into a system where a 2BR unit at one place may be worth only a few days at another or a 2BR only worth a studio in exchange will be a bitter pill to swallow. Moreover, as buyers we all looked forward to the next new property, confident that we too could trade in there one day. A variable points system will, as you suggest, likely lock out past owners from enjoying future properties (or allowing them only to enjoy them for fewer days and/or lesser accommodations). Now, Marriott may look at this type of devaluation as a plus, hoping to generate more sales, but it erodes owner satisfaction and may ultimately erode owner support. Marriott will have to be very confident that people will just buy more; the flip side is that dissatisfaction may cause people jsut not to buy at all.


----------



## mpizza

MFs will definitely be impacted.  If Gold weeks are assigned lower points values, they will have a proportionately lower MF, Platinum owners will now have to pay the difference.

Maria


----------



## Twinkstarr

I think this will be a mess if there is not someway to get 90%+ of  owners to convert to the point system. Conversion fees of $5000 are not the best way. 

If I owned less than a Gold or Plat. season I'd tell MCVI to forget it.


----------



## PerryM

*Yes or No?*


Should a 1BR Gold Summit Watch exchange into a Platinum Plus Christmas week at the same resort?  Yes or No.

Should a Studio Gold Summit Watch exchange into a Studio Platinum Maui week?  Yes or no.

Should a Studio Gold Summit Watch exchange into a 2BR Platinum Maui at 59 days?  Yes or no.

Right now the answers are Yes - Marriott wants them to be NO.  The reason its Yes is because a third party exchange company, II, allows for it.  Good bye II.

We will lose that.

Marriott will completely shift the way they sell their product to one of a generic Points with some kind of home resort advantage.  This is a better way to sell deeded weeks?


Should a 2BR Gold Summit Watch exchange into a Studio Maui 12 months out?  Yes or no.

Should a Studio Maui exchange into 2 weeks at a 2BR in Silver season at Summit Watch?  Yes or no.

We don't know the answers to those questions.  Rumors never have answers just more and more questions.

Marriott; instead of spending 3 years spreading rumors you should have been holding a traveling road show where you invite owners in and do focus groups as to what the hell we want.  And its not stupid rumors; I can tell you that.

Marriott; what again is the purpose to issue corporate rumors for 3 years?  Just what's in it for you and for us?

I deplore class action lawsuits, but I can see a number of them instantly popping up - if this new exchange system punishes a 2BR Platinum owner in one resort and rewards another 2BR Platinum owner in another resort that smacks of litigation to me; especially if previous II exchanges can be offered as evidence; and the salesreps who shot off their mouths boasting that their resort always gets the II exchange you want.

I sure don't remember Marriott ever warning us in the 15 or so sales presentations we've been to over the years that we might be buying an inferior Marriott resort.

And that's exactly what this is all about - which resort is better than another resort.


----------



## LisaRex

mpizza said:


> MFs will definitely be impacted.  If Gold weeks are assigned lower points values, they will have a proportionately lower MF, Platinum owners will now have to pay the difference.  Maria



I think that there was a lawsuit that prohibited TS HOAs from charging disproportionate MFs based on season. An owner in the fall creates just as much wear and tear as an owner in the summer, so it would be patently unfair for the latter owner to have to fork up more money to maintain the same unit. Remember that a premium for owning a popular week was already paid when the unit was purchased.  They'd have a tough time selling platinum weeks if the MFs were also consistently higher.


----------



## thinze3

Dave, is this the same person who gave you this information?



Dave M said:


> *January 1, 2008. My latest info....*
> 
> *The sales "rumor" about a six-month restriction on making reservations for owners of resale weeks is no longer a rumor.* It comes from Marriott's highest levels. That six-month restriction is the most likely scenario. As I stated earlier, the change would likely grandfather from the new policy those resale weeks as of the date the new policy is announced or implemented.
> 
> I can't stress enough that _no definitive policy has as yet been decided upon._ There are still a number of issues being worked out. When? What are the details? Still being worked on. Ultimately, the actual change might look much different from this six-month proposal, but _there will be a change_.


----------



## BocaBum99

PerryM said:


> Should a 1BR Gold Summit Watch exchange into a Platinum Plus Christmas week at the same resort?  Yes or No.
> 
> Should a Studio Gold Summit Watch exchange into a Studio Platinum Maui week?  Yes or no.
> 
> Should a Studio Gold Summit Watch exchange into a 2BR Platinum Maui at 59 days?  Yes or no.
> 
> Right now the answers are Yes - Marriott wants them to be NO.  The reason its Yes is because a third party exchange company, II, allows for it.  Good bye II.
> 
> We will lose that.
> 
> Marriott will completely shift the way they sell their product to one of a generic Points with some kind of home resort advantage.  This is a better way to sell deeded weeks?
> 
> 
> Should a 2BR Gold Summit Watch exchange into a Studio Maui 12 months out?  Yes or no.
> 
> Should a Studio Maui exchange into 2 weeks at a 2BR in Silver season at Summit Watch?  Yes or no.
> 
> We don't know the answers to those questions are unknown.
> 
> Marriott; instead of spending 3 years spreading rumors you should have been holding a traveling road show where you invite owners in and do focus groups as to what the hell we want.  And its not stupid rumors; I can tell you that.
> 
> Marriott; what again is the purpose to issue corporate rumors for 3 years?  Just what's in it for you and for us?



Perry,

What Marriott wants to do is force current owners away from what they have today to join the "NEW" thing which is points.

The problem is that the NEW thing will cost them money to join, will devalue their ownerships by increasing the difference between developer and resale points and take away their trade up capabilities through II.

I'd be for it if Marriott allowed full transfer of points on the resale market since a point system would ultimately be better for the whole.

There will be winners and losers.  The winners are the highest demand, lowest supply platinum weeks.  The losers will be those who were used to trading up and those in the middle and lower tier resorts as defined by the Marriott point table.  I wonder how Marriott will position it?

My guess is they will give away the program for free to all Platinum owners.  They will charge a fee for everyone else, but they will waive it as an incentive for Gold, Silver and Bronze owners to buy into the program.


----------



## indyhorizons

Twinkstarr said:


> I think this will be a mess if there is not someway to get 90%+ of  owners to convert to the point system. Conversion fees of $5000 are not the best way.
> 
> If I owned less than a Gold or Plat. season I'd tell MCVI to forget it.



There is no way I'm paying an additional $5000 for anything. There is no program that marriott could introduce to entice me to pay that. Period!


----------



## Twinkstarr

LisaRex said:


> I think that there was a lawsuit that prohibited TS HOAs from charging disproportionate MFs based on season. An owner in the fall creates just as much wear and tear as an owner in the summer, so it would be patently unfair for the latter owner to have to fork up more money to maintain the same unit. Remember that a premium for owning a popular week was already paid when the unit was purchased.  They'd have a tough time selling platinum weeks if the MFs were also consistently higher.



Lakeside Terrace has lower MF's for "mud season" weeks. Summer and Ski season pay a bit more. It's maybe $50, I'll have to see if I have one of the breakdowns that come with my bill.


----------



## BocaBum99

thinze3 said:


> Dave, is this the same person who gave you this information?



Wow.  I missed that 6 month rule.  Can someone restate what they is supposed to be like?  Today, we have 12 months.  In the future, resales can only book 6 months out?  

How could they take away a basic right of ownership?  Why wouldn't this lead to a class action law suit?

I can see how they can do this if you sign up for the new points program and then try to sell those points.  That's because they can have you trade in your week for ownership in a new product that defines basic ownership as 6 month reservation.

I don't see how this is possible legally.  Anyone venture a guess?


----------



## Twinkstarr

BocaBum99 said:


> Perry,
> 
> What Marriott wants to do is force current owners away from what they have today to join the "NEW" thing which is points.
> 
> The problem is that the NEW thing will cost them money to join, will devalue their ownerships by increasing the difference between developer and resale points and take away their trade up capabilities through II.
> 
> I'd be for it if Marriott allowed full transfer of points on the resale market since a point system would ultimately be better for the whole.
> 
> There will be winners and losers.  The winners are the highest demand, lowest supply platinum weeks.  The losers will be those who were used to trading up and those in the middle and lower tier resorts as defined by the Marriott point table.  I wonder how Marriott will position it?
> 
> My guess is they will give away the program for free to all Platinum owners.  They will charge a fee for everyone else, but they will waive it as an incentive for Gold, Silver and Bronze owners to buy into the program.




How Marriott defines the "middle/lower tier" resorts is key. That will be interesting. Obviously if you own one of the big three in HHI, no problem. The older resorts on HHI even if you own a prime summer week are probably going to get lower points. 


Is an Orlando plat. 2br, not including Lakeshore, going to get you as many points as one of the Park City resort 2br Plat season?


----------



## BocaBum99

After thinking about a 6 month rule, I don't see how it could stand.  Let's say you spent $50k to buy a 2 br Platinum Maui Marriott Ocean Club.  If Marriott changes the rules where the new buyer you sell to can only book out 6 months from check in, your platinum floating week becomes valueless.  The new owner would never be able to get a summer week.

That would be some very extreme damages done to a basic right of ownership.  I don't see how you can lose those rights unless you sign them over.

Maybe Marriott's plan is to coerce and scare platinum owners into converting their weeks into the program free of charge by threatening a 6 month rule.

If that's the case, there has to be something illegal about that.  Not sure the legal term, but it would be like commercial blackmail.  I think Carolinian has a term for it.

Would Marriott be so bold as to threaten or even implement such a rule.  If they did, I'd dump all of my Marriott timeshares.  That would be the single nost egregious act any timeshare company could actually try to pull off.    This must be something different than I am thinking.


----------



## PerryM

BocaBum99 said:


> Wow.  I missed that 6 month rule.  Can someone restate what they is supposed to be like?  Today, we have 12 months.  In the future, resales can only book 6 months out?
> 
> How could they take away a basic right of ownership?  Why wouldn't this lead to a class action law suit?
> 
> I can see how they can do this if you sign up for the new points program and then try to sell those points.  That's because they can have you trade in your week for ownership in a new product that defines basic ownership as 6 month reservation.
> 
> I don't see how this is possible legally.  Anyone venture a guess?



Marriott isn't that stupid - just another stupid rumor.

For whatever reason Marriott seems to foster corporate rumors - this is insane.

Marriott would be more productive if they worked on Loyalty Programs - been a loyal Marriott owner you should get a reward.  Those are the kinds of rumors that they should be spreading - but they are spreading the exact opposite rumor - buy from us or we will screw you.


----------



## BocaBum99

PerryM said:


> Marriott isn't that stupid - just another stupid rumor.
> 
> For whatever reason Marriott seems to foster corporate rumors - this is insane.
> 
> Marriott would be more productive if they worked on Loyalty Programs - been a loyal Marriott owner you should get a reward.  Those are the kinds of rumors that they should be spreading - but they are spreading the exact rumor - buy from us or we will screw you.



I agree with you Perry.  I don't see how Marriott could adopt such a rule.  It's so eggregious.  The legal liability would kill the idea.  Damages sought would be 100% of retail value of the product times the number of effected owners.

Boy, a Class Action law firm would love this case.  The problem for Marriott would be that they wouldn't be able to solve the problem by giving certificates out like RCI.  Owners would literally not be able to sell their timeshares at any price due to an arbitrary, self serving action by Marriott.  The only possible resolution would be to allow the features to transfer or to remove the rule.

The context for this rule must be for owners who opt into the program.  They would in essence be trading in their current Marriott timeshare for a new points based timeshare in the new program.  The basic right of that program is access to the system 6 months from checkin.  Outside of that, certain rules don't transfer unless you buy into another program from Marriott.  But then, I'd still wonder how they would pull it off.


----------



## ngmaui

GregT said:


> Perhaps Marriott is rattling the saber about a points sytem to force a concession from II?  Better revenue sharing?  Who knows?  It is a distinct possibility that they are threatening to depart to sweeten the arrangement.



Quite possible...especially since DVC just left II for RCI.  DVC leaving really devalued II in my eyes given I have 3 young kids and a love for Disney.


----------



## m61376

Twinkstarr said:


> Lakeside Terrace has lower MF's for "mud season" weeks. Summer and Ski season pay a bit more. It's maybe $50, I'll have to see if I have one of the breakdowns that come with my bill.



If I am not mistaken, it is not that Marriott has differentiated amonst seasons for MF's. However, part of your fees are taxes and, in certain locales, the taxes are based on purchase price. So it is not really the actually MF that is lower, but the real estate tax part of the fees, which of course lowers the overall fees.


----------



## potchak

What I want is a program that gives me more flexibiility and no less than what I can get right now through II. Right now I can trade my 2 bd MMC into a 2bd in Hawaii as long as I am flexible on the timing and willing to wait. If I cannot still get that in the new program, I do not see us joining the points program. I also do not want to spend thousands on the program! I own 4 Marriott's which would mean the cost of another timeshare in order to buy into their points program. That is most certainly not worth it to me. Even at $500/unit (and btw, one of mine is resale) I am still talking $2000 which is not smal change especially in this economy. Even middle of next year, my DH and I will still be recovering from his being out of work the last 6 months.


----------



## BocaBum99

GregT said:


> Perhaps Marriott is rattling the saber about a points sytem to force a concession from II?  Better revenue sharing?  Who knows?  It is a distinct possibility that they are threatening to depart to sweeten the arrangement.



I don't think so.  The exchange revenue is small.  This is all about creating a more competitive product and making more money on the resale market by sucking out value of the product unless you pay them both coming and going.


----------



## BocaBum99

potchak said:


> What I want is a program that gives me more flexibiility and no less than what I can get right now through II. Right now I can trade my 2 bd MMC into a 2bd in Hawaii as long as I am flexible on the timing and willing to wait. If I cannot still get that in the new program, I do not see us joining the points program. I also do not want to spend thousands on the program! I own 4 Marriott's which would mean the cost of another timeshare in order to buy into their points program. That is most certainly not worth it to me. Even at $500/unit (and btw, one of mine is resale) I am still talking $2000 which is not smal change especially in this economy. Even middle of next year, my DH and I will still be recovering from his being out of work the last 6 months.



Moving from one system vs. the other will be a zero sum game.  If in the past, you were getting better than average trades, you will lose in the new program.  If in the past, you were constantly trading down, you will gain in the new program.

It appears that Marriott will entice those who have been trading down in the program with some freebies.  Then, they will coerce others to do so or become nothing.  Take the loss now because you loss will be bigger if you don't.


----------



## PerryM

potchak said:


> *What I want is a program that gives me more flexibiility and no less than what I can get right now through II*. *Right now I can trade my 2 bd MMC into a 2bd in Hawaii as long as I am flexible on the timing and willing to wait. If I cannot still get that in the new program, I do not see us joining the points program*. I also do not want to spend thousands on the program! I own 4 Marriott's which would mean the cost of another timeshare in order to buy into their points program. That is most certainly not worth it to me. Even at $500/unit (and btw, one of mine is resale) I am still talking $2000 which is not smal change especially in this economy. Even middle of next year, my DH and I will still be recovering from his being out of work the last 6 months.




Marriott is in a pickle - they should be offering more and not less to owners.

This is NOT the purpose of such and exchange program - the one you describe already exists and apparently many owners are happy.

Its all about Marriott's sales.  I'm pretty confident that if such a system is introduced you will get:

1) Eye watering initiation fee
2) Point for Point exchanges - forget about the great II deals
3) Resales hurt with the exchange system not transferring from owner to owner
4) Complicated - 2 exchange systems working at once

So the Marriott owner will have to settle for less and Marriott wants more profit from us.

Marriott owners would be better off if we just got together with RedWeek and came up with our own exchange system.  RedWeek's Point system already exists and if Marriott owners got behind it they could take on II.

I'd suggest that the various HOAs start approaching RedWeek and just do it ourselves.

Disney owners could do the same thing.


----------



## Dave M

Responding to a couple of comments and questions....

If you carefully read my posts of the past few years on this topic (including timing of the implementation, the proposed six-month reservation rule, etc.), all of my statements were based on what the most probable timing or specifics were as of the date of my posts. I believe I tried to be careful - as I have in my first post in this thread - to specify that there were a lot of details yet to work out.

As an example, many of us here questioned in the past the legality of a proposed six-month reservation rule for resale owners, at least in some states. If Marriott has decided against such a provision, it's possible that the legal issue was insurmountable. Further, if you read what I wrote about that issue on January 1, 2008 (quoted above), I clearly stated that "the six-month restriction is the most likely scenario." I didn't state that it was a done deal. 

Responding to another question, anyone who bought a Marriott resale directly from Marriott is not considered a resale purchaser. 

You can try to hang me because it now appears that the implementation will have different timing or different specifics than first proposed internally at Marriott. I don't believe those differences change in any way that, as I stated here long ago, Marriott will have an internal exchange program that - at least in some manner - will be less favorable for some resale owners than for those who purchased from Marriott. 

It does make me a bit sad that in trying to provide useful info, I (or one of my sources) get criticized when the stated likely scenarios and likely timing don’t turn out to be 100% accurate.

I doubt that there are any readers here who would have preferred that I withhold info that comes to my attention solely because I am unable to confirm that the final product will look exactly like or be formally implemented at the exact date of early development forecasts.

Overall, the inside info that I have posted here over the years has been remarkable accurate, even in situations such as this where Marriott is still in the development stages of a project. Thus, I give you what I get. And as I stated in my initial post in this thread, there are still a myriad of details to be worked out before the estimated implementation date.  

Starting later today I will be out of the U.S. for the next four weeks and will have very limited Internet access for most of the next three weeks. So I will not be able to check in on this thread very often during that time.


----------



## saturn28

Here we go again. I will believe it when I see it. Until then, I am going back to sleep.

:zzz:


----------



## thinze3

Dave M said:


> It does make me a bit sad that in trying to provide useful info, I (or one of my sources) get criticized when the stated likely scenarios and likely timing don’t turn out to be 100% accurate.



Dave, please understand that all of your posts seem to qualify things with phrases similar to "likely to change". Thus, we should all take it for what it is worh - and have for the most part. We also know that this has been an evolving process. I was just wondering if the contact you have now is the same contact you have had all along.

Thank you for your continued input / updates.


----------



## jimf41

Of all the rumors started by so called impeccable sources in the last few years I think this one is the silliest. I own 7 weeks. At 5K per week I would have to pay 35K to get into this system if the rumored entrance fee is accurate. For that fee my silver L/O at Ocean Pointe would no longer get me into a platinum 2BDRM at Grand Vista or any other Marriott resort.

If I don't opt in and the majority of the rest of you folks do that makes my L/O even more valuable than it is because there won't be very many Marriott units available on II and mine will become a super trade value. I won't have much luck trading my Marriott unit for another Marriott but the Westin St John looks like a nice place to spend a week. If the rest of you buy into the program I could probably get there with one of my Ocean Pointe L/O's. Of course if the rest of you don't buy into this nonsense then my plan is thwarted and I'll have to come up with something better than an Ocean Pointe silver unit to get into St John.

Some posters have indicated that Marriott is stupid for attempting this. As far as I can see no one at Marriott has said anything about it. I'm not referring to sales reps here I mean corporate folks. We all went down this road in January 08, except for Boca apparently, and in the end the "rumor" was debunked. I don't see that this one has much of chance either.


----------



## CMF

Don't be sad Mr. Dave.  There ain't gonna be no hanging in this here town!

Charles


----------



## BocaBum99

Dave M said:


> Responding to a couple of comments and questions....
> 
> If you carefully read my posts of the past few years on this topic (including timing of the implementation, the proposed six-month reservation rule, etc.), all of my statements were based on what the most probable timing or specifics were as of the date of my posts. I believe I tried to be careful - as I have in my first post in this thread - to specify that there were a lot of details yet to work out.
> 
> As an example, many of us here questioned in the past the legality of a proposed six-month reservation rule for resale owners, at least in some states. If Marriott has decided against such a provision, it's possible that the legal issue was insurmountable. Further, if you read what I wrote about that issue on January 1, 2008 (quoted above), I clearly stated that "the six-month restriction is the most likely scenario." I didn't state that it was a done deal.
> 
> Responding to another question, anyone who bought a Marriott resale directly from Marriott is not considered a resale purchaser.
> 
> You can try to hang me because it now appears that the implementation will have different timing or different specifics than first proposed internally at Marriott. I don't believe those differences change in any way that, as I stated here long ago, Marriott will have an internal exchange program that - at least in some manner - will be less favorable for some resale owners than for those who purchased from Marriott.
> 
> It does make me a bit sad that in trying to provide useful info, I (or one of my sources) get criticized when the stated likely scenarios and likely timing don’t turn out to be 100% accurate.
> 
> I doubt that there are any readers here who would have preferred that I withhold info that comes to my attention solely because I am unable to confirm that the final product will look exactly like or be formally implemented at the exact date of early development forecasts.
> 
> Overall, the inside info that I have posted here over the years has been remarkable accurate, even in situations such as this where Marriott is still in the development stages of a project. Thus, I give you what I get. And as I stated in my initial post in this thread, there are still a myriad of details to be worked out before the estimated implementation date.
> 
> Starting later today I will be out of the U.S. for the next four weeks and will have very limited Internet access for most of the next three weeks. So I will not be able to check in on this thread very often during that time.



Dave,

We love you and the info you provide.  I was just kidding about the delay. 

I am okay with everything except the 6 month rule.  I hope that gets dropped because of legal issues and risks.


----------



## Dave M

I can assure you, Jim, that this is not a "rumor". This is a project that has been in development for over two years. It's coming. That's why, even with much misinformation, sales reps have been talking about it in sales presentations for quite a while now. 

As for $5k to convert to points, that amount is idle speculation. My understanding, as alluded to in my initial post, is that Marriott has not established conversion fees as yet. 

As for whether you will like or dislike the actual program when it's announced, it might or might not benefit you. Obviously, any change will positively impact some owners, negatively impact some owners and have virtually no impact on some owners.



jimf41 said:


> As far as I can see no one at Marriott has said anything about it. I'm not referring to sales reps here I mean corporate folks.


No public announcement by corporate executives. Of course not. But your supposition that no non-sales higher-up hasn't disclosed info about the program is incorrect.


----------



## RandR

mpizza said:


> MFs will definitely be impacted.  If Gold weeks are assigned lower points values, they will have a proportionately lower MF, Platinum owners will now have to pay the difference.
> 
> Maria



The way Hilton does it is by unit size.  So all 2 BR have the same maintenance.  This creates an interesting issue since a 2BR Plat is 7000 points and a 2BR Gold is 5000 points (silver even less) but they have the same MF.  The people who buy Plat pay a higher price per point but a lower MF/point

While I would be extremely unhappy if the way things were set up changed and having my week esentially be worth nothing on the resale market, that is why I listened to the advice of buy where you want to go.  My Orlando week may not be worth as many points as some others but it should still get me into MGV for 1 week when I want to go.


----------



## Numismatist

It's just all the frustration that we all feel when we realize we're being taken once again.  I'm always waiting for the next thing to come along that makes me regret buying.

I love the resort MFC, but the system sucks.

They have our money, they only care about the next possible sale to a new owner.  Once they have that money, they won't care about that buyer.  It's how the fast-paced development has to work to keep it going.


----------



## Dave M

I don't believe for a second that Marriott doesn't "care about the buyer". Having worked in and consulting to entreprenurial businesses all of my adult life until retiring last year, I know that the balance between giving customers everything they want and making a profit is a very delicate balance. Both are important and Marriott can't have some of one without some of the other.

The new system will be great for some owners and not so great for others. But Marriott does care. They have to. A high percentage of Marriott timeshare sales are to existing owners. If they roll out a new program that makes most of the owners so mad that they won't buy again.... Well, they just aren't that stupid.


----------



## RandR

Many people here have said that Marriott wouldn't do this because it would bring resale prices to zero.  This may not be the case.  Many if not most people who buy timeshares direct are those that do it on impulse at a sales presentation (TUGgers excluded).  They don't even think about the resale question and if they do, I'm sure the salesperson will have a snappy answer for it.


----------



## ciscogizmo1

Without more details it is hard to say how the "new" Marriott Point system would work.  I can see one of the problems Marriott will have is convincing people to convert during this economic depression.  Even though we still have a job I don't think we'd waste our money on a point system that may or may not better than the current system.  I'm curious to what this new system will be modeled after.  We own DVC which is point based and I like it but I don't get how Marriott would convert a week system to a point system like DVC.  If they can't do that then what would be the point of it.  (I know Marriott would do it to generate more revenue).  But I think, too many timeshare holders own in multiple systems that it might be harder to convince them.  I know, my aunt who owns at Marriott Maui would not convert.  She even bought direct from Marriott and paid around $11k.  I can't imagine that she would pay $5000 to convert her week.  That would be absurd.


----------



## SueDonJ

RandR said:


> Many people here have said that Marriott wouldn't do this because it would bring resale prices to zero.  This may not be the case.  Many if not most people who buy timeshares direct are those that do it on impulse at a sales presentation (TUGgers excluded).  They don't even think about the resale question and if they do, I'm sure the salesperson will have a snappy answer for it.



I don't think resale prices will be brought to zero by any exchange program because there will always be people who only want to use their weeks to travel to their own resorts every year.  Consider that the lack of MRP-exchange value in current resales is a non-existent factor for those who buy resale.  There will be a smaller pool of resale buyers, sure, if a diminished resort exchange program is attached to resales, but the number won't be zero.

It's always been my thought that Marriott/MVCI concerns itself less than some on TUG think with the profit/loss margins that owners realize on the resale market.  BUT with the relatively recent explosion of resale opportunities on the internet, it makes sense to me that Marriott/MVCI do something to get in on the action.

The only points program that I know anything about is DVC, so I'm looking forward to reading this thread because I know you people will provide a great education.  Seriously, no sarcasm or snarkiness intended.   

****

Dave, have a grand time sailing the seven seas.  Again.


----------



## arch53

*Thanks For Info*

Dave,
Just wanted to say thanks for passing along the information. I appreciate your being willing to endure some slings and arrows in order to keep us up to date on the latest thinking.  I do not own Marriott but bought (resale)  into Worldmark recently to trade through II. I was fully aware-thanks to your posts - of the risk that much of the future exchange activity for Marriotts would occur outside of II.  When  Marriott adopts its own internal trading system my hope is that--similar to  Hyatt's current participation  in II -- there will still some, albeit limited, availablity through II. If not, then that's  just the way it goes. Overall, change to all the timeshare sytems  over time is probably  inevitable.  It is through  TUG and volunteers such as you that people like me can maximize  their trading status in II,   regardless what  system is eventually adopted.  Again Thanks.


----------



## davidvel

BocaBum99 said:


> After thinking about a 6 month rule, I don't see how it could stand.  Let's say you spent $50k to buy a 2 br Platinum Maui Marriott Ocean Club.  If Marriott changes the rules where the new buyer you sell to can only book out 6 months from check in, your platinum floating week becomes valueless.  The new owner would never be able to get a summer week.
> 
> That would be some very extreme damages done to a basic right of ownership.  I don't see how you can lose those rights unless you sign them over.
> 
> Maybe Marriott's plan is to coerce and scare platinum owners into converting their weeks into the program free of charge by threatening a 6 month rule.
> 
> If that's the case, there has to be something illegal about that.  Not sure the legal term, but it would be like commercial blackmail.  I think Carolinian has a term for it.
> 
> Would Marriott be so bold as to threaten or even implement such a rule.  If they did, I'd dump all of my Marriott timeshares.  That would be the single nost egregious act any timeshare company could actually try to pull off.    This must be something different than I am thinking.



Absolutely impossible (legally) to change reservation rights to a "6 month rule" or any similar B.S. For the "legal" analysis see this post:
http://tugbbs.com/forums/showpost.ph...&postcount=168

IT IS IN THE DEED. All owners (resale/direct) have equal reservation rights. 
If bored, read the Declaration : http://www.veljovich.com/homeweb/index.php?page=tug

If Marriott were to do this I could write the Complaint in my sleep.


----------



## BocaBum99

davidvel said:


> Absolutely impossible (legally) to change reservation rights to a "6 month rule" or any similar B.S. For the "legal" analysis see this post:
> http://tugbbs.com/forums/showpost.ph...&postcount=168
> 
> IT IS IN THE DEED. All owners (resale/direct) have equal reservation rights.
> If bored, read the Declaration : http://www.veljovich.com/homeweb/index.php?page=tug
> 
> If Marriott were to do this I could write the Complaint in my sleep.



Awesome!  One thing, the link you provided above for the legal analysis doesn't work.  Or, it is pointed to the wrong location.


----------



## EZ-ED

Dave, 
Thanks for the info.

As a MSW gold resale owner I do what is best for me just as I expect Marriott will do what is best for Marriott. I bought resale because of price and I was aware of the limitations at the time (no chance of trading for points and since I'm not a points aficionado that loss was of little concern). If there had been a six month limitation on making a reservation we would not have bought as the use would have been to limiting. 

I believe the key is to be an informed buyer which is difficult for those without access to TUG. While many may be in favor of points (Worldmark, RCI, Redweek, etc.) I would not touch them with a 10 foot pole. There are just to many variables to consider and many of them I don't control. So for me the Marriott point system is just another point scam that will benefit Marriott at my expense if I were to join. I'll pass on points and I'll stay with II for the occasional trade or use our units just as we have done in the past.


----------



## ciscogizmo1

Has anyone read this post about the ASIA point system:  http://www.tugbbs.com/forums/showthread.php?t=100469

After reading that post I do like that it is like DVC in that you can check-in any day fo the week.  That is very attractive for me right now.  I know, this is an emotional response to the post but to be able to leave the day after Christmas Day would be perfect.  For example, this year we are using our resort from Fri to Fri.  Christmas day is on our check - out day.  However, my kdis want to spend Christmas at home so, we are leaving a day earlier.  So, if the new system is anything like the ASIA system it just might tempt me but it all depends on price and how many people join.  

I'm concerned if a lot of people jump ship and join the point system and I don't what will happen to my trades.  I trade mostly to Marriott resorts and I've been happy with my trades.  This is why I bought in the Marriott system because of the trading.  I guess, I'll be happy staying at my home resort all the time but not what I bought a timeshare for.  We bought to see other places if I wanted to return to the same place over and over I would have bought a cabin in Tahoe.


----------



## wsrobinson

Dave M said:


> I can assure you, Jim, that this is not a "rumor". This is a project that has been in development for over two years. It's coming. That's why, even with much misinformation, sales reps have been talking about it in sales presentations for quite a while now.




Having been in IT for 20 plus years it would not surprise me at all to overrun the deadlines on a project of this magnitude.  Listening to all of the parameters tossed around on this board, I wouldn't be surprised at all!  This would be one very complicated and time consuming effort.


----------



## thinze3

wsrobinson said:


> Having been in IT for 20 plus years it would not surprise me at all to overrun the deadlines on a project of this magnitude.  Listening to all of the parameters tossed around on this board, I wouldn't be surprised at all!  This would be one very complicated and time consuming effort.



They have already overrun the deadline. Announced in late 2007, the deadline was originally early 2009 if I remember correctly.


----------



## AceValenta

Not to add a further kink into the thought process but when you own the deeded property...you own it. Most points memberships expire after a period of time. 

I was just reading the MVCI AP thread ans their points will expire in 2056. Now, I know that is a long time away and I probably won't live that long but my kids may. That is one the selling points when you attend a seminar, "You can pass this onto your children."

So, if you pay to convert over to the point system will your points expire at a specified date or do you own them in perpitude?


----------



## wsrobinson

thinze3 said:


> They have already overrun the deadline. Announced in late 2007, the deadline was originally early 2009 if I remember correctly.


 
I think I said I would not be surprised that they would overrun the deadline. Not sure why you inferred a past or present tense in that. Two years is not a long time in the life cycle of a software development project. Three is more reasonable for this (actually I would have said 3-5 years).


----------



## susanmmm

Dave,

Have a wonderful trip.  We will miss your input and information.  Thanks for all you do!

Susan


----------



## BocaBum99

ciscogizmo1 said:


> Has anyone read this post about the ASIA point system:  http://www.tugbbs.com/forums/showthread.php?t=100469
> 
> After reading that post I do like that it is like DVC in that you can check-in any day fo the week.  That is very attractive for me right now.  I know, this is an emotional response to the post but to be able to leave the day after Christmas Day would be perfect.  For example, this year we are using our resort from Fri to Fri.  Christmas day is on our check - out day.  However, my kdis want to spend Christmas at home so, we are leaving a day earlier.  So, if the new system is anything like the ASIA system it just might tempt me but it all depends on price and how many people join.
> 
> *I'm concerned if a lot of people jump ship and join the point system and I don't what will happen to my trades.*  I trade mostly to Marriott resorts and I've been happy with my trades.  This is why I bought in the Marriott system because of the trading.  I guess, I'll be happy staying at my home resort all the time but not what I bought a timeshare for.  We bought to see other places if I wanted to return to the same place over and over I would have bought a cabin in Tahoe.



It is FAR more likely that the opposite will be true.  Owners who convert should be concerned if NOT a lot of people jump ship to join the point system and what they purchase doesn't work as planned due to insufficient inventory converted.

Nobody in the history of point systems has been able to get a significant majority of owners to convert from fixed/flex weeks to points.  There are always those hold outs who "say over my dead body" when it comes to converting to points.


----------



## IngridN

You can count me in with those that will not convert.  The reason...weeks works for me.  We've looked into the points system and we actually purhased a Hyatt before recinding.  We like long vacations of at least a week and purchased the Hyatt only for close-by long weekends. Reviewing the paperwork and points exchange costs, it was much more expensive than renting a very nice (and costly) hotel room.  Who needs a kitchen for a long weekend.  

For us, we would most likely be losers under a points system.  We prefer exchanging into Marriotts, however, have also exchanged into very nice non-Marriotts and don't have a problem with that.

Also, it galls us to pay for something we have already paid for.

Ingrid


----------



## Latravel

I find it really interesting that people are saying this is all a rumor despite all the signs to the contrary.  What more information or signs do you need to understand there will be changes?

I personally am looking forward to hearing about the upcoming points system.  I own RCI points and love them.  I am willing to pay a little extra ($500 is not bad) to get this option but I've had experience with a points program and love it.

I also find it interesting that people are complaining about possibly being treated differently in the new system.  Those that bought resale knew there was a possibility that changes could occur regarding trading and they may not favor the resale buyer.  It was a risk that was taken for the sake of lower upfront prices.  Complaining now just seems like you're trying to take advantage of the system.  It doesn't work that way.


----------



## littlestar

I'm glad I only own an EOY with Marriott. I'm going to sit back and watch this play out. If the value of Marriott goes to nothing, I'll just give mine away for free. It's a lock-off, so splitting it and trading it in II would still have value. 

We own DVC points, too, and I actually like the combination of my DVC points and my Marriott week vacations. It works out great for booking 10 or 11 day trips by splitting my stays between weeks and points. Both systems have resorts in locations where I like to go - Hilton Head and Orlando.


----------



## FlyerBobcat

Latravel said:


> ....  I also find it interesting that people are complaining about possibly being treated differently in the new system.  Those that bought resale knew there was a possibility that changes could occur regarding trading and they may not favor the resale buyer.  It was a risk that was taken for the sake of lower upfront prices.....



Really? How do you know that????  Maybe they opted for "lower" prices because that reflects the real value.  And/or maybe they feel that those that paid developer prices just overpaid....

Two sides to every coin....


----------



## Latravel

_"How do you know that????"_

It doesn't take much to pick up pretty clearly the main reason people purchase resale is price.  That's a very puzzling question!


----------



## sandesurf

Latravel said:


> I also find it interesting that people are complaining about possibly being treated differently in the new system.  Those that bought resale knew there was a possibility that changes could occur regarding trading and they may not favor the resale buyer.  It was a risk that was taken for the sake of lower upfront prices.  Complaining now just seems like you're trying to take advantage of the system.  It doesn't work that way.



As a direct AND a resale Marriott buyer, I just wanted to say, that when we bought resale, the ONLY thing we knew we were giving up was the conversion of our week to points, nothing else. Certainly, we didn't think we'd be treated differently, and thankfully, that has been far from the case. Keeping that in mind, you shouldn't be surprised that we would be concerned over this matter.


----------



## Twinkstarr

SueDonJ said:


> I don't think resale prices will be brought to zero by any exchange program because there will always be people who only want to use their weeks to travel to their own resorts every year.  Consider that the lack of MRP-exchange value in current resales is a non-existent factor for those who buy resale.  There will be a smaller pool of resale buyers, sure, if a diminished resort exchange program is attached to resales, but the number won't be zero.
> 
> It's always been my thought that Marriott/MVCI concerns itself less than some on TUG think with the profit/loss margins that owners realize on the resale market.  BUT with the relatively recent explosion of resale opportunities on the internet, it makes sense to me that Marriott/MVCI do something to get in on the action.
> 
> The only points program that I know anything about is DVC, so I'm looking forward to reading this thread because I know you people will provide a great education.  Seriously, no sarcasm or snarkiness intended.
> 
> ****
> 
> Dave, have a grand time sailing the seven seas.  Again.



Susan,

We love our DVC points! I probably wouldn't be looking at Marriott if DVC's HHI resort was oceanfront, the decor not so dark and the MF"s per point were not quite so high. 

It's very flexible as to season and size of unit. I've got a 3br booked for Thanksgiving and just booked a studio for myself to go down for Epcot Food & Wine. We go for full weeks at Thanksgiving and Easter, plus through in a long weekend around MLK. 

If you or anyone else has any questions about how DVC works,send me a PM. We own at 2 resorts. I think it's a much easier system to learn than Wyndham.


----------



## Latravel

_"I just wanted to say, that when we bought resale, the ONLY thing we knew we were giving up was the conversion of our week to points, nothing else."_

Since you are a direct purchaser, when you attended the sales presentation, the sales person didn't mention not having any restrictions on your unit if you bought direct?  The sales person didn't mention that you'd have an "R" next to your unit in the system if you bought resale?     Just curious but what did you take this to mean?


----------



## SueDonJ

sandesurf said:


> As a direct AND a resale Marriott buyer, I just wanted to say, that when we bought resale, the ONLY thing we knew we were giving up was the conversion of our week to points, nothing else. Certainly, we didn't think we'd be treated differently, and thankfully, that has been far from the case. Keeping that in mind, you shouldn't be surprised that we would be concerned over this matter.



I can somewhat understand this because the only Marriott sales rep that we've dealt with over the years has been very forthright with us in stating that the one difference between resale and developer purchases is the ability to exchange for MRP.  She didn't _initiate_ any comments about possible future devaluation between resale and developer.  We did, though, after reading things here on TUG, and her response was that MVCI does have the ability to make certain changes (none were mentioned specifically) that would be protected by contract language.

That's why I say "somewhat" - it's hard for me to believe that any frequent readers of TUG could be surprised/newly concerned that Marriott/MVCI will at any time exercise its rights to make changes in the program.  The history of them doing just that is all right here in black and white.


----------



## sandesurf

We bought into a small, mostly So.CA, point system 14 years ago. At the time, our points were only good at our home location. They then announced their new "upgraded" plan... For a conversion fee, $3000!, our points could be used an any of the other resorts in the system. Seemed like a good idea at the time, but now I feel that was the worse timeshare mistake we've made. Not only are the HOAs more (as much as a high end Marriott), but the other resorts just are not worth that much to us. (I have learned to make the best use of those points though). We liked the original location so much, that we bought a resale week there for $200, and use the heck out of it! Low HOA too.
I can see the direction Marriott is thinking of going, and will never buy into a conglomerate point system again.


----------



## sandesurf

Latravel said:


> Since you are a direct purchaser, when you attended the sales presentation, the sales person didn't mention not having any restrictions on your unit if you bought direct?  The sales person didn't mention that you'd have an "R" next to your unit in the system if you bought resale?     Just curious but what did you take this to mean?





We bought direct 14 years ago, and re-sale 5 years ago. PRE TUG and PRE rumors. Hope that clears it up for you.


----------



## PerryM

*Insanity at Marriott or just being sly*

I can understand Marriott wanting to make a few bucks in the exchange business - every little crumb helps.

However, 3 years of wild speculation - now that makes absolutely no sense.  There is no reason why the programmers or contract programming service can't sign NDAs and keep this all hush-hush.  6 months before release the training courses are released and salesreps would then learn of the exchange system and incorporate the rumor into their normal spiel.

The ONLY reason that makes any sense is that this will be such a culture shock that 3 years of wild speculation are needed to ease the program onto the owner base.  If that's the case then expect the worse.

If the new exchange program incorporates Marriott's Destination Club, hotels, and fractionals then this makes all the sense in the world - a huge shakeup at Marriott as it combines their entire product line.  But that's not what the rumors hint at; simply a substitute for II.


----------



## SueDonJ

Twinkstarr said:


> Susan,
> 
> We love our DVC points! I probably wouldn't be looking at Marriott if DVC's HHI resort was oceanfront, the decor not so dark and the MF"s per point were not quite so high.
> 
> It's very flexible as to season and size of unit. I've got a 3br booked for Thanksgiving and just booked a studio for myself to go down for Epcot Food & Wine. We go for full weeks at Thanksgiving and Easter, plus through in a long weekend around MLK.
> 
> If you or anyone else has any questions about how DVC works,send me a PM. We own at 2 resorts. I think it's a much easier system to learn than Wyndham.



Thanks for the offer; I'm sure someone will be asking about DVC but I think I have that system down pat.

Don and I have an agreement that we both have to want whatever major purchase is on the table, and that's the reason we don't own DVC.     I would have purchased in a heartbeat because I love WDW but he's happy with a visit every five years or so.  The ability to rent points, which we've done in the past through the disboards, sealed the deal against DVC for us.  But I've gotta admit, I was heartbroken when DVC left II.  More so now that the Ko Olina property is in the works - that resort looks stunning!

If only someone could explain MVCI's points program (as it develops) as compared to DVC, then I'll have a better chance of understanding it!


----------



## wsrobinson

PerryM said:


> However, 3 years of wild speculation - now that makes absolutely no sense.  There is no reason why the programmers or contract programming service can't sign NDAs and keep this all hush-hush.  6 months before release the training courses are released and salesreps would then learn of the exchange system and incorporate the rumor into their normal spiel.



I sincerely doubt the source of ANY information has come from programmer (contract or other).  Programmers are bound not to disclose proprietary information.  I don't see alot of proprietary inforamtion here.  Just alot of speculation.   Besides I doubt many of the programmers are owners or care what they are coding.  The source is NOT likely and IT source.


----------



## Dave M

wsrobinson said:


> The source is NOT likely an IT source.


You are correct.


----------



## JimC

LisaRex said:


> I think that there was a lawsuit that prohibited TS HOAs from charging disproportionate MFs based on season. An owner in the fall creates just as much wear and tear as an owner in the summer, so it would be patently unfair for the latter owner to have to fork up more money to maintain the same unit. Remember that a premium for owning a popular week was already paid when the unit was purchased.  They'd have a tough time selling platinum weeks if the MFs were also consistently higher.



But they can distinguish property taxes by season.  If converted to points then all costs are the same per point.  You pay more or less based on the number of points you own, which will vary by time of year and size of unit.


----------



## SueDonJ

PerryM said:


> I can understand Marriott wanting to make a few bucks in the exchange business - every little crumb helps.
> 
> However, 3 years of wild speculation - now that makes absolutely no sense.  There is no reason why the programmers or contract programming service can't sign NDAs and keep this all hush-hush.  6 months before release the training courses are released and salesreps would then learn of the exchange system and incorporate the rumor into their normal spiel.
> 
> The ONLY reason that makes any sense is that this will be such a culture shock that 3 years of wild speculation are needed to ease the program onto the owner base.  If that's the case then expect the worse.
> 
> If the new exchange program incorporates Marriott's Destination Club, hotels, and fractionals then this makes all the sense in the world - a huge shakeup at Marriott as it combines their entire product line.  But that's not what the rumors hint at; simply a substitute for II.



Is it possible that the three years of speculation have resulted not from salespeople initiating comments about resale v. developer purchases, but from the savvy owners who attend sales meetings and ask directly, "but why should I buy from you when I can get a much better deal on the resale market?"

It could be a vicious circle kind of thing, couldn't it?  Prior to savvy owners asking that question, sales people didn't have any reason to acknowledge the resale market.  Then as the internet brought resales to the mainstream, the question started getting asked and salespeople responded to it with only the MRP exchange difference.  But at the same time, they were reporting to MVCI thinking heads who had to acknowledge that their customer base was being impacted in larger and larger numbers by the resale market.  So MVCI had no choice, I think, but to think of ways to reign in that customer base.  They start brainstorming with the salespeople who have direct contact with customers, the salespeople start repeating what's been speculated about in meetings, the customer base starts brainstorming and speculating on internet message boards, MVCI incorporates some of that info into its brainstorming, and voila! - three years have gone by and we still don't know how this will flesh out.  

All that to say, maybe MVCI isn't totally at fault for the long drawn-out process.


----------



## Twinkstarr

SueDonJ said:


> Thanks for the offer; I'm sure someone will be asking about DVC but I think I have that system down pat.
> 
> Don and I have an agreement that we both have to want whatever major purchase is on the table, and that's the reason we don't own DVC.     I would have purchased in a heartbeat because I love WDW but he's happy with a visit every five years or so.  The ability to rent points, which we've done in the past through the disboards, sealed the deal against DVC for us.  But I've gotta admit, I was heartbroken when DVC left II.  More so now that the Ko Olina property is in the works - that resort looks stunning!
> 
> If only someone could explain MVCI's points program (as it develops) as compared to DVC, then I'll have a better chance of understanding it!



I don't think anyone has mentioned banking/borrowing of points which makes DVC work so well. 

I think I may throw up when I see the point chart for DVC Ko Olina, BLT was creeped up a bit, no problem. The resort at DL  when someone wanted to trade a Hyatt week for it, I about passed out.

That is something I would be worried about with a Marriott point system, point creep at new resorts. It's very evident with Wyndham's resorts and now DVC(but I understand the economics of it).


----------



## sdtugger

*Thanks Dave!*



Dave M said:


> I don't believe for a second that Marriott doesn't "care about the buyer". Having worked in and consulting to entreprenurial businesses all of my adult life until retiring last year, I know that the balance between giving customers everything they want and making a profit is a very delicate balance. Both are important and Marriott can't have some of one without some of the other.
> 
> The new system will be great for some owners and not so great for others. But Marriott does care. They have to. A high percentage of Marriott timeshare sales are to existing owners. If they roll out a new program that makes most of the owners so mad that they won't buy again.... Well, they just aren't that stupid.



Dave,  Your knowledge of the Marriott system and insider information is very much appreciated.  Please keep sharing what you hear and know.  You put enough disclaimers in your posts that we all know that you are hearing general outlines of planned changes.

My question for you is based on your last sentence stating that Marriott won't roll out a new program that makes most of the owners so mad that they won't buy again.  I agree with your premise.  But, I'm puzzled by the application to the points system.  Perhaps you are saying that Marriott will grandfather all current owners (I think you said that was likely with the other potential changes) and, therefore, owners won't be "mad."  But, if the new points system does what I understand to be its purpose and that is to make new sales more attractive, then wouldn't the new points system devalue all prior sales be they developer or resale?  And, depending on the extent of devaluation, wouldn't that make all existing owners "mad"?  I'm not criticizing your info, I'm just trying to understand what you understand to be Marriott's thinking and strategy here.  Thanks.


----------



## Dave M

JimC said:


> If converted to points then all costs are the same per point.  You pay more or less based on the number of points you own, which will vary by time of year and size of unit.


That's not necessarily true. Although not my source on this particular thread, one Marriott person I have talked to about this topic suggested that the points might be solely for purposes of internal exchanges and not for any other ownership purpose. 

Bottom line? It's easy to speculate, as you have. But beware of assuming that such speculation will become fact.


----------



## SueDonJ

Twinkstarr said:


> I don't think anyone has mentioned banking/borrowing of points which makes DVC work so well.
> 
> I think I may throw up when I see the point chart for DVC Ko Olina, BLT was creeped up a bit, no problem. The resort at DL  when someone wanted to trade a Hyatt week for it, I about passed out.
> 
> That is something I would be worried about with a Marriott point system, point creep at new resorts. It's very evident with Wyndham's resorts and now DVC(but I understand the economics of it).



There's a lot about a possible MVCI points system that concerns me, despite owning developer-direct HHI 3BR and 2BR plat/gold oceanside/oceanfront properties.  Theoretically I think my resorts are among the higher-valued properties, but as you say, as time goes on they will be pushed further down the list by newer properties that will probably have higher point values.

I also have had excellent results with trading in II, and love love LOVE the opportunity for AC's with II.  Any MVCI points program that devalues what we've gotten with II will not be championed by me, that's for sure.


----------



## JimC

Dave M said:


> Responding to a couple of comments and questions.......It does make me a bit sad that in trying to provide useful info, I (or one of my sources) get criticized when the stated likely scenarios and likely timing don’t turn out to be 100% accurate.
> 
> I doubt that there are any readers here who would have preferred that I withhold info that comes to my attention solely because I am unable to confirm that the final product will look exactly like or be formally implemented at the exact date of early development forecasts....
> 
> Starting later today I will be out of the U.S. for the next four weeks and will have very limited Internet access for most of the next three weeks. So I will not be able to check in on this thread very often during that time.



Dave, I appreciate the information, even when it comes with limitations and/or may not be to my liking.  Enjoy your holiday!


----------



## SueDonJ

Dave M said:


> That's not necessarily true. Although not my source on this particular thread, one Marriott person I have talked to about this topic suggested that the points might be solely for purposes of internal exchanges and not for any other ownership purpose.
> 
> Bottom line? It's easy to speculate, as you have. But beware of assuming that such speculation will become fact.



So, speculating, all of the program features will remain as is except that weeks will be assigned a point value (based on resort/season/unit configurations and purchase method, maybe?) for exchanging to other MVCI properties?  That doesn't sound so bad.


----------



## Dave M

sdtugger said:


> ...if the new points system does what I understand to be its purpose and that is to make new sales more attractive, then wouldn't the new points system devalue all prior sales be they developer or resale?  And, depending on the extent of devaluation, wouldn't that make all existing owners "mad"?  I'm not criticizing your info, I'm just trying to understand what you understand to be Marriott's thinking and strategy here.  Thanks.


I don't have any information to suggest that anything you have said in the quoted language is accurate. Obviously, it would be stupid for Marriott to implement a voluntary program (which is what this will be) that angers so many owners that very few will join. Thus, Marriott obviously expects the program will be attractive to enough owners such that many will join. That's one reason that speculating on all of the possible negative aspects of a program that we as yet know very little about is just that - speculation.

If we were trying to visualize what the program will look like, my guess is that it would be more productive to make guesses as to how Marriott plans to shape the program so that a high percentage of those owners who like to exchange internally will be enticed to join.


----------



## Twinkstarr

SueDonJ said:


> So, speculating, all of the program features will remain as is except that weeks will be assigned a point value (based on resort/season/unit configurations and purchase method, maybe?) for exchanging to other MVCI properties?  That doesn't sound so bad.



If it's anything like the Hyatt system that would work just fine.


----------



## davidvel

Latravel said:


> Those that bought resale knew there was a possibility that changes could occur regarding trading and they may not favor the resale buyer.  It was a risk that was taken for the sake of lower upfront prices.  Complaining now just seems like you're trying to take advantage of the system.  It doesn't work that way.


This is inaccurate. There are no *changes* taking place. There are no changes regarding trading, because Marriott never contractually promised anyone that any trading system would continue to exist etc. But, you still have the right to rent, gift or trade your week with whomever will trade with you. "This" (whatever it will be) is simply a new trading system ala Redweek, II, Ownertrades, etc. 

No risk has been incurred by resale buyers. No one was told or believed that there couldn't be new trading programs started up, or that they had a right to join any or all of them (I can't trade with RCI can I??) Assuming there are no anti-competitive issues (a big assumption), anyone can start their own trading system tomorrow and presumably refuse to allow _*direct purchasers*_... (II?) [Marriott a monopoly??]



SueDonJ said:


> That's why I say "somewhat" - it's hard for me to believe that any frequent readers of TUG could be surprised/newly concerned that Marriott/MVCI will at any time exercise its rights to make changes in the program.  The history of them doing just that is all right here in black and white.



Nothing about the "new system" as discussed involves _changes_ to your timeshare rights ("the program") that you bought as a resale or direct purchaser. Just a new trading system added. No obligation. No change. Nothing more. Nothing less. 

Just more wait and see and speculation.


----------



## JimC

Dave M said:


> That's not necessarily true. Although not my source on this particular thread, one Marriott person I have talked to about this topic suggested that the points might be solely for purposes of internal exchanges and not for any other ownership purpose.
> 
> Bottom line? It's easy to speculate, as you have. But beware of assuming that such speculation will become fact.




That was out of context.  I had just responded to a comment on whether  maintenance fees could be disproportionate based on season.  I had said that taxes could be and then continued.  That line was referring to if the MFs were converted to points.  I did not say they would be converted to points, only if.


----------



## JimC

ngmaui said:


> Quite possible...especially since DVC just left II for RCI.  DVC leaving really devalued II in my eyes given I have 3 young kids and a love for Disney.




You could always buy DVC.  They are building one in Ko Olina.


----------



## BocaBum99

Dave M said:


> I don't have any information to suggest that anything you have said in the quoted language is accurate. Obviously, it would be stupid for Marriott to implement a voluntary program (which is what this will be) that angers so many owners that very few will join. Thus, Marriott obviously expects the program will be attractive to enough owners such that many will join. That's one reason that speculating on all of the possible negative aspects of a program that we as yet know very little about is just that - speculation.
> 
> If we were trying to visualize what the program will look like, my guess is that it would be more productive to make guesses as to how Marriott plans to shape the program so that a high percentage of those owners who like to exchange internally will be enticed to join.



I completely agree that Marriott does care about its owners.  And, it is smart enough to know that it needs widespread adoption to make this work.  The only thing I would add is that the program needs to meet 2 additional screens.

1) how will it make Marriott's timeshare program more competitive.
2) what program maximizes the return to Marriott for the resources invested.

The constraints are significant.


----------



## PerryM

*Are rumors lies?*



SueDonJ said:


> Is it possible that the three years of speculation have resulted not from salespeople initiating comments about resale v. developer purchases, but from the savvy owners who attend sales meetings and ask directly, "but why should I buy from you when I can get a much better deal on the resale market?"
> 
> It could be a vicious circle kind of thing, couldn't it?  Prior to savvy owners asking that question, sales people didn't have any reason to acknowledge the resale market.  Then as the internet brought resales to the mainstream, the question started getting asked and salespeople responded to it with only the MRP exchange difference.  But at the same time, they were reporting to MVCI thinking heads who had to acknowledge that their customer base was being impacted in larger and larger numbers by the resale market.  So MVCI had no choice, I think, but to think of ways to reign in that customer base.  They start brainstorming with the salespeople who have direct contact with customers, the salespeople start repeating what's been speculated about in meetings, the customer base starts brainstorming and speculating on internet message boards, MVCI incorporates some of that info into its brainstorming, and voila! - three years have gone by and we still don't know how this will flesh out.
> 
> All that to say, maybe MVCI isn't totally at fault for the long drawn-out process.



I don't know how many sales Marriott has lost because they don't have an internal exchange system for owners.  My guess is that fear of a meteorite striking the resort has more impact.

This is Marriott's rumor that they have pushed for 3 years now - I've never heard of a sales organization doing this before.  It makes no sense at all.

Are rumors the same as a lie?  A lie is simply stating what did NOT take place.  A rumor is stating something that does NOT exist and may not exist and may be totally different if it comes true.  If that rumor is used to Marriott's benefit then I classify it as another salesrep lie.

This is what's so disturbing with what Marriott keeps doing - benefiting from the fear their rumor instills.  Just another timeshare salesrep lie but from the corporate office.

Shame on you Marriott....


----------



## Dave M

My Marriott source has watched this dialogue and contacted me. He didn't provide any additional info. However, he was amused at the speculation and found the comments to be very interesting. 

I doubt that anyone in Marriott will make any decisions based on this thread. If that's what they were seeking by feeding info to us, I think we would have gotten more details about the tentative plans. 

I'm sitting in the United Red Carpet lounge at DC's Dulles International Airport, waiting for my flight to Amsterdam. In a couple of days, I'll get on a cruise ship in Rotterdam for a Baltic cruise. Internet connections on most cruise ships are notoriously slow and unreliable. That's why I'll likely be out of touch for most of the next two weeks.


----------



## littlestar

You know, I just thought of something. If Marriott doesn't make an internal points system attractive enough to join it, some owners may just use their Marriott weeks to try to trade for a Westin, Sheraton, or Hyatt in II. I think Starwood signed a new agreement with II a few months back?  I know all of our stays in Orlando over the last few years are either DVC, Sheraton, or Marriott. And I like all three of them. 

I've always been happy with my Starwood stays. Interesting to think about all of this and trading in II.


----------



## Twinkstarr

Dave M said:


> My Marriott source has watched this dialogue and contacted me. He didn't provide any additional info. However, he was amused at the speculation and found the comments to very interesting.
> 
> I doubt that anyone in Marriott will make any decisions based on this thread. If that's what they were seeking by feeding info to us, I think we would have gotten more details about the tentative plans.
> 
> I'm sitting in the United Red Carpet lounge at DC's Dulles International Airport, waiting for my flight to Amsterdam. In a couple of days, I'll get on a cruise ship in Rotterdam for a Baltic cruise. Internet connections on most cruise ships are notoriously slow and unreliable. That's why I'll likely be out of touch for most of the next two weeks.




Baltic cruise, that's one I want to try. Have a great time Dave.


----------



## BocaBum99

I'll bet one of the features Marriott adds to such a program is bonus time like what HGVC provides in Open Season.  If they don't offer it, it would be the single biggest miss of all time in this new program.  I'll predict that the revenue from bonus time would be far greater than the exchange fees generated from the program.

In the current model with II, all breakage in expired deposits accrue to the benefit of II.  In an internal exchange model, the breakage can be offered back to owners in the form of bonus time paid with cash.  This is a very popular feature for all timeshare systems I own.  It would be a reason that I sign up for the program.  I would pay a few thousand dollars just for this feature alone.


----------



## PerryM

Dave M said:


> My Marriott source has watched this dialogue and contacted me. He didn't provide any additional info. However, *he was amused at the speculation* and found the comments to very interesting.
> 
> I doubt that anyone in Marriott will make any decisions based on this thread. If that's what they were seeking by feeding info to us, I think we would have gotten more details about the tentative plans.
> 
> I'm sitting in the United Red Carpet lounge at DC's Dulles International Airport, waiting for my flight to Amsterdam. In a couple of days, I'll get on a cruise ship in Rotterdam for a Baltic cruise. Internet connections on most cruise ships are notoriously slow and unreliable. That's why I'll likely be out of touch for most of the next two weeks.



This is truly despicable - Marriott having a chuckle at our expense.

What the hell is happening to a once great company?

Dave, have a great vacation.


----------



## BocaBum99

littlestar said:


> You know, I just thought of something. If Marriott doesn't make an internal points system attractive enough to join it, some owners may just use their Marriott weeks to try to trade for a Westin, Sheraton, or Hyatt in II. I think Starwood signed a new agreement with II a few months back?  I know all of our stays in Orlando over the last few years are either DVC, Sheraton, or Marriott. And I like all three of them.
> 
> I've always been happy with my Starwood stays. Interesting to think about all of this and trading in II.



This won't work well given the internal preferences of the the hotel chains.  To make best use of those systems, you need to own in those systems, or own a much cheaper trader than a Marriott.


----------



## josh1231

Out of curiosity, if they move to an internal exchange system is there anything that says that have to still let you trade your week through Interval? Might be a stupid question but I have not read anywhere that they are required to do so???


----------



## Twinkstarr

BocaBum99 said:


> I'll bet one of the features Marriott adds to such a program is bonus time like what HGVC provides in Open Season.  If they don't offer it, it would be the single biggest miss of all time in this new program.  I'll predict that the revenue from bonus time would be far greater than the exchange fees generated from the program.
> 
> In the current model with II, all breakage in expired deposits accrue to the benefit of II.  In an internal exchange model, the breakage can be offered back to owners in the form of bonus time paid with cash.  This is a very popular feature for all timeshare systems I own.  It would be a reason that I sign up for the program.  I would pay a few thousand dollars just for this feature alone.



I've heard the Open Season HGVC term used and owners are pretty happy with it.  Boca, why don't you explain how it works to the Marriott group.


----------



## SueDonJ

SueDonJ said:


> That's why I say "somewhat" - it's hard for me to believe that any frequent readers of TUG could be surprised/newly concerned that Marriott/MVCI will at any time exercise its rights to make changes in the program.  The history of them doing just that is all right here in black and white.





davidvel said:


> Nothing about the "new system" as discussed involves _changes_ to your timeshare rights ("the program") that you bought as a resale or direct purchaser. Just a new trading system added. No obligation. No change. Nothing more. Nothing less.



You'll notice that I didn't say anything about my rights as an owner.  But Marriott/MVCI holds a right, just as the owners do, to contract with an exchange company as they have done with II.  If they do not continue with that contract* or supplement it with an internal exchange system such as the one that's being speculated about here (discontinuing the MVCI-priority system currently in place in the current MVCI-II contract,) then that is most certainly a "change" in the exchange specifics of the "program."

*Does anyone know the terms or dates of the current contract between MVCI and II?


----------



## JimC

Dave M said:


> ...I'm sitting in the United Red Carpet lounge at DC's Dulles International Airport, waiting for my flight to Amsterdam. In a couple of days, I'll get on a cruise ship in Rotterdam for a Baltic cruise.....



Safe travels!  Sounds like a fantastic holiday.


----------



## SueDonJ

PerryM said:


> I don't know how many sales Marriott has lost because they don't have an internal exchange system for owners.  My guess is that fear of a meteorite striking the resort has more impact.
> 
> This is Marriott's rumor that they have pushed for 3 years now - I've never heard of a sales organization doing this before.  It makes no sense at all.
> 
> Are rumors the same as a lie?  A lie is simply stating what did NOT take place.  A rumor is stating something that does NOT exist and may not exist and may be totally different if it comes true.  If that rumor is used to Marriott's benefit then I classify it as another salesrep lie.
> 
> This is what's so disturbing with what Marriott keeps doing - benefiting from the fear their rumor instills.  Just another timeshare salesrep lie but from the corporate office.
> 
> Shame on you Marriott....



Sure, the swirling rumors/lies don't paint Marriott/MVCI in a favorable light.  But my main point was that maybe MVCI didn't start brainstorming about all this as a means to threaten its ownership group, but rather as a means to respond to questions brought up by the changing market.


----------



## Dave M

PerryM said:


> This is truly despicable - Marriott having a chuckle at our expense.
> 
> What the hell is happening to a once great company?


I disagree. What seems out of place to me is casting dispersions on an entire company because of a comment made by one person that you didn't like. And I agree with my source. I also find many posts to be amusing, especially the suggestions that the forthcoming program will be so lousy that very few owners will want to join. 

Finding posts to be amusing doesn't equate to being critical of those same posts. I find many of my grandkids profound statements to be amusing. That's not a negative. Why distort such innocent comments made by a Marriott employee?


----------



## KathyPet

Dave,   You will love St. Petersburg.  Absolutely amazing city and so much to see there.  We were there for 3 days and still did not see everything we wanted to.    Have a great time!

Also want to thank you for all the information you provide us.  As far as those  who say that the new trading system will never happen well there are always some of those everywhere.

I do, however, disagree with you on one thing.  I truly believe deep in my heart that Marriott does not care one whit about its customers EXCEPT as a source of future revenue.  Except for looking at us as future cash cows they could care less whether we are happy or unhappy with them.  That is why I no longer recommend that people buy MVCI either direct or resale.    Last time they contacted me to see if i wanted to add any more names to a old referral list I had given them I told them I would not give them any new names as I could not, in good conscience,  recommend the Marriott program to my friends


----------



## Dave M

josh1231 said:


> Out of curiosity, if they move to an internal exchange system is there anything that says that have to still let you trade your week through Interval? Might be a stupid question but I have not read anywhere that they are required to do so???


Marriott fully recognizes that many owners will continue to want to exchange externally. Thus, you can with confidence expect Marriott to continue its relationship with II, unless it were to switch back to RCI.


----------



## PerryM

Dave M said:


> I disagree. What seems out of place to me is casting dispersions on an entire company because of a comment made by one person that you didn't like. And I agree with my source. I also find many posts to be amusing, especially the suggestions that the forthcoming program will be so lousy that very few owners will want to join.
> 
> Finding posts to be amusing doesn't equate to being critical of those same posts. I find many of my grandkids profound statements to be amusing. That's not a negative. *Why distort such innocent comments made by a Marriott employee?*



Because Marriott is using this rumor to benefit sales - they created this rumor, make money from it, and laugh at us.

I find that despicable but that's just my opinion.


----------



## Janette

Have a wonderful time Dave. We did own Hyatt and sold it because we had to have a separate II account(Hyatt club) for every week we owned. Also, once we put our week in II, we could no longer go back to our home resort. Their theory was that we had a chance to go during our period before putting it in II. The Hyatt rep told me that it wasn't fair for me to trade to a better time at my own resort. I asked if it were more fair for me to get it or a Marriott owner to get it, and she said it was fairer for an outsider to get it. I certainly don't want a system like that. I really enjoy my Marriott ownership and have never been dissatisfied with their program.


----------



## AceValenta

Dave M said:


> I disagree. What seems out of place to me is casting dispersions on an entire company because of a comment made by one person that you didn't like. And I agree with my source. I also find many posts to be amusing, especially the suggestions that the forthcoming program will be so lousy that very few owners will want to join.
> 
> Finding posts to be amusing doesn't equate to being critical of those same posts. I find many of my grandkids profound statements to be amusing. That's not a negative. Why distort such innocent comments made by a Marriott employee?



Are you the Marriott insider....Maybe Bill Marriott's son Dave testing us to see if the program will work?  

j/k 

Have a great trip around the world!


----------



## PerryM

SueDonJ said:


> Sure, the swirling rumors/lies don't paint Marriott/MVCI in a favorable light.  But my main point was that maybe MVCI didn't start brainstorming about all this as a means to threaten its ownership group, but rather as a means to respond to questions brought up by the changing market.



Marriott has total control over this rumor - they could easily instruct their employees (MVCI) to cut it out.  But they haven't for 3 years and use their rumor in their sales pitches if you lean towards not buying.

I've bumped into this rumor in the last 5 sales tours I believe - this is a coordinated effort on Marriott's part and they should know better.


----------



## Dave M

PerryM said:


> Because Marriott is using this rumor to benefit sales - they created this rumor, make money from it, and laugh at us.
> 
> I find that despicable but that's just my opinion.


You are entitled to your opinion, with which I strongly disagree.

If you truly believe this is merely a rumor, how about a substantial wager as to whether this program will become reality? Since you are apparently convinced that it won't, you should be willing to bet a lot. I am.


----------



## SueDonJ

Dave M said:


> ... I'm sitting in the United Red Carpet lounge at DC's Dulles International Airport, waiting for my flight to Amsterdam. In a couple of days, I'll get on a cruise ship in Rotterdam for a Baltic cruise. Internet connections on most cruise ships are notoriously slow and unreliable. That's why I'll likely be out of touch for most of the next two weeks.



Yes, and we're all impatiently waiting for you to board the ship so that we can run amuk and cross-post all over creation and double-post until our eyeballs bleed and just generally wreak havoc all over your un-moderated Marriott Board.

But don't worry - just give us 24-hour notice of your return and we'll have this place back in its perfect condition.  Or, looking at least as undamaged as wayward teenagers manage to leave their parents' homes when left unattended. :hysterical:

No really, Dave, have a great time.  We'll miss you.


----------



## JimC

SueDonJ said:


> Yes, and we're all impatiently waiting for you to board the ship so that we can run amuk and cross-post all over creation and double-post until our eyeballs bleed and just generally wreak havoc all over your un-moderated Marriott Board.
> 
> But don't worry - just give us 24-hour notice of your return and we'll have this place back in its perfect condition.  Or, looking at least as undamaged as wayward teenagers manage to leave their parents' homes when left unattended. :hysterical:
> 
> No really, Dave, have a great time.  We'll miss you.



ROTFLOL!!  Great post :hysterical:


----------



## PerryM

Dave M said:


> You are entitled to your opinion, with which I strongly disagree.
> 
> If you truly believe this is merely a rumor, how about a substantial wager as to whether this program will become reality? Since you are apparently convinced that it won't, you should be willing to bet a lot. I am.



Interesting but bet on what?  An exact day when Marriott will release this and what will be released?

My betting would simply add credence to a rumor - I would be aiding Marriott's scheme in that case.

I don't question what you say Dave I question the ethics of Marriott - spread a rumor and then profit from that rumor.  And then use the largest independent chat-room for timeshares to spread the rumor even further.

They profit if they scare the life out of an elderly couple who are now afraid they will not be part of an exchange system.  That, to me, is immoral and just a cheap sales gimmick.

So I don't think I will participate in this sham...


----------



## rsackett

So what do people think will happen to the Marriott preference in II?  Will it be gone?  Will Marriott weeks owners have just the same chance of getting a Marriot weeks as everyone else?  Will the trading fee be $149 if you trade into a Marriott or anyother resort?  If this is the case would you still stick with II?

Or do you think the points program will be an additional program rather than a replacement?

Ray


----------



## Dave M

Perry -

There is no question that Marriott is using the info related to the forthcoming internal exchange program to profit from sales. That's no different from what many corporations do. And I don't see anything unethical about it. And if you think carefully about what people have related from those sales presentations, a potential buyer being advised of the coming program might well question whether it makes sense to buy from Marriott because the comments by salespeople, as often related here in recent months, suggest that an owner might have difficulty reselling a Marriott timeshare.  

It would be unethical do disseminate info about the coming program if Marriott had no intention of implementing such a program. Further, as related in this thread, a number of people have chosen not to buy solely because of the uncertainties about the coming program. That doesn't benefit Marriott. 

I can assure you that Marriott does plan to implement it. If you choose not to believe that, as I said previously, you are entitled to your opinion.

I'm about to board my plane. So I'll check out of this debate.


----------



## PerryM

*Marriott gets an F in business ethics in my book...*



Dave M said:


> Perry -
> 
> There is no question that Marriott is using the info related to the forthcoming internal exchange program to profit from sales. That's no different from what many corporations do. And I don't see anything unethical about it. And if you think carefully about what people have related from those sales presentations, a potential buyer being advised of the coming program might well question whether it makes sense to buy from Marriott because the comments by salespeople, as often related here in recent months, suggest that an owner might have difficulty reselling a Marriott timeshare.
> 
> It would be unethical do disseminate info about the coming program if Marriott had no intention of implementing such a program. Further, as related in this thread, a number of people have chosen not to buy solely because of the uncertainties about the coming program. That doesn't benefit Marriott.
> 
> I can assure you that Marriott does plan to implement it. If you choose not to believe that, as I said previously, you are entitled to your opinion.
> 
> I'm about to board my plane. So I'll check out of this debate.



Its not that I don't think they will implement an internal exchange system they have every right to do so.  *To me this is about business ethics* - for 3 years they have made a profit from the rumor they created.  That I find despicable. 

Then to have a Marriott employee chuckling at their lack of business ethics is just raunchy.  I've recommended Marriott to many folks over the years - even buying direct from Marriott; now I must warn folks that the downturn in the economy has affected Marriott's ethics as well.

Marriott owns us an apology for a lapse in their ethics.


----------



## pwrshift

*Marriott already has 'categorized' their timeshares!*

As you know, Marriott gave Marriott Reward Category levels to their timeshares, with:

*6 considered Category 5*

*6 considered Category 7*

*all the rest considered Category 6*

That means it costs you more MR points to stay in some TS and less if you stay in others, just like with hotel levels. The same thing could work in an internal trading system, and I wonder if Marriott is already telling us something about a possible "points" program of the future? 

A discussion on 'trading points' is confusing because of the 'MR Points' program, but it might mean if you wanted to trade your Cat5 TS into a Cat7 TS using points you might only get to stay 4 nights instead of 7 nights...and if the Cat 7 traded in to a Cat5 they might get 12 nights instead of 7 nights.

Interesting times ahead...

Brian

http://www.tugbbs.com/forums/showpost.php?p=719220&postcount=9


----------



## hotcoffee

I very much hope that whatever Marriott does, it does not hurt resales.  I never bought my timeshare thinking that I would own it for the remainder of my life (and my children for the remainder of theirs).

If there are any who bought developer who do not care about the value of resales, I assume that they actually do expect to own their units for the remainder of their lives.  I have a natural aversion to getting into something that I cannot get out of - especially when it costs me money to remain in it.  If it turns out that resales are in any way hurt by whatever Marriott implements, I will probably explore whether Marriott would be willing to take my unit for resale.  I might be able to get out because I have a quality unit in a sold-out resort.  But, I'd feel bad for those who are truly stuck with a unsellable unit if they can no longer get the exchanges they want.

The one comment I generally agree with is that Marriott cares little about what owners think.  Marriott is just a business.  They do what is in their own best interests.


----------



## indyhorizons

pwrshift said:


> As you know, Marriott gave Marriott Reward Category levels to their timeshares, with:
> 
> *6 considered Category 5*
> 
> *6 considered Category 7*
> 
> *all the rest considered Category 6*
> 
> That means it costs you more MR points to stay in some TS and less if you stay in others, just like with hotel levels. The same thing could work in an internal trading system, and I wonder if Marriott is already telling us something about a possible "points" program of the future?
> 
> A discussion on 'trading points' is confusing because of the 'MR Points' program, but it might mean if you wanted to trade your Cat5 TS into a Cat7 TS using points you might only get to stay 4 nights instead of 7 nights...and if the Cat 7 traded in to a Cat5 they might get 12 nights instead of 7 nights.
> 
> Interesting times ahead...
> 
> Brian
> 
> http://www.tugbbs.com/forums/showpost.php?p=719220&postcount=9



Excellent point Brian. The problem with that is, what in that process, entices an existing owner to move from deeded week to a points system?  Right now, at the least, I am guaranteed like for like and can/will receive a 2 bdrm (as others have pointed out), very likely an upgrade (if I am patient) thru the existing program with II. Plus, I have to pay for the privilege (unknown as yet conversion fee). Speaking of, even if it is alot (a la AP) or a little (let's say $50, or you can use MR poiints to cover - let's get real creative), I still see no advantage based on what you have outlined above. In the OP by Dave, I believe he mentions the carrot will be waived that will likely make it impossible to refuse (or something to that effect).


----------



## davidvel

josh1231 said:


> Out of curiosity, if they move to an internal exchange system is there anything that says that have to still let you trade your week through Interval? Might be a stupid question but I have not read anywhere that they are required to do so???



Once you reserve your week you can let anyone you want stay there. Rent it, trade it, Redweek, ownertrades, II,  whatever... But this doesn't mean that if you join the new system you won't be agreeing to only use thier system-- most likely you will.


----------



## SueDonJ

hotcoffee said:


> I very much hope that whatever Marriott does, it does not hurt resales.  I never bought my timeshare thinking that I would own it for the remainder of my life (and my children for the remainder of theirs).
> 
> If there are any who bought developer who do not care about the value of resales, I assume that they actually do expect to own their units for the remainder of their lives.  I have a natural aversion to getting into something that I cannot get out of - especially when it costs me money to remain in it.  If it turns out that resales are in any way hurt by whatever Marriott implements, I will probably explore whether Marriott would be willing to take my unit for resale.  I might be able to get out because I have a quality unit in a sold-out resort.  But, I'd feel bad for those who are truly stuck with a unsellable unit if they can no longer get the exchanges they want.
> 
> The one comment I generally agree with is that Marriott cares little about what owners think.  Marriott is just a business.  They do what is in their own best interests.



I guess I just don't understand the contradiction.  Folks here say, on the one hand, that it is guaranteed a developer purchase will immediately depreciate to a sometimes drastic extent the minute a buyer signs on the dotted line.  That's the rationale behind choosing a resale over a developer-purchase every time, despite the fact that doing so contributes to the depreciation of a developer-purchase.

But on the other hand, those same folks say that MVCI should not be able to implement or contract any exchange system which will negatively impact the value of their resale-purchased weeks.  Meaning what, exactly?  Is MVCI expected to act in such a way that the resale buyers' investments are protected, when MVCI takes no such action to protect developer buyers' investments?

Like I said, I don't get the contradiction.

The fact that timeshares depreciate as they do is the single reason why I don't see them as financial investments.  They are an investment in a forced vacation lifestyle, nothing more and nothing less.  The way we buy them is one of the determining factors for our eventual profit/loss ratio should we sell them at some point in the future, sure.  Each of us has to determine what level of that risk we want to assume when we're buying.  But MVCI assumes none of that risk for when we're selling.

That's how I see it, anyway.


----------



## Pit

SueDonJ said:


> Like I said, I don't get the contradiction.



There is no contradiction. The comments do not pertain to developer vs. resale buyers, but rather resale sellers. Regardless of where you bought, all owners are, sooner or later, resale sellers.


----------



## SueDonJ

PerryM said:


> Its not that I don't think they will implement an internal exchange system they have every right to do so.  *To me this is about business ethics* - for 3 years they have made a profit from the rumor they created.  That I find despicable.
> 
> Then to have a Marriott employee chuckling at their lack of business ethics is just raunchy.  I've recommended Marriott to many folks over the years - even buying direct from Marriott; now I must warn folks that the downturn in the economy has affected Marriott's ethics as well.
> 
> Marriott owns us an apology for a lapse in their ethics.



But on the other hand, Perry ....

Speculation here is that it makes sense that it would take as long as it has to rollout a new exchange system, right?  Now what if somebody goes to a sales presentation during this time, asks about resale differentials and is told about only the MRP exchange option.  Bingo! S/he signs on the dotted line for a resale and six (eight, ten, twenty, whatever) months later is notified that the week s/he purchased no longer has an exchange value equal to a developer-purchased week.  S/he rants and raves and finds TUG, and is dismayed to learn that what was speculated about HERE was not disclosed in the original sales presentation.  Isn't s/he going to think, maybe rightly so, that MVCI had an obligation to disclose future use limitations if such things were more than rumors though not yet fully developed?

I guess the answer is that if no speculative info had ever been disclosed during any sales presentations, then there could be no discussion about it on TUG or any other message boards.  But consider that message board discussions center around all sorts of "what if?" scenarios, some that are in the works as well as some that aren't.  Is it more or less ethical for a company to acknowledge the discussion/speculation if by chance one of those scenarios is in the development stage?


----------



## SueDonJ

Pit said:


> There is no contradiction. The comments do not pertain to developer vs. resale buyers, but rather resale sellers. Regardless of where you bought, all owners are, sooner or later, resale sellers.



Well then I'm confused, because the speculation in this thread is about a devalued exchange system that applies to resale purchases, not sales.  And again, MVCI doesn't assume any risk for the profit/loss ratio of any week for sale, not developer- or resale-purchase.


----------



## Pit

SueDonJ said:


> Well then I'm confused, because the speculation in this thread is about a devalued exchange system that applies to resale purchases, not sales.  And again, MVCI doesn't assume any risk for the profit/loss ratio of any week for sale, not developer- or resale-purchase.



The speculation concerns a new internal exchange system with the *potential* to devalue all weeks on the resale market. For example, if Marriott does not allow participation in the internal exchange system to transfer with your week when you sell it, who do you think wants to buy it from you?

I believe this is the issue hotcoffee was speaking to.


----------



## SueDonJ

Pit said:


> The speculation concerns a new internal exchange system with the *potential* to devalue all weeks on the resale market. If Marriott does not allow participation in the internal exchange system to transfer with your week when you sell it, who do you think wants to buy it from you?



As I said before, the folks who do not care to exchange but rather are purchasing for consistent yearly use.  Granted, those buyers will benefit by being able to negotiate an extremely good deal by virtue of the fact that the sellers will have a smaller pool of buyers with which to do business (because we assume that most folks want exchange privileges,) and the sellers will suffer a higher loss ratio.

But isn't that somewhat related to the current system whereby a developer-purchaser suffers a higher loss ratio than the resale-purchaser, when they each put identical weeks on the resale market?  I think so, and now see it as this thread contains a contradiction in that resale purchasers have never up until this point been concerned with the devaluation of developer purchases.


----------



## sdtugger

SueDonJ said:


> As I said before, the folks who do not care to exchange but rather are purchasing for consistent yearly use.  Granted, those buyers will benefit by being able to negotiate an extremely good deal by virtue of the fact that the sellers will have a smaller pool of buyers with which to do business (because we assume that most folks want exchange privileges,) and the sellers will suffer a higher loss ratio.
> 
> But isn't that somewhat related to the current system whereby a developer-purchaser suffers a higher loss ratio than the resale-purchaser, when they each put identical weeks on the resale market?  I think so, and now see it as this thread contains a contradiction in that resale purchasers have never up until this point been concerned with the devaluation of developer purchases.



I'm not sure I totally follow your point.  But, I can say that in the thread earlier this year on the potential for a different reservation system for developer and resale purchasers, I and a few others pointed out that all owners would suffer under that system because all owners would lose if they tried to sell.

That's one of the reasons that I asked Dave earlier what he thought Marriott was trying to accomplish.  On the one hand, I believe that Marriott is trying to make developer sold units more appealing.  On the other hand, just about any step to make developer sold units more appealing would by definition make ALL resale units less appealing.  As a result, ALL current owners would suffer a devaluation in the product that they own.  Dave says that Marriott recognizes this issue and will not roll something out that makes everyone mad.  But, I'm still struggling with the concept.  How is that possible unless Marriott is banking on the majority of owners not caring what their units might sell for in the future?


----------



## Pit

SueDonJ said:


> As I said before, the folks who do not care to exchange but rather are purchasing for consistent yearly use.  Granted, those buyers will benefit by being able to negotiate an extremely good deal by virtue of the fact that the sellers will have a smaller pool of buyers with which to do business (because we assume that most folks want exchange privileges,) and the sellers will suffer a higher loss ratio.



Yes, those buyers will be able to negotiate an extremely good deal, and that means you will get a lot less when you sell your unit. That's the point. You are the seller in this scenario. Maybe that doesn't concern you, but I think it does concern most owners.



SueDonJ said:


> But isn't that somewhat related to the current system whereby a developer-purchaser suffers a higher loss ratio than the resale-purchaser, when they each put identical weeks on the resale market?  I think so, and now see it as this thread contains a contradiction in that resale purchasers have never up until this point been concerned with the devaluation of developer purchases.



Resale purchasers are still not concerned with the devaluation of developer purchases. They are concerned about the devaluation of their own purchases. There is no contradiction in that, just self-preservation.


----------



## taffy19

When we were in Maui last March, the internal exchange system was mentioned already but not by the sales people at that time. It was mentioned by someone who works for the Marriott Vacation Club and gave the workshop for letting new buyers or anyone know how to make reservations and better exchanges with II, etc. 

A few months later I asked a sales person about it and she told me that they had a meeting about it and the new system was mentioned but no details yet. It was mentioned that it would be rolled out in about a year. I recently called again because of what I read in this forum. I wanted to know how the new system will affect re-sales in the future for all of us.

I told her that re-sale prices would drop like a rock if re-sale buyers are treated differently from Marriott direct buyers as this is what is happening with the Wyndham resorts. She told me not to worry about it because Marriott would sell the week for me. If that is true, re-sale prices will not go to zero. We may have to pay 40% commission but that would be OK if it is based on the current sales prices. Even if they don't go up, you will still get 60% back of your original price and the new owner will get all the perks that come with the new system most likely. If Marriott is willing to sell the weeks for you, then I am not worried about it. 

Most likely, they will exercise ROFR again, when the economy turns around and that will keep re-sale prices up again and the Marriott can sell these units with the new point system in place so that gives them more internal exchange inventory between older and newer resorts, if they start building at other locations again. There are locations where no resorts can be built anymore so they will always be attractive to buyers at the newest resorts for exchanging to these locations, if the resorts are kept up to date which they will.

I also feel that they can make changes in the reservation system if that is what they want to do but hopefully only for people who opt-in to go to the new system. The question is, can they do it with all contracts? As I have posted before, they changed the reservation rules for our first timeshare as I am positive that there was no mention of the 13 months reservation perk in our contract as it wasn't even introduced yet but there is a clause in our documents that says that they can make changes in the reservation system from time to time. We still had the 12 months reservation window so that wasn't really changed but half the inventory was no longer available to us so it made a big difference for the early contracts. I still haven't found my documents yet but when I find them, I will scan them and post it here. 

We own a fixed unit/week and even that can be changed to a floating week/unit according to the documents but I would need an attorney to have it explained to me. As I understand it now, you have to request it and they will approve it. No way would I make this change but other people may _automatically, if they opt-in to the new internal exchange system which is based on points,_ or it will be done by Marriott when they sell our week so it will be part of the new point system from thereon.  _I even wonder now if the fixed week/unit contracts will lose that status eventually and all fixed condos will revert back to a floating unit/week with a certain amount of points assigned to it?_

I feel that Marriott is hurting themselves by having the sales people spreading these rumors around (not ours) but not giving more details. I would never buy a Marriott now and not even one for pennies on the dollar until they announce the new system. JMHO.


----------



## FlyerBobcat

Latravel said:


> _"How do you know that????"_
> 
> It doesn't take much to pick up pretty clearly the main reason people purchase resale is price.  That's a very puzzling question!



Heidi,

I was simply responding to *your quote*, where you stated:



> Those that bought resale knew there was a possibility that changes could occur regarding trading and they may not favor the resale buyer


.
not about price.....


----------



## KathyPet

I agree with you that if Marriott sells your unit for you your resale value is obviously not zero.  The problem arises in that currently Marriott will not accept a unit to be listed for resale unless the resort is sold out of that particular season or unit view.  So, in the case of someone needing to sell prior to a location being closed out due to divorce or death or job loss if they cannot get Marriott to sell it then it is virtually worthless.


----------



## Pit

No, values won't go to zero. Even Wyndham sells on ebay for more than zero. Marriott has a nice product, even without the exchange system.

So, they will sell your week. I don't think that's anything new. How long are you willing to wait? 1 year? 3 years? 5 years?


----------



## m61376

sandesurf said:


> As a direct AND a resale Marriott buyer, I just wanted to say, that when we bought resale, the ONLY thing we knew we were giving up was the conversion of our week to points, nothing else. Certainly, we didn't think we'd be treated differently, and thankfully, that has been far from the case. Keeping that in mind, you shouldn't be surprised that we would be concerned over this matter.



I am glad you posted this. You have underscored what I think are critical points in the whole discussion as to how past/current resale purchasers should be treated. First of all, resale buyers bought under a system that they enjoyed all usage privileges that developer purchasers had; the only difference was they did not receive the perk of being able to trade for points. Some buyers felt this perk was worth spending thousands of dollars extra for, and others didn't. Those that didn't still actively supported the product, sustaining the value for ALL owners and supporting the individual resort(s) monetarily by paying MF's like everyone else.

Secondly, you're the perfect example of why it would be a bad business decision on Marriott's part to exclude any current owner from any new program. Many, if not most, resale owners have purchased at least one unit from Marriott directly and ALL resale owners are potentially future direct purchasers. It doesn't make good business sense to exclude and alienate any group of otherwise satisfied and loyal Marriott owners.


----------



## Latravel

Based on the comments we have been hearing, it looks like they would come up with a system to resell units.  Maybe an expanded version of what they have now.

Tom- If you've been on this board for a while, you'll know that Marriott reserves the right to change the Vacation Club program as they wish.  It's also very clearly stated in the documents I signed when I purchased my properties.  That's how I know.


----------



## tlwmkw

Suedonj is right in this- Marriott specifically points out in all sales presentations that purchase of a TS is not an investment.  They aren't stupid and know that if any class action lawyer challenges them that they are devaluing re-sales they can point this out to said lawyer and say "Our agreement is to provide a weeks vacation at a beautiful resort, we never promised to support prices for re-sellers or even original purchasers."  I don't think anyone can find any documents that say that they promise to support prices for anyone so to say you can sue them later is really ridiculous.

Everyone needs to remember that this system will be an opt-in, you do not have to participate and can still use your week just as you have in the past- they cannot force you to change what you have and honestly I don't see many current owners paying for this change.

I believe that Marriott is also trying to take more control of re-sales- they currently have a re-sale department and with this new system I can see that it will be in their interest to expand it.  There is no overhead in re-selling, especially when you already have an active sales staff up and running and can make a 40% profit.  I believe we will be offered re-sales at the MVCI presentations as a routine in the future.


----------



## hotcoffee

SueDonJ said:


> I guess I just don't understand the contradiction.  Folks here say, on the one hand, that it is guaranteed a developer purchase will immediately depreciate to a sometimes drastic extent the minute a buyer signs on the dotted line.  That's the rationale behind choosing a resale over a developer-purchase every time, despite the fact that doing so contributes to the depreciation of a developer-purchase.



I'm more concerned with the ability to resell at any rational price.  Let's take a worse case scenerio.  If Marriott were to cut the reservation window to six months for resale owners, plus they don't allow resale owners access to the new exchange system, it might be very nearly impossible to sell a timeshare.  That could affect you as well as me.  If your spouse were to suddenly take sick (or worse), I suspect you might want to sell.  It would be nice if that option were available.

It is pretty well known now that developer timeshare purchases will lose much of their value as soon as the sale is finalized.  In like manner, if you purchased a new car, but had to sell it after the first year, you expect it to have lost much of its value.  But, you would also expect to get the accepted value for that model year.  You would certainly hope that you did not have to give it away just to get it off your hands.  In fact, in the case of timeshares, it could conceivably be difficult to even give one away due to the maintenance fees.  Imagine getting stuck with a timeshare where you could not reserve the weeks you want, could not exchange into good locations at the time you wanted, and had to pay high maintenance fees.  Then, just to add insult to injury, you could not sell it because no one wanted it.



SueDonJ said:


> But on the other hand, those same folks say that MVCI should not be able to implement or contract any exchange system which will negatively impact the value of their resale-purchased weeks.  Meaning what, exactly?  Is MVCI expected to act in such a way that the resale buyers' investments are protected, when MVCI takes no such action to protect developer buyers' investments?



Yes.  I think a timeshare should have some value - just like a used car.  I would not pay $15,000 for a used car if I knew it were worth nothing if I needed to sell it.  I can accept depreciation.  That is not what I am talking about.  IF Marriott deliberately destroys the value of my timeshare, and then makes it practically impossible to get rid of it, I think I would have a legitimate gripe.

Like I said, I have a very good unit in a very nice sold-out Hawaiian resort.  So, they might take mine for resale; and if they do, I might even make some money over what I paid for it.  

If you experience any type of situation that would cause you to want to sell, and the worse-case scenerio were to take place, you better hope that Marriott will take yours for resale; because, if you bought at developer prices, you could be out a lot more money than I am with mine.

However, I think it needs to be said that all of this is speculation because we don't know if the new system is going to kill resales or not.


----------



## AceValenta

Why do they have to reinvent the wheel and change everything. 

1. Keep the system on a weekly basis.
2. Charge everyone $500 to join the Marriott internal exchange system at time of purchase. (This could be waived to entice sales.) $1000 if you were a resale purchaser. 
3. Yearly fee, $100 to have the right to trade internally. This could be added to Maintenance fees. 
4. Exchanges would be $50 if you are changing for like seasons and units (Plat to Plat or 1 BR to 1 BR) $100 to upgrade a unit size, lock-off or season per upgrade level. (1BR Gold to 2 BR Platinum = $200.) 

Let's say 90% are direct purchase and 10% are resale:
90% of 350,000 owners x $500 = 157,500,000.
10% of 350,000 owners x $1000 =   35,000,000. 

$192,500,000 raised just by convincing people to use the system. Each new resale must pay the $1000 if they want to stay in the system. 

350,000 x $100 anual fee: $35,000,000 raised annually just on dues. 

That wouldn't even account for the trading fees. Pure profit. No complicated point numbers and everyone wins. Still allow trading with II but people would have to pay a separate fee to keep II an open option. 

So, if Marriott is watching or for everyone else what are the thoughts on this?


----------



## hotcoffee

tlwmkw said:


> Suedonj is right in this- Marriott specifically points out in all sales presentations that purchase of a TS is not an investment.  They aren't stupid and know that if any class action lawyer challenges them that they are devaluing re-sales they can point this out to said lawyer and say "Our agreement is to provide a weeks vacation at a beautiful resort, we never promised to support prices for re-sellers or even original purchasers."



You are absolutely right.  If you bought a beautiful new 6-cylinder Ford, and in the contract it stipulated that if you sell the car to anyone other than another Ford dealer, you had to remove the six cylinder engine and replace it with a four cylinder, and had to put in a gas tank only 1/2 the size, you would have no complaints since that was in the contract.  Somehow, though, it just wouldn't seem right.



tlwmkw said:


> I believe that Marriott is also trying to take more control of re-sales- they currently have a re-sale department and with this new system I can see that it will be in their interest to expand it.  There is no overhead in re-selling, especially when you already have an active sales staff up and running and can make a 40% profit.  I believe we will be offered re-sales at the MVCI presentations as a routine in the future.



This would satisfy me.  If I don't like the new system and think it might eventually make it difficult for me to reserve the most desired weeks, and if Marriott would take it for resale, that is all that I can expect.  I only ask they play fair.  If I don't like the heat in kitchen, let me get out it.


----------



## laurac260

jimf41 said:


> Let me be the first to say  WOW. About a year and a half ago you dropped the bombshell 6 month reservation window for resale owners. I assume that this source is not the same one. IF Marriott is definitely doing this why let it out a year ahead of time. One reason, just like with the 6 month resale res window deal they want to see what the owners reaction is before they do it.
> 
> I bought all my weeks direct and even if they give me free entrance into this system I don't see the benefit to me over the current system. To "buy" into something there would have to be a big advantage over II. From the rumors going around about how it would work, none of them appeal to me.
> 
> Can't wait to see the posts on this one.



Hi, did I understand you correctly, do resale purchasers have a SIX MONTH window for which to book their weeks???  We are currently trying to decide developer vs resale purchase.  We need platinum season, so this would be a big deal breaker for us.


----------



## Pit

laurac260 said:


> Hi, did I understand you correctly, do resale purchasers have a SIX MONTH window for which to book their weeks???  We are currently trying to decide developer vs resale purchase.  We need platinum season, so this would be a big deal breaker for us.



No, this would be in violation of the CCRs. Which is the only reason they won't do it. Continue reading, specifically post #68.


----------



## hotcoffee

laurac260 said:


> Hi, did I understand you correctly, do resale purchasers have a SIX MONTH window for which to book their weeks???  We are currently trying to decide developer vs resale purchase.  We need platinum season, so this would be a big deal breaker for us.



Last year at a sales presentation, a Marriott salesman who talked about the new exchange system also told me that he believed Marriott intended to eventually cut the reservation window to six months for any owner who bought resale.  They have not done that yet, and most people here do not think that they will actually do it.

If I were contemplating a timeshare purchase now from Marriott, knowing about the upcoming changes, I think that I would wait a year and see how things work out.  According to posts here, they plan to roll the new system next year.


----------



## bobcat

hotcoffee said:


> Last year at a sales presentation, a Marriott salesman who talked about the new exchange system also told me that he believed Marriott intended to eventually cut the reservation window to six months for any owner who bought resale.  They have not done that yet, and most people here do not think that they will actually do it.
> 
> If I were contemplating a timeshare purchase now from Marriott, knowing about the upcoming changes, I think that I would wait a year and see how things work out.  According to posts here, they plan to roll the new system next year.



Here is what I think. Marriott will need weeks in their points system to work. If owners do not join and use their weeks there will be a shortage of inventory.  I do not like points. When you have the deed in your hand you own a piece of that resort.


----------



## BocaBum99

Twinkstarr said:


> I've heard the Open Season HGVC term used and owners are pretty happy with it.  Boca, why don't you explain how it works to the Marriott group.



Open Season is a feature of owning HGVC points.  If any 2 night stay is available at any HGVC resort, an owner can choose to pay a cash rate for that unit which ranges anywhere from $80/night and up for a 2br unit depending on day of the week and unit type.  It's a great feature for owners to get more HGVC nights without having to own a lot of points.  And, it reduces the amount of vacant units.  Win-win-win.  I don't know if the Open Season revenues goes to reduce maintenance fees.  Maybe part of it does.


----------



## Pat H

Dave M said:


> My Marriott source has watched this dialogue and contacted me. He didn't provide any additional info. However, he was amused at the speculation and found the comments to be very interesting.
> 
> I doubt that anyone in Marriott will make any decisions based on this thread. If that's what they were seeking by feeding info to us, I think we would have gotten more details about the tentative plans.
> 
> I'm sitting in the United Red Carpet lounge at DC's Dulles International Airport, waiting for my flight to Amsterdam. In a couple of days, I'll get on a cruise ship in Rotterdam for a Baltic cruise. Internet connections on most cruise ships are notoriously slow and unreliable. That's why I'll likely be out of touch for most of the next two weeks.



Oh, sure, start a brouhaha and then take off for a month and make us envious to boot!  :hysterical:


----------



## m61376

Latravel said:


> Based on the comments we have been hearing, it looks like they would come up with a system to resell units.  Maybe an expanded version of what they have now.
> 
> Tom- If you've been on this board for a while, you'll know that Marriott reserves the right to change the Vacation Club program as they wish.  It's also very clearly stated in the documents I signed when I purchased my properties.  That's how I know.



It really doesn't matter how much they plan on reselling units- there still has to be buyers for them. Unless Marriott wants to do a complete change and no longer maintain fixed pricing (although they have run recent specials, they have always maintained a fixed price policy) they can have the best of intentions of helping owners well their units. But the resale market depends upon supply and demand. People have to be willing to buy and the potential pool of buyers willing to pay full price will likely be lower than the pool of buyers willing to pay lower resale prices, especially at sold out resorts that no longer have an active sales force on site. And Marriott can't even afford to maintain an active sales force at properties it is currently trying to build and promote, so it would be foolhardy to assume that they suddenly will be actively on-site marketing resales at every location for owners who need to sell. So even if they make a concerted effort to resell units, the reality is that the waiting list will likely be years long- and some people just can't wait and continue to pay annual MF's that long.

The bottom line is that Marriott may be so intent on bolstering its bottom line that they make decisions which are even bad for them in the long run. Sabotaging the resale market also devalues each and every ownership. Although some have pointed out that timeshares are not an investment in the traditional sense of the word, I think the majority of buyers have bought anticipating that if they ever decide to sell (and certainly if they need to sell) that their would be retained value in their property. I think it will be hard for a salesperson to pitch buying something and shelling out $40 or 50,000 that would have little inherent value (after all, hasn't Marriott prided itself on selling deeded properties and differentiated itself from other ventures because of equity ownership?). 

And, yes, you are right that they have the right to make certain changes. While I don't think it will be good for the system in the long run to sabotage the resale market, I think changing the system for future owners is vastly different then excluding any current owner from a new system. I know we don't agree on this. It appears to me that you feel that developer purchasers should enjoy additional privileges than perhaps they originally bought into, even if at the expense of other owners who would lose some of the privileges they enjoyed at the time of their purchase. Personally, I couldn't enjoy something that was gained at someone else's expense, but that's me. Since all current owners bought into a system with certain exchange privileges, my opinion is that it is only equitable that Marriott extend the same opportunities for future use and exchanges to all current owners (after all, we all have been supporting the properties with our MF's). 

Even IF Marriott has the right to penalize people retroactively, it doesn't make it right to do so. Future resale buyers would be in a different situation, because they'd be buying into a limited system, aware of the limitations of their purchases. While I don't think that would be good for any owner (because it would make all Marriotts plummet in value similar to Starwood's voluntary resorts) and I think it would be bad for Marriott in the long run, I don't feel that Marriott has any moral obligation to future resale buyers who purchase aware that they are buying a second class product. 

Marriott has long prided itself on the Marirott name and its reputation. I can only hope it will continue to do so.


----------



## tango4u

*If we opt out of their new point system...*

Do we have to convert to their point system? Can they force us to do so?
If they can not force us, and if we decide NOT to buy into their new point system, and we own some resale weeks, can we still be able to reserve the weeks within our season (12 month)? Can we still be able to lock-off the unit, use one and deposit another to II? Or Marriott will take it away as well, and we will only be able to deposit the whole unit into II for exchange (equal trade, but not trade-up)? 
Guess that we will have to wait until next year to find out!! Can't wait...

MN


----------



## KathyPet

Interesting to read all the comments made by resale purchasers justifying why Marriott won't do anything to change their current ownership rights.  Is anyone getting just a wee bit nervous here?


----------



## SueDonJ

BocaBum99 said:


> Open Season is a feature of owning HGVC points.  If any 2 night stay is available at any HGVC resort, an owner can choose to pay a cash rate for that unit which ranges anywhere from $80/night and up for a 2br unit depending on day of the week and unit type.  It's a great feature for owners to get more HGVC nights without having to own a lot of points.  And, it reduces the amount of vacant units.  Win-win-win.  I don't know if the Open Season revenues goes to reduce maintenance fees.  Maybe part of it does.



This sounds similar to II's Getaway options, except that HGVC offers less-than-a-week stays while II doesn't.

Or, am I way off base here?


----------



## tango4u

KathyPet said:


> Interesting to read all the comments made by resale purchasers justifying why Marriott won't do anything to change their current ownership rights.  Is anyone getting just a wee bit nervous here?



Well, I travel a lot for business and every year, I accumulate approx. 200,000 MR points, plus 250,000 miles. I always can reserve the weeks using my points... I just wonder how the new point system will work for resale owners, I am not nervous because I bought the weeks fairly cheap and will not loose money when I decide to dump them back to resale market, or even give them to charity and get my tax credits.

Now I think that Marriott can not force you buy into their point system because you own a "deed" week, it's within your right to be able to use a week within the deeded season. However, they can make it harder for you to utilize your TS weeks/usages....

MN


----------



## BocaBum99

SueDonJ said:


> This sounds similar to II's Getaway options, except that HGVC offers less-than-a-week stays while II doesn't.
> 
> Or, am I way off base here?



Yeah, that's a good analogy.  The prices are fixed and only available to owners.  And, you can use points or cash subject to the reservation rules (e.g. 2 nights minimum for open season, 3 night minimum for points).

Plus, like I said, benefits accrue to owners and not to II.


----------



## ecwinch

tlwmkw said:


> Suedonj is right in this- *Marriott specifically points out in all sales presentations that purchase of a TS is not an investment.*  They aren't stupid and know that if any class action lawyer challenges them that they are devaluing re-sales they can point this out to said lawyer and say "Our agreement is to provide a weeks vacation at a beautiful resort, we never promised to support prices for re-sellers or even original purchasers."  I don't think anyone can find any documents that say that they promise to support prices for anyone so to say you can sue them later is really ridiculous.



Goes further than that. Most states require the specific disclosure in the public offering statement that the purchase is not an investment. Here is one from WA:

INVESTMENT POTENTIAL: NONE OFFERED

RCW 64.36.140(17) "XXXX AND ITS AGENTS WILL NOT BE SELLING OR ADVERTISING THE XXXX VACATION OWNER PROGRAM FOR INVESTMENT PURPOSES AND ANY SALES PERSON MAKING SUCH A REPRESENTATION HAS NO AUTHORITY TO DO SO AND IS IN VIOLATION OF THE STATE'S TIMESHARE ACT AND THE CONDITIONS TO THE PROMOTER'S REGISTRATION"

This a document the purchaser usually signs for in most states, indicating receipt.


----------



## SueDonJ

Here's a thought.  What if MVCI doesn't allow the transfer of a week's inclusion in this speculated Internal Exchange Point Value System* with ANY resale, regardless of whether the week being sold was a developer- or resale-purchase?  Instead, ALL new owners are offered the option by MVCI to be included after the sale - subject to the buy-in costs and point valuations - and MVCI will be afforded an opportunity to profit from every sale.

Sure, the IEPVS* changes the dynamics of exchanging as it currently stands by assigning a higher value on developer purchases (by virtue of the buy-in costs and exchange point value differentials,) and that higher value would not be negated by the non-transfer to new owners.  But the non-transfer and buy-in option after every sale will not result in the "but my week will have zero value" doomsday predictions here.

It's just a thought.   

*I think that I have invented a new acronym.  Is there a tee shirt in my future or what?  :hysterical:


----------



## SueDonJ

BocaBum99 said:


> Yeah, that's a good analogy.  The prices are fixed and only available to owners.  And, you can use points or cash subject to the reservation rules (e.g. 2 nights minimum for open season, 3 night minimum for points).
> 
> Plus, like I said, benefits accrue to owners and not to II.



Well that's encouraging.  Is there also something in HGVC to compare to the AC's offered by II when depositing an "in-demand" week?  Because that's one perk with II that I would hate to give up.


----------



## dioxide45

Based on prior information, Marriott was planning to still use II to facilitate the internal exchange system. So they would still have to pay a chunk of any exchange fee to II. I don't think Marriott is looking to reinvent the wheel and they are not experts in the exchange business. I think they will utilize II to facilitate these exchanges even though users may go through a different GUI.

Based on the OP, it doesn't appear that there is a plan to exclude resale owners (that is all everyone else’s speculation). It was indicated that they may charge resale owners more to opt in to the program, not exclude them. If course, depending on the price, they may be excluding them. 

I think Marriott is actually less concerned with resale owners than many here on TUG think. While there is plenty of speculation here about what will happen with resale purchases, I would find it doubtful Marriott is even taking them in to consideration.

Basically, whatever Marriott does we all have little control of. The only control some of us had was providing input via the survey last year. The new system will be what it is. From our standpoint, when and if it comes out, we will look in to it, see if it makes sense for us. Possibly try it out. If we find we are able to make it work for us and we can benefit from the system, then that is great. If not we would continue to utilize the current system as long as possible. If in the end all it no longer works for us then we would look at selling our weeks, even if they went for $1, we would feel that we got our monies worth since we paid a low enough price by buying resale.

We can't change what may or may not happen, just deal with it when and if it comes.


----------



## Latravel

_"Interesting to read all the comments made by resale purchasers justifying why Marriott won't do anything to change their current ownership rights. Is anyone getting just a wee bit nervous here?"_

I was thinking the same exact thing as you!  Another observation is reading how people think it's just wrong to make any changes that could hurt resale buyers (for many reasons such as property values, investments, etc) yet in the same paragraph state it's ok for Marriott to make changes to future resale purchasers.


----------



## Pit

SueDonJ said:


> What if MVCI doesn't allow the transfer of a week's inclusion in this speculated Internal Exchange Point Value System* with ANY resale, regardless of whether the week being sold was a developer- or resale-purchase?



Were you expecting something else?


----------



## SueDonJ

KathyPet said:


> Interesting to read all the comments made by resale purchasers justifying why Marriott won't do anything to change their current ownership rights.  Is anyone getting just a wee bit nervous here?



I can't seem to get past the fact resale purchasers feel that they are entitled to protections from MVCI which have never been included with any purchase.  As a developer purchaser I never had any expectations that MVCI would be responsible for acting in a manner which would preserve what little financial investment there might be in my weeks should I offer them for sale.  I knew and accepted, as I thought we all did, that the financial risk involved in buying and possibly eventually selling a timeshare is not in any way a risk that MVCI assumes in any instance.


----------



## SueDonJ

Pit said:


> Were you expecting something else?



Well I don't know what to expect - do any of us?!  But some posts here have speculated that resales would be worthless without the ability to exchange.  My thought is that if that ability is offered by MVCI after every sale as opposed to possibly not transferring at all from owner to buyer upon a resale, then resales wouldn't be worthless.

Like I said, it's just a thought.


----------



## sandesurf

laurac260 said:


> Hi, did I understand you correctly, do resale purchasers have a SIX MONTH window for which to book their weeks???  We are currently trying to decide developer vs resale purchase.  We need platinum season, so this would be a big deal breaker for us.



NO, you're not understanding that right. As far as I can tell, only ONE person made referance to that, and that was something they heard from ONE salesperson. That in NOT a fact, just a rumor, from ONE salesperson.


----------



## m61376

Latravel said:


> _"Interesting to read all the comments made by resale purchasers justifying why Marriott won't do anything to change their current ownership rights. Is anyone getting just a wee bit nervous here?"_
> 
> I was thinking the same exact thing as you!  Another observation is reading how people think it's just wrong to make any changes that could hurt resale buyers (for many reasons such as property values, investments, etc) yet in the same paragraph state it's ok for Marriott to make changes to future resale purchasers.



I can't speak for other resale owners, but I think many if not most of us are *not *saying it is ok for Marriott to make changes for future resale buyers as long as they don't make changes to current resale buyers. I know the distinction I have been making is that current resale owners bought with the expectation and understanding that the only difference in use was the inability to enjoy the perk of trading for points. I think it is morally wrong for Marriott to change the game after being a party to the sale (after all, they approved the resale and transferred the property).

While I still think penalizing future resale purchasers will be bad for Marriott overall and bad for all owners, I don't think Marriott has the same obligation to future resale buyers as they do to current owners. The distinction I was making is that it is one thing to penalize owners retroactively and another to be upfront with people prior to them making a purchase. Those are two very distinct things, and it is not a line which you should casually be blurring.

And, despite the sarcasm, I don't think my posts and those by several others are due to "becoming nervous." I hope- and think- Marriott is too good a company to penalize anyone just for the sake of being punitive and will recognize that there is nothing to gain by excluding current resale owners from any future program; moreover, there is plenty to gain financially and wrt good will by being inclusive. If I am nervous about anything it is the prospect of how future changes which I fear likely will be implemented penalizing future resale buyers will impact the product as a whole. I am concerned- as you all should be (and that includes direct purchasers as well) what impact it will have on retained value (even though it is not an investment, we all like to feel we didn't just throw our money away and that there is inherent value) and how a points program will likely suffer from progressive devaluation as future properties are added and over the course of time. I bought anticipating that I'd be able to trade for a week not only at today's properties but also at the ones that were being discussed. Even though I currently own at what Marriott considers one of their top resorts, will it still be considered at the top of the heap next year, or in five years, or will I slowly find that my week is worth 6 days, then 5, then a 1 BR, etc., at a future resort property? So- yes- I am nervous about that- but you should be too!


----------



## davidvel

KathyPet said:


> Interesting to read all the comments made by resale purchasers justifying why Marriott won't do anything to change their current ownership rights.  Is anyone getting just a wee bit nervous here?



I am VERY NERVOUS. I also heard that Marriott is going to only allow resale buyers to have 2 people occupy their unit, even if a 2BR!! In addition, Marriott will require any owner, resale or direct, who gets divorced to sell their unit back to Marriott for $1!!!  

To support family values, they also will not allow any unmarried people to stay in any unit in the same bed. They are starting a new _special forces_ program to enforce this rule. 

Also, a good source told me that Marriott is going to only allow children older than 16 years old in any unit.  In addition, Marriott is thinking of a new policy that will only allow you reserve 2 months in advance if you are a resale purchaser. Further,anyone who has bought resale in the last 2 years will have their deed expire in 5 years and it will revert back to Marriott!!!

Of course, they can do this because they reserve the right to make any changes to the "program" (whatever the heck the "program" is) and are in control of people's property rights. 

I also heard a rumor that for any property that is not owned by someone whose ancestors came over on the Mayflower, the State of Virginia will be converting any deed to such property to a government parcel owned by the state. 

FYI- Marriott doesn't own your timeshare, they just manage it:
http://tugbbs.com/forums/showpost.php?p=764828&postcount=68


----------



## SueDonJ

m61376 said:


> I can't speak for other resale owners, but I think many if not most of us are *not *saying it is ok for Marriott to make changes for future resale buyers as long as they don't make changes to current resale buyers. I know the distinction I have been making is that current resale owners bought with the expectation and understanding that the only difference in use was the inability to enjoy the perk of trading for points. I think it is morally wrong for Marriott to change the game after being a party to the sale (after all, they approved the resale and transferred the property).
> 
> While I still think penalizing future resale purchasers will be bad for Marriott overall and bad for all owners, I don't think Marriott has the same obligation to future resale buyers as they do to current owners. The distinction I was making is that it is one thing to penalize owners retroactively and another to be upfront with people prior to them making a purchase. Those are two very distinct things, and it is not a line which you should casually be blurring.



I don't know, I guess I just expect that Marriott/MVCI is free to make whatever changes they wish to any aspect of the program, so long as the changes are contractually enforceable and/or would survive a legal challenge by virtue of the contract stipulations.  I apply that expectation equally to developer and resale purchases, which means that I would not be surprised if Marriott/MVCI implemented a change which would negatively affect my ownership.  After all, they've done it in the past.


----------



## jimf41

sandesurf said:


> NO, you're not understanding that right. As far as I can tell, only ONE person made referance to that, and that was something they heard from ONE salesperson. That in NOT a fact, just a rumor, from ONE salesperson.



No, this info was contained in Dave M's first report from his source that changes would be coming to the system back in December 2007.

"Restrictions on Resale Weeks

Note: See my January 1, 2009 post in this thread for an update - suggesting that resale weeks not grandfathered might be restricted to making reservations only six months on advance."


----------



## Latravel

_"I know the distinction I have been making is that current resale owners bought with the expectation and understanding that the only difference in use was the inability to enjoy the perk of trading for points. I think it is morally wrong for Marriott to change the game after being a party to the sale (after all, they approved the resale and transferred the property)."_

I am confused by this comment.  When I signed my purchase documents, Marriott had us intial a very long list of qualifiers.  I remember clearly the documents stating that Marriott could change the system at their discretion(not exactly in those words).  To me, if they change the vacation club rules, I do not feel it is morally wrong in any way since they disclosed this fact and I accepted.  They disclose all the facts so people don't come back later and say, "I had an expectation..."

Even if you purchase resale, don't you get the same documents?  Can you really say you didn't know or didn't you read your purchase agreement?


SueDon - you don't have to assume, it's written in the documents.


----------



## SueDonJ

davidvel said:


> I am VERY NERVOUS. I also heard that Marriott is going to only allow resale buyers to have 2 people occupy their unit, even if a 2BR!! In addition, Marriott will require any owner, resale or direct, who gets divorced to sell their unit back to Marriott for $1!!!
> 
> To support family values, they also will not allow any unmarried people to stay in any unit in the same bed. They are starting a new _special forces_ program to enforce this rule.
> 
> Also, a good source told me that Marriott is going to only allow children older than 16 years old in any unit.  In addition, Marriott is thinking of a new policy that will only allow you reserve 2 months in advance if you are a resale purchaser. Further,anyone who has bought resale in the last 2 years will have their deed expire in 5 years and it will revert back to Marriott!!!
> 
> Of course, they can do this because they reserve the right to make any changes to the "program" (whatever the heck the "program" is) and are in control of people's property rights.
> 
> I also heard a rumor that for any property that is not owned by someone whose ancestors came over on the Mayflower, the State of Virginia will be converting any deed to such property to a government parcel owned by the state.
> 
> FYI- Marriott doesn't own your timeshare, they just manage it:
> http://tugbbs.com/forums/showpost.php?p=764828&postcount=68



Geeze, your sarcasm is so helpful here.   

You've said yourself many times over that Marriott cannot make changes to the deeded rights, and you've included that link pertaining to the Shadow Ridge documents as support in practically every instance.

Well, this thread isn't about either a deeded right or Shadow Ridge.  It's about a proposed change in the exchange system/contract utilized by MVCI for all of its resorts, which is not stipulated in any ownership documents.

Perhaps it would be more helpful if your sarcasm is at least on topic.


----------



## davidvel

SueDonJ said:


> Geeze, your sarcasm is so helpful here.
> 
> You've said yourself many times over that Marriott cannot make changes to the deeded rights, and you've included that link pertaining to the Shadow Ridge documents as support in practically every instance.
> 
> Well, this thread isn't about either a deeded right or Shadow Ridge.  It's about a proposed change in the exchange system/contract utilized by MVCI for all of its resorts, which is not stipulated in any ownership documents.
> 
> Perhaps it would be more helpful if your sarcasm is at least on topic.



My sincere apologies for being the first on TUG to post a sarcastic thought. However, my post was as on topic as the post it responded to:


KathyPet said:


> Interesting to read all the comments made by resale purchasers justifying why Marriott won't do anything to change their current ownership rights.  Is anyone getting just a wee bit nervous here?



 Sarcasm is often a fun way to take an argument to its (il)logical extreme to point out the fallacy in the argument. I continue to beat that poor horse because people continue to post statements that _Marriott can change anything it wants..._ or _Marriott can change the "program rules,"_ without specifying what exactly they contend Marriott can change. People who are new to a thread get confused, and post things such as "Can resale owners only reserve 6 months in advance?", etc.  

I still contend that there is no "change" at all, other than to what people inaccurately believed was contractually promised to them by Marriott. I was just trying to inject some humor in response to the post "getting a wee bit nervous..." (I would say go Chargers but that would definitely be off topic.)


----------



## SueDonJ

davidvel said:


> My sincere apologies for being the first on TUG to post a sarcastic thought. However, my post was as on topic as the post it responded to:
> 
> 
> Sarcasm is often a fun way to take an argument to its (il)logical extreme to point out the fallacy in the argument. I continue to beat that poor horse because people continue to post statements that _Marriott can change anything it wants..._ or _Marriott can change the "program rules,"_ without specifying what exactly they contend Marriott can change. People who are new to a thread get confused, and post things such as "Can resale owners only reserve 6 months in advance?", etc.
> 
> I still contend that there is no "change" at all, other than to what people inaccurately believed was contractually promised to them by Marriott. I was just trying to inject some humor in response to the post "getting a wee bit nervous..." (I would say go Chargers but that would definitely be off topic.)



You know what, David?  I was wrong in calling you out for your sarcastic post.  You're right in that sarcasm is alive and well on TUG, and it's hypocritical of me to call out someone else for it.  I apologize, sincerely.

In my defense, though, I don't think that Kathypet's post to which you responded was meant to be sarcastic.  Perhaps defensive, maybe, when you consider that the ongoing developer v. resale arguments here allow for a certain "oh no, not again" mentality to creep into any related thread, but not I don't think sarcastic.

In this thread if you follow its progression you can see where the "Can resale owners only reserve 6 months in advance?" came from.  It went off tangent when someone asked Dave if his source for this thread's topic is the same as the source who told him that there was a 6-month reservation change in the works, and that post of Dave's was linked here.  Of course now it's useless to try to put that horse back in the barn.    And it's a little bit disingenuous of you to quote my "Marriott can change anything it wants" as if that phrase was my entire thought, isn't it?  You asked, so I'm answering - I contend they can make whatever changes will be contractually enforceable.

But I disagree that what's being discussed here now, the proposed internal exchange system, isn't a "change" from the current exchange system.  Whether or not it supplements MVCI's current contract with II or replaces it, it's a change.

And finally, "go Chargers?!"  This is baseball season - go RedSox.


----------



## davidvel

SueDonJ said:


> You asked, so I'm answering - I contend they can make whatever changes will be contractually enforceable.


I wholeheartedly agree.


> And finally, "go Chargers?!"  This is baseball season - go RedSox.


Unfortuantely, we in SD have to look ahead to football season. "Go Padres" (39-62) would be more foolish than anything else I have ever said


----------



## Dean

PerryM said:


> This is truly despicable - Marriott having a chuckle at our expense.
> 
> What the hell is happening to a once great company?
> 
> Dave, have a great vacation.


That happens all the time at top companies like Marriott and Disney, it's just that often you don't know about it.  It also happens at the bank, hospital, doctors offices, church etc when people are difficult, say dumb things, etc.  I know of several times with Marriott and Disney where the employee thought they were off the phone with the member and made comments that were not esp nice though they may have been true.  Sometimes it's inappropriate, sometimes it's not.  I didn't get the impression from Dave it was done in an inappropriate way but it is one of the areas where you had to be there so to speak.


----------



## KathyPet

For those who think that it is "not morally right" to change the rules in the middle of the game and penalize current resale purchasers because you bought with certain expectations understanding the existing  limits on your purchase I would say that those of us who bought direct also feel that it was "not morally right" to have changed the rewards program multiple times over the years so that the value of our trade in for points has been reduced and we can no longer get the # of hotel nights for our points that we could when we purchased.  Welcome to the real world where Marriott will do whatever they want to do because morality has nothing to do with their decision.

PS  I also hear that the new rules will allow two deeded chairs per unit at every swimming pool complete with a little brass plaque with the unit # of it.  You can only use 'your deeded chairs" in the future.


----------



## PerryM

*Are those lips moving?*



davidvel said:


> I am VERY NERVOUS. I also heard that Marriott is going to only allow resale buyers to have 2 people occupy their unit, even if a 2BR!! In addition, Marriott will require any owner, resale or direct, who gets divorced to sell their unit back to Marriott for $1!!!
> 
> To support family values, they also will not allow any unmarried people to stay in any unit in the same bed. They are starting a new _special forces_ program to enforce this rule.
> 
> Also, a good source told me that Marriott is going to only allow children older than 16 years old in any unit.  In addition, Marriott is thinking of a new policy that will only allow you reserve 2 months in advance if you are a resale purchaser. Further,anyone who has bought resale in the last 2 years will have their deed expire in 5 years and it will revert back to Marriott!!!
> 
> Of course, they can do this because they reserve the right to make any changes to the "program" (whatever the heck the "program" is) and are in control of people's property rights.
> 
> I also heard a rumor that for any property that is not owned by someone whose ancestors came over on the Mayflower, the State of Virginia will be converting any deed to such property to a government parcel owned by the state.
> 
> FYI- Marriott doesn't own your timeshare, they just manage it:
> http://tugbbs.com/forums/showpost.php?p=764828&postcount=68



I like your post - a great use of sarcasm!

Marriott is the one spreading these rumors, not us - thousands of us have heard them direct from Marriott's mouth and for years now.  These rumors have but one purpose - to scare the living daylights out of us.  Better buy from Marriott or you will get screwed.

I find the use of Marriott's rumors ethically reprehensible - I'm positive that if we consulted an authority on Business Ethics we would find that what Marriott is doing is ethically challenging.  If this were Westgate folks here would be guillotined but because its Marriott we seem to have some defense of Marriott.

What ever happened to the good ol' TUG slogan "If the salesreps lips are moving they're lying" - its still alive and well...

So what rumor will Marriott spread today?  And why do we tolerate their deceptive behavior?  Imagine Disney doing this - I can't.


----------



## m61376

Latravel said:


> _"I know the distinction I have been making is that current resale owners bought with the expectation and understanding that the only difference in use was the inability to enjoy the perk of trading for points. I think it is morally wrong for Marriott to change the game after being a party to the sale (after all, they approved the resale and transferred the property)."_
> 
> I am confused by this comment.  When I signed my purchase documents, Marriott had us intial a very long list of qualifiers.  I remember clearly the documents stating that Marriott could change the system at their discretion(not exactly in those words).  To me, if they change the vacation club rules, I do not feel it is morally wrong in any way since they disclosed this fact and I accepted.  They disclose all the facts so people don't come back later and say, "I had an expectation..."
> 
> Even if you purchase resale, don't you get the same documents?  Can you really say you didn't know or didn't you read your purchase agreement?
> 
> 
> SueDon - you don't have to assume, it's written in the documents.



Just because someone can get away with doing something legally doesn't mean they should or that it is ethically correct. We are looking at it from opposite vantage points. Your contention appears to be, at least, that Marriott can do anything they want to ANY owner (and that would include developer purchasers too) that they can legally get away with. And, yes, in a sense you are right; there is a lot of latitude in their legal documents. HOWEVER, that doesn't make it morally right to effectively shaft anyone just because the law says you can get away with it. I guess I expect people- and companies- to treat me the way I deal with people. I know it is unrealistic sometimes, but I expect a sense of fairness and of moral obligation. Marriott has been a good company up to now, and I can only hope and expect they will continue to be that way. Making second class citizens, so to speak, out of a group of owners who purchased with the expectation of full usage rights (knowing they would not enjoy the perk of trading for points) is very different from setting different standards for future buyers, who would be cognizant of the limitations of their purchase before spending any money or making any commitment. 

In a similar fashion, they "could" decide to offer a points system and then make every new resort double value in points, so you could never trade into a new resort unless you used 2 weeks for one. They can legally make such changes- but I am sure you would be up in arms about it, feeling that it was unfair and not the system you bought into. 

I've always subscribed to the mantra of treating people like you'd like to be treated, and I expect that in anyone I do business with. I like Marriott and you may think I am naive, but I think they will do right by their owners and I think at the end of the day current resale owners will be grandfathered. You're free to disagree- but it doesn't make you right and me wrong.


----------



## indyhorizons

tlwmkw said:


> I believe that Marriott is also trying to take more control of re-sales- they currently have a re-sale department and with this new system I can see that it will be in their interest to expand it.  There is no overhead in re-selling, especially when you already have an active sales staff up and running and can make a 40% profit.  I believe we will be offered re-sales at the MVCI presentations as a routine in the future.



What about resale of resells?  Do you think Marriott will take those units that current resale owners have bought and sell those for them?


----------



## NJMOM2

All resales started as direct purchases - Marriott already made their money on the original sale. This debate it getting old.

I own both direct and resale.  I did not initial the Marriott contract with all the stipulations in it when I bought resale.  I signed a contract with the escrow company and didn't see the deed until the sale was completed.  I knew the only thing I was giving up was my right to trade for Marriott reward points.  Which basically has been taken away from direct purchase timeshare since I can pay less to buy the points then I would pay to trade for points with MF's and conversion costs.  Financially it doesn't make sense to trade for point any more so that is one of the reasons I bought resale the second time.  I didn’t feel I was giving up anything and I saved a lot of money by taking over someone else’s financial burden of MF’s.  I don't feel that any internal trading system should treat resale owners any different than direct purchase owners.  I would not be surprised if Marriott asked for more money for resale owners to convert but I also feel that if I paid more to join the club I should be treated as an equal to someone who bought direct.


----------



## PerryM

*We don't need a stinking new exchange system...*

Marriott's new internal exchange system is going to have a HUGE impact on our usage and enjoyment of our villas, and resale prices.  If Marriott interferes with our enjoyment in any way they can expect class-action lawsuits - that's how business is done today.

Look at the impact it already has had on us and that's just the rumor of an internal exchange program.  Marriott uses the rumor as a weapon against us now - imagine how they will use it against us when its a reality.

Do we need an internal exchange program?  The existing II way seems to have served us owners for 10+ years.  I don't remember anyone here bellyaching about needing a better exchange system.

The current 24-day Marriott-only window works great - it could be lengthened to 30 days and we would have a whole month to mull over reservations that only we Marriott owners get to see.  That would cost us nothing and not impact II or Marriott at all.

*This is all about Marriott wanting to squeeze more money out of the existing owners and to have a new sales tool - no other reason that I can think of.*

I don't see where there is any joy in these rumors - you all know this is going to cost you huge bucks and a brand new caste system is being forced down our throats.  There will be those in the system and those beggars out of the system.

Marriott has every right to foist this on us - there is nothing morally, ethically, or legally wrong with that.  But don't think for a second that this is a great thing for Marriott owners - its all abut Marriott.

P.S.
Once Marriott sells the last unit in a resort they become the hired help - the folks who clean the toilets.  These same folks now get to yank our chain around?


----------



## rsackett

Latravel said:


> _"I know the distinction I have been making is that current resale owners bought with the expectation and understanding that the only difference in use was the inability to enjoy the perk of trading for points. I think it is morally wrong for Marriott to change the game after being a party to the sale (after all, they approved the resale and transferred the property)."_
> 
> I am confused by this comment.  When I signed my purchase documents, Marriott had us intial a very long list of qualifiers.  I remember clearly the documents stating that Marriott could change the system at their discretion(not exactly in those words).  To me, if they change the vacation club rules, I do not feel it is morally wrong in any way since they disclosed this fact and I accepted.  They disclose all the facts so people don't come back later and say, "I had an expectation..."
> 
> *Even if you purchase resale, don't you get the same documents?  Can you really say you didn't know or didn't you read your purchase agreement?*
> 
> SueDon - you don't have to assume, it's written in the documents.



To answer your question, I have purchased two resale units and have never seen the documents you are talking about.  I am guessing they are to cover Marriott's a** when you as a buyer from them come back to complain that you were not told somthing, not part of the deed.

Ray


----------



## RandR

Latravel said:


> _"Interesting to read all the comments made by resale purchasers justifying why Marriott won't do anything to change their current ownership rights. Is anyone getting just a wee bit nervous here?"_
> 
> I was thinking the same exact thing as you!  Another observation is reading how people think it's just wrong to make any changes that could hurt resale buyers (for many reasons such as property values, investments, etc) yet in the same paragraph state it's ok for Marriott to make changes to future resale purchasers.



Heidi, be careful that you don't fall off your high horse.  As a very recent resale buyer, I am happy with my purchase.  I used a TUG suggestion of buying where I want to go so I know for the next 5 - 10 years minimum I will still be happy with my purchase whatever happens with a points program.  (Although if they do put ina 6-month window for resale buyers I would not be.)

To be all pompous and holier-than-thou about having bought direct and that we who bought resale are just getting what we deserve is obnoxious.  If future resale purchasers lose all rights (forget about current ones), the prices of resales will drop substantially.  This will effect ANYONE trying to sell whether they bought direct or not.  Not everyone who bought direct will have the perfect life that you are leading and will lead forever.  Some people will get divorced, lose jobs, have medical problems or just need the money and they will get almost nothing for their sale.  Obviously a ts is not an investment but I am sure that most have the expectation that they will be able to get something back when they sell.

How would you feel if when they assigned the points, your units were given less points than many of the others?  What if your week could only get you 5 days in some of the properties?  Would that make you mad?  It could happen.  Maybe not to you but to other direct buyers.  This would be within Marriott's rights.

Is this an angry post?  YES!!  Whenever there was an "argument" on buying direct vs resale, many resale buyers tried to make the direct buyers feel stupid for paying so much.  I thought that sucked.  Now some of the direct buyers are heaping it on the resale buyers and I think that sucks as well.

We are all in this together.  I pay the same maintenance as a direct buyer.  I care about my property the same as a direct buyer.  I shouldn't be treated as a second class citizen and neither should anyone.


----------



## Superchief

I suggest that everyone who has a concern about a potential new point system send a letter regarding their concerns to David Babich, Chief Customer officer.


----------



## thinze3

*Does anyone remember the Marriott survey from last year??*

As much as some of you guys believe this is all a bunch of rumors, I believe differently. IMHO the new Marriott system will be here before you know it, and as Dave stated what's wrong with using that information to push sales in the interim (interim = 3 or more years)?

Marriott obviously has been kicking this around for a very long time. Marriott's mathematicians and masterminds, with the use of the survey, the new Marriott Insiders forum, and anything else that they could get feedback from, have probably come up with a points based trading system already.

Most likely the leagal team and the rest of the suits are simply fine tuning the new system at this point. The recent points devaluations and the revamping of the timeshare points requirements are all part of a grand scheme IMO slowly but surely coming to light.


----------



## NJMOM2

Thank you RandR- I couldn't agree more.  We are all in this together.


----------



## Pit

SueDonJ said:


> Well I don't know what to expect - do any of us?!  But some posts here have speculated that resales would be worthless without the ability to exchange.  My thought is that if that ability is offered by MVCI after every sale as opposed to possibly not transferring at all from owner to buyer upon a resale, then resales wouldn't be worthless.
> 
> Like I said, it's just a thought.



It's more than just a thought. It's the current plan, according to the OP...



> Those who bought directly from Marriott will pay a relatively low fee if they choose to join the points program. Marriott intends to make the fee low enough so that many, many owners will join. Those who bought resale will pay a higher fee, possibly much higher, if they wish to join.


----------



## thinze3

*Resale vs Developer purchase.*

*Buying resale today at ridiculously low prices and taking advantage of any potential grandfathering is probably the best case scenario, because I can only assume that there is no way in he$$ that Marriott will exclude current resale owners from joining the points based system due to legal issues.*

Suppose you buy a DSV or a BeachPlace unit for about $7,000 dollars today and get grandfathered in. Marriott gives you the option to convert for points for the same $ amount they offer developer-purchased owners. Let's guestimate a $3K-$5K conversion fee.

Total expense with full points trading privilages = $12K for resale vs $30K-$35K developer.

Suppose you do not get grandfathered in and Marriott wants double, as much as $10K (this will never happen), to join the points system . Total cost is $17K for resale vs $30K-$35K for current developer owners.

Obviously Marriott has the right to ban future resale owners from being included in the new points system.

Just thought I would stir it up a bit.


----------



## KathyPet

What goes around comes around.  Marriott has already scr**** its once loyal retail purchasers by changing the point system (in the guise of enhancements) so that your reward points cannot get you what they once did.  it does not surprise me in the least that they are now trying to figure out how they can sc*** the next level down (resale buyers) to whom they probably feel they have no need to concern themselves with at all.  As far as complaining about it by writing to Marriott don't bother wasting your ink.  If they did not care enough to even respond to the letters they received about the last changes to the Reward point program as it effects the Vacation Club owners who bought direct then they surely won't respond to any complaints voiced by the small percentage of owners who bought resale.


----------



## indyhorizons

2 questions on this matter:
1) Don't you think there are less savvy owners out there that as long as Marriott doesn't make the entry fee too cost-prohibitive, will just convert?  The same people who don't know that they can split their lock-off unit and deposit both into II to increase their value, etc. (hey, I would have never known that had it not been for TUG).
2) Isn't it logical that Marriott wants to get this thing off the ground and running successfully and will likely NOT penalize current resale owners (I'm not a resale owner btw) because they want to entice them to join this program as well. I mean the more weeks owners have to choose from the merrier.  Why would Marriott want to shoot themselves in the foot by being too restrictive for current resell owners? Yes this is a small number of people, but let's assume that not all direct owners (myself included) will not convert. 

I honestly think we are looking at this wrong. I don't think the differences are going to be as extreme as others have pointed out. I think Marriott will find other ways to differentiate (for instance direct owners can/will get AC's, or something like that), not do something to completely alienate a class of owners who are potential depositors/exchangers into the new system.


----------



## PerryM

*And now what....*



thinze3 said:


> *Buying resale today at ridiculously low prices and taking advantage of any potential grandfathering is probably the best case scenario, because I can only assume that there is no way in he$$ that Marriott will exclude current resale owners from joining the points based system due to legal issues.*
> 
> Suppose you buy a DSV or a BeachPlace unit for about $7,000 dollars today and get grandfathered in. Marriott gives you the option to convert for points for the same $ amount they offer developer-purchased owners. Let's guestimate a $3K-$5K conversion fee.
> 
> Total expense with full points trading privilages = $12K for resale vs $30K-$35K developer.
> 
> Suppose you do not get grandfathered in and Marriott wants double, as much as $10K (this will never happen), to join the points system . Total cost is $17K for resale vs $30K-$35K for current developer owners.
> 
> Obviously Marriott has the right to ban future resale owners from being included in the new points system.
> 
> Just thought I would stir it up a bit.



Assume this is all true - grandfathering will be allowed for ALL Marriott owners as of the day of the official announcement.

Whoopee!

We now get to spend big bucks to enroll in the caste system.  Just how is this going to make our ownership better?

Think the 8 AM mad dash to call/click a hotly desired reservation is going away?

Think you stand a better chance getting an exchange that you've tried in II for 3 years now is going to become a reality?

*Someone tell me what great benefit we owners will get - besides the huge conversion fee?*

You know that when you sell your week on eBay Marriott's internal exchange system won't go with it.  That new owner will be forced to join - if they can.

How is any of this malarkey going to do you, personally, any good?

We will simply change masters - from II to Marriott and pay dearly for it.  II didn't make us pay a small fortune to belong.

And for what?  The rumors never tell us what's in it for us - only what evils await us if we buy resale.


----------



## RandR

Another way to make direct buyers happier without being punitive against old resales is to give the old direct buyers bonus points when they join the system.

A points system is not necessarily a bad thing.  I thought about buying into Hilton but ultimately didn't because they didn't have the breadth of product that Marriott had and they were more expensive on the resale side.  The problem here is that everyone is used to the system that is currently in place.  I am sure the collective wisdom here will find ways to game the new system to their advantage.

As many have stated, a new system is coming.  We can't stop it.  Some will benefit, some will not.  Just hope you are one of the ones that benefit.


----------



## SueDonJ

RandR said:


> Heidi, be careful that you don't fall off your high horse.  As a very recent resale buyer, I am happy with my purchase.  I used a TUG suggestion of buying where I want to go so I know for the next 5 - 10 years minimum I will still be happy with my purchase whatever happens with a points program.  (Although if they do put ina 6-month window for resale buyers I would not be.)
> 
> To be all pompous and holier-than-thou about having bought direct and that we who bought resale are just getting what we deserve is obnoxious.  If future resale purchasers lose all rights (forget about current ones), the prices of resales will drop substantially.  This will effect ANYONE trying to sell whether they bought direct or not.  Not everyone who bought direct will have the perfect life that you are leading and will lead forever.  Some people will get divorced, lose jobs, have medical problems or just need the money and they will get almost nothing for their sale.  Obviously a ts is not an investment but I am sure that most have the expectation that they will be able to get something back when they sell.



What exactly is "all pompous and holier-than-thou" about acknowledging that MVCI assumes no risk for the profit/loss resale value of any week, regardless of the way it was purchased?  No developer purchaser has said here that s/he won't be directly affected by any drop in value that this proposed exchange system might cause on the resale market.  But rather, we've all questioned why resale sellers think that possibility is something with which MVCI should concern itself now, especially because we've been beneficiaries of MVCI not considering it previously.

Maybe that's the difference - developer purchasers are used to a market whereby a financial loss is guaranteed should we sell at a future date.



RandR said:


> How would you feel if when they assigned the points, your units were given less points than many of the others?  What if your week could only get you 5 days in some of the properties?  Would that make you mad?  It could happen.  Maybe not to you but to other direct buyers.  This would be within Marriott's rights.



Again, it's been acknowledged by pretty much everyone that the opportunity exists within this proposed exchange system for certain weeks to have more or less exchange point value than others.  No developer purchaser has said that their expected point value _should_ be more by virtue of the way they purchased, but rather that they don't see a legal impediment to MVCI assigning developer-purchased weeks a higher value.



RandR said:


> Is this an angry post?  YES!!  Whenever there was an "argument" on buying direct vs resale, many resale buyers tried to make the direct buyers feel stupid for paying so much.  I thought that sucked.  Now some of the direct buyers are heaping it on the resale buyers and I think that sucks as well.



Heaping?  Really?  I see more resale than developer purchasers participating in this discussion, so my perception is that the resale folks are the ones making more comments.  But regardless, your anger and defensiveness is understood - it's natural to feel that way when threatened.  (And I mean that in the truest sense of the definition, not as an adversarial remark.  This proposed exchange system is a new threat to every owner.) 



RandR said:


> We are all in this together.  I pay the same maintenance as a direct buyer.  I care about my property the same as a direct buyer.  I shouldn't be treated as a second class citizen and neither should anyone.



"Second class citizen" is a perceived insult that has not been voiced by anyone here.


----------



## KathyPet

All of these logical arguments for not penalizing existing resale owners make perfect sense except for one thing Marriott is only out for one thing and that is the $$$.  You ask why Marriott would want to alienate its current owners whether resale or direct?  Well, they certainly alienated lots and lots of current direct owners who WERE good candidates for the purchase of another unit direct from Marriott when they changed the reward point system to make your points less valuable.  I have read statistics about how many owners end up buying another week from Marriott and the #'s were pretty high if I recall.  they certainly pissed all those people off when they changed the point system.  I most certainly would never buy direct from Marriott again and we were actually considering buying another week at the time they made the changes. So if they don't care about possible loss of sales from their current direct purchasers why do you think they would care about angry resale purchasers?


----------



## pwrshift

Any truth to the rumour that Marriott is reading all these rumours to get new ideas on how to adapt their rumoured points program?    

Brian


----------



## PerryM

*Double dipping...*



RandR said:


> Another way to make direct buyers happier without being punitive against old resales is to give the old direct buyers bonus points when they join the system.
> 
> A points system is not necessarily a bad thing.  I thought about buying into Hilton but ultimately didn't because they didn't have the breadth of product that Marriott had and they were more expensive on the resale side.  The problem here is that everyone is used to the system that is currently in place.  I am sure the collective wisdom here will find ways to game the new system to their advantage.
> 
> As many have stated, a new system is coming.  We can't stop it.  *Some will benefit*, some will not.  Just hope you are one of the ones that benefit.



On the day of the announcement the Marriott resale timeshare market will immediately drop the price of the conversion - by the end of that day.

If Marriott charges $1k to enroll then ALL resale Marriotts will instantly drop by $1k at least.  That difference won't go away - ever.  That new owner may then have to pay a penalty fee to qualify for the system that will be even larger than the membership fee.

So as an existing Marriott owner I will have to cough up $1k and when I sell my Marriott I will lose another $1k - I got screwed by Marriott twice at least.

How is there ANY upside to this for ANY Marriott owner?

And what again do I gain for my loss of money?


----------



## indyhorizons

pwrshift said:


> Any truth to the rumour that Marriott is reading all these rumours to get new ideas on how to adapt their rumoured points program?
> 
> Brian




I wouldn't doubt it.


----------



## PerryM

pwrshift said:


> Any truth to the rumour that Marriott is reading all these rumours to get new ideas on how to adapt their rumoured points program?
> 
> Brian



That would mean that Marriott has never heard of focus groups.

I get paid to participate in many focus groups during the year - they are constantly looking for folks who like to shoot off their mouths and get paid for it.

Marriott; I will volunteer to be on your focus group if you want.


----------



## indyhorizons

PerryM said:


> That would mean that Marriott has never heard of focus groups.
> 
> I get paid to participate in many focus groups during the year - they are constantly looking for folks who like to shoot off their mouths and get paid for it.
> 
> Marriott; I will volunteer to be on your focus group if you want.



Yes, but this is FREE!!  And in this economy...:hysterical:


----------



## SueDonJ

PerryM said:


> ... So what rumor will Marriott spread today?  And why do we tolerate their deceptive behavior?  Imagine Disney doing this - I can't.



Read the disboards - you'll get an earful of DVC rumors and speculation and inconsistencies that are foisted on potential customers during sales presentations.  Sure, those presentations enjoy the distinction of being the least-pressure ones out there in the world of timeshares, but they are far from perfect.  As that system ages there are more and more complaints about the salespeople, which leads me to believe that DVC is slowly joining the real world of deceptive timeshare sales practices.

Also, DVC recently instituted a change whereby the points were reallocated across the calendar, resulting in some folks requiring more points (in some cases, than they've purchased) for the same week/unit vacation they've enjoyed up to this point.  Speculation was that Disney was responding to the historical traits of DVC'ers utilizing more weekday points than weekend in order to use less points, so they applied a more even point distribution to increase weekday points to take advantage of members' vacation habits.  Don't kid yourself - DVC is in it for the money, too.

No, none of this makes any company's questionable/deceptive sales practices more correct, but it does speak to your argument about MVCI being less "ethical" than others.


----------



## PerryM

*Medical emergency....*



SueDonJ said:


> Read the disboards - you'll get an earful of DVC rumors and speculation and inconsistencies that are foisted on potential customers during sales presentations.  Sure, those presentations enjoy the distinction of being the least-pressure ones out there in the world of timeshares, but they are far from perfect.  As that system ages there are more and more complaints about the salespeople, which leads me to believe that DVC is slowly joining the real world of deceptive timeshare sales practices.
> 
> Also, DVC recently instituted a change whereby the points were reallocated across the calendar, resulting in some folks requiring more points (in some cases, than they've purchased) for the same week/unit vacation they've enjoyed up to this point.  Speculation was that Disney was responding to the historical traits of DVC'ers utilizing more weekday points than weekend in order to use less points, so they applied a more even point distribution to increase weekday points to take advantage of members' vacation habits.  Don't kid yourself - DVC is in it for the money, too.
> 
> No, none of this makes any company's questionable/deceptive sales practices more correct, but it does speak to your argument about MVCI being less "ethical" than others.



Ok, then ALL timeshare developers are pond scum.

How does this benefit the Marriott owners who are about to get hosed?

Let's think about this for a second:



Marriott introduces their wonderful internal exchange system and grandfathers ALL owners on the day of release.

Marriott want's a fee of $3,500 for each week to join the new system.

Marriott informs us that their system does NOT transfer to new owners if the sale is not made thru Marriott

The new resale owner must pay a fee of 25% of the current sales price to qualify for entry into the new system.  Assume the average Marriott Platinum week is $35k so that fee is $8,750.

You must sell your Platinum week (Medical emergency and you need the cash) and Marriott informs you that there is a 2 year wait - you list your week on RedWeek.

Resale Platinum weeks used to sell for 50% on Redweek or $17,500.  You list it for that and notice that fellow owners reduce their asking price by $3,500 or you must change your listing to $14,000.

A potential buyer calls you and wants to buy your week!  They want to join the new internal exchange system and want you to split that $8,750 fee ($4,375) and want you to lower your asking price to $9,625.

You need the money fast and agree to sell your week at $9,625.

Marriott exercises the ROFR and snaps up the week for $9,625 and sells it next week for $35,000.

Now; what again do we owners get out of this new Marriott Internal Exchange System?


----------



## SueDonJ

pwrshift said:


> Any truth to the rumour that Marriott is reading all these rumours to get new ideas on how to adapt their rumoured points program?
> 
> Brian



When did you get all British?


----------



## pwrshift

From the beginning it made sense to me to buy where I wanted to use, so bought direct the resorts I wanted to use more than trade.  In some cases I traded a lockoff to upgrade to a 1 or 2 bdrm suite, but usually by trading back into resorts where I own...and made great use of AC's to try out other Marriotts.  

Two of my 6 platinum weeks are traded in for MR points every year to replenish what I use, and I quite enjoy my 4 (split) weeks in a row at Beachplace every Feb-Mar and 2 weeks at Manor Club.  Trading through II gives me the 'upgrades' in size that I want.  Manor Club Sequel and Canyon villas were bought to use/rent EOY and trade for points in the between years.  Don't know what a points system would do to my use of the MR points benefit.

It's hard to get a feel for how a points system could improve my main purposes for the purchases I made, but right now the rumoured 'points' doesn't interest me at all.  Maybe I am just resisting change, but admit to feeling more 'comfortable' owning weeks (like real estate) rather than a bunch of points.  Time will tell.

Brian


----------



## RandR

SueDonJ said:


> What exactly is "all pompous and holier-than-thou" about acknowledging that MVCI assumes no risk for the profit/loss resale value of any week, regardless of the way it was purchased?  No developer purchaser has said here that s/he won't be directly affected by any drop in value that this proposed exchange system might cause on the resale market.  But rather, we've all questioned why resale sellers think that possibility is something with which MVCI should concern itself now, especially because we've been beneficiaries of MVCI not considering it previously.
> 
> Maybe that's the difference - developer purchasers are used to a market whereby a financial loss is guaranteed should we sell at a future date.
> 
> As I have read other postings by Heidi in this thread, I just got the feeling that she was kind of saying that resale owners are now getting their comeupance.  If I am wrong, then I was out of line.
> 
> 
> 
> Again, it's been acknowledged by pretty much everyone that the opportunity exists within this proposed exchange system for certain weeks to have more or less exchange point value than others.  No developer purchaser has said that their expected point value _should_ be more by virtue of the way they purchased, but rather that they don't see a legal impediment to MVCI assigning developer-purchased weeks a higher value.
> 
> I am not saying that the point values will be different based on how the unit was purchased.  I am saying that different properties may be assigned different points.  That would mean that someone in a property with less points could no longer trade like for like.  The only thing that Marriott technically has to provide is what you bought, which is a week at your home resort.  I am sure though that the salespeople have told, and still do tell, buyers that they can trade their unit for the like at another property.
> 
> 
> Heaping?  Really?  I see more resale than developer purchasers participating in this discussion, so my perception is that the resale folks are the ones making more comments.  But regardless, your anger and defensiveness is understood - it's natural to feel that way when threatened.  (And I mean that in the truest sense of the definition, not as an adversarial remark.  This proposed exchange system is a new threat to every owner.)
> 
> Heaping may have been too strong.
> 
> 
> "Second class citizen" is a perceived insult that has not been voiced by anyone here.



That was not directed at Heidi or any other owner, just a term used on the board in general.


----------



## pwrshift

SueDonJ said:


> When did you get all British?


 
Bite your tongue Susan ... I'm Canadian, eh. 

Brian


----------



## AceValenta

In Dave's OP it was mentioned that the system comes from a "reliable source" inside Marriott. But, who is this source? We know it is not an IT guy from Dave's later post. 

Is it a salesperson wanting to line his pockets more?
Is it a Manager of a Sales Department wanting to add to his bottom line?
Is it a Marketing person trying to find ideas? 
Is it just a ploy to scare people by Marriott to make people buy direct?
Is it from TUGBBS want to increase the hit traffic for Google analytics?
Is it a member of the MVCI that stayed somewhere and went to a presentation? 

We don't know the system. 
We don't know the facts. 
We don't know anything except a generic comment that has resulted in  a plethora of arguments over resale and developer purchaser rights. 

Just like the argument over the 6 month window for resale purchasers. Which hasn't come to fruition. 

Marriott has not released a statement to the truth or denial of the plan. Marriott isn't going to shoot itself in the foot to not be able to sell future units. 

Rumors are assumptions with no factual basis. if Dave came out with details, then I would worry. Right now, it is all speculation. You know what happens when one assumes.....I don't need to spell it out.


----------



## SueDonJ

PerryM said:


> Ok, then ALL timeshare developers are pond scum.
> 
> How does this benefit the Marriott owners who are about to get hosed?
> 
> Let's think about this for a second:
> 
> 
> 
> Marriott introduces their wonderful internal exchange system and grandfathers ALL owners on the day of release.
> 
> Marriott want's a fee of $3,500 for each week to join the new system.
> 
> Marriott informs us that their system does NOT transfer to new owners if the sale is not made thru Marriott
> 
> The new resale owner must pay a fee of 25% of the current sales price to qualify for entry into the new system.  Assume the average Marriott Platinum week is $35k so that fee is $8,750.
> 
> You must sell your Platinum week (Medical emergency and you need the cash) and Marriott informs you that there is a 2 year wait - you list your week on RedWeek.
> 
> Resale Platinum weeks used to sell for 50% on Redweek or $17,500.  You list it for that and notice that fellow owners reduce their asking price by $3,500 or you must change your listing to $14,000.
> 
> A potential buyer calls you and wants to buy your week!  They want to join the new internal exchange system and want you to split that $8,750 fee ($4,375) and want you to lower your asking price to $9,625.
> 
> You need the money fast and agree to sell your week at $9,625.
> 
> Marriott exercises the ROFR and snaps up the week for $9,625 and sells it next week for $35,000.
> 
> Now; what again do we owners get out of this new Marriott Internal Exchange System?



Okay well first, at the risk of repeating myself for the eight hundred seventy-thirteenth time, every owner assumes the risk for a financial loss should s/he have to or want to sell his/her ownership at a future date.  I don't know how many different times or ways this can be said, or why it's not sinking in, but MVCI has never assumed that risk.  It boggles my mind that some folks think MVCI should begin now to concern itself with that risk.  It's just a non-issue to me, and has been since the day I purchased.

As far as the benefits to this proposed internal exchange system?  I agree with you that the possibility exists that we will all end up paying for something that is similar to the exchange system now in place (which offers an MVCI-preference as well as outside-MVCI exchange opportunities.)  Way back when I asked in this thread if anyone knew the terms of the existing contract between II and MVCI, with the thought that possibly MVCI will be renegotiating or terminating its partnership with II and this proposed exchange system will be somehow related to a new contract, if any.  None of us can know if that's the case.

What I think about the proposal is that if enough owners join into it, then it could provide more even exchanges across the board with the advantage decidedly in favor of those who own at the more-desired MVCI resorts and those who have purchased developer-direct.  But again, there are not enough details for anyone to decide right this minute if joining in is a smart move.  It's wait and see time, as others have said.

As others have also said, it's all about continued revenue for Marriott/MVCI.  I agree.  But it appears that this proposal is a choice each owner will have to make for him/herself, and Marriott/MVCI gains no revenue from those who choose to not participate.  As with every commercial venture, we speak with our pocketbooks. 

And finally, I'll say here what I've said in many of the developer v. resale discussions on TUG.  If Marriott/MVCI implements any changes with respect to ownership that offer an advantage to developer purchasers, I will not complain about MVCI making those changes so long as they do not remove any deeded rights from any owner and/or so long as any legal challenge to them could be successfully defended by MVCI.


----------



## BocaBum99

PerryM said:


> Ok, then ALL timeshare developers are pond scum.
> 
> How does this benefit the Marriott owners who are about to get hosed?
> 
> Let's think about this for a second:
> 
> 
> 
> Marriott introduces their wonderful internal exchange system and grandfathers ALL owners on the day of release.
> 
> Marriott want's a fee of $3,500 for each week to join the new system.
> 
> Marriott informs us that their system does NOT transfer to new owners if the sale is not made thru Marriott
> 
> The new resale owner must pay a fee of 25% of the current sales price to qualify for entry into the new system.  Assume the average Marriott Platinum week is $35k so that fee is $8,750.
> 
> You must sell your Platinum week (Medical emergency and you need the cash) and Marriott informs you that there is a 2 year wait - you list your week on RedWeek.
> 
> Resale Platinum weeks used to sell for 50% on Redweek or $17,500.  You list it for that and notice that fellow owners reduce their asking price by $3,500 or you must change your listing to $14,000.
> 
> A potential buyer calls you and wants to buy your week!  They want to join the new internal exchange system and want you to split that $8,750 fee ($4,375) and want you to lower your asking price to $9,625.
> 
> You need the money fast and agree to sell your week at $9,625.
> 
> Marriott exercises the ROFR and snaps up the week for $9,625 and sells it next week for $35,000.
> 
> Now; what again do we owners get out of this new Marriott Internal Exchange System?



I believe this is very close to the thinking that Marriott must have for this program.  The numbers may be slightly exagerated, but the overall model is about right.

When you model the revenue from this approach, it is hugely profitable for Marriott.  The only question you should ask yourself is where this profitability is coming from?  Is it coming from $100 exchange fees?  No!  I already showed how this is less than 1% contribution to the top line.

It is likely coming out of the resale value of current owners who want to sell their ownerships.  If owners sign up for this program enmasse, they are likely to be driving down the values of their ownerships by several thousand dollars.  This is why Marriott wants to have mass adoption of the program.   So, they can control the inventory and recapture value.

I think Perry nailed this one.  Welcome back, Perry.  You are now thinking clearly again.


----------



## Bill4728

DaveM said:
			
		

> Those who bought directly from Marriott will pay a relatively low fee if they choose to join the points program. Marriott intends to make the fee low enough so that many, many owners will join. Those who bought resale will pay a higher fee, possibly much higher, if they wish to join. I don't know yet whether there will be any partial or full grandfathering for those who purchased resale before a particular unknown date.


The real key to Marriott new system will be this paragraph by Dave. 

-If the fee is small enough to get people to switch, then many people will likely switch, but if Marriott tries to do what most RCI resorts are doing when they introduce RCI points ( cost to resort $200, cost to owner >$3000) Then IMHO, very few people will pay to convert to points.


----------



## FlyerBobcat

Great posting....


RandR said:


> Heidi, be careful that you don't fall off your high horse.  As a very recent resale buyer, I am happy with my purchase.  I used a TUG suggestion of buying where I want to go so I know for the next 5 - 10 years minimum I will still be happy with my purchase whatever happens with a points program.  (Although if they do put ina 6-month window for resale buyers I would not be.)
> 
> To be all pompous and holier-than-thou about having bought direct and that we who bought resale are just getting what we deserve is obnoxious.  If future resale purchasers lose all rights (forget about current ones), the prices of resales will drop substantially.  This will effect ANYONE trying to sell whether they bought direct or not.  Not everyone who bought direct will have the perfect life that you are leading and will lead forever.  Some people will get divorced, lose jobs, have medical problems or just need the money and they will get almost nothing for their sale.  Obviously a ts is not an investment but I am sure that most have the expectation that they will be able to get something back when they sell.
> 
> How would you feel if when they assigned the points, your units were given less points than many of the others?  What if your week could only get you 5 days in some of the properties?  Would that make you mad?  It could happen.  Maybe not to you but to other direct buyers.  This would be within Marriott's rights.
> 
> Is this an angry post?  YES!!  Whenever there was an "argument" on buying direct vs resale, many resale buyers tried to make the direct buyers feel stupid for paying so much.  I thought that sucked.  Now some of the direct buyers are heaping it on the resale buyers and I think that sucks as well.
> 
> We are all in this together.  I pay the same maintenance as a direct buyer.  I care about my property the same as a direct buyer.  I shouldn't be treated as a second class citizen and neither should anyone.


----------



## RandR

SueDonJ said:


> Okay well first, at the risk of repeating myself for the eight hundred seventy-thirteenth time, every owner assumes the risk for a financial loss should s/he have to or want to sell his/her ownership at a future date.  I don't know how many different times or ways this can be said, or why it's not sinking in, but MVCI has never assumed that risk.  It boggles my mind that some folks think MVCI should begin now to concern itself with that risk.  It's just a non-issue to me, and has been since the day I
> purchased.
> 
> You are correct, Marriott never assumed this risk and no one should think they would.  That said, how about some honesty in sales presentations.  If the new program forces resale prices way down (further than even now) when a presentation is being given the salesperson says that the value of the unit you are about to buy is virtually nothing.  It didn't matter to you but I bet they would lose a lot of sales if they stated that.  They should really be saying that now as the resale values are dramatically below the selling price direct.
> 
> What I think about the proposal is that if enough owners join into it, then it could provide more even exchanges across the board with the advantage decidedly in favor of those who own at the more-desired MVCI resorts and those who have purchased developer-direct.  But again, there are not enough details for anyone to decide right this minute if joining in is a smart move.  It's wait and see time, as others have said.
> 
> But if this is the case and the program will be decidedly in favor of those in the most desired properties, why would anyone in a "not as desirable" property join? This would limit the trades for everyone.
> 
> And finally, I'll say here what I've said in many of the developer v. resale discussions on TUG.  If Marriott/MVCI implements any changes with respect to ownership that offer an advantage to developer purchasers, I will not complain about MVCI making those changes so long as they do not remove any deeded rights from any owner and/or so long as any legal challenge to them could be successfully defended by MVCI.



So in other words, you don't mind if resale buyers are treated like second class citizens. (Had to use that phrase again.)


----------



## indyhorizons

BocaBum99 said:


> I believe this is very close to the thinking that Marriott must have for this program.  The numbers may be slightly exagerated, but the overall model is about right.
> 
> When you model the revenue from this approach, it is hugely profitable for Marriott.  The only question you should ask yourself is where this profitability is coming from?  Is it coming from $100 exchange fees?  No!  I already showed how this is less than 1% contribution to the top line.
> 
> It is likely coming out of the resale value of current owners who want to sell their ownerships.  If owners sign up for this program enmasse, they are likely to be driving down the values of their ownerships by several thousand dollars.  This is why Marriott wants to have mass adoption of the program.   So, they can control the inventory and recapture value.
> 
> I think Perry nailed this one.  Welcome back, Perry.  You are now thinking clearly again.



This is only true for those resorts that Marriott knows they can quickly turn around.  There is still no desire on Marriott's part to be holding excess inventory waiting on someone to come along and buy it.  Remember, with the ability to snatch up that week for $9625 in Perry's example, come the MF's until the unit sells.


----------



## sandesurf

SueDonJ said:


> Okay well first, at the risk of repeating myself for the eight hundred seventy-thirteenth time, .



Why do you feel the need then??

Geez, get over it. The bottom line is, no one knows, for sure, what's going to happen. 
PERIOD


----------



## SueDonJ

RandR said:


> So in other words, you don't mind if resale buyers are treated like second class citizens. (Had to use that phrase again.)



Everything else in your post is rehash.  But this is a direct insult rather than a perceived insult, and it pisses me off despite your use of a smiley.  Rather passive/aggressive there, don't you think?

Where did I say that I'm okay with any owners being treated as second-class citizens?  Oh, that's right, NOWHERE.  Consider that it's entirely possible that any change implemented by MVCI that favors on the surface developer purchasers could in fact negatively impact my personal ownership usage, such as in this proposal if the exchange point value of my weeks does not afford me the exact same trade value that I've enjoyed up to this point with II.  Would I perceive that as MVCI treating me as a second-class citizen?  No, of course not, it's just the way the system would work.

Perhaps we'd all be better off if we could only stick to "the way the system works" as opposed to who of us are holier-than-thou.


----------



## PerryM

*Check your wallets...*



SueDonJ said:


> *Okay well first, at the risk of repeating myself for the eight hundred seventy-thirteenth time, every owner assumes the risk for a financial loss should s/he have to or want to sell his/her ownership at a future date*.  I don't know how many different times or ways this can be said, or why it's not sinking in, but MVCI has never assumed that risk.  It boggles my mind that some folks think MVCI should begin now to concern itself with that risk.  It's just a non-issue to me, and has been since the day I purchased.
> 
> As far as the benefits to this proposed internal exchange system?  I agree with you that the possibility exists that we will all end up paying for something that is similar to the exchange system now in place (which offers an MVCI-preference as well as outside-MVCI exchange opportunities.)  Way back when I asked in this thread if anyone knew the terms of the existing contract between II and MVCI, with the thought that possibly MVCI will be renegotiating or terminating its partnership with II and this proposed exchange system will be somehow related to a new contract, if any.  None of us can know if that's the case.
> 
> What I think about the proposal is that if enough owners join into it, then it could provide more even exchanges across the board with the advantage decidedly in favor of those who own at the more-desired MVCI resorts and those who have purchased developer-direct.  But again, there are not enough details for anyone to decide right this minute if joining in is a smart move.  It's wait and see time, as others have said.
> 
> As others have also said, it's all about continued revenue for Marriott/MVCI.  I agree.  But it appears that this proposal is a choice each owner will have to make for him/herself, and Marriott/MVCI gains no revenue from those who choose to not participate.  As with every commercial venture, we speak with our pocketbooks.
> 
> And finally, I'll say here what I've said in many of the developer v. resale discussions on TUG.  If Marriott/MVCI implements any changes with respect to ownership that offer an advantage to developer purchasers, I will not complain about MVCI making those changes so long as they do not remove any deeded rights from any owner and/or so long as any legal challenge to them could be successfully defended by MVCI.



Your statement is true - we will get screwed by this new exchange system.

For a new Marriott resort, one in construction and developer sales still going on then Marriott is king of the roost.  They can screw around with just about anything that their lawyers say they can get away with - no arguments here.

However, take a resort like MountainSide, sales ended years ago and only resales take place.  There is a Marriott salesrep hawking weeks to sell but they all come from resales.  Marriott cleans the toilets and runs the front desk - that's all they do and the owners there pay for that service in their MFs.

If Marriott then introduces an exchange system that impacts the resale value of owner weeks should the owners sit by or should the HOA get upset that the value of their owner's weeks is being affected by an outside force?

That's exactly what is about to happen with this new exchange program - it will adversely impact Marriott owners and impact Marriott positively.

Don't know what can be done about it but I don't see anything to celebrate as a Marriott owner.

Marriott is declaring a war with their owners just like Wyndham has; the result will impact us all in the wallet.  Wyndham resales are 5 cents on the dollar.

So even if you don't plan to join this new scheme and just use your weeks at your resort you will feel the impact of the membership fee and penalty fee for not reselling thru Marriott.  These two figures will eventually be felt in the wallet.


----------



## SueDonJ

sandesurf said:


> Why do you feel the need then??



Because I was asked, and if you'd bothered to follow the progression of the posts between me and Perry then you'd know that.



sandesurf said:


> Geez, get over it. The bottom line is, no one knows, for sure, what's going to happen.
> PERIOD



Exactly.  Is there any particular reason, though, why my post in this discussion was chosen by you to make a point, when several others have been as vocal as me?


----------



## sandesurf

SueDonJ said:


> Exactly.  Is there any particular reason, though, why my post in this discussion was chosen by you to make a point, when several others have been as vocal as me?



Because you're the only one who pointed out that you're repeating yourself.

The "Get over it part", wasn't only directed at you.


----------



## BocaBum99

indyhorizons said:


> This is only true for those resorts that Marriott knows they can quickly turn around.  There is still no desire on Marriott's part to be holding excess inventory waiting on someone to come along and buy it.  Remember, with the ability to snatch up that week for $9625 in Perry's example, come the MF's until the unit sells.



No, it will be true for ALL Marriott resales.  Whether Marriott exercises ROFR is not relevant to the fact that in this scenario, there is a significant drop in resale value due exclusively to the introduction and success of this program.


----------



## BocaBum99

SueDonJ said:


> Okay well first, at the risk of repeating myself for the eight hundred seventy-thirteenth time, every owner assumes the risk for a financial loss should s/he have to or want to sell his/her ownership at a future date.  I don't know how many different times or ways this can be said, or why it's not sinking in, but MVCI has never assumed that risk.  It boggles my mind that some folks think MVCI should begin now to concern itself with that risk.  It's just a non-issue to me, and has been since the day I purchased.



The reason you keep having to repeat yourself is because you think a point is important to the discussion and it isn't.  If you feel the need to make it a few more times, please feel free to do it.  It will get the same response it has already.

It doesn't matter what legal risks were assumed by parties at the time of original agreement between Marriott and its owners.

What matters is owners will have a real choice to make over the next year.  That is to opt into a new internal exchange system or not.   So, it is helpful to educate owners on this message board about the pros and cons to them by making one choice or the other.  That is the relevant question.

My belief is that whatever program they come up with will hurt the overall resale value of Marriotts for reasons that Perry points out.  Any owner who thinks that the "free" offer Marriott will make for this program is indeed "free" needs to read Perry's post about how the resale value of your timeshare will decrease in value the day this program reaches critical mass.

Owners may feel that the cost of the program measured in terms of lost resale value is worth the benefits.  That's fine with me.  As long as they are making this decision with their eyes wide open.  Unfortunately, what I believe will happen is Marriott will use sleight of hand to make something appear free that is actually very costly to owners.


----------



## PerryM

*War has been declared....*

Up until now Marriott has had a sane policy concerning owner resales – that will stop with the new Internal Exchange System.

How do I know this?  Simple – all those Marriott salesreps warning us of resales for 3 years now.  This is a broadside attack on resales and the Marriott salesreps know this.  *Many timeshare developers are at war with their owners – the amount of conflict is easy to measure by how much resales are discounted over developer sales.*

This should give concern to ALL Marriott owners.

Stop this war Marriott - just leave the existing exchange system along (II).


----------



## indyhorizons

BocaBum99 said:


> My belief is that whatever program they come up with will hurt the overall resale value of Marriotts for reasons that Perry points out.  Any owner who thinks that the "free" offer Marriott will make for this program is indeed "free" needs to read Perry's post about how the resale value of your timeshare will decrease in value the day this program reaches critical mass.
> 
> Owners may feel that the cost of the program measured in terms of lost resale value is worth the benefits.  That's fine with me.  As long as they are making this decision with their eyes wide open.  Unfortunately, what I believe will happen is Marriott will use sleight of hand to make something appear free that is actually very costly to owners.




I posed this very thing several posts back. I truly believe that there are far more owners out there (esp developer purchasers) who are not nearly as savvy as the avg tugger who will likely see this as great (as a result of whatever spin Marriott puts on this) and in turn will sign on.  In their eyes they are in most cases getting the jump on all those II exchangers out there (outside of 24 day window) and this will be attractive to them. The average Marriott owner is not going to be thinking about or looking to the future in terms of potential resale value. And not until such time that a life changing event occurs that may result in the need to sell their unit will they even be (or need to be) concerned about this.

That is what I believe Marriott is banking on.  And that is what will make their program "successful" from the onset, because most people won't "get it".


----------



## AceValenta

PerryM said:


> Up until now Marriott has had a sane policy concerning owner resales – that will stop with the new Internal Exchange System.
> 
> How do I know this?  Simple – all those Marriott salesreps warning us of resales for 3 years now.  This is a broadside attack on resales and the Marriott salesreps know this.  *Many timeshare developers are at war with their owners – the amount of conflict is easy to measure by how much resales are discounted over developer sales.*
> 
> This should give concern to ALL Marriott owners.
> 
> Stop this war Marriott - just leave the existing exchange system along (II).




Maybe they have already won the war....The rumor is out there and that is all it is a RUMOR!!! Nothing concrete has come from Marriott.....The only thing is rumors floating here and there. 

No one has officially stated from Marriott that they are going to do this. 

The cheapest way to de-value resales is to float a rumor. People will not buy a resale because they are scared that it will go even lower in value. What does this floating of the rumor cost Marriott....NADA, ZIP, ZILCH!! 

How many confidential sources turn out to be false? Until there is a name or facts and figures attached to it then, I am not buying it.


----------



## SueDonJ

PerryM said:


> ... If Marriott then introduces an exchange system that impacts the resale value of owner weeks should the owners sit by or should the HOA get upset that the value of their owner's weeks is being affected by an outside force? ...



This is where I see things differently.  It appears that some owners perceive the "value" of their property to be the dollar amount they could recoup if they resell.  But MVCI and some other owners perceive the "value" to be in usage opportunities.  I don't know which can be said to be more correct, if either one could, but it makes for different arguments.

If usage value is the determining factor (which is presumably MVCI's defense of this proposal, as evidenced by their not recognizing resale value in the past), how could an HOA get upset over owners' weeks affording them some version of a like-for-like exchange opportunity?  Consider that like-for-like can mean different things - a 2BR in an older inland resort for a 1BR at a newer oceanside resort, for instance.



BocaBum99 said:


> The reason you keep having to repeat yourself is because you think a point is important to the discussion and it isn't.  If you feel the need to make it a few more times, please feel free to do it.  It will get the same response it has already.
> 
> It doesn't matter what legal risks were assumed by parties at the time of original agreement between Marriott and its owners.
> 
> What matters is owners will have a real choice to make over the next year.  That is to opt into a new internal exchange system or not.   So, it is helpful to educate owners on this message board about the pros and cons to them by making one choice or the other.  That is the relevant question.
> 
> My belief is that whatever program they come up with will hurt the overall resale value of Marriotts for reasons that Perry points out.  Any owner who thinks that the "free" offer Marriott will make for this program is indeed "free" needs to read Perry's post about how the resale value of your timeshare will decrease in value the day this program reaches critical mass.
> 
> Owners may feel that the cost of the program measured in terms of lost resale value is worth the benefits.  That's fine with me.  As long as they are making this decision with their eyes wide open.  Unfortunately, what I believe will happen is Marriott will use sleight of hand to make something appear free that is actually very costly to owners.



I agree with most everything you've written here, except that I'm confused by you saying that the legal risks "assumed by parties at the time of original agreement between Marriott and its owners" don't matter.  Of course they do.  The point that the only thing that doesn't transfer to a new owner upon resale is the MRP exchange opportunity has been driven home endlessly in every one of the TUG developer v. resale discussion.  It stands to reason then (and is in fact what happens) that every other contract stipulation does transfer, including the zero risk assumption by MVCI of any financial value upon resale.

In this particular discussion we're all speculating about everything and anything because that's all we can do with the limited information that's been posted here about something that may never come to fruition.  You're right that if it does we will all have a major decision to make and it's best to be as educated as possible before doing so.  I think we all agree that this thinktank can provide that education.

I think we also all agree that this proposal will result in lower resale values across the board.  My repeated thought is in direct response to those who say that MVCI should not or will not or can not implement the change because of its impact on resale financial values.  How is it not germane to the discussion to acknowledge that Marriott/MVCI has never considered that impact before so probably will not now, and in fact suffers no legal burden to do so?  That's certainly different from saying that owners should not be concerned about resale financial values, which is not what I'm saying at all.


----------



## rsackett

SueDonJ said:


> Okay well first, at the risk of repeating myself for the eight hundred seventy-thirteenth time, every owner assumes the risk for a financial loss should s/he have to or want to sell his/her ownership at a future date.  I don't know how many different times or ways this can be said, or why it's not sinking in, but MVCI has never assumed that risk.  It boggles my mind that some folks think MVCI should begin now to concern itself with that risk.  It's just a non-issue to me, and has been since the day I purchased. ...




Sue,

I understand your position, I think most here do.  

I am a resale buyer.  I first bought from Marriott, but rescinded when I did some research and learned how much of my up front money would be gone if I ever needed to sell my week.  Even though the sales rep said it was not an investment, he did not say I would loose 60% of my money if I had to sell it the next day.  He did say I was buying a deeded property, and how much better that was than a right to use property because I would own a deed and real property that I could hand down to my children.

If there is no residual value than a right to use would be better.


I like the Marriott product, and after doing due diligence I decided to buy on the resale market, since the Rewards points was not worth the extra money to me, and I felt the risk to capital was minimal based on historical data.

If Marriott as the management company that I am paying to run my property makes a decision to increase their profits by consciously reducing my properties' residual value, yes I would be upset.  Can I as one owner do anything about it, probably not.  Especially if they can make a subset of owners happy enough that they are not willing to replace the management company that we as owners have hired to run our property.

Ray


----------



## dougp26364

It amazes me that anyone would purchase a timeshare based on any thought other than to vacation. With few exceptions, very few people turn a profit buying and then selling timeshares. Especially when purchased from the developer. 

Changes that are costly to owners? The very act of buying a timeshare is costly to the owner. Time loss of money, yearly MF's, special assessments et... make it a costly "investment". An investment that is unlikely to return any significant residual value other than the enjoyment of it's use.

Marrriott hasn't done anything yet. No one is certain that they will do anything. All remains speculation but, it does give us something to talk about. The most interesting thing about this subject will be if/when Marriott actually does something. Then we'll really have something to talk about.


----------



## BocaBum99

dougp26364 said:


> It amazes me that anyone would purchase a timeshare based on any thought other than to vacation. With few exceptions, very few people turn a profit buying and then selling timeshares. Especially when purchased from the developer.
> 
> Changes that are costly to owners? The very act of buying a timeshare is costly to the owner. Time loss of money, yearly MF's, special assessments et... make it a costly "investment". An investment that is unlikely to return any significant residual value other than the enjoyment of it's use.
> 
> Marrriott hasn't done anything yet. No one is certain that they will do anything. All remains speculation but, it does give us something to talk about. The most interesting thing about this subject will be if/when Marriott actually does something. Then we'll really have something to talk about.



I don't know.  this is the 236th post of this thread.  I'd say we have plenty to talk about.


----------



## AceValenta

dougp26364 said:


> Marrriott hasn't done anything yet. No one is certain that they will do anything. All remains speculation but, it does give us something to talk about. The most interesting thing about this subject will be if/when Marriott actually does something. Then we'll really have something to talk about.



Thank you for repeating my previous post! We have nothing to talk about here except rumors...Nothing concrete, no facts not even a name or the department the person works in. For all we know it could be the guy or gal who mops the floors! 

It is pure speculation as to what they are going to roll out, if anything at all!


----------



## Latravel

_"It amazes me that anyone would purchase a timeshare based on any thought other than to vacation. With few exceptions, very few people turn a profit buying and then selling timeshares. Especially when purchased from the developer. "_


Amen!  This is exactly what I have been trying to say though some who are on the defensive or a little bit worried are obviously taking my points the wrong way (hello RandR and FlyerBobcat).  I understand being a little sensitive but there's no need to get "mad".  We're just talking about timeshares.

Our timeshare is not an investment!  We should not _expect_ any return.  If we sell and get something back, yea for us.

Marriott does not owe anyone anything, direct or resale.  They clearly spell out what they will give us in the purchase documents (yes, they are in the purchase documents) such as:
1.  Your timeshare is not an investment
2.  Marriott reserves the right to make changes at their discretion,regardless of your expectations or moral compass.


----------



## m61376

rsackett said:


> To answer your question, I have purchased two resale units and have never seen the documents you are talking about.  I am guessing they are to cover Marriott's a** when you as a buyer from them come back to complain that you were not told somthing, not part of the deed.
> 
> Ray



Actually, I didn't address that- but I didn't receive any such documents either.


----------



## Latravel

Going back to the points issue,

You may like what Marriott comes up with.  I think it's important to keep an open mind since it may suit your family.  We own a RCI points system and we are very happy with it.  Every resort is given a certain number of points per year based on location and size of the unit.  Each person is given a certain number of points to "spend" on a resort to trade. 

The best part is the last minute exchanges which is similar to flexchange.  Any reservations left 60 before travel is significantly reduced as far as the number of points to reserve.  It's about 10% of the initial points requirement.  Needless to say, I wait to within 60 days of travel and start searching.  I've gotten some really great resorts/vacations this way.

I'm sure Marriott is taking their time to come up with a competive system.  They won't do anything to anger people or no one will join.  Just keep an open mind.


----------



## rsackett

I have a question for those of you who have no expectation of residual value for your Marriott time share.

Why would you purchase a property with the expectation that it would have no residual value?  You as an owner have a responsibility to pay for upkeep as long as you own that property.  I understand that you feel that what you paid for was the right to use that property for one week for vacations as long as you own it, is that correct?  Do you not have any concern how much that week costs you?  If Marriott makes decisions that lower the value of your property to zero and it costs extra money to get trading privileges, the value could go to less than zero, i.e. you may have to pay someone to take over your responsibilities to the property.

If money is of no concern why buy at all?  The ultimate freedom would be to rent from Marriott all the weeks you want, when you want, and where you want to go and that way you would have no further downward risk.

One reason I bought was to save money, and the less my timeshare is worth when I sell it the more the weeks I use cost me.


ray


----------



## PerryM

*Asset or Expense?  You decide...*



Latravel said:


> _"It amazes me that anyone would purchase a timeshare based on any thought other than to vacation. With few exceptions, very few people turn a profit buying and then selling timeshares. Especially when purchased from the developer. "_
> 
> 
> Amen!  This is exactly what I have been trying to say though some who are on the defensive or a little bit worried are obviously taking my points the wrong way (hello RandR and FlyerBobcat).  I understand being a little sensitive but there's no need to get "mad".  We're just talking about timeshares.
> 
> *Our timeshare is not an investment!*  We should not _expect_ any return.  If we sell and get something back, yea for us.
> 
> Marriott does not owe anyone anything, direct or resale.  They clearly spell out what they will give us in the purchase documents (yes, they are in the purchase documents) such as:
> 1.  Your timeshare is not an investment
> 2.  Marriott reserves the right to make changes at their discretion,regardless of your expectations or moral compass.



There are two ways to view a timeshare:

An investment like your home - an asset
An expense like your car

I bought our timeshares as if I were buying part of a condo - I want to profit from ownership.  I want the usage and some kind of appreciation.

Others view timeshares as an expense and expect to lose money.

I've bought and sold 5 Marriott weeks and either broke even or made a small profit.  On top of that I got 5 years of usage, exchanges, and rental income that paid for ALL the MFs for those 5 units for those 5 years.

I'm a capitalist and want it all.

I know that the road Marriott is about to drive means my asset is worth less - I don't like it.  I'm down to just a Gold week and have really no exposure here.

Those of you who own many Marriott weeks that you paid hundreds of thousands of dollars you should be viewing your investment as an asset and concerned when anything, the federal government or Marriott, reduces the value of your asset.

Those who view timeshare ownership as an expense you should still view all the expenses that are about to hit you with little to show over what you already have.

P.S.
That MF you pay is what - an expense on top of an expense or an expense of the upkeep of an asset?  I can't think of an example of an expense that requires an expense each year.


----------



## BocaBum99

AceValenta said:


> Thank you for repeating my previous post! We have nothing to talk about here except rumors...Nothing concrete, no facts not even a name or the department the person works in. For all we know it could be the guy or gal who mops the floors!
> 
> It is pure speculation as to what they are going to roll out, if anything at all!



I actually don't agree.  I believe we have some educated guesses we can make.  Those educated guesses can help prepare us for the future.  I know what action I am going to take based on what I've learned on this thread.

I know that it's speculation and what I am thinking could be wrong.  But, even if it doesn't pan out, it's what I have wanted to do anyway.


----------



## m61376

KathyPet said:


> What goes around comes around.  Marriott has already scr**** its once loyal retail purchasers by changing the point system (in the guise of enhancements) so that your reward points cannot get you what they once did.  it does not surprise me in the least that they are now trying to figure out how they can sc*** the next level down (resale buyers) to whom they probably feel they have no need to concern themselves with at all.  As far as complaining about it by writing to Marriott don't bother wasting your ink.  If they did not care enough to even respond to the letters they received about the last changes to the Reward point program as it effects the Vacation Club owners who bought direct then they surely won't respond to any complaints voiced by the small percentage of owners who bought resale.



I know this sticks in your craw, but the reality is that historically rewards programs become devalued over time. It is a fact of life in every hotel or airline program. Dave clearly detailed the reasoning for it in a prior post- basically, as prices go up, people staying in hotels get more and more points, so it is a necessary extension of inflation that the point "cost" increase as well. As unfair as you contend that it was, it was to be expected. 

Not to be obnoxious, but the time to have complained about that very likely reality (since, as I said, it has happened periodically over the years) would be before you signed on the dotted line, which (since everyone here is so focused on legal documents) fixed the number of points you would receive for trading in your unit at a set point, with no ties to increased maintenance fees (which was clear to any sane purchaser that they would in fact increase over time) or to any potential devaluation in the Rewards program.

So, I still maintain that shafting resale buyers is different, because they bought into a program with full unit usage and full trading privileges, and it would be wrong to change the rules after the fact. It is different than devaluing the Rewards program, because you bought fully knowing that you would get the same number of points 5, 10 or 15 years down the road, and even if you didn't think about it, there was historical precedent for points programs to get devalued just the way they did.


----------



## thinze3

*Speculation:*
The final outcome is speculation indeed, but there is change a coming.

*Residual values to zero:*
Not going to happen at prime locations and seasons.
Who doesn't want to go to Waiohai every other year?


----------



## PerryM

Latravel said:


> Going back to the points issue,
> 
> You may like what Marriott comes up with.  I think it's important to keep an open mind since it may suit your family.  We own a RCI points system and we are very happy with it.  Every resort is given a certain number of points per year based on location and size of the unit.  Each person is given a certain number of points to "spend" on a resort to trade.
> 
> The best part is the last minute exchanges which is similar to flexchange.  Any reservations left 60 before travel is significantly reduced as far as the number of points to reserve.  It's about 10% of the initial points requirement.  Needless to say, I wait to within 60 days of travel and start searching.  I've gotten some really great resorts/vacations this way.
> *
> I'm sure Marriott is taking their time to come up with a competive system.*  They won't do anything to anger people or no one will join.  Just keep an open mind.



Why would Marriott care about what II did?

Check on the rent Marriott charges for a 2BR villa 7 days before check-in - they don't give it away.

Marriott is into hotels and selling timeshares.

II is into exchanging reservations of timeshare owners

I don't see a connection here at all.

Marriott spews this rumor for 3 years to kill resales and we should assume they will stop acting like a hotel company when it comes to reservations?

I don't make that assumption at all.

P.S.
Marriott has some problems with this kind of system.  Owners deposit weeks which are converted to Points.  Those Points are eventually converted to Weeks.  They can't offer discounts since there would be too many Points chasing too few Weeks - that's the definition of inflation and that's a problem with this kind of system.

II doesn't have this problem - they use week for week and inflation never becomes a problem.


----------



## dougp26364

rsackett said:


> I have a question for those of you who have no expectation of residual value for your Marriott time share.
> 
> Why would you purchase a property with the expectation that it would have no residual value?



Because we bought it STRICTLY as an investment in vacation lifestyle. When we purchased our first timeshare, we made the mistake of believing the salesman when he said we were buying a piece of the Las Vegas Strip or, we were buying property. That's not true. Even a deeded week is still a RTU and not real property. The only thing you own is the RTU that space in perpetuity. There are generally provisions for disolving the covenent/contract for the right to use that may have residual value but, that's it. To buy a timeshare with the expectation of having any value past the vacation experience if foolish at best.




> You as an owner have a responsibility to pay for upkeep as long as you own that property.  I understand that you feel that what you paid for was the right to use that property for one week for vacations as long as you own it, is that correct?  Do you not have any concern how much that week costs you?


 Sure I'm concerned about the cost. What I'm not concerned about is the cash value after I purchase. Unlike a few, I realized very soon after my first purchase that a timeshare has very little to no cash value after purchase. It's only an investment in time/vacation. 



> If Marriott makes decisions that lower the value of your property to zero and it costs extra money to get trading privileges, the value could go to less than zero, i.e. you may have to pay someone to take over your responsibilities to the property.



You've just summed up owning a timeshare. After you purchase, you're week has zero cash value. You can't mortgage it or take out a home equity loan against it. Why? Because banks realize what you don't. It has no real cash value. Marriott can not hurt what doesn't really exist. 

The only way Marriott can make a decision to lower the value of my "property" would be if they limited my enjoyment of our ability to use our ownership. Any cash or residual value is purely coincidental and base solely on what I can market and sell it for. I have no expectation of any cash return on my purchase.  



> If money is of no concern why buy at all?  The ultimate freedom would be to rent from Marriott all the weeks you want, when you want, and where you want to go and that way you would have no further downward risk.



Owning set out rules that allow us first choice vs renters getting what's left over. Owning guarentee's the view we purchased. Owning should give us preference over exchangers for location of the unit. Owning locks in the up front cost. Owning FORCES us to take vacation (I won't waste my money easily). Before timeshare, we took vacations, on average, once every 5 years. After buying our first timeshare we now vacation 6 times per year plus take a few weekend trips. 





> One reason I bought was to save money, and the less my timeshare is worth when I sell it the more the weeks I use cost me.
> 
> 
> ray



Then you have made a poor choice. We've owned for 11 years. Every time I run the numbers, owing hasn't saved me money. Timeshare is an expensive way to vacation but, it's how we prefer to vacation. We've had some great timeshare vacations but, if I add up all the costs of owning, I find I've spent more than if I rented. 

I suppose that, if I own and use for a long enough period of time, I may be able to justify the cost of ownership vs the cost or renting. With the cost of MF's, special assessments, exchange fee's et.... I'm not holding my breath on every seeing a significant return on the money I've spent. If money was my concernt, I'd have been better off leaving that money in the bank and renting. But, this wasn't my concern when I purchased. It wasn't a concern because I understood the basic rule of timeshare. The rule is that is not a cash investment. It's a lifestyle investment.


----------



## m61376

BocaBum99 said:


> I actually don't agree.  I believe we have some educated guesses we can make.  Those educated guesses can help prepare us for the future.  I know what action I am going to take based on what I've learned on this thread.
> 
> I know that it's speculation and what I am thinking could be wrong.  But, even if it doesn't pan out, it's what I have wanted to do anyway.



So...inquiring minds want to know???


----------



## Pens_Fan

PerryM said:


> There are two ways to view a timeshare:
> 
> An investment like your home - an asset
> An expense like your car
> 
> That MF you pay is what - an expense on top of an expense or an expense of the upkeep of an asset?  I can't think of an example of an expense that requires an expense each year.



You answered your own question.

Your car is an expense on top of an expense.

Not only do you have the upfront costs of purchasing the car, you also have the continued yearly expenses to maintain that car.


----------



## SueDonJ

rsackett said:


> I have a question for those of you who have no expectation of residual value for your Marriott time share.
> 
> Why would you purchase a property with the expectation that it would have no residual value?  You as an owner have a responsibility to pay for upkeep as long as you own that property.  I understand that you feel that what you paid for was the right to use that property for one week for vacations as long as you own it, is that correct?  Do you not have any concern how much that week costs you?  If Marriott makes decisions that lower the value of your property to zero and it costs extra money to get trading privileges, the value could go to less than zero, i.e. you may have to pay someone to take over your responsibilities to the property.
> 
> If money is of no concern why buy at all?  The ultimate freedom would be to rent from Marriott all the weeks you want, when you want, and where you want to go and that way you would have no further downward risk.
> 
> One reason I bought was to save money, and the less my timeshare is worth when I sell it the more the weeks I use cost me.
> 
> 
> ray



Well, this is a question that must take into consideration a whole lot of factors ...

We weren't able to take yearly vacations for most of our younger years because of financial constraints, and now that we can, the timeshare model of "forced vacations" was a big incentive to get into the game.  Old habits die hard, and we wanted to combat against those old once-in-a-great-while vacation habits.

We don't like very much at all staying in hotel rooms, but do like the accommodations that are offered with the certain timeshare configurations that we considered purchasing (multi bedrooms, kitchen, living room, etc) combined with the resort amenities that are generally associated with hotels.

If you compare hotel room vacation costs to timeshare vacation costs, it's true that you can probably spend less over a lifetime (especially if you purchase developer) by sticking to hotel rooms.  However, if you compare timeshare ownership costs to timeshare rental costs, you will almost always come out ahead even in the case of direct purchases.  Consider, during our stay at Barony this past May, the notice in the unit indicated that nightly rental rates at that time were $815 (or $850, not exactly sure) per night.  Granted, m/f associated with timeshare ownership increase every year, but so will rental rates.  Plus, a specific timeshare unit configuration may not always be available in the rental pool.

Similarly, if you compare timeshare ownership costs to vacation property ownership costs, sometimes you come out ahead with the timeshare.  We did anyway, because we were comparing the Hilton Head Island luxury oceanfront condominium that we'd stayed in for three years to the MVCI oceanfront resorts where we eventually purchased.  $4M, at least, as well as taxes and insurance (subject to resale market fluctuations) for a property we weren't able to stay in for more than ten months of the year and didn't want to enter into any rental agreement for, versus MVCI ownership for the exact amount of weeks we could use subject to understood limitations?  No-brainer.

As for resale v. developer?  Well, the more I read these boards the more I realize that we were extremely lucky the day that we chose to visit an MVCI sales office.  We went in armed with some knowledge from reading these boards and the disboards, and a copy of the latest local Timeshare Resales (or whatever it was called) magazine, and ran into a sales person who explained the product exactly as what I'd read here it should be.  She didn't use any rumors or lies or threats to try to influence us, and she didn't offer any speculative info beyond what we asked for ("Yes, only one - the ability to trade for MRP. ... Yes, MVCI can make changes if the contract language protects such things. ... No, there are no changes that will definitely be rolled out to immediately impact whatever you may buy today." - etc. paraphrased.)  It was the possible changes combined with the developer v. resale discussions that I'd read on TUG that concerned us, and so we chose to purchase developer-direct simply to hedge our bets against any possible future changes.

I honestly think that our good fortune in meeting up with that particular salesperson is the single most important reason why I generally will try to see Marriott/MVCI's point of view during discussions here.  As much as it's reported here that salespeople are the scum of the earth  , that's not been my experience at all.

And finally, timeshare ownership is an intensely personal financial decision that can generate all of those feelings behind that old "three things not to discuss - finances, religion and politics" axiom.  Suffice it to say that our ownership/purchase works for us in our financial situation when we consider all the rewards and risks.  I'm sure the same could be said by at least 95% of the TUG members.


----------



## PerryM

Pens_Fan said:


> You answered your own question.
> 
> Your car is an expense on top of an expense.
> 
> Not only do you have the upfront costs of purchasing the car, you also have the continued yearly expenses to maintain that car.



I can park the car and not use it - no expenses.  However, that car keeps depreciating each year.

Try that with your timeshare - don't pay that MF and you will convince yourself that you have an asset that needs upkeep whether you use it or not.

But this is a fundamentally different way of viewing your timeshare - its your decision.


----------



## FlyerBobcat

Doug,

You might not have considered a possible residual value on your timeshare purchase when you are "done with it", but I really don't understand how you can so easily neglect the fact that it could & very well might be worth something.

Using this information certainly could help one choose a unit.... it seems only too logical to me.

If torn between two "very similar" units that you are considering purchasing, and one seems to be a much better bet to hold its resale value, are you saying that you wouldn't weigh that in on your purchase decision?





dougp26364 said:


> Because we bought it STRICTLY as an investment in vacation lifestyle. When we purchased our first timeshare, we made the mistake of believing the salesman when he said we were buying a piece of the Las Vegas Strip or, we were buying property. That's not true. Even a deeded week is still a RTU and not real property. The only thing you own is the RTU that space in perpetuity. There are generally provisions for disolving the covenent/contract for the right to use that may have residual value but, that's it. To buy a timeshare with the expectation of having any value past the vacation experience if foolish at best.
> 
> 
> Sure I'm concerned about the cost. What I'm not concerned about is the cash value after I purchase. Unlike a few, I realized very soon after my first purchase that a timeshare has very little to no cash value after purchase. It's only an investment in time/vacation.
> 
> 
> 
> You've just summed up owning a timeshare. After you purchase, you're week has zero cash value. You can't mortgage it or take out a home equity loan against it. Why? Because banks realize what you don't. It has no real cash value. Marriott can not hurt what doesn't really exist.
> 
> The only way Marriott can make a decision to lower the value of my "property" would be if they limited my enjoyment of our ability to use our ownership. Any cash or residual value is purely coincidental and base solely on what I can market and sell it for. I have no expectation of any cash return on my purchase.
> 
> 
> 
> Owning set out rules that allow us first choice vs renters getting what's left over. Owning guarentee's the view we purchased. Owning should give us preference over exchangers for location of the unit. Owning locks in the up front cost. Owning FORCES us to take vacation (I won't waste my money easily). Before timeshare, we took vacations, on average, once every 5 years. After buying our first timeshare we now vacation 6 times per year plus take a few weekend trips.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Then you have made a poor choice. We've owned for 11 years. Every time I run the numbers, owing hasn't saved me money. Timeshare is an expensive way to vacation but, it's how we prefer to vacation. We've had some great timeshare vacations but, if I add up all the costs of owning, I find I've spent more than if I rented.
> 
> I suppose that, if I own and use for a long enough period of time, I may be able to justify the cost of ownership vs the cost or renting. With the cost of MF's, special assessments, exchange fee's et.... I'm not holding my breath on every seeing a significant return on the money I've spent. If money was my concernt, I'd have been better off leaving that money in the bank and renting. But, this wasn't my concern when I purchased. It wasn't a concern because I understood the basic rule of timeshare. The rule is that is not a cash investment. It's a lifestyle investment.


----------



## AceValenta

BocaBum99 said:


> I actually don't agree.  I believe we have some educated guesses we can make.  Those educated guesses can help prepare us for the future.  I know what action I am going to take based on what I've learned on this thread.
> 
> I know that it's speculation and what I am thinking could be wrong.  But, even if it doesn't pan out, it's what I have wanted to do anyway.



That is my point! Based on what facts? In order to make an educated guess you need factual information. An informed guess or educated guess is a guess that is based on a degree of experience, knowledge, or information.

I don't doubt the experience or knowledge of people on this board. It is the information we have that isn't reliable it is pure opinion. 

Right now, we have nothing but rumors, opinions and ideas. Nothing is provided to us from Marriott, the main decision makers in all of this. 

All the words provided in the OP are open ended:

"In Development"
Scheduled
if
expects
anticipated
intent
likely
I don't know

I never like the term "inside source"....too open ended. Where do they work within the organization?  

Right now there aren't any facts. We aren't getting any details

WHO is spreading this info?
WHAT is the program?
WHY? We know this, if it at all happens. 
WHEN? Scheduled release date? Hasn't this been 3 years running...... 
and HOW will the program work? 

Until you know the answers to all these questions, then you can't make a decision. There are a lot of what if's out there! A lot of people creating speculative assumptions. 

The main thing is, who is the source? Marketing Department? VP? Janitor? Disgruntled former employee? Timeshare owner (We are all figuratively speaking "inside Marriott" as owners)?  Salesperson? Some guy that just left a presentation? 

We don't have anything in writing? It is pure conjecture at this point to know what the program is. Is it going to be a $1 or $5000 to join? How many points do I get? Will resales be excluded or included? The list goes on and on. 

Unless we are sitting on the board of Marriott or in their development department we have no idea what is going to happen. Maybe if we had more info from Marriott we might be able to plan ahead and make that educated guess. Right now we have nothing but some post that someone talked to someone. We have nothing factual.


----------



## LisaRex

This new program, which I’ll call MEP (Marriott Exchange Program) for the sake of discussion, sounds a lot like Starwood’s exchange program SVN.  Generally speaking, if you buy from Starwood you are automatically a member of SVN; If you buy on the resale market, you are excluded from SVN. (There are exceptions, but not relevant to my main point.)  

And it’s a system guaranteed to fail.  Why?  Because virtually every timeshare is eventually sold. As these units are sold, whether they sell for $40k or $.01, the end result is one less unit in inventory for MEP members to book.  If resale owner is barred from using MEP, or if it's too cost prohibitive to join MEP, they will simply use II.  Or they’ll book a high demand week at the resort they paid for and try to rent it out on Redweek.  End result is that it's one less unit in MEP and MEP becomes less valuable over time.

Oops. 

If I understand it correctly, all Marriott owners now enjoy a generous period where the entire Marriott exchanged inventory in II is available exclusively to other Marriott owners.    Once MEP rolls out, right off the bat, MEP inventory is going to be a fraction of what it was under II because resale owners won’t be allowed to deposit their weeks in the program.  How exactly is that benefical to folks who paid a fortune to buy from the developer?  II inventory as well will be reduced because MEP owners will use MEP.  So the introduction of MEP dilutes both programs!  

Well, that sounds fabulous, doesn’t it? 

Cases to ponder: 

Westin Maui, one of a handful of resorts that mandate participation in SVN (even for resale owners) continuously has robust availability in both SVN and II.   It’s currently one of the easiest trades for Starwood owners.  Another great resort, Westin Mission Hills, has the II/SVN split deal.  When an SVN owner called to book a Spring Break week several months ago, she was told there was no inventory available.  The same week was available in II.


----------



## BocaBum99

AceValenta said:


> That is my point! Based on what facts? In order to make an educated guess you need factual information. An informed guess or educated guess is a guess that is based on a degree of experience, knowledge, or information.
> 
> I don't doubt the experience or knowledge of people on this board. It is the information we have that isn't reliable it is pure opinion.
> 
> Right now, we have nothing but rumors, opinions and ideas. Nothing is provided to us from Marriott, the main decision makers in all of this.
> 
> All the words provided in the OP are open ended:
> 
> "In Development"
> Scheduled
> if
> expects
> anticipated
> intent
> likely
> I don't know
> 
> I never like the term "inside source"....too open ended. Where do they work within the organization?
> 
> Right now there aren't any facts. We aren't getting any details
> 
> WHO is spreading this info?
> WHAT is the program?
> WHY? We know this, if it at all happens.
> WHEN? Scheduled release date? Hasn't this been 3 years running......
> and HOW will the program work?
> 
> *Until you know the answers to all these questions, then you can't make a decision.* There are a lot of what if's out there! A lot of people creating speculative assumptions.
> 
> The main thing is, who is the source? Marketing Department? VP? Janitor? Disgruntled former employee? Timeshare owner (We are all figuratively speaking "inside Marriott" as owners)?  Salesperson? Some guy that just left a presentation?
> 
> We don't have anything in writing? It is pure conjecture at this point to know what the program is. Is it going to be a $1 or $5000 to join? How many points do I get? Will resales be excluded or included? The list goes on and on.
> 
> Unless we are sitting on the board of Marriott or in their development department we have no idea what is going to happen. Maybe if we had more info from Marriott we might be able to plan ahead and make that educated guess. Right now we have nothing but some post that someone talked to someone. We have nothing factual.



The above bolded sentence is where I disagree with you.  Nothing is ever fully knowable.  Once they announce it, we can all speculate that they will cancel it within a year.  Or, Marriott will go bankrupt with it.  There is simply a probabililty for every possible future state.  The judgement of a decision maker to take in the information they are getting and place bets on likely outcomes is the huge difference between those who take control of their futures and those that let their futures happen to them.

There are calculated risks with EVERYTHING we do in life.  I'll tell you one thing that I am willing to bet on.  That is that Dave M has better information than anyone else on this board about Marriott.  I am willing to bet on it.   If you aren't, that's fine.  But, don't say that we can't make decisions based on it.  I can and I am.


----------



## Zac495

BocaBum99 said:


> I actually don't agree.  I believe we have some educated guesses we can make.  Those educated guesses can help prepare us for the future.  I know what action I am going to take based on what I've learned on this thread.
> 
> I know that it's speculation and what I am thinking could be wrong.  But, even if it doesn't pan out, it's what I have wanted to do anyway.



What will you do, Jim? Would you buy now? I lean towards no for resale and of course not developer - not in a box, not with a fox, not in a tree - just let me be!


----------



## BocaBum99

LisaRex said:


> This new program, which I’ll call MEP (Marriott Exchange Program) for the sake of discussion, sounds a lot like Starwood’s exchange program SVN.  Generally speaking, if you buy from Starwood you are automatically a member of SVN; If you buy on the resale market, you are excluded from SVN. (There are exceptions, but not relevant to my main point.)
> 
> And it’s a system guaranteed to fail.  Why?  Because virtually every timeshare is eventually sold. As these units are sold, whether they sell for $40k or $.01, the end result is one less unit in inventory for MEP members to book.  If resale owner is barred from using MEP, or if it's too cost prohibitive to join MEP, they will simply use II.  Or they’ll book a high demand week at the resort they paid for and try to rent it out on Redweek.  End result is that it's one less unit in MEP and MEP becomes less valuable over time.
> 
> Oops.
> 
> If I understand it correctly, all Marriott owners now enjoy a generous period where the entire Marriott exchanged inventory in II is available exclusively to other Marriott owners.    Once MEP rolls out, right off the bat, MEP inventory is going to be a fraction of what it was under II because resale owners won’t be allowed to deposit their weeks in the program.  How exactly is that benefical to folks who paid a fortune to buy from the developer?  II inventory as well will be reduced because MEP owners will use MEP.  So the introduction of MEP dilutes both programs!
> 
> Well, that sounds fabulous, doesn’t it?
> 
> Cases to ponder:
> 
> Westin Maui, one of a handful of resorts that mandate participation in SVN (even for resale owners) continuously has robust availability in both SVN and II.   It’s currently one of the easiest trades for Starwood owners.  Another great resort, Westin Mission Hills, has the II/SVN split deal.  When an SVN owner called to book a Spring Break week several months ago, she was told there was no inventory available.  The same week was available in II.



Very good insight!


----------



## SueDonJ

LisaRex said:


> ... If I understand it correctly, all Marriott owners now enjoy a generous period where the entire Marriott exchanged inventory in II is available exclusively to other Marriott owners.    Once MEP rolls out, right off the bat, MEP inventory is going to be a fraction of what it was under II because resale owners won’t be allowed to deposit their weeks in the program.  How exactly is that benefical to folks who paid a fortune to buy from the developer?  II inventory as well will be reduced because MEP owners will use MEP.  So the introduction of MEP dilutes both programs!



Yes, the system now in place is as you described - within II there is an MVCI-preference whereby when a unit is deposited it is available to only other MVCI owners for a limited period of time.

But the rest of your post is speculation.  What if this MEP proposal is rolled out in conjunction with a renegotiated contract between MVCI and II?  What if the terms of that contract provide that every single week in the MVCI inventory is assigned for bookkeeping purposes an exchange point value, whether or not an owner chooses to opt in to the system?  And what if it's negotiated in the new MVCI/II contract that every single week deposited for exchange must be made available first to those who have opted in to the new system, subject to the limitations of those pre-determined point system values?

Think about it.  Each owner who makes a deposit will be given the trade value of their week that is attached to whatever system they choose, whether they opt into the new one or stay with the old.  Each week deposited for exchange will be offered to owners based on the priority that MVCI has pre-determined - MEP members having top priority.  Wouldn't the number of weeks deposited for exchange still equal the number of owners searching for exchanges, subject to the limitations of a single week's trade value?  Isn't that the system which is currently in effect?

Or, is there something somewhere which stipulates that if MVCI rolls out a dual-provider exchange system, then the inventory must be separated according to the individual owners' chosen provider?

I have no idea, it's food for thought.


----------



## rickandcindy23

This is going to kill II!  Having Marriott was quite a feather in II's cap, and to lose that will affect their bottomline in a huge way.  II will likely offer AC's for most deposits now.  With the low prices of resales, now is not a bad time to get a Marriott.  

Love the preference period in II for Starwood resale buyers.


----------



## RandR

RandR said:


> So in other words, you don't mind if resale buyers are treated like second class citizens. (Had to use that phrase again.)





SueDonJ said:


> Everything else in your post is rehash.  But this is a direct insult rather than a perceived insult, and it pisses me off despite your use of a smiley.  Rather passive/aggressive there, don't you think?
> 
> *Where did I say that I'm okay with any owners being treated as second-class citizens?*  Oh, that's right, NOWHERE.  Consider that it's entirely possible that any change implemented by MVCI that favors on the surface developer purchasers could in fact negatively impact my personal ownership usage, such as in this proposal if the exchange point value of my weeks does not afford me the exact same trade value that I've enjoyed up to this point with II.  Would I perceive that as MVCI treating me as a second-class citizen?  No, of course not, it's just the way the system would work.
> 
> Perhaps we'd all be better off if we could only stick to "the way the system works" as opposed to who of us are holier-than-thou.



Below is your quote from an earlier post.  In the quote you say that if Marriott implements any changes that offer advantages to developer purchasers you would not complain as long as it does not remove any deeded right.  To me that means that any changes made, as long as they don't impact you negatively, you are okay with.  If owners of the same type of unit at the same property are treated way differently with respect to how they can use the system, then yes I would call the one group second class citizens.  I obviously knew going in that Marriott could make changes, we all did.  That's not the point.  But to subjugate one group that has been loyal to the product just because of the way they bought it is ridiculous.  I am saying this about current resale owners.  I do not want to throw new resale owners under the bus, but if a new system is put into place, they will know the rules going in and can make a decision based on that information.

To say that hey that's just the way the system works is crazy.  If Marriott changed the system and you got screwed and just said oh well, that's the way it goes that's sad.



			
				SueDonJ said:
			
		

> And finally, I'll say here what I've said in many of the developer v. resale discussions on TUG. If Marriott/MVCI implements any changes with respect to ownership that offer an advantage to developer purchasers, I will not complain about MVCI making those changes so long as they do not remove any deeded rights from any owner and/or so long as any legal challenge to them could be successfully defended by MVCI.


----------



## PerryM

rickandcindy23 said:


> *This is going to kill II!*  Having Marriott was quite a feather in II's cap, and to lose that will affect their bottomline in a huge way.  II will likely offer AC's for most deposits now.  With the low prices of resales, now is not a bad time to get a Marriott.
> 
> Love the preference period in II for Starwood resale buyers.



If I were II I'd start my own Marriott Owners Points program.  Model it after RedWeek and have it ready to be released the second Marriott releases their program.

Make it $99 to join, and the first year's membership is free, and $49 for each deposit.

Make it a "no brainier" for Marriott owners while they ponder Marriott's new scheme.  Make it a viable competitor to Marriott and one that won't deflate the resale value of the timeshare involved.

II has just as much marketing power in the timeshare exchange business as Marriott and could instantly transform II into something much more powerful since the Point program would be an instant replacement for their week based system down the road.


----------



## ecwinch

PerryM said:


> If I were II I'd start my own Marriott Owners Points program.  Model it after RedWeek and have it ready to be released the second Marriott releases their program.
> 
> Make it $99 to join, and the first year's membership is free, and $49 for each deposit.
> 
> Make it a "no brainier" for Marriott owners while they ponder Marriott's new scheme.  Make it a viable competitor to Marriott and one that won't deflate the resale value of the timeshare involved.
> 
> II has just as much marketing power in the timeshare exchange business as Marriott and could instantly transform II into something much more powerful since the Point program would be an instant replacement for their week based system down the road.



Without the ability to do partial stays, it would only be second-rate.


----------



## PerryM

ecwinch said:


> Without the ability to do partial stays, it would only be second-rate.



The ability to offer partial stays has nothing to do with the exchange company - it has everything to do with the actual resort.

Most resorts have a weekend check-in - Fri, Sat, Sun which is really a rotation of the same cleaning staff.

If the resort offers daily maid service then partial stays are a possibility but that opens the door for remnant/scrap days that go unused.


----------



## SueDonJ

RandR said:


> Below is your quote from an earlier post.  In the quote you say that if Marriott implements any changes that offer advantages to developer purchasers you would not complain as long as it does not remove any deeded right.  To me that means that any changes made, as long as they don't impact you negatively, you are okay with.  If owners of the same type of unit at the same property are treated way differently with respect to how they can use the system, then yes I would call the one group second class citizens.  I obviously knew going in that Marriott could make changes, we all did.  That's not the point.  But to subjugate one group that has been loyal to the product just because of the way they bought it is ridiculous.  I am saying this about current resale owners.  I do not want to throw new resale owners under the bus, but if a new system is put into place, they will know the rules going in and can make a decision based on that information.
> 
> To say that hey that's just the way the system works is crazy.  If Marriott changed the system and you got screwed and just said oh well, that's the way it goes that's sad.



Honestly, what more do you want?  I've acknowledged already that it is entirely possible for Marriott/MVCI to implement changes that may negatively affect my ownership as much as any other owner's, and I would have no recourse to challenge those changes if the contracts stipulate that Marriott/MVCI has the rights to make those changes.

What, you want me to agree that my thinking is "sad" and "crazy?"  Okay, fine, call me sad and crazy then if you feel that insulting me somehow makes your point valid.  Whatever that point may be.


----------



## BocaBum99

Zac495 said:


> What will you do, Jim? Would you buy now? I lean towards no for resale and of course not developer - not in a box, not with a fox, not in a tree - just let me be!



What I am going to do is dump my Bronze weeks and trade up to Platinum weeks.  Why? 

1) With Marriott not exercising ROFR, prices now are very good when compared to historical levels.  It's possible to get a below market value price, especially when there appears to be no floor to prices.  When Marriott exercises, it's virtually impossible to get a steal.  In this market, it is.

2) This program will scare owners from buying, reducing demand again and further contributing to the opportunity to get a below market unit.  It pays to be bold when everyone else is scared as long as you have calculated your risks properly.

3) I agree with Dave M that Marriott will want to create a program that provides a huge incentive for a mass number of owners to enroll into the program.  2 years ago, I thought this would be a critical criteria for success.  When Dave said they are focused on it, that tells me that Marriott gets it.  That is good.  Furthermore, I believe the best deals will be provided to Platinum owners at highly desirable locations.  If Marriott doesn't get these owners to convert, the program is doomed to failure.  There is no guarantee of success, so a future plan must accommodate both potential outcomes.

4) All resales will take a hit in value when this program is launched.  Even more so when the program hits critical mass.  The overall value decrease will probably be equal to something close to the enrollment fee for the program as Perry points out.  Highly desirable platinum weeks will experience less decline since Marriott wants these weeks in the program and will actively exercise ROFR when the time is right.  Other weeks will depreciate much more in value.  To protect my investment, I just need to make sure I get the unit for enough below market to accommodate the future decrease in value.  The potential cost of that loss in value is the option value of being positioned to enter the program at a relatively cheap cost.  The lower I can get the unit below market, the cheaper that option costs me.

5) I've wanted to do this anyway.  I just haven't had the time to do anything about it.  If I am right about what will happen, I will have a great option to join the new program with reduced risk and at resale prices.  If I am wrong about it, I still upgraded my bronze weeks to platinum and will enjoy better trades in the future.  If things go back to the way they were, I will profit handsomely by getting cheap platinum weeks when the market was soft.  If the market collapses and all Marriott's go to zero value, that is the risk I am taking by employing this strategy.


----------



## RandR

SueDonJ said:


> What, you want me to agree that my thinking is "sad" and "crazy?"  Okay, fine, call me sad and crazy then if you feel that insulting me somehow makes your point valid.  Whatever that point may be.



Susan, I am not trying to insult you.  You are very likely correct that we will have no voice in this and that in past changes complaints from us have not worked, but that doesn't mean we should go down without making noise.  Everything here is speculation so we don't know what will happen or when.  When and if it does happen, owners who are dissatisfied should complain.  Loud and long.  Don't give Marriott a free pass, let them know how you feel.

I said earlier that we are all in this together and I meant it.


----------



## hotcoffee

Latravel said:


> _"Interesting to read all the comments made by resale purchasers justifying why Marriott won't do anything to change their current ownership rights. Is anyone getting just a wee bit nervous here?"_
> 
> I was thinking the same exact thing as you!  Another observation is reading how people think it's just wrong to make any changes that could hurt resale buyers (for many reasons such as property values, investments, etc) yet in the same paragraph state it's ok for Marriott to make changes to future resale purchasers.



I would suggest that both of these posts reflect sour grapes rather than logic.  What owner, direct or resale, who is thinking logically would want his right to sell trashed?

None of my comments concern buyers.  My comments only concern owners.  Both owners and Marriott itself benefit from high resale values - just like car owners and car manufacturers do.  High resale values do not benefit buyers.  High resale values benefit owners.

If Marriott were to trash resales - even if current resale owners were to get grandfathered into the new system and are in no way harmed by it, I would eventually get rid of my unit at the best price I could get.


----------



## indyhorizons

PerryM said:


> If I were II I'd start my own Marriott Owners Points program.  Model it after RedWeek and have it ready to be released the second Marriott releases their program.
> 
> Make it $99 to join, and the first year's membership is free, and $49 for each deposit.
> 
> Make it a "no brainier" for Marriott owners while they ponder Marriott's new scheme.  Make it a viable competitor to Marriott and one that won't deflate the resale value of the timeshare involved.
> 
> II has just as much marketing power in the timeshare exchange business as Marriott and could instantly transform II into something much more powerful since the Point program would be an instant replacement for their week based system down the road.



This would assume that a new II program would not violate their current agreement with Marriott, would it not?


----------



## PerryM

indyhorizons said:


> This would assume that a new II program would not violate their current agreement with Marriott, would it not?



Assuming the agreement will terminate between Marriott and II.

II has little to fear after the new Marriott system - they would simply do what RedWeek is already doing.


----------



## BocaBum99

RandR said:


> Susan, I am not trying to insult you.  You are very likely correct that we will have no voice in this and that in past changes complaints from us have not worked, but that doesn't mean we should go down without making noise.  Everything here is speculation so we don't know what will happen or when.  When and if it does happen, owners who are dissatisfied should complain.  Loud and long.  Don't give Marriott a free pass, let them know how you feel.
> 
> I said earlier that we are all in this together and I meant it.



I don't like the idea of complaining.  It rarely leads to a positive outcome.  Rather, I would anticipate the potential moves of the developer and position my portfolio to best make use of what they are likely to do at the lowest possible cost.  Or, dump it and get out.  Those are actions you can actually take that will result in something happening.  Complaining just puts me in a bad mood and nothing improves as a result of it.


----------



## SueDonJ

RandR said:


> Susan, I am not trying to insult you.  You are very likely correct that we will have no voice in this and that in past changes complaints from us have not worked, but that doesn't mean we should go down without making noise.  Everything here is speculation so we don't know what will happen or when.  When and if it does happen, owners who are dissatisfied should complain.  Loud and long.  Don't give Marriott a free pass, let them know how you feel.



I will always agree that going directly to the source will result in more satisfaction than is possible to gain by any other method.  But why wait?  Several pages back Superchief suggested that letters be sent to Mr. Babich now.  It's as good a strategy as any for doing all you can do to make your opinions clear, especially if you feel as strongly as you appear to about all this.



RandR said:


> I said earlier that we are all in this together and I meant it.



If that is truly the case, then I will thank you to stop putting words in my mouth that I have not said, and attributing a caste system among owners which I have not done.


----------



## m61376

SueDonJ said:


> Yes, the system now in place is as you described - within II there is an MVCI-preference whereby when a unit is deposited it is available to only other MVCI owners for a limited period of time.
> 
> But the rest of your post is speculation.  What if this MEP proposal is rolled out in conjunction with a renegotiated contract between MVCI and II?  What if the terms of that contract provide that every single week in the MVCI inventory is assigned for bookkeeping purposes an exchange point value, whether or not an owner chooses to opt in to the system?  And what if it's negotiated in the new MVCI/II contract that every single week deposited for exchange must be made available first to those who have opted in to the new system, subject to the limitations of those pre-determined point system values?
> 
> Think about it.  Each owner who makes a deposit will be given the trade value of their week that is attached to whatever system they choose, whether they opt into the new one or stay with the old.  Each week deposited for exchange will be offered to owners based on the priority that MVCI has pre-determined - MEP members having top priority.  Wouldn't the number of weeks deposited for exchange still equal the number of owners searching for exchanges, subject to the limitations of a single week's trade value?  Isn't that the system which is currently in effect?
> 
> Or, is there something somewhere which stipulates that if MVCI rolls out a dual-provider exchange system, then the inventory must be separated according to the individual owners' chosen provider?
> 
> I have no idea, it's food for thought.



A knowledgeable source has stated that Marriott will never discontinue the weeks program for exchanges. Thus, owners who retain their current ownership will continue to trade in a weeks based system, and not some paperwork conversion to points as you suggest. I am fairly confident that this source has the correct information.


----------



## Dave M

*In my capacity as moderator....*

Susan and RandR -

Please stop the bickering. You would be best served by ignoring (or at least not responding to) the other's posts. If you don't stop, don't complain that you weren't warned. For reference, please read the "Be Courteous" section of the Posting Rules, located on the above blue bar.

Further, please don't comment here about this warning. Doing so would also violate the Posting Rules. If you (or anyone) feel the need to discuss it, take it behind the scenes.


----------



## JimC

SueDonJ said:


> ...Also, DVC recently instituted a change whereby the points were reallocated across the calendar, resulting in some folks requiring more points (in some cases, than they've purchased) for the same week/unit vacation they've enjoyed up to this point.  Speculation was that Disney was responding to the historical traits of DVC'ers utilizing more weekday points than weekend in order to use less points, so they applied a more even point distribution to increase weekday points to take advantage of members' vacation habits.  Don't kid yourself - DVC is in it for the money, too.
> 
> No, none of this makes any company's questionable/deceptive sales practices more correct, but it does speak to your argument about MVCI being less "ethical" than others.



DVC did a reallocation in 96 and then again this year to re-balance supply and demand.  They were and are required to not change the total number of points required across the year.  Thus any increases had to be offset in total by decreases elsewhere.  That is a bit different then the points issues discussed here.


----------



## Dave M

m61376 said:


> A knowledgeable source has stated that Marriott will never discontinue the weeks program for exchanges. Thus, owners who retain their current ownership will continue to trade in a weeks based system, and not some paperwork conversion to points as you suggest. I am fairly confident that this source has the correct information.


I don't know your source, but so am I. However, I'm also quite confident that some future non-Asian MVCI resorts will be points-only or mostly-points resorts.


----------



## SueDonJ

m61376 said:


> A knowledgeable source has stated that Marriott will never discontinue the weeks program for exchanges. Thus, owners who retain their current ownership will continue to trade in a weeks based system, and not some paperwork conversion to points as you suggest. I am fairly confident that this source has the correct information.



Could be, except that I'm not sure that what's being proposed here IS a weeks-to-points conversion system.  Dave's first post didn't include any details about how or what points system would be implemented.  These are his exact words:  "We can speculate all we want, but I currently have no additional info (how the points program would work, what the fees would be, how points would be assigned to various individual weeks or seasons, etc.)."

Consider this possibility, which would still result in a weeks-based exchange system.

But of course, it's all speculation.


----------



## m61376

Dave M said:


> I don't know your source, but so am I. However, I'm also quite confident that some future non-Asian MVCI resorts will be points-only or mostly-points resorts.



Yes- I also heard that future resorts will be released as points only or primarily points, and it will likely coincide with the new system roll-out. 

While retaining the right/ability to trade week for week will be good for owners who either choose not to convert or those who are not offered the opportunity to do so (depending upon whether current resale owners are grandfathered and whether future resale owners are excluded), they will likely be largely or completely excluded from future resorts because the majority of such units will be in the points system. 

Of course, going down the road, Marriott will not only need to address how resale weeks are treated, but how resale points are treated as well, and as even new resorts hit the resale market over time if they are excluded it may be that if owners don't use a week that they book at their home resort using owned points they will simply have to deposit it into II to trade it (akin to the Starwood voluntary resorts where owners excluded from internal trading use their points to book their week and then get to deposit the week that they've booked).  Curiously, owners at voluntary resorts that can't trade internally have the right to deposit the week they've booked, but owners at mandatory resorts are subject to having Starwood deposit whatever off season week they choose if owners want to trade through II, so for going outside of the system in some ways they are better off if they own a voluntary resort.

More importantly- how is your trip going so far? I assume you've arrived safe and sound at your destination? Just couldn't resist peeking in   ?


----------



## Bill4728

Right now even though I just bought a Marriott TS. I currently plan to trade that TS for even nicer Marriott  resorts. The Marriott resort we visit most often ( and just bought) I'm able to trade for with my non Marriott weeks. 

This new point program may put a stop to that and therefore I'm not happy.


----------



## thinze3

Zac495 said:


> What will you do, Jim? Would you buy now? I lean towards no for resale and of course not developer - not in a box, not with a fox, not in a tree - just let me be!



I am not Jim, but Ellen I think right now is a great time to buy a good platinum week. You can buy a manor Club for half of what Marriott gave you.


----------



## m61376

SueDonJ said:


> Could be, except that I'm not sure that what's being proposed here IS a weeks-to-points conversion system.  Dave's first post didn't include any details about how or what points system would be implemented.  These are his exact words:  "We can speculate all we want, but I currently have no additional info (how the points program would work, what the fees would be, how points would be assigned to various individual weeks or seasons, etc.)."
> 
> Consider this possibility, which would still result in a weeks-based exchange system.
> 
> But of course, it's all speculation.


You are right- but that was definitely my impression.
The other problem I see with the post you've reference is that since these are deeded rights (which is why every unit is sold with a unit and week number for bookkeeping purposes), Marriott MUST guarantee the availability of what owners bought if they continue to retain the same ownership. What I mean is this- if I own a Platinum OF unit, for argument's sake, I must be able to book 7 days in such a unit at my resort in my owned season. If, suddenly, the entire reservation pool was converted to points, there is a possibility that there may never be a week in my season available for me to reserve in my OF unit. 

Logistically, it is very unlikely to happen with most views. But it certainly potentially could happen with certain limited unit views that may be highly desirable.

Unless I relinquish my absolute ownership rights to that deeded week, Marriott must guarantee its availability. Maybe I am missing something, but I don't see how the system you suggest (and I realize it is pure speculation) could ensure my legal ownership rights- whether I bought direct and decided not to convert, bought resale int he past or buy resale in the future. The deeded rights can only be changed if both parties agree to any modification.


----------



## SueDonJ

JimC said:


> DVC did a reallocation in 96 and then again this year to re-balance supply and demand.  They were and are required to not change the total number of points required across the year.  Thus any increases had to be offset in total by decreases elsewhere.  That is a bit different then the points issues discussed here.



Of course, except that I brought it up in the context that was suggested that DVC did not engage in deceptive sales tactics or product devaluations.  For some DVC'ers, the recent point reallocation did result in a devaluation of their established ownership usage.


----------



## BocaBum99

thinze3 said:


> I am not Jim, but Ellen I think right now is a great time to buy a good platinum week. You can buy a manor Club for half of what Marriott gave you.



I'm not sure that the best platinums to buy for the internal trade program will be the same as those for II.


----------



## SueDonJ

m61376 said:


> You are right- but that was definitely my impression.
> The other problem I see with the post you've reference is that since these are deeded rights (which is why every unit is sold with a unit and week number for bookkeeping purposes), Marriott MUST guarantee the availability of what owners bought if they continue to retain the same ownership. What I mean is this- if I own a Platinum OF unit, for argument's sake, I must be able to book 7 days in such a unit at my resort in my owned season. If, suddenly, the entire reservation pool was converted to points, there is a possibility that there may never be a week in my season available for me to reserve in my OF unit.
> 
> Logistically, it is very unlikely to happen with most views. But it certainly potentially could happen with certain limited unit views that may be highly desirable.
> 
> Unless I relinquish my absolute ownership rights to that deeded week, Marriott must guarantee its availability. Maybe I am missing something, but I don't see how the system you suggest (and I realize it is pure speculation) could ensure my legal ownership rights- whether I bought direct and decided not to convert, bought resale int he past or buy resale in the future. The deeded rights can only be changed if both parties agree to any modification.



Again, it's all speculation, but I don't see where the proposed points program would be applied to every facet of our ownership, which could ultimately impact the deeded rights attached to each ownership as you suggest, and which I agree would be contrary to owners' rights.

Isn't this proposed program only applicable to the exchange system, which is negotiated between MVCI and whatever exchange company it selects?  What would that have to do with our rights to occupy the unit configuration we've purchased?


----------



## LisaRex

SueDonJ said:


> (W)hat if it's negotiated in the new MVCI/II contract that every single week deposited for exchange must be made available first to those who have opted in to the new system...



If every Marriott deposited in II was earmarked for MEP owners first, what possible incentive would non-MEP owners have for depositing their unit there? Resale owners would simply choose another more equitable vehicle for making exchanges, such as Redweek or SFX. 

I own at Westin Maui and the main reason that I don't deposit my unit in II is because I fear I won't be able to find a comparable exchange.  I'm sure Marriott resale owners, especially ones who own at the higher end resorts, would share the same fear and the same reticence to deposit.  And without deposits, the whole program collapses.


----------



## Pit

SueDonJ said:


> Isn't this proposed program only applicable to the exchange system, which is negotiated between MVCI and whatever exchange company it selects?



You're assuming MEP will be administered by an outside company. I think its much more likely this MEP system will be setup similar to Starwood and Hyatt. An internal exchange system administered by Marriott (not II). Those who opt-in to MEP create an internal pool of inventory, seperate from II. Those who do not or cannot opt-in continue using II (or SFX, etc). Those within MEP who wish to trade outside the Marriott system will do so by requesting MEP to make a deposit with II. Then you have your week in II with which to search and exchange.

So, this basically splits the Marriott inventory between MEP and II.  It's not a given that the MEP inventory pool will be bigger or better than the II pool. It all depends how successful they are getting owners to opt-in. Clearly, they need the owners more than the owners need MEP. Of course, if they design the system like Hyatt, then all weeks carry a point equivalent which transfers upon resale. Your deeded week is still yours - that doesn't change. On an annual basis, you have the option to use your week, or take the point equivalent and go shopping in Hyatt inventory pool or deposit with II. Much more owner friendly than this rumored MEP system, IMO.


----------



## dougp26364

FlyerBobcat said:


> Doug,
> 
> You might not have considered a possible residual value on your timeshare purchase when you are "done with it", but I really don't understand how you can so easily neglect the fact that it could & very well might be worth something.
> 
> Using this information certainly could help one choose a unit.... it seems only too logical to me.
> 
> If torn between two "very similar" units that you are considering purchasing, and one seems to be a much better bet to hold its resale value, are you saying that you wouldn't weigh that in on your purchase decision?



I can because I know that a) there's a reason they're forbiden from selling as an "investment" and b) Because I've seen the rules change enough over the last 11 years to be aware that and residule value can change without notice. Every contract I've seen clearly states the developer can change the rules anytime they want. That means I have little to no control. When I have little to no control, I'm at someone else's mercy. In this case, someone who's goal is to turn a profit. Those rules will always favor the developer, who generally hangs onto the management contract of the resort. 

I've seen this play out with pretty much every timeshare we own. NO TIMESHARE HAS ANY REAL CASH VALUE. The only reason for some to sell for more than others would be that resale buyers want to spend enough to get over ROFR. ROFR isn't a guarentee. What's happened to Marriott resale prices lately in this economic downturn? They've tanked is what I believe I've been reading. 

What would happen if Marriott got out of the timeshare developement business all together and never exercised ROFR again? My bet is prices would plumet. There should be no expecation of any significant resale value when you purchase a timeshare. To much of the control is out of your hands. Most of you seem to be coming to this realization with the rumor that Marriott is going to change their rules slightly.


----------



## Glynda

*Sigh...*

Sigh.  Timeshare developers seem to always be coming up with something to make it more difficult and to sell more, more, more.  I was doing fine with my little 10,000 point package with Bluegreen and then they added a bunch of levels and earlier reserving for some. Marriott has the same thing with owners of multiples.

I've been wanting to buy Marriott and waiting for it to hit bottom but now I'm beginning to think I'd just be better off renting wherever we want to go....especially when hubby retires and we're more felxible.


----------



## m61376

BocaBum99 said:


> I'm not sure that the best platinums to buy for the internal trade program will be the same as those for II.



I'd venture to guess that the best Platinum weeks are those that Marriott has already deemed to be the best resorts; they recently categorized the timeshare properties for reward point redemption. It is logical that they would value them accordingly.


----------



## davidvel

m61376 said:


> A knowledgeable source has stated that Marriott will never discontinue the weeks program for exchanges. Thus, owners who retain their current ownership will continue to trade in a weeks based system, and not some paperwork conversion to points as you suggest. I am fairly confident that this source has the correct information.


This is correct. Marriott cannot alter your right to reserve a week in your season 12/13 months out, nor give any one else (direct or not) any different rights or priority to do so.

This is the area I am most focused upon that is ripe for manipulation and will watch quite closely as the system rolls out. Marriott's "Program" can only ask participants to deposit the week you reserve into their program. They cannot manipulate the system so that they automatically reserve the week you will deposit, or othewise give any priority ahead of non-participants. 

However, I recognize this would be quite hard to police as Marriott manages the reservation process for each resort/HOA (ala the RCI poaching). If Marriott is not completely transparent here, they (and each resort's HOA) will face litigation.

PS. Your right to reserve is more than a "program," its what's in that deed the salespeople tell you is so "valuable." (Apologies to Sue for using the D-word )


----------



## hotcoffee

Whew!!  I miss about 17 hours of this thread, and gads! four more pages. . .  I'm exhausted from reading all of this.  I read those post that I thought were sour grapes and decided to respond prior to reading further.  I would have been too exhausted to respond had I read to the end before posting that response (which I think is back on page 11).

I am going to wait for this new system to come out, and then decide whether it is worth joining, keeping the status quo, or dumping my timeshare.  If I have to dump my timeshare, my biggest regret is that I will have to listen to the "I told you so's" from my wife who thought buying a timeshare was a stupid idea to start with.

IF (big if) Marriott were to make the idiotic decision to kill resales, I will get out any way I can.  Then it will be goodbye timesharing, goodbye TUG, good riddence Marriott.  I will have gotten burned, but it will only happen once.

I had great vacations prior to Marriott.  I had great vacations with Marriott.  And I will have great vacations after Marriott.  I don't need Marriott to have great vacations.  I really like the Kauai Beach Club.  We had a great time there.  The staff was great.  The Surf Club was a little crowed, but we liked it.  The room was great, and the staff treated us well.  Marriott sure seemed like a good company, and I hope that they will prove to be a consummer-oriented company with the new system.  If so, I will probably stick around a while, and TUGgers will have to continue to endure all my whipping-of-the-deadhorse posts.


----------



## SueDonJ

davidvel said:


> This is correct. Marriott cannot alter your right to reserve a week in your season 12/13 months out, nor give any one else (direct or not) any different rights or priority to do so.
> 
> This is the area I am most focused upon that is ripe for manipulation and will watch quite closely as the system rolls out. Marriott's "Program" can only ask participants to deposit the week you reserve into their program. They cannot manipulate the system so that they automatically reserve the week you will deposit, or othewise give any priority ahead of non-participants.
> 
> However, I recognize this would be quite hard to police as Marriott manages the reservation process for each resort/HOA (ala the RCI poaching). If Marriott is not completely transparent here, they (and each resort's HOA) will face litigation.
> 
> PS. Your right to reserve is more than a "program," its what's in that deed the salespeople tell you is so "valuable." (Apologies to Sue for using the D-word )



No worries, I used it myself in my response to m's same post.  We three all agree that the usage options - occupy, rent, exchange - are deeded rights, as is the specific unit/season configuration that an owner purchased.

You bring up an interesting unwelcome new thought, though, with your "ala the RCI poaching" thing.  Don't like the sound of that.


----------



## FlyerBobcat

dougp26364 said:


> ..... There should be no expecation of any significant resale value when you purchase a timeshare. To much of the control is out of your hands.



Well Doug, I will have to agree to disagree. 

Maybe you are close to being correct that _there *should *be no expectation_, but certainly I think _ there *could *be an reasonable expectation_ that is used in the decision process.

And if that expectation turns out to be a BIG bust, you're no worse off than if you just ignored it as you propose.

Now I'm not talking about someone that buys developer, and hopes to sell at that price in 5 - 10 years (I have a freind in that situation).  But it you buy at say 25% to 50% of (not "off") Marriott retail price -- and didn't overpay at that price -- then I think it's probably a reasonable expection to get a good part of your money back if you sell in a few years.  [Of course, you should not spend that money early    ]


----------



## BocaBum99

davidvel said:


> This is correct. Marriott cannot alter your right to reserve a week in your season 12/13 months out, nor give any one else (direct or not) any different rights or priority to do so.
> 
> This is the area I am most focused upon that is ripe for manipulation and will watch quite closely as the system rolls out. Marriott's "Program" can only ask participants to deposit the week you reserve into their program. They cannot manipulate the system so that they automatically reserve the week you will deposit, or othewise give any priority ahead of non-participants.
> 
> However, I recognize this would be quite hard to police as Marriott manages the reservation process for each resort/HOA (ala the RCI poaching). If Marriott is not completely transparent here, they (and each resort's HOA) will face litigation.
> 
> PS. Your right to reserve is more than a "program," its what's in that deed the salespeople tell you is so "valuable." (Apologies to Sue for using the D-word )



I am usually the last person who wants to litigate anything.  My corporate experience was centered around avoiding it rather than fostering it.  So, it's not engrained into my being.

However, if Marriott tries to muck with the 12 month reservation rule that is a fundamental element of my title, I will most likely be willing to sign on as a co-plaintiff to your complaint.


----------



## BocaBum99

m61376 said:


> I'd venture to guess that the best Platinum weeks are those that Marriott has already deemed to be the best resorts; they recently categorized the timeshare properties for reward point redemption. It is logical that they would value them accordingly.



I agree.  Is that table anywhere to be found?  I'd like to look at it.


----------



## BocaBum99

dougp26364 said:


> I I've seen this play out with pretty much every timeshare we own. *NO TIMESHARE HAS ANY REAL CASH VALUE*. The only reason for some to sell for more than others would be that resale buyers want to spend enough to get over ROFR. ROFR isn't a guarentee. What's happened to Marriott resale prices lately in this economic downturn? They've tanked is what I believe I've been reading.
> 
> What would happen if Marriott got out of the timeshare developement business all together and never exercised ROFR again? My bet is prices would plumet. *There should be no expecation of any significant resale value when you purchase a timeshare*. To much of the control is out of your hands. Most of you seem to be coming to this realization with the rumor that Marriott is going to change their rules slightly.



I believe your two statements above in bold are incorrect financial assumptions to make unless you are estimating value over a 10 year or more horizon.

If you assign all of your timeshares a zero residual value, you will make the wrong decision in managing your timeshare portfolio.

When I first started timesharing, I thought 5 or 10 years was the optimal length of time to own one.  Now, I think it is around 1-2 years.  If you have a one year time horizon, you can travel for free.  If you assume zero residual value, you may as well rent and not buy.


----------



## AMJ

BocaBum99,
To view the rewards chart and the MVCI rewards information try this link http://www.marriott.com/rewards/mvci-faq.mi and then click on "view the entire list of Vacation Club properties and their new category level".

Joyce


----------



## BocaBum99

AMJ said:


> BocaBum99,
> To view the rewards chart and the MVCI rewards information try this link http://www.marriott.com/rewards/mvci-faq.mi and then click on "view the entire list of Vacation Club properties and their new category level".
> 
> Joyce



Thanks Joyce.  I reviewed the list and it only breaks down the resorts into 3 categories with the same values all year long.  There are no seasons.  It only gives you a high level idea as to which resorts they believe are the highest relative value.

As I suspected, though, Manor Club and Branson are only cat 5.  People talk about those resorts being great traders.  It's clear they will have the lowest point tables.  

There isn't enough information in that table to predict how Marriott will create point tables.


----------



## indyhorizons

BocaBum99 said:


> As I suspected, though, Manor Club and Branson are only cat 5.  People talk about those resorts being great traders.  It's clear they will have the lowest point tables.



I don't think you're comparing apples to apples.  For whatever reason, in the II world, apparently these are great traders. Past performance obviously bears this out.


----------



## m61376

AMJ said:


> BocaBum99,
> To view the rewards chart and the MVCI rewards information try this link http://www.marriott.com/rewards/mvci-faq.mi and then click on "view the entire list of Vacation Club properties and their new category level".
> 
> Joyce



This is the direct link

I don't think people tout Manor Club and Branson as being the top of the trading heap, but just that they are good traders which can be purchased at a relatively lower price point and have lower annual MF's.

I think the only indication as to possibly how Marriott values different sizes/views/seasons can be found in the posts by Starbucks describing the Asia Pacific program. Although it only references the resorts in that system, my guess that it is indicative of how Marriott relatively values things.


----------



## Dean

RandR said:


> So in other words, you don't mind if resale buyers are treated like second class citizens. (Had to use that phrase again.)


I can't speak for anyone else.  IMO, there are primary rights of a given ownership and secondary options.  Primary would be the ability to use the week you bought, rent it and exchange it (though not guaranteeing an exchange company).  Secondary would be things like specialty reservations, internal exchanges, discounts and other fringe benefits.  I also think it matter whether the resale buyer knew OR SHOULD HAVE KNOWN, the limitations going forward.  So to your question in a post above, I feel it is reasonable for a company to draw the line for NEW changes in secondary benefits at the point of the change because the resale buyers going forward know where they stand (or should know) and have the option of making the choice whether to buy in or not.  Might they do so retroactively, it depends on the specifics.  Many timeshare companies offer benefits to retail owners that they do not offer to those that buy resale on the secondary market.  Some offer major benefits including reservation priorities based on developer purchase as well as your size stake in the system.  Bluegreen and Wyndham to name a few offer significant perks in exactly this way.  Marriott's 13 month reservation option is similar though based on different parameters.  But if Marriott restricted this option to retail only going forward, it would be consistent with the others I've mentioned.  In some cased, companies may not extend new retail benefits to existing retail customers, I know of this happening in some cases as well.



Latravel said:


> _"It amazes me that anyone would purchase a timeshare based on any thought other than to vacation. With few exceptions, very few people turn a profit buying and then selling timeshares. Especially when purchased from the developer. "_
> 
> 
> Amen!  This is exactly what I have been trying to say though some who are on the defensive or a little bit worried are obviously taking my points the wrong way (hello RandR and FlyerBobcat).  I understand being a little sensitive but there's no need to get "mad".  We're just talking about timeshares.
> 
> Our timeshare is not an investment!  We should not _expect_ any return.  If we sell and get something back, yea for us.
> 
> Marriott does not owe anyone anything, direct or resale.  They clearly spell out what they will give us in the purchase documents (yes, they are in the purchase documents) such as:
> 1.  Your timeshare is not an investment
> 2.  Marriott reserves the right to make changes at their discretion,regardless of your expectations or moral compass.


I would disagree somewhat.  Timeshare emphasize that it's not an investment and that you should not expect returns (rental or resale) due to state laws and to protect themselves from litigation, not because it has to be true.  I can tell you that while many timeshares I've owned were to use at least part of the time, none have been to use all of the time.  And I have purchased timeshares with the main intent of reselling them and in every case where that was the intent, I made money, usually quite a bit.  I have never lost money on a timeshare and I've bought and sold a number of them.  IMO, this is one of the best times to buy a timeshare, I bought 3 in the last few weeks, all Marriott's.  All have passed ROFR at 20-40% retail and 2 were OF units during Platinum season, the other platinum to trade.  The risk is mine and I am willing to take it.  To reiterate, much of the legal wording is about requirements, expectations and posturing, not a statement of fact, from a factual standpoint and considering well informed buyers, often those statements are totally incorrect.



davidvel said:


> This is correct. Marriott cannot alter your right to reserve a week in your season 12/13 months out, nor give any one else (direct or not) any different rights or priority to do so.


In keeping with my thoughts above, I do believe that there is a core requirement for owners to be able to reserve, however, they could change it in many ways.  The 13 month option represents just that, a change aimed at selling additional weeks to existing owners, esp those at placed like HH with multiple resorts.


----------



## verby

*low fee*

I don't own any mvc but my timeshare went a while ago to the point system and their 'low fee' is $5000... Thank you but NO... just my 2c.


----------



## dioxide45

AceValenta said:


> Not to add a further kink into the thought process but when you own the deeded property...you own it. Most points memberships expire after a period of time.
> 
> I was just reading the MVCI AP thread ans their points will expire in 2056. Now, I know that is a long time away and I probably won't live that long but my kids may. That is one the selling points when you attend a seminar, "You can pass this onto your children."
> 
> So, if you pay to convert over to the point system will your points expire at a specified date or do you own them in perpitude?



From the survey many took it seemed that Marriott planned to expire your membership in the program every three years or so. You would have to re-up in the program every time paying a new fee each time. A great money maker for Marriott IMO. Now just because this was in the survey doesn't mean it will be in the final program, but it shows they are thinking about it. It also provides good flexibility for the owners since if they don't like it they can drop out.


----------



## Clemson Fan

mpizza said:


> MFs will definitely be impacted. If Gold weeks are assigned lower points values, they will have a proportionately lower MF, Platinum owners will now have to pay the difference.
> 
> Maria


 
This is actually a great point.  

If you look at Disney's system, you buy a certain number of points at your "home" resort and then your MF's are based on the number of points you own.  You can then reserve at your "home" resort for any day or week of the year at 11 months out and for other Disney resorts at 7 months out.  The point value assigned to any particular day or room size is based on demand.  So, getting a 2 bedroom room on Dec 31st is going to cost you a heck of a lot more points then a 2 bedroom on a Wed in October.

Now if you translate the same thought process to a new point system with Marriott, then at resorts like ski resorts where there's clearly a huge difference between ski weeks and non ski weeks, owners of ski weeks will need to be given a ton of points to compensate them for their ownership week should they decide to make the conversion.  

Now, what about the MF's???  Is there a way to separate what you owe in MF's from the amount of points you "own"???

Currently, the owner of a ski week pays the same MF's as the owner of a bronze week.  This is fair since it's reflected in the initial purchase price of 30-50K for the ski week vs. <5K for the bronze week, and everybody knows what the MF arrangement is at the time of purchase.  Now, if say for argument sake the owner of a ski week gets 500 points in the new system while the owner of a bronze week gets 100 points.  If the MF's are then tied into the number of points you own, then that ski week owner will be paying 5 times as much in MF's as the bronze week owner.  That immediately significantly devalues the value of the ski week and decreases the initial inherent value received by paying such a high initial purchase price for a ski week.

Marriott doesn't even handle their internal MVCI reservation system well (e.g. no wait list, etc.), so I have very little faith that if they roll this out it won't be an absolute utter mess for at least 5 years.  They should concentrate on making good fixes in their current system rather than reinventing the wheel which I think will be a dissaster.


----------



## BocaBum99

indyhorizons said:


> I don't think you're comparing apples to apples.  For whatever reason, in the II world, apparently these are great traders. Past performance obviously bears this out.



I'm not trying to compare apples to apples.  II will not be the same as Marriott.  II = Apple.  Marriott internal = Orange.  I am trying to get some insight as to how Marriott will construct its Orange and see how it might differ from the II Apple.

When we understand the differences, the better buys may be different resorts than they are for II.


----------



## BocaBum99

dioxide45 said:


> From the survey many took it seemed that Marriott planned to expire your membership in the program every three years or so. You would have to re-up in the program every time paying a new fee each time. A great money maker for Marriott IMO. Now just because this was in the survey doesn't mean it will be in the final program, but it shows they are thinking about it. It also provides good flexibility for the owners since if they don't like it they can drop out.



If this happens, it will be more like RCI Points.  I hate that program.  I hope Marriott doesn't create such a model.


----------



## JimIg23

ahh.  If it ain't broke, don't fix it.  If Marriott becomes Starwood, I'm selling.


----------



## BocaBum99

m61376 said:


> This is the direct link
> 
> I don't think people tout Manor Club and Branson as being the top of the trading heap, but just that they are good traders which can be purchased at a relatively lower price point and have lower annual MF's.
> 
> I think the only indication as to possibly how Marriott values different sizes/views/seasons can be found in the posts by Starbucks describing the Asia Pacific program. Although it only references the resorts in that system, my guess that it is indicative of how Marriott relatively values things.



What we are trying to find are two ratios:

1) Purchase Price / Number of Points.

2) $MF / Number of Points.

Whichever has the best combination of the above (lowest ratio) is the resort to buy.

Of course, if the program provides advantage at a single resort you own, these ratios aren't important when you use your home resort.  These ratios are only meaningful if you use them for internal exchanges.


----------



## FlyerBobcat

mpizza said:


> MFs will definitely be impacted.  If Gold weeks are assigned lower points values, they will have a proportionately lower MF, Platinum owners will now have to pay the difference.
> 
> Maria



Someone will have to straighten me out on this one....  

Isn't the MF set by the resort's BoD?

So if a platinum owner does not opt in to this new points system, why should their MFs go up?


----------



## thinze3

It will get worked out. Aren't Grand Chateau and Ko Olina currently both weeks and points resorts.


----------



## Pit

FlyerBobcat said:


> Someone will have to straighten me out on this one....
> 
> Isn't the MF set by the resort's BoD?
> 
> So if a platinum owner does not opt in to this new points system, why should their MFs go up?



I don't think you have to worry about this. When you bought, you purchased a fractional interest in a condo, same as everyone else. Your MFs are based on your fractional interest, not some arbitrary point allocation. Disney is a different animal. Read your deed.


----------



## lovearuba

*HOAs*



PerryM said:


> Marriott is in a pickle - they should be offering more and not less to owners.
> 
> This is NOT the purpose of such and exchange program - the one you describe already exists and apparently many owners are happy.
> 
> Its all about Marriott's sales. I'm pretty confident that if such a system is introduced you will get:
> 
> 1) Eye watering initiation fee
> 2) Point for Point exchanges - forget about the great II deals
> 3) Resales hurt with the exchange system not transferring from owner to owner
> 4) Complicated - 2 exchange systems working at once
> 
> So the Marriott owner will have to settle for less and Marriott wants more profit from us.
> 
> Marriott owners would be better off if we just got together with RedWeek and came up with our own exchange system. RedWeek's Point system already exists and if Marriott owners got behind it they could take on II.
> 
> I'd suggest that the various HOAs start approaching RedWeek and just do it ourselves.
> 
> Disney owners could do the same thing.


 

Hi Perry
I agree with everything you say, with one small exception.  I do not think the Home Owner associations at Marriott will be left with any power to go against Marriott, look at the way they treated the Marriott Aruba Ocean club when we wanted to get different members on the board.  That board is definately Marriott puppets and as soon as owners try to replace any, Marriott will miraculously find those B votes.


----------



## hotcoffee

rsackett said:


> If Marriott makes decisions that lower the value of your property to zero and it costs extra money to get trading privileges, the value could go to less than zero, i.e. you may have to pay someone to take over your responsibilities to the property.
> ray



Oh man.  I was feeling bad when I thought I would have to sell my Marriott for $1 to get someone to assume those high MFs.  Now you're telling me that I may have to pay someone to take it off my hands!  I hope that does not become a reality!


----------



## m61376

Terry- yes they are. 

As for the whole MF question, it will be interesting to see what Marriott decides to do. In the Asia Pacific program, as it has been explained on Tug, a point is a point, and MF's are equalized amongst all resorts in the system. Thus, relatively high MF resorts such as those in Hawaii actually have lower MF's under their points program. Furthermore, since you are no longer paying resort specific MF's, that expensive Plat. week- which will be awarded high point values- will also be encumbered with higher MF's (since the fees are tied to the point valuation). An owner of a Gold week at the same resort will enjoy lower MF's, but will also have less points to reserve with.

The loophole here is that if you own a Gold week at resort X and intend to use that week at resort X, you will be given ownership of enough points to make that reservation, but will be paying a significantly lower MF than the Platinum week owner who is using all his points to make a reservation in his owned week. If you are using your owned week and not trading, you won't care that you've been awarded fewer points, but will be happy that you have lower MF's. Similarly, a Platinum week at a lesser rated resort might be awarded less points, but it doesn't matter if the owner is using the week. There are some owners who will definitely see a big drop in their MF's, which other owners will have to balance out of necessity. If MF's are spread amongst all resorts in the program, a hurricane or fire,etc., at one, or even the need to refurbish, will impact everyone, not only owners of that resort.

Of course, Marriott may enact a different program than it has in its Asia Pacific program, but it is likely that that program is a testing ground for the future.


----------



## m61376

Pit said:


> I don't think you have to worry about this. When you bought, you purchased a fractional interest in a condo, same as everyone else. Your MFs are based on your fractional interest, not some arbitrary point allocation. Disney is a different animal. Read your deed.



Yes- but IF you opt into the points program then the rules of the game change.


----------



## lovearuba

*not a good strategy*



SueDonJ said:


> I will always agree that going directly to the source will result in more satisfaction than is possible to gain by any other method. But why wait? Several pages back Superchief suggested that letters be sent to Mr. Babich now. It's as good a strategy as any for doing all you can do to make your opinions clear, especially if you feel as strongly as you appear to about all this.
> 
> 
> 
> If that is truly the case, then I will thank you to stop putting words in my mouth that I have not said, and attributing a caste system among owners which I have not done.


 
Go ahead, go to the source and see where that gets you. I'll sit back and watch. Let me know how you make out. I'll check in again after you get no response. Our opinions holds no weight when it comes to the almighty dollar.


----------



## SueDonJ

Maybe it's just me but I am getting very confused here with the last couple pages worth of posts.  I know that all of this is speculation, but didn't Dave's original post here mention that MVCI is considering a points value system with respect to only the exchange option of our ownership usage?

Why are we off on so many tangents that have to do with a weeks-to-points conversion that would impact every single aspect of our ownership?  Especially since we all pretty much agree that the specific resort/unit/season configuration that we bought is protected by deeded rights, as are the stipulated usage options - occupy, rent, exchange?  And that the protections contained in our deeds/ownership contracts prohibit Marriott/MVCI from making changes which would effectively remove any of those deeded rights?

Is it because Marriott/MVCI recently rolled out information about the AP point conversion?  Are we perhaps not separating that info from what was provided by Dave's source?  Should we be?

I know, I know, it's all speculation so what's the harm in going off tangent anyway?  And these are a lot of questions.  But I'm just saying, I think that all these tangents are making what's in development more confusing than it should be.  And maybe not really very productive if our objective is to discuss/analyze whatever exchange system Marriott/MVCI wants to try to force on us?

Or maybe I'm totally off base here.


----------



## taffy19

BocaBum99 said:


> If this happens, it will be more like RCI Points. I hate that program. I hope Marriott doesn't create such a model.


Jim, did you see this post already plus the rest of the thread? There is a very big difference in the required points for different resorts depending on were the resort is, what season and type of unit and for what day of the week. This whole thread is quite an eye opener and also about the maintenance fees that may change depending on how many points you get. Can they do this even if you don't want to join the new system?

I wished Marriott would stop the rumors from spreading even further by coming out with some type of statement to all of us.


----------



## dioxide45

iconnections said:


> Jim, did you see this post already plus the rest of the thread? There is a very big difference in the required points for different resorts depending on were the resort is, what season and type of unit and for what day of the week. This whole thread is quite an eye opener and also about the maintenance fees that may change depending on how many points you get. Can they do this even if you don't want to join the new system?
> 
> I wished Marriott would stop the rumors from spreading even further by coming out with some type of statement to all of us.



You really can't reference the rest of the thread in any real way as fact. Everything but the initial post is pure speculation, much if it off base of what the OP was passing along. Much of the rumor here is built by other Tuggers and not from Marriott in any way.


----------



## Michigan Czar

SueDonJ said:


> Maybe it's just me but I am getting very confused here with the last couple pages worth of posts.  I know that all of this is speculation, but didn't Dave's original post here mention that MVCI is considering a points value system with respect to only the exchange option of our ownership usage?
> 
> Why are we off on so many tangents that have to do with a weeks-to-points conversion that would impact every single aspect of our ownership?
> Or maybe I'm totally off base here.



Susan, I agree with you. From what I understand the points option is only used when you are trading your unit for another. It has nothing to do with ownership, maintenance fees, etc.

I too am confused why everyone keeps going off on this tangent! 

Everyone, Dave only mentioned if you opt in when trading your unit, nothing to do with a change to a point system for ownership. Let's get back to the original topic please. If Susan and I are missing something please explain it to us.


----------



## dioxide45

Michigan Czar said:


> Susan, I agree with you. From what I understand the points option is only used when you are trading your unit for another. It has nothing to do with ownership, maintenance fees, etc.
> 
> I too am confused why everyone keeps going off on this tangent!
> 
> Everyone, Dave only mentioned if you opt in when trading your unit, nothing to do with a change to a point system for ownership. Let's get back to the original topic please.



I agree.

I think the easiest way for Marriott to implement this is an overlay program where points are really only used for exchange purposes. This doesn't change your base deeded ownership and MF are what each BOD sets for their own resorts. This type of program has the fewest legal issues with it. When a new purchaser buys their purchase price includes the overlay program. They will still be deeded a week and unit and that will have a value in the program. Current owners can buy in at a fixed cost and get the same value based on what they own.

Trying to change the basic foundation from weeks to points is very difficult and has far more legal challenges than an overlay program would have.

This really won't give anyone much more than II currently offers, one may be able to do shorter stays (II now has short stay exchange), check in any day of the week (II now has this). This may be why II has come out with their new short stay exchange program. Though an internal program would offer more flexibility at your home resort.

Ultimately this is a way for Marriott to make more money, no other reason for it. It won't come free for anyone.


----------



## laurac260

PerryM said:


> Marriott has total control over this rumor - they could easily instruct their employees (MVCI) to cut it out.  But they haven't for 3 years and use their rumor in their sales pitches if you lean towards not buying.
> 
> I've bumped into this rumor in the last 5 sales tours I believe - this is a coordinated effort on Marriott's part and they should know better.



I'm not much of a conspiracy theorist, and I sense that you may be, but I have to tend to agree with you a bit on this one.  I am not saying that this is only a rumor, I have absolutely no background or experience from which to draw a conclusion on this topic, but I can tell you from very recent experience with Marriott salespeople that some have no problem perpetuating rumors (outright lies) to assist in advancing a sale, or at the very least, creatin confusion to keep someone from purchasing resale.  I was told by a salesperson yesterday that "this is a good ole' boy's network" (not sure if he meant Marriott, South Carolina, or the Barony), and that they definitely make a distinction between internal and external owners, and that the internal owners always get the best units.  Two different people at the front desk assured me they really have no ability to tell whether someone is internal or external while they are in the process of assigning units, but that didn't stop the salesperson.  He was very, very specific in his statement, and repeated it many times.


----------



## chalucky

*Just for fun*

The Aruba thread has 1803 posts and has been going on for many months....I expect this thread will overtake that one within seven days!


----------



## laurac260

Latravel said:


> _"I know the distinction I have been making is that current resale owners bought with the expectation and understanding that the only difference in use was the inability to enjoy the perk of trading for points. I think it is morally wrong for Marriott to change the game after being a party to the sale (after all, they approved the resale and transferred the property)."_
> 
> I am confused by this comment.  When I signed my purchase documents, Marriott had us intial a very long list of qualifiers.  I remember clearly the documents stating that Marriott could change the system at their discretion(not exactly in those words).  To me, if they change the vacation club rules, I do not feel it is morally wrong in any way since they disclosed this fact and I accepted.  They disclose all the facts so people don't come back later and say, "I had an expectation..."
> 
> Even if you purchase resale, don't you get the same documents?  Can you really say you didn't know or didn't you read your purchase agreement?
> 
> 
> SueDon - you don't have to assume, it's written in the documents.



In a nutshell, if you purchase resale, no, you do not get the same documents.  The agreement that was sent to me yesterday to buy a resale WAS NOT  a Marriott document.


----------



## laurac260

Latravel said:


> _"I know the distinction I have been making is that current resale owners bought with the expectation and understanding that the only difference in use was the inability to enjoy the perk of trading for points. I think it is morally wrong for Marriott to change the game after being a party to the sale (after all, they approved the resale and transferred the property)."_
> 
> I am confused by this comment.  When I signed my purchase documents, Marriott had us intial a very long list of qualifiers.  I remember clearly the documents stating that Marriott could change the system at their discretion(not exactly in those words).  To me, if they change the vacation club rules, I do not feel it is morally wrong in any way since they disclosed this fact and I accepted.  They disclose all the facts so people don't come back later and say, "I had an expectation..."
> 
> Even if you purchase resale, don't you get the same documents?  Can you really say you didn't know or didn't you read your purchase agreement?
> 
> 
> SueDon - you don't have to assume, it's written in the documents.


also, as a resale purchaser, you really have to dig, dig, dig to get the honest answer as to what a resale purchaser does/does not get. I'm still not sure I have gotten the honest answers.


----------



## gmarine

laurac260 said:


> In a nutshell, if you purchase resale, no, you do not get the same documents.  The agreement that was sent to me yesterday to buy a resale WAS NOT  a Marriott document.



Of course the agreement wasnt from Marriott. Your not buying it from Marriott. You can request a copy of the resorts governing documents which are the same as someone buying direct from Marriott.


----------



## taffy19

dioxide45 said:


> You really can't reference the rest of the thread in any real way as fact. Everything but the initial post is pure speculation, much if it off base of what the OP was passing along. Much of the rumor here is built by other Tuggers and not from Marriott in any way.


I have read several times on TUG that there are sales people who are spreading these rumors and I remember one in particular because we owned at this resort so so could find it quickly. I even read that Marriott wants this to happen at another thread but I don't remember who posted this and at what resort it was so cannot find the link so quickly but may look for it as I am not making this up. Why would I? There is enough confusion already.  

If sales people are spreading rumors or are lying to us then Marriott needs to stop them if they want to keep their integrity as a resort developer. Personally, I have never experienced this with all our updates over the years as I would challenge them immediately and let the Sales Manager know about it. They can stop it too.

People are worried about it judging from so many posts in only two days since Dave posted this. I am very worried.

PS. I found the thread (post #11 and #32). I knew I had read it somewhere and didn't make it up. I was planning to make a comment about it but changed my mind. I will do it here and that is that Marriott needs to clean up their act if they allow these rumors to fly. We have enough insecurity already with the economy the way it is and all the other changes that are hanging over our head. Just listen to the news.


----------



## mas

What I find curious is that a lot of people feel that once a point system is instituted, Marriott trades through II will dry up and:
1) those trying to trade into a Marriott through II will find it difficult, if not impossible to do so, and 
2) those who do deposit their Marriott units to II will somehow have achieved super trade status.  

If that were the case, then I suspect that I should have an impossible situation trying to trade into a points based system, as an outsider.  This, however, is not the case, as I have experienced it.  As already mentioned, Hyatt is a points based system that trades through II.  For the last 9 out of 10 years I have routinely traded into Hyatt's Key West resorts through II with what I would consider relatively little problems.   This suggests to me that neither case #1 or #2 will come to pass.

So my guess is that the world will not end, if, or more probably, when Marriott implements a points system.  My advice:  step back; take a deep breath; and wait for the details to develop.


----------



## Latravel

_"In a nutshell, if you purchase resale, no, you do not get the same documents."_

This explains so much.  I wish I could locate my purchase documents (i'm in the process of moving) so I could list the items they made us initial.  There was a list of maybe 35 disclosure sentences.  

Like i've posted before, Marriott was very clear, and made us initial next to the sentence, that timeshares are not an investment and no promises of resale value was implied.  I personally believe I will receive some sort of return should I sell, but it was never promised to me.

They were also clear about reserving their right to change the program.  I find it interesting when people say Marriott cannot apply changes to previous resale purchasers.  Oh yes they can and they made us sign the documents to make sure we understood this point.  

This is a flaw in the system if resale purchasers don't get these documents!  These documents are almost like the truth after the sales pitch.  Maybe that's why some people have unrealistic expectations?


----------



## davidvel

Latravel said:


> _"In a nutshell, if you purchase resale, no, you do not get the same documents."_
> 
> This explains so much.  I wish I could locate my purchase documents (I'm in the process of moving) so I could list the items they made us initial.  There was a list of maybe 35 disclosure sentences.
> 
> They were also clear about reserving their right to change the program.  I find it interesting when people say Marriott cannot apply changes to previous resale purchasers.  Oh yes they can and they made us sign the documents to make sure we understood this point.
> 
> This is a flaw in the system if resale purchasers don't get these documents!  These documents are almost like the truth after the sales pitch.  Maybe that's why some people have unrealistic expectations?



No, these "documents" are irrelevant to resale purchasers because they didn't contract with Marriott to buy their timeshare/condo interest.

This goes to the heart of nearly all my posts and my goal to inform and educate people about what deeded "rights" people have vs. what are simply contractual "add-ons" which Marriott contends it can change at will (ie. bonus MRP points on its egregious loans, trading for points, your personal adviser, etc.) 

I would love to see the documents that everyone always refers to which (at least according to all the posts I read from direct buyers) evidence the illusory contract that they entered into with Marriott (ie. Marriott promises things that they can at their own whim change or rescind, etc.) Note: if one side in a contract can change the terms when they want, it is not a contract... but I digress.  



laurac260 said:


> also, as a resale purchaser, you really have to dig, dig, dig to get the honest answer as to what a resale purchaser does/does not get. I'm still not sure I have gotten the honest answers.



Many people often say that resale purchasers "lose the right" to exchange for points, or other perceived benefits. I see it from a different perspective. There are two parts to a Marriott timeshare ownership (the following should be a sticky named YOUR MARRIOTT "RIGHTS" 101):

1. DIRECT and RESALE BUYERS have equivalent deeded rights
Your rights in your deed=Your right to reserve a week in your season, at your resort, 12/13 months in advance, and use it as you wish (yourself, friend, family, rent out, any exchange program you choose to contract with).  MF you pay are up to your HOA (mostly controlled by Marriott but legally distinct.) Marriott doesn't own your TS or project, you do. Any "documents" you signed as a direct purchaser have nothing to do with these rights other than that Marriott had to transfer the deed to you, after which they are done. As a resale purchaser, you got the same deed. The deed and accompanying CCRs, etc. do not distinguish between direct purchasers and resale purchasers. 

2. Other stuff
 anything other than 1, above, is (apparently) subject to change at any time at the whim of Marriott or any other vendor. In reality this "other stuff" isn't part of your rights as a "Marriott" timeshare owner, but a "side deal" or deals that may have been promised to you as part of the sale, or something you perceived you were getting. You should not think that this is a "right" that you have. 

This other stuff (which may or may not be available to a direct or resale purchaser) includes: right to trade unit for points for round the world trips or weeks in Paris (which of course will never be devalued), glorious promises about trading your unit with II's program (salesman:"You can lock off this mud week and trade the studio for a 2BR in Maui..."), promises in your sales presentation about bonus MRP each year you repay your loan (which of course won't be withdrawn), the new Marriott internal trading program, redweek, *is subject to change*, renegotiation, etc.  


In fact, few people realize that legally Marriott has no ongoing direct obligation to you at all. They have an indirect obligation as a manager of your resort for the HOA. They don't have any legal obligation as manager to do anything other than 1, above, or what it contracts with the HOA to do, which contract can end. This means that your resort called "Marriott's XXXXX resort" could become "XXXXX resort," once the management contract ends (and this has happened.) This is the leverage Marriott has to demand high management fees (and thus higher MF).

So, hopefully, the above puts all the commentary about what can or can't be done (positive statements), and what should or shouldn't be done (normative staments), in context.


----------



## m61376

Heidi-
As has been explained before, there are legal issues as to why Marriott has you acknowledge that timeshares are not investments. However, this doesn't negate the fact that most people consider that something they have purchased has inherent value and have the expectation that it will retain at least some value over time. Investments in the typical use of the word have the expectation at least of increasing in value over time and generating income; while educated purchasers know in general that is not the case (except in rare instances of either great buys or initial pre-construction purchases) with timeshares, that is different than the expectation that there will be at least partial retention of value. And, no, Marriott never promised that there would be resale value- but that is different from gutting the market so that they ensure there is no value.

And you are right- they can apply certain changes to resale purchasers as well as to direct purchasers. There are basic usage rights that are ensured in the documents that they cannot change, however. 

I think where our opinions sharply diverge is that you seemingly agree, or are willing to accept, the fact that as long as Marriott can do it, that it isn't wrong to do and, well, if anyone gets hurt along the way they should have known better, and it is unrealistic for us to expect that Marriott will deal with us fairly. I staunchly maintain that Marriott has a moral obligation to ALL its owners who they have entered into a contractual relationship with to sustain the terms of that relationship, whether stipulated or implied. And, yes, that means continuing to treat resale owners as equals to developer purchasers in all aspects of product usage (except for the perk of being able to trade their units for points, but I consider that an alternative to product usage), because that's the understanding that resale owners bought the product under. And that was not just the unrealistic expectations of resale buyers- those were the parameters that Marriott transferred ownership under and those were the rules that Marirott conveyed. 

The legal entanglements of whether or not their actions constitute an implied contract in the legal sense of the word are beyond me, but irregardless I have the *realistic *expectation that Marriott should treat its customer base fairly and equitably and not remove rights that were enjoyed at the time the purchase was consummated and, moreover, have been the normal and customary course of business over time. All owners pay ongoing MF's (which quickly approach and likely even exceed even the initial purchase prices over time) and all are entitled to expect to retain the rights that existed at the time of purchase. Any changes, if instituted, should affect all owners equally, since all current owners made their purchases based on a policy of equal ownership usage. 

Just so I am not misinterpreted- this doesn't mean I think it is ok to shaft future resale buyers as long as current ones retain their rights, because I don't. But I recognize the distinction between removing rights that were enjoyed and that purchases were based upon and changing a program over the course of time. I may not like it, but concede that Marriott has the right to create a two tier usage system (which it would effectively be doing) as long as no one is penalized retroactively. I fear for everyone's resale values, and for the impact that this may have on the Marriott brand overall, if they decide to exercise this right and only convey partial usage rights to future resale purchasers.

As for the several posts about the points system being instituted only for exchanging- we, of course, don't know if or how it will eventually be implemented. There has been at least some consideration of a total points model, akin to the Asia Pacific program, for those owners that opt to buy into the program. Those who choose not to will continue to book weeks as before and trade in II as before, and proportionate inventory at the respective resorts will have to be retained in the current system to cover those owners' interests. The eventual program may, as suggested above, only be points based for exchange purposes (as an overlay system as suggested) but it may very well be a completely points based system, which will allow people to reserve days at a time at their home resort, elsewhere or any combination. Marriott will sell it as offering tremendous flexibility and hope that people don't perceive the inherent limitations and logistical problems which are likely to ensue. 

Rolling out this program and gaining acceptance is going to require a tremendous public relations effort and, frankly, even if Marriott isn't motivated to do the right thing for the right thing's sake, I don't think at the outset they will be looking to antagonize any customer base and would not want to risk any negative publicity, making me reasonably certain that they will, in fact, treat ALL their current owners fairly and equitably (and that means allowing resale owners to retain their current equal usage rights). It is to their advantage as well, because it increases their potential enrollment base and costs them nothing, since penalizing past resale purchasers would be purely punitive and Marriott would have nothing to gain since the sales were already made.


----------



## FlyerBobcat

chalucky said:


> The Aruba thread has 1803 posts and has been going on for many months....I expect this thread will overtake that one within seven days!



Interesting..... maybe another deliberate act by Marriott


----------



## indyhorizons

dioxide45 said:


> This really won't give anyone much more than II currently offers, one may be able to do shorter stays (II now has short stay exchange), check in any day of the week (II now has this). This may be why II has come out with their new short stay exchange program. Though an internal program would offer more flexibility at your home resort.



The only thing in your post I would disagree with is the fact that Marriott controls developer units.  These are ones that we see at II during flexchange (I suppose).  If these units are moved to the internal program, that will have a negative impact on any owners who opt to stay with the current program.  Marriott has the option to rent them, deposit into their own internal exchange program (MEP) or offer them during their own flexchange program.  I don't see where II comes into this equation.


----------



## indyhorizons

mas said:


> What I find curious is that a lot of people feel that once a point system is instituted, Marriott trades through II will dry up and:
> 1) those trying to trade into a Marriott through II will find it difficult, if not impossible to do so, and
> 2) those who do deposit their Marriott units to II will somehow have achieved super trade status.
> 
> If that were the case, then I suspect that I should have an impossible situation trying to trade into a points based system, as an outsider.  This, however, is not the case, as I have experienced it.  As already mentioned, Hyatt is a points based system that trades through II.  For the last 9 out of 10 years I have routinely traded into Hyatt's Key West resorts through II with what I would consider relatively little problems.   This suggests to me that neither case #1 or #2 will come to pass.
> 
> So my guess is that the world will not end, if, or more probably, when Marriott implements a points system.  My advice:  step back; take a deep breath; and wait for the details to develop.



You reference the Hyatt points system, but isn't this the only system they offer? Marriott's program is proposed to be optional.  I stand that #1 and #2 are both quite possible in this new scenario.


----------



## bobcat

indyhorizons said:


> You reference the Hyatt points system, but isn't this the only system they offer? Marriott's program is proposed to be optional.  I stand that #1 and #2 are both quite possible in this new scenario.



As I see it, Dave tried to pass on some information and also said may not be correct. What this thread I see two sides. Direct purchase and resale owners. Now we are two kinds of owners. Just think, we should all stand together and show a united front. We own one of the top 10 Marriott resorts and it is 300 miles from home. We use it each year. If the rules change, just think how many weeks will no longer be up for trades as the owners will use them.  Stand together and we are strong.


----------



## indyhorizons

bobcat said:


> As I see it, Dave tried to pass on some information and also said may not be correct. What this thread I see two sides. Direct purchase and resale owners. Now we are two kinds of owners. Just think, we should all stand together and show a united front. We own one of the top 10 Marriott resorts and it is 300 miles from home. We use it each year. If the rules change, just think how many weeks will no longer be up for trades as the owners will use them.  Stand together and we are strong.



I think Perry's earlier suggestion, that we band together and create our own internal exchange program is an idean worth considering.  I agree that there is obviously enough knowledge on this board to get one implemented, and if II is not going to do something "strong" to counter this (more than flexible stays) to lure us to stay with them, then why not?


----------



## AceValenta

WOW!! Has this thread balllooned!

Great insights by everyone....


----------



## PerryM

*Try this out...*



indyhorizons said:


> I think Perry's earlier suggestion, that we band together and create our own internal exchange program is an idean worth considering.  I agree that there is obviously enough knowledge on this board to get one implemented, and if II is not going to do something "strong" to counter this (more than flexible stays) to lure us to stay with them, then why not?



RedWeek already has a 100% Points exchange system that costs peanuts to join and use.  Their problem has always been a lack of marketing effort by Redweek.

I encourage all the folks reading this thread to go to Redweek's Exchange Page and put in a reservation they already have and find out how many RW Points you would get if you deposited.

I'm a member of RW but an not current in dues and I just submitted a week for appraisal - give it a try.

So ALL Marriott owners instantly have an alternative to Marriott's new reservation system if they choose.  Building our own would require money, manpower, and a backing of a lot of Marriott owners - I don't really see that happening.

So spend 30 minutes and see what RW has to offer us Marriott owners and then we can let Marriott know that there are viable alternatives to any new system they might shove down our throats.

RW has been discussed for years now and I'd bet that the folks there would jump through hoops to get a bunch of Marriott owners using their system; that's worth pursuing and costs nothing.

I have no doubt they would make a part of their system "Marriott Owners Only".

P.S.

I can see a huge petition drive taking place where the word is spread from Marriott owner to owner that RedWeek is an alternative to any parasitic exchange system Marriott might infect us with that will result in loss of freedoms, decreases in resale values, and a damn caste system imposed upon us.

That's worth the effort.

Send that petition to Bill Marriott's Blog.  There's a difference between an upset Marriott owner and 50,000 of them.


----------



## indyhorizons

PerryM said:


> RedWeek already has a 100% Points exchange system that costs peanuts to join and use.  Their problem has always been a lack of marketing effort by Redweek.
> 
> I encourage all the folks reading this thread to go to Redweek's Exchange Page and put in a reservation they already have and find out how many RW Points you would get if you deposited.
> 
> I'm a member of RW but an not current in dues and I just submitted a week for appraisal - give it a try.
> 
> So ALL Marriott owners instantly have an alternative to Marriott's new reservation system if they choose.  Building our own would require money, manpower, and a backing of a lot of Marriott owners - I don't really see that happening.
> 
> So spend 30 minutes and see what RW has to offer us Marriott owners and then we can let Marriott know that there are viable alternatives to any new system they might shove down our throats.
> 
> RW has been discussed for years now and I'd bet that the folks there would jump through hoops to get a bunch of Marriott owners using their system; that's worth pursuing and costs nothing.
> 
> I have no doubt they would make a part of their system "Marriott Owners Only".
> 
> P.S.
> 
> I can see a huge petition drive taking place where the word is spread from Marriott owner to owner that RedWeek is an alternative to any parasitic exchange system Marriott might infect us with that will result in loss of freedoms, decreases in resale values, and a damn caste system imposed upon us.
> 
> That's worth the effort.



Interesting.  Quick question about RW, OT, but if I have a week that I have purchased with an AC that I can't use, could I exchange it on RW? Just curious.


----------



## PerryM

indyhorizons said:


> Interesting.  Quick question about RW, OT, but if I have a week that I have purchased with an AC that I can't use, could I exchange it on RW? Just curious.



You have to have a reservation to a resort - doesn't matter how you got it.  RW allows rentals (last time I checked) so you can deposit a week, and then anyone who snaps it up can rent it for cash.

But I'll be honest in that I've not tested this out; I'm sure others here have.


----------



## rsackett

One big change that will take place from a points system, Redweek, Marriott, whatever, is that high demand high quality resorts will get not just more trading power, but can turn that into more days of vacation.

The flip side is that lower demand weeks will not just have lower trading power, but less vacation time if they move up the quality/demand chain.  Under the current system lower demand weeks will not be able to grab higher demand/quality weeks without down grading size and/or days of vacation.  

The winners are those with great weeks.

Ray


----------



## PerryM

*Fight back...*

What the sales morons at Marriott don't realize is that we are not sheep - we have the internet and all the tools to take Marriott on in this matter.  We have hundreds of millions of dollars at risk here and this is no small matter.

Giving us 2 years of constant threats and then almost 1 year to get ready is stupid on Marriott's part but that's how the salesreps think - threaten the owners into submission.

Well we don't have to take it on the chin without a good fight.


----------



## m61376

PerryM said:


> Send that petition to Bill Marriott's Blog.  There's a difference between an upset Marriott owner and 50,000 of them.



Accomplishing that would be quite a herculean effort  

Can individual posts be submitted to the blog? It would be interesting to see how/if there was a response to a polite, non-threatening non self-serving letter outlining many of our concerns.


----------



## indyhorizons

m61376 said:


> Accomplishing that would be quite a herculean effort
> 
> Can individual posts be submitted to the blog? It would be interesting to see how/if there was a response to a polite, non-threatening non self-serving letter outlining many of our concerns.



I'd say our #1 concern is the rumor mill that Marriott has refused to acknowledge or respond to. If we could get some confirmation from Marriott that some type of program is coming, then we could be informed buyers and/or owners.  It's all the cloak and dagger that has everyone up in arms. Its the fact that allegedly they have people who can't keep their mouths shut for this alleged program that is going to be implemented and enough information is being leaked (again allegedly) to get a large number of owners up in arms.  If we could get an answer to that question alone, I think that would eliminate 75% of the posts in this thread (and previous as well).

Of course details would be nice as well.


----------



## Eric

Perry


Maybe you can team up with Mark as you kind of think alike. Good luck with that



PerryM said:


> What the sales morons at Marriott don't realize is that we are not sheep - we have the internet and all the tools to take Marriott on in this matter.  We have hundreds of millions of dollars at risk here and this is no small matter.
> 
> Giving us 2 years of constant threats and then almost 1 year to get ready is stupid on Marriott's part but that's how the salesreps think - threaten the owners into submission.
> 
> Well we don't have to take it on the chin without a good fight.


----------



## thinze3

Eric, what have you heard about the internal trading program?


----------



## PerryM

I own just one Gold Summit Watch so I really don't have a bone in this struggle.

Others, that have $100k+ invested should be worried and ban together.

But that's up to you guys - good luck.


----------



## icydog

I don't see how Marriott can make a point system that would punitively affect their owners whether they bought resale or not. 

Someone gave the DVC model as an example. In the DVC system, no matter how you bought your points you are considered the same. 

If Marriott doesn't grandfather resale owners into their system I think they would be open to legal action as this stipulation, that resale owners would not have an equal right to a new exchange system, was not part of the deed, whether purchased resale or not, when we bought.


----------



## CMF

I'm amazed at the amount of energy expended on this discussion.  I can't keep up with the posts.

I would like to know [just curious] if anyone will make a move in advance of the expected and uncertain changes.  Perhaps a poll is in order? The poll could be along the lines of:

What action will you take before Marriott changes the exchange/reservation system:


No change, I do not plan to sell my weeks in advance of an official announcement.
I am selling my weeks now.

Charles


----------



## indyhorizons

CMF said:


> I'm amazed at the amount of energy expended on this discussion.  I can't keep up with the posts.
> 
> I would like to know [just curious] if anyone will make a move in advance of the expected and uncertain changes.  Perhaps a poll is in order? The poll could be along the lines of:
> 
> What action will you take before Marriott changes the exchange/reservation system:
> 
> 
> No change, I do not plan to sell my weeks in advance of an official announcement.
> I am selling my weeks now.
> 
> Charles



And you'll start the poll by responding....


----------



## icydog

Again, I cannot understand why everyone is running around exclaiming the _sky is falling_ without any facts.  If you sell your weeks preemptively that is your choice, although I believe it is the wrong one. Keep a clear head when rumors circulate and you will be fine. Wait for the final story and don't believe Marriott salespeople who have their own agenda in mind.  Stay cool, real cool, as they sang in West Side story.


----------



## PerryM

*Blood suckers beware...*

We own WorldMark credits but I've not been to a WM resort in many years - exchange into II and stay at Marriotts.

When you check into a WM resort you are immediately hit with a caste system - at the front desk there is a VIP marked line and dedicated front desk clerk who only handles WM owners who have bought credits from WM direct, no resales, and they get faster service.  I'm not a VIP member so I schlep through the long lines that await non VIP members.  The developer, Wyndham, started this caste system and not the WM owners who actually own the damn resorts.

It's not a stretch of the imagination to see Marriott headed down this same path - folks who buy from Marriott and the blood suckers who buy resale.

The rumor of the Internal Exchange System that ONLY is available to Marriott bought weeks is the start of a caste system and why should they not get a VIP line at Marriott resorts?

Out of all the units that will go into this new exchange system 80% will be us owners (just a guess) - why are we to all of a sudden be thrown into a caste system?  Marriott is the hired help at most Marriotts - the tail now wags the dog?


----------



## Zac495

icydog said:


> Again, I cannot understand why everyone is running around exclaiming the _sky is falling_ without any facts.  If you sell your weeks preemptively that is your choice, although I believe it is the wrong one. Keep a clear head when rumors circulate and you will be fine. Wait for the final story and don't believe Marriott salespeople who have their own agenda in mind.  Stay cool, real cool, as they sang in West Side story.



Marilyn,
The sky keeps falling with Marriott lately - so that's why I think people are speculating. Points devalued, no more points with financing, super high fees at Aruba ....

Would I buy a Marriott now? Only at a ridiculously low price - if I got ridiculously lucky.


----------



## mjbaran

GregT said:


> Perhaps Marriott is rattling the saber about a points sytem to force a concession from II?  Better revenue sharing?  Who knows?  It is a distinct possibility that they are threatening to depart to sweeten the arrangement.



I read somewhere that Marriott is part owner of II


----------



## CMF

indyhorizons said:


> And you'll start the poll by responding....



Sure . . . I'm waiting for the dust to settle.  I don't have enough information to make a reasonable decision. So, my answer is 1.

Charles


----------



## icydog

If Marriott departs II, and with DVC's departure this year, I think II will be in for a vast devaluation. I also portend that II will start to lose other highend timeshare systems if this happens. After all why give a great Hyatt week in for exchange if all you have left are some straglers which nobody wants.


----------



## Bill4728

mjbaran said:


> I read somewhere that Marriott is part owner of II


Many years ago Marriott did own or was owned by a company which also owns II. That has not been true for several (maybe many) years.


----------



## icydog

Zac495 said:


> Marilyn,
> The sky keeps falling with Marriott lately - so that's why I think people are speculating. Points devalued, no more points with financing, super high fees at Aruba ....
> 
> Would I buy a Marriott now? Only at a ridiculously low price - if I got ridiculously lucky.



Ellen, I just sent an email to my Marriott sales rep. I will post her answers here. 

I just don't think Marriott would be so dollar foolish as to lose a vast audience like those who bought from resellers. I, for one, would not subscribe to a system in which I am treated like a second class citizen as Perry has described. I'd sell my weeks if that was the end outcome of this. 

Thankfully, as you know, I now own where I want to go, so this may be academic to me. Of course, there will be times I will want to exchange and this is not the atmosphere I wish to encounter when I make that decision. 

So yes, I see your side..I am hoping it doesn't come to the regretful ending everyone is leaning towards here on Tug. Take care..


----------



## Latravel

I understand what a few posters are saying that they had an expectation of how the system was when they bought therefore Marriott has a moral obligation to continue.

It has never happened that way in the past so why would it happen in the future?  Marriott can and will change the system now and in the future.  There have been some negative changes:  Point devaluations, removing the points for financing program.  And there have been some positive changes: including stays at Marriott timeshares toward Elite credit, removing black out times.

They have to change to be competitive, to be in alignment with other timeshare companies, to be profitable, to offer new programs to attract new customers.  Is this morally wrong?  Were you cheated?  NO!!!!  As others have said, we still have the right to use our one week a year at our resort and they cannot alter this right.  There just may be some changes to the other perks but that was a risk you took when you purchased outside the Marriott system because you didn't feel those perks were worth paying the extra cost.  You didn't pay for those benefits upfront.

I don't feel Marriott can do what ever they want.  I just don't have the same anxiety that others may feel.  I bought direct from Marriott for this peace of mind.  How much is this worth to you?


----------



## PerryM

*Rumor Central...*

Just remember folks that for 2+ years Marriott has spread this rumor through their agents at sales presentations - this is not an Alligator In The Sewer rumor, this is an officially sponsored rumor designed to frighten folks into buying from Marriott.

This is despicable from a Fortune 500 company.

Marriott's rumor could have been "ALL owners, no matter how they became owners, will get a 21st century, Marriott only, exchange system".

But no, Marriott had to introduce a caste system and immediately use the rumor as a weapon against us.

Marriott is 100% responsible for this rumor - I believe Dave and don't think for a second he embellished a single word - we are getting an official rumor from Marriott Central.

We can put on rose colored glasses I suppose but that rumor is used as a weapon and not something that benefits the owners of the resorts that Marriott cleans the toilets.


----------



## Bill4728

Just wanted to remind everyone that the other big three hotel based TS systems have had a "point-based" internal exchange system for a long time. Here is how they do theirs:

*Hilton: *everyone, no matter how they purchased, is in the point system. The points for peak weeks is basically the same for most of their resorts. Though Hawaii is higher and you'd only get a 1 bd instead of a 2 bd in hawaii. 

*Hyatt*: everyone, no matter how they purchased, is in the point system. The points for peak weeks is basically the same for most of their resorts.

*Westin/Starwood*: Most resale buyers are excluded from the point system. The points for their nicest resorts are lot more than the points for their lessor resorts. Resale buyers at only an handful of Westin resorts are allowed in. At all the other Starwood resorts you can't join the point system at any price unless you buy another week direct from starwood.  All owners who bought before the point system started were grandfathered into the system for ~$500. 

Marriott could choose to do a system like Hilton or Hyatt but it looks like they are going to follow Starwood.


----------



## SueDonJ

Bill4728 said:


> Just wanted to remind everyone that the other big three hotel based TS systems have had a "point-based" internal exchange system for a long time. Here is how they do theirs:
> 
> *Hilton: *everyone, no matter how they purchased, is in the point system. The points for peak weeks is basically the same for most of their resorts. Though Hawaii is higher and you'd only get a 1 bd instead of a 2 bd in hawaii.
> 
> *Hyatt*: everyone, no matter how they purchased, is in the point system. The points for peak weeks is basically the same for most of their resorts.
> 
> *Westin/Starwood*: Most resale buyers are excluded from the point system. The points for their nicest resorts are lot more than the points for their lessor resorts. Resale buyers at only an handful of Westin resorts are allowed in. At all the other Starwood resorts you can't join the point system at any price unless you buy another week direct from starwood.  All owners who bought before the point system started were grandfathered into the system for ~$500.
> 
> Marriott could choose to do a system like Hilton or Hyatt but it looks like they are going to follow Starwood.



I don't know anything about these programs.

Are they similar to MVCI where deeded rights entitle the owners to the purchased season/resort/unit configurations to occupy/rent/exchange, which would mean the points programs you've outlined are related to only exchanges within those three systems?

Or, are they similar to DVC where deeded rights entitle the owners to the purchased number of points with priority for home resort reservations, which would mean that the points programs you've outlined are an extension of the purchased points within those three systems?


----------



## BocaBum99

Bill4728 said:


> Just wanted to remind everyone that the other big three hotel based TS systems have had a "point-based" internal exchange system for a long time. Here is how they do theirs:
> 
> *Hilton: *everyone, no matter how they purchased, is in the point system. The points for peak weeks is basically the same for most of their resorts. Though Hawaii is higher and you'd only get a 1 bd instead of a 2 bd in hawaii.
> 
> *Hyatt*: everyone, no matter how they purchased, is in the point system. The points for peak weeks is basically the same for most of their resorts.
> 
> *Westin/Starwood*: Most resale buyers are excluded from the point system. The points for their nicest resorts are lot more than the points for their lessor resorts. Resale buyers at only an handful of Westin resorts are allowed in. At all the other Starwood resorts you can't join the point system at any price unless you buy another week direct from starwood.  All owners who bought before the point system started were grandfathered into the system for ~$500.
> 
> Marriott could choose to do a system like Hilton or Hyatt but it looks like they are going to follow Starwood.



Following Starwood and Diamond is actually a really bad idea.  It's too bad that Marriott isn't building a point system as a fundamental aspect of the ownership.  In my opinion, that really weakens the system.

All the best point systems have permanent multi-site reservation privileges that are a fundamental feature of the ownership.  In other words, you can't take it away.

The one's that treat the point system as an addon to a product are the weakest.


----------



## indyhorizons

Bill4728 said:


> *Westin/Starwood*:  At all the other Starwood resorts you can't join the point system at any price unless you buy another week direct from starwood.  All owners who bought before the point system started were grandfathered into the system for ~$500. .



Does this purchase have to come after the fact? IOW, if someone owns a developer week, and also owns resale, are they eligible then?


----------



## LisaRex

indyhorizons said:


> Does this purchase have to come after the fact? IOW, if someone owns a developer week, and also owns resale, are they eligible then?



The one purchased from the developer trades in the internal system (SVN) or II.  The one purchased on the resale market cannot participate in SVN unless the resale purchase was made first and the owner was able to get Starwood to requalify it (bring it into SVN) as a condition of closing on the subsequent developer purchase. 

Clear as mud?


----------



## Bill4728

> Originally Posted by Bill4728
> Westin/Starwood: At all the other Starwood resorts you can't join the point system at any price unless you buy another week direct from starwood.
> 
> 
> 
> Does this purchase have to come after the fact? IOW, if someone owns a developer week, and also owns resale, are they eligible then?
Click to expand...

This is discussed over on the starwood board. BUT in a nut shell:  
You buy a resale week at a Starwood resort, then buy a second week direct from starwood ( at any of their resorts) and get the resale week " retro'd " and it's like both weeks were bought direct from Starwood.

Generally, you can not do it the other way around. You can not buy direct, then buy resale and get the resale "retro'd"


----------



## indyhorizons

LisaRex said:


> The one purchased from the developer trades in the internal system (SVN) or II.  The one purchased on the resale market cannot participate in SVN unless the resale purchase was made first and the owner was able to get Starwood to requalify it (bring it into SVN) as a condition of closing on the subsequent developer purchase.
> 
> Clear as mud?



Believe it or not, yes I do understand that. Scary?


----------



## Bill4728

Bill4728 said:


> The real key to Marriott new system will be this paragraph by Dave.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by DaveM
> Those who bought directly from Marriott will pay a relatively low fee if they choose to join the points program. Marriott intends to make the fee low enough so that many, many owners will join. Those who bought resale will pay a higher fee, possibly much higher, if they wish to join. I don't know yet whether there will be any partial or full grandfathering for those who purchased resale before a particular unknown date.
> 
> 
> 
> -If the fee is small enough to get people to switch, then many people will likely switch, but if Marriott tries to do what most RCI resorts are doing when they introduce RCI points ( cost to resort $200, cost to owner >$3000) Then IMHO, very few people will pay to convert to points.
Click to expand...




BocaBum99 said:


> Following Starwood and Diamond is actually a really bad idea.  It's too bad that Marriott isn't building a point system as a fundamental aspect of the ownership.  In my opinion, that really weakens the system.
> 
> All the best point systems have permanent multi-site reservation privileges that are a fundamental feature of the ownership.  In other words, you can't take it away.
> 
> The one's that treat the point system as an addon to a product are the weakest.


 I have to agree with Boca. _"All the best point systems have permanent multi-site reservation privileges that are a fundamental feature of the ownership.  In other words, you can't take it away."_

But I think that Marriott thinks it can make money when there is a switch to this new system. Therefore Marriott will charge all current owners to join the new system. If Marriott gets too greedy, because of higher fee than is necessary, many owners may not choose to join.


----------



## BocaBum99

Bill4728 said:


> I have to agree with Boca. _"All the best point systems have permanent multi-site reservation privileges that are a fundamental feature of the ownership.  In other words, you can't take it away."_
> 
> But I think that Marriott thinks it can make money when there is a switch to this new system. Therefore Marriott will charge all current owners to join the new system. If Marriott gets too greedy, because of higher fee than is necessary, many owners may not choose to join.



It really depends on the amount that Marriott charges.  If I were selling the Marriott resale product, I could sell it (if what I think "it" is turns out to be close to what Marriott offers) as a $1000-2000 add on if they had a rudimentary point system where you could book partial weeks and there are differential values for the various Marriott properties by season, unit size, unit type and day of the week AND an Open Season like feature.  If they have just that, I could sell it as a premium offer over resale prices.

If Marriott makes the fee $5000, I wouldn't even look at the product.  I can't imagine them creating a product that would be worth that premium over II.


----------



## SueDonJ

Bill4728 said:


> I have to agree with Boca. _"All the best point systems have permanent multi-site reservation privileges that are a fundamental feature of the ownership.  In other words, you can't take it away."_
> 
> But I think that Marriott thinks it can make money when there is a switch to this new system. Therefore Marriott will charge all current owners to join the new system. If Marriott gets too greedy, because of higher fee than is necessary, many owners may not choose to join.



Exactly.  Too high a buy-in fee will defeat the purpose of Marriott implementing an internal exchange system, because as you say then not enough owners will join to generate the buy-in and exchange fees that Marriott must be banking on.  Why offer what amounts to a new revenue source if you can logically expect that it won't sell?


----------



## mas

indyhorizons said:


> You reference the Hyatt points system, but isn't this the only system they offer? Marriott's program is proposed to be optional.  I stand that #1 and #2 are both quite possible in this new scenario.



The point I was trying to make was that the fact that a program implements an internal points system doesn't necessarily equate to less availability in an affiliated exchange company (II).  To my way of thinking Marriott's program is proposed to be optional whereas Hyatt's is not.  This, I would think, would make more Marriott's available to II, not less, as not all owners will buy into the internal trade program.


----------



## indyhorizons

BocaBum99 said:


> If Marriott makes the fee $5000, I wouldn't even look at the product.  I can't imagine them creating a product that would be worth that premium over II.



Yes, but you are making an assumption that the existing Marriott:II relationship continues to exist as we know it. If there are changes (no 24-day window preference, no developer week deposits, etc), will the II product continue to be a viable product. Some changes that Marriott may implement in this relationship may make their product seem more attractive, even if the fee is exorbitant. It leaves the owners in a catch-22.


----------



## LisaRex

mas said:


> The point I was trying to make was that the fact that a program impliments an internal points system doesn't necessarily equate to less availability in an affiliated exchange company (II).  To my way of thinking Marriott's program is proposed to be optional whereas Hyatt's is not.  This, I would think, would make more Marriott's available to II, not less, as not all owners will buy into the internal trade program.



I thought all trades are currently done via II.   If Marriott creates its own system, a portion of the inventory will be diverted into that program, ergo less inventory in II vs. now. 

No?


----------



## indyhorizons

mas said:


> The point I was trying to make was that the fact that a program impliments an internal points system doesn't necessarily equate to less availability in an affiliated exchange company (II).  To my way of thinking Marriott's program is proposed to be optional whereas Hyatt's is not.  This, I would think, would make more Marriott's available to II, not less, as not all owners will buy into the internal trade program.



I agree that would be ideal. But why bother entering into this internal program at all if it won't make them money? Why even bother? They have to have a plan for this to be profitable and successful.  Therefore, I believe there will be some incentive to get owners to join. Whether it is low entry fees, or a bonus week, or Marriott rewards points. 

In which case, just like people go to the sales presentations for $100 in gift certificates or 10,000 MRP, (which I have long ago decided are not worth my time when I have no intention of buying and the incentives are not enough to lose valuable vacation time) Marriott can dangle some other meaningless carrot and many people will flock to this program. Maybe not all, I for one plan on not doing so if at all feasible. But if I find an impact to my II experience, I may find I have no other choice, other than always going to my home resort.


----------



## indyhorizons

LisaRex said:


> I thought all trades are currently done via II.   If Marriott creates its own system, a portion of the inventory will be diverted into that program, ergo less inventory in II vs. now.
> 
> No?




Not only that, but think of the owners who won't/don't trade at all. So they won't be in either pool of inventory.  Of course, that's no different than now. The thing I worry about is Marriott is going to obviously keep those developer weeks in their program, wouldn't you think? Or the inventory they can't rent. Those would likely go into a flexchange program for their "MEP".


----------



## BocaBum99

indyhorizons said:


> Not only that, but think of the owners who won't/don't trade at all. So they won't be in either pool of inventory.  Of course, that's no different than now. The thing I worry about is Marriott is going to obviously keep those developer weeks in their program, wouldn't you think? Or the inventory they can't rent. *Those would likely go into a flexchange program for their "MEP*".



Exactly!  That is why I believe a bonus time program ala the HGVC Open Season program would be worth a $1000-2000 premium over resale price to enroll a week.

Marriott wants to control all of the inventory.  They can do it if all owners automatically deposit their week into their internal program.  That gives them the flexibility of offer bonus time, trade ups, etc.

The biggest source of real gain in a weeks based system such as Marriott currently has is in recapturing value from breakage in weeks.   That breakage is hugely valuable.  FAR more than an exchange fees that Marriott can get.


----------



## indyhorizons

BocaBum99 said:


> Exactly!  That is why I believe a bonus time program ala the HGVC Open Season program would be worth a $1000-2000 premium over resale price to enroll a week.
> 
> Marriott wants to control all of the inventory.  They can do it if all owners automatically deposit their week into their internal program.  That gives them the flexibility of offer bonus time, trade ups, etc.
> 
> The biggest source of real gain in a weeks based system such as Marriott currently has is in recapturing value from breakage in weeks.   That breakage is hugely valuable.  FAR more than an exchange fees that Marriott can get.



So by breakage in weeks, are you referring to (using II as an example, as I don't own any timeshare beside Marriot) the new short stay exchange where you can split your week? Why is that valuable? Because you have to pay for 2 exchanges? I'm not sure I follow.


----------



## BocaBum99

Back of the envelope business case for Marriott.  

I think it may be helpful to characterize a potential view of the economics for an internal exchange program for Marriott.  This is just a guess.  But, it provides a ball park view and an idea of the relative contribution of various program elements.

Let's just use a couple of simple assumptions.   Dave mentioned that there are about 700,000 Marriott intervals in the system.  Let's go with that number.  In addition, Marriott had sales of $212M in the second quarter of this year.  Assuming a $23,500 average revenue per sale, that is about 9000 sales per quarter or 100 sales per day.  Seems roughly in the ball park.

Conservatively, I'd say that Marriott will set a price for a membership into an internal exchange program of between $2000-5000.  Let's be conservative and set it at $2000.

Then, we can guess some quarterly revenue potentials.

1) If such a program could add a premium to a Marriott sale of $2000 per sale, that would be 9000 * $2000 = *$18M per quarter or about 8% revenue *increase.  Obviously, they would probably discount this value to zero for all platinum owners to get critical mass early.  But, over time, this could be the value they extract from the program in upfront fees.  In fact, what I would do is waive it completely for the first year and then start increasing it until it reaches the maximum.  They could set the MSRP at $5000 to scare people into joining, but never actually ever charge that much.

2) I would waive all exchange fees or make it $49 at most to be competitive with their primary competitors.  And, I would charge and annual fee of $75.  If Marrott gets 250,000 weeks enrolled or about 35% of current owners.

250000* 75 / 4 = *$4.6M per quarter just in quarterly fees*.

100,000 exchanges per year =>  25000 * 49 = *$1.2M per quarter in exchange fees. => NOT MUCH. * They are NOT doing this to get exchange fees. 

3) Reclaiming value from breakage.  Breakage are weeks that expire and go unused.  These are either owner weeks that leave them go empty or unreserved.  Or, it is deposits that owners make into II that they never use for exchange.  If Marriott can reduce breakage by just 10%.  Look what happens to economics:

700,000 intervals * 10% breakage reclaimed *$800 minimum rental value / 4 quarters = *$14M per quarter*.  This is the untapped potential of controlling inventory.  Note that it is almost as much as it is in selling the product in the first place.

4) Getting extra value from resale customers.  I don't know the number, but assuming there are 5% of the total population resells their week every year and 50% of those convert back into the program at a $2000 fee.  Here is the contribution:

700000 intervals * 5% owner churn * 50% conversion rate * $2000 per conversion / 4 quarters per year = *$8.75M per year in resale revenue*.

Total quarterly impact:

1) $18M for retail conversion fees (probably waived for first few years of program)

2)  $5.8M in exchange fees and dues

3) $14M in reclaimed breakage rented off

4) $8.75M in resale upgrade fees

Total:  $46.5M per quarter or 22% increase in revenue.  Anything that has the potential of increasing revenue by that much is a huge winner and a no brainer.

If Marriott creates the program and gives away the program to all retail buyers forever, here is still what the program does:  $28.5M per quarter = 13.5% of revenue.

Here is where that money comes from.  

1) Retail Program fees.  Marriott doesn't really care about the first fee much.  Even if they give it away, it's hugely positive for the company.  They will try to get as much of it as they can, though.   If there is a charge, this is a tax on the retail buyers.

2) Exchange fees.  This is a wash for current owners since they pay these fees anyway for exchanging in II.

3) Breakage.  This comes out of II.  The great thing is that this doesn't cost owners anything.  It's free money that was going down the drain.

4) Resale Program fees.  This is coming out of the hide of everyone.  Whatever the resale program fee is, all ownerships will immediately be reduced by that amount.  That's because when they go to sell, their product will sell for a reduced amount roughly equal to the resale program fee.  You don't fee that upfront.  But, you definitely experience it when you go to sell.  Grandfather people into the program doesn't matter.  The loss is incurred when you sell.  If you never sell, you never take this loss.

If I were Marriott, I would do this as soon as I could.


----------



## indyhorizons

BocaBum99 said:


> 3) Reclaiming value from breakage.  Breakage are weeks that expire and go unused.  These are either owner weeks that leave them go empty or unreserved.  Or, it is deposits that owners make into II that they never use for exchange.  If Marriott can reduce breakage by just 10%.  Look what happens to economics:
> 
> 700,000 intervals * 10% breakage reclaimed *$800 minimum rental value / 4 quarters = *$14M per quarter*.  This is the untapped potential of controlling inventory.  Note that it is almost as much as it is in selling the product in the first place.
> 
> 
> 3) Breakage.  This comes out of II.  The great thing is that this doesn't cost owners anything.  It's free money that was going down the drain.



Interesting. I guess I couldn't relate to your term "breakage" because none of those scenarios has ever happened to me. As yet, I have always used my deposited weeks. Also, the one time I wasn't able to use my AC, I sold the week on e-bay (I know that's a no-no). 

Anyway, I'm still opposed to the MEP (in this speculative discussion) because I am not prepared to pay $2,000 MORE to enjoy what I already have.  I did not purchase at one of the high-end resorts, we own at MHZ and it was what we could afford at the time. It has proven to be a good purchase for us, we've been happy with our trades. Do I think it is worth $2000 more to continue to use the priveleges I have become accustomed to? No. Fortunate for me, in YOUR scenario, I may have my fee waived (if I decide to opt-in) because we are platinum week owners.


----------



## BocaBum99

If the above are the conservative economics of a Marriott internal exchange program, even though the real cost to all owners would be equal to the resale program enrollment fee, they gain back new features they never had in a points program and bonus time.  As I mentioned, that really is a fair fee for such a program.

If Marriott launched a program with the above economics, I'd say that they are a great company that is owner friendly.

It is possible for Marriott to use the same model that I have provided and be very greedy by setting the values very high and really extracting as much as possible from owners.  There is a chance that they would do that.  But, there is a limit which is the pain the owners are willing to bear for this program enhancement.

Also, I should note, that with these economics, Marriott does NOT need to change the 12/13 month rule for resale consumers.  I believe they may just be using it to scare people into buying into the program or from the developer.  This program is so profitable, there is no need to subject themselves to bad PR, owner class action lawsuits and the energy drain it takes from the organization.  Both systems can co-exist.

In fact, Marriott can create a light program where you get no new features, but you turn over your week to Marriott automatically and you get access to bonus time.  That would be a way to get more people to enroll, control more inventory to take more revenue away from II in reclaimed breakage, and to receive an upgrade opportunity.

As you can see, there are so many new avenues for Marriott to make revenue that this program is a no brainer for Marriott management.


----------



## BocaBum99

indyhorizons said:


> Interesting. I guess I couldn't relate to your term "breakage" because none of those scenarios has ever happened to me. As yet, I have always used my deposited weeks. Also, the one time I wasn't able to use my AC, I sold the week on e-bay (I know that's a no-no).
> 
> Anyway, I'm still opposed to the MEP (in this speculative discussion) because I am not prepared to pay $2,000 MORE to enjoy what I already have.  I did not purchase at one of the high-end resorts, we own at MHZ and it was what we could afford at the time. It has proven to be a good purchase for us, we've been happy with our trades. Do I think it is worth $2000 more to continue to use the priveleges I have become accustomed to? No. Fortunate for me, in YOUR scenario, I may have my fee waived (if I decide to opt-in) because we are platinum week owners.



In my scenario, you get the point system, higher and lower point values for smaller units, units with a view and season.  And, you get access to bonus time.  That is much more than II provides today.  

And, even if you get in for free, your ownership is losing value equal to the resale program fee.  It's a hidden cost that isn't obvious or realized until you decide to sell.  But, it is a real cost nonetheless.


----------



## chris5

davidvel said:


> No, these "documents" are irrelevant to resale purchasers because they didn't contract with Marriott to buy their timeshare/condo interest.
> 
> This goes to the heart of nearly all my posts and my goal to inform and educate people about what deeded "rights" people have vs. what are simply contractual "add-ons" which Marriott contends it can change at will (ie. bonus MRP points on its egregious loans, trading for points, your personal adviser, etc.)
> 
> I would love to see the documents that everyone always refers to which (at least according to all the posts I read from direct buyers) evidence the illusory contract that they entered into with Marriott (ie. Marriott promises things that they can at their own whim change or rescind, etc.) Note: if one side in a contract can change the terms when they want, it is not a contract... but I digress.
> 
> 
> 
> Many people often say that resale purchasers "lose the right" to exchange for points, or other perceived benefits. I see it from a different perspective. There are two parts to a Marriott timeshare ownership (the following should be a sticky named YOUR MARRIOTT "RIGHTS" 101):
> 
> 1. DIRECT and RESALE BUYERS have equivalent deeded rights
> Your rights in your deed=Your right to reserve a week in your season, at your resort, 12/13 months in advance, and use it as you wish (yourself, friend, family, rent out, any exchange program you choose to contract with).  MF you pay are up to your HOA (mostly controlled by Marriott but legally distinct.) Marriott doesn't own your TS or project, you do. Any "documents" you signed as a direct purchaser have nothing to do with these rights other than that Marriott had to transfer the deed to you, after which they are done. As a resale purchaser, you got the same deed. The deed and accompanying CCRs, etc. do not distinguish between direct purchasers and resale purchasers.
> 
> 2. Other stuff
> anything other than 1, above, is (apparently) subject to change at any time at the whim of Marriott or any other vendor. In reality this "other stuff" isn't part of your rights as a "Marriott" timeshare owner, but a "side deal" or deals that may have been promised to you as part of the sale, or something you perceived you were getting. You should not think that this is a "right" that you have.
> 
> This other stuff (which may or may not be available to a direct or resale purchaser) includes: right to trade unit for points for round the world trips or weeks in Paris (which of course will never be devalued), glorious promises about trading your unit with II's program (salesman:"You can lock off this mud week and trade the studio for a 2BR in Maui..."), promises in your sales presentation about bonus MRP each year you repay your loan (which of course won't be withdrawn), the new Marriott internal trading program, redweek, *is subject to change*, renegotiation, etc.
> 
> 
> In fact, few people realize that legally Marriott has no ongoing direct obligation to you at all. They have an indirect obligation as a manager of your resort for the HOA. They don't have any legal obligation as manager to do anything other than 1, above, or what it contracts with the HOA to do, which contract can end. This means that your resort called "Marriott's XXXXX resort" could become "XXXXX resort," once the management contract ends (and this has happened.) This is the leverage Marriott has to demand high management fees (and thus higher MF).
> 
> *So, hopefully, the above puts all the commentary about what can or can't be done (positive statements), and what should or shouldn't be done (normative staments), in context.*
> 
> 
> 
> Well, your commentary does not exactly end the matter. I think you have the basic stuff right, as far as rights that might run with a deed of real property (in this case fractional time interests in a condominium) Marriott conveyed to owners, as opposed to obligations anchored in promises that Marriott has made to owners in its contracts.
> 
> However, this is a gross oversimplification of whether the owners are entitled to "relief" that extends beyond the rights transferred or promises made.  That relief might be grounded in antitrust or consumer protection statutes that might prevent Marriott from engineering the scenario laid out by Perry in post 211.  I'm sure there's an enterprising lawyer out there, grounded in antitrust or consumer protection/fair practices law, who thinks that if Marriott has deliberately set up a process that could deflate and manipulate the "resale" market to benefit its ROFR option, to the detriment of existing owners, that this could conceivably violate federal or state antitrust or consumer protection laws.
> 
> You all give a lot of credit to Marriott in that many of you believe they have teams of lawyers who must have assuredly have thought out this entire scenario.  In many cases that might be true, but I never underestimate the ability of even the most talented and highly paid corporate lawyers and corporate managers to miss something or be clueless about some other area.  And it never surprises me that some enterprising lawyer (whether a class action specialist or a government lawyer in the DOJ or the FTC or 50 State AG offices) might come up with a novel way to challenge behavior that is arguably unfair, as Perry and others appear to speculate.
Click to expand...


----------



## hotcoffee

m61376 said:


> I fear for everyone's resale values, and for the impact that this may have on the Marriott brand overall, if they decide to exercise this right and only convey partial usage rights to future resale purchasers.



I really believe that hoping or expecting Marriott to grandfather current resale owners into the new program misses the point.  If Marriott were to deliberately trash resale values (which affects every owner regardless of whether resale owners are grandfathered into the new system or not), I wonder if anybody in Congress would be interested.  There was a time when politicians were interested in taking on the timeshare industry.  Maybe there still would be some interest.  It seems to me that a timeshare company stopping their owners from being able to sell their timehares at prices consistent with what is (or had been) their market value would be very anti-consumer.  And some politicians have in the past been noted for being consumer advocates.

Sure, I would like to be grandfathered into the new system and have the same reservation and trading rights as anyone else, but I still want my right to sell preserved.  If Marriott were to enter the resale business themselves (in a bigger way than they currently are), and they would broker the sale of their timeshares, I personally would be satisfied by that as long as any buyer has the same reservation and trading rights as any current owner.   Anything short of that will cause resale values to plummet.


----------



## indyhorizons

BocaBum99 said:


> In my scenario, you get the point system, higher and lower point values for smaller units, units with a view and season.  And, you get access to bonus time.  That is much more than II provides today.
> 
> And, even if you get in for free, your ownership is losing value equal to the resale program fee.  It's a hidden cost that isn't obvious or realized until you decide to sell.  But, it is a real cost nonetheless.



Which is a point that I made quite a few points back. THere will be drawbacks that will not be apparent to the average owner. Heck, without this discussion on tug, quite possibly I wouldn't not have been able to identify the potential drawbacks. Having said that, I think that if Marriott spins/promotes/markets it right, they will not have any problem getting the average owner to join this program. If people feel they are getting more than they already had, then they will view it as a win-win.  Perhaps they will never have to sell in which case, joining will have been a great deal for them.


----------



## SueDonJ

BocaBum99 said:


> ... I think it may be helpful to characterize a potential view of the economics for an internal exchange program for Marriott.  This is just a guess.  But, it provides a ball park view and an idea of the relative contribution of various program elements. ...



Thanks, that was very helpful.  

Wow! That's a lot of revenue despite the conservative factoring that you've used.  Good stuff.


----------



## Dean

laurac260 said:


> In a nutshell, if you purchase resale, no, you do not get the same documents.  The agreement that was sent to me yesterday to buy a resale WAS NOT  a Marriott document.


But legally the documents and often the deed, are written in such a way that you assume the responsibilities and requirements thereof.


----------



## m61376

Latravel said:


> I understand what a few posters are saying that they had an expectation of how the system was when they bought therefore Marriott has a moral obligation to continue.
> 
> It has never happened that way in the past so why would it happen in the future?  Marriott can and will change the system now and in the future.  There have been some negative changes:  Point devaluations, removing the points for financing program.  And there have been some positive changes: including stays at Marriott timeshares toward Elite credit, removing black out times.
> 
> They have to change to be competitive, to be in alignment with other timeshare companies, to be profitable, to offer new programs to attract new customers.  Is this morally wrong?  Were you cheated?  NO!!!!  As others have said, we still have the right to use our one week a year at our resort and they cannot alter this right.  There just may be some changes to the other perks but that was a risk you took when you purchased outside the Marriott system because you didn't feel those perks were worth paying the extra cost.  You didn't pay for those benefits upfront.
> 
> I don't feel Marriott can do what ever they want.  I just don't have the same anxiety that others may feel.  I bought direct from Marriott for this peace of mind.  How much is this worth to you?



I don't know why, but you continue to miss the point here. The only perk which was at risk (actually it was a known fact that it was unavailable) was the ability to trade for points.

And, as I stated before, the point devaluations should have been recognized by buyers in advance, because there has been historical precedent for this over time.

There were no other risks that were even remotely on the horizon when many resale purchases were made. In fact, buyers were repeatedly assured by owner modifications and even salespeople that the ONLY difference in ownership was the ability to trade for points. That was the singular distinction and the one discussed repeatedly. So, to assume that resale buyers didn't pay for other benefits up front is just plain wrong- we paid for having the same benefits of usage as every other owner, including the same ability to trade our weeks, the same ability to book our units, and the same priority in room assignment. We opted not to pay for a single perk- the ability to trade for points.

So, implying that resale purchasers basically deserve whatever limitations Marriott decides to throw at them because we decided not to pay for the privileges is really quite arrogant.


----------



## m61376

Hotcoffee- I agree with you- don't get me wrong- I am not in favor of penalizing future resale owners as long as current ones are grandfathered in, for the very reasons you mention. My point is that legally and morally I think they are two different situations, because former resale buyers bought under a given set of legal documents and assumptions based on precedent, which could be interpreted as an implied contract. IF Marriott was to change the program going forward, unless some political or other force as you suggest decided to intervene, I don't think buyers could cry foul if they were aware of the limitations at the time of their purchase.

I think the only basis for outside intervention would be the negative impact such restrictions would have on the inherent value of the property (resale value) but, since the documents all specify that the units are not investment property, that may insulate Marriott from any such claims.

Boca- what a great analysis!


----------



## Eric

I hate to stop the ramblings but did anyone read Dave's post?? ( see below)
If he is correct, everyone will be invited so if you want to start arguing about what the fee is, fine, but why argue about something that Dave never said ??? geez, Marriott will probably change their minds 5 times before they make the change,  but don't let that stop the bickering 





______________________________________________________ 
Those who bought directly from Marriott will pay a relatively low fee if they choose to join the points program. Marriott intends to make the fee low enough so that many, many owners will join. Those who bought resale will pay a higher fee, possibly much higher, if they wish to join.


----------



## Bill4728

Eric said:


> I hate to stop the ramblings but did anyone read Dave's post?? ( see below)
> If he is correct, everyone will be invited so if you want to start arguing about what the fee is, fine, but why argue about something that Dave never said ??? geez, Marriott will probably change their minds 5 times before they make the change,  but don't let that stop the bickering


Stop bickering?!  

What fun is that??


----------



## Pit

BocaBum99 said:


> 3) Reclaiming value from breakage.  Breakage are weeks that expire and go unused.  These are either owner weeks that leave them go empty or unreserved.  Or, it is deposits that owners make into II that they never use for exchange.  If Marriott can reduce breakage by just 10%.  Look what happens to economics:
> 
> 700,000 intervals * 10% breakage reclaimed *$800 minimum rental value / 4 quarters = *$14M per quarter*.  This is the untapped potential of controlling inventory.  Note that it is almost as much as it is in selling the product in the first place.



I don't see any _new_ revenue here. Unreserved weeks are already available to Marriott for rental to the general public. Regarding unused weeks -- where a reservation is made but the owner or the exchanger is a no show -- how is Marriott to know, in advance, that the owner or exchanger will be a no show? 

Perhaps you're suggesting owner deposits to the internal system that go unclaimed will expire well ahead of the use date, and Marriott can then rent the deposit (i.e. rent units out instead of making them available for owner exchange). Sounds very RCI-like.  

I believe they are doing this to differentiate the developer product from resale. Because today, there's just no justification for the price delta. They want to draw (or keep) prospective buyers away from the resale market and be able to offer some rational explanation if buyers pop the resale question. Otherwise, they would just include everyone in the point system and allow points to transfer with the resale - as Hilton and Hyatt do.


----------



## chris5

m61376 said:


> I think the only basis for outside intervention would be the negative impact such restrictions would have on the inherent value of the property (resale value) but, since the documents all specify that the units are not investment property, that may insulate Marriott from any such claims.



Not so; it seems to me, that restraints on alienation (like the ROFR), which are generally disfavored in the law unless reasonable, when coupled with a manufactured mechanism for depressing resale value, could all amount to an unfair, deceptive or anti-competitive practice. The legal documents don't insulate one from practices that are contrary to antitrust or consumer protection public policy under state or federal statutes. This was the point I perhaps didn't make clear in an earlier post.


----------



## BocaBum99

Pit said:


> I don't see any _new_ revenue here. Unreserved weeks are already available to Marriott for rental to the general public. Regarding unused weeks -- where a reservation is made but the owner or the exchanger is a no show -- how is Marriott to know, in advance, that the owner or exchanger will be a no show?
> 
> Perhaps you're suggesting owner deposits to the internal system that go unclaimed will expire well ahead of the use date, and Marriott can then rent the deposit (i.e. rent units out instead of making them available for owner exchange). Sounds very RCI-like.
> 
> I believe they are doing this to differentiate the developer product from resale. Because today, there's just no justification for the price delta. They want to draw (or keep) prospective buyers away from the resale market and be able to offer some rational explanation if buyers pop the resale question. Otherwise, they would just include everyone in the point system and allow points to transfer with the resale - as Hilton and Hyatt do.



I have my perspective because I have seen utilization statistics for various resort groups and exchange companies.  There is a surprising amount of under utilized resorts and expiring or sell off weeks.  Why do you think that RCI and II have such a huge rental pool of getaways and extra vacations.  When the developer maintains control of those expiring weeks, they can profit from them.  When owners control inventory by booking reservations and making deposits into exchange companies, those deposits become under the control of the exchange company instead of Marriott.  Huge money left on the table.

When owners own points, they don't have to book anything to keep their points.   Lots of owners allow points to expire.  An amazing number do.  The unreserved inventory due to the points not being booked creates excess inventory for rent via bonus time.  Just look at all the systems that have bonus time.  It is very plentiful.  Expiring points = bonus time usage + empty units.


----------



## BocaBum99

Pit said:


> I believe they are doing this to differentiate the developer product from resale. Because today, there's just no justification for the price delta. They want to draw (or keep) prospective buyers away from the resale market and be able to offer some rational explanation if buyers pop the resale question. Otherwise, they would just include everyone in the point system and allow points to transfer with the resale - as Hilton and Hyatt do.



It seems a bit cynical to believe that the only reason Marriott is doing this is to suck more value out of the ownerships of their current customers.

At least in my approach, owners are gaining a new set of features and they are paying for it with equity in their current ownerships instead of an upfront fee.


----------



## dioxide45

Pit said:


> I don't see any _new_ revenue here. Unreserved weeks are already available to Marriott for rental to the general public. Regarding unused weeks -- where a reservation is made but the owner or the exchanger is a no show -- how is Marriott to know, in advance, that the owner or exchanger will be a no show?
> 
> .



I don't think Marriott rents unreserved weeks on Marriott.com. Those weeks you see there are weeks turned in for points or developer owned weeks. I believe owned unreserved weeks get bulk banked with II and go in to the exchange or getaway pool.


----------



## RandR

Eric said:


> I hate to stop the ramblings but did anyone read Dave's post?? ( see below)
> If he is correct, everyone will be invited so if you want to start arguing about what the fee is, fine, but why argue about something that Dave never said ??? geez, Marriott will probably change their minds 5 times before they make the change,  but don't let that stop the bickering
> 
> _____________________________________________________
> Those who bought directly from Marriott will pay a relatively low fee if they choose to join the points program. Marriott intends to make the fee low enough so that many, many owners will join. Those who bought resale will pay a higher fee, possibly much higher, if they wish to join.



Eric, everyone may get invited but if it costs direct buyers $500 and resale buyers $5000, they have effectively not invited resale buyers.


----------



## PerryM

*Flushed down the toilet...*



RandR said:


> Eric, everyone may get invited but if it costs direct buyers $500 and resale buyers $5000, they have effectively not invited resale buyers.



It's much worse than that - WE, the owners, are going to be kept from exchanging our units with other Marriott owners - why is Marriott interfering with this basic right of timeshare ownership?

Take a sold out resort, like MountainSide, and I want to exchange my week 52, which I bought resale, for a week 7, and that owner bought Marriott and is in the new system.  These are the ONLY weeks 52 and 7 that aren't being occupied by the owners or rented for big bucks.  Neither owner can exchange with the other owner.

We both pay MFs, elect the HOA members who then decide who will be the management firm, which is Marriott, and then pay Marriott to clean the toilets.

Now how does Marriott get to interfere with the two Marriott owners enjoyment of timeshare ownership at their own resort which Marriott cleans the toilets.

Marriott made their commission when both units were first sold - they were happy back then.  Now they want to interfere with the descendants of the original owners (not family but resale owners).

I just don't see where Marriott has any right to interfere with the owners' enjoyment of ownership of the timeshares.

Somebody show me where this is perfectly OK; beyond the legal fine print that allows them to bully us.

Marriott is erecting barriers for one owner to exchange with another owner.

I understand that both owners can still use II but why do we owners tolerate Marriott screwing around with our exchanging ability.  They need to clean the toilets better and stop messing with us.


----------



## Pit

BocaBum99 said:


> I have my perspective because I have seen utilization statistics for various resort groups and exchange companies.  There is a surprising amount of under utilized resorts and expiring or sell off weeks.  Why do you think that RCI and II have such a huge rental pool of getaways and extra vacations.  When the developer maintains control of those expiring weeks, they can profit from them.  When owners control inventory by booking reservations and making deposits into exchange companies, those deposits become under the control of the exchange company instead of Marriott.  Huge money left on the table.



Certainly, many weeks go unreserved and many deposits go unused. No disagreement there. But, Marriott already has control of unreserved weeks. This is not something they gain by introducing a point system. Whether owners deposit or not is irrelevant, because Marriott cannot double-book a unit that is owner reserved. The only upside I see is that last minute owner cancellations would go back into Marriott inventory rather than II. Marriott could then recycle that inventory.



BocaBum99 said:


> When owners own points, they don't have to book anything to keep their points.   Lots of owners allow points to expire.  An amazing number do.  The unreserved inventory due to the points not being booked creates excess inventory for rent via bonus time.  Just look at all the systems that have bonus time.  It is very plentiful.  Expiring points = bonus time usage + empty units.



Yes, but unreserved weeks in a point system have no more value than unreserved weeks in the current system. Are you saying that there will be more unreserved weeks under a point system than the current system? Maybe so.


----------



## Pit

BocaBum99 said:


> It seems a bit cynical to believe that the only reason Marriott is doing this is to suck more value out of the ownerships of their current customers.
> 
> At least in my approach, owners are gaining a new set of features and they are paying for it with equity in their current ownerships instead of an upfront fee.



Well, I am a bit cynical when it comes to timeshare developers. However, I think you misunderstood me. I believe they are doing this in an effort to improve developer sales. They want to differentiate their product from the Marriott week on ebay. They also need to compete with Starwood, Hyatt, and Hilton, who already offer internal point systems. 

Marriott might surprise me here. For me, the most revealing detail will be whether or not they allow the point system to transfer with the resale for free (as do Hyatt and Hilton). Marriott has the option to do this without depressing resale values. I'll reserve judgement until I see which path they choose.


----------



## Pit

dioxide45 said:


> I don't think Marriott rents unreserved weeks on Marriott.com. Those weeks you see there are weeks turned in for points or developer owned weeks. I believe owned unreserved weeks get bulk banked with II and go in to the exchange or getaway pool.



I don't know if they rent the excess days/weeks via marriott.com or not. I was just pointing out that Marriott has already granted themselves the right to rent unreserved weeks. It is written into the CCRs. Nor do I know the details of the II-Marriott agreement, but I suspect that Marriott profits from rentals (i.e. getaways) through II.


----------



## dougp26364

It amazes me the number of posts and assumptions (guesses) being made about a program that doesn't exist. Sure it might be fun to talk about as far as potential but, those of you that are worried really shouldn't be concerned at this point. Nothing said in the almost 400 posts in this thread could be considered anywhere close to acurate. It's ALL a guessing game. 

$2,000 to join? That's just a figure pulled out of the air. The "source" said it would be low enough that the majority would join. To me that means $500 or less. At $200 I'd jump on the band wagon. At $500 I'd still have to think about it. At $2,000 I'm betting a lot of owners will be more than happy to keep their ownership as it is.


----------



## BocaBum99

Pit said:


> Certainly, many weeks go unreserved and many deposits go unused. No disagreement there. But, Marriott already has control of unreserved weeks. This is not something they gain by introducing a point system. Whether owners deposit or not is irrelevant, because Marriott cannot double-book a unit that is owner reserved. The only upside I see is that last minute owner cancellations would go back into Marriott inventory rather than II. Marriott could then recycle that inventory.
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, but unreserved weeks in a point system have no more value than unreserved weeks in the current system. Are you saying that there will be more unreserved weeks under a point system than the current system? Maybe so.



I'm not talking about today's unreserved units in Marriott.  I am talking about reserved weeks that get deposited only because an owner wants to extend the life of their weeks.  The beneificiary of those units is II.  If Marriott takes that back, then that is a huge potential to reclaim weeks that II is profiting from.

Even for units that go unreserved in Marriott, an internal exchange system allows them to control who gets what weeks in external exchange.  When owners sign over their weeks to Marriott, the owner loses the ability to choose which unit gets deposited into the exchange company.  For instance, in the past, someone who owns a Maui Napili Village who wants to go somewhere else must deposit that week into II.  If that owner is part of the internal exchange system, Marriott will give them a ton of points and if the owner wants to go to a non-Marriott resort, that Napili Village doesn't have to go to the exchange company.  They deposit a much less valuable week.  The difference in the value of that deposit is value that accrues to Marriott and/or owners.


----------



## jerseyfinn

*time will tell . . . patience is a virtue*

Well, I'm glad that I sort of missed all of this as I usually wander in once a week to TUG to see what's up. It takes me a long time to parse through the first two pages of this thread and then I quit reading . . .  so excuse me if I miss something from pages 3 through 6. :deadhorse: 

First off, sincere thanks to *DaveM* for his earnest info update. Hope you're having a nice holiday. I already know that you've become personally reacquainted with the old addage about "shooting the messenger"   but I think most here  do genuinely appreciate your efforts   . Likewise I sincerely appreciate a chunk of the the commentary here as some posters are indeed thinking outloud and positing some good questions about "proposed changes". Some of you have given me ( and other TUGgers) some instructive thoughts to ponder.

As to the rest of it. I gotta be honest and say that there's so much *speculation * ( some of it is sounds more like Puritan heresay    ) floating around on this thread that I really don't see anything useful flowing from it. Bottom line is that if you're an MVC owner, you've got to be interested in any talk of internal trades or a points system. But in truth, we have nothing at all to go on except that DaveM asserts that Marriott is seriously considering something -- and that's good enough for me at this moment.

So yeah, I'm concerned as we, like many folks here, are considerably invested in MVC. But I've always known that Marriott is in timeshare for the revenue, I'm comfortable witih that fact, & I hope that the integrity and creativity of Marriott comes through when they finally lay their cards on the table. There is indeed a lot at stake for all parties involved.  All I can do is sit back, utilize my weeks, and wait for the letter from Marriott to arrive whenever that day will be.

Now back to speculating about how many angels fit on the head of a pin  :zzz: 

Barry


----------



## gmarine

dougp26364 said:


> It amazes me the number of posts and assumptions (guesses) being made about a program that doesn't exist. Sure it might be fun to talk about as far as potential but, those of you that are worried really shouldn't be concerned at this point. Nothing said in the almost 400 posts in this thread could be considered anywhere close to acurate. It's ALL a guessing game.
> 
> $2,000 to join? That's just a figure pulled out of the air. The "source" said it would be low enough that the majority would join. To me that means $500 or less. At $200 I'd jump on the band wagon. At $500 I'd still have to think about it. At $2,000 I'm betting a lot of owners will be more than happy to keep their ownership as it is.



Great point Doug. 

Marriott is going to its best keeping the price low enough to entice ALL owners to join. The company is going to want the recurring revenue of exchanges and is going to want to show that the program works by very simply showing the large amount of owners who join. The developers of this program are not going to take a chance on rolling it out at a price that many owners will see as too high.

Any Marriott bashing isnt necessary since NOTHING is known about the program yet. NOTHING at all. It is all rumours,guesses and speculation.

Marriott is a very owner friendly timeshare company. There is no indication that they wont continue to be the same way. 

And everything I've posted is still just another guess.


----------



## PerryM

dougp26364 said:


> It amazes me the number of posts and assumptions (guesses) being made about a program that doesn't exist. Sure it might be fun to talk about as far as potential but, those of you that are worried really shouldn't be concerned at this point. Nothing said in the almost 400 posts in this thread could be considered anywhere close to acurate. It's ALL a guessing game.
> 
> $2,000 to join? That's just a figure pulled out of the air. The "source" said it would be low enough that the majority would join. To me that means $500 or less. At $200 I'd jump on the band wagon. At $500 I'd still have to think about it. At $2,000 I'm betting a lot of owners will be more than happy to keep their ownership as it is.



I suggest that worst case scenarios be used since you can believe that Marriott is rumoring the best case scenario for Marriott.

This is Marriott's rumor that they plug hundreds of times a day - if the Marriott owner base gets all riled up its their fault.

There is NO valid reason for Marriott to spread rumors that frighten Marriott owners - none but stupidity.


----------



## BocaBum99

dougp26364 said:


> It amazes me the number of posts and assumptions (guesses) being made about a program that doesn't exist. Sure it might be fun to talk about as far as potential but, those of you that are worried really shouldn't be concerned at this point. Nothing said in the almost 400 posts in this thread could be considered anywhere close to acurate. It's ALL a guessing game.
> 
> $2,000 to join? That's just a figure pulled out of the air. The "source" said it would be low enough that the majority would join. To me that means $500 or less. At $200 I'd jump on the band wagon. At $500 I'd still have to think about it. At $2,000 I'm betting a lot of owners will be more than happy to keep their ownership as it is.



There is nothing wrong with speculation about a future program that is very likely to be implemented.  It's only a problem if it brings worry to the person doing the speculating.

People who make the most money in business are those who can successfully anticipate what happens in the market.  With a little bit of thought and understanding about what motivates businesses and people in business, it's not hard to get in the ball park.  A clear understanding of the likely outcomes can help a saavy person get into a good position to capitalize on programs as they reveal themselves.

When this thread started, I was thinking very negatively about the possibility that Marriott would charge a large fee for resale owners to get into the program.    Now that I have thought through it like a Marriott product manager would, I have decided that it may not be as bad as I originally anticipated and in fact, it could be something that can be very good for a saavy buyer.

All timeshare systems have loopholes which we as tuggers exploit.  It enables us to do great trade ups in II and RCI by knowing which traders are the cheapest to buy and maintain that will get us the biggest exchange possible.  It's clear to me that Marriott's system will also have such features for us to exploit.  The question is what will those features be and how much will it cost to get in.  You have a year to get your portfolio ready to anticipate some type of grandfathering.  If it happens, great.  If not, it was a good bet.

Regarding $2000.  That is a guess.  We have seen a $5000 price point in Asia.  I know that $2000 would be easy to sell if let it go at that price with the features I mentioned earlier.  My guess is the retail price will be set somewhere between $2000-5000.  And, there will be waiving of most of it for developer purchases and a street price for everyone else.  This is a guess.  But, it's not an uninformed guess.  For instance, I am very confident that it won't be $10,000.

In addition, doing scenario planning can help remove fear if you use it to help understand potential outcomes and plan appropriately for each major scenario that is likely to occur.  Once a person has a chance to think through the scenarios and they have a plan of attack for each of the possible scenarios, it gives a person tremendous confidence about their abiltiy to navigate an ambiguous future state.

So, speculating can be very healthy if used in this way.


----------



## PerryM

*$3,500 is my guess*



gmarine said:


> Great point Doug.
> 
> *Marriott is going to its best keeping the price low* enough to entice ALL owners to join. The company is going to want the recurring revenue of exchanges and is going to want to show that the program works by very simply showing the large amount of owners who join. The developers of this program are not going to take a chance on rolling it out at a price that many owners will see as too high.
> 
> Any Marriott bashing isnt necessary since NOTHING is known about the program yet. NOTHING at all. It is all rumours,guesses and speculation.
> 
> Marriott is a very owner friendly timeshare company. There is no indication that they wont continue to be the same way.
> 
> And everything I've posted is still just another guess.



Well that's a rumor to a rumor - why assume that?  I don't see Marriott reducing their sales prices by a penny.  They have temporary cash rebates but they haven't backed down a single penny on sales.

Marriott can do whatever they want to us and the vast majority of Marriott owners will go with it.  

My guess is $3,500 to deposit a week into the new internal exchange program - the price sounds right to me.  This is for a Platinum Plus Holiday week, I have no idea what a Bronze will cost.

Why don't we start a pool?  No money but just bragging rights.  My guess is $3,500 as the highest fee charged.


----------



## BocaBum99

PerryM said:


> I suggest that worst case scenarios be used since you can believe that Marriott is rumoring the best case scenario for Marriott.
> 
> This is Marriott's rumor that they plug hundreds of times a day - if the Marriott owner base gets all riled up its their fault.
> 
> There is NO valid reason for Marriott to spread rumors that frighten Marriott owners - none but stupidity.



What I recommend is figure out what a likely worst case scenario is and have a plan should that scenario play out.  However, worst case scenarios rarely ever happen.  You should also determine what you believe is the likely scenario.  I'll bet that the likely scenario is something that will be palitable to most owners.

In thinking this through, I am okay with an overlay internal exchange program with a fee and a higher fee for resale buyers as long as it isn't ludicrously high.  $5000 would ludicrously high.  And, there are a set of features, if they include them in the program, I will buy in at the right price.

I would be okay as long as the separate system of II and the 12/13 month reservation window is in place.  That's because owners will have a choice to keep what they have or pay a premium to get a premium product.


----------



## BocaBum99

gmarine said:


> Great point Doug.
> 
> Marriott is going to its best keeping the price low enough to entice ALL owners to join. The company is going to want the recurring revenue of exchanges and is going to want to show that the program works by very simply showing the large amount of owners who join. The developers of this program are not going to take a chance on rolling it out at a price that many owners will see as too high.
> 
> Any Marriott bashing isnt necessary since NOTHING is known about the program yet. NOTHING at all. It is all rumours,guesses and speculation.
> 
> Marriott is a very owner friendly timeshare company. There is no indication that they wont continue to be the same way.
> 
> And everything I've posted is still just another guess.



Marriott is NOT doing this for the exchange fees.  The revenue from such an endeavor would be very very small.


----------



## Pit

BocaBum99 said:


> I'm not talking about today's unreserved units in Marriott.  I am talking about reserved weeks that get deposited only because an owner wants to extend the life of their weeks.  The beneificiary of those units is II.  If Marriott takes that back, then that is a huge potential to reclaim weeks that II is profiting from.



We must not be viewing this the same way, because I don't see how a points program changes this behavior. Owners who currently reserve and deposit with II to extend their weeks, will simply continue the same practice under a point system (rather than allow their points to expire). Likewise there will always be some that do not use their ownership, whether it be weeks or points. In the end, it boils down to unreserved weeks, because that's all Marriott has to work with.



BocaBum99 said:


> Even for units that go unreserved in Marriott, an internal exchange system allows them to control who gets what weeks in external exchange.  When owners sign over their weeks to Marriott, the owner loses the ability to choose which unit gets deposited into the exchange company.  For instance, in the past, someone who owns a Maui Napili Village who wants to go somewhere else must deposit that week into II.  If that owner is part of the internal exchange system, Marriott will give them a ton of points and if the owner wants to go to a non-Marriott resort, that Napili Village doesn't have to go to the exchange company.  They deposit a much less valuable week.  The difference in the value of that deposit is value that accrues to Marriott and/or owners.



This is a very good point regarding control of deposits to II. Marriott can profit by increasing the quality, rather than quantity, of the weeks they control.  This is what Starwood does today through SVN.


----------



## BocaBum99

PerryM said:


> Well that's a rumor to a rumor - why assume that?  I don't see Marriott reducing their sales prices by a penny.  They have temporary cash rebates but they haven't backed down a single penny on sales.
> 
> Marriott can do whatever they want to us and the vast majority of Marriott owners will go with it.
> 
> My guess is $3,500 to deposit a week into the new internal exchange program - the price sounds right to me.  This is for a Platinum Plus Holiday week, I have no idea what a Bronze will cost.
> 
> Why don't we start a pool?  No money but just bragging rights.  My guess is $3,500 as the highest fee charged.



I think that is a good guess.


----------



## PerryM

*Make it up in volume?*

Marriott faces the age old problem of price sensitivity.

Out of all the existing Marriott weeks sold probably 80% were sold by Marriott and the other 20% are resales at this point - just a wild guess.

Marriott really has no competition here - the 80% will just do what Marriott says.  Here is my guess of all seasons:


$3,500 Platinum Plus/Holiday week
$3,000 Platinum
$2,500 Gold
$2,000 Silver
$1,000 Bronze

No discounts for multiple weeks of ownership.

To get the program off to a running start I'd offer "Pre-construction pricing" for the new exchange system:


First 10,000 weeks get 50% off
Next 10,000 weeks get 40% off
Next 10,000 weeks get 30% off
Next 10,000 weeks get 20% off
Next 100,000 weeks get 10% off

The first day would probably sell 20,000 weeks with little difficulty.

Just a guess...


----------



## BocaBum99

Pit said:


> We must not be viewing this the same way, because I don't see how a points program changes this behavior. Owners who currently reserve and deposit with II to extend their weeks, will simply continue the same practice under a point system (rather than allow their points to expire).



Ah, that is where you are incorrect.  Most point systems allow you to save your points for another year.  Or borrow points from the future.  You can't do that with a weeks based system like Marriott.  The inventory is there or it expires.  So, there is a sense of urgency around an expiring week or float period.  When you can save points into another year, you have NO NEED TO BOOK A RESERVATION AND DEPOSIT IT.

As a side note, Wyndham's point pool creates an incentive for owners to deposit expiring points into RCI because there isn't an automatic points saving feature.  They don't really care because they own RCI.  If they didn't, they should change it so that points save automatically.  It would create much more breakage that they would control and profit from.

And, having seen literally thousands of owner accounts.  The majority of the ones I see have 2 years of points in them.  They happen to be sellers accounts who want to sell because they aren't using their ownerships.  There would be more if they didn't allow them to expire for 3 years instead of two.  Expiring points is the dark matter that explains how all points systems and exchange companies can even operate.  If it weren't for those who own and get nothing or deposit and get nothing, customer satisfaction would be horrible since it would be impossible to get much of what you wanted out of a system.


----------



## BocaBum99

PerryM said:


> Marriott faces the age old problem of price sensitivity.
> 
> Out of all the existing Marriott weeks sold probably 80% were sold by Marriott and the other 20% are resales at this point - just a wild guess.
> 
> Marriott really has no competition here - the 80% will just do what Marriott says.  Here is my guess of all seasons:
> 
> 
> $3,500 Platinum Plus/Holiday week
> $3,000 Platinum
> $2,500 Gold
> $2,000 Silver
> $1,000 Bronze
> 
> No discounts for multiple weeks of ownership.
> 
> To get the program off to a running start I'd offer "Pre-construction pricing" for the new exchange system:
> 
> 
> First 10,000 weeks get 50% off
> Next 10,000 weeks get 40% off
> Next 10,000 weeks get 30% off
> Next 10,000 weeks get 20% off
> Next 100,000 weeks get 10% off
> 
> The first day would probably sell 20,000 weeks with little difficulty.
> 
> Just a guess...



I think they just set a flat rate of $3500 and they discount it to zero for the 1st year to get as many weeks enrolled as possible.

Then, over time, they can give bigger discounts to platinum owners who are the key to the whole internal system success.


----------



## AceValenta

I am with some of the people that this is just hearsay and speculation. Marriott has neither announced or denounced such a system. So, who is to say if it is true or not.....

To speculate cost, resale or develper, and amount of points purely conjecture at most. 

When it is released, we can all make our respective decisions. As someone stated before, maybe Marriott is negotiations with II or even a return to RCI and they are trying to get a bigger piece of the pie. 

No one as suggested the costs of running such a program for Marriott. Setup, employee, rental space and promotional expenses to name a few.

It will be interesting to see how this all plays out for Marriott and its group of owners. Until we know the full effects we can "guess" all we want. 

I have read every post and there have been some valid points. They have all been very valid. However, some have taken a pea sized rumor and turned it into a boulder of speculation. 

It will be interesting to see how many of these ideas come to fruition, if any, in the next year. 

Also, don't forget about the economy. Many people's disposable income has decrease over the past few years here in the states. Marriott may shoot itself in the foot by asking for large amounts of money to join a program such as rumored. 

It is interesting to see that they picked a launch date around tax time and after dues have been paid. Just odd timing if you ask me and adding less validity to the rumor. 

Who knows? It is what it is and it will be what it will be....in the meantime we have no control of the future.


----------



## PerryM

*Resale owners program*



BocaBum99 said:


> I think they just set a flat rate of $3500 and they discount it to zero for the 1st year to get as many weeks enrolled as possible.
> 
> Then, over time, they can give bigger discounts to platinum owners who are the key to the whole internal system success.



Could be there are dozens of ways to rake in the money.

I do see Marriott offering a one-time-only offer to existing resale owners:

Resale owners can enter the program if they pay double the Marriott owner's rate.  So for resale owners here is what they would pay:

    * $7,000 Platinum Plus/Holiday week
    * $6,000 Platinum
    * $5,000 Gold
    * $4,000 Silver
    * $2,000 Bronze


Resale owners get the following discounts:

    * First 20,000 weeks get 50% off
    * Next 20,000 weeks get 40% off
    * Next 20,000 weeks get 30% off
    * Next 20,000 weeks get 20% off
    * Next 20,000 weeks get 10% off

That would put pressure on resale owners to join and Marriott bought owners will feel they got something for buying Marriott.


----------



## m61376

BocaBum99 said:


> I think they just set a flat rate of $3500 and they discount it to zero for the 1st year to get as many weeks enrolled as possible.
> 
> Then, over time, they can give bigger discounts to platinum owners who are the key to the whole internal system success.



I tend to agree with some of the principle points you've outlined. To get the product off to a good start and to entice owners, I'd also venture to guess there will be an initial free enrollment period, or a very minimal fee. I think what happens here MAY end up being a reflection of what happens with the Asia Pacific points program. I'm guessing the buy ins there are not necessarily a precursor, but a testing grounds of sort for here. If owners there balk at the $5000 price, then it is more likely we will see significant grand-opening specials.

As for current resale owners, my guess is that at the end of the day there will be a grandfathering, and they will make the same initial offer to all owners, but I think that window overall will be shorter than the year you suggest (perhaps 6 months). I think they want to start off with a bang, and it is human nature to push the papers aside. A 6 month initial offering would get the ball rolling and, if met with success, will force others to join so the program will become self-sustaining.

And I think that at the end of the initial enrollment- which might entail more of a small sign-up fee to cover costs-the discount will slowly decrease (possibly 50% after 6 months, 40% after 7 or 8 months, etc.) so that a year after inception there is a fixed price- a MSRP, as you suggest. This sign-on fee will likely be waived as special offers to entice buyers to buy direct, with different promotional offerings much akin to different up front point incentives.

Perry, of course, you may end up being right, but I like to think of Marriott as a company more positively, and I think they are concerned with their customers. I may be naive, but at the end of the day I think that, at least initially, resale owners will receive the same offering. They don't want to create bad will towards a program at its inception, and if they alienated current resale owners there would likely be a lot of negative publicity from a significant group (and, since many resale owners are also direct purchasers of one or more properties, it would likely be a significant group), and I believe there would be credibility to complaints that a system that they bought into was being changed so that they would no longer enjoy the same benefits relative to other owners. While Marriott reserves the right to change the program in the future, there was no language indicating that they reserved the right to subjugate a certain subset of owners. I do agree that it is likely the distinction will be made for future resale buyers, even though I prefer it wasn't.

Of course, that's just my musings based on your speculation, nothing more.

I think an important consideration that there hasn't been much conversation about is the very real probability of point devaluation over time IF Marriott decides on a variable point system (wherein different properties of like season/view are awarded different point values at the onset). Just as many developer purchasers never thought about the future of Marriott Rewards devaluation and there was a huge outcry when that happened, I think that is a very real probability if the system is designed in that fashion. Even owners of the category 7 properties, who will be the winners in such a system, may find themselves losers 5 years down the road even when booking what Marriott consider equivalent properties. I'd hate for my 7 days to be suddenly worth 5 days when exchanging  (of course assuming they'd be fixed when booking my home resort, which may or may not be an assumption that can be made). The precedent has been set by devaluation of the perk of trading for reward points, an explanation for why that is necessary over time has been validly offered; there is every reason to expect that IF Marriott adopts a variable point system where different Platinum weeks, for example, at different resorts are awarded different point values based on 2010 parameters, that down the road a new resort will likely be more expensive and will likely be awarded more points.

And, just like the decrease in resale value, this also affects EVERY owner.


----------



## Pit

BocaBum99 said:


> Ah, that is where you are incorrect.  Most point systems allow you to save your points for another year.  Or borrow points from the future.  You can't do that with a weeks based system like Marriott.  The inventory is there or it expires.  So, there is a sense of urgency around an expiring week or float period.  When you can save points into another year, you have NO NEED TO BOOK A RESERVATION AND DEPOSIT IT.
> 
> As a side note, Wyndham's point pool creates an incentive for owners to deposit expiring points into RCI because there isn't an automatic points saving feature.  They don't really care because they own RCI.  If they didn't, they should change it so that points save automatically.  It would create much more breakage that they would control and profit from.
> 
> And, having seen literally thousands of owner accounts.  The majority of the ones I see have 2 years of points in them.  They happen to be sellers accounts who want to sell because they aren't using their ownerships.  There would be more if they didn't allow them to expire for 3 years instead of two.  Expiring points is the dark matter that explains how all points systems and exchange companies can even operate.  If it weren't for those who own and get nothing or deposit and get nothing, customer satisfaction would be horrible since it would be impossible to get much of what you wanted out of a system.




Well, rolling over points would seem to just postpone the eventual owner deposit, rather than eliminate it. Eventually, the owner has to use the points or make a deposit to avoid forfeiture. But, I'll take your word for it that a point system results in a greater number of unreserved weeks. 

That conclusion in itself, does not bode well for owners. Marriott keeps the revenue and owners pay the MFs. Pure profit for Mariott at owner expense. An owner-friendly approach would seek to increase owner utilization, rather than profit from decreased owner utilization. See why I am cynical?


----------



## BocaBum99

Pit said:


> Well, rolling over points would seem to just postpone the eventual owner deposit, rather than eliminate it. Eventually, the owner has to use the points or make a deposit to avoid forfeiture. But, I'll take your word for it that a point system results in a greater number of unreserved weeks.
> 
> That conclusion in itself, does not bode well for owners. Marriott keeps the revenue and owners pay the MFs. Pure profit for Mariott at owner expense. An owner-friendly approach would seek to increase owner utilization, rather than profit from decreased owner utilization. See why I am cynical?



Yeah, you are right to be cynical.  Developers set themselves up for scorn with their sales and marketing model.  I just think there is some balance that needs to be put into the discussion.  I think Marriott will be good to its owners at the same time it profits.  Just like Disney.

It's true that owners will wait until the last minute to deposit expiring points.  But, there are two things that can mitigate it.  There can be limitations placed on points that are saved.  Or, at a minimum, Marriott deposits a weak trader with low rental possibilities and retains the better weeks for owners.

Marriott will return the benefit to the owners by offering bonus time.  Or, they should anyway.  Every system I've seen that has it, the owners love it, use it and would pay extra for it.  Those discounted rates are the benefit to owners.   Those units would have gone expired anyway, only II would have benefited otherwise in terms of the getaways they sell off.  And, non owners would be getting those benefits from their ACs.  With an internal system, owners get the benefit.  II's loss is Marriott's and owners gain.


----------



## gmarine

BocaBum99 said:


> Marriott is NOT doing this for the exchange fees.  The revenue from such an endeavor would be very very small.




As everything else about the program, this is pure speculation. Companies love recurring income. The program could also have a yearly fee as II currenlty does.

My guess is that the fee to join this points program is going to be relatively small. Marriott is going to want to show the program as a success by the amount of owners who join. A price of a few thousand dollars will be prohibitive for many owners
IMO, of course, since again, there is NOTHING known about the program


----------



## jerseyfinn

Let's go with what we know is *fact *and spinkle in some *reality*. I try to avoid *speculation *and *hubris*, as well as stepping on pins with angels on them.

*The facts:*


We're MVC owners here.
The overwhelming majority of MVC owners have walked in through the developer purchase door. 
We select our resorts/seasons/villa type in accordance with our own individual goals. 
Marriott lays down the fundamental T&C of MVC ownership & we sign on. 
We each proceed to put our own individual spin on how we utilize our weekswithin MVC
Marriott is pondering significant changes to the exchange/ownerhsip process 
*None *of us can speak with certitude of what this new program will or will not be.

*The reality:*


Life is not a static process. No surprise that MVC & Marriott do not hold still.
Marriott TS is not the only game in town, it competes against other products.
TS ownership carries risks/advantages
TS of any type is a discretionary purchase.
A real value can be pegged to any TS week ( but one may not like the price )
Prior to this present economic downturn, a significant segment of MVC owners could utilize MVC developer pricing as a yardstick to gauge resale prices for their own weeks.
The economic downturn has temporarily thrown this pricing mechanism into disarray
Marriott's effort to change the program predates the economic downturn.
It's not possible to accurately gauge future TS resale values at this moment.
Marriott has quite a headache upon it's hands in terms of timing, but it must none-the-less move on & execute it's business plan.


I think that some several other capable TUGgers have already laid out the fabric of questions that each of us should be asking as MVC owners. I leave it to individuals to figure out which posts constitute fact and reality and which posts might be better suited for the virtual rubbish heap.

I myself am trying to wrap my imaginination around all of this as I'm pretty happy with my purchases and how we utilize them within the present 7 day scheme. I'm an owner with a long-term point of view so my other concern is what is gonna happen to the value of my weeks when we elect to divest ourselves of these weeks some 15 plus years hence. I'm a relativist, so I can afford to be patient whilst trying to adjust to change and reality.

I don't feel any particular urge to berate or deride Marriott nor do I feel especially cynical or vindictive. I'm certainly not gonna advocate litigation at this stage,though I do wonder about what kind of nightmare Marriott is presented with whenever it ponders a change in any rule given that you're talking about 50 individual states, each with their own arcane rules regarding TS. If you live in NJ like we do, you know exactly what I mean about FUBARed government. So I myself wish Marriott well in negotiating the barbed wire of rampant litigation which has become an American pasttime.

All I know is that I hope that Marriott presents/develops something cogent, thoughtful, and useful for the bulk of MVC owners. Oh yeah, another reality pops into my mind - all MVC weeks are not precisely equal. A problem for Marriott, but a reality indeed that could pop up for a small strata of owners.  Is it time to call Obama and his crew to "fix" all of this?  I sure as hell hope not.

Let's allow this thing to move forward while the good people at Marriott work out all of the kinks and go home each night with all of the headaches of change. I'm not in Fairey Tale mode at this moment although I do anxiously await real information from Marriott itself. I don't think that any of us are on the MVC VIP list, so I guess we'll just have to utilize our weeks and wait for word to trickle out from MVC about what the future holds. Let's hope that by then, the economy has turned a bit more favorable and MVC gets a little wind in it's sails ( or should I say sales? ) as it remains in all of our interests for MVC to remain vibrant and successful.

Barry


----------



## BocaBum99

Pit said:


> Well, rolling over points would seem to just postpone the eventual owner deposit, rather than eliminate it. Eventually, the owner has to use the points or make a deposit to avoid forfeiture. But, I'll take your word for it that a point system results in a greater number of unreserved weeks.
> 
> That conclusion in itself, does not bode well for owners. Marriott keeps the revenue and owners pay the MFs. Pure profit for Mariott at owner expense. An owner-friendly approach would seek to increase owner utilization, rather than profit from decreased owner utilization. See why I am cynical?



Oh, I forgot to mention.  What Marriott can do is create a foreign timeshare, one time, trade in program as an incentive for purchasers of the developer product.  Wyndham calls it PIC.  Bluegreen calls it AIM.  Diamond calls it Club Select.  WorldMark calls it exchange plus.  What this program would do for Marriott is as follows.  Non-Marriott owners who are dissatisfied with their timeshare can buy a Marriott and annual deposit their non-Marriott timeshare for points.  

This type of program does a number of things for Marriott.

1) It provides a nice incentive for an existing owner of a non-Marriott timeshare to buy in by taking an objection off the table.

2) When the owner deposits these weeks, Marriott can use these deposits to get exchange credits for owners who are depositing expiring points.   They keep the Marriott inventory for owners.  And, the point value for what they offer for the non-Marriott unit is considerably less in value than the initial deposit.

The bottom line is that when Marriott has total control of the inventory, this gives them huge negotiating leverage with 3rd party exchange companies, it allows them to keep the best stuff for owners, and it helps to create a strong differential value to a resale product.

So, inventory control is what Marriott is seeking as much as anything.  It gives them huge revenue opportunities that I have explained in prior posts.


----------



## BocaBum99

gmarine said:


> As everything else about the program, this is pure speculation. Companies love recurring income. The program could also have a yearly fee as II currenlty does.
> 
> My guess is that the fee to join this points program is going to be relatively small. Marriott is going to want to show the program as a success by the amount of owners who join. A price of a few thousand dollars will be prohibitive for many owners
> IMO, of course, since again, there is NOTHING known about the program



I agree that companies love recurring revenue.  What they love more is a defensible beach head that allows them to reap revenues from lots of new sources.  I claim that the exchange revenue is the minor part of the equation.  Look at my prior post that outlines some possible revenue lines.


----------



## BocaBum99

jerseyfinn said:


> Let's go with what we know is *fact *and spinkle in some *reality*. I try to avoid *speculation *and *hubris*, as well as stepping on pins with angels on them.
> 
> *The facts:*
> 
> 
> We're MVC owners here.
> The overwhelming majority of MVC owners have walked in through the developer purchase door.
> We select our resorts/seasons/villa type in accordance with our own individual goals.
> Marriott lays down the fundamental T&C of MVC ownership & we sign on.
> We each proceed to put our own individual spin on how we utilize our weekswithin MVC
> Marriott is pondering significant changes to the exchange/ownerhsip process
> *None *of us can speak with certitude of what this new program will or will not be.
> 
> *The reality:*
> 
> 
> Life is not a static process. No surprise that MVC & Marriott do not hold still.
> Marriott TS is not the only game in town, it competes against other products.
> TS ownership carries risks/advantages
> TS of any type is a discretionary purchase.
> A real value can be pegged to any TS week ( but one may not like the price )
> Prior to this present economic downturn, a significant segment of MVC owners could utilize MVC developer pricing as a yardstick to gauge resale prices for their own weeks.
> The economic downturn has temporarily thrown this pricing mechanism into disarray
> Marriott's effort to change the program predates the economic downturn.
> It's not possible to accurately gauge future TS resale values at this moment.
> Marriott has quite a headache upon it's hands in terms of timing, but it must none-the-less move on & execute it's business plan.
> 
> 
> I think that some several other capable TUGgers have already laid out the fabric of questions that each of us should be asking as MVC owners. I leave it to individuals to figure out which posts constitute fact and reality and which posts might be better suited for the virtual rubbish heap.
> 
> I myself am trying to wrap my imaginination around all of this as I'm pretty happy with my purchases and how we utilize them within the present 7 day scheme. I'm an owner with a long-term point of view so my other concern is what is gonna happen to the value of my weeks when we elect to divest ourselves of these weeks some 15 plus years hence. I'm a relativist, so I can afford to be patient whilst trying to adjust to change and reality.
> 
> I don't feel any particular urge to berate or deride Marriott nor do I feel especially cynical or vindictive. I'm certainly not gonna advocate litigation at this stage,though I do wonder about what kind of nightmare Marriott is presented with whenever it ponders a change in any rule given that you're talking about 50 individual states, each with their own arcane rules regarding TS. If you live in NJ like we do, you know exactly what I mean about FUBARed government. So I myself wish Marriott well in negotiating the barbed wire of rampant litigation which has become an American pasttime.
> 
> All I know is that I hope that Marriott presents/develops something cogent, thoughtful, and useful for the bulk of MVC owners. Oh yeah, another reality pops into my mind - all MVC weeks are not precisely equal. A problem for Marriott, but a reality indeed that could pop up for a small strata of owners.  Is it time to call Obama and his crew to "fix" all of this?  I sure as hell hope not.
> 
> Let's allow this thing to move forward while the good people at Marriott work out all of the kinks and go home each night with all of the headaches of change. I'm not in Fairey Tale mode at this moment although I do anxiously await real information from Marriott itself. I don't think that any of us are on the MVC VIP list, so I guess we'll just have to utilize our weeks and wait for word to trickle out from MVC about what the future holds. Let's hope that by then, the economy has turned a bit more favorable and MVC gets a little wind in it's sails ( or should I say sales? ) as it remains in all of our interests for MVC to remain vibrant and successful.
> 
> Barry



Excellent post.  I would only add that owners can get an insight into what Marriott might do by looking at what their competitors have done.  The Marriott product manager definitely spends a lot of time doing this to ensure that their program is competitive.

Also, since Marriott will want to be an innovator, there is a good chance that we will be positively surprised by some features they add that we never considered.


----------



## BocaBum99

gmarine said:


> As everything else about the program, this is pure speculation.



Sure, it's speculation.  But, it is speculation based on insight and mathematics.  Exchange fee revenue would be roughly 1-2% of total revenue using reasonable assumptions about the likely take rates for the program.

Companies don't launch into major new initiatives for 1% revenue potential.  There are too many other things that they can do to increase profitability at a higher rate for less work.  An easy one would be to cut everyone's operating budget by 5%.  Easy to do.  Much greater impact.  No extra work.


----------



## gmarine

BocaBum99 said:


> I agree that companies love recurring revenue.  What they love more is a defensible beach head that allows them to reap revenues from lots of new sources.  I claim that the exchange revenue is the minor part of the equation.  Look at my prior post that outlines some possible revenue lines.



Certainly a valid point as well.


----------



## Latravel

Geez.  I've been saying this in a few posts.  We should keep an open mind - you may really like the new program!  

Love this quote from jerseyfinn:
_"Life is not a static process. No surprise that MVC & Marriott do not hold still."_  and we shouldn't expect them to.


----------



## BocaBum99

Latravel said:


> Geez.  I've been saying this in a few posts.  We should keep an open mind - you may really like the new program!
> 
> Love this quote from jerseyfinn:
> _"Life is not a static process. No surprise that MVC & Marriott do not hold still."_  and we shouldn't expect them to.



It will be fun to see what they actually do.  We will see how good the product manager is.  It won't be hard to assess.


----------



## gmarine

So, how much are you willing to pay? I realize without knowing the exact program details its hard to say, but in general, how many of us would pay 2 or 3 thousand dollars for access to a points program? I cant see myself spending more than a couple hundred $$. Anything more than that and I would probably stay with II and/or look for owner trades.


----------



## Bill4728

gmarine said:


> So, how much are you willing to pay? I realize without knowing the exact program details its hard to say, but in general, how many of us would pay 2 or 3 thousand dollars for access to a points program? I cant see myself spending more than a couple hundred $$. Anything more than that and I would probably stay with II and/or look for owner trades.


If more than $1000,  I will not join.  Hopefully they charge >$2000  and a lot a people will not join, then we'll still have critical mass in  II.


----------



## PerryM

*Wanted, dead or alive*



gmarine said:


> So, how much are you willing to pay? I realize without knowing the exact program details its hard to say, but in general, how many of us would pay 2 or 3 thousand dollars for access to a points program? I cant see myself spending more than a couple hundred $$. Anything more than that and I would probably stay with II and/or look for owner trades.



This is a great question - one that Marriott is mulling over right now.

The amount can't be financed, like a timeshare for 10 years, so we really are talking about credit card charges.

I'm guessing that 10% of the current sales price is something that feels right to Marriott.  To make it more palatable Marriott may offer 4 payments spread over the year to be charged to the credit card.  Interest would be 10% but of the total to be added to each payment.

10% is what you originally charged on your credit card to buy/hold the timeshare and they will bring up this fact.

Marriott's only costs here are the programming fees, training fees, and sales and marketing.

I'm guessing but a bounty of 10% goes to the salesreps.  This will have them phoning every Marriott owner since you have a business relationship with them so they are exempt from Federal Do Not Call lists.

Expect the salesreps to sell this membership just like they did with the timeshare - a credit card number is asked for over the phone and 25%, the first payment, will get you on the salesreps list to place the order the morning sales start.

If you want pre-construction pricing this is how it will be done.

This is going to be a mad dash, panic feeling, event pushed by thousands of Marriott salesreps.  This will make a feeding frenzy shark attack seem mild.

Marriott's only problem will be processing the memberships fast enough.  Marriott might even add a new page to the MVCI website and allow owners to just sign up there after their salesrep gives them a special code which identifies him to the system.


----------



## hotcoffee

jerseyfinn said:


> As to the rest of it. I gotta be honest and say that there's so much *speculation * ( some of it is sounds more like Puritan heresay    ) floating around on this thread that I really don't see anything useful flowing from it. Bottom line is that if you're an MVC owner, you've got to be interested in any talk of internal trades or a points system. But in truth, we have nothing at all to go on except that DaveM asserts that Marriott is seriously considering something -- and that's good enough for me at this moment.
> 
> . . . . .
> 
> Now back to speculating about how many angels fit on the head of a pin  :zzz:
> 
> Barry






			
				dougp26364 said:
			
		

> It amazes me the number of posts and assumptions (guesses) being made about a program that doesn't exist. Sure it might be fun to talk about as far as potential but, those of you that are worried really shouldn't be concerned at this point. Nothing said in the almost 400 posts in this thread could be considered anywhere close to acurate. It's ALL a guessing game.
> 
> $2,000 to join? That's just a figure pulled out of the air. The "source" said it would be low enough that the majority would join. To me that means $500 or less. At $200 I'd jump on the band wagon. At $500 I'd still have to think about it. At $2,000 I'm betting a lot of owners will be more than happy to keep their ownership as it is.



I think there is a lot of reason to be concerned that Marriott does not like resale owners very much.  It was obvious to me at last year's sales presentation.  Others have mentioned the same thing.  Both DaveM's post from last year, and his most recent mentioned resale owners in one way or another.  It is clear that there is a lot of talking going on behind closed doors at Marriott on how to integrate resale owners into the new trading system or whether to exclude them altogether.  It is, however, certainly possible that Marriott will decide not to punish future resale buyers, current resale owners, and future sellers of any type.  High resale values are good for everyone (except buyers, or course), including Marriott.  Happy customers make repeat customers.  Many businesses are more concerned about short term profits rather than making loyal customers.

I must be different than must timeshare owners, based upon some of the posts here.  I did not buy into timesharing with the mindset that I would own my timeshare for the rest of my life.  I assumed that I would eventually sell it when making use of was no longer practical.  So, I'm a little concerned.  I don't have to sell for as much as I paid, but I would like to get something reasonable for it when I do sell.

We will see how the new system is implemented.  If it damages my ownership and makes it more difficult for me to sell, I will look for the best alternative to get out, and bolt.


----------



## hotcoffee

m61376 said:


> . . . IF Marriott was to change the program going forward, unless some political or other force as you suggest decided to intervene, I don't think buyers could cry foul if they were aware of the limitations at the time of their purchase.
> 
> I think the only basis for outside intervention would be the negative impact such restrictions would have on the inherent value of the property (resale value) but, since the documents all specify that the units are not investment property, that may insulate Marriott from any such claims.



Actually, the political realm could possibly be a great place to air complaints if Marriott were to implement an unfair system.  It does not require any legal analysis of documents.  Marriott could even be in the right, but still be forced to back off some of its actions.  No hotel chain wants to be publicly viewed in a bad light, or seen on the evening news being chastised for being anti-consumer.  Finding a sufficiently powerful political figure who is interested might not be so easy, but it could be worth a try if it were to come to that.


----------



## csalter2

*Must Be Retirees*

You folks must be retirees to have all of this time to talk about absolutely nothing. I actually went to Lakeshore Reserve today and spoke with a sales rep. He did say that there would be a points system and he said there would be an internal trading system. However, he did not know any specifics because they are still working on it. 

Over 400 posts on what? Absolutely nothing. I did get one thing from the discussion. That is that Marriott is trying to retain value of the timeshare so that those who bought from the developer would not feel that their buying their timeshare for $25,000 to $50,000 would not lose it all the next day as a resale buyer purchased it for $5000. That's fine with me to help protect the value. That helps everyone by protecting the value of the product.

I love going to my Marriott property and others. I was at Shadow Ridge earlier this month and am now here at Grand Vista. I feel that Marriott has a good product. I don't mind paying for a good product. If Marriott, goes similar to DRI with its points, I will be mad at myself for purchasing as many points as I did with DRI because their resorts don't have the same quality as Marriott resorts but have maintenance fees in the same ball park. I must say that DRI does have timeshares in more locations than Marriott which is appealing. 

Nevertheless, I too think that everyone should calm down and wait for the word to come down so that it can be evaluated and we can all speak from a position of knowledge. Only then can we analyze the changes and make intelligent suggestions and decisions that would best suit our needs. 

I am not worried about what Marriott does. I know they want to make money and I want great vacations. I am looking forward to when I retire in about 15 years and can stay in my resorts hang out and have fun and not speculate about what coulda', mighta', or maybe'll happen.


----------



## BocaBum99

csalter2 said:


> Nevertheless, I too think that everyone should calm down and wait for the word to come down so that it can be evaluated and we can all speak from a position of knowledge. Only then can we analyze the changes and make intelligent suggestions and decisions that would best suit our needs.



I am personally excited about how this program will develop and unfold.  As for deciding to wait for more information before posting any longer, I think other people can make their own decision on whether or not that is good advice.   I don't know about you, but I am speaking from a position of knowledge.


----------



## PerryM

*10...9...8...7...*



csalter2 said:


> You folks must be retirees to have all of this time to talk about absolutely nothing. I actually went to Lakeshore Reserve today and spoke with a sales rep. He did say that there would be a points system and he said there would be an internal trading system. However, he did not know any specifics because they are still working on it.
> 
> Over 400 posts on what? Absolutely nothing. I did get one thing from the discussion. That is that Marriott is trying to retain value of the timeshare so that those who bought from the developer would not feel that their buying their timeshare for $25,000 to $50,000 would not lose it all the next day as a resale buyer purchased it for $5000. That's fine with me to help protect the value. That helps everyone by protecting the value of the product.
> 
> I love going to my Marriott property and others. I was at Shadow Ridge earlier this month and am now here at Grand Vista. I feel that Marriott has a good product. I don't mind paying for a good product. If Marriott, goes similar to DRI with its points, I will be mad at myself for purchasing as many points as I did with DRI because their resorts don't have the same quality as Marriott resorts but have maintenance fees in the same ball park. I must say that DRI does have timeshares in more locations than Marriott which is appealing.
> 
> Nevertheless, I too think that everyone should calm down and wait for the word to come down so that it can be evaluated and we can all speak from a position of knowledge. Only then can we analyze the changes and make intelligent suggestions and decisions that would best suit our needs.
> 
> I am not worried about what Marriott does. I know they want to make money and I want great vacations. I am looking forward to when I retire in about 15 years and can stay in my resorts hang out and have fun and not speculate about what coulda', mighta', or maybe'll happen.



I make my living on the internet so I can easily chat on many chat rooms during the day - just like I would at a water-cooler.

Marriott is the one that is causing all of this - they should have kept their big mouth shut but they don't and this rumor is designed to scare owners.

I find it reprehensible and see Marriott shrinking from its once great role as a leader in this field - they are now no better than Wyndham.

Beyond that I believe the owners can influence Marriott if they wanted to - a more owner friendly version could result.

But knowing human nature this won't happen and I'd bet that my predictions will come true; close enough for timeshare work.  Time will tell - in fact we should install a count down clock and see.


----------



## BocaBum99

PerryM said:


> I make my living on the internet so I can easily chat on many chat rooms during the day - just like I would at a water-cooler.
> 
> Marriott is the one that is causing all of this - they should have kept their big mouth shut but they don't and this rumor is designed to scare owners.
> 
> I find it reprehensible and see Marriott shrinking from its once great role as a leader in this field - they are now no better than Wyndham.
> 
> Beyond that I believe the owners can influence Marriott if they wanted to - a more owner friendly version could result.
> 
> But knowing human nature this won't happen and I'd bet that my predictions will come true; close enough for timeshare work.



Perry, I'd say this is where we diverge a bit.  I think Marriott will launch a good program.  It will cost all owners in a one time loss of value of their ownerships.  That is true.  But, because there are so many legitimate ways for Marriott to make money aside from stealing value from owners, I think Marriott will lean in that direction rather than the most evil direction possible.  There are at least 3 other companies that I would have a different opinion about if they were doing the same thing.


----------



## dougp26364

BocaBum99 said:


> There is nothing wrong with speculation about a future program that is very likely to be implemented.  It's only a problem if it brings worry to the person doing the speculating.
> 
> People who make the most money in business are those who can successfully anticipate what happens in the market.  With a little bit of thought and understanding about what motivates businesses and people in business, it's not hard to get in the ball park.  A clear understanding of the likely outcomes can help a saavy person get into a good position to capitalize on programs as they reveal themselves.
> 
> When this thread started, I was thinking very negatively about the possibility that Marriott would charge a large fee for resale owners to get into the program.    Now that I have thought through it like a Marriott product manager would, I have decided that it may not be as bad as I originally anticipated and in fact, it could be something that can be very good for a saavy buyer.
> 
> All timeshare systems have loopholes which we as tuggers exploit.  It enables us to do great trade ups in II and RCI by knowing which traders are the cheapest to buy and maintain that will get us the biggest exchange possible.  It's clear to me that Marriott's system will also have such features for us to exploit.  The question is what will those features be and how much will it cost to get in.  You have a year to get your portfolio ready to anticipate some type of grandfathering.  If it happens, great.  If not, it was a good bet.
> 
> Regarding $2000.  That is a guess.  We have seen a $5000 price point in Asia.  I know that $2000 would be easy to sell if let it go at that price with the features I mentioned earlier.  My guess is the retail price will be set somewhere between $2000-5000.  And, there will be waiving of most of it for developer purchases and a street price for everyone else.  This is a guess.  But, it's not an uninformed guess.  For instance, I am very confident that it won't be $10,000.
> 
> In addition, doing scenario planning can help remove fear if you use it to help understand potential outcomes and plan appropriately for each major scenario that is likely to occur.  Once a person has a chance to think through the scenarios and they have a plan of attack for each of the possible scenarios, it gives a person tremendous confidence about their abiltiy to navigate an ambiguous future state.
> 
> So, speculating can be very healthy if used in this way.



Nothing wrong unless you get carried away and start making things up. Right now, no one knows what Marriott is going to come out with. All we know is that there has been speculation that they will come out with something, DaveM has a contact that states it will be within the next year BUT, has qualified that statement by saying delays could happen (gee, it's been two years already) and that it will be made VERY AFFORDABLE to all current owners who bought direct from Marriott and cost more from those who bought resale. Somwhere along the line we got the information that there are ~ 700,000 Marriott owners, the majority of which have bought directly from Marriott. 

Otherwise, everyone is getting all worked up over nothing. For all we know, Marriott may take a good look at what they're planning and scrap it all together. They may go forward with it and it may look like HGVC's plan where all platinum 2 bedroom weeks are 7,000 points unless they have a special view, and then they may be 9,600 because of the view (you can pay for the view or penthouse with HGVC by spending/buying more points). OR, they could go with something like Wyndham where each new resort cost more points to reserve than older resorts or, they could do something like DRI where each resort has a different point value and many of the resorts are affilates for internal exchange purposes. OR it could be something entirely different. 

You could say they'll charge a joiner fee like DRI of $2,995, or like HGVC does with it's affiliates of $599 or nothing like Wyndham. You could even venture to guess they'll offer a trust program like DRI or Bluegreen. 

However, everything is pure speculation. To put price tags, bottom lines and financial statements into is actually somewhat comical.


----------



## PerryM

BocaBum99 said:


> Perry, I'd say this is where we diverge a bit.  I think Marriott will launch a good program.  It will cost all owners in a one time loss of value of their ownerships.  That is true.  But, because there are so many legitimate ways for Marriott to make money aside from stealing value from owners, I think Marriott will lean in that direction rather than the most evil direction possible.  There are at least 3 other companies that I would have a different opinion about if they were doing the same thing.



I was just in the II system a week ago and the bug that was there 3 years ago is still there.  Certainly I would hope that Marriott introduces a first rate system that results in a great exchanges for Marriott owners.

The impact will be easy to measure - the resale values one month before introduction and one month after.  That will be the real verdict of how this new system is received by the owners.

P.S.
This new system should have the ability to book airline reservations, car reservations, and activities while in the reservation system.  There are a lot of other ways for Marriott to make a buck or two.

Pre-stocking the refrigerator can now be a great service to charge for - have the milk, cereal, eggs, and OJ in the fridge to get you going.


----------



## BocaBum99

dougp26364 said:


> However, everything is pure speculation. To put price tags, bottom lines and financial statements into is actually somewhat comical.



You clearly don't make a living in business or new product development.  If you did, you wouldn't characterize these analyses as "comical."  I find it tragic that the average American can't do this type of basic analysis.  If they did, they would make much better decisions in life.  In fact, if all Americans did it, there wouldn't be a timesharing market since any real financial rigor shows that timeshares bought from the developer don't make financial sense.  After my first developer purchase, when I did this analysis and research, it led me to the conclusion that I should cancel my developer purchase.  Is that comical to you, too?  Did you make a developer purchase?  When, if ever, did you decide it was an optimal or suboptimal decision?

People earn a living doing this type of analysis.  I spent a 20 year career doing it using this exact methodology to determine quickly if a project was even worth spending any corporate resources developing.  You'll be surprised at how many ideas employees come up with to make money that they just know the company must do.  Then, when the simplest of business cases show those ideas to be a complete waste of time.

Before you even start a project, you need to see if its potentially big enough to have an impact.  Then, and only then, do you begin drafting specs on what it should do and fine tuning your assumptions.

If I had access to Marriott's internal data, I could come up with a solid business case for this project in a couple of weeks.  The hard work is in pulling together the details product specs and operational processes required to launch the new program will using market and customer research to validate your assumptions.


----------



## BocaBum99

PerryM said:


> I was just in the II system a week ago and the bug that was there 3 years ago is still there.  Certainly I would hope that Marriott introduces a first rate system that results in a great exchanges for Marriott owners.
> 
> The impact will be easy to measure - the resale values one month before introduction and one month after.  That will be the real verdict of how this new system is received by the owners.
> 
> P.S.
> This new system should have the ability to book airline reservations, car reservations, and activities while in the reservation system.  There are a lot of other ways for Marriott to make a buck or two.
> 
> Pre-stocking the refrigerator can now be a great service to charge for - have the milk, cereal, eggs, and OJ in the fridge to get you going.



I would say it slightly differently.  I would say that the resale cost of the program is the price that all owners pay for this program since their ownerships will go down by about that much.  I just hope Marriott creates a program that is worth that much or more.

It would be worth $2000 to me if the program had bonus time and a rationale point system based on supply/demand, unit size, season and view class.  

I guess that Marriott will charge a maximum amount of $5000 with a likely amount of $3500 like you predict.  I just need to make sure I buy my next platinum Marriott at $3000-5000 below the average resale price.


----------



## dougp26364

BocaBum99 said:


> You clearly don't make a living in business or new product development.  If you did, you wouldn't characterize these discussions as "comical."
> 
> People earn a living doing this type of analysis.  I spent a 20 year career doing it using this exact methodology to determine quickly if a project was even worth spending any corporate resources developing.  You'll be surprised at how many ideas employees come up with to make money that they just know the company must do.  Then, when the simplest of business cases show those ideas to be a complete waste of time.
> 
> Before you even start a project, you need to see if its potentially big enough to have an impact.  Then, and only then, do you begin drafting specs on what it should do and fine tuning your assumptions.
> 
> If I had access to Marriott's internal data, I could come up with a solid business case for this project in a couple of weeks.  The hard work is in pulling together the details product specs and operational processes required to launch the new program will using market and customer research to validate your assumptions.



There was a business philosphy I learned a long time ago. People worry all the time. The problem with this is, 90% of what they worry about never happens and, the 10% that does happen, they have no control over. So there is no need to worry. In this case, nothing has happened except for speculation. Over 400 posts about phantom programs borders on propoganda and that's not even worth the bandwidth it takes to publish. 

All we know is, Marriott has rumored this phantom program to be in the works for over 2 years now. Salesmen have attempted to use this rumor to push developer sales rather than buying cheaper resale units. Marriott is likely to come out with some new program (programs change all the time, this is no big leap) but, there have been no announcements, no plans, no structure, nothing to go by.

There was solid information released that DRI would buy Bluegreen. It never happened. IMHO, we have less solid information to discuss on this topic and the likelyhood that something will happen is less than DRI's proposed purchase of Bluegreen. 

Once something is announced, then speculation is off the table and a rational discussion can proceed. Until then we're just spreading rumors that do no one any good.

Sure speculators earn a living by trying to GUESS what the market is going to do. I can try to guess whether it will rain or not by looking at the sky. Sometimes I'm right, most times I'm wrong. Speculation is one of the riskest ways to try to turn a profit there is in business. When you're right, the rewards can be very nice but, it often takes a little inside knowledge to be correct a majority of the time.


----------



## BocaBum99

dougp26364 said:


> There was a business philosphy I learned a long time ago. People worry all the time. The problem with this is, 90% of what they worry about never happens and, the 10% that does happen, they have no control over. So there is no need to worry. In this case, nothing has happened except for speculation. Over 400 posts about phantom programs borders on propoganda and that's not even worth the bandwidth it takes to publish.
> 
> All we know is, Marriott has rumored this phantom program to be in the works for over 2 years now. Salesmen have attempted to use this rumor to push developer sales rather than buying cheaper resale units. Marriott is likely to come out with some new program (programs change all the time, this is no big leap) but, there have been no announcements, no plans, no structure, nothing to go by.
> 
> There was solid information released that DRI would buy Bluegreen. It never happened. IMHO, we have less solid information to discuss on this topic and the likelyhood that something will happen is less than DRI's proposed purchase of Bluegreen.
> 
> Once something is announced, then speculation is off the table and a rational discussion can proceed. Until then we're just spreading rumors that do no one any good.
> 
> Sure speculators earn a living by trying to GUESS what the market is going to do. I can try to guess whether it will rain or not by looking at the sky. Sometimes I'm right, most times I'm wrong. Speculation is one of the riskest ways to try to turn a profit there is in business. When you're right, the rewards can be very nice but, it often takes a little inside knowledge to be correct a majority of the time.



I agree that if speculation turns into excessive worry that you can't do anything about, then its very bad.

Market analysis that is predicting likely outcomes is extremely valuable.  If nothing else, it provides you with insight into potential options that if they occur, you can pounce on.  What I've tried to do is provide people with some insight they probably didn't have before so that if Marriott does something that surprises them, it could explain why.

Probably most importantly, it provide you with a decision framework.  If Marriott does A, I do B.  If Marriott does C, I do D.  That is very helpful and removes the paralysis that an overwhelming new program can place on someone who waits until a program is ready before figuring out what it can be.  Part of the reason there are so many posts on this thread is that people are trying to figure out how this program might effect them.  It wouldn't have over 400 posts if it weren't important.  

Knowing the nature of the beast will help you understand if the monster is likely to be huge or small.  I think it is likely to cost all of us a few thousand dollars whether we opt in or opt out.  Whether it will be good or bad or whether or not Marriott cares about owners will be very obvious to me when I see the program details.   So far, I believe they are an owner friendly company.


----------



## IuLiKa

I also can't believe the amount of talk that is going on on this topic and the speculations. I do not even have the time to read all the posts. I read the first and the last page. gee some of us have a lot of time on their hands.


----------



## m61376

BocaBum99 said:


> I would say it slightly differently.  I would say that the resale cost of the program is the price that all owners pay for this program since their ownerships will go down by about that much.  I just hope Marriott creates a program that is worth that much or more.
> 
> It would be worth $2000 to me if the program had bonus time and a rationale point system based on supply/demand, unit size, season and view class.
> 
> I guess that Marriott will charge a maximum amount of $5000 with a likely amount of $3500 like you predict.  I just need to make sure I buy my next platinum Marriott at $3000-5000 below the average resale price.



Of course, that's assuming that the price tag is applicable to current or future resale weeks at all. If they exclude future resale weeks completely then it is anybody's guess as to how badly that will impact the value, but I would expect them to plummet if Marriott's internal trading system attracts most owners. 

If they only allow current resale buyers to join and exclude future resale buyers, then everyone's value suffers, but as you've indicated, that would mean the next year is a good time to buy.


----------



## FlyerBobcat

IuLiKa said:


> I also can't believe the amount of talk that is going on on this topic and the speculations. I do not even have the time to read all the posts. I read the first and the last page. gee some of us have a lot of time on their hands.



One of the reasons that makes TUG so good.....  Lots of input and lots of diverse opinions....


----------



## dougp26364

BocaBum99 said:


> I agree that if speculation turns into excessive worry that you can't do anything about, then its very bad.
> 
> Market analysis that is predicting likely outcomes is extremely valuable.  If nothing else, it provides you with insight into potential options that if they occur, you can pounce on.  What I've tried to do is provide people with some insight they probably didn't have before so that if Marriott does something that surprises them, it could explain why.
> 
> Probably most importantly, it provide you with a decision framework.  If Marriott does A, I do B.  If Marriott does C, I do D.  That is very helpful and removes the paralysis that an overwhelming new program can place on someone who waits until a program is ready before figuring out what it can be.  Part of the reason there are so many posts on this thread is that people are trying to figure out how this program might effect them.  It wouldn't have over 400 posts if it weren't important.
> 
> Knowing the nature of the beast will help you understand if the monster is likely to be huge or small.  I think it is likely to cost all of us a few thousand dollars whether we opt in or opt out.  Whether it will be good or bad or whether or not Marriott cares about owners will be very obvious to me when I see the program details.   So far, I believe they are an owner friendly company.



Analysis needs to be based on more fact and less fiction. Right now, the opposite is true. Analysis is based almost 100% on shadows seen through the eyes of those worried about how this will affect their ownership. 

The only facts we have are that Marriott salesmen have been pushing this rumor for at least two years. We have DaveM's word that he has an inside source that has been accurate when passing along information. But even an inside source can release information before it becomes fact, leaving everyone to run wild with rumors. 

There are no facts indicating what Marriott will or won't do. There are no indicators to point us solidly in any direction. With rumors running rampent, the only thing one can do is sit tight and see how this plays out. If you already own, I wouldn't be concerned about it until they announce something solid. By solid I don't mean some unnamed source giving out vague information. If you don't own, now may not be the time to buy with all these rumors running around. It might be best to let the rumors settle and see what happens. 

Past those two things, this is mostly just entertainment. Speculating about what might and might not be the future for Marriott internal trading can be nothing more than entertainment at this point. There is nothing solid to go on to provide for realistic speculation. Speculation based on non-existant facts won't remove paralysis. It will create it instead. You can't figure out how this non-existant program will affect you until you know the rules of the non-existant program first. Right now, we don't know squat past Marriott MIGHT make a change somewhere in the future.


----------



## BocaBum99

m61376 said:


> Of course, that's assuming that the price tag is applicable to current or future resale weeks at all. If they exclude future resale weeks completely then it is anybody's guess as to how badly that will impact the value, but I would expect them to plummet if Marriott's internal trading system attracts most owners.
> 
> If they only allow current resale buyers to join and exclude future resale buyers, then everyone's value suffers, but as you've indicated, that would mean the next year is a good time to buy.



Dave mentioned that there would be a fee for resale owners to buy in which would be higher than those who buy from the developer.  This makes sense from Marriott's point of view.  My claim is that resale prices will go down by that much since the new owner will have to pay that fee to get back into the program.  That's worst case.  Because some may just not care about the program and opt out as long as Marriott doesn't much with too much with the current program while the other one is operating.


----------



## BocaBum99

dougp26364 said:


> Analysis needs to be based on more fact and less fiction. Right now, the opposite is true. Analysis is based almost 100% on shadows seen through the eyes of those worried about how this will affect their ownership.
> 
> The only facts we have are that Marriott salesmen have been pushing this rumor for at least two years. We have DaveM's word that he has an inside source that has been accurate when passing along information. But even an inside source can release information before it becomes fact, leaving everyone to run wild with rumors.
> 
> There are no facts indicating what Marriott will or won't do. There are no indicators to point us solidly in any direction. With rumors running rampent, the only thing one can do is sit tight and see how this plays out. If you already own, I wouldn't be concerned about it until they announce something solid. By solid I don't mean some unnamed source giving out vague information. If you don't own, now may not be the time to buy with all these rumors running around. It might be best to let the rumors settle and see what happens.
> 
> Past those two things, this is mostly just entertainment. Speculating about what might and might not be the future for Marriott internal trading can be nothing more than entertainment at this point. There is nothing solid to go on to provide for realistic speculation. Speculation based on non-existant facts won't remove paralysis. It will create it instead. You can't figure out how this non-existant program will affect you until you know the rules of the non-existant program first. Right now, we don't know squat past Marriott MIGHT make a change somewhere in the future.



There are facts that you haven't mentioned that play into the picture as well.  There are competitive products.  We can look at them, see how they have constructed their products.  Evaluate what has been successful for them and make an educated guess at what Marriott would put in theirs.   Marriott surely has done a detailed competitive analysis.  This gives you insight.

Also, there are price points in the market that have showed success and others that have failed.  That puts constraints on the problem.  Based on my personal experience in the market, I can tell you without a doubt that programs such as bonus time and converting non-TS weeks into the program have been successful.  And, that Marriott would be very wise to put them in.  Those are facts that give Marriott the benefit of the doubt.

Also, having seen and owned lots of points systems, they will have differential values by units, seasons, probably view class and resort.  As someone mentioned earlier, you could make a high level guess by using the assignments that they gave for Marriott rewards.  Those are facts.

I can pretty much guarantee you that if I find out that someone here is going to build a house that I can guess a lot of the elements they will put into it.  I can guess there will be a master bedroom, a kitchen, living room, dining room, a few extra bedrooms and maybe even a rec room or 2-3 car garage.  Based on their income and the size of houses in their neighborhood and the number of kids they have, I can estimate the size house they will buy.  I can get in the ball park on a lot of these things.    Using your strategy, you can't know what they are going to build until you see it for yourself.  I claim you can know a lot about what is likely to happen before it happens and that insight can be very useful.

If you don't find it useful, that's fine.  But, don't make generalizations that just because you don't see any benefit in the analysis that others don't either.


----------



## fskins

BocaBum99 said:


> Dave mentioned that there would be a fee for resale owners to buy in which would be higher than those who buy from the developer.  This makes sense from Marriott's point of view.  My claim is that resale prices will go down by that much since the new owner will have to pay that fee to get back into the program.  That's worst case.  Because some may just not care about the program and opt out as long as Marriott doesn't much with too much with the current program while the other one is operating.




I also haven't read all the posts so this may have been covered, whats in the past is History. If I'm Marriott, why not Grandfather everyone in to set the std, make the new trading sytem inclusive of the price for purchasing a new timeshare direct. Now everyone is included. Then charge all future resales to join (which they must because everyone is trading in the system), but also include the option to trade points. If fact, make the buy in substatial. Then, resale values get closer to direct (resale cost plus sign up fee), because people would not be shying away from them.  They would be treated like Marriot direct buyers. For every resale, Marriott could take a large "vig" for every purchase without doing a thing, no overhead on resales, just cash.  Resales in my opinion stay high in value, and Marriott would not discourage the resale market as much because they are getting a commision for every resale forever. Everyone's happy


----------



## RandR

fskins said:


> I also haven't read all the posts so this may have been covered, whats in the past is History. If I'm Marriott, why not Grandfather everyone in to set the std, make the new trading sytem inclusive of the price for purchasing a new timeshare direct. Now everyone is included. Then charge all future resales to join (which they must because everyone is trading in the system), but also include the option to trade points. If fact, make the buy in substatial. Then, resale values get closer to direct (resale cost plus sign up fee), because people would not be shying away from them.  They would be treated like Marriot direct buyers. For every resale, Marriott could take a large "vig" for every purchase without doing a thing, no overhead on resales, just cash.  Resales in my opinion stay high in value, and Marriott would not discourage the resale market as much because they are getting a commision for every resale forever. Everyone's happy



Or resale values would crash as people would just buy direct if the cost of a resale plus initiation fee was close to buying direct.  I'm sure there will be incentives to buy direct as there usually are.


----------



## Lawlar

*Funny Math*



csalter2 said:


> ...
> Over 400 posts on what? Absolutely nothing. I did get one thing from the discussion. That is that Marriott is trying to retain value of the timeshare so that those who bought from the developer would not feel that their buying their timeshare for $25,000 to $50,000 would not lose it all the next day as a resale buyer purchased it for $5000. That's fine with me to help protect the value. That helps everyone by protecting the value of the product.



I am amused with this concept.  It is like the banks not wanting to recognize that the value of their mortgage loans has declined, or homeowners not wanting to recognize that their homes have decreased in value.

The drop in timeshare resale prices tells us exacting how the market values what we purchased.  No way to hide that truth.


----------



## Lawlar

*Fixed Week - Best Value*

I cannot really justify the purchase of a timeshare from Marriott.  The value doesn't equal the amount paid.

Nonetheless, I am happy that my emotional, not to smart, decision to purchase a fixed week TS, in a fixed ocean front unit, protects me from any decision Marriott might make to switch to a points system.  I will be happy sitting in room 1208, on the fourth week of each year, watching the whales swim by.  My deed says I have that right.

Would I pay Marriott thousands more to "upgrade" to their points system.  No way.


----------



## BocaBum99

IuLiKa said:


> I also can't believe the amount of talk that is going on on this topic and the speculations. I do not even have the time to read all the posts. I read the first and the last page. gee some of us have a lot of time on their hands.



What this tells you without reading any of the posts is that this is an extremely important topic to many owners.  It may be a waste of time to go back and read the 450 posts or so.  But, it may be worth some of your time to follow the developments going forward since it could effect you rather dramatically in the future.

TUG is here to educate owners and arm them with enough facts and analysis so that they can come to their own decision on what is right for their families.  We do need to have these discussions so that we can stamp out bad rumors and help each other figure out what is real, what is likely to happen and what will probably never happen.  Then, we will be informed owners.  The best kind.


----------



## BocaBum99

csalter2 said:


> Over 400 posts on what? Absolutely nothing. I did get one thing from the discussion. That is that Marriott is trying to retain value of the timeshare so that those who bought from the developer would not feel that their buying their timeshare for $25,000 to $50,000 would not lose it all the next day as a resale buyer purchased it for $5000. That's fine with me to help protect the value. That helps everyone by protecting the value of the product.



Wow, this couldn't be further from the reality.  If that is what you learned from this thread.  We failed you.

If Marriott takes actions that differentiates the retail product from the resale product and the resale product is only worth $5000, then the value of your ownership drops down to $5000.  You don't benefit at all.  Only Marriott gets the higher price.  That's because when you go to sell, you sell it for $5000.  You don't sell it for $25000.


----------



## RandR

I was just on with an Owner Services person asking a few questions and I mentioned the points system to her.  She said she heard a rumor but really didn't know anything more except that they are talking about a fee to join.  I mentioned TUG, which she hadn't heard of, and told her that the majority of people were extremely unhappy with the prospects of a change to a points based system. She was surprised and seemed sincere.


----------



## Dean

Pit said:


> Yes, but unreserved weeks in a point system have no more value than unreserved weeks in the current system. Are you saying that there will be more unreserved weeks under a point system than the current system? Maybe so.


That's true, however, there are other issues of a points system that may push owners of higher demand times into lower demand reservations.  It totally depends on the administration of the system and what priorities certain owners and the developer can take advantage of. 

A good points system can be a win-win situation, as usual the devil is in the details.  If, like many resorts and systems, they get greedy and try to make too much off current owners, then it could be a nightmare for the system and for the current owners, assuming anything actually happens of course.  There are systems that have converted from scratch over to a points system, Fairfield comes to mind as does RCI points.  



gmarine said:


> Marriott is going to its best keeping the price low enough to entice ALL owners to join. The company is going to want the recurring revenue of exchanges and is going to want to show that the program works by very simply showing the large amount of owners who join. The developers of this program are not going to take a chance on rolling it out at a price that many owners will see as too high.


Maybe, maybe not.  It really depends on their goals going forward.  If their goal is maximum profit in any such conversion, the cost may be more significant than many of us would like to see.  If it's to get maximum participation to shore up a future system and sales at new resorts, you are probably right.  Time will tell what will happen, if anything.  My guess is if it does happen that they will be somewhere in between with an initial sale period that is more reasonable.  In the interim, we get to beat it to death.



gmarine said:


> So, how much are you willing to pay? I realize without knowing the exact program details its hard to say, but in general, how many of us would pay 2 or 3 thousand dollars for access to a points program? I cant see myself spending more than a couple hundred $$. Anything more than that and I would probably stay with II and/or look for owner trades.


Without specifics I don't think there's any way to answer that question.  If I make lots of assumptions it could be as few as nothing or as high as $20K for all of my weeks.  Totally depends on what I'm potentially getting in return, what type of priorities I might or might not have in doing so and what I'm giving up.  Since ALL of my weeks are Platinum and 6 of the 8 are very high demand locations, it would take some mix of goodies to get me onboard even at a low price.  However, a system that I can use to my advantage to almost guarantee reservations at far more high demand resorts would definitely get my attention.  The problem is that for every winner that is created in the new system, there is a potential loser.  So get ready to have the "it's not fair" discussion a few times if this actually comes about.


----------



## Clark

Yaaaaaawwwwnn.


----------



## Zac495

Clark said:


> Yaaaaaawwwwnn.



Not sure why Clark is bored, but his website WORKS and it's a way to deal with this nonsense. Clark - I'd like you to elaborate on your yawn -but I am here to say that ownertrade is the BEST!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## billymach4

Zac495 said:


> Not sure why Clark is bored, but his website WORKS and it's a way to deal with this nonsense. Clark - I'd like you to elaborate on your yawn -but I am here to say that ownertrade is the BEST!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!



I know why Clark is bored. This topic has been sliced and diced, dissected and cross sectioned, post mortem, recreated, died, resurrected, inflated like some sort of messiah. 

Don't take this the wrong way, but as has been mentioned before. This is still a rumor. Plain and simple. Some of the great experts here have done Marriott a great favor.  Boca already has a business plan for Marriott. Boca should send Marriott a consultant fee of $500,000. 

We have people calling Vacation Consultants about this. Let's get real here. Dave M. is Marriott's puppet. They know how much respect Dave M. garners in this forum. It would be so easy to get someone on the inside to feed a tip to Dave. Dave took the bait left the chum here and we Tug sharks tore this thing up. 

Marriott's executive office is sitting back laughing at this whole scene. What a comic frenzy this has caused. Heck even PerryM  came back to pay his 2 cents and then some.

My theory is that Marriott started this to distract all of the attention that the AOC ripoff thread garners. 


:deadhorse:


----------



## chris5

Anyone have any images or cartoons of chickens running around with no heads?


----------



## m61376

billymach4 said:


> e have people calling Vacation Consultants about this. Let's get real here. Dave M. is Marriott's puppet. They know how much respect Dave M. garners in this forum. It would be so easy to get someone on the inside to feed a tip to Dave. Dave took the bait left the chum here and we Tug sharks tore this thing up.



It's not fair to take advantage of Dave while he's away. He's been an honest and tremendous resource to a lot of people here and I don't think the criticism is in any way warranted.

This is a program that is definitely being worked on, with the expectation that it will be released to coincide with the next property release. 

If you don't feel the debate, analysis and what not is worthwhile, then you can simply ignore the thread. However, I think it is a great way not only to speculate on what Marriott might offer, but to learn about the possible parameters of a points program, gain insight into how others operate, and start to think about how to personally evaluate whatever program they do offer, if and when it is released.

I do think that there is a good chance that if/when they release the program there will be a "pre-construction special" of sorts- a window in which the sign-on fee is markedly reduced just to get the ball rolling and to be able to advertise "in just x number of weeks we've already had y members joining," or something similar to that. Personally, I think it would be helpful to gain an understanding so I can evaluate any possible future program.


----------



## IuLiKa

Mr. Bocabum99,

I am an owner and I also recognize the importance of this topic.. No offense, but the reason I did not read all the 400 posts, is because the significance of this topic got lost!

Some have too much time on their hands... to speculate, and Marriott will do whatever will make business sense for them, doesn't matter what we say here.


----------



## PerryM

*Recap so far...*



IuLiKa said:


> Mr. Bocabum99,
> 
> I am an owner and I also recognize the importance of this topic.. No offense, but the reason I did not read all the 400 posts, is because the significance of this topic got lost!
> 
> Some have too much time on their hands... to speculate, and Marriott will do whatever will make business sense for them, doesn't matter what we say here.



Let's recap those 460 posts:


We Marriott owners have a perfectly good way to exchange our weeks with each other right now - the 24-day "Marriott Only" window in II

Marriott has decided to get into the timeshare exchange business and take the profit that used to be reserved for II

Marriott is releasing the rumor of an impending system through their agents at sales presentations

Marriott controls that rumor and the few "facts" lead one to the conclusion that a caste system is to be imposed upon the owners at their very own resorts - those that bought from Marriott and blood sucking scum who bought resale

The new exchange system is to be 100% Points oriented and not the existing week exchange system

Many timeshare developers already have such an exchange system and many of us are aware of the pros and cons and have shared them

Release date has slipped 2-3 years from the first Marriott sponsored rumor

Resales, which is the main target of the new system, will be impacted to some degree

It isn't going to be free and WILL cost more than using II to use and the benefits are not included in the rumor.
Hope this helps....


That's it I believe - start to set money aside that you would use for your family but will now go to Marriott - and for what?

P.S.

Comments in this chat room are designed for fellow Marriott owners - Marriott could care less what happens here or on any chat room.

And if any of us were in Dave's shoes, we would do the same thing - tell us what Marriott said; I do it all the time (salesreps comments).  What; the alternative is to not share what an employee of Marriott said?

Many of us here have profited from the chit-chat that goes on here - that's why we chit-chat.


----------



## KathyPet

Comments about Dave are totally unfair and unwarranted.  Dave's contributions to this board cannot be underestimated.!


----------



## ricki999

_



			[Some have too much time on their hands... to speculate, and Marriott will do whatever will make business sense for them, doesn't matter what we say here./QUOTE]
		
Click to expand...

_


> I too believe that Marriott will do what makes business sense to them regardless of what is posted here.  I'd bet that most "speculating" on this topic would also agree.
> 
> I value the speculators having "too much time on their hands", as I plan to make an educated guess on what to do with my Marriott weeks based in part upon some of their speculation.  In the end, I will do what makes best sense for me.


----------



## billymach4

m61376 said:


> It's not fair to take advantage of Dave while he's away. He's been an honest and tremendous resource to a lot of people here and I don't think the criticism is in any way warranted.
> QUOTE]
> 
> 
> 
> My intention was not to take advantage or to critisize Dave in any way. As I said Marriott knows how much respect Dave has in this Forum.
> 
> I do think that someone inside at Marriott is taking advantage of Dave and the Goodwill he brings to this Forum.
> 
> Marriott got a very valuble analysis and a Focus Group result here. For zero $$$$. They are going to turn around and ask us to pay.


----------



## AceValenta

I booked and exchange last night and spoke to the II representative at the Marriott desk and was informed that II and Marriott just renewed their contract 2 years ago and there is no intention of II and Marriott breaking the contract. 

They also informed me that they are in the process of joining the two systems together so that Marriott Reps can make appointments and deposits through the II system and vice/versa. This way, you only have to call one line. 

I asked them about the points system rumor. I was informed me that it purely a rumor and that is all it is, nothing more. The costs of developing a program, purchasing servers, training people, paying salaries and benefits far out weigh the benefits of the points program. The person went onto discuss server loads and how Marriott's system is able to handle a roll out of a program of this magnitude. I was also informed me that there hasn't been any information on their end that this is going to happen and reassured it was rumor. 

I left the conversation satisfied after talking to the rep in length (30 minutes) about the rumor and feel that it is pure speculation. 

I guess we will find out next March or April.


----------



## Dean

AceValenta said:


> I booked and exchange last night and spoke to the II representative at the Marriott desk and was informed that II and Marriott just renewed their contract 2 years ago and there is no intention of II and Marriott breaking the contract.
> 
> They also informed me that they are in the process of joining the two systems together so that Marriott Reps can make appointments and deposits through the II system and vice/versa. This way, you only have to call one line.
> 
> I asked them about the points system rumor. I was informed me that it purely a rumor and that is all it is, nothing more. The costs of developing a program, purchasing servers, training people, paying salaries and benefits far out weigh the benefits of the points program. The person went onto discuss server loads and how Marriott's system is able to handle a roll out of a program of this magnitude. I was also informed me that there hasn't been any information on their end that this is going to happen and reassured it was rumor.
> 
> I left the conversation satisfied after talking to the rep in length (30 minutes) about the rumor and feel that it is pure speculation.
> 
> I guess we will find out next March or April.


I doubt Marriott would tell II much until they had their plans finalized and I doubt the upper management at II would tell the rank and file much until they were ready so I don't think this info would give any support in any way.  I would assume that the contract would be for around 5 years give or take and that would be about right for a transition if any changes were in the works.  It's likely that IF Marriott makes any changes that the Marriott internal preference with II will either go away or be significantly reduced such as Starwood's 3 day preference.  

IMO, the only real reason for Marriott to do this is because they feel they can sell new resorts easier, faster and for a higher price than they currently can do.  Any conversion profit would be minimal and gravy, IMO.


----------



## dioxide45

AceValenta said:


> I booked and exchange last night and spoke to the II representative at the Marriott desk and was informed that II and Marriott just renewed their contract 2 years ago and there is no intention of II and Marriott breaking the contract.
> 
> They also informed me that they are in the process of joining the two systems together so that Marriott Reps can make appointments and deposits through the II system and vice/versa. This way, you only have to call one line.
> 
> I asked them about the points system rumor. I was informed me that it purely a rumor and that is all it is, nothing more. The costs of developing a program, purchasing servers, training people, paying salaries and benefits far out weigh the benefits of the points program. The person went onto discuss server loads and how Marriott's system is able to handle a roll out of a program of this magnitude. I was also informed me that there hasn't been any information on their end that this is going to happen and reassured it was rumor.
> 
> I left the conversation satisfied after talking to the rep in length (30 minutes) about the rumor and feel that it is pure speculation.
> 
> I guess we will find out next March or April.



I wouldn't be suprised and it has been said in the past that II will fulfill this new program. I highly doubt Marriott will invest in the technology and staff when it already exists at II. II will get a portion of any fees generated for fulfillment of the program.


----------



## Dean

dioxide45 said:


> I wouldn't be suprised and it has been said in the past that II will fulfill this new program. I highly doubt Marriott will invest in the technology and staff when it already exists at II. II will get a portion of any fees generated for fulfillment of the program.


Maybe, does II have an operating points software that would accommodate this possibility.  I'm not aware they do though they should have a ton of data of overall demand on a weeks basis.  Marriott likely has a lot more data on nightly demand and value from their hotel side than would II.  I also bet that Marriott has access to a lot of II's data contractually as well.


----------



## short

*short stay exchanges*



Dean said:


> Maybe, does II have an operating points software that would accommodate this possibility.  I'm not aware they do though they should have a ton of data of overall demand on a weeks basis.  Marriott likely has a lot more data on nightly demand and value from their hotel side than would II.  I also bet that Marriott has access to a lot of II's data contractually as well.



II now has the short stay exchanges and the Marriott properties seem to dominate.  This could be a practice round for Marriott points.  Slap a Marriott priority on it, add 7 plus days stays and there you go.

Every time I have gone to a presentation or gotten a survey, my dominate comment has been that until Marriott make their product as flexible as HGVC(ie nightly stays, changing unit size etc) that I have no interest in buying developer Marriott.

Short

PS. Not that I would buy developer anyway but thats my story to them.


----------



## Dean

short said:


> II now has the short stay exchanges and the Marriott properties seem to dominate.  This could be a practice round for Marriott points.  Slap a Marriott priority on it, add 7 plus days stays and there you go.
> 
> Every time I have gone to a presentation or gotten a survey, my dominate comment has been that until Marriott make their product as flexible as HGVC(ie nightly stays, changing unit size etc) that I have no interest in buying developer Marriott.
> 
> Short
> 
> PS. Not that I would buy developer anyway but thats my story to them.


It's nothing near the same.  However, the short stay option was spearheaded by DVC prior to their departure which does have a lot of points experience down to single day reservations.


----------



## NJDave

fskins said:


> Then charge all future resales to join (which they must because everyone is trading in the system), but also include the option to trade points. If fact, make the buy in substatial. Then, resale values get closer to direct (resale cost plus sign up fee), because people would not be shying away from them.  They would be treated like Marriot direct buyers. For every resale, Marriott could take a large "vig" for every purchase without doing a thing, no overhead on resales, just cash.  Resales in my opinion stay high in value, and Marriott would not discourage the resale market as much because they are getting a commision for every resale forever. Everyone's happy



This is similar to what Hilton does for affilated non-HGVC built resorts but the fee to join is modest and is not mandatory.  Even though resale owners are treated the same, the prices are much lower in the resale market.


----------



## ecwinch

PerryM said:


> And if any of us were in Dave's shoes, we would do the same thing - tell us what Marriott said; I do it all the time (salesreps comments).  What; the alternative is to not share what an employee of Marriott said?
> 
> Many of us here have profited from the chit-chat that goes on here - that's why we chit-chat.



Is this a confirmed sighting of  Perry defending another TUG member? And a moderator at that. 

If so I need to go look for some unicorns. 

Seriously though - being a late comer to this thread, I appreciate the recap. I never thought a thread based on speculation about a system yet to be released would garner so many posts.

Edit: I now see what is going on. This thread has become a magnet with every owner that has a MVCI axe to grind. It should be renamed the MVCI complaint mash-up thread with pts commentary by PerryM and BocaBum (and others). Interesting stuff, to some degree it is like those year in review shows.


----------



## lovearuba

*purpose of the thread*



ecwinch said:


> Is this a confirmed sighting of Perry defending another TUG member? And a moderator at that.
> 
> If so I need to go look for some unicorns.
> 
> Seriously though - being a late comer to this thread, I appreciate the recap. I never thought a thread based on speculation about a system yet to be released would garner so many posts.
> 
> Edit: I now see what is going on. This thread has become a magnet with every owner that has a MVCI axe to grind. It should be renamed the MVCI complaint mash-up thread with pts commentary by PerryM and BocaBum (and others). Interesting stuff, to some degree it is like those year in review shows.


 
I think the thread did just what it was intended to do.  Dave got some information probably from a reliable source.  He posted it for his friend and got some input.  In hindsight it should have probably been posted by Marriott through their forum. I thought it was interesting reading and yes those of us who feel Marriott was not and is not honest with us did once again show our dissatisfaction.  I do hope Marriott does not charge higher price for folks that bought resale, that is just wrong so maybe they will see how this went over.


----------



## Dean

I wonder what people would have thought if Dave had gotten the info and not shared.  No matter the outcome and no matter the intent of the other party, I feel Dave did the right thing and appreciate him sharing.  He is well placed and often has access to things that many of us do not, I hope the negatives on this thread don't dissuade him from doing so in the future.


----------



## PerryM

*And the winner is....*



Dean said:


> I wonder what people would have thought if Dave had gotten the info and not shared.  No matter the outcome and no matter the intent of the other party, I feel Dave did the right thing and appreciate him sharing.  He is well placed and often has access to things that many of us do not, I hope the negatives on this thread don't dissuade him from doing so in the future.



The Marriott sponsored rumor is probably blowing up in their face.

With Marriott dropping the ROFR, but not the charge to check it, resale prices are doing down - you can argue which causes which but smart TUG members are snapping up resale Marriotts at once-in-a-lifetime prices.  (These sales account for a tiny fraction of total resales)

More resales to TUG members are the unintended consequence of a slimy sales gimmick on Marriott's part.

Will resale owners be grandfathered in?  Who knows and that's the risk of buying now.

If Marriott does what the rumor threatens, set up a caste system of Marriott owners, then resales will drop even lower but the ROFR might be then executed.

Personally I think that's Marriott's plan from the get-go spread a rumor that makes resales look bad and the new exchange system will make them look even worse.

The day Marriott releases this new system will be the day they start to exercise the ROFR if it hasn't been resurrected yet.

Marriott wins with snapping up fire-sale prices of resales and fees to join the new exchange system.

Just one Marriott owner's guess...


----------



## Dean

PerryM said:


> The Marriott sponsored rumor is probably blowing up in their face.
> 
> With Marriott dropping the ROFR, but not the charge to check it, resale prices are doing down - you can argue which causes which but smart TUG members are snapping up resale Marriotts at once-in-a-lifetime prices.  (These sales account for a tiny fraction of total resales)
> 
> More resales to TUG members are the unintended consequence of a slimy sales gimmick on Marriott's part.
> 
> Will resale owners be grandfathered in?  Who knows and that's the risk of buying now.
> 
> If Marriott does what the rumor threatens, set up a caste system of Marriott owners, then resales will drop even lower but the ROFR might be then executed.
> 
> Personally I think that's Marriott's plan from the get-go spread a rumor that makes resales look bad and the new exchange system will make them look even worse.
> 
> The day Marriott releases this new system will be the day they start to exercise the ROFR if it hasn't been resurrected yet.
> 
> Marriott wins with snapping up fire-sale prices of resales and fees to join the new exchange system.
> 
> Just one Marriott owner's guess...


Perry, I thought you no longer owned a Marriott, did you buy another one?


----------



## PerryM

Dean said:


> Perry, I thought you no longer owned a Marriott, did you buy another one?



Have bought and sold 5 Marriotts and still own a resale Gold Summit Watch that we have exchanged into the Maui Ocean Club for 4 years (including next year) now.

The rumored exchange program will kill that.


----------



## Dean

PerryM said:


> Have bought and sold 5 Marriotts and still own a resale Gold Summit Watch that we have exchanged into the Maui Ocean Club for 4 years (including next year) now.
> 
> The rumored exchange program will kill that.


Thanks, I thought you'd gotten out totally or at least implied you were going to.  I can't get all doom and gloom at this point but at least I own good underlying weeks and resorts of my 8 (3 of which are counted as retail).  Only 2 of which I'd routinely trade anyway.


----------



## PerryM

*Casualties of war are we...*



Dean said:


> Thanks, I thought you'd gotten out totally or at least implied you were going to.  *I can't get all doom and gloom at this point* but at least I own good underlying weeks and resorts of my 8 (3 of which are counted as retail).  Only 2 of which I'd routinely trade anyway.



I understand, but understand that the rumored exchange system with its caste component will negatively affect Marriott resale prices on the day of release and every day after that.

At some point every Marriott week exchanges owners - inheritance or resale.  Marriott is going to war over resales which have little impact on them now but over the long run eat away at profits more each year.

Marriott is the one declaring war on this matter and there is no reason they should be doing this.

It's their rumor - they control it and its purpose, which is to scare the hell out of owners.

Now if Marriott drops the Caste component then everyone wins - resales are not impacted and Marriott makes huge bucks from resale owners.

So Marriott, drop the damn caste component of the exchange system.


----------



## Dean

PerryM said:


> I understand, but understand that the rumored exchange system with its caste component will negatively affect Marriott resale prices on the day of release and every day after that.
> 
> At some point every Marriott week exchanges owners - inheritance or resale.  Marriott is going to war over resales which have little impact on them now but over the long run eat away at profits more each year.
> 
> Marriott is the one declaring war on this matter and there is no reason they should be doing this.
> 
> It's their rumor - they control it and its purpose, which is to scare the hell out of owners.
> 
> Now if Marriott drops the Caste component then everyone wins - resales are not impacted and Marriott makes huge bucks from resale owners.
> 
> So Marriott, drop the damn caste component of the exchange system.


Obviously anything that significantly changes the status quo has the possibility of changing retail and resale both numbers and prices.  It may or may not have that much of an effect on prices compared to where they are now.  I'm not willing to concede that even this specific change would have that dramatic of an effect, time will tell.


----------



## SueDonJ

PerryM said:


> ... Now if Marriott drops the Caste component then everyone wins - resales are not impacted and Marriott makes huge bucks from resale owners.
> 
> So Marriott, drop the damn caste component of the exchange system.



Funny how the system that's in place which allows a guaranteed loss upon resale for developer-purchases is okay with you, but a system which might allow a guaranteed loss upon resale for resale-purchases is not.  Huh.

Please understand - I'm not advocating that *MVCI must do something!* to equalize the current discrepancy or give an advantage to developer-purchasers.  I've said many times that I understand the way the current system works and am very happy with my purchases despite the negative resale value I'm faced with.  The system works for me as is.

But again, the contradiction is amusing.


----------



## PerryM

*The Scarlet "R" is the solution....*



SueDonJ said:


> Funny how the system that's in place which allows a guaranteed loss upon resale for developer-purchases is okay with you, but a system which might allow a guaranteed loss upon resale for resale-purchases is not.  Huh.
> 
> Please understand - I'm not advocating that *MVCI must do something!* to equalize the current discrepancy or give an advantage to developer-purchasers.  I've said many times that I understand the way the current system works and am very happy with my purchases despite the negative resale value I'm faced with.  The system works for me as is.
> 
> But again, the contradiction is amusing.



I play the game according to the rules - do it in many parts of my life.

There are always outside forces that want to change the rules and not play the game.  Sore losers.

The existing II exchange system has worked just fine for 15+ years now - why change it?  We already have a 24 day exclusive Marriott owner to owner ability now.  Marriott could easily change this to 8 weeks - a full 2 months we have to exchange amongst ourselves.

The sold out Marriotts, the ones where Marriott simply cleans the toilets, are going to be impacted by what Marriott does now - why is this OK with anyone?

Marriott can release a 21st century Points system that allows ALL owners, even those at resorts where Marriott just cleans the toilets, to exchange amongst ourselves and they make a profit for creating this for us.

But the kicker here is the caste system - those that bought a recycled Marriott from Marriott and the dog poop who bought from another Marriott owner without cutting Marriott in on the deal.  Marriott already made a gross 400% profit once on the initial sale - they need more?

Marriott - here's an idea.  On sold out Marriott resorts ALL owners qualify for the new exchange system - ALWAYS.  On Marriott resorts, under construction, any resale owner must wear a large red "R" on their shirts while at the resort.  Those Scarlet R folks don't qualify for the new exchange system until you have sold all units and shut down the boiler rooms.  Then they can remove the R and join the new exchange system with their heads held high.

While at the Marriott resorts under construction normal folks would walk on one side of the street while the Scarlet R folks must walk on the other side with their eyes never making contact with the normal folks.

That sounds fair to me.


----------



## wsrobinson

PerryM said:


> I understand, but understand that the rumored exchange system with its caste component will negatively affect Marriott resale prices on the day of release and every day after that.



I'm not sure that any implementation of a "caste system" will have a negative effect on resales or direct sales at all.  All of this being completely hypothetical, if there is a point value given based on a particular week (perhaps loosely based on the TDI) and you own platinum GO OF.  I would expect you to have the highest point value in the system.  If you bought resale, you have the same value as a retail buyer.  Seems simple.

However, if you bought an off season at a less desirable resort wouldn't you EXPECT to have a lower point value?  Resale or otherwise.  I think it's about what you own.  I own platinum weeks and therefore am not worried in the slightest.  I also occupy my home Marriott resorts each year.  The whole concept doesn't appeal to me at all.  

I used to think the concept of timesharing was brilliant.  Sell the same unit 52 times over.  Then, the points concept came along.  Convince your owners to convert to points telling them what the point values will be.  Then raise the point values (so owners can no longer go where they had been going) and force the owners to buy more points.  That is brilliance!!!  I am not saying this is where Marriott is headed.  I just appreciate the ingenuity here.


----------



## SueDonJ

PerryM said:


> ... That sounds fair to me.



I guess I just don't expect "fair" unless it's guaranteed to me in some form or fashion, and there are no guarantees that MVCI will continue its current exchange program as is with II.  I agree, Perry, that the system in place now works just fine for owners - we've managed some outstanding exchanges, made good use of the bonus AC's, and enjoy very much the weeks that we spend at our home resorts.

But as others have said, maybe it's possible for MVCI to increase revenue by tweaking with the exchange program.  If so, then why would we expect them to not do so?  That's what their business objective IS - to increase revenue!  But their ongoing business practices have not been slanted towards protecting a certain financial value for the owners who purchased direct, so why would we expect a difference in their philosophy simply because resale purchasers may also suffer a loss if certain changes are implemented?

The way I see it, ROFR protects MVCI and not the owners.  It's not meant to prop up resale prices (although that is sometimes a result of exercised ROFR); it's meant to give MVCI an opportunity to scoop up resales at the lowest possible price when/if MVCI has a ready buyer for a certain resort/season/unit.  That's been the extent of MVCI's concern with resale value.

And again, why would any of us expect that to change?

(Besides, none of us wants to be forced to wear uniforms while we're vacationing.  What fun is that?!  )


----------



## PerryM

*I believe Marriott...*



wsrobinson said:


> *I'm not sure that any implementation of a "caste system" will have a negative effect on resales* or direct sales at all.  All of this being completely hypothetical, if there is a point value given based on a particular week (perhaps loosely based on the TDI) and you own platinum GO OF.  I would expect you to have the highest point value in the system.  If you bought resale, you have the same value as a retail buyer.  Seems simple.
> 
> However, if you bought an off season at a less desirable resort wouldn't you EXPECT to have a lower point value?  Resale or otherwise.  I think it's about what you own.  I own platinum weeks and therefore am not worried in the slightest.  I also occupy my home Marriott resorts each year.  The whole concept doesn't appeal to me at all.
> 
> I used to think the concept of timesharing was brilliant.  Sell the same unit 52 times over.  Then, the points concept came along.  Convince your owners to convert to points telling them what the point values will be.  Then raise the point values (so owners can no longer go where they had been going) and force the owners to buy more points.  That is brilliance!!!  I am not saying this is where Marriott is headed.  I just appreciate the ingenuity here.



The proof will be one month after Marriott releases their caste system - we will know 100% if that caste system helped or hurt the resale owner - which is eventually all of us.

Marriott believes it will hurt resales - that's why Marriott is pushing the rumor at the first sign of resales in the sales pitch - the new system will hurt resales is what they preach.

I take Marriott at their word.


----------



## PerryM

*The need for greed*



SueDonJ said:


> I guess I just don't expect "fair" unless it's guaranteed to me in some form or fashion, and there are no guarantees that MVCI will continue its current exchange program as is with II.  I agree, Perry, that the system in place now works just fine for owners - we've managed some outstanding exchanges, made good use of the bonus AC's, and enjoy very much the weeks that we spend at our home resorts.
> 
> But as others have said, maybe it's possible for MVCI to increase revenue by tweaking with the exchange program.  If so, then why would we expect them to not do so?  That's what their business objective IS - to increase revenue!  But their ongoing business practices have not been slanted towards protecting a certain financial value for the owners who purchased direct, so why would we expect a difference in their philosophy simply because resale purchasers may also suffer a loss if certain changes are implemented?
> 
> The way I see it, ROFR protects MVCI and not the owners.  It's not meant to prop up resale prices (although that is sometimes a result of exercised ROFR); it's meant to give MVCI an opportunity to scoop up resales at the lowest possible price when/if MVCI has a ready buyer for a certain resort/season/unit.  That's been the extent of MVCI's concern with resale value.
> 
> And again, why would any of us expect that to change?
> 
> (Besides, none of us wants to be forced to wear uniforms while we're vacationing.  What fun is that?!  )



The existing system that I bought into 10 years ago is "fair" to me - the rules have not changed and I play the game well.  Other Marriott owners don't even use their weeks - they pay the MFs and just don't go to their villa.  They don't exchange them they just pay for the MFs, mortgage, and sit at home.

I've talked to many Marriott owners who do this - they typically want advice on how to sell their week.

Now Marriott is about to change all of that - they are changing the rules.

This is fine for folks buying in on the day of the new system's release at resorts where resales are competition to unsold developer inventory.

But is it "fair" for Marriott to impact the resale value and the enjoyment value of a resort that they sold out long ago and today simply are the hired help?

Marriott has to weigh this need for greed and weigh it against bad press and a permanent black eye.  That's Marriott's choice.

Does Marriott have that right to send in brown shirts to a Marriott resort and completely upset the status quo?  I suspect at least one HOA will fight back and this will become something that a judge decides.  Just a wild guess on my part.  I can easily envision a restraining order a few days after the release - talk about chaos.


----------



## dougp26364

Dean said:


> I wonder what people would have thought if Dave had gotten the info and not shared.  No matter the outcome and no matter the intent of the other party, I feel Dave did the right thing and appreciate him sharing.  He is well placed and often has access to things that many of us do not, I hope the negatives on this thread don't dissuade him from doing so in the future.



While I appreciate DaveM's inside information, it's what we as members do to it that I find most entertaining. 

All that was said was sometime in 2010 Marriott should unveil their internal exchange points program but, delay's are possible. It will be affordable enough that many members are expected to join. Resale members may have to pay more to join that those that bought direct. The majority of Marriott owners purchased direct. 

Members have speculated and added to that basic information. They've speculated on how the program will work, how much it will cost, how many members will join, how it might affect resale values and how it will effect owners. The problem with all this speculation is, we're speculating without any evidence of what Marriott has planned. 

Until Marriott releases the details, I wouldn't rely on any information in this thread past what DaveM posted. That being that an internal points program will eventually be released and members will have more choices than ever before. After that, it's all guesswork.

The only thing that has changed for me is that I wouldn't be buying anything from Marriott until this issue is settled. I woudn't buy direct from Marriott because I don't want to be tagged with additional fee's to join shortly after paying thousands of dollars for a "new" timeshare week. I woudn't buy resale because Marriott could lock resale buyers out of this program or, charge them considerably more to join. So the rumor has essentially killed any desire I have to buy additional Marriott weeks.


----------



## PerryM

dougp26364 said:


> While I appreciate DaveM's inside information, it's what we as members do to it that I find most entertaining.
> 
> All that was said was sometime in 2010 Marriott should unveil their internal exchange points program but, delay's are possible. It will be affordable enough that many members are expected to join. Resale members may have to pay more to join that those that bought direct. The majority of Marriott owners purchased direct.
> 
> Members have speculated and added to that basic information. They've speculated on how the program will work, how much it will cost, how many members will join, how it might affect resale values and how it will effect owners. The problem with all this speculation is, we're speculating without any evidence of what Marriott has planned.
> 
> Until Marriott releases the details, I wouldn't rely on any information in this thread past what DaveM posted. That being that an internal points program will eventually be released and members will have more choices than ever before. After that, it's all guesswork.
> 
> *The only thing that has changed for me is that I wouldn't be buying anything from Marriott until this issue is settled.* *I woudn't buy direct from Marriott because I don't want to be tagged with additional fee's to join shortly after paying thousands of dollars for a "new" timeshare week.* I woudn't buy resale because Marriott could lock resale buyers out of this program or, charge them considerably more to join. *So the rumor has essentially killed any desire I have to buy additional Marriott weeks*.



The law of unintended consequences Marriott - are you listening?  No of course not all those salesreps need to shoot off their mouths since they can't sell timeshares in any quantity anymore.


----------



## Pens_Fan

PerryM said:


> Does Marriott have that right to send in brown shirts to a Marriott resort and completely upset the status quo?  I suspect at least one HOA will fight back and this will become something that a judge decides.  Just a wild guess on my part.  I can easily envision a restraining order a few days after the release - talk about chaos.



Wow.  

The term "Drama Queen" comes to mind.


----------



## PerryM

Pens_Fan said:


> Wow.
> 
> The term "Drama Queen" comes to mind.



Glad I have your attention - thanks for the plug.


----------



## SueDonJ

PerryM said:


> ... But is it "fair" for Marriott to impact the resale value and the enjoyment value of a resort that they sold out long ago and today simply are the hired help?



Again, Perry, I find that we don't necessarily disagree, we just have different expectations of our MVCI ownership.  To me, what's "fair" doesn't matter; it's what they have a legal right to do that we should be concerned with.

The fact that MVCI holds the right to ROFR any unit at most every one of their resorts (I think there's one or two with no ROFR?) negates your distinction between a newer resort where developer sales are ongoing and older resorts which have no developer inventory available.  Doesn't it?  I think yes, because at any time MVCI could swoop in and purchase by ROFR any unit which is placed on the resale market, so theoretically MVCI is an active developer at every resort which allows for ROFR.


----------



## SueDonJ

dougp26364 said:


> ... The only thing that has changed for me is that I wouldn't be buying anything from Marriott until this issue is settled. I woudn't buy direct from Marriott because I don't want to be tagged with additional fee's to join shortly after paying thousands of dollars for a "new" timeshare week. I woudn't buy resale because Marriott could lock resale buyers out of this program or, charge them considerably more to join. So the rumor has essentially killed any desire I have to buy additional Marriott weeks.



All of which makes a person appreciate Marriott's timing here, eh?  The economy has pretty much depressed MVCI's market anyway, so they may as well roll this out at the same time.  Implement it in time to work out the kinks before the market starts rebounding - that's as near to the best marketing dream that they could envision.


----------



## PerryM

SueDonJ said:


> Again, Perry, I find that we don't necessarily disagree, we just have different expectations of our MVCI ownership.  To me, what's "fair" doesn't matter; it's what they have a legal right to do that we should be concerned with.
> 
> The fact that MVCI holds the right to ROFR any unit at most every one of their resorts (I think there's one or two with no ROFR?) negates your distinction between a newer resort where developer sales are ongoing and older resorts which have no developer inventory available.  Doesn't it?  I think yes, because at any time MVCI could swoop in and purchase by ROFR any unit which is placed on the resale market, so theoretically MVCI is an active developer at every resort which allows for ROFR.



I like the ROFR I believe it is better to have a developer have it and use it for their enrichment than to have the developer at war with the owners over resales.  That's just my opinion which I can't prove.

Marriott made huge profits from the initial sale of developer inventory.  The question is for the HOAs does Marriott have the right to implement sales tactics that harm the sold out resort?  I'm not a lawyer and I don't know.

Marriott is the one demanding to change the rules here that we have operated under for many many years.  I'm sure that somewhere in the fine print of the documents there are provisions that allow them to do all kinds of things.

HOAs will have to decide if what the hired contractor is doing to their owners is worth a fight.  If they decide that Marriott will harm their resort so much they can find another management company.

All of this is unknown but one thing is for certain - when Marriott rolls out the new exchange system its going to cost us all more money and will the results be worth it?

Marriott has encouraged wild speculation by shooting off its mouth on this topic.  Apparently they want a lively discussion by the owners and the HOAs.

That's my conclusion to their rumor.


----------



## RandR

Perry, what percentage of MVCI owners would you say are "savvy"?  I have no idea but figure you might be able to guess since you have been doing this for a while.  Basically, what I mean is, how many owners will even understand the changes that are coming?  For every SueDonJ who bought retail going in with her eyes open, there are probably lots of people that didn't.  If the vast majority of owners are not "educated", like those you mentioned who pay but never go, they may just go along with the new system being none the wiser. (especially if the fee is waived initially.)  Then any new people would just be put into the new system automatically.  This could get the numbers up very quickly.


----------



## PerryM

RandR said:


> Perry, what percentage of MVCI owners would you say are "savvy"?  I have no idea but figure you might be able to guess since you have been doing this for a while.  Basically, what I mean is, how many owners will even understand the changes that are coming?  For every SueDonJ who bought retail going in with her eyes open, there are probably lots of people that didn't.  If the vast majority of owners are not "educated", like those you mentioned who pay but never go, they may just go along with the new system being none the wiser. (especially if the fee is waived initially.)  Then any new people would just be put into the new system automatically.  This could get the numbers up very quickly.



I think most Marriott owners are very happy with their ownership - how many are "savvy" are probably here on TUG.

Marriott knows that they can introduce anything they want and there won't be a whimper of a complaint.

The HOAs are another matter all together - these folks have a fiduciary responsibility to the owners - this is where any problems will pop up.

I, personally, won't do a thing with ANY mouth watering Marriott that should show up on eBay - I'm with dougP - I won't do anything until this system is released.


----------



## dougp26364

If you go by the crowds at the informal updates Marriott has for owners, I'm not sure there are a lot of savy Marriott owners out there. Most of the owners I've spoken to over the years seem to be doing good just figuring out how to use their weeks and make the occasional exchange. There are a few that really understand the system but they seem to be few and far between. 

The one thing Marriott does right is having reps that can assist owners get what they want out of their ownership. It seems that, for the most part at least, one doesn't have to be very savy to get decent milage out of their ownership. 

I go to the informal updates for a few reasons. If there's been changes, it's a decent place to learn. If I've come up with a question I usually get a decent answer (depends on the knowledge level of the presenter). They usually lay out something I either haven't considered, hadn't thought about, didn't know or had forgotten along the way. Finally, it's mildly entertaining when someone complains that the silver studio week they deposited for exchange last week isn't pulling the platinum Hawaiian 2 bedroom ocean front week for next month like their salesman told them it would.


----------



## icydog

On July 31st I sent an email to my Marriott Rep. At that time I told him I was very upset with the impending point system.. I told him that as an owner of developer weeks, as well as weeks I bought resale, I am very concerned about the new point system and its effect on me and my properties. I told him when I bought Marriott I assumed it would be an equitable system, sort of like the way DVC treats its resale owners. Resale and retail owners are treated exactly the same.  I told him I would expect Marriott would follow the DVC example. 

*The sales rep told me:

*_That the whole point thing is top secret. He also said the program will be flexible and not mandatory. He also told me not to stress over this._

*His manager said, and I am paraphrasing here*:

_The only ones who know the way the point system will work is upper management, and they will not be releasing any information since their jobs would be on the line. The program and its workings have not been finalized and therefore anything else speculated is only that, speculation. 

_Neither the sales rep or the manager allayed my fears. I still don't know how this will affect me as a purchaser of resold Marriott weeks.  
I did not copy the words verbatim from the emails to save them from prosecution, or persecution, by higher-ups in Marriott.


----------



## PerryM

*100% average with me....*



icydog said:


> On July 31st I sent an email to my Marriott Rep. At that time I told him I was very upset with the impending point system.. I told him that as an owner of developer weeks, as well as weeks I bought resale, I am very concerned about the new point system and its effect on me and my properties. I told him when I bought Marriott I assumed it would be an equitable system, sort of like the way DVC treats its resale owners. Resale and retail owners are treated exactly the same.  I told him I would expect Marriott would follow the DVC example.
> 
> *The sales rep told me:
> 
> *_That the whole point thing is top secret. He also said the program will be flexible and not mandatory. He also told me not to stress over this._
> 
> *His manager said, and I am paraphrasing here*:
> 
> _*The only ones who know the way the point system will work is upper management, and they will not be releasing any information since their jobs would be on the line. The program and its workings have not been finalized and therefore anything else speculated is only that, speculation*.
> 
> _Neither the sales rep or the manager allayed my fears. I still don't know how this will affect me as a purchaser of resold Marriott weeks.
> I did not copy the words verbatim from the emails to save them from prosecution, or persecution, by higher-ups in Marriott.



That may be but in the last 5 Marriott sales presentations ALL 5 reps said that resale owners would be screwed.  I don't think they know if existing resale owners would be screwed but definitely resale owners after the release would be screwed.

That's a 100% average on the topic of resale owners getting screwed.

So details are being released to the salesreps who then use them as weapons to frighten folks who dare think buying a Marriott from a Marriott owner.

Has anyone ever been told that new resale owners will benefit from the new exchange system?  I've not heard that from anyone.


----------



## Clark

icydog said:


> The only ones who know the way the point system will work is upper management.



That, my fellow Tuggers, is the last thing you wanted to hear. 

Now, when you finally see how it works, remember, you heard it here first: "Never attribute to malice that which can be explained by simple incompetence"

I'm just sayin' ---


----------



## RandR

PerryM said:


> That may be but in the last 5 Marriott sales presentations ALL 5 reps said that resale owners would be screwed.  I don't think they know if existing resale owners would be screwed but definitely resale owners after the release would be screwed.
> 
> That's a 100% average on the topic of resale owners getting screwed.
> 
> So details are being released to the salesreps who then use them as weapons to frighten folks who dare think buying a Marriott from a Marriott owner.
> 
> Has anyone ever been told that new resale owners will benefit from the new exchange system?  I've not heard that from anyone.



Not to defend them, but you don't know that the salespeople have been told anything.  They have heard rumors and hearsay as well.  They are just using it to their advantage.  If it turns out that resales don't get treated differently they will just say things changed since they told you that.


----------



## icydog

I have heard all kinds of things on sales tours about buying resale.. i was told if I bought resale I couldn't exchange the week, that if I bought resale I would be given the bottom of the barrel for reservations, that if I bought resale I couldn't be sure the deed was valid, if I bought resale I couldn't trade my week in for points, whoops that one is true!!:ignore:But you get the idea. If this is being thrown out there salesmen will run with it. Who's to say it isn't true since nobody is saying what the truth is. So they can, with impunity, claim that resold weeks outside of Marriott's auspices will not enjoy the same benefits in the new point system as those weeks purchased directly from Marriott. 

I was in sales/marketing for years and an untruth is not an untruth if you are not sure of the source. Salespeople will use any and all ammunition to get the sale. In this case, if they tell their prospects that they will be shunned from the new point system if they buy resale- that is what they will say to make the deal. It is not untrue yet, so they are not lying. Again, impunity works here. They probably believe what they are saying. That doesn't make it so.


----------



## hotcoffee

PerryM said:


> That may be but in the last 5 Marriott sales presentations ALL 5 reps said that resale owners would be screwed.  I don't think they know if existing resale owners would be screwed but definitely resale owners after the release would be screwed.



Have it ever been hinted to you that Marriott intended to get more involved in resales?  At the sales presentation last year (I refused to go this year), the salesman made a remark similar to that.  I have not seen any comments here about anyone else having heard a salesman state that.  Am I the only person who was told anything like that?

To me, that would be a viable option because I would assume that if anyone were to buy a resale through Marriott, he would gain normal access to the new point trading system even if current resale owners are not (or given expensive access).  That would preserve value in one's timeshare.  Of course, independent brokers would likely cry foul.

As long as I can reserve, exchange, and sell when needed, I don't care much about how the new system will work.  I might even join it if the cost is reasonable, and if I am not excluded.


----------



## Dean

PerryM said:


> I play the game according to the rules - do it in many parts of my life.
> 
> There are always outside forces that want to change the rules and not play the game.  Sore losers.
> 
> The existing II exchange system has worked just fine for 15+ years now - why change it?  We already have a 24 day exclusive Marriott owner to owner ability now.


I'm not sure the system as is works nearly as well as you think.  It does for the well informed because we learn how to use and abuse it but not nearly as much for the average owner.  Certainly a points system bypasses many of the current issues though it does create other issues and problems.  The question is what is the balance.  IMO, a points system for Marriott is inevitable however questions remain how to get from here to there.  And the answer varies as to what is the purpose of the question, is it the most profit or the best, smoothest transition, a balance, etc.


----------



## RandR

hotcoffee said:


> Have it ever been hinted to you that Marriott intended to get more involved in resales?  At the sales presentation last year (I refused to go this year), the salesman made a remark similar to that.  I have not seen any comments here about anyone else having heard a salesman state that.  Am I the only person who was told anything like that?
> 
> To me, that would be a viable option because I would assume that if anyone were to buy a resale through Marriott, he would gain normal access to the new point trading system even if current resale owners are not (or given expensive access).  That would preserve value in one's timeshare.  Of course, independent brokers would likely cry foul.
> 
> As long as I can reserve, exchange, and sell when needed, I don't care much about how the new system will work.  I might even join it if the cost is reasonable, and if I am not excluded.



Marriott being in the resale business doesn't necessarily help you.  They will help you sell your unit now but the wait can be 2+ years.


----------



## Dean

PerryM said:


> The proof will be one month after Marriott releases their caste system - we will know 100% if that caste system helped or hurt the resale owner - which is eventually all of us.
> 
> Marriott believes it will hurt resales - that's why Marriott is pushing the rumor at the first sign of resales in the sales pitch - the new system will hurt resales is what they preach.
> 
> I take Marriott at their word.


Obviously any system wants to push sales toward retail and away from resale.  However, any system that is too one sided also has the potential to hurt resale and if it does, it may backlash on retail as well.  I don't think 1 month after any change will answer the question, people are too reactive to make that statement as a long term expectation.

With any change there are winners and losers.  It very well may be that any change that does come hurts you and helps me or vice versa.  No way to make it "fair" for everyone with every change.


----------



## verby

maybe MVC will take the point system from SVN. It looks pretty straight forward and I hope it works well...


----------



## PerryM

*Sweet*



RandR said:


> Not to defend them, but you don't know that the salespeople have been told anything.  They have heard rumors and hearsay as well.  They are just using it to their advantage.  If it turns out that resales don't get treated differently they will just say things changed since they told you that.



This is Marriott's rumor that is blessed by various levels of Marriott management.

The rumor is very uniform in the past 2-3 years and from the 5 salesreps - the new internal exchange Marriott only system will bar resale owners.

Marriott if this is not what you meant when spreading the rumor please correct it here.

The net result will be a decline in resale prices since folks who want to exchange to other Marriotts will have to be part of the new exchange program.  That means less demand on the resale market and falling prices.

Marriott will probably then exercise the ROFR to snap up the resale weeks that nobody wants.

To me this is ideal for Marriott and if I were in management I'd want this rumor out for years to scare the hell out of the resale market.  Throw in a real estate bubble bursting and Marriott might be able to recycle units for 30 - 40 cents on the dollar.  Sweet.

I believe the Marriott rumors myself at this point.  Resales will not be allowed into the new exchange system and there will be no need to grandfather anyone in.


----------



## Dean

PerryM said:


> This is Marriott's rumor that is blessed by various levels of Marriott management.
> 
> The rumor is very uniform in the past 2-3 years and from the 5 salesreps - the new internal exchange Marriott only system will bar resale owners.
> 
> Marriott if this is not what you meant when spreading the rumor please correct it here.
> 
> The net result will be a decline in resale prices since folks who want to exchange to other Marriotts will have to be part of the new exchange program.  That means less demand on the resale market and falling prices.
> 
> Marriott will probably then exercise the ROFR to snap up the resale weeks that nobody wants.
> 
> To me this is ideal for Marriott and if I were in management I'd want this rumor out for years to scare the hell out of the resale market.  Throw in a real estate bubble bursting and Marriott might be able to recycle units for 30 - 40 cents on the dollar.  Sweet.
> 
> I believe the Marriott rumors myself at this point.  Resales will not be allowed into the new exchange system and there will be no need to grandfather anyone in.


Perry, we've seen consistently incorrect info coming from sales staff for years.  Things like you can't access the II Marriott desk or get the internal trading preference and the like.  That several sales staff told similar stories doesn't mean much to me and from what I've seen, they have not all been the same though similar.  One would expect sales staff that discussed these options would spin them in the most negative light for resales.  That doesn't make them knowledgeable about specifics nor accurate, just spouting off in my book.  And while it may indeed mean that prices will go down with any change, that is not fact, though you keep stating it like it is.  It is speculation that may or may not be true and will depend on specifics of what happens, or doesn't happen.  I know some have said they won't buy no matter what until this is sorted out, I've taken the opportunity to add some very nice options at much cheaper prices.  Given 2 of them are things I'd likely never trade (6 of my 8 weeks fall in the same thinking), I doubt it'll make much difference to me one way or another other than if prices fall lower, I might add another week or 2 similar to what I just bought.


----------



## dougp26364

PerryM said:


> This is Marriott's rumor that is blessed by various levels of Marriott management.
> 
> The rumor is very uniform in the past 2-3 years and from the 5 salesreps - the new internal exchange Marriott only system will bar resale owners.
> 
> Marriott if this is not what you meant when spreading the rumor please correct it here.
> 
> The net result will be a decline in resale prices since folks who want to exchange to other Marriotts will have to be part of the new exchange program.  That means less demand on the resale market and falling prices.
> 
> Marriott will probably then exercise the ROFR to snap up the resale weeks that nobody wants.
> 
> To me this is ideal for Marriott and if I were in management I'd want this rumor out for years to scare the hell out of the resale market.  Throw in a real estate bubble bursting and Marriott might be able to recycle units for 30 - 40 cents on the dollar.  Sweet.
> 
> I believe the Marriott rumors myself at this point.  Resales will not be allowed into the new exchange system and there will be no need to grandfather anyone in.



Perry,

I would ask that consideration be given to the fact that it is, IMHO, a minority of owners that actually pay attention and think about what's going on around them. Most that I run into are not as savy as the typical TUG member (aka: are often clueless). Most don't have a clue that the resale market exists or that the resale market has prices considerably lower than developer pricing. Thus the existance of all these upfront fee companies.

I submit that it's not the rumor killing reslae pricing so much as the ecomony and Marriott no longer exercising ROFR. The economy is likely putting more units on the market, depressing resale pricing (supply and demand). Couple that with Marriott no longer being able to afford (or choosing to afford) exercising ROFR and you have the receipt for lower resale prices. 

Granted the rumor BS they're spreading can't be helping the case for the resale market value but, I believe that very few owners ever pay attention to those rumore and, those that do are not in large enough numbers so as to have a significant impact.

Essentially, I still feel that this is a great deal of speculation, worry and hand wringing over nothing. We're chasing ghosts here and nothing substantial yet. Until Marriot DOES something, nothing has changed.


----------



## Twinkstarr

dougp26364 said:


> I would ask that consideration be given to the fact that it is, IMHO, a minority of owners that actually pay attention and think about what's going on around them. Most that I run into are not as savy as the typical TUG member (aka: are often clueless). Most don't have a clue that the resale market exists or that the resale market has prices considerably lower than developer pricing. Thus the existance of all these upfront fee companies.
> .



I agree 100% with you on the above statement. I've met a local Marriott owner who had no clue that II was on line and you could "do it yourself". She thought you always had to call in. 

Or while working out at the Y in March, a couple of Westin Kierland Villa owners who were planning on calling in "sometime" this year to book their 2 weeks for Spring Training 2010. I said they should perhaps consider calling in sooner to get the exact weeks they wanted. No they wait and can't get B2B and were thinking about selling.


----------



## PerryM

dougp26364 said:


> Perry,
> 
> I would ask that consideration be given to the fact that it is, IMHO, a minority of owners that actually pay attention and think about what's going on around them. Most that I run into are not as savy as the typical TUG member (aka: are often clueless). Most don't have a clue that the resale market exists or that the resale market has prices considerably lower than developer pricing. Thus the existance of all these upfront fee companies.
> 
> I submit that it's not the rumor killing reslae pricing so much as the ecomony and Marriott no longer exercising ROFR. The economy is likely putting more units on the market, depressing resale pricing (supply and demand). Couple that with Marriott no longer being able to afford (or choosing to afford) exercising ROFR and you have the receipt for lower resale prices.
> 
> Granted the rumor BS they're spreading can't be helping the case for the resale market value but, I believe that very few owners ever pay attention to those rumore and, those that do are not in large enough numbers so as to have a significant impact.
> 
> *Essentially, I still feel that this is a great deal of speculation, worry and hand wringing over nothing. We're chasing ghosts here and nothing substantial yet. Until Marriot DOES something, nothing has changed.*



I wish it were true, that nothing has changed.

By Marriott using this rumor thousands of times over the past 2-3 years they are impacting resales - folks who might want to take advantage of low resale prices now are being scared out of doing so by a Marriott sponsored rumor.  Assume that amounts to thousands of folks in the demand spectrum of Marriott resales - fewer buyers means lower prices.

It's one thing for the salesreps to lie and bend the truth to make a sale but its a completely different thing for a Fortune 500 company to blatantly create a rumor to depress resale prices of their own owners.

This is outrageous and my point - Marriott is harming every owner with this 3 year old rumor they spread thousands of times a day for almost 1,000 days now.

This is no small matter in my mind.

The definition of a lie is very simple - The truth is simply what actually happened - a lie is recounting something that did not happen.

Marriott, as a corporation, is spreading a lie - the internal exchange system doesn't exist.  If we don't try to hold them accountable for their lie who will?

My advice at this point is to NOT buy Marriott either direct from Marriott or resale.  The lie Marriott is spreading has introduced so much doubt into Marriott ownership that folks should wait until the system is released - no matter how many years that takes.


----------



## KathyPet

Perry, I do agree with your wait and see posture.  If I was in the market for a Marriott now and I was aware that this program was coming along I would not buy either direct or resale but would want to wait until the details of the new program were released.


----------



## PerryM

*Mission accomplished (Not the sign on that aircraft carrier)*



KathyPet said:


> Perry, I do agree with your wait and see posture.  If I was in the market for a Marriott now and I was aware that this program was coming along I would not buy either direct or resale but would want to wait until the details of the new program were released.



My goal of pointing out Marriott's blatant lie has been achieved.

If you type in "Marriott internal exchange" (without the quotes) into Google you will be brought to this thread and my objections.

I hope this blows up in Marriott's face.

Marriott what you have done is despicable - stop the rumor!  Stop the lies!


----------



## dougp26364

PerryM said:


> I wish it were true, that nothing has changed.
> 
> By Marriott using this rumor thousands of times over the past 2-3 years they are impacting resales - folks who might want to take advantage of low resale prices now are being scared out of doing so by a Marriott sponsored rumor.  Assume that amounts to thousands of folks in the demand spectrum of Marriott resales - fewer buyers means lower prices.
> 
> It's one thing for the salesreps to lie and bend the truth to make a sale but its a completely different thing for a Fortune 500 company to blatantly create a rumor to depress resale prices of their own owners.
> 
> This is outrageous and my point - Marriott is harming every owner with this 3 year old rumor they spread thousands of times a day for almost 1,000 days now.
> 
> This is no small matter in my mind.
> 
> The definition of a lie is very simple - The truth is simply what actually happened - a lie is recounting something that did not happen.
> 
> Marriott, as a corporation, is spreading a lie - the internal exchange system doesn't exist.  If we don't try to hold them accountable for their lie who will?
> 
> My advice at this point is to NOT buy Marriott either direct from Marriott or resale.  The lie Marriott is spreading has introduced so much doubt into Marriott ownership that folks should wait until the system is released - no matter how many years that takes.



While I'll agree that it's true enough in my case that this rumor is enough to make me not want to buy another Marriott week until this is settled, for anyone other than those of us in the know about resale, I'm not 100% convinced this rumor is having much impact.

There at two things Marriott can not take away from a resale buyer. 1) The right to use the week they own in the season they own and 2) the right to exchange the week they own through an independant exchange company. In that respect, despite any rumor of internal exchange program, nothing can change. By forcing resale prices to all time lows they could be encouraging resale purchases rather than discouraging them. It's a risky business to be guessing exactly WHY someone is buying. 

True if they're buying for the Marriott system it would discourage resales but, it they're buying to use their home resort week or, if they're buying to be able to exchange through I.I. and don't care whether they're exchanging into Marriott resorts, then the extremely low resale prices we're seeing now would be encouraging prospects to walk away from the table and buy resale. This is a double edged sword their playing with without knowing which side is doing the cutting each time a client sits across from a salesman.

The one thing we both agree on is this rumor is an idiotic ploy for Marriott salesmen to be using. It's doubtful it will actually encourage a great percentage of people to buy from the developer and there is a risk it could drive people away because of an uncertain future. The rest is mearly semantics. 

As far as Marriott harming me (or all owners), I see no harm. I bought to use and to retain. I have no intention of selling now or anytime in the near future. For me there is no loss in resale value much like there is no loss when selling stocks UNLESS you actually sell when the market is low. If the internal exchange system wasn't an important aspect of owning Marriott, it might actually benefit me as I could be buying resale units at what I believe are historically low prices. But, the internal exchange portion is important to me and, the uncertain future would push me away from any purchase, developer or resale, until this matter is settled.


----------



## PerryM

dougp26364 said:


> While I'll agree that it's true enough in my case that this rumor is enough to make me not want to buy another Marriott week until this is settled, for anyone other than those of us in the know about resale, I'm not 100% convinced this rumor is having much impact.
> 
> There at two things Marriott can not take away from a resale buyer. 1) The right to use the week they own in the season they own and 2) the right to exchange the week they own through an independant exchange company. In that respect, despite any rumor of internal exchange program, nothing can change. By forcing resale prices to all time lows they could be encouraging resale purchases rather than discouraging them. It's a risky business to be guessing exactly WHY someone is buying.
> 
> True if they're buying for the Marriott system it would discourage resales but, it they're buying to use their home resort week or, if they're buying to be able to exchange through I.I. and don't care whether they're exchanging into Marriott resorts, then the extremely low resale prices we're seeing now would be encouraging prospects to walk away from the table and buy resale. This is a double edged sword their playing with without knowing which side is doing the cutting each time a client sits across from a salesman.
> 
> The one thing we both agree on is this rumor is an idiotic ploy for Marriott salesmen to be using. It's doubtful it will actually encourage a great percentage of people to buy from the developer and there is a risk it could drive people away because of an uncertain future. The rest is mearly semantics.
> 
> As far as Marriott harming me (or all owners), I see no harm. I bought to use and to retain. I have no intention of selling now or anytime in the near future. For me there is no loss in resale value much like there is no loss when selling stocks UNLESS you actually sell when the market is low. If the internal exchange system wasn't an important aspect of owning Marriott, it might actually benefit me as I could be buying resale units at what I believe are historically low prices. But, the internal exchange portion is important to me and, the uncertain future would push me away from any purchase, developer or resale, until this matter is settled.



Timeshare salesreps tell enough lies, distortions, and just wrong information that we should have a 100% No Lie policy towards ALL timeshare developers.

What Marriott is doing is despicable - they are scaring thousands of folks with a rumor and tarnishing the very timeshare resorts we own.

Maybe we can't track back a verifiable example of how Marriott's rumor has lowered a resale trade but I sure don't see how it helps Marriott resales.

We are it - we either ignore 1,000 days of lies or we point it out for all that take the time to research "Marriott Internal Exchange" and want to know what the hell Marriott is up to.


----------



## dougp26364

PerryM said:


> Timeshare salesreps tell enough lies, distortions, and just wrong information that we should have a 100% No Lie policy towards ALL timeshare developers.
> 
> What Marriott is doing is despicable - they are scaring thousands of folks with a rumor and tarnishing the very timeshare resorts we own.
> 
> Maybe we can't track back a verifiable example of how Marriott's rumor has lowered a resale trade but I sure don't see how it helps Marriott resales.
> 
> We are it - we either ignore 1,000 days of lies or we point it out for all that take the time to research "Marriott Internal Exchange" and want to know what the hell Marriott is up to.



I agree it needs to stop. 

One other adverse affects this has had, at least with me, is that I have ceased all referals to Marriott. In the past, I've refered family, friends and co-workers to Marriott. With the direction the sales presentations are going and, with the uncertainty over the future direction of this rumored internal exchange program, I've stopped all referals.


----------



## Bill4728

verby said:


> maybe MVC will take the point system from SVN. It looks pretty straight forward and I hope it works well...


I pointed out earlier in this thread that all the other hotel branded TS systems have a point system. 
I also said that SVN (Starwood vacation) has the system which I would least like to see Marriott follow.


----------



## LAX Mom

Why would anyone buy a timeshare from Marriott if they are told there is little opportunity to sell it on the resale market? 

If Marriott markets this new plan and uses it as a way to promote developer sales, it will make it difficult to sell anything resale. So Marriott has a new internal trading system, but you can't use it if you don't purchase from Marriott?

What happens if I buy from Marriott and then at a later date this timeshare doesn't meet my needs? No one will want it because a resale unit can't utilize the Marriott internal trading system.

Marriott can't be this dumb! Why would anyone ever buy a timeshare from them once this new program is introduced? It makes no sense to me, everyone (or their heirs) needs to sell their timeshare units at some point in the future.


----------



## PerryM

LAX Mom said:


> *Why would anyone buy a timeshare from Marriott if they are told there is little opportunity to sell it on the resale market?*
> 
> If Marriott markets this new plan and uses it as a way to promote developer sales, it will make it difficult to sell anything resale. So Marriott has a new internal trading system, but you can't use it if you don't purchase from Marriott?
> 
> What happens if I buy from Marriott and then at a later date this timeshare doesn't meet my needs? No one will want it because a resale unit can't utilize the Marriott internal trading system.
> 
> Marriott can't be this dumb! Why would anyone ever buy a timeshare from them once this new program is introduced? It makes no sense to me, everyone (or their heirs) needs to sell their timeshare units at some point in the future.



Ma and Pa who wander into a Marriott sales gallery have no idea what they are doing - they signed up for the freebie and may eventually be talked into a sale.  No one is bringing up resales to them and the fact that the instant the ink dries o the sales contract they just lost 50% of their money.  Throw in 14% financing and the loss is equal to the initial price of the timeshare.

So what else is new?


----------



## rsackett

LAX Mom said:


> Why would anyone buy a timeshare from Marriott if they are told there is little opportunity to sell it on the resale market?
> 
> If Marriott markets this new plan and uses it as a way to promote developer sales, it will make it difficult to sell anything resale. So Marriott has a new internal trading system, but you can't use it if you don't purchase from Marriott?
> 
> What happens if I buy from Marriott and then at a later date this timeshare doesn't meet my needs? No one will want it because a resale unit can't utilize the Marriott internal trading system.
> 
> Marriott can't be this dumb! Why would anyone ever buy a timeshare from them once this new program is introduced? It makes no sense to me, everyone (or their heirs) needs to sell their timeshare units at some point in the future.




_I also do not understand, however there are more than one person in this thread that have said that they concider the residual value of any timeshare they buy to be zero, and are still comfortable buying direct._

Ray



SueDonJ said:


> ... That's what their business objective IS - to increase revenue!  But their ongoing business practices have not been slanted towards protecting a certain financial value for the owners who purchased direct, so why would we expect a difference in their philosophy simply because resale purchasers may also suffer a loss if certain changes are implemented?
> 
> The way I see it, ROFR protects MVCI and not the owners.  It's not meant to prop up resale prices (although that is sometimes a result of exercised ROFR); it's meant to give MVCI an opportunity to scoop up resales at the lowest possible price when/if MVCI has a ready buyer for a certain resort/season/unit.  That's been the extent of MVCI's concern with resale value....



_I have never realized it before but in thinking that way it is in Marriott's best interest to have ROFR AND very low resale prices.  Scoop them up at very low prices and resell them at developer prices to uneducated buyers, or those that consider their initial purchase as an initiation fee to join the great Marriott system, i.e. no residual value._

Ray


----------



## sdtugger

LAX Mom said:


> Why would anyone buy a timeshare from Marriott if they are told there is little opportunity to sell it on the resale market?
> 
> If Marriott markets this new plan and uses it as a way to promote developer sales, it will make it difficult to sell anything resale. So Marriott has a new internal trading system, but you can't use it if you don't purchase from Marriott?
> 
> What happens if I buy from Marriott and then at a later date this timeshare doesn't meet my needs? No one will want it because a resale unit can't utilize the Marriott internal trading system.
> 
> Marriott can't be this dumb! Why would anyone ever buy a timeshare from them once this new program is introduced? It makes no sense to me, everyone (or their heirs) needs to sell their timeshare units at some point in the future.



This is an excellent point that I and others have made many times on this board.  However, I believe Marriott is banking on the majority of owners/buyers not thinking about selling some day (even some on this board said they don't care about resale values).  It makes no sense to me, but that is the only logical conclusion, isn't it?


----------



## SueDonJ

LAX Mom said:


> Why would anyone buy a timeshare from Marriott if they are told there is little opportunity to sell it on the resale market?



Possibly, for the same reasons that folks who buy direct from MVCI now do, despite knowing that they face a practically guaranteed financial loss should they choose to sell in the future?  It's a hedged bet, at least it was for us, against the most drastic devaluation in usage that could occur in the future.

Because regardless of whatever supplemental exchange company or system (or any other related ownership allowance) that MVCI chooses, the only thing guaranteed by the ownership documents is the usage ability to occupy, rent or trade the specific resort/season/unit type that you've purchased.

It's all speculation here though, isn't it, leading to as severely depressed a resale market as is being discussed?


----------



## sdtugger

*Points Strategies?*

How does the existing Marriott point system work with regard to combining points from multiple units?  I have the same question with regard to the Starwood and other systems.  In other words, could you purchase two low cost weeks with low maintenance fees and combine the points to trade?  If so, that might actually be a benefit of the new system?  In other words, could two low value weeks equal a Hawaii plat week in the number of points for example?


----------



## RandR

sdtugger said:


> How does the existing Marriott point system work with regard to combining points from multiple units?  I have the same question with regard to the Starwood and other systems.  In other words, could you purchase two low cost weeks with low maintenance fees and combine the points to trade?  If so, that might actually be a benefit of the new system?  In other words, could two low value weeks equal a Hawaii plat week in the number of points for example?



Marriott does not have an existing points system for their ts it is a weeks based system.  I am pretty sure that Hilton lets you combine the points you buy from multiple properties (or the same property) and then use those points as you wish.  You still get priority at your own property for a window of time.


----------



## PerryM

SueDonJ said:


> Possibly, for the same reasons that folks who buy direct from MVCI now do, despite knowing that they face a practically guaranteed financial loss should they choose to sell in the future?  It's a hedged bet, at least it was for us, against the most drastic devaluation in usage that could occur in the future.
> 
> Because regardless of whatever supplemental exchange company or system (or any other related ownership allowance) that MVCI chooses, *the only thing guaranteed by the ownership documents is the usage ability to occupy, rent or trade the specific resort/season/unit type that you've purchased*.
> 
> It's all speculation here though, isn't it, leading to as severely depressed a resale market as is being discussed?



Correct!

Marriott owners in mature resorts (long ago sold out by Marriott) want to exchange reservations - this is now the #1 reason to buy a timeshare - at least that's what I read from the surveys.

Marriott owners now have that ability through a 3rd party since Marriott never wanted to get into the reservation exchange business.

Now the question is will Marriott offer an inferior product for the owners to use?  Preventing 20% of them from participating in this exchange of reservations is NOT in the best interest of the owners.

Each year has those same owners wanting to sell their weeks for various reasons and want to find someone to assume their ownership and to pay the MFs.  Next year there will be more owners who want to sell and new owners to replace them.

Marriott can easily screw the owners by barring resale owners - the question is will they do it as they have promised?

I assume they will screw the owners - I take the rumor as it has been spread.

This is all about greed on Marriott's part - how much greed is enough?


----------



## hotcoffee

RandR said:


> Marriott being in the resale business doesn't necessarily help you.  They will help you sell your unit now but the wait can be 2+ years.



Marriott becoming more involved in resales than currently will help all owners. It would mean that Marriott would act as brokers, like current real estate brokers.  There is no guarantee that any of us could sell our unit today in less than 2+ years (unless, of course, you want to sell at a can't-refuse price).  It's not the length of time it takes to sell that is the issue.  It is the fact that the buyer would not be severely penalized if Marriott were to act as broker.  If Marriott decides not to penalize new buyers any more than they currently do resale owners, then the issue is a moot point.

I have no issue with Marriott rewarding direct buyers with as much value-added features as they want.  As long as everyone can reserve good weeks, exchange into good resorts for good weeks, and sell when needed, then this whole discussion is largely a moot point.


----------



## SueDonJ

PerryM said:


> Correct!
> 
> Marriott owners in mature resorts (long ago sold out by Marriott) want to exchange reservations - this is now the #1 reason to buy a timeshare - at least that's what I read from the surveys.
> 
> Marriott owners now have that ability through a 3rd party since Marriott never wanted to get into the reservation exchange business.
> 
> Now the question is will Marriott offer an inferior product for the owners to use?  Preventing 20% of them from participating in this exchange of reservations is NOT in the best interest of the owners.
> 
> Each year has those same owners wanting to sell their weeks for various reasons and want to find someone to assume their ownership and to pay the MFs.  Next year there will be more owners who want to sell and new owners to replace them.
> 
> Marriott can easily screw the owners by barring resale owners - the question is will they do it as they have promised?
> 
> I assume they will screw the owners - I take the rumor as it has been spread.
> 
> This is all about greed on Marriott's part - how much greed is enough?



Well, in the business world there is no such thing as too much revenue.

You're fixating on the distinction between sold-out resorts and those that still have developer inventory available, Perry, but as I said before, ROFR allows for MVCI to pick up developer inventory at any time.  That negates your distinction, at least at those resorts with ROFR.

Edit:  Also, as long as owners have an option to exchange their units, by way of a private exchange or through whatever means MVCI may choose to make available to them, then the deeded usage right to exchange is not infringed.  That right is deeded, but the parameters for any supplemental exchange program that MVCI chooses to offer in conjunction with the deeded resort/season/week are not.  *hotcoffee* mentions "value added features" in a post up there, I like that terminology better than the "system" or "program" that I've been using to try to mean those features not deeded.


----------



## RandR

hotcoffee said:


> Marriott becoming more involved in resales than currently will help all owners. It would mean that Marriott would act as brokers, like current real estate brokers.  There is no guarantee that any of us could sell our unit today in less than 2+ years (unless, of course, you want to sell at a can't-refuse price).  It's not the length of time it takes to sell that is the issue.  It is the fact that the buyer would not be severely penalized if Marriott were to act as broker.  If Marriott decides not to penalize new buyers any more than they currently do resale owners, then the issue is a moot point.
> 
> I have no issue with Marriott rewarding direct buyers with as much value-added features as they want.  As long as everyone can reserve good weeks, exchange into good resorts for good weeks, and sell when needed, then this whole discussion is largely a moot point.



I agree that if Marriott treats everyone the same it is a moot point.  Unfortunately the speculation is that they will not.  I guess only time will tell.


----------



## hotcoffee

SueDonJ said:


> *hotcoffee* mentions "value added features" in a post up there, I like that terminology better than the "system" or "program" that I've been using to try to mean those features not deeded.



Keep in mind that a new points-based internal trading system is not quite the same as a value-added feature.  Let's suppose that the new system becomes a big hit, and sucks up many of the available Marriott weeks.  And, let's assume that Marriott takes the most radical course and excludes resale owners (either new or current or both), then resale owners plus those direct owners who elect not to join the new system will have a diminished number of Marriott weeks to exchanged with.  That's fine if they are happy always going to their home resort or are satisfied with whatever II has to offer, but it is a significant loss of what owning a Marriott timeshare should have been.

What Marriott could do to enhance the direct buy program is, first-of-all, stop devaluing the point values, and then add some new advantages like exchanging a TS week for perhaps two weeks directly into one of their non-resort hotels anywhere in the world (or something like that).  That type of thing would be value-added.  Robbing resale owners of exchange weeks is not value-added to direct buyers.


----------



## SueDonJ

hotcoffee said:


> Keep in mind that a new points-based internal trading system is not quite the same as a value-added feature.  Let's suppose that the new system becomes a big hit, and sucks up many of the available Marriott weeks.  And, let's assume that Marriott takes the most radical course and excludes resale owners (either new or current or both), then resale owners plus those direct owners who elect not to join the new system will have a diminished number of Marriott weeks to exchanged with.  That's fine if they are happy always going to their home resort or are satisfied with whatever II has to offer, but it is a significant loss of what owning a Marriott timeshare should have been.
> 
> What Marriott could do to enhance the direct buy program is, first-of-all, stop devaluing the point values, and then add some new advantages like exchanging a TS week for perhaps two weeks directly into one of their non-resort hotels anywhere in the world (or something like that).  That type of thing would be value-added.  Robbing resale owners of exchange weeks is not value-added to direct buyers.



Ah, there I go adding confusion to the mix again.  I meant that I liked using "value added features" to specify the terms of ownership usage that are not specifically deeded although the usage right is.  In other words, exchanging is a deeded right, exchanging through the current system with II is the value added to that right.  Does that make sense?  In any event, it confused even you so maybe it's best to go back to the drawing board.  

As far as the speculation in this thread about what would be the specific terms/features to the deeded exchange right, I'm not assuming anything.  I still can't figure out if folks are talking here about a points-based system being applied for every aspect of ownership or just the exchange aspect!


----------



## icydog

I have a question. Will the points be Marriott Reward points or will there be yet another point system on top of their already popular Marriott Rewards?


----------



## PerryM

SueDonJ said:


> Well, in the business world there is no such thing as too much revenue.
> 
> *You're fixating on the distinction between sold-out resorts and those that still have developer inventory available,* Perry, but as I said before, ROFR allows for MVCI to pick up developer inventory at any time.  That negates your distinction, at least at those resorts with ROFR.
> 
> Edit:  Also, as long as owners have an option to exchange their units, by way of a private exchange or through whatever means MVCI may choose to make available to them, then the deeded usage right to exchange is not infringed.  That right is deeded, but the parameters for any supplemental exchange program that MVCI chooses to offer in conjunction with the deeded resort/season/week are not.  *hotcoffee* mentions "value added features" in a post up there, I like that terminology better than the "system" or "program" that I've been using to try to mean those features not deeded.



I see no difference between a resale to another person and a resale to Marriott.

Just where is there a difference?

Marriott flips the unit just like any mortal person can.

Show me, in any documents, where Marriott gets a special advantage on a resale concerning exchange abilities?

Once Marriott has sold out a resort they made their profit and if they want to act as the closing agent for the new buyer or flip the unit they are NO different than any other owner at the sold out resort.

The HOA controls everything at the resort and can kick Marriott out as the management company.  I'm sure the clever lawyers put a sentence in that allows Marriott to hawk resales from the premises.

Now Marriott wants to control how owners at the sold out resort exchange their reservations among other Marriott owners in other sold out resorts.  I don't see where they have any right to do this.  But I'm not a lawyer.

Just because Marriott says they can do this does not mean its so.

Hopefully an HOA will decide that Marriott doesn't have that right to interfere with their owner's ability to exchange reservations.  But time will tell.

If Marriott had me sign a document that stated I could be barred from exchanging reservations with other Marriott owners when I bought resale and direct that would be a different thing.  But they never said that.


----------



## Pit

SueDonJ said:


> You're fixating on the distinction between sold-out resorts and those that still have developer inventory available, Perry, but as I said before, ROFR allows for MVCI to pick up developer inventory at any time.  That negates your distinction, at least at those resorts with ROFR.



Rofr is irrelevant here. Any developer can pick up inventory at any time simply by bidding on ebay (at least one developer does so). Rofr is not necessary for developers to buy back resale inventory.



hotcoffee said:


> And, let's assume that Marriott takes the most radical course and excludes resale owners (either new or current or both), then resale owners plus those direct owners who elect not to join the new system will have a diminished number of Marriott weeks to exchanged with.



It should be noted that by splitting the inventory pool, those who elect the internal system will also have a diminished number of Marriott weeks to exchange with. So, which pool will be better, IIs or Marriotts?


----------



## SueDonJ

PerryM said:


> I see no difference between a resale to another person and a resale to Marriott.
> 
> Just where is there a difference?
> 
> Marriott flips the unit just like any mortal person can.
> 
> Show me, in any documents, where Marriott gets a special advantage on a resale concerning exchange abilities?
> 
> Once Marriott has sold out a resort they made their profit and if they want to act as the closing agent for the new buyer or flip the unit they are NO different than any other owner at the sold out resort.
> 
> The HOA controls everything at the resort and can kick Marriott out as the management company.  I'm sure the clever lawyers put a sentence in that allows Marriott to hawk resales from the premises.
> 
> Now Marriott wants to control how owners at the sold out resort exchange their reservations among other Marriott owners in other sold out resorts.  I don't see where they have any right to do this.  But I'm not a lawyer.
> 
> Just because Marriott says they can do this does not mean its so.
> 
> Hopefully an HOA will decide that Marriott doesn't have that right to interfere with their owner's ability to exchange reservations.  But time will tell.
> 
> If Marriott had me sign a document that stated I could be barred from exchanging reservations with other Marriott owners when I bought resale and direct that would be a different thing.  But they never said that.



My point is, ROFR negates the distinction between a sold out resort and one which has developer inventory available.  That's why I don't understand why you make the distinction such as when you say this:



PerryM said:


> Now Marriott wants to control how owners at the sold out resort exchange their reservations among other Marriott owners in other sold out resorts.



IF these rumored changes or any others are made to the current exchange system, even if there are differences between the terms applied to developer and resale units, then won't Marriott/MVCI be controlling how owners at ALL of the resorts are able to exchange among other MVCI owners?

I'm just not getting the distinction, that's all.  Sold-out or not, MVCI is still the developer as well as the management company.


----------



## sdtugger

RandR said:


> Marriott does not have an existing points system for their ts it is a weeks based system.  I am pretty sure that Hilton lets you combine the points you buy from multiple properties (or the same property) and then use those points as you wish.  You still get priority at your own property for a window of time.



I was referring to the Marriott point system for the Asian properties and some others such as Las Vegas.  I would expect that Marriott's new points system would be modeled after their existing system at some level.  How do points work in that existing system?


----------



## hotcoffee

Pit said:


> It should be noted that by splitting the inventory pool, those who elect the internal system will also have a diminished number of Marriott weeks to exchange with. So, which pool will be better, IIs or Marriotts?



That makes any decision to convert weeks to a new system a bit of a gamble.  If only two owners ended up converting, they sure would get tired exchanging with each other every year.


----------



## davidvel

PerryM said:


> Now Marriott wants to control how owners at the sold out resort exchange their reservations among other Marriott owners in other sold out resorts.  I don't see where they have any right to do this.  But I'm not a lawyer.


I am a lawyer. In the Imagined MAR Trading System (MTS), Marriott is not controlling how owners exchange their reservations, except within their voluntary system. You have a right to join or not, but can't argue with their terms. 
. . .


> Hopefully an HOA will decide that Marriott doesn't have that right to interfere with their owner's ability to exchange reservations.  But time will tell.


The HOA doens't have to do anything, as the IMTS doesn't affect anyone's trading rights unless they choose to join, which is optional and voluntary. The HOA is only on the hook if Marriott (as its manager) doesn't allow you to reserve your week, in season, 12/13 months out, or allows anyone else to do otherwise. 

Perry, you can set up the Perry Trading System (PTS), and allow resale and direct purchasers (or charge direct purchasers more), I suppose. Will you be able to market as well? No. Will you be as big and funded as Marriot (maybe  ).  But this is why some trading systmes work and others don't. Obviously Marriott would have a huge advantage, but has yet to dive into this area, possibly for anti-trust concerns as you allude to. 

The point being (as has been made countless times but forgotten as many), the IMTS is nothing more than another trading option ala II, redweek, RCI, ownertrades, PTS... none of which were guranteed or contractually promised to purchasers, direct or not.


----------



## dougp26364

LAX Mom said:


> Why would anyone buy a timeshare from Marriott if they are told there is little opportunity to sell it on the resale market?
> 
> If Marriott markets this new plan and uses it as a way to promote developer sales, it will make it difficult to sell anything resale. So Marriott has a new internal trading system, but you can't use it if you don't purchase from Marriott?
> 
> What happens if I buy from Marriott and then at a later date this timeshare doesn't meet my needs? No one will want it because a resale unit can't utilize the Marriott internal trading system.
> 
> Marriott can't be this dumb! Why would anyone ever buy a timeshare from them once this new program is introduced? It makes no sense to me, everyone (or their heirs) needs to sell their timeshare units at some point in the future.



I can answer this question in two words: IMPULSE BUYER. People who buy from the developer aren't thinking about all the angles. They're not thinking about selling, they're thinking about buying and using. They're invited to "preview" a resort for a gift and get blindsided by a high pressure sales pitch. Those that bite aren't looking at the alternatives down the road and the salesman certainly isn't going to clue them in that resale values are 25 to 50% (or less) than developer pricing.


----------



## dougp26364

icydog said:


> I have a question. Will the points be Marriott Reward points or will there be yet another point system on top of their already popular Marriott Rewards?



The only program I can compare to would be Hilton and, I'd suspect Marriott would be the same. HGVC points and HHonors points are two different programs. HGVC points exchange on a ratio of something like 1:25 when converted to HHonors points (I don't know the exact number, I've never converted my points to HHonors points). HGVC has made it so a member can use their HGVC points to book hotel rooms directly rather than convert to HHonors and then book hotel rooms. 

It's anyone's guess what/if Marriott will do the same. Right now, it's all speculation and guessing about something the does not exist.


----------



## SueDonJ

dougp26364 said:


> I can answer this question in two words: IMPULSE BUYER. People who buy from the developer aren't thinking about all the angles. They're not thinking about selling, they're thinking about buying and using. They're invited to "preview" a resort for a gift and get blindsided by a high pressure sales pitch. Those that bite aren't looking at the alternatives down the road and the salesman certainly isn't going to clue them in that resale values are 25 to 50% (or less) than developer pricing.



All developer purchasers are not impulse buyers.  Neither are we all clueless, as has been insinuated in a few of these posts.  Some developer purchasers think the MRP exchange option works for them, some like the ease of processing that's practically guaranteed, some have other reasons.  My "hedged bet" reason, as I said above, was the catalyst.

My point is, developer purchasers can't be pigeon-holed by their reasons for buying direct.  You can disagree with any reasons you've heard, sure, but you can't say that the only reason which makes sense to you is the only legitimate reason, especially when your reason happens to call into question whether or not developer purchasers are also informed purchasers.  Believe me, some of us are.


----------



## davidvel

SueDonJ said:


> All developer purchasers are not impulse buyers.  Neither are we all clueless, as has been insinuated in a few of these posts.



This is certainly true, and there would be no general rule without exceptions. 

But, I have to agree with Icydog that MOST, first-time direct purchasers do not have the wisdom of TUG, nor understand 10% of what those who study here do; and I also agree that MOST (a super majority at least) are impulse purchases who buy the lies, promises and pitch that cannot be found in the purchase contract (side benefits) or governing documents (rights); and that MOST, first-time direct purchasers are invited to "preview" a resort for a gift and get blindsided by a high pressure sales pitch.

I have been to the preview office in Tahoe, Newport Beach and Palm Desert and asked for the "white report" which is a DRE disclosure document that CA state law requires the seller provide upon request to any potential purchaser, wihtout obligation or a sales tour. Never have I received one. If I can't get the state required disclosures upon request, I am sure the lay-person seeking a $75 gift card won't either (maybe in the huge stack they are supposed to read to determine if they want to rescind.)

For all these reasons, I don't think that the new points system or what any salesperson says about it has any _material_ affect upon direct-sales. I firmly believe that the primary purpose of this system isn't to create any distinction between re-sale and direct purchase, but simply to make more $$ for Marriott. Of course, any benefit the saleseople perceive to pushing this they will use.


----------



## lovearuba

*decisions are personal*



dougp26364 said:


> I can answer this question in two words: IMPULSE BUYER. People who buy from the developer aren't thinking about all the angles. They're not thinking about selling, they're thinking about buying and using. They're invited to "preview" a resort for a gift and get blindsided by a high pressure sales pitch. Those that bite aren't looking at the alternatives down the road and the salesman certainly isn't going to clue them in that resale values are 25 to 50% (or less) than developer pricing.


 
I bought from the developer and did go in with my eyes open. I was not thinking of selling because I had visited Aruba at least 7 times and knew I would use the resort. I also liked the presentation which showed me how I could trade for points, rent or exchange. Most of the sales pitch was a pack of lies. People like to blame it on sales people. Marriott salespeople represent Marriott. What isnt said is more important than what is said. I didnt go there on a preview and I did look at alternative timeshares in Aruba. I did not know about resale and would never have bought through the developer if it wasnt for the fact that the salesperson told me you couldnt buy resale. He told me to look at the newspapers there were no resales for the Marriott ocean in aruba. Imagine that. Imagine that I trusted Marriott. I should not have and learned a very expensive lesson. This points system is extremely disturbing. Its another money generating product from a company that lost my respect. I still love their resorts though. Have to admit, they have beautiful resorts.


----------



## SueDonJ

davidvel said:


> This is certainly true, and there would be no general rule without exceptions.
> 
> But, I have to agree with Icydog that MOST, first-time direct purchasers do not have the wisdom of TUG, nor understand 10% of what those who study here do; and I also agree that MOST (a super majority at least) are impulse purchases who buy the lies, promises and pitch that cannot be found in the purchase contract (side benefits) or governing documents (rights); and that MOST, first-time direct purchasers are invited to "preview" a resort for a gift and get blindsided by a high pressure sales pitch.
> 
> I have been to the preview office in Tahoe, Newport Beach and Palm Desert and asked for the "white report" which is a DRE disclosure document that CA state law requires the seller provide upon request to any potential purchaser, wihtout obligation or a sales tour. Never have I received one. If I can't get the state required disclosures upon request, I am sure the lay-person seeking a $75 gift card won't either (maybe in the huge stack they are supposed to read to determine if they want to rescind.)
> 
> For all these reasons, I don't think that the new points system or what any salesperson says about it has any _material_ affect upon direct-sales. I firmly believe that the primary purpose of this system isn't to create any distinction between re-sale and direct purchase, but simply to make more $$ for Marriott. Of course, any benefit the saleseople perceive to pushing this they will use.



I completely agree with everything you say, but I will also continue to counter every developer v. resale discussion that does not make any allowance at all for the admittedly few exceptions to the "developer buyers don't know enough to buy resale instead" mindset that prevails here.


----------



## Dean

IMO, there are very limited appropriate reasons for the truly informed to buy retail.  Things like getting something you can't get resale like a fixed week on Maui or that hot new resort at good pre-construction prices might do it.  Just to get points is likely not a good choice.  To have financing options is also not a good choice.  However, I realize that there needs to be many that do buy for the system to stay afloat and for those of us "in the know" to take advantage of the benefits of resale.


----------



## RandR

Thought I would post this link to the points chart for Hilton so people can get a look at the distribution that Hilton uses.  It is a little more detailed than the one TUG has.  Newer resorts have higher point values but the vast majority of Hilton ts use this chart.  Plus and Premier are upgrades generally based on location, size or view.

http://www.alltimeshare.com/HiltonPointsPerSeason.html

If something like this is put in, the people bought Silver or Bronze will be extremely unhappy with the new system.  (Of course they can just stay with the old system.)  A 2BR Silver week would only get a 1BR Gold or a Studio Plus (if available at the resort they want) during Platinum time.


----------



## Latravel

I think it's really interesting to read people who actually put in writing they know so much more than others.  It's amazing! 

It doesn't matter that 93% of Marriott owners bought developer, which equates to hundreds of thousands of people.  ALL these people were blindsighted and uninformed?  What do you know that these people didn't?  

Could it be these people were looking more long term than the short term savings of money?  Could it be they WANTED to be a complete member of the Marriott vacation club to protect themselves from exactly what is happening now?  You may have to rethink your comments when changes come around.  Then how will you feel?


----------



## DaveHenry

*Will Marriott computer grab all the good weeks?*

Or will Marriott's computer grab all the good weeks at 8:00:00 using the points units and leave the crumbs for the nonconverting owner who calls at 8:00:01?


----------



## Latravel

sorry - double post


----------



## Dean

Latravel said:


> I think it's really interesting to read people who actually put in writing they know so much more than others.  It's amazing!
> 
> It doesn't matter that 93% of Marriott owners bought developer, which equates to hundreds of thousands of people.  ALL these people were blindsighted and uninformed?  What do you know that these people didn't?
> 
> Could it be these people were looking more long term than the short term savings of money?  Could it be they WANTED to be a complete member of the Marriott vacation club to protect themselves from exactly what is happening now?  You may have to rethink your comments when changes come around.  Then how will you feel?  Will you still feel as smart, or "in the know".


I assume these comments are aimed at me.  I stand by them but did give exceptions for certain situations as I realize there can be special circumstances and yes, most of those retail owners are unaware of their options, with a few exceptions of course.  I will bet you that IF there's a major change that screws those that bought resale in the past, past retail owners are likely to be little better off if at all.  Time will tell.

In the interest of full disclosure, I have owned over 50 timeshare contracts/weeks over the years though many were at the same resorts.  Of those, exactly 3 were retail purchases and all were relatively recently (in the last few years).  Those 3 were, a small add on at DVC's Animal Kingdom pre-construction, a 3000 pt Bluegreen purchase converting my fixed weeks to 72K total BG points and a Platinum week at Surfwatch.  However, part of the SW deal was that my 2 Grande Ocean weeks that were resale became retail units with no cost involved.  Do you know anyone else that is able to get points on a Marriott week that was bought resale but not through Marriott in any way?


----------



## SueDonJ

Dean said:


> IMO, there are very limited appropriate reasons for the truly informed to buy retail.  Things like getting something you can't get resale like a fixed week on Maui or that hot new resort at good pre-construction prices might do it.  Just to get points is likely not a good choice.  To have financing options is also not a good choice.  However, I realize that there needs to be many that do buy for the system to stay afloat and for those of us "in the know" to take advantage of the benefits of resale.



It's funny, but it was what I read on TUG that convinced me to buy developer-direct.  For years I'd been reading the disboards all about DVC and when we realized that wouldn't work for both of us, I started reading TUG before we even thought about Marriott.  Here I found all these folks writing about how only "suckers" buy direct, with more direct buyers than are participating today explaining their huge MRP incentives at new resorts and successful use of MRP exchange values for hotel stays and first-class tickets to Europe and awesome exchanges to Hawaii because their newer resorts had such good exchange value ... the list went on and on.  But then there were the other people who quietly asked if the contracts did not prevent Marriott from ever distinguishing value between developer and resale units, did anybody think Marriott would ever do so?

Then we went to Hilton Head, fell in love with the island, and dumped what I thought was an obscene amount of money into renting oceanfront 3- and 4-BR condos for several years in a row.  Visiting a real estate agent there quickly put the dream of actually owning one of those condos to bed for good (4M+ - no way was that happening,) but he told us that Marriott might have what we wanted.  And they did - SurfWatch exceeded the quality of the condos considering the resort amenities and the flexibility of ownership, for a whole lot less money.

But during the presentation I kept hearing in my head the quiet question that I'd first heard here on TUG.  I asked, "what's the difference between direct and resale?" and she answered, "direct will get you the incentive MRP and the opportunity to exchange your week for MRP."  Then I asked, "will Marriott ever differentiate further between them?" and she answered, "I don't know, but there isn't anything in the works now that I know of."  So I asked, "but can they?" and she answered that only the specific resort/season/unit configuration and usage options were guaranteed, any other facets of the ownership might be subject to change.  I finished by asking about resale value, and she told me that no resale value is guaranteed but Marriott does have a program that allows folks who own the better weeks/units (gold, platinum, 2BR, 3BR) at the newer resorts to offer their unit for sale through Marriott's Resale Offices.

That was it.  We chose the hedge bet, with absolutely no lies or threats or cajoling or insinuating on our salesperson's part.  I know it's unbelievable, but it's true.  Then we came home and joined TUG, actually paid money to get what could have been gotten forever for free.  Both purchases have been worth every penny.   

To make a long story short (HA!), we were informed buyers.  But it was on TUG where we learned which questions to ask, and which were most important to us, before we signed on the dotted line.


----------



## SueDonJ

Dean said:


> ... However, part of the SW deal was that my 2 Grande Ocean weeks that were resale became retail units with no cost involved.  Do you know anyone else that is able to get points on a Marriott week that was bought resale but not through Marriott in any way?



I don't, but I'll say honestly that I think it's great you were able to negotiate the deal that you did.  I don't think it would ever occur to me!


----------



## PerryM

davidvel said:


> I am a lawyer. In the Imagined MAR Trading System (MTS), Marriott is not controlling how owners exchange their reservations, except within their voluntary system. You have a right to join or not, but can't argue with their terms.
> . . .
> 
> The HOA doens't have to do anything, as the IMTS doesn't affect anyone's trading rights unless they choose to join, which is optional and voluntary. The HOA is only on the hook if Marriott (as its manager) doesn't allow you to reserve your week, in season, 12/13 months out, or allows anyone else to do otherwise.
> 
> Perry, you can set up the Perry Trading System (PTS), and allow resale and direct purchasers (or charge direct purchasers more), I suppose. Will you be able to market as well? No. Will you be as big and funded as Marriot (maybe  ).  But this is why some trading systmes work and others don't. Obviously Marriott would have a huge advantage, but has yet to dive into this area, possibly for anti-trust concerns as you allude to.
> 
> The point being (as has been made countless times but forgotten as many), the IMTS is nothing more than another trading option ala II, redweek, RCI, ownertrades, PTS... none of which were guranteed or contractually promised to purchasers, direct or not.



Marriott can set up any system they want and make it voluntary - I understand that.

The ability of one Marriott owner to exchange with another owner is provided now via II.  We have had that ability for 15+ years.

Now Marriott wants to take that ability away with their own exchange system which will not allow folks in for any reason Marriott chooses.  Today it's resales tomorrow it might be a VIP system they cook up for more sales.

Since the buildings say Marriott the resorts will go along with the Marriott system leaving the folks who don't want to participate a greatly reduced ability to exchange weeks among owners that they can do today.

That is a reduction in benefits to Marriott ownership which will be reflected in resale prices.

Sure its legal but it will harm Marriott owners and reduce the worth of their weeks on the resale market.

HOA's can elect to allow other exchange companies in addition to Marriott I believe.  The HOAs might start talks with other exchange companies if the door is now wide open to new exchange companies.

All because Marriott wants to punish resale sales.

The days of "an owner is an owner" are ending at Marriott and we are headed down the Wyndham route - expect falling resale prices as a result.  Wyndham resales average 5 cents on the sales dollar.


----------



## SueDonJ

PerryM said:


> Marriott can set up any system they want and make it voluntary - I understand that.
> 
> The ability of one Marriott owner to exchange with another owner is provided now via II.  We have had that ability for 15+ years.
> 
> Now Marriott wants to take that ability away with their own exchange system which will not allow folks in for any reason Marriott chooses.  Today it's resales tomorrow it might be a VIP system they cook up for more sales.
> 
> Since the buildings say Marriott the resorts will go along with the Marriott system leaving the folks who don't want to participate a greatly reduced ability to exchange weeks among owners that they can do today.
> 
> That is a reduction in benefits to Marriott ownership which will be reflected in resale prices.
> 
> Sure its legal but it will harm Marriott owners and reduce the worth of their weeks on the resale market.
> 
> HOA's can elect to allow other exchange companies in addition to Marriott I believe.  The HOAs might start talks with other exchange companies if the door is now wide open to new exchange companies.
> 
> *All because Marriott wants to punish resale sales.*



Ah, Perry, you had me right up to *there* but then you lost me again.  I'm in the camp who would say, "All because Marriott wants to increase revenue."  But you can add, "...because they're bloodsucking vultures," if it makes you feel better.


----------



## hotcoffee

davidvel said:


> This is certainly true, and there would be no general rule without exceptions.
> 
> But, I have to agree with Icydog that MOST, first-time direct purchasers do not have the wisdom of TUG, nor understand 10% of what those who study here do; and I also agree that MOST (a super majority at least) are impulse purchases who buy the lies, promises and pitch that cannot be found in the purchase contract (side benefits) or governing documents (rights); and that MOST, first-time direct purchasers are invited to "preview" a resort for a gift and get blindsided by a high pressure sales pitch.



I actually considered buying from the developer last year.  I had bought the unit I now have resale, of course, but the issue of being able to use points to travel to Marriott hotels rather than just timeshares was somewhat appealing.  But, I would not make any such decision without a lot of additional thought.  As I was leaving, the salesman wanted me to talk to another salesman who he said could handle sales for their east coast resorts (I had mentioned that I was interested in Myrtle Beach, SC).  Both salesmen knew I had purchased resale, and this second salesman started warning me about all the bad things that Marriott was going to do to resale owners.  He implied that resale owners would be excluded from the coming new exchange program, and he said that they would likely reduce the reservation window to 6 months.  At that point, I felt enraged and ended the session.  They couldn't have paid me to buy anything related to Marriott.  Prior to that session, I had felt that Marriott was a pretty good company.  After that, I began viewing them as a little on the sleazy side.

Nonetheless, I can see how someone would feel that the value-added perks would work well for them.  In thinking it over, they would not work well for me; and if all timeshares were only available from direct sales, I would not buy one at all.  The extra cost is just not worth it to me.


----------



## davidvel

DaveHenry said:


> Or will Marriott's computer grab all the good weeks at 8:00:00 using the points units and leave the crumbs for the nonconverting owner who calls at 8:00:01?


I posted about this about 10 pages back. This is my biggest concern about the "new system"-- something that would actually violate the CC&Rs and your deeded rights:


> Marriott's "Program" can only ask participants to deposit the week you reserve into their program. They cannot manipulate the system so that they automatically reserve the week you will deposit, or othewise give any priority ahead of non-participants. . . . If Marriott is not completely transparent here, they (and each resort's HOA) will face litigation.
> http://tugbbs.com/forums/showpost.php?p=765923&postcount=289


----------



## davidvel

hotcoffee said:


> He implied that resale owners would be excluded from the coming new exchange program, and he said that they would likely reduce the reservation window to 6 months.  At that point, I felt enraged and ended the session.  They couldn't have paid me to buy anything related to Marriott.  Prior to that session, I had felt that Marriott was a pretty good company.  After that, I began viewing them as a little on the sleazy side.


My point exactly. What about the masses that come in with no prior knowledge of timeshare, or less knowledge? You can only imagine what else they lie about. This is a blatent lie, no gray area what-so-ever. They cannot reduce the reservation window as this is in your deed and CC&Rs. They know this.  I would love one of these guys to tell me this. (But then, I _enjoy_ buying a car.  )


----------



## thinze3

hotcoffee said:


> I actually considered buying from the developer last year.  I had bought the unit I now have resale, of course, but the issue of being able to use points to travel to Marriott hotels rather than just timeshares was somewhat appealing.  But, I would not make any such decision without a lot of additional thought.  As I was leaving, the salesman wanted me to talk to another salesman who he said could handle sales for their east coast resorts (I had mentioned that I was interested in Myrtle Beach, SC).  Both salesmen knew I had purchased resale, and this second salesman started warning me about all the bad things that Marriott was going to do to resale owners.  He implied that resale owners would be excluded from the coming new exchange program, and he said that they would likely reduce the reservation window to 6 months.  At that point, I felt enraged and ended the session.  They couldn't have paid me to buy anything related to Marriott.  Prior to that session, I had felt that Marriott was a pretty good company.  After that, I began viewing them as a little on the sleazy side.
> 
> Nonetheless, I can see how someone would feel that the value-added perks would work well for them.  In thinking it over, they would not work well for me; and if all timeshares were only available from direct sales, I would not buy one at all.  The extra cost is just not worth it to me.




This was brought up by Dave in Jan '08. He said then that his contact stated that existing resale owners would probably be grandfathered in. Let's hope that is still the case.




> Originally Posted by *Dave M*
> Grandfathering? Yes, Marriott plans to grandfather all owners, presumably as of the date the change is announced or implemented. Thus, if you buy a Marriott timeshare on the resale market now, you will - as currently planned - be exempt from the proposed restrictions on resale weeks, whatever they might be. That makes sense because it would be a public relations nightmare if Marriott implemented such a drastic change that impacted existing owners – whether resale or not.


----------



## Latravel

_"I assume these comments are aimed at me."_

No, they weren't.  They were aimed at the few people here that feel, or should I say, used to feel, smug because they are so much smarter than most Marriott owners (sounds childish, doesn't it?) by buying resale.  All others are "suckers", as Sue puts it.

In the past, if I wrote a comment such as the one above, there would have been many posts attacking me for daring to defend my direct purchase.  My intelligence would have been questioned.  It's very surprising that the only-buy-resale crowd is so quiet.  Why so quiet?


----------



## davidvel

I guess I'll have to speak up... ( I'm a resale buyer, not a "buy only resale" poster) :ignore:


----------



## Dean

Latravel said:


> _"I assume these comments are aimed at me."_
> 
> No, they weren't.  They were aimed at the few people here that feel, or should I say, used to feel, smug because they are so much smarter than most Marriott owners (sounds childish, doesn't it?) by buying resale.  All others are "suckers", as Sue puts it.
> 
> In the past, if I wrote a comment such as the one above, there would have been many posts attacking me for daring to defend my direct purchase.  My intelligence would have been questioned.  It's very surprising that the only-buy-resale crowd is so quiet.  Why so quiet?


Given your post came immediately after mine and I do feel that there are limited reasons where it's reasonable to buy resale, as I posted, I assumed it was aimed at me.  If not, I apologize but the message still stands that there are limited situations where it's a good choice.  However, that's different that attacking one personally or one's intelligence.  I try to never do those things.  I think many of us realize that MOST people here made their first purchase retail then learned other options later.  I am actually one of the exceptions that was involved in resale before it was a well known option.  It's likely I was the very first DVC resale buyer which was my first purchase back in 94.  

IMO, nothing has changed other than as some have said, a wait and see approach is a viable option.  I would certainly not take the current rumors as a reasonable incentive to buy retail when one would otherwise buy resale.  This could be fun for a while.


----------



## gmarine

There is no program that Marriott could come out with that would make me wish I spent $15K + more on a developer purchase.


----------



## PerryM

*Dog eat dog...*

It always amazes me that timeshare developers eventually seem to treat their customers as the devil – their biggest competitor.  Marriott has resisted this trend up until 2-3 years ago when it had no weapon to fight resales but the MRP system – so they created a new one in the form of a rumor of an internal exchange system that only Marriott sold owners could use.  This devalues the resale value of the owners’ weeks.

I’m convinced that Marriott has turned this corner where a caste system is needed and owner hating owner is encouraged – all in the name of making money the second time around on the same units they have already made a huge profit on.

Marriott is introducing this into mature projects – where they long ago sold every unit and now want to hurt the owners there so they can make money reselling the same units.  The net result will be even lower resale prices and this time that lower price is for real – the Marriott week sold by an owner will have a huge negative drawback – the new owner can’t exchange their week with other Marriott owners in the same resort.

Imagine that – Marriott has turned owner against owner in the same building so they can make more money.  Well they are simply joining Wyndham and other developers who do the same thing – owner fighting owner in the same building so the developer can make money the second and third time around.


----------



## verby

Bill,
what's wrong with starwood vacation point system?
...



Bill4728 said:


> I pointed out earlier in this thread that all the other hotel branded TS systems have a point system.
> I also said that SVN (Starwood vacation) has the system which I would least like to see Marriott follow.


----------



## Twinkstarr

verby said:


> Bill,
> what's wrong with starwood vacation point system?
> ...



Just go over to the Starwood subsection and take a look.

http://www.tugbbs.com/forums/showthread.php?t=103664

I'm a Starwood voluntary resort owner, but the voluntary/mandatory rules were in place when I bought. I knew what I was getting into.


----------



## taffy19

dougp26364 said:


> If you go by the crowds at the informal updates Marriott has for owners, I'm not sure there are a lot of savy Marriott owners out there. Most of the owners I've spoken to over the years seem to be doing good just figuring out how to use their weeks and make the occasional exchange. There are a few that really understand the system but they seem to be few and far between.
> 
> The one thing Marriott does right is having reps that can assist owners get what they want out of their ownership. It seems that, for the most part at least, one doesn't have to be very savy to get decent milage out of their ownership.
> 
> I go to the informal updates for a few reasons. If there's been changes, it's a decent place to learn. If I've come up with a question I usually get a decent answer (depends on the knowledge level of the presenter). They usually lay out something I either haven't considered, hadn't thought about, didn't know or had forgotten along the way. Finally, it's mildly entertaining when someone complains that the silver studio week they deposited for exchange last week isn't pulling the platinum Hawaiian 2 bedroom ocean front week for next month like their salesman told them it would.


Do you mean the workshop about exchanging for the owners? We never used to go to them because we hardly exchange but we went this March. The room was full and I agree that most people have no clue so the information was interesting to them. The person also showed pictures of the new resorts that you could exchange into and he mentioned something about them too. I found it worthwhile going to this workshop as you stated too. It was here that I learned that St. Kitts is one of the most demanded resorts now for exchanging. Maui was still up there too.


----------



## taffy19

hotcoffee said:


> Have it ever been hinted to you that Marriott intended to get more involved in resales? At the sales presentation last year (I refused to go this year), the salesman made a remark similar to that. *I have not seen any comments here about anyone else having heard a salesman state that. Am I the only person who was told anything like that?*
> 
> To me, that would be a viable option because I would assume that if anyone were to buy a resale through Marriott, he would gain normal access to the new point trading system even if current resale owners are not (or given expensive access). That would preserve value in one's timeshare. Of course, independent brokers would likely cry foul.
> 
> As long as I can reserve, exchange, and sell when needed, I don't care much about how the new system will work. I might even join it if the cost is reasonable, and if I am not excluded.


I was told the same thing too and did comment about it in this thread (#145). If this is true, I would be happy and it will benefit all owners too because the re-sale prices do not have to drop so much so you don't have to take such a loss when you have to sell and certainly if you bought from the developer direct.

There will always be an open re-sale market as people may have to sell quickly for whatever reason. The question is will Marriott handle re-sales for all their locations or only where there is high demand? Haven't they done this all along until recently because very few people are buying today?

I still cannot understand why the Marriott is not putting a stop to all these rumors as it must hurt their business name. It may also hurt their direct sales as well as re-sales if more people hear about these rumors. It just doesn't make sense to me. :annoyed: 

Whatever they do, I hope it is on a voluntary basis only so you don't have to join. Direct exchanges between owners may become more popular now.


----------



## hotcoffee

*General questions about point trading systems*

Departing from the predominant discussion of effect on resale values of the coming new points system, I would like to address some questions to those who are reasonably familiar with the existing points trading systems of other companies.  I am pretty much unfamiliar with such systems, knowing only what I have learned on TUG.

Assuming one joins a typical point system at some reasonable cost:

1. I assume that he would be awarded a set number of points for his timeshare, the amount of which would be determined by the timeshare company, correct?
2. If his timeshare was a 2-BR in the continental US, and he wanted to exchange into a 2-BR in Hawaii, I assume that he might not have been awarded enough points to do that.  Would it be likely that he then could:

   A. Buy a sufficient number of additional points so as to have enough to make the trade he wants?
   B. Accumulate two years worth of points to gain enough to make the trade he wants?
   C. Never be able to trade into Hawaii?

If the answer to the last question in 2, is both A and B, then a points system might work for someone who does not use his timeshare every year because he could choose B.  But, for someone who is used to using his timeshare every year and sometimes succeeding in get an exchange through II into Hawaii, and still wants to do that, would option A be his only recourse?  Is it likely he would still be able to make that exchange through II without having to spend money buying more points?

I am trying to get an idea in advance of how one might be able to make use of a system like what might be coming to his advantage.


----------



## taffy19

RandR said:


> Thought I would post this link to the points chart for Hilton so people can get a look at the distribution that Hilton uses. It is a little more detailed than the one TUG has. Newer resorts have higher point values but the vast majority of Hilton ts use this chart. Plus and Premier are upgrades generally based on location, size or view.
> 
> http://www.alltimeshare.com/HiltonPointsPerSeason.html
> 
> If something like this is put in, the people bought Silver or Bronze will be extremely unhappy with the new system. (Of course they can just stay with the old system.) A 2BR Silver week would only get a 1BR Gold or a Studio Plus (if available at the resort they want) during Platinum time.


This is one drawback about points. The newest resorts will always have more points so the week at your own resort won't give you a full week at a newer resort if you want to go there. 

A light bulb went on in my head when I saw the Hilton point chart. Since Marriott cannot "print" points since it is a week-based system, they may decide to have a re-sale market at all locations in all colors because people need additional points so can add an older and cheaper resort to their portfolio through the Marriott direct and all the developer perks will go to the new owner automatically and he can join the new internal exchange system too. This is another income stream for the Marriott that they can use to get enough points in the new system and they can exercise their ROFR too if they are low enough. I have a feeling that all present owners will be grandfathered if you decide to join the new system but it will cost you.

Commission fees have always been the same for everyone so if you are patient, you can decide to sell through them or if you need to sell fast, you can use a re-sale broker but that buyer may not be grand-fathered to the new system but I am only speculating here. Most resorts are doing what they can to stop the re-sale market slowing down their direct sales, I guess.


----------



## Troopers

hotcoffee said:


> Departing from the predominant discussion of effect on resale values of the coming new points system, I would like to address some questions to those who are reasonably familiar with the existing points trading systems of other companies.  I am pretty much unfamiliar with such systems, knowing only what I have learned on TUG.
> 
> Assuming one joins a typical point system at some reasonable cost:
> 
> 1. I assume that he would be awarded a set number of points for his timeshare, the amount of which would be determined by the timeshare company, correct?  Starwood (SVN) determines # of points based on season, resort, unit size & view.
> 2. If his timeshare was a 2-BR in the continental US, and he wanted to exchange into a 2-BR in Hawaii, I assume that he might not have been awarded enough points to do that.  This happens all the time.  Would it be likely that he then could:
> 
> A. Buy a sufficient number of additional points so as to have enough to make the trade he wants?  In SVN, one can not buy more points.  One has to buy more week(s), which than equates to more points.
> B. Accumulate two years worth of points to gain enough to make the trade he wants? No banking allowed in SVN.  Borrowing is allowed but with restrictions making it difficult to use.
> C. Never be able to trade into Hawaii?  It's possible but it may end up being a smaller unit, island view, etc.  All depends on point values.
> 
> If the answer to the last question in 2, is both A and B, then a points system might work for someone who does not use his timeshare every year because he could choose B.  But, for someone who is used to using his timeshare every year and sometimes succeeding in get an exchange through II into Hawaii, and still wants to do that, would option A be his only recourse?  Is it likely he would still be able to make that exchange through II without having to spend money buying more points?  II is an option but I wouldn't count on it.
> 
> I am trying to get an idea in advance of how one might be able to make use of a system like what might be coming to his advantage.



There's more to Starwood's trading system than that.  Except for the voluntary/mandatory issue, I think it's great...it favors the owners collectively as a group.


----------



## Dean

hotcoffee said:


> Departing from the predominant discussion of effect on resale values of the coming new points system, I would like to address some questions to those who are reasonably familiar with the existing points trading systems of other companies.  I am pretty much unfamiliar with such systems, knowing only what I have learned on TUG.
> 
> Assuming one joins a typical point system at some reasonable cost:
> 
> 1. I assume that he would be awarded a set number of points for his timeshare, the amount of which would be determined by the timeshare company, correct?
> 2. If his timeshare was a 2-BR in the continental US, and he wanted to exchange into a 2-BR in Hawaii, I assume that he might not have been awarded enough points to do that.  Would it be likely that he then could:
> 
> A. Buy a sufficient number of additional points so as to have enough to make the trade he wants?
> B. Accumulate two years worth of points to gain enough to make the trade he wants?
> C. Never be able to trade into Hawaii?
> 
> If the answer to the last question in 2, is both A and B, then a points system might work for someone who does not use his timeshare every year because he could choose B.  But, for someone who is used to using his timeshare every year and sometimes succeeding in get an exchange through II into Hawaii, and still wants to do that, would option A be his only recourse?  Is it likely he would still be able to make that exchange through II without having to spend money buying more points?
> 
> I am trying to get an idea in advance of how one might be able to make use of a system like what might be coming to his advantage.


The one's I know best that are applicable are Bluegreen, Disney and RCI points.  They are all different.  Disney has 1 resort coming in HI but the points are not out.  BG has 1, but it is an affiliate and not a core resort.  RCI points also is limited.  Disney is points based entirely where a week has essentially no meaning, Bluegreen and RCI are both points based for underlying weeks (or portions of a week in limited situations), I believe Wyndham is a combination of the two types with newer being points only and older ones based on underlying weeks.  Extracting from other information for other destinations and a little info about other points systems, here are a few thoughts.  

Marriott has a weeks based system and thus would have to take that approach.  A given resort, week and unit size would give X points.  They'd have to have a way to allow you to keep your week.  RCI points and BG does this by giving you a priority window to reserve your owned underlying week.  The floating nature of Marriott's weeks system definitely throws a curve ball to this.  Do they allow you to reserve only the week on your deed or only to the units/weeks that are included in the points system?  That part could get tricky but I'm sure there's a decent way to do it that's fair to everyone.  Maybe they allow you to reserve the week first then deposit to points similar to the way Hyatt does it.  

They then have to decide on HOW they allow reservations.  Given you'd have mostly weeks and limited points week early, reservations could be quite tricky and difficult for points more so than weeks though much later when it was mostly points, the tables would be turned.  Do they allow only full weeks and only allow shorter reservation much later?  Until there is wide spread participation I don't see how they could do anything other than a full week at the initial run.  Both BG and I believe Wyndham, have a priority reservation system for retail owners that qualify.  The benefits are really quite striking.  It's a combo of qualified points (usually retail) AND the number of points you own.  Marriott could do something like this or they could take the DVC or Club Intrawest approach where everyone is on the same plane and no one has a priority, or some in between options.  BG has generally allowed you to buy something small directly (including resale through them) to move to the inner circle.  I know fairfield did similar or a moderate conversion fee early on, not sure where they're going with fixed week owner currently or if they've written them off.

IMO, they'd need a large amount of participation early so some way to get a large portion of current owners to convert over would be imperative for a viable system.  They could do so by charging a fee that was easily workable or they could allow conversions for the purchase of an additional week or just invite all comers if they wanted.  The list of possibilities is almost endless.  For new resorts they just start selling points but if there are only a handful of resorts on board, that doesn't get much interest because a new points owner needs access to the other resorts to be interested in this type of system.  For new resorts they wouldn't even have to base them on a full week if they didn't want to.

Then there's the question of dues.  DVC does it by resort per point with no adjustment for small or large contracts, not really a very fair system overall though.  BG (mostly) does it as a base fee then so much per point and all members (mostly) pay the same base fee and pp costs no matter which resort they own.  They also spread any assessments this way as well over the entire group.  BG has some that are treated differently but this is the main portion that is applicable to this discussion IMO.  For Marriott I think full fees for the resort, plus a club fee is most likely.  

Then there's reservation and cancelation options.  Do you charge for reservations, cancelations, banking/borrowing (if even allowed), housekeeping costs for shorter reservations like RCI points and Wyndham, etc, etc.  The list of topics along this direction is almost endless.

As to trading, I think it depends on the resort and location.  The difference for say Harbour Pt and Grande Ocean is likely much greater than the different from GO to any of the HI resorts.  Then there's the 2 BR vs lockoff breakdown.  More important might be the chance of getting a given reservation.  I'll stop there.


----------



## hotcoffee

Dean said:


> The one's I know best that are applicable are Bluegreen, Disney and RCI points.



The earlier post mentioned that SVN does not allow banking of points.  Do any of the other systems that you know of allow any points rollover from year-to-year?  If not, this is goiing to be a real bummer for a lot of people.  The only people who will do well will be the owners at top-tier resorts in top locations during platinum seasons.  No one else gains much beyond what they already have as far as I can see, and some will even lose.  I'm trying to see some advantage to joining (even if it would be free to join).


----------



## linsj

hotcoffee said:


> Departing from the predominant discussion of effect on resale values of the coming new points system, I would like to address some questions to those who are reasonably familiar with the existing points trading systems of other companies.  I am pretty much unfamiliar with such systems, knowing only what I have learned on TUG.
> 
> Assuming one joins a typical point system at some reasonable cost:
> 
> 1. I assume that he would be awarded a set number of points for his timeshare, the amount of which would be determined by the timeshare company, correct?
> 2. If his timeshare was a 2-BR in the continental US, and he wanted to exchange into a 2-BR in Hawaii, I assume that he might not have been awarded enough points to do that.  Would it be likely that he then could:
> 
> A. Buy a sufficient number of additional points so as to have enough to make the trade he wants?
> B. Accumulate two years worth of points to gain enough to make the trade he wants?
> C. Never be able to trade into Hawaii?



For me, a points system works much better than weeks (although I did buy a week at Kauai Beach Villas last year). I'll answer your questions for Hilton:

1. Yes.

2. No. Except for two new properties with higher point systems, it takes the same number of points for the same season for the same size unit, no matter where the property is. The difference comes in how the seasons are allocated for the properties. My first HGVC purchase was 5000 points, which on paper = a 2-bedroom gold in Orlando. With those points, I have been able to get 3+ weeks in a Hawaii studio gold season, or I could get a week in a 1-bedroom platinum with points leftover.

2A. You'd have to buy another unit which comes with a second MF.

2B. You may borrow from the next two years' points or bank this year's points into next year, called rescuing.

Note: Not all of Hilton's new properties have a higher point system. The two new ones in Hawaii do, but the new one in Orlando does not even though it's touted as upscale as the others.


----------



## Troopers

hotcoffee said:


> The earlier post mentioned that SVN does not allow banking of points.  Do any of the other systems that you know of allow any points rollover from year-to-year?  If not, this is goiing to be a real bummer for a lot of people.  The only people who will do well will be the owners at top-tier resorts in top locations during platinum seasons.  No one else gains much beyond what they already have as far as I can see, and some will even lose.  I'm trying to see some advantage to joining (even if it would be free to join).



Disney allows banking, valid for one year.  Don’t know about the others.

It all depends on point values.  Most Starwood resorts have the same point value for 2 bedroom platinum season.


----------



## SueDonJ

Dean said:


> The one's I know best that are applicable are Bluegreen, Disney and RCI points.  They are all different.  Disney has 1 resort coming in HI but the points are not out.  BG has 1, but it is an affiliate and not a core resort.  RCI points also is limited.  Disney is points based entirely where a week has essentially no meaning, Bluegreen and RCI are both points based for underlying weeks (or portions of a week in limited situations), I believe Wyndham is a combination of the two types with newer being points only and older ones based on underlying weeks.  Extracting from other information for other destinations and a little info about other points systems, here are a few thoughts.
> 
> Marriott has a weeks based system and thus would have to take that approach.  A given resort, week and unit size would give X points.  They'd have to have a way to allow you to keep your week.  RCI points and BG does this by giving you a priority window to reserve your owned underlying week.  The floating nature of Marriott's weeks system definitely throws a curve ball to this.  Do they allow you to reserve only the week on your deed or only to the units/weeks that are included in the points system?  That part could get tricky but I'm sure there's a decent way to do it that's fair to everyone.  Maybe they allow you to reserve the week first then deposit to points similar to the way Hyatt does it.
> 
> They then have to decide on HOW they allow reservations.  Given you'd have mostly weeks and limited points week early, reservations could be quite tricky and difficult for points more so than weeks though much later when it was mostly points, the tables would be turned.  Do they allow only full weeks and only allow shorter reservation much later?  Until there is wide spread participation I don't see how they could do anything other than a full week at the initial run.  Both BG and I believe Wyndham, have a priority reservation system for retail owners that qualify.  The benefits are really quite striking.  It's a combo of qualified points (usually retail) AND the number of points you own.  Marriott could do something like this or they could take the DVC or Club Intrawest approach where everyone is on the same plane and no one has a priority, or some in between options.  BG has generally allowed you to buy something small directly (including resale through them) to move to the inner circle.  I know fairfield did similar or a moderate conversion fee early on, not sure where they're going with fixed week owner currently or if they've written them off.
> 
> IMO, they'd need a large amount of participation early so some way to get a large portion of current owners to convert over would be imperative for a viable system.  They could do so by charging a fee that was easily workable or they could allow conversions for the purchase of an additional week or just invite all comers if they wanted.  The list of possibilities is almost endless.  For new resorts they just start selling points but if there are only a handful of resorts on board, that doesn't get much interest because a new points owner needs access to the other resorts to be interested in this type of system.  For new resorts they wouldn't even have to base them on a full week if they didn't want to.
> 
> Then there's the question of dues.  DVC does it by resort per point with no adjustment for small or large contracts, not really a very fair system overall though.  BG (mostly) does it as a base fee then so much per point and all members (mostly) pay the same base fee and pp costs no matter which resort they own.  They also spread any assessments this way as well over the entire group.  BG has some that are treated differently but this is the main portion that is applicable to this discussion IMO.  For Marriott I think full fees for the resort, plus a club fee is most likely.
> 
> Then there's reservation and cancelation options.  Do you charge for reservations, cancelations, banking/borrowing (if even allowed), housekeeping costs for shorter reservations like RCI points and Wyndham, etc, etc.  The list of topics along this direction is almost endless.
> 
> As to trading, I think it depends on the resort and location.  The difference for say Harbour Pt and Grande Ocean is likely much greater than the different from GO to any of the HI resorts.  Then there's the 2 BR vs lockoff breakdown.  More important might be the chance of getting a given reservation.  I'll stop there.



Ugh, this sounds like it has the potential to be a nightmare if point values are applied to every aspect of ownership - home resort, dues, exchanges, etc ...  I love the DVC setup but can't imagine the logistics involved in converting the overall MVCI ownership to that.

More and more I am really hoping that what's possibly being developed is only that overlay idea for exchanging.  Even then, it won't be worth any fee to join if it doesn't offer the bonus weeks and getaways that we get from II now.


----------



## Troopers

SueDonJ said:


> Ugh, this sounds like it has the potential to be a nightmare if point values are applied to every aspect of ownership - home resort, dues, exchanges, etc ...  I love the DVC setup but can't imagine the logistics involved in converting the overall MVCI ownership to that.



I doubt that...too big of an overhaul.



SueDonJ said:


> More and more I am really hoping that what's possibly being developed is only that overlay idea for exchanging.  Even then, it won't be worth any fee to join if it doesn't offer the bonus weeks and getaways that we get from II now.



I'm not so sure about this.  If Starwood is an example, I'd say it would be worth joining.


----------



## Dean

hotcoffee said:


> The earlier post mentioned that SVN does not allow banking of points.  Do any of the other systems that you know of allow any points rollover from year-to-year?  If not, this is goiing to be a real bummer for a lot of people.  The only people who will do well will be the owners at top-tier resorts in top locations during platinum seasons.  No one else gains much beyond what they already have as far as I can see, and some will even lose.  I'm trying to see some advantage to joining (even if it would be free to join).


Bluegreen allows banking and borrowing for one year.  You have to prepay fees to borrow and banked points have a fair amount of limitations on them.  They tend to have cancelation fees but not other fees for multiples reservations, banking, borrowing, etc and no housekeeping fees with a 2 day min reservation.  DVC allows banking and borrowing for 1 year, no fees of any kind for anything other than maint fees, 1 day min reservation.  RCI points allows 1 year banking and borrowing with no borrowing fee and a potential banking fee that is waived for many people based on usage.  RCI points has exchange fees that vary with the length of a reservation and the resorts almost always charge a housekeeping fee for less than 7 days which is often astronomical.  With DVC and BG you can reserve 11 months out.  With DVC you must plan and bank 4 months before the end of the UY, with BG, they roll over automatically (but as I said, are somewhat restricted).

I also own an individual resort in MX that works on points that are based on a week.  You have a priority period where only those those points are based on that type unit can reserve that is 3 months long then on 1 Jan, you can reserve anything for up until the end of the year the following year (up to 2 years out). There is a small fees to bank, borrow, multiple reservations and cancel.  You also have to plan to bank and it's 6 months before the end of the calendar year.  

I know I looked at Hyatt at one point and the banking and borrowing options were very limited and restrictive.  The tour info I got when we stayed at the Westin on Maui suggested what you say, that Starwood is far too restrictive for me for their points system.


----------



## Dean

SueDonJ said:


> Ugh, this sounds like it has the potential to be a nightmare if point values are applied to every aspect of ownership - home resort, dues, exchanges, etc ...  I love the DVC setup but can't imagine the logistics involved in converting the overall MVCI ownership to that.
> 
> More and more I am really hoping that what's possibly being developed is only that overlay idea for exchanging.  Even then, it won't be worth any fee to join if it doesn't offer the bonus weeks and getaways that we get from II now.


Probably not so much other than for Marriott to work out the details of how THEY want it to work.  Don't forget that any such option won't be a substitute for II, it will be a parallel path.  You trade internally or you trade with II (or RCI if they were to change or even independents).  And if they go with a points system, changing to RCI is a definite possibility I'd think.  Regardless I'd think the internal trading preference would be eliminated or severely reduced for II.  

I would agree it's a daunting task to think about a total change over and that in many ways, a voluntary second level system is actually more so.  I vaguely remember all the discussions 12-13 years ago around the Fairfield conversion which started from a similar point and had essentially the same task being discussed here.  My recollection (I'm sure many know better than I for this) is that their model was mostly to pay a fee to upgrade even for those that had bought retail.  That fee was pretty high if I recall though variable.  Such a system for MVCI would have to offer me a lot to get me involved because I am essentially at or near the top of the food chain now with Marriott.

Several systems have secondary points options they can use that tie to other systems.  DVC has Club Intrawest and Club Cordial, Bluegreen has many of the Shell Properties, Hilton has some tie in's as well where you get the chance to reserve using points at resorts in other systems after the others in that system get first crack.  I've long held that companies like Hilton, Hyatt, Marriott, Club Intrawest, Four Seasons and Disney should get together and trade among themselves.  Disney actually has a registered exchange company, the Buena Vista Trading Company, set up already.  Other's like Shell, BG, Wyndham might be able to participate but likely only their upper level resorts and not all of their resorts.


----------



## thinze3

Dean said:


> I've long held that companies like Hilton, Hyatt, Marriott, Club Intrawest, Four Seasons and Disney should get together and trade among themselves.



... and Starwood and the Royals.


----------



## IuLiKa

Can someone provide an update with the points of the last 250 posts. I've lost this! I can't keep up.
Thx
IuLiKa


----------



## Quimby4

IuLiKa said:


> Can someone provide an update with the points of the last 250 posts. I've lost this! I can't keep up.
> Thx
> IuLiKa



The points are that nobody really knows anything!!
Dave  has posted all he knows.  
Just lots of speculating, worries and concerns.  
Sit back and relax and we'll see what and when Marriott rolls out the program, then we can react accordingly 

But I do appreciate everyone thoughts and insights of course


----------



## Dean

thinze3 said:


> ... and Starwood and the Royals.


Certainly, but only a subset of Starwood might be acceptable as well.  Royals are interesting in that they have a parallel system for external exchanging that is not very workable for the situation we're discussing but is similar to what has been mentioned by some as a possibility.


----------



## PerryM

*Marriott Internal Exchange to date*



IuLiKa said:


> Can someone provide an update with the points of the last 250 posts. I've lost this! I can't keep up.
> Thx
> IuLiKa



Summary of Marriott's Internal Exchange system so far:
*1)	Marriott has amply demonstrated it intends to pit owner against owner to further profits

2)	Marriott has amply demonstrated it will introduce a caste system to make further profits

3)	Marriott has amply demonstrated it is at war with its owners to make further profits

4)	Marriott has amply demonstrated it intends to hurt every Marriott owner’s resale values to make further profits*

Beyond that its simply speculation on our part…

P.S.

Many of us have come to the conclusion that Marriott does not want us to buy Marriott timeshares right now either direct from Marriott or resale until they release the Marriott Internal Exchange system.

Folks, Marriott has given us 2-3 years of warning - don't bellyache to Marriott when they introduce the new system and you get screwed royally because you bought too early.  They have given us fair warning on this matter.

Thanks, Marriott, for the heads-up.


----------



## hotcoffee

I appreciate all of the posts about how point systems work at the other TS companies.  Gaining insight in how other systems work will make it easier to determine how good or bad the Marriott system will be (if they ever actually implement it), and, in my case, whether there would be any advantage to joining or not (assuming I can).


----------



## IngridN

hotcoffee said:


> I appreciate all of the posts about how point systems work at the other TS companies.  Gaining insight in how other systems work will make it easier to determine how good or bad the Marriott system will be (if they ever actually implement it), and, in my case, whether there would be any advantage to joining or not (assuming I can).



This is our concern as well. While I appreciate the debate about resale value and the new program's impact on that, our concern is will we continue to get a week at another resort.  When we purchased our Shadow Ridge units we purchased strictly to trade, right, wrong or indifferent.  They were sold to us as "pre-paid vacations." We were not concerned with resale value. So when I lock off my week, I expect one studio and one 1 bedroom week at another resort during the gold season as well as low season in areas like Hawaii that have platinum designation for the entire year. If this new program does not deliver on that, you can bet I will be very upset and I don't expect to have to pay for this either. I also like the weeks system for the ability to upgrade when that is available, but don't see that as a "right."

The Aruba and Grand Chateau weeks are for personal use, so Marriott will not see those in it's new points program.

Just my 2 cents.

Ingrid


----------



## Latravel

_"They were sold to us as "pre-paid vacations." We were not concerned with resale value."_


This is the best post i've seen on this subject.  It looks like you purchased direct from Marriott, because Marriott outright states you are purchasing a prepaid vacation, not an investment.  All this talk about resale value is irrelevant!  When you purchase a timeshare, this is part of the agreement.  If you come back later and complain about your resale value, they can point to the original contract.

As Ingrid stated, we have to focus on what options this program offers for trading.  Not resale value!


----------



## davidvel

Latravel said:


> As Ingrid stated, we have to focus on what options this program offers for trading.  Not resale value!


I don't see any problem with people doing both. 



Latravel said:


> It looks like you purchased direct from Marriott, because Marriott outright states you are purchasing a prepaid vacation, not an investment.  All this talk about resale value is irrelevant!  When you purchase a timeshare, this is part of the agreement.  If you come back later and complain about your resale value, they can point to the original contract.



As to resale value, the fact that original purchasers were told that they were buying pre-paid vacations in their disclosures is accurate, but does not tell the whole story. 

In every presentation I have been on Marriott has highlighted the "deeded" nature of the interest, and that it has inherent value as such, and is more than just a timeshare because it is real property. 

I don't think anyone here can argue with a straight face that Marriott has any contractual obligation to maintain your TS value, any more than I can go back to the developer who sold my house almost a decade ago and complain that he is seleing houses down the street cheaply and my home value has plummeted in the past few years. Most posts I have seen have been that it is "morally wrong" or against the values that Marriott one espoused. As a resale buyer you have no direct contractual relationship with Marriott anyway. 

In any event, regardless of what the contract says, Marriott TSs (at least so far) *do have value*, and are considered an interest in property. There is nothing wrong with people being upset that the company that sold that to them may do something that they believe will devalue that interest.


----------



## Dean

Latravel said:


> As Ingrid stated, we have to focus on what options this program offers for trading.  Not resale value!


I would disagree somewhat as I think both are important though I would agree they are different issues to a degree.  IF a new system doesn't work for a given members they may indeed look to move on and in that case, resale prices and value become very important.  I'm not convinced this is gloom and doom but there are considerations.


----------



## SueDonJ

Latravel said:


> _"They were sold to us as "pre-paid vacations." We were not concerned with resale value."_
> 
> 
> This is the best post i've seen on this subject.  It looks like you purchased direct from Marriott, because Marriott outright states you are purchasing a prepaid vacation, not an investment.  All this talk about resale value is irrelevant!  When you purchase a timeshare, this is part of the agreement.  If you come back later and complain about your resale value, they can point to the original contract.
> 
> As Ingrid stated, we have to focus on what options this program offers for trading.  Not resale value!



I agree, and my focus is that if any new exchange system or rules result in us getting less than what we get now from II, especially less Getaway or AC options, then it might not be worth joining.

You know, even if it's stated only upon developer sales that your purchase does not guarantee a financial investment value, doesn't it stand to reason that a resale purchaser should recognize that fact just by virtue of the depreciation between what s/he paying for a week and what the developer originally sold it for?  Or, if s/he's unaware of that discrepancy, can't the premise be assumed by the resale purchaser knowing that s/he can get the exact same week for less than if s/he purchases from the developer?  I think it's a little convenient for resale purchasers to use the argument that MVCI never had an opportunity to offer them the same "no guaranteed resale value" information that is offered to developer purchasers.  It's widespread knowledge, isn't it, for folks who are savvy about resales?  If not, why are there so many who champion resale purchases to save thousands?


----------



## bogey21

PerryM said:


> Folks, Marriott has given us 2-3 years of warning - don't bellyache to Marriott when they introduce the new system and you get screwed royally because you bought too early.


*

I agree with this 100%.  Marriott will do what is best for Marriott.  What is best for its owners is immaterial.

George*


----------



## davidvel

SueDonJ said:


> I think it's a little convenient for resale purchasers to use the argument that MVCI never had an opportunity to offer them the same "no guaranteed resale value" information that is offered to developer purchasers.



Sue-

Did someone actually make this argument? I must have missed it.

David


----------



## Latravel

So I go to a Marriott timeshare presentation and once I decide to buy, they tell me my timeshare is a prepaid vacation, not an investment, and I should not expect any return on this purchase, and any promises made by the salesperson is incorrect, etc...  They even make me and my spouse initial next to this paragraph to make VERY sure I understand.  

So how can I now complain about resale value?   Is this a reasonable expectation?  Do you really think Marriott executives care too much about the resale value of prepaid vacations or do they care about developing new products to generate income so the company stays afloat so they can be around to provide high quality vacations to owners?  Why are people being so short sighted?


----------



## Dean

PerryM said:


> Folks, Marriott has given us 2-3 years of warning - don't bellyache to Marriott when they introduce the new system and you get screwed royally because you bought too early.  They have given us fair warning on this matter.


No argument from me on that one but same could be said for almost any issue including reservations issues and salesperson smoke that isn't backed up in the legal paperwork.  Timesharing is a high risk/reward business, IMO.


----------



## FlyerBobcat

Latravel said:


> _"They were sold to us as "pre-paid vacations." We were not concerned with resale value."_
> 
> 
> This is the best post i've seen on this subject.  It looks like you purchased direct from Marriott, because Marriott outright states you are purchasing a prepaid vacation, not an investment.  All this talk about resale value is irrelevant!  When you purchase a timeshare, this is part of the agreement.  If you come back later and complain about your resale value, they can point to the original contract.
> 
> As Ingrid stated, we have to focus on what options this program offers for trading.  Not resale value!



Heidi,
I have a feeling I will get blasted for asking this...  but when you quote someone's post, could you use the "quote" feature/icon.

By doing this, the quoted box contains a link (the arrow) to that entire posting from which you quoted -- to quickly allow one to go back and get the entire context of the post.  TIA


----------



## davidvel

Latravel said:


> So I go to a Marriott timeshare presentation and once I decide to buy, they tell me my timeshare is a prepaid vacation, not an investment, and I should not expect any return on this purchase, and any promises made by the salesperson is incorrect, etc...  They even make me and my spouse initial next to this paragraph to make VERY sure I understand.
> 
> So how can I now complain about resale value?   Is this a reasonable expectation?  Do you really think Marriott executives care too much about the resale value of prepaid vacations or do they care about developing new products to generate income so the company stays afloat so they can be around to provide high quality vacations to owners?  Why are people being so short sighted?



I think it is not a question of whether you can complain at all (into the air, at the circumstances, at Marriott's marketing department) vs. complaining that Marriott has some obligation to maintain resale value. As to the latter I wholeheartedly agree, as I think most people (except Perry) do.

I think most of the complaints have been as to the former, but those who blame Marriott as though they have some continuing obligation as to your resale value are certainly missing the mark. 



> Marriott makes me initial a paragraph that says any promises made by the salesperson are incorrect, etc...


That being said, I always love reading a contract that says "Despite the last 3-300 hours of negotiations, promises, representations, slide shows, graphs, charts, books, exchange scenarios that have your head spinning in euphoria and excitement about what we are selling you, *you should ignore all of them*."  (This is called a "zipper clause")

It should actually read:  

WARNING: The last 2 hours and everything we told you have been complete BullS&^t, a waste of your time, may even be complete lies and you only get what's in the small legal print and governing documents that most lawyers can't even understand. Spend the next three days hiring a lawyer to decipher what we are really selling you. Good Luck!!"


----------



## RandR

While I didn't figure much of a resale value for the resale I bought, I think that despite what Marriott has direct buyers initial, some still think there will be a resale value.  The reason for them having you initial that and all the other things is to completely cover their a$$.  If a reasonable person did their research on buying a timeshare and saw that Marriott timeshares seemed to maintain some value they could then reasonably assume that would continue.  When they then sat down and bought direct because they got bonus points and the ability to trade for MRP and were told it was a pre-paid vacation with no guaranteed value it would still be reasonable for them to assume there would be some resale value based on their research.


----------



## sdtugger

*Loss of Value?*

I've been wondering whether there will be a significant devaluation of any weeks that don't join the new system.  It really depends on how many people join the new system, doesn't it?  If a majority stick with the old system, then there would be no or little impact to resale value, right?  My only hope is that all owners won't be like sheep and follow the Marriott shepherd regardless of the cost and value.  If owners make Marriott earn our internal trades with low cost and high value, then the new system might be great for all.

I'm not counting on the masses here, but I do think we need to recognize that this may not be a huge problem and we won't know until we see it.


----------



## Dean

davidvel said:


> vs. complaining that Marriott has some obligation to maintain resale value. As to the latter I wholeheartedly agree, as I think most people (except Perry) do.
> 
> I think most of the complaints have been as to the former, but those who blame Marriott as though they have some continuing obligation as to your resale value are certainly missing the mark.


I agree.  I think it ludicrous to suggest that Marriott has an obligation to maintain resale value for the owners that have purchased.  I do think that it's smart business to do so up to a point and poor business to institute actions that would severely reduce them beyond the usual levels we've seen historically.


----------



## dioxide45

davidvel said:


> I don't see any problem with people doing both.
> 
> 
> 
> As to resale value, the fact that original purchasers were told that they were buying pre-paid vacations in their disclosures is accurate, but does not tell the whole story.
> 
> In every presentation I have been on Marriott has highlighted the "deeded" nature of the interest, and that it has inherent value as such, and is more than just a timeshare because it is real property.
> 
> I don't think anyone here can argue with a straight face that Marriott has any contractual obligation to maintain your TS value, any more than I can go back to the developer who sold my house almost a decade ago and complain that he is seleing houses down the street cheaply and my home value has plummeted in the past few years. Most posts I have seen have been that it is "morally wrong" or against the values that Marriott one espoused. As a resale buyer you have no direct contractual relationship with Marriott anyway.
> 
> In any event, regardless of what the contract says, Marriott TSs (at least so far) *do have value*, and are considered an interest in property. There is nothing wrong with people being upset that the company that sold that to them may do something that they believe will devalue that interest.



I have to agree. While the written information may say otherwise, all of our sale reps have told us that these are a great investment and would only go up in value.


----------



## Pit

dioxide45 said:


> I have to agree. While the written information may say otherwise, all of our sale reps have told us that these are a great investment and would only go up in value.



Furthermore, stating that it is not an investment is not equivalent to stating they are worthless.


----------



## RandR

Absolutely.  If something is going to loss at least half it's value right out of the gate, no one would consider that an investment.  But is still does have some value.


----------



## hotcoffee

Latravel said:


> _"They were sold to us as "pre-paid vacations." We were not concerned with resale value."_
> 
> 
> This is the best post i've seen on this subject.  It looks like you purchased direct from Marriott, because Marriott outright states you are purchasing a prepaid vacation, not an investment.  All this talk about resale value is irrelevant!  When you purchase a timeshare, this is part of the agreement.  If you come back later and complain about your resale value, they can point to the original contract.
> 
> As Ingrid stated, we have to focus on what options this program offers for trading.  Not resale value!



I believe that the issue is Marriott intentionally and knowingly destroying resale values in order to prevent people from buying resale.  None of the previous arguments involves depreciation or anything resembling it.

We don't know at this point whether Marriott will exclude resale purchases from the new program (if an when it is implemented).  But should they do so, it would be a planned and calculated action in which the only purpose would be to hinder resales.  It would be an example of a strong-armed tactic employed by a wealthy corporation to extract extra profit from the public.

As Perry has pointed out several times in this thread, Marriott has already sold every timeshare at developer prices once.  So, they made their money.  A resale is nothing more than an original buyer transferring ownership to someone else because he no longer wants his timeshare.  He should have that right.  It does not harm Marriott for an owner to sell his timeshare. Whether it is the original owner or a resale owner, it should not matter to Marriott.  Either one who comes to their resort spends money.


----------



## Latravel

_"While the written information may say otherwise, all of our sale reps have told us that these are a great investment and would only go up in value."_


And you believed a timeshare salesman? 

As someone pointed out above, it's true, the salesperson did say this was an investment in our future and all the other stuff they say.  Only after we said we wanted to buy a unit did the truth come out on paper.  BUT, even without the documents, common sense would tell us a timeshare is not an investment.


_"I believe that the issue is Marriott intentionally and knowingly destroying resale values in order to prevent people from buying resale."_

There is no resale value as far as Marriott is concerned.  You sign away that right when you purchase a Marriott timeshare.  They feel no obligation to your resale value and they put that in writing.  This could be because they want to cover their butts (as someone put it) or because that is their business model.  So if a business decision must be made that affects your resale value, they may not happily change but they will for the sake of business.  They made that clear.

I'm going to find the documents we signed in all our moving junk.  Once I do, i'll post word for word.


----------



## davidvel

Latravel said:


> There is no resale value as far as Marriott is concerned.  You sign away that right when you purchase a Marriott timeshare.  They feel no obligation to your resale value and they put that in writing.


Absolutely agree and would add to "feel no obligation": "have no obligation."

But, I would like to see where Marriott put in writing that  they actually "feel no obligation to your resale value." 


> I'm going to find the documents we signed in all our moving junk.  Once I do, i'll post word for word.


That would answer the above, and would be very helpful to this ongoing discussion.


----------



## Latravel

Ok, I found the document in my Timberlodge purchase documents.  This was for a purchase in Dec. 2007.

The document covers the following categories: Ownership Rights, Use Options, Lockoff, Split Week, Marriott Rewards, Exchange through Interval Iinternational, Internal Exchange, External Exchange, Maintenance Fees and Miscellaneous.

It is titled: 

_Quality Assurance Checklist_

_Guest satisfaction results from your complete understanding of all components of the Marriot Vacation Ownership Program.  Please take the time to review the following and sign in the space provided indicating that you understand each component._

_Miscellaneous_
Item #18:
_I acknowledge that no representations have been made to me by my salesperson or any other representative of the Developer as to investment potential, resale potential, or rental income potential._

Item #19:
_The Resort currently does not offer a resale program._

Item #20
_I acknowledge that I am purchasing this interest for my personal vacation uses._
_
Any terms capitalized in this document have the same definition as provided in the Public Offering Statement._


Next to each sentence, my spouse and I were asked to initial.  The entire document was signed and dated at the bottom.


----------



## davidvel

Latravel said:


> Ok, I found the document in my Timberlodge purchase documents.  This was for a purchase in Dec. 2007.
> 
> It is titled Quality Assurance Checklist
> 
> _Guest satisfaction results from your complete understanding of all components of the Marriot Vacation Ownership Program.  Please take the time to review the following and sign in the space provided indicating that you understand each component._
> 
> 
> Item #18:
> 
> _I acknowledge that no representations have been made to me by my salesperson or any other representative of the Developer as to investment potential, resale potential, or rental income potential._
> 
> Item #19:
> 
> _The Resort currently does not offer a resale program._
> 
> Item #20
> _I acknowledge that I am purchasing this interest for my personal vacation uses._
> 
> Next to each sentence, my spouse and I were asked to initial.  The entire document was signed and dated.



Thank you Heidi! That is great info.

Any contract is only pertinet in context of the whole document. It would be great if you could scan the documents redacting your personal info of course, so us resale people o ) could see it in its entirety. I would be happy to host at my personal  website where I posted the Shadow Ridge CC&Rs (and will post  any other Marriott TS docs.)


----------



## Latravel

I think that is a very good idea.  I'll do it by Monday.


----------



## SueDonJ

Latravel said:


> _Quality Assurance Checklist_



We initialed one of those, too, with our Contract to Purchase SurfWatch dated 6/2/06; the items pertaining to value aren't on that form but rather contained in the Contract under "VII. ADDITIONAL TERMS, 4. PURCHASER'S ACKNOWLEDGMENTS:  ... Purchaser acknowledges that the purchase of the Time Sharing Interest(s) is made for the Purchaser's personal use, and that neither Seller nor any of its agents, employees and/or affiliates has made any oral or written representations that the Purchaser would derive economic benefits or expectations of profit from appreciation in the value of the Time Sharing Interest(s) being purchased or profits to be derived from the entrepreneurial or managerial efforts of the Seller ..."

Here's a scan, although the quality may not be very good:


----------



## Latravel

After reading your post, I looked over the rest of my documents.  I found the same thing:

_10. Covenants, Representations and Warranties of Purchaser and Seller.

   (b) Purchaser covenants, represents and warrants to Seller as follows:
Purchaser is purchasing the Timeshare interest (s) for his or her own personal use and account and not for any other purpose, and does not intend to place the Timeshare Interest(s) in any rental pool or rental agency or vacation club or similar type arrangement.  *Seller has not authorized any representation of the investment potential of the Timeshare Interest(s), and has specifically not authorized the representatioin of any potential for rental income, resale at a profit, or any expected tax benefit.*  Nothing in this subparagraph shall be deemed to prevent Purchaser, individually or jointly, from renting an Assigned Unit during his or her reserved Use Period to a member of the general public._

It looks like the checklist was an added document that singles out the most important points so you can't say you didn't read the fine print.

Well folks.  There it is in writing.


----------



## SueDonJ

Our Barony week was a resale by Marriott.  That Contract For Purchase dated 11/23/07 also included a "Marriott's Barony Beach Resort Re-sales Ownership Assurance Checklist" with this item:

"I acknowledge that no representations have been made to me by my salesperson or any other representative of MVCI as to investment potential, resale potential or rental income potential."

Here's another poor scan:


----------



## IuLiKa

Perry and Quimby thank you for the update. I cannot follow this thread there are more than 50 posts a day some times. I will check back soon and ask for another update.
Iulika


----------



## Dean

hotcoffee said:


> I believe that the issue is Marriott intentionally and knowingly destroying resale values in order to prevent people from buying resale.  None of the previous arguments involves depreciation or anything resembling it.
> 
> We don't know at this point whether Marriott will exclude resale purchases from the new program (if an when it is implemented).  But should they do so, it would be a planned and calculated action in which the only purpose would be to hinder resales.  It would be an example of a strong-armed tactic employed by a wealthy corporation to extract extra profit from the public.
> 
> As Perry has pointed out several times in this thread, Marriott has already sold every timeshare at developer prices once.  So, they made their money.  A resale is nothing more than an original buyer transferring ownership to someone else because he no longer wants his timeshare.  He should have that right.  It does not harm Marriott for an owner to sell his timeshare. Whether it is the original owner or a resale owner, it should not matter to Marriott.  Either one who comes to their resort spends money.


I'd say it's speculation at best to accuse Marriott of purposefully destroying resale value.  It's possible that any actions may do so and any attempt to steer buyers to retail may inadvertently reduce resale.  And it's possible that whatever the next change is (there's always one around the corner for any system) will decrease resale values.  I don't believe there's anything Marriott could do that would destroy resale values of good weeks at good resorts.  I  think market forces will be in effect as we're seeing right now with the economy.  And it's true that off season and shoulder season weeks have likely been over priced due to the perception of benefit being with Marriott (rightfully so or not) and those values likely will fall IF the value is decreased based on internal changes.  One will always be able to reserve, use and potentially trade their own resort which is all that is promised up front anyway.  But one who bought mostly to trade because it was a MARRIOTT may indeed lose out just like those that bought Spicebush and Swallowtail just before the separation lost some of their value.  I remember the venomous thread's at the time.

IMO, saying they've sold each week once and they've made their money has no bearing on the argument at hand.  They still have retail resorts to sell which are competing with resale weeks/resorts and they still have a fairly active resale department.  Their responsibility on the sales side is to further those options.  Certainly there's a right and wrong way to do so and we'd all likely disagree on what those were anyway.  IF they can further those benefits by excluding resale buyers or charging them an inclusion fee that makes it not worthwhile, that is their right for anything over simply reserving at your resort.  I doubt they will do so exclusively without options for existing resale members but they might and the options might not be "reasonable" even if offered in the eyes of many, including myself.

The bottom line IMO is that unless Marriott takes away the fundamental ability to reserve a week at one's home resort, they really haven't done anything of substance from a right and wrong standpoint.


----------



## Dean

Latravel said:


> Ok, I found the document in my Timberlodge purchase documents.  This was for a purchase in Dec. 2007.
> 
> The document covers the following categories: Ownership Rights, Use Options, Lockoff, Split Week, Marriott Rewards, Exchange through Interval Iinternational, Internal Exchange, External Exchange, Maintenance Fees and Miscellaneous.
> 
> It is titled:
> 
> _Quality Assurance Checklist_
> 
> _Guest satisfaction results from your complete understanding of all components of the Marriot Vacation Ownership Program.  Please take the time to review the following and sign in the space provided indicating that you understand each component._
> 
> _Miscellaneous_
> Item #18:
> _I acknowledge that no representations have been made to me by my salesperson or any other representative of the Developer as to investment potential, resale potential, or rental income potential._
> 
> Item #19:
> _The Resort currently does not offer a resale program._
> 
> Item #20
> _I acknowledge that I am purchasing this interest for my personal vacation uses._
> _
> Any terms capitalized in this document have the same definition as provided in the Public Offering Statement._
> 
> 
> Next to each sentence, my spouse and I were asked to initial.  The entire document was signed and dated at the bottom.


Those are pretty standard things included in most POS as well and in many cases, much of that info is required by law to be provided.  The reason is that some timeshares tout resale and rental as a way to make money for the buyer.  While helpful, any type of product understanding checklist may not a true legal document at least as I'm told by the State of Florida.


----------



## PerryM

*Anti Owner Marriott Programs - just the start*



Dean said:


> I'd say it's speculation at best to accuse Marriott of purposefully destroying resale value.  It's possible that any actions may do so and any attempt to steer buyers to retail may inadvertently reduce resale.  And it's possible that whatever the next change is (there's always one around the corner for any system) will decrease resale values.  I don't believe there's anything Marriott could do that would destroy resale values of good weeks at good resorts.  I  think market forces will be in effect as we're seeing right now with the economy.  And it's true that off season and shoulder season weeks have likely been over priced due to the perception of benefit being with Marriott (rightfully so or not) and those values likely will fall IF the value is decreased based on internal changes.  One will always be able to reserve, use and potentially trade their own resort which is all that is promised up front anyway.  But one who bought mostly to trade because it was a MARRIOTT may indeed lose out just like those that bought Spicebush and Swallowtail just before the separation lost some of their value.  I remember the venomous thread's at the time.
> 
> IMO, saying they've sold each week once and they've made their money has no bearing on the argument at hand.  They still have retail resorts to sell which are competing with resale weeks/resorts and they still have a fairly active resale department.  Their responsibility on the sales side is to further those options.  Certainly there's a right and wrong way to do so and we'd all likely disagree on what those were anyway.  IF they can further those benefits by excluding resale buyers or charging them an inclusion fee that makes it not worthwhile, that is their right for anything over simply reserving at your resort.  I doubt they will do so exclusively without options for existing resale members but they might and the options might not be "reasonable" even if offered in the eyes of many, including myself.
> 
> The bottom line IMO is that unless Marriott takes away the fundamental ability to reserve a week at one's home resort, they really haven't done anything of substance from a right and wrong standpoint.



Folks, Marriott is taking the fundamental ability to exchange reservations among Marriott owners away - sure they can do it but what's in it for Marriott owners?

By the time such a system is released 80%+ of all Marriott resorts have been sold out and Marriott cleans the toilets there now.  Right now EVERY owner in these mature resorts can exchange reservations with every other Marriott owner within the same building and other Marriott resorts.

Now Marriott wants to take that ability away - after 20 years in the business all of a sudden Marriott owners are barred from exchanging reservations with each other.

Who the hell does Marriott think they are?

What the hell right do they now have to bar one Marriott owner from exchanging reservations with another Marriott owner?

That's what this is all about.  Because resale owners will be pond scum at a Marriott resort good luck on your resale.  Timeshares are real estate and you should fight to keep what you have.

I can understand Marriott doing this on day-one with no owners - that's ok.  But Marriott is going to have a horrendous impact on their loyal owners - and for our benefit?

Don't buy a Marriott now either direct from Marriott or resale until Marriott shows just how much damage to our ownerships they intend to inflict for a few bucks of profit.

P.S.

You don't think for a second Marriott will stop here do you?  This opens the floodgates for all kinds of VIP programs just like Wyndham has.

Marriott resales used to command 60% of current sales prices - in 5 years you broke even if you bought from Marriott.  Once these anti-owner programs are implemented expect to join Wyndham where their resales are 5% of current sale prices.

Count on it...

P.P.S.

There is a fundamental difference between a mature Marriott and one under construction - we, the owners own the damn thing - lock stock and barrel.  We elect members to the HOA who can kick Marriott out if they are detrimental to the wellbeing of the resort.

If something horrible happens to the resort Marriott is going to turn their back and shout "this is not our resort" - well they are right.  Now they want to screw around with our resorts - hopefully at least one HOA won't stand for this assault on their owners at their resort.

These are our resorts not Marriott - Marriott seems to have lost sight of that fact.


----------



## potchak

Dean said:


> I agree.  I think it ludicrous to suggest that Marriott has an obligation to maintain resale value for the owners that have purchased.  I do think that it's smart business to do so up to a point and poor business to institute actions that would severely reduce them beyond the usual levels we've seen historically.



I wholeheartedly disagree with you. Our timeshares are a real estate transaction and we have deeds to those propertiies. Our COA's have hired Marriott to manage these properties, therefore Marriott most definitely has a responsibility to consider the resale values just like our local HOA's. With this in mind, I am pretty certain they will not go the route of Wyndham or Starwood with voluntary/mandatory resorts. 

I have a feeling that they will try to take the best of all the programs out there. DH and I love our DVC because of the flexibility- many resort choices, room size choices etc, and the fact that you can book as many nights as you want within your point value. I am sure Marriott will incorporate some of that into their new system. 

I am trying to be optimisitic that Marriott will not just do what is right for Marriott, but for their owners as well. Considering most Marriott owners not only have purchased developer, but purchased multiples from them, I do not think they want to alienate us. 

JMHO.


----------



## Dean

potchak said:


> I wholeheartedly disagree with you. Our timeshares are a real estate transaction and we have deeds to those propertiies.


Your option of course.  Having a deed has no bearing on the discussion from an obligation standpoint, IMO.  Resale value is not a management issue.  To be clear, my statement is Marriott has no obligation to owners to protect resale values.  However, they do have other responsibilities that will indirectly do this and do have responsibilities to shareholders.  If they keep the property in good shape and run a resort in a well oiled manner that makes people want to go there, this will aid value while the reverse will rob value.  IMO, it is in Marriott's best interest to have a viable resale market, it's just good business.  They should want it to be reasonable but not too good because they want to sell retail as much as possible and not have those potential buyers go resale instead more than necessary.  It is, and always has been, an adversarial love/hate relationship.  Technically Marriott the seller and Marriott he manager are two different and unrelated companies.

I too am optimistic that IF anything happens, it can be a win-win situation for many.  But it will not be for everyone just like DVC's reallocation was not.  And even if win-win, it will likely cost us some money to make it so.


----------



## Latravel

_"While helpful, any type of product understanding checklist may not a true legal document at least as I'm told by the State of Florida."_

This language is also included in the purchase documents which are true legal documents.  The checklist is just to make sure you really understand the important points and you must initial by each point.  No way around this.  Marriott is protecting themselves from any obligation to protect resale values.

If you have an expectation of a resale value, that is your option.  Your expectation does not match the legal documents you signed so you may be disappointed.  You may expect all you want but it is not based on reality.


----------



## SueDonJ

Latravel said:


> ... The checklist is just to make sure you really understand the important points and you must initial by each point.



I found that it was very easy to understand the purchase because our salesperson used the checklist during the presentation - we went through each item line-by-line while she explained each in detail.  It was a good tool to make sure some of the more important (but often not covered in detail, judging by horror stories related on TUG?) items were covered.  Although, of course, we didn't initial or sign anything on that sheet until after we'd agreed to the purchase and the Contract was drawn up.


----------



## Dean

Latravel said:


> _"While helpful, any type of product understanding checklist may not a true legal document at least as I'm told by the State of Florida."_
> 
> This language is also included in the purchase documents which are true legal documents.  The checklist is just to make sure you really understand the important points and you must initial by each point.  No way around this.  Marriott is protecting themselves from any obligation to protect resale values.
> 
> If you have an expectation of a resale value, that is your option.  Your expectation does not match the legal documents you signed so you may be disappointed.  You may expect all you want but it is not based on reality.


It certainly has been in every POS I've looked at.  However, the product understanding check lists often give additional information or cover areas not addressed directly in the POS and that's where their legality tends to fall down.


----------



## Latravel

Dean-
Did you see SueDon's post where she included a scan of the purchase agreement?  The language from the checklist is there.  I also looked in my purchase documents and it was there hidden the many pages.  Like i've said, the checklist does not stand alone.  It recaps the important points to make sure the buyer is fully aware.  It does not list additional information.  It is a recap.


----------



## kjd

*Marriott's resale values*

Marriott makes no commitment to upholding resale values and should't make any.  It's the same thing with most large purchases.  No car dealer makes any commitment to uphold resale values either.  If they do, it's a rare exception and they would probably go out of business.

When you drive out of a car dealership with a new car you are immediately "upside down"  in terms of your resale value and/or your car loan.  If you paid cash, you have also lost a lost of money in the event that you had to sell.  Most people look at cars as a depreciating asset.  I think that we should look at timeshares in the same manner.  A timeshare is not an investment.

The value of a timeshare is in its' usage.  I think a time horizon for me of ten years is about right.  You may have a different one. Just like an auto, a person must add the cost of ownership over time (including maintenance fees) and subtract the resale value when you are finished. That puts it on a cost per year basis.

 For most timeshare owners that could average anywhere from $3,000 to $5,000 per year.  Whether you purchased from Marriott or as a resale buyer is immaterial.  The real question, just as with automobiles, is did you get value for your money.  Each timeshare owner has to answer that for themselves.  There is no one right answer.


----------



## hotcoffee

Latravel said:


> _"I believe that the issue is Marriott intentionally and knowingly destroying resale values in order to prevent people from buying resale."_
> 
> There is no resale value as far as Marriott is concerned.  You sign away that right when you purchase a Marriott timeshare.  They feel no obligation to your resale value and they put that in writing.  This could be because they want to cover their butts (as someone put it) or because that is their business model.  So if a business decision must be made that affects your resale value, they may not happily change but they will for the sake of business.  They made that clear.
> 
> I'm going to find the documents we signed in all our moving junk.  Once I do, i'll post word for word.



There is a fundamental difference between resale values diminishing on their own and the developer deliberately destroying them.  The issue is not whether a timeshare appreciates or depreciates, or even whether timeshares at a given resort have any value at all to most people (which is probably true of off-season weeks at seasonal resorts).  None of the documents you later posted have any verbiage in them like "the customer understands that Marriott reserves the right at any time at their discretion to greatly diminish your ability to sell your timeshare should you ever wish to do so."  I suspect if you read anything resembling that in the documents, you would not sign them.  I would not.  The issue is whether Marriott will engage in sleaze tactics to build their profits, or whether they will let their reputation build their profits. 

Note that I try to keep my posts in the subjunctive mood when referring to what Marriott might or might not do regarding the upcoming trading system.  I don't think that they will necessarily do any of the things we have talked about.  I cannot think of a good reason why they would want to exclude some top-notch inventory held by resale buyers out of any new trading system.


----------



## RandR

For those that bought direct, did your salesperson talk about how you would be able to trade your week?  If so, how did s/he describe it?


----------



## hotcoffee

kjd said:


> Marriott makes no commitment to upholding resale values and should't make any.  It's the same thing with most large purchases.  No car dealer makes any commitment to uphold resale values either.  If they do, it's a rare exception and they would probably go out of business.
> 
> When you drive out of a car dealership with a new car you are immediately "upside down"  in terms of your resale value and/or your car loan.  If you paid cash, you have also lost a lost of money in the event that you had to sell.  Most people look at cars as a depreciating asset.  I think that we should look at timeshares in the same manner.  A timeshare is not an investment.
> 
> The value of a timeshare is in its' usage.  I think a time horizon for me of ten years is about right.  You may have a different one. Just like an auto, a person must add the cost of ownership over time (including maintenance fees) and subtract the resale value when you are finished. That puts it on a cost per year basis.
> 
> For most timeshare owners that could average anywhere from $3,000 to $5,000 per year.  Whether you purchased from Marriott or as a resale buyer is immaterial.  The real question, just as with automobiles, is did you get value for your money.  Each timeshare owner has to answer that for themselves.  There is no one right answer.



Again, your post misses the point.  Depreciation of an automobile is the natural result of market forces.  Neither the dealer nor car manufacturer makes any attempt to deliberately destroy your ability to sell your car.  It is considered a good thing for car models to have good resale value.  If you bought a second car, and your spouse died, you would probably want to sell one of the cars.  Hopefully, someone would buy it because it still has SOME value.  Otherwise, you would have to just park it in your yard until you can find some way to get rid of it.  With a timeshare, we pay yearly maintenance fees.  So, if we cannot use it, I think most of us would want to sell it as soon as we can.  I suspect it might become hard to sell if buyers become aware that they will be significantly discriminated against should they ever want to do an exchange.


----------



## Latravel

I don't believe for one minute Marriott willl intentionally and deliberately try to "destroy resale" values.  They have more important things to do!!!

They will do business as they see fit in order to make the company successful.  If they do something that may result, indirectly, in lower resale values, they warned you in the beginning.  

If you bought resale and didn't get this information, the original owner did.  This was another risk of purchasing resale.

I did find a very interesting sentence in the Quality Assurance Checklist.  It is regarding Internal Exchange:

Item #10:
_Occupying another season at my resort instead of the one I am purchasing or occupying at another MVCI resort is considered and internal exchange, which *currently* must be reserved through Internal International._

Bold is my emphasis.

I found this very interesting since it looks like they were working on the point system from 2007.


----------



## PerryM

*Marriott - stop bashing owners....*

If you did your due diligence then resales mean a lot to you.

This analysis can be done a number of ways but I recommend 10 years – that’s the length of time Marriott finances a unit.  At the end of the 10 years you sell the timeshare to complete the transaction.  Ideally, the cost to buy the timeshare, pay the mortgage expenses, MF’s and finally to add back in the resale value of the timeshare should be cheaper than renting.  If not you decided to pay more in ownership than renting.

So that resale value has everything to do with due diligence.  You may have decided that the resale value is too hard to calculate and made it $0 then if you bought the cost of ownership must be really really good versus just renting.  In this case you should try to get every penny in resales since it’s a windfall to you.

Marriott has everything to do with that resale price – everything.  It's their name on the timeshare.

During those 10 years of ownership, Marriott could go belly up.  Marriott could be charged with all kinds of violations of laws, it could be sued by hundreds of thousands of its owners.  It could come up with something, like a Destination Club, that is much more profitable and easier to make money than timeshares and abandoned timeshares.  All of these calamities would tarnish the Marriott brand and folks would be less inclined to buy resale Marriotts from owners.

Marriott has decided to view their owners as competition to their sales and thus the rumor was started 2-3 years ago disparaging resales.  *Marriott has spent every second of every day bashing resales and owners and pointing out that the new resale owners are going to get screwed by the new Marriott Internal Exchange Program.*

This declaration of war will harm resale values since resales will be left out of the exchange system.  Marriott has decided that its bashing of owners will result in less competition and the natural reaction of falling resales is viewed as a plus:


Marriott will have fewer sales snatched away by resales
Marriott will exercise the ROFR at much lower prices and snap up weeks for pennies on the dollar to recycle and sell at full price

This is the natural byproduct of selling used condos at new condo prices!

This is perfectly ok for new construction but 20 year old Marriotts are being sold as NEW units to the public - at NEW prices, no discounts for 20 year old Marriotts.  It would be like a new car dealer buying 20 year old wrecks, fixing them up, and selling them as NEW cars.  Then to top it off the new car dealer spreads rumors of all kinds of problems with their older cars and the prices fall even further.

Marriott needs to stop bashing resales by concocting all kinds of systems that punish loyal owners – stop this insanity Marriott.


----------



## SueDonJ

RandR said:


> For those that bought direct, did your salesperson talk about how you would be able to trade your week?  If so, how did s/he describe it?



(paraphrased) "You are free to exchange your reserved week with anybody in a private deal.  MVCI has a contract with Interval International to handle exchanges with other resorts in that system.  They use a system in which rankings based on resort amenities, number of bedrooms, whether there is a kitchen, number of guests who can be accommodated, etc are assigned to every resort in their inventory, and they try to match you to a property that is of equal quality to yours.  You are, however, free to accept from them a property of lesser or greater quality if it is offered.  Within II's system, there is a limited period of time in which only other Marriott owners have access to other Marriott weeks which have been deposited."  There was more about the difference between "request first" and "deposit first", the time frames in which your deposit can be exchanged, Getaway and AC possibilities and the other general II terms including the fee structure at the time.

She never used the words "like-for-like", she was clear that MVCI's contractual relationship could be terminated, and she never guaranteed that we would be able to make any certain exchange to any certain property.

Everything that she did say is supported by language in the Contract for Purchase, the worksheet we initialed and the other ownership documents.


----------



## Dean

Latravel said:


> Dean-
> Did you see SueDon's post where she included a scan of the purchase agreement?  The language from the checklist is there.  I also looked in my purchase documents and it was there hidden the many pages.  Like i've said, the checklist does not stand alone.  It recaps the important points to make sure the buyer is fully aware.  It does not list additional information.  It is a recap.


I did, I also have copies of several from Marriott, Bluegreen and Disney.  The issue I have is that OFTEN they go beyond the language in the POS.  I think we're in agreement just approaching things from the opposite side.  Still, the issue is what does the POS say, what do the state laws say and what case law applies.  Often they are open to interpretation and sometimes even lawyers and judges interpret them differently.  



kjd said:


> The value of a timeshare is in its' usage.


While I don't disagree with anything you've said, I would suggest that there is an inherent value in many timeshares similar to the used car example.  Not all resorts and weeks actually reach a point where they truly have an inherent value but many good weeks at good resort do for Marriott and others.  Take HH for GO or other similar resorts.  There is an inherent value to a summer OF week, another for an OS or GV week and so on.  Certainly for seasonal resort areas there often reaches a point where a given unit is not worth the underlying maint fee or is very close.  Take HH bronze weeks for example.  Even with the unit is near break even as an ownership, it's hard to justify buying one and the risks that go with it.  In addition timesharing in general suffers from a lack of mainstream acceptance and interest which further drives down prices.  Disney is likely the only company that's truly been able to overcome this issue to a large degree and have more of a market forces based resale market.  Even then if DVC changed their system where retail buyers got benefits that resale owners didn't, it would shift the curve.

As another TUGGER has often demonstrated in the past, any resort needs a significant number of owners paying their yearly dues to be viable.  For some this means overpaying and supplementing the owners of higher demand weeks.  This is one of the fundamental differences in many points systems, that a given owner pays more in line with the value of what they own and use than a fixed week system where maint fees are the same or nearly so for each week.  Of course a points system often allows a developer to sell for higher total because everyone that buys is expecting to reserve when they want to go but not everyone can go during higher demand times.  



hotcoffee said:


> There is a fundamental difference between resale values diminishing on their own and the developer deliberately destroying them.  The issue is not whether a timeshare appreciates or depreciates, or even whether timeshares at a given resort have any value at all to most people (which is probably true of off-season weeks at seasonal resorts).  None of the documents you later posted have any verbiage in them like "the customer understands that Marriott reserves the right at any time at their discretion to greatly diminish your ability to sell your timeshare should you ever wish to do so."  I suspect if you read anything resembling that in the documents, you would not sign them.  I would not.  The issue is whether Marriott will engage in sleaze tactics to build their profits, or whether they will let their reputation build their profits.
> 
> Note that I try to keep my posts in the subjunctive mood when referring to what Marriott might or might not do regarding the upcoming trading system.  I don't think that they will necessarily do any of the things we have talked about.  I cannot think of a good reason why they would want to exclude some top-notch inventory held by resale buyers out of any new trading system.


To me I guess it depends on the actual intent rather than the actions.  IF they made changes that benefited retail sales but depressed resale prices (intended or not), that's fair game in my book.  If they were able to do something that ONLY reduced resale prices with NO other changes, I might agree with you.  Ultimately any timeshare ownership is a bet on the company involved, one you might lose.  Some have seen their resort go belly up and be left with nothing.



RandR said:


> For those that bought direct, did your salesperson talk about how you would be able to trade your week?  If so, how did s/he describe it?


To me it doesn't matter because verbal representations are not enforceable and the legal documents specifically state that no exchange option is guaranteed, at least in every one I'd seen.


----------



## hotcoffee

Latravel said:


> I don't believe for one minute Marriott willl intentionally and deliberately try to "destroy resale" values.  They have more important things to do!!!



If they were to exclude resale owners (current and/or new) access to their new system, that would indeed be deliberate.  The eventual result of that action over time would be to destroy the value of your timeshare on the open market.  What would your consider their motive to be if they excluded resale owners (or buyers)?  If you say for their own "profit", then you are in effect supporting the "destroy resale" argument.  Their enhanced profit comes from eliminating their perceived competition from resales.  Plus, like Perry said, they might even get to sell some of those units that current owners are trying to get rid at developer prices again.

In reality, it is unlikely that they would pick up a large number of new sales from people who would have otherwise bought resale.  That is due to the huge price difference.  Many of the people who bought resale only bought to begin with because they could pickup a quality timeshare at a relatively cheap price.  Take away that option, and they, like me, would have just found other options for vacations.


----------



## hotcoffee

Dean said:


> To me I guess it depends on the actual intent rather than the actions.



What would be the "intent" if resale owners (or future buyers) were expressly excluded from a new trading system?



Dean said:


> IF they made changes that benefited retail sales but depressed resale prices (intended or not), that's fair game in my book.  If they were able to do something that ONLY reduced resale prices with NO other changes, I might agree with you.



I noticed you used the word "intended" here in your parentheses.  In the first sentence quoted above, you said it "depends on the actual intent".  Obviously, by singling out resales, the differentiation would have to have been intended.  I am hard-pressed to think of changes involving either reservation windows or exchanging capabilities that would unintentionally harm resales.



Dean said:


> Ultimately any timeshare ownership is a bet on the company involved, one you might lose.  Some have seen their resort go belly up and be left with nothing.



True.  But this would hurt direct sales owners also.


----------



## RandR

SueDonJ said:


> (paraphrased) "You are free to exchange your reserved week with anybody in a private deal.  MVCI has a contract with Interval International to handle exchanges with other resorts in that system.  They use a system in which rankings based on resort amenities, number of bedrooms, whether there is a kitchen, number of guests who can be accommodated, etc are assigned to every resort in their inventory, and they try to match you to a property that is of equal quality to yours.  You are, however, free to accept from them a property of lesser or greater quality if it is offered.  Within II's system, there is a limited period of time in which only other Marriott owners have access to other Marriott weeks which have been deposited."  There was more about the difference between "request first" and "deposit first", the time frames in which your deposit can be exchanged, Getaway and AC possibilities and the other general II terms including the fee structure at the time.
> 
> She never used the words "like-for-like", she was clear that MVCI's contractual relationship could be terminated, and she never guaranteed that we would be able to make any certain exchange to any certain property.
> 
> Everything that she did say is supported by language in the Contract for Purchase, the worksheet we initialed and the other ownership documents.



Sue, thanks.  Part of the problem seems to be that some salespeople seem straightforward, as yours was, and some give grandiose visions.  Unfortunately there seem to be more that give grandiose visions.



Dean said:


> To me it doesn't matter because verbal representations are not enforceable and the legal documents specifically state that no exchange option is guaranteed, at least in every one I'd seen.



Dean I agree that verbal representations are not enforceable but from stories on TUG there are plenty of salespeople who fill peoples heads with all kinds of things.  Marriott is aware of this and should not let it happen.  Sue's rep seems to have been very straightforward about what to expect.  How do you think a judge would look at things, (or perhaps the BBB) if they got to hear salespeople telling what amounts to lies over and over and over again?  They then get people to sign documents that I am sure not all of them read closely.  If they question the point about trading, can't you just see a saleperson telling the buyer not to worry, that it is in there just to cover Marriott's butt?  Obviously a person should read the contract carefully and not fall for misrepresentaions, but not all do.  If the salespeople were honest
there would be less disgruntled ts owners.


----------



## Dean

hotcoffee said:


> If they were to exclude resale owners (current and/or new) access to their new system, that would indeed be deliberate.  The eventual result of that action over time would be to destroy the value of your timeshare on the open market.  What would your consider their motive to be if they excluded resale owners (or buyers)?  If you say for their own "profit", then you are in effect supporting the "destroy resale" argument.  Their enhanced profit comes from eliminating their perceived competition from resales.  Plus, like Perry said, they might even get to sell some of those units that current owners are trying to get rid at developer prices again.


But that speaks to the heart of my post.  ANY change they make will be deliberate.  Any deliberate change aimed at shifting more people to retail OR getting more money out of current or future weeks owners (resale or retail) is potentially a fair move even if the end result is that it totally tanks resale prices. YMMV.


----------



## Dean

RandR said:


> Dean I agree that verbal representations are not enforceable but from stories on TUG there are plenty of salespeople who fill peoples heads with all kinds of things.  Marriott is aware of this and should not let it happen.  Sue's rep seems to have been very straightforward about what to expect.  How do you think a judge would look at things, (or perhaps the BBB) if they got to hear salespeople telling what amounts to lies over and over and over again?  They then get people to sign documents that I am sure not all of them read closely.  If they question the point about trading, can't you just see a saleperson telling the buyer not to worry, that it is in there just to cover Marriott's butt?  Obviously a person should read the contract carefully and not fall for misrepresentaions, but not all do.  If the salespeople were honest
> there would be less disgruntled ts owners.


I can't imagine a job trying to sell something to people that really don't need it, can't afford it and  don't know what to do with it.  I can't speak to what a given court would do however, my expectation is if you said it happened, the company said it didn't and the legal documents you accepted (and signed you received) specifically addressed the issues in question to the side of the company, I think you're SOL with the court and close to it with the BBB not that I really care much for them either.  A large number of salespeople are honest and Marriott has far more of the good ones than most companies.  Likely the only company that I'd put ahead of them in this regard is Disney but I don't know all of them enough to be certain.  To me if you didn't read the documents it's hard to say much.


----------



## kjd

Hotcoffee:  I don't think that my post misses any point.  It's very simple.  A timeshare is not an investment.  It's an expense.  It is not meant to return any money to anyone.  Whatever you get when you sell is gravey.  If a TS was sold originally as an investment to unknowning individuals the salespersons were off base.  Frankly, I personally have never heard a Marriott sales person pitch that a timeshare was an investment.  That's not to say it couldn't happen.

As far as not reading a contract goes that is the fault of the buyer.  In any event, I don't think that Marriott's legal department will allow much latitude in changing the wording of one of their contracts.  Certainly not to guarantee anyone a specific price upon resale unless Marriott was interested in buying the unit back.  It would probably be that if you don't like their contract, take your business elsewhere.


----------



## davidvel

I think hotcoffee brought up a comparable analogy to think about involving the value of a car you buy. Imagine that FORD makes a new policy that they will only sell FORD parts to original purchasers of their vehicles, not to any resale purchase even if the vehicle was only 1 year old.  This includes special coded keys you can only buy from them or other electronic components that cannot be purchased on the aftermarket. So if you need these parts, you are out of luck and will have to buy a new car. If you want to sell your car that was worth $20,000 on the day before they instituted the policy, your car is probably worth considerably less after.

Now, remember FORD never promised to supply anyone with parts for your car (especially resale buyers), and are not legally or contractually obligated to do so, so don't complain. I am not trying to analyze all the potential outcomes of such a policy or even of it would be good for FORD or not. I am simply stating that most people would consider this to be a bit unconscionable.    



kjd said:


> As far as not reading a contract goes that is the fault of the buyer.  In any event, I don't think that Marriott's legal department will allow much latitude in changing the wording of one of their contracts.  Certainly not to guarantee anyone a specific price upon resale unless Marriott was interested in buying the unit back.  It would probably be that if you don't like their contract, take your business elsewhere.



This is true. Except as I indicated in an earlier post, salespeople make numerous statements that are directly contrary to what the contract says. Is this fair?


----------



## RandR

davidvel said:


> This is true. Except as I indicated in an earlier post, salespeople make numerous statements that are directly contrary to what the contract says. Is this fair?



This was more my point.  I person who is not as prepared going in can be duped even if they read the contract.  If a person asks about the resale value of the unit, the salesperson could very easily say, 'Don't worry, you can always have Marriott resell it for you.'  Of course not mentioning that they won't if they still have inventory and that there may be a long waiting list to sell.  The salesperson can also say that the language about trading is only in there in case a person doesn't get what they want one year but don't worry you almost always get what you want.  Many people will believe the salesperson because they don't think there is a reason not to.

Not all salespeople on Marriott are trying to give misinformation but based on stories on TUG many are.  There is no reason for this and it should be stopped.


----------



## Latravel

I disagree.  The salesperson goes over each item in the Quality Assurance Checklist and then asks you to sign.  There is no way someone who purchased direct from Marriott can say they were duped.  They make sure you understand the important parts of the program.




> "If they were to exclude resale owners (current and/or new) access to their new system, that would indeed be deliberate. The eventual result of that action over time would be to destroy the value of your timeshare on the open market.



I find this comment interesting.  All resale buyers are currently excluded from the Marriott program.  Your unit has an "R" next to it in the system.  Why do you think you should be treated any differently in the future?  Why do you think Marriott will automatically INCLUDE you for free in the new system when they didn't do that in the past?  I don't understand.


----------



## dioxide45

Latravel said:


> I find this comment interesting.  All resale buyers are currently excluded from the Marriott program.  Your unit has an "R" next to it in the system.  Why do you think you should be treated any differently in the future?  Why do you think Marriott will automatically INCLUDE you for free in the new system when they didn't do that in the past?  I don't understand.



It is unlikely that anyone will be "free" in the new system. Marriott will charge people who purchased full frieght to buy in also.


----------



## Latravel

Totally agree, but my comment wasn't necessarily meant in monetary terms.  It was addressed to resale purchasers who expect to have the same rights in the new Marriott Vacation Club as direct purchasers when that is something they don't have now.  

I'm not saying that wouldn't happen as none of us knows what the new system will look like but if I was a resale purchaser, I wouldn't expect it based on current practice and language in purchase documents.  

My feeling is Marriott will be very generous in order to get everyone to sign up for the new program and to get support among owners.


----------



## davidvel

Latravel said:


> Totally agree, but my comment wasn't necessarily meant in monetary terms.  It was addressed to *resale purchasers who expect to have the same rights in the new Marriott Vacation Club as direct purchasers *when that is something they don't have now.


If by "expect" you mean that resale purchasers here believe they are entitled to the same benefits, I disagree. In the almost 650 posts on this thread I don't think anyone has said that they think that resale owners have the same "rights" as direct purchasers. Most of the commentary has been directed to the presumption that Marriott CAN and MAY treat the two classes of ownership differently in their new program (so long as the deeded ownership rights are not altered).   

At the same time, it should be noted that it IS AN ACCURATE STATEMENT that both direct purchasers and resale purchasers currently have *the exact same rights* in the "new system": *ABSOLUTELY NONE*. So at least on that issue there is no debate.  

No one has any right to be part of the system or to pay any amount to join or anything. IT IS  A NEW SYSTEM with which MARRIOTT can do whatever it wants. (Marriott could give _resale purchasers double points_ as compared to direct purchasers ,  if it wants.) 



Latravel said:


> My feeling is Marriott will be very generous in order to get everyone to sign up for the new program and to get support among owners.


I agree.


----------



## RandR

Latravel said:


> I disagree.  The salesperson goes over each item in the Quality Assurance Checklist and then asks you to sign.  There is no way someone who purchased direct from Marriott can say they were duped.  They make sure you understand the important parts of the program.
> 
> Your salesperson went over it in detail but not everyone's does.  How many people post here after buying on impulse saying they didn't fully undersstand.  You went in with your eyes open but many do not.
> 
> 
> I find this comment interesting.  All resale buyers are currently excluded from the Marriott program.  Your unit has an "R" next to it in the system.  Why do you think you should be treated any differently in the future?  Why do you think Marriott will automatically INCLUDE you for free in the new system when they didn't do that in the past?  I don't understand.



Big difference being excluded from Marriott points, which I don't care about and knew about upfront and being excluded from the ability to trade my unit.  While I am sure you will get joy out of seeing resale buyers get the short end of the stick, it diminishes everyones trading ability if some are left out.


----------



## PerryM

*New exchange system punishes resale owners AND developer owners*

Why does Marriott care about resales?

When a Marriott owner decides that their unit must be sold they go out and find a person who simply replaces them.  The new owner pays the same MFs, and up until this new system was treated exactly the same at the resort.

Marriott wants the new owner, the one the original owner found, to not have the same privileges at the same resort.  Why?

If the unit sold is a Platinum week, for instance, and the new owner wants to vacation at the resort in Gold season they must use an exchange company.  Since the new owner is not part of the new exchange system he has a much more difficult time in finding a Gold reservation in II - the Gold reservation he wants is in the new system.  Additionally that Platinum week he deposited is in II and not in the new system so developer bought weeks can't get it either.

*This is exactly what the new system will do - it will punish BOTH resale owners and developer owners.*  This makes no sense unless Marriott now views ALL owners as evil competitors that might snatch a sale from them at any time.

So you developer bought owners don't think this new system is going to improve your exchange odds - it will decrease them.  Then throw in the fee to convert your weeks to the new system.

P.S.
Like I asked - why does Marriott care about resales at all?  No new owners are added to the roles just the owner running ads to find someone to take their place.  Marriott spent no time nor money - the owner did all the work.

If Marriott had their head on straight they would want to become more competitive and run an auction at sold out resorts where the market determines what an old Marriott resort is worth - you know the ones with the 400 pound TVs taking up half the living room.  Marriott would charge a percentage and do the closing.

But no, Marriott wants to fool new owners into thinking that the resort is brand new and gouge them for new prices.  Wake up Marriott.


----------



## hotcoffee

Latravel said:


> I find this comment interesting.  All resale buyers are currently excluded from the Marriott program.  Your unit has an "R" next to it in the system.  Why do you think you should be treated any differently in the future?  Why do you think Marriott will automatically INCLUDE you for free in the new system when they didn't do that in the past?  I don't understand.



You are comparing apples to oranges.  Any value-added benefits given to direct purchasers were never part of the resold timeshare.  Having the "R" next to a resold timeshare does not at this time affect one's ability to reserve or exchange weeks.  Those are the two fundamental features of owning a timeshare.  I personally don't care about the points.  The issue is that if Marriott were to exclude resale owners (or new purchasers) from a program that might eventually become the primary vehicle for exchanging weeks, they would be taking away one of the fundamental features of owning a timeshare.  Put into the situation of not being able to make good exchanges, one might reasonably conclude that he will have to sell.  Trouble is, will anyone want to buy given that he can only reserve weeks but not do exchanges (except perhaps for inferior timeshares through II)?  So, the current owner has to continue to pay MFs for a timeshare he doesn't want but can't get rid of?  That scenerio might well cause some direct purchasers to snicker - until for whatever reason they themselves one day have to sell.  Then it ceases to be funny.


----------



## davidvel

hotcoffee said:


> So, the current owner has to continue to pay MFs for a timeshare he doesn't want but can't get rid of?  That scenerio might well cause some direct purchasers to snicker - until for whatever reason they themselves one day have to sell.  Then it ceases to be funny.



B I N G O!


----------



## Dean

davidvel said:


> If by "expect" you mean that resale purchasers here believe they are entitled to the same benefits, I disagree. In the almost 650 posts on this thread I don't think anyone has said that they think that resale owners have the same "rights" as direct purchasers. Most of the commentary has been directed to the presumption that Marriott CAN and MAY treat the two classes of ownership differently in their new program (so long as the deeded ownership rights are not altered).


As noted and as you acknowledge, there is currently a difference between resale and retail buyers.  I think much of rhetoric has been around the idea of whether they can widen that gap in such a way that gives current owners less options going forward and also in a way that may reduce the resale values.  I think everyone acknowledges they can, the question seems to be whether it'd be appropriate/reasonable or not.  It seems that is where you can draw the line, between those that feel it's reasonable and appropriate for them to broaden the gap and those that do not.  I'm hoping they don't but the answer remains to be seen. In addition, myself and others have pointed out, the gap between existing owners that bought retail and any new system is likely to be larger than the gap between resale buyers and current retail owners.


----------



## Dean

hotcoffee said:


> That scenerio might well cause some direct purchasers to snicker - until for whatever reason they themselves one day have to sell.  Then it ceases to be funny.


Not snicker but shake their heads.  The truth is that the Majority of timeshare owners (all not just MVCI) who look to sell already find themselves in that situation.  If you buy an off season week that really isn't even worth the underlying fees and don't read the documents, you have set yourself up for trouble, no reason to look for a scapegoat.  As I said earlier, timesharing is a gamble, sometimes that gamble doesn't work out as well as others.


----------



## PerryM

*Asset is better than expense...*



Dean said:


> Not snicker but shake their heads.  The truth is that the Majority of timeshare owners (all not just MVCI) who look to sell already find themselves in that situation.  If you buy an off season week that really isn't even worth the underlying fees and don't read the documents, you have set yourself up for trouble, no reason to look for a scapegoat.  As I said earlier, *timesharing is a gamble, sometimes that gamble doesn't work out as well as others*.



I did not buy our 6 Marriotts as a gamble.  I sold 5 of them for break even or a slight profit after 5 years and got 5 years of vacations, rental income, and enjoyment.  I made a net profit from my units.

The 6th unit, our Gold Summit Watch, I bought resale for $5,500 and we have gone to the Maui Ocean Club for 3 years as studio and 1 BR units.  If I add the difference between renting the MOC and what we pay in MF I have already made back the $5,500 and all the MFs.

Folks, the idea is to NOT look at timeshare ownership as pre-paid vacations or expenses but to look at it as an investment where you expect to make out handsomely for the risk of exposing your money to the real estate and timeshare markets.

Everything I did you can do if you demand a profit from your asset.

I will wait and see what the new Marriott Internal Exchange System is and then make plans.  Marriott's agents, the salesreps, have given us fair warning that there will be MAJOR changes to the ability to exchange Marriott weeks - my guess it will be a disaster - that's what I read from the Official Marriott Rumor on this topic.


----------



## Dean

PerryM said:


> I did not buy our 6 Marriotts as a gamble.  I sold 5 of them for break even or a slight profit after 5 years and got 5 years of vacations, rental income, and enjoyment.  I made a net profit from my units.
> 
> The 6th unit, our Gold Summit Watch, I bought resale for $5,500 and we have gone to the Maui Ocean Club for 3 years as studio and 1 BR units.  If I add the difference between renting the MOC and what we pay in MF I have already made back the $5,500 and all the MFs.
> 
> Folks, the idea is to NOT look at timeshare ownership as pre-paid vacations or expenses but to look at it as an investment where you expect to make out handsomely for the risk of exposing your money to the real estate and timeshare markets.
> 
> Everything I did you can do if you demand a profit from your asset.
> 
> I will wait and see what the new Marriott Internal Exchange System is and then make plans.  Marriott's agents, the salesreps, have given us fair warning that there will be MAJOR changes to the ability to exchange Marriott weeks - my guess it will be a disaster - that's what I read from the Official Marriott Rumor on this topic.


You gambled and broke even, given the risks involved, I hope you got some good trips and enjoyment out of them.  Most people gamble and lose, esp if they buy retail but some lose more than others.  I've owned over 50 timeshare weeks/contracts at various resorts, sold most of them over the years.  In every case except one, I made money.  The one that I didn't make money, I broke even including the extra expenses.  Interesting it was a Marriott week I'd bought resale directly from Marriott with the purpose of trading and I did trade it for several years.  WHEN that resort drops from the Marriott fold, I'll be even more glad I got rid of it.  In some of those cases, I specifically bought with the idea of flipping the week and did so successfully.


----------



## PerryM

*Can't wait...*



Dean said:


> You gambled and broke even, given the risks involved, I hope you got some good trips and enjoyment out of them.  Most people gamble and lose, esp if they buy retail but some lose more than others.  I've owned over 50 timeshare weeks/contracts at various resorts, sold most of them over the years.  In every case except one, I made money.  The one that I didn't make money, I broke even including the extra expenses.  Interesting it was a Marriott week I'd bought resale directly from Marriott with the purpose of trading and I did trade it for several years.  WHEN that resort drops from the Marriott fold, I'll be even more glad I got rid of it.  In some of those cases, I specifically bought with the idea of flipping the week and did so successfully.



This is great!

Too many folks here are scared out of their whits by the economy, government, and real estate.  I humbly suggest we give them a pep talk to keep them from dumping their weeks on the resale market and make things even worse.

I fully expect the new Marriott Internal Exchange System to be a colossal failure for the following reasons:


Poor timing - bottom of the real estate market is a stupid place to introduce this system - Forrest Gump stupid
Gouge owners - I expect the fee to be 10% of the current sales price to join
Screw owners - resale owners will NOT be allowed in - forget grandfathering
Poor selection - Most exchanges will still be done on II since most won't convert

I fully expect Marriott to do the bull through the china shop introduction and when the word gets out that spending all that money results in fewer exchanges the system will languish as a disaster.

Can't wait....

P.S.

Note to Marriott: Offer a 1 year return policy - if after 1 year the owner finds out that your new great system is a turkey they can get ALL their money back - just a suggestion.

That would be a sign of confidence on your part - no confidence; well how about a 15 day return policy like most electronic stores offer?


----------



## Eric

Mark this post. I think all 4 of your bullet points will be wrong
1. It will be successful 
2. price will be minimal 
3. Resale owners allowed ( higher price )
4. Within a reasonable amount of time, the will get over 50% of their market 



PerryM said:


> This is great!
> 
> Too many folks here are scared out of their whits by the economy, government, and real estate.  I humbly suggest we give them a pep talk to keep them from dumping their weeks on the resale market and make things even worse.
> 
> I fully expect the new Marriott Internal Exchange System to be a colossal failure for the following reasons:
> 
> 
> Poor timing - bottom of the real estate market is a stupid place to introduce this system - stupid
> Gouge owners - I expect the fee to be 10% of the current sales price to join
> Screw owners - resale owners will NOT be allowed in - forget grandfathering
> Poor selection - Most exchanges will still be done on II since most won't convert


----------



## Dean

PerryM said:


> This is great!
> 
> Too many folks here are scared out of their whits by the economy, government, and real estate.  I humbly suggest we give them a pep talk to keep them from dumping their weeks on the resale market and make things even worse.
> 
> I fully expect the new Marriott Internal Exchange System to be a colossal failure for the following reasons:
> 
> 
> Poor timing - bottom of the real estate market is a stupid place to introduce this system - stupid
> Gouge owners - I expect the fee to be 10% of the current sales price to join
> Screw owners - resale owners will NOT be allowed in - forget grandfathering
> Poor selection - Most exchanges will still be done on II since most won't convert
> 
> I fully expect Marriott to do the bull through the china shop introduction and when the word gets out that spending all that money results in fewer exchanges the system will languish as a disaster.
> 
> Can't wait....


Marriott is not dumb, I'm sure they'll be successful in anything they do if the underlying product holds up.  If it doesn't all of us in timesharing are screwed anyway.  While I don't want to make light of anyone's situation or the economy in general, it is an opportunity for some.  I've taken the lower prices to add on several weeks, all Marriott.  And I understand it is a gamble but everything I own is platinum and 6 of the 8 weeks are at very high demand locations.  If I owned Bronze or Silver, esp at a lower demand location, I'd be worried about it and more worried about any possible negative changes.  That wouldn't change the appropriateness, only my risk and situation.  Thinking back, didn't Fairfield exclude certain off season weeks/locations from being able to convert even at the jacked up prices?


----------



## PerryM

Dean said:


> *Marriott is not dumb*, I'm sure they'll be successful in anything they do if the underlying product holds up.  If it doesn't all of us in timesharing are screwed anyway.  While I don't want to make light of anyone's situation or the economy in general, it is an opportunity for some.  I've taken the lower prices to add on several weeks, all Marriott.  And I understand it is a gamble but everything I own is platinum and 6 of the 8 weeks are at very high demand locations.  If I owned Bronze or Silver, esp at a lower demand location, I'd be worried about it and more worried about any possible negative changes.  That wouldn't change the appropriateness, only my risk and situation.  Thinking back, didn't Fairfield exclude certain off season weeks/locations from being able to convert even at the jacked up prices?



3 years of 24/7 rumors touting a system that doesn't exist is NOT a sign of super intelligence - we have a slogan in St. Louis that Marriott might want to remember:

*You can't sell anything from an empty cart*

I don't expect Marriott to be anything but a timeshare developer and gouge/screw the owners.  If Marriott has become a kinder/gentler timeshare developer the rumor sure doesn't support that notion.

Assume the worst, hope for the best....


----------



## timeos2

*Skim the cream and the leftovers are easily dismissed to oblivion*



Dean said:


> Marriott is not dumb, I'm sure they'll be successful in anything they do if the underlying product holds up.  If it doesn't all of us in timesharing are screwed anyway.  While I don't want to make light of anyone's situation or the economy in general, it is an opportunity for some.  I've taken the lower prices to add on several weeks, all Marriott.  And I understand it is a gamble but everything I own is platinum and 6 of the 8 weeks are at very high demand locations.  If I owned Bronze or Silver, esp at a lower demand location, I'd be worried about it and more worried about any possible negative changes.  That wouldn't change the appropriateness, only my risk and situation.  Thinking back, didn't Fairfield exclude certain off season weeks/locations from being able to convert even at the jacked up prices?



No, Marriott is not dumb. And they will set things up at the start to be certain that THE most demanded weeks at every resort are the most likely to join the new program. There are many ways they can accomplish that with the goal being that those highest value weeks will be for owners likely use / rent OR the new system - NOT II - ASAP.  The leftovers after that first push will pay more if they are mid-tier - even more, or they may even basically be excluded, if they are low demand time. Wyndham did that and it made orphans out of many offseason weeks at many resorts that now are poor weeks traders and some can't be converted to FSP at any price. A new system can be used to basically weed out some of the swamp weeks and prevent them from cluttering up the higher value system being created. II would be left with a majority of those near worthless carcasses to pass among others owners left in the same lurch.  See the Wyndham FAX (week for week) system for an example of the low end leftover trading system that can evolve from such a move.  

It's easy to do and nothing owners or II say will change it (except simply not joining the new system but Marriott can nearly assure the needed numbers will join with careful planning).  As those in the Wnydham system who held out found the developer holds the cards in this case.


----------



## Dean

PerryM said:


> 3 years of 24/7 rumors touting a system that doesn't exist is NOT a sign of super intelligence - we have a slogan in St. Louis that Marriott might want to remember:
> 
> *You can't sell anything from an empty cart*
> 
> I don't expect Marriott to be anything but a timeshare developer and gouge/screw the owners.  If Marriott has become a kinder/gentler timeshare developer the rumor sure doesn't support that notion.
> 
> Assume the worst, hope for the best....


I think you are exaggerating the issue.  While there may have been rumors over 3 years, it hasn't been anything near 24/7.  It's been occasional at best and may have picked up lately.  I've personally been on 7 or 8 tours with Marriott in that period of time and not only has it been mentioned, I asked about it AFTER giving them a chance to bring it up on their own.  NO ONE took the ball and ran with it.  At most, a couple mentioned they'd heard rumors and moved on.  You're overstating what has happened.  We've seen consistent info coming from sales staff in the past that certain perks were not available to resale buyers which in fact were.  Things like no internal trading preference, can't talk to the II Marriott desk, no advisor, etc.  These rumors were more consistent and more pervasive than has this rumor been from what I've seen and they were blatantly wrong at the time.

Marriott may or may not pursue a points option.  It makes sense they'd like to but the issue is getting from point A to point B, as we've discussed ad nauseam in the thread.  Such a conversion is a MAJOR undertaking but one that has potential rewards as well as risks.  It seems to me that it's likely IF this were to happen, that Marriott and II would likely be a matched set.  That if one does it, the other is very likely to as well, and it's very likely they would plan it together to a degree.  And if Marriott does so and II doesn't, it's very possible Marriott would change to RCI in a similar fashion as has DVC.  As Eric mentioned and I have said, they need a certain amount of participation to make it work.  I do agree with him they're likely to make us an offer we can't refuse.  I'm not convinced it'll be as cheap as he seems to think but we'll see.  

One thing to mention is that IF they do make such a conversion and also convert future resorts to points only, it's very likely those new resorts will not be very accessible to existing non points owners other than possibly in a limited way through II or other exchange companies. 

I'm


----------



## PerryM

*Harvard bound...*



Dean said:


> I think you are exaggerating the issue.  While there may have been rumors over 3 years, it hasn't been anything near 24/7.  It's been occasional at best and may have picked up lately.  I've personally been on 7 or 8 tours with Marriott in that period of time and not only has it been mentioned, I asked about it AFTER giving them a chance to bring it up on their own.  NO ONE took the ball and ran with it.  At most, a couple mentioned they'd heard rumors and moved on.  You're overstating what has happened.  We've seen consistent info coming from sales staff in the past that certain perks were not available to resale buyers which in fact were.  Things like no internal trading preference, can't talk to the II Marriott desk, no advisor, etc.  These rumors were more consistent and more pervasive than has this rumor been from what I've seen and they were blatantly wrong at the time.
> 
> Marriott may or may not pursue a points option.  It makes sense they'd like to but the issue is getting from point A to point B, as we've discussed ad nauseam in the thread.  Such a conversion is a MAJOR undertaking but one that has potential rewards as well as risks.  It seems to me that it's likely IF this were to happen, that Marriott and II would likely be a matched set.  That if one does it, the other is very likely to as well, and it's very likely they would plan it together to a degree.  And if Marriott does so and II doesn't, it's very possible Marriott would change to RCI in a similar fashion as has DVC.  As Eric mentioned and I have said, they need a certain amount of participation to make it work.  I do agree with him they're likely to make us an offer we can't refuse.  I'm not convinced it'll be as cheap as he seems to think but we'll see.
> 
> *One thing to mention is that IF they do make such a conversion and also convert future resorts to points only, it's very likely those new resorts will not be very accessible to existing non points owners other than possibly in a limited way through II or other exchange companies.*
> 
> I'm



This is a great point!

Marriott is about to get into a new business - the timeshare reservation exchange business.  They know little about this business.

On top of that, the new Marriott Internal Exchange System is a sales tool - it will be used as a carrot and a stick on the front line of sales.

However, their new business venture still boils down to offering what II offered - the ability of Marriott owners to exchange reservations among themselves and then to exchange with 2,000 other timeshare resorts.

Marriott will be barred from the 2,000 resorts - this is a HUGE disadvantage and the reason many Marriott owners must belong to BOTH systems.  Hello Marriott??

Finally, I'm guessing that 1 year after introduction 50% of Marriott owners won't convert and the owners who do will be ticked off - all that money spent and its worse than II.


This is going to be a disaster that will make it into the Harvard Business School's Case Study books - how to get into a business that you don't know what the hell you are doing.


----------



## Bill4728

> Originally Posted by PerryM
> 
> This is great!
> 
> Too many folks here are scared out of their whits by the economy, government, and real estate. I humbly suggest we give them a pep talk to keep them from dumping their weeks on the resale market and make things even worse.
> 
> I fully expect the new Marriott Internal Exchange System to be a colossal failure for the following reasons:
> 
> * Poor timing - bottom of the real estate market is a stupid place to introduce this system - stupid
> * Gouge owners - I expect the fee to be 10% of the current sales price to join
> * Screw owners - resale owners will NOT be allowed in - forget grandfathering
> * Poor selection - Most exchanges will still be done on II since most won't convert





Eric said:


> Mark this post. I think all 4 of your bullet points will be wrong
> 1. It will be successful
> 2. price will be minimal
> 3. Resale owners allowed ( higher price )
> 4. Within a reasonable amount of time, the will get over 50% of their market


If Marriott sets up their system like the starwood system, then it may not be a colossal failure, but it will be a failure. 

I just hope that it doesn't cause me to regret buying a Marriott TS this past spring.


----------



## JimIg23

Eric said:


> Mark this post. I think all 4 of your bullet points will be wrong
> 1. It will be successful
> 2. price will be minimal
> 3. Resale owners allowed ( higher price )
> 4. Within a reasonable amount of time, the will get over 50% of their market



Eric

What is your definition of "price will be minimal?" 2k, 4k per week?

When you say "Resale owners allowed - high price" do you think this will be at the initial offering or after the program gets up and running?

I think that survey Marriott did last year they was trying to gage what price they could get from owners.  It would be interesting to tell the owners the results of it, since they did ask the owners their opinions....


----------



## UK Fan

Latravel said:


> _"I just wanted to say, that when we bought resale, the ONLY thing we knew we were giving up was the conversion of our week to points, nothing else."_
> 
> Since you are a direct purchaser, when you attended the sales presentation, the sales person didn't mention not having any restrictions on your unit if you bought direct?  The sales person didn't mention that you'd have an "R" next to your unit in the system if you bought resale?     Just curious but what did you take this to mean?




I just did a tour and no one mentioned anything about an "R" next to my unit in the system.  The only thing that was said was that we would not be able to convert our weeks to points.  In fact, I inquired with the salesperson regarding the new system and she said that it was a rumor that had been circulating for many years and that it would not happen.  I will say that if Marriott implement a system that puts resale purchasers at a disadvantage, I will discourage everyone I know from purchasing from them in the future.  One of the reasons that I bought from Marriott was because it wasn't a "point system" and that it was deeded.  I have hopes of purchasing more weeks in the future, but if this change happens, I will not.


----------



## Dean

PerryM said:


> On top of that, the new Marriott Internal Exchange System is a sales tool - it will be used as a carrot and a stick on the front line of sales.
> 
> However, their new business venture still boils down to offering what II offered - the ability of Marriott owners to exchange reservations among themselves and then to exchange with 2,000 other timeshare resorts.
> 
> Marriott will be barred from the 2,000 resorts - this is a HUGE disadvantage and the reason many Marriott owners must belong to BOTH systems.  Hello Marriott??
> 
> Finally, I'm guessing that 1 year after introduction 50% of Marriott owners won't convert and the owners who do will be ticked off - all that money spent and its worse than II.
> 
> 
> This is going to be a disaster that will make it into the Harvard Business School's Case Study books - how to get into a business that you don't know what the hell you are doing.


I doubt it'll be a disaster but suspect we'll see our share of unhappy thread's just like when FF converted over.  I'll point out that IF this happens, it won't bar members from exchanging with other owners, I'd expect a relationship with II or RCI or something similar going forward.  The issue is whether it'd be directly using points like Starwood or DVC or indirectly as a parallel system like the Royals or Bluegreen (all of which are different), etc.  

I'd also disagree about any new system NOT offering more than II currently offers.  A well done points system definitely offers more than Marriott or II currently offer but it also changes the playing field in many ways.  Ways that you might like and I may not or vice versa.  As I've tried to point out, the choices with a points system are almost infinite.  There WILL be winners and losers, that is the nature of any and all major change to any system.


----------



## Dean

JimIg23 said:


> Eric
> 
> What is your definition of "price will be minimal?" 2k, 4k per week?
> 
> When you say "Resale owners allowed - high price" do you think this will be at the initial offering or after the program gets up and running?
> 
> I think that survey Marriott did last year they was trying to gage what price they could get from owners.  It would be interesting to tell the owners the results of it, since they did ask the owners their opinions....


I can't speak for Eric and I don't have a price in mind.  What I do know is that I can't make any interpretation of what's appropriate or what interests me until I see what the ground rules are.


----------



## PerryM

*Moving the status quo is hard to do...*



Dean said:


> I doubt it'll be a disaster but suspect we'll see our share of unhappy thread's just like when FF converted over.  I'll point out that IF this happens, it won't bar members from exchanging with other owners, I'd expect a relationship with II or RCI or something similar going forward.  The issue is whether it'd be directly using points like Starwood or DVC or indirectly as a parallel system like the Royals or Bluegreen (all of which are different), etc.
> 
> I'd also disagree about any new system NOT offering more than II currently offers.  A well done points system definitely offers more than Marriott or II currently offer but it also changes the playing field in many ways.  Ways that you might like and I may not or vice versa.  As I've tried to point out, the choices with a points system are almost infinite.  There WILL be winners and losers, that is the nature of any and all major change to any system.



I love Point systems but the new Marriott Internal Exchange System will only work with the weeks deposited.  Existing owners are going to ask why all the cost to join a new system and the low inventory.

Ma and Pa walking into the sales gallery won't know the difference and will sign up.  But I'd expect a tough sell to existing members.  I can guess the tricks Marriott will use to cause a panic and that will convert many right away.

But Marriott will have to demonstrate that spending thousands of dollars and learning a brand new system is worth the few units deposited into it.

Point systems are very flexible and completely different than the existing II system - don't assume that folks will gladly spend thousands of dollars and days of work to figure out how the new system works.  People love the status quo and hate change as a general rule.

I don't expect II to sit by with it's thumb up it's butt - they can fight for their exchange system and point out how flawed Marriott's is (no units to speak of to exchange).  Marriott can't get by without II now or in the future.  Marriott is the one taking away customers and dollars from II.

All those happy II members, like me, who believe they are getting a good deal from II will be hard to convert to a system where little advantage exists.

The whole idea of this exchange system is to help Gold, Silver, and Bronze weeks sell easier - buy a couple of them and combine the Points for a Platinum week.  These same owners will quickly realize that their weeks are worthless in this system when you throw in the MFs they pay which are identical to Platinum week owners.

Let's hope II has some guts.


----------



## Eric

This is MY opinion. owners 1k max




JimIg23 said:


> Eric
> 
> What is your definition of "price will be minimal?" 2k, 4k per week?
> 
> When you say "Resale owners allowed - high price" do you think this will be at the initial offering or after the program gets up and running?
> 
> I think that survey Marriott did last year they was trying to gage what price they could get from owners.  It would be interesting to tell the owners the results of it, since they did ask the owners their opinions....


----------



## Eric

I agree 100%. Without knowing the rules, you can't even come close to decide if its worth the money 



Dean said:


> I can't speak for Eric and I don't have a price in mind.  What I do know is that I can't make any interpretation of what's appropriate or what interests me until I see what the ground rules are.


----------



## Dean

PerryM said:


> I love Point systems but the new Marriott Internal Exchange System will only work with the weeks deposited.  Existing owners are going to ask why all the cost to join a new system and the low inventory.
> 
> Ma and Pa walking into the sales gallery won't know the difference and will sign up.  But I'd expect a tough sell to existing members.  I can guess the tricks Marriott will use to cause a panic and that will convert many right away.
> 
> But Marriott will have to demonstrate that spending thousands of dollars and learning a brand new system is worth the few units deposited into it.
> 
> Point systems are very flexible and completely different than the existing II system - don't assume that folks will gladly spend thousands of dollars and days of work to figure out how the new system works.  People love the status quo and hate change as a general rule.
> 
> I don't expect II to sit by with it's thumb up it's butt - they can fight for their exchange system and point out how flawed Marriott's is (no units to speak of to exchange).  Marriott can't get by without II now or in the future.  Marriott is the one taking away customers and dollars from II.
> 
> All those happy II members, like me, who believe they are getting a good deal from II will be hard to convert to a system where little advantage exists.
> 
> The whole idea of this exchange system is to help Gold, Silver, and Bronze weeks sell easier - buy a couple of them and combine the Points for a Platinum week.  These same owners will quickly realize that their weeks are worthless in this system when you throw in the MFs they pay which are identical to Platinum week owners.
> 
> Let's hope II has some guts.


Actually I think Marriott can get by without II and that IF Marriott were to jump to RCI, all the rhetoric about II being the higher quality evaporates.  II is the one at risk unless they are in a plan with Marriott to make a conversion, assuming anything actually happens.  I would agree that a points system is potentially more beneficial to none high demand week owners and does potentially increase the profit overall for a given resort, esp since I made that point a ways back.  But I do  think there is a potential for a win-win situation, time will tell if it goes that route or not. As for how hard to convert the owners, it depends on what they're giving up and what they're getting in return which we don't know yet what that will be or if all of this is simply hype.


----------



## UK Fan

I am new to all of this (certainly not an expert like most of you are), but I really hope that this works out well for all involved.  IMO, all owners (direct or resale) should have the same basic rights.  I don't feel as though an owner's basic rights should be distinguished by who they purchased from.  With the state of the economy, as an owner I hope that there are people willing to buy resales from those who have had misfortune.  I would much rather someone purchase a resale than MF's, etc. to go unpaid and passed down to everyone else.  An owner is an owner, regardless of how you got to that point.   Personally, I do not feel as though the change in the MRP awhile back was fair to the direct purchasers and one reason I didn't purchase direct is that I knew the points wouldn't get very much with the recent changes. 

Again, hopefully things will work out for all.


----------



## JimIg23

Eric said:


> This is MY opinion. owners 1k max



I could live with that if the benefits were decent.  We will have to wait and see.


----------



## Clemson Fan

I haven’t read all of this thread, but I’d thought I’d throw in my 2 cents. I do think Marriott uses this board as a free focus group. When it comes to the TUG BB, the Marriott board is one of the busiest and most active probably on the whole internet with typically over 20 people watching it at any one time. Also, DaveM seems to have several inside contacts at Marriott. So, IMO, it makes sense for Marriott to feed DaveM some information like this to generate a free focus group discussion for them to look at. That being said, here’s my opinion to the Marriott execs who I believe will be reading it.

If you’re going to make this change to a point based system, be very very careful and make sure it’s done right. Right now Marriott is very well thought of in the TS market and IMO is probably the second best only behind Disney and it’s the best weeks based TS system. If this is done poorly, then the product will see a great devaluation like a great many of the other point based systems. I’m going to use Disney as a comparison since that seems to be the most well thought of points based system. Here are my points that I’d like to get across.

1. Do not create any sort of caste system between owners who purchased through Marriott and resale owners. Doing this will greatly devalue the product for ALL owners because everyone will probably want to sell their TS eventually. If you look at Disney, they make NO differentiation among points owners regarding where they got their points. This in large part is why IMO the Disney points retain the most value from the original price of any TS on the market.

2. Plan on maintaining a very active ROFR system to support the value of your product. Again, Disney does this the best through their very active ROFR system which IMO really maintains the value of their product. Also, by doing this, Disney is able to not have any caste system based on how you acquired your Disney points and they treat all their “owners” the same. Also by doing this it protects your own TS salespeople who won’t then feel compelled to use unscrupulous and nasty sales tactics that have long given the TS industry a bad name. Just check out this thread for an example: http://www.tugbbs.com/forums/showthread.php?t=103525 Would you ever think of a Disney salesperson acting like this? Your salespeople may actually encourage people to check out TUG and educate themselves instead of calling us “wackjobs” and just relying on a purely emotional spur of the moment decision to buy. Disney does a heck of a lot of sales over the phone well after the TS sales pitch has taken place. Marriott can greatly enhance their over the phone off-site TS sales by acting like Disney by not creating a caste system and by strongly supporting their product through an active ROFR system. It’s of quite a bit of concern to me that Marriott has suspended their ROFR with the current state of the economy. Disney has not suspended their ROFR system and as such the underlying value of their product has stood up much better through this really bad economy then Marriott’s product has stood up.

3. Be careful on how the yearly MF’s are calculated. Most people, like myself, bought very expensive platinum weeks. We were willing to pay the very high upfront initial price knowing that we would get our beautiful 2 bedroom TS during a very desirable time for only the yearly 700-1K MF’s each year. This especially applies to places like ski resorts where there is clearly a huge difference between a platinum and a bronze week. Bronze week owners pay the same MF which is why their initial cost is usually pretty dirt cheap. They buy in hopes of playing the “trading” game successfully and are quite flexible which are completely different to why most platinum owners buy in. With most, if not all, points based TS systems including Disney, the MF’s are directly tied into the number of points one has. If this happens it’s going to make the weekly MF’s for a premiere 2 bedroom TS during a premiere ski week probably triple or quadruple which is not going to make those owners very happy and it will devalue their weeks by bringing the MF’s a lot closer to the price for just renting the week. This, IMO, is the biggest dilemma a weeks based system has when they want to convert to a points based system. I don’t know the solution to this dilemma, but IMO it’s a huge dilemma which you should not take lightly.

All in all, I really hope you Marriott guys scrap these plans for a points based system. You guys chose to make your system a weeks based system and in actuality it’s IMO the premiere weeks based TS system in the industry. I would not recommend blowing up your system which can have disastrous consequences and really destroy the value of the underlying Marriott product and TS brand. Instead I would focus your energies on enhancing the weeks based system you already have in place to make it better and better.

Again, everything I have stated is strictly my opinion. Enjoy the free focus group reading.


----------



## Latravel

_"That scenerio might well cause some direct purchasers to snicker - until for whatever reason they themselves one day have to sell. Then it ceases to be funny."_

Incorrect.  People who purchased from Marriott were informed by sales management to NOT expect any resale value.  If I sell, I am aware I may not (and probably would not) get my money back.


----------



## Clemson Fan

Latravel said:


> _"That scenerio might well cause some direct purchasers to snicker - until for whatever reason they themselves one day have to sell. Then it ceases to be funny."_
> 
> Incorrect. People who purchased from Marriott were informed by sales management to NOT expect any resale value. If I sell, I am aware I may not (and probably would not) get my money back.


 
Are you serious?  :hysterical: 

I've never had a Marriott salesperson come out and say that what they were proposing to sell me would in the end have no resale value and essentially be worthless.  I'd dare say that that is a statement nobody has ever heard from a Marriott salesperson because it would be sales suicide for them to say anything like that.  When asked directly what the potential resale value would be (I know b/c I've asked this question many times to Marriott salespeople), they spin it and flip the question around to something like, "Consider it an investment in your families future vacations" or "Your buying your future vacations in todays dollars rather than tomorrows dollar" etc etc.  

They also like to hype that Marriott will sell your week for you if you needed to sell it and they DO say that Marriott's prices are always INCREASING.  They neglect to mention the 40% commission and that Marriott will really only take back premium weeks to sell and they won't bother with a bronze or silver week.


----------



## FlyerBobcat

Clemson Fan said:


> Are you serious?  :hysterical:
> 
> I've never had a Marriott salesperson come out and say that what they were proposing to sell me would in the end have no resale value and essentially be worthless.  I'd dare say that that is a statement nobody has ever heard from a Marriott salesperson because it would be sales suicide for them to say anything like that.  When asked directly what the potential resale value would be (I know b/c I've asked this question many times to Marriott salespeople), they spin it and flip the question around to something like, "Consider it an investment in your families future vacations" or "Your buying your future vacations in todays dollars rather than tomorrows dollar" etc etc.
> 
> They also like to hype that Marriott will sell your week for you if you needed to sell it and they DO say that Marriott's prices are always INCREASING.  They neglect to mention the 40% commission and that Marriott will really only take back premium weeks to sell and they won't bother with a bronze or silver week.



Now that makes a lot more sense to me than below...



Latravel said:


> _"That scenerio might well cause some direct purchasers to snicker - until for whatever reason they themselves one day have to sell. Then it ceases to be funny."_
> 
> Incorrect.  *People who purchased from Marriott were informed by sales management to NOT expect any resale value.*  If I sell, I am aware I may not (and probably would not) get my money back.



Quite a generalization here. As Clemson mentioned, we can all be quite certain that their sales pitch was not focused on this topic.


Yes, you may had initialed something related to that topic at the end of the sale, but that's just another data point showing the pitch was not as up-front as you seem to claim all the time, IMO..

Also, there a HUGE potential difference between the two sentences in your paragraph:



> People who purchased from Marriott were informed by sales management to NOT expect *any *resale value.





> If I sell, I am aware I may not (and probably would not) get my money back.


----------



## PerryM

*What planet are you from again?*

Some of the comments here must be from folks from another planet - maybe an alternative universe.

In the past 10 years I've been to 20 Marriott sales presentations - NONE have brought up residual value of the timeshare; that would be insanity on their part.

I've only been to ONE timeshare sales presentation out of the 50+ I've been to that brought up residual value and resales - Disney.  No other developer has ever brought up the topic of resales on their own but Disney.

Residual value and resales then open the door for the analysis of the complete cycle of owning a timeshare - buy it, use it, and sell it.  All other developers, but Disney, leave out the reselling part.  Resales are a verboten topic at the sales presentation - why in the world bring up that topic by the salesrep?  The developer bypasses residual value and resales by simply saying "That deed lets you pass down your timeshare to your heirs" (Like saddling them with MFs for the rest of their lives is a great thing for you to do; it is for the developer)

If you plan to actually use your timeshare ONLY at the resort then resales are perfectly OK to buy.  However, the majority of owners now look at timeshare ownership as exchanging first and usage at the resort second.  That's where the developer muddies up the waters - they start to control what you can do with an exchange - that's what Marriott is doing right now with their new future system - control access to exchanges.

Exchanging opens the door to usage of the timeshare outside the resort where the deed is deeded to.  Marriott's new wonder system leaves out the other 3,000 timeshare resorts in the world - a very very stupid mistake if you want to gouge owners into submission.

Maybe on the next sales tour the salesrep will bring up resales and residual value on his/her own - I'll let you guys be the first to know that I've been transported into an alternative universe.

P.S.
Last night I took another timeshare tour - this time I was given a HUD brochure which I got to read before taking the tour.  The HUD brochure was 20 pages long and had all kinds of tips on buying timeshares - work sheets and helpful phone numbers of government agencies to call to help with buying a timeshare.  One of the spreadsheets dealt with the residual value of the timeshare and the complete buying-using-selling cycle.  Resales were brought up many times.  It looked like this.

Then I woke up.....


----------



## Eric

There is nothing more informative than a person giving opinions on a points program that hasn't even been rolled out yet. Your posts tend to have that " look at how smart I am " kind of spin. It's actually pretty comical. 




PerryM said:


> Some of the comments here must be from folks from another planet - maybe an alternative universe.
> 
> In the past 10 years I've been to 20 Marriott sales presentations - NONE have brought up residual value of the timeshare; that would be insanity on their part.
> 
> I've only been to ONE timeshare sales presentation out of the 50+ I've been to that brought up residual value and resales - Disney.  No other developer has ever brought up the topic of resales on their own but Disney.
> 
> Residual value and resales then open the door for the analysis of the complete cycle of owning a timeshare - buy it, use it, and sell it.  All other developers, but Disney, leave out the reselling part.  Resales are a verboten topic at the sales presentation - why in the world bring up that topic by the salesrep?
> 
> If you plan to actually use your timeshare ONLY at the resort then resales are perfectly OK to buy.  However, the majority of owners now look at timeshare ownership as exchanging first and usage at the resort second.  That's where the developer muddies up the waters - they start to control what you can do with an exchange - that's what Marriott is doing right now with their new future system - control access to exchanges.
> 
> Exchanging opens the door to usage of the timeshare outside the resort where the deed is deeded to.  Marriott's new wonder system leaves out the other 3,000 timeshare resorts in the world - a very very stupid mistake if you want to gouge owners into submission.
> 
> Maybe on the next sales tour the salesrep will bring up resales and residual value on his/her own - I'll let you guys be the first to know that I've been transported into an alternative universe.


----------



## PerryM

Eric said:


> There is nothing more informative than a person giving opinions on a points program that hasn't even been rolled out yet. Your posts tend to have that " look at how smart I am " kind of spin. It's actually pretty comical.



Thanks, appreciate the plug.


----------



## CMF

Who is considering buying resale in the face of this uncertainty? And, if so, why?

Just curious.

Charles


----------



## Latravel

_"I've never had a Marriott salesperson come out and say that what they were proposing to sell me would in the end have no resale value and essentially be worthless. "_

Have you guys been reading the previous posts where SueDon and I have been showing the language in the purchase documents?  In those documents, they specifically state that no representation of resale value has been made.  I can't be any more clear so yes, i'm serious.


----------



## PerryM

*CYA is for Marriott's protection*



Latravel said:


> _"I've never had a Marriott salesperson come out and say that what they were proposing to sell me would in the end have no resale value and essentially be worthless. "_
> 
> Have you guys been reading the previous posts where SueDon and I have been showing the language in the purchase documents?  In those documents, they specifically state that no representation of resale value has been made.  I can't be any more clear so yes, i'm serious.



That's to cover the concept of the salesrep selling a timeshare as something to flip; that's all.

It's probably on a long list of things that cover the salesreps butt and Marriott - nothing whatsoever to do with warning nor protecting the buyer.

This document means nothing but CYA to Marriott.  A simple signature and/or initialing a long list impart no knowledge to that owner.  Hell the war of 1812 could be disclaimed in the document and the new owner would blissfully sign it.


----------



## SueDonJ

Latravel said:


> _"I've never had a Marriott salesperson come out and say that what they were proposing to sell me would in the end have no resale value and essentially be worthless. "_
> 
> Have you guys been reading the previous posts where SueDon and I have been showing the language in the purchase documents?  In those documents, they specifically state that no representation of resale value has been made.  I can't be any more clear so yes, i'm serious.



Here on TUG it appears that the majority of the posters have had bad experiences, if any at all, with MVCI salespersons, so it seems to make sense that the collective opinion is, "MVCI salespersons are as bad as the rest of the weasels."

But TUG members represent only a small fraction of the MVCI ownership base, and our experiences have been different from the collective, so we understand it's probably more true than not that the majority of MVCI direct-purchasers understand the terms of their purchase.  Granted, they may not all have understood them at the time of their purchase, but after it they were able to combine their salesperson's spoken words with the contractual language and are at least satisfied, if not happy as we are, with the terms of their purchase.  Otherwise, with the popularity of the internet, wouldn't more of them come here to what is acknowledged to be the most-utilized timeshare message boards, in order to express their dissatisfaction?

In this discussion, also, it's not been acknowledged by all the participants that a change in the internal exchange system will result in a worthless resale value for all MVCI properties.  I think some are conveniently ignoring that, instead assuming it is a done deal as Point A and then going on to Point B from there.


----------



## SueDonJ

PerryM said:


> That's to cover the concept of the salesrep selling a timeshare as something to flip; that's all.
> 
> It's probably on a long list of things that cover the salesreps butt and Marriott - nothing whatsoever to do with warning nor protecting the buyer.
> 
> This document means nothing but CYA to Marriott.  A simple signature and/or initialing a long list impart no knowledge to that owner.  Hell the war of 1812 could be disclaimed in the document and the new owner would blissfully sign it.



We carried a Timeshare Resales (or whatever it was titled) magazine in to the presentation and contrasted the information in it with our salesperson's words and the various MVCI literature she offered, and made our informed decision based on all of that.  You can continue to think that MVCI makes certain declarations for the sole purpose of CYA, but in our experience it simply isn't true.  Our salesperson did her best to make sure we were as informed as we could be, and welcomed all of our questions to that end.  Again, I think certain truths are being ignored to shore up certain opinions.

[Edit:]  Perry, you're also (conveniently?) ignoring that the value language isn't only on those Quality Assurance Checklists; it's in the actual Contract for Purchase.


----------



## m61376

Clemson Fan said:


> I haven’t read all of this thread, but I’d thought I’d throw in my 2 cents. I do think Marriott uses this board as a free focus group. When it comes to the TUG BB, the Marriott board is one of the busiest and most active probably on the whole internet with typically over 20 people watching it at any one time. Also, DaveM seems to have several inside contacts at Marriott. So, IMO, it makes sense for Marriott to feed DaveM some information like this to generate a free focus group discussion for them to look at. That being said, here’s my opinion to the Marriott execs who I believe will be reading it.
> 
> If you’re going to make this change to a point based system, be very very careful and make sure it’s done right. Right now Marriott is very well thought of in the TS market and IMO is probably the second best only behind Disney and it’s the best weeks based TS system. If this is done poorly, then the product will see a great devaluation like a great many of the other point based systems. I’m going to use Disney as a comparison since that seems to be the most well thought of points based system. Here are my points that I’d like to get across.
> 
> 1. Do not create any sort of caste system between owners who purchased through Marriott and resale owners. Doing this will greatly devalue the product for ALL owners because everyone will probably want to sell their TS eventually. If you look at Disney, they make NO differentiation among points owners regarding where they got their points. This in large part is why IMO the Disney points retain the most value from the original price of any TS on the market.
> 
> 2. Plan on maintaining a very active ROFR system to support the value of your product. Again, Disney does this the best through their very active ROFR system which IMO really maintains the value of their product. Also, by doing this, Disney is able to not have any caste system based on how you acquired your Disney points and they treat all their “owners” the same. Also by doing this it protects your own TS salespeople who won’t then feel compelled to use unscrupulous and nasty sales tactics that have long given the TS industry a bad name. Just check out this thread for an example: http://www.tugbbs.com/forums/showthread.php?t=103525 Would you ever think of a Disney salesperson acting like this? Your salespeople may actually encourage people to check out TUG and educate themselves instead of calling us “wackjobs” and just relying on a purely emotional spur of the moment decision to buy. Disney does a heck of a lot of sales over the phone well after the TS sales pitch has taken place. Marriott can greatly enhance their over the phone off-site TS sales by acting like Disney by not creating a caste system and by strongly supporting their product through an active ROFR system. It’s of quite a bit of concern to me that Marriott has suspended their ROFR with the current state of the economy. Disney has not suspended their ROFR system and as such the underlying value of their product has stood up much better through this really bad economy then Marriott’s product has stood up.
> 
> 3. Be careful on how the yearly MF’s are calculated. Most people, like myself, bought very expensive platinum weeks. We were willing to pay the very high upfront initial price knowing that we would get our beautiful 2 bedroom TS during a very desirable time for only the yearly 700-1K MF’s each year. This especially applies to places like ski resorts where there is clearly a huge difference between a platinum and a bronze week. Bronze week owners pay the same MF which is why their initial cost is usually pretty dirt cheap. They buy in hopes of playing the “trading” game successfully and are quite flexible which are completely different to why most platinum owners buy in. With most, if not all, points based TS systems including Disney, the MF’s are directly tied into the number of points one has. If this happens it’s going to make the weekly MF’s for a premiere 2 bedroom TS during a premiere ski week probably triple or quadruple which is not going to make those owners very happy and it will devalue their weeks by bringing the MF’s a lot closer to the price for just renting the week. This, IMO, is the biggest dilemma a weeks based system has when they want to convert to a points based system. I don’t know the solution to this dilemma, but IMO it’s a huge dilemma which you should not take lightly.
> 
> All in all, I really hope you Marriott guys scrap these plans for a points based system. You guys chose to make your system a weeks based system and in actuality it’s IMO the premiere weeks based TS system in the industry. I would not recommend blowing up your system which can have disastrous consequences and really destroy the value of the underlying Marriott product and TS brand. Instead I would focus your energies on enhancing the weeks based system you already have in place to make it better and better.
> 
> Again, everything I have stated is strictly my opinion. Enjoy the free focus group reading.



 I think your post touches on several important points.

I was away for the last week and just spent an hour catching up on this thread- whew! Some interesting comments have been made. Heidi repeatedly stressed her opinion that Marriott's verbiage states that there is no representation of resale value; in actuality, at least in my reading, it doesn't guarantee any resale value and goes to great lengths to legally insulate themselves from implying that there is any such guarantee. That is a far cry from stating that there is no inherent resale value. In fact, despite the verbiage, salespeople are currently advertising the fact that, in Aruba for example, the government has placed a 30 year moratorium on new timeshares, so that the value of any current purchases will only increase in time since there will be no new ones built and, once the remaining 10% of the Surf Club is sold out, owners can expect the value to increase. So as recently as a few days ago Marriott representatives were accenting the inherent resale value as a sales tool.

The latest additions to the rumor mill (and I say that because it is clear that it is impossible to filter out fact from fiction in all the rumors being circulated):
-there will be a new points program next year
-weeks will be converted to points
-Premiere properties will get more points and be at the top of the heap
-ALL owners will be treated equally, with no distinction between how their week was purchased (wrt this program; of course, the trade for reward points will remain a distinction)
- it is being touted as a wonderful way to directly book alternate properties. They have not worked out the details and are currently working on how to ensure that owners at specific resorts retain a priority to book weeks at their owned resorts. They will likely retain priority, but everyone may have the same booking period. I pointed out that there would be no way to ensure that owners get priority for their home resort weeks unless they could reserve before other owners could reserve, but that was an area that clearly was still under review/development.
-They clearly want everyone to join this wonderful new program and are even at least thinking about it being a no cost conversion.

After filtering through everything I heard, I think some of Clemson's concerns are some of the biggest- how will any projected changes affect annual MF's? As pointed out, Platinum owners already paid for the privilege via higher up front costs. They will be rewarded with higher point values, but will they also incur much higher MF's? That would be a huge issue. I think that's one of the two biggest hurdles Marriott will have to address.

The other big issue is sort of the flip side of the coin- how not to make Bronze and Silver weeks basically worthless, and not antagonize owners who have manipulated the system a bit to their benefit. Every year, a significant portion of weeks go unused. Deposits into II expire. Other owners have been able to utilize these weeks. Who will reap the benefits of the something like 10% (I forget the exact number) of such underutilized weeks? 

They need to incorporate a late trade reduced point system or something similar so as to allow lower value weeks to still grab value out of the system and justify their MF's, and work out a system where Platinum week owners don't see their MF's double or worse.

Personally, I think addressing the distinction between relative value of different resorts and the season owned represents a bigger problem than how the unit was purchased. But, again, that's just my opinion, for what it is (or isn't) worth.


----------



## PerryM

SueDonJ said:


> Here on TUG it appears that the majority of the posters have had bad experiences, if any at all, with MVCI salespersons, so it seems to make sense that the collective opinion is, "MVCI salespersons are as bad as the rest of the weasels."
> 
> *But TUG members represent only a small fraction of the MVCI ownership base, and our experiences have been different from the collective, so we understand it's probably more true than not that the majority of MVCI direct-purchasers understand the terms of their purchase.*  Granted, they may not all have understood them at the time of their purchase, but after it they were able to combine their salesperson's spoken words with the contractual language and are at least satisfied, if not happy as we are, with the terms of their purchase.  Otherwise, with the popularity of the internet, wouldn't more of them come here to what is acknowledged to be the most-utilized timeshare message boards, in order to express their dissatisfaction?
> 
> In this discussion, also, it's not been acknowledged by all the participants that a change in the internal exchange system will result in a worthless resale value for all MVCI properties.  I think some are conveniently ignoring that, instead assuming it is a done deal as Point A and then going on to Point B from there.



I don't assume that for a second - we TUG members represent a sampling of owners/prospects that march through the sales gallery  - why would you assume differently?  I've never been asked "Are you now or have you ever been a member of TUG?"

I long ago stopped trying to correct timeshare salesreps - either the flat out lies or the wrong information they spew out while at the sales presentation.  As a game I try to keep track of how many minutes it takes for the salesrep to spit out the first lie - about 5 minutes is the average once we are done chit-chatting.

Once the prospect starts signing documents its over - they don't read the documents and they are not lawyers so they take the word of the salesrep for the past 2 hours.

What's on the documents means something to Marriott, what the salesrep said for 120+ minutes is what the new owner remembers.

Of course what was NOT said is even more important - sadly our new owner never heard those topics and will discover all the things left out for many years to come.


----------



## PerryM

SueDonJ said:


> We carried a Timeshare Resales (or whatever it was titled) magazine in to the presentation and contrasted the information in it with our salesperson's words and the various MVCI literature she offered, and made our informed decision based on all of that.  You can continue to think that MVCI makes certain declarations for the sole purpose of CYA, but in our experience it simply isn't true.  Our salesperson did her best to make sure we were as informed as we could be, and welcomed all of our questions to that end.  Again, I think certain truths are being ignored to shore up certain opinions.
> 
> [Edit:]  Perry, you're also (conveniently?) ignoring that the value language isn't only on those Quality Assurance Checklists; it's in the actual Contract for Purchase.



I've been tempted to sit through a sales presentation with a tape recorder running and my cell phone browser open and fact checking taking place in real time.

But once you introduce anything into that sales gallery that doesn't belong there the salesreps don't act normal they act like lawyers on TV - CYA.


----------



## SueDonJ

m61376 said:


> ... -weeks will be converted to points ...- how will any projected changes affect annual MF's?



Isn't there a significant distinction to be made between weeks being converted to points for all aspects of ownership as opposed to only for the internal exchange system?

If the internal exchange system is rolled out as what's been termed here "an overlay," then there could be absolutely no change at all in any other aspect of the ownership terms.  MF would not be impacted in that case.


----------



## SueDonJ

SueDonJ said:


> ... But TUG members represent only a small fraction of the MVCI ownership base, and our experiences have been different from the collective, so *we* understand it's probably more true than not that the majority of MVCI direct-purchasers understand the terms of their purchase.





PerryM said:


> I don't assume that for a second - we TUG members represent a sampling of owners/prospects that march through the sales gallery  - why would you assume differently?



I meant "we" as Latravel and me; hers was the post I quoted.  And I said why I assume it for the majority of MVCI owners:



SueDonJ said:


> Otherwise, with the popularity of the internet, wouldn't more of them come here to what is acknowledged to be the most-utilized timeshare message boards, in order to express their dissatisfaction?


----------



## m61376

One more thing- as Sue and others have pointed out, the majority of direct purchasers aren't "uninformed idiots." Clearly, many of them made an informed decision BUT I do agree that I don't think most were fully informed. 

I think most direct purchasers are unaware of the resale market, or at least of the price differential. Just this past week I was talking with an owner who felt that buying another week at 25% off was a terrific bargain, despite a paltry offering of incentive points, and made a purchase while on vacation. They were current owners, know the system to some degree, and I would consider them an informed consumer to a certain degree. 

They were happy with their purchase and I wouldn't burst their bubble. They were unaware that they could have bought the same unit (which they intend to use, btw) and saved 9 or 10K.

I think they are characteristic of the vast majority of so called informed buyers. I think that few purchasers are fully informed and that most purchases are made either by the uninformed, purchasing while on a vacation and in vacation mode, so to speak, or by happy owners adding to their vacation portfolio. 

Just like resale buyers are in the minority, I think there are relatively few retail purchasers who buy direct fully aware of the resale market. Again, I am in no way being disparaging here to those making such decisions- if it works to their benefit and they've enjoyed some fabulous trips, more power to them. I just don't think that even the best and most honest salespeople do a thorough job of educating their buyers. Salespeople are in the market to sell- and even if they don't stretch the truth, they naturally largely advance the pros of ownership without discussing the cons.


----------



## m61376

SueDonJ said:


> Isn't there a significant distinction to be made between weeks being converted to points for all aspects of ownership as opposed to only for the internal exchange system?
> 
> If the internal exchange system is rolled out as what's been termed here "an overlay," then there could be absolutely no change at all in any other aspect of the ownership terms.  MF would not be impacted in that case.



Yes- and it remains to be seen to what extent they do this. IF they enact it like the Asia Pacific points program, then it affects everything. From my recent conversations, my impression was that it is not only going to be an overlay for exchanges, but be utilized while making home resort reservations as well. Whether or not that will impact the MF's or how they are calculated remains to be seen, of course.


----------



## PerryM

m61376 said:


> One more thing- as Sue and others have pointed out, the majority of direct purchasers aren't "uninformed idiots." Clearly, many of them made an informed decision BUT I do agree that I don't think most were fully informed.
> 
> I think most direct purchasers are unaware of the resale market, or at least of the price differential. Just this past week I was talking with an owner who felt that buying another week at 25% off was a terrific bargain, despite a paltry offering of incentive points, and made a purchase while on vacation. They were current owners, know the system to some degree, and I would consider them an informed consumer to a certain degree.
> 
> They were happy with their purchase and I wouldn't burst their bubble. They were unaware that they could have bought the same unit (which they intend to use, btw) and saved 9 or 10K.
> 
> I think they are characteristic of the vast majority of so called informed buyers. I think that few purchasers are fully informed and that most purchases are made either by the uninformed, purchasing while on a vacation and in vacation mode, so to speak, or by happy owners adding to their vacation portfolio.
> 
> *Just like resale buyers are in the minority, I think there are relatively few retail purchasers who buy direct fully aware of the resale market*. Again, I am in no way being disparaging here to those making such decisions- if it works to their benefit and they've enjoyed some fabulous trips, more power to them. I just don't think that even the best and most honest salespeople do a thorough job of educating their buyers. Salespeople are in the market to sell- and even if they don't stretch the truth, they naturally largely advance the pros of ownership without discussing the cons.



Eventually resale buyers WILL account for more than 50% of all transactions during the year - folks sell timeshares all the time.

Just like timeshares don't work well when real estate prices fall, they stop working as resales get to the point the developer has real competition - especially when the developer has spent decades bashing resales that now cost just 5 cents on the current sales dollar.

There is nothing wrong with the owner of a timeshare wanting to sell their unit and THEY spend the time and money finding a replacement - it costs the developer nothing and keeps the owners paying MFs.

The developer should do what Marriott does do - act as the real estate broker and closing agent.  Marriott what the hell are you afraid of?  Why the bashing of resales by your owners?  Why concoct a scheme that punishes resale owners?

Are you nuts Marriott?


----------



## kjd

*Point system paranoia*

I having trouble understanding why there is such angst about changing to an unknown point system that is best described as an illusionary fantasy.  I certainly don't think that it deserves 28 pages of a thread.  It's pure speculation.

No one has presented any concrete details of a point system plan that is to be adopted by Marriott nor is there any firm date for its' adoption.  It's been said here many times that there are "rumors" by salespeople and others supposedly in the know.  

No other subject seems to bring out this much paranoia.  Marriott can do just about whatever it wants, whenever it wants, and that's what we all signed onto whether we bought from Marriott or bought resale.  It's like gravity; you have to live with it.


----------



## SueDonJ

m61376 said:


> Yes- and it remains to be seen to what extent they do this. IF they enact it like the Asia Pacific points program, then it affects everything. From my recent conversations, my impression was that it is not only going to be an overlay for exchanges, but be utilized while making home resort reservations as well. Whether or not that will impact the MF's or how they are calculated remains to be seen, of course.



This is the one area in which I will wholeheartedly agree with Perry.  It doesn't [Edit: reflect well on MVCI or its employees or the product] one bit to offer misleading (sometimes totally incorrect) information during a sales presentation, and it doesn't [reflect well] either for certain owners to be privy to speculative incomplete information that is not available to all owners.

Dave has a contact, m here (do you mind if I call you "m?"  ) has a contact ... I'll bet we could all make a phone call to our salespersons or advisors and probably 50% of us would be successful in getting our "contacts" to speculate over this.  But would any of it be correct?  That's the question, and even Dave's and m's contacts haven't put their details or names out in the public eye.

By the way, I'm not calling my salesperson.   It's not her job to know what any future changes WILL consist of, no matter what they MAY consist of.  True, we asked for speculation during our sales presentation so we could consider the possibilities, but speculation about this one internal exchange system seems to be more harmful than helpful judging by the various responses.


----------



## PerryM

*Marriott's rumor*



kjd said:


> I having trouble understanding why there is such angst about changing to an unknown point system that is best described as an illusionary fantasy.  I certainly don't think that it deserves 28 pages of a thread.  It's pure speculation.
> 
> No one has presented any concrete details of a point system plan that is to be adopted by Marriott nor is there any firm date for its' adoption.  It's been said here many times that there are "rumors" by salespeople and others supposedly in the know.
> 
> No other subject seems to bring out this much paranoia.  Marriott can do just about whatever it wants, whenever it wants, and that's what we all signed onto whether we bought from Marriott or bought resale.  It's like gravity; you have to live with it.



Marriott has made it clear, in 3 years of 24/7 pushing the rumor of a Marriott Internal Exchange System, that they welcome a lively debate on their rumor.

Why else would Marriott push the same rumor for 3 years?

We are simply taking our knowledge of other Point systems and making a best effort guess as to what Marriott will do.

We know 5 facts that Marriott has shared with us:


The new exchange system will hurt resale owners

The new exchange system will be for Marriott only sold weeks

The new exchange system will depress resale prices - don't buy resale

The new exchange system will leave out 3,000 other timeshare resorts so II membership must be used outside of the new system

The new exchange system will be Points oriented and there is great doubt as to the ability to make an exchange versus II
Beyond that Marriott gives us little guidance.

Hey, its Marriott's rumor they know folks will talk....

Marriott has only itself to blame - it can just shut its mouth and stop pushing the rumor.


----------



## m61376

PerryM said:


> Marriott has made it clear, in 3 years of 24/7 pushing the rumor of a Marriott Internal Exchange System, that they welcome a lively debate on their rumor.
> 
> Why else would Marriott push the same rumor for 3 years?
> 
> We are simply taking our knowledge of other Point systems and making a best effort guess as to what Marriott will do.
> 
> We know 5 facts that Marriott has shared with us:
> 
> 
> The new exchange system will hurt resale owners
> 
> The new exchange system will be for Marriott only sold weeks
> 
> The new exchange system will depress resale prices - don't buy resale
> 
> The new exchange system will leave out 3,000 other timeshare resorts so II membership must be used outside of the new system
> 
> The new exchange system will be Points oriented and there is great doubt as to the ability to make an exchange versus II
> Beyond that Marriott gives us little guidance.
> 
> Hey, its Marriott's rumor they know folks will talk....
> 
> Marriott has only itself to blame - it can just shut its mouth and stop pushing the rumor.


Perry- only the last two "facts" are actually facts; whether or not Marriott will actively hurt current or future resale owners is fraught with speculation. It is entirely possible (and highly probably according to some sources at least) that the new program will include at least current resale owners, it may include future resale owners as well, in which case it would not likely depress resale prices. If it includes all weeks, regardless of how purchased, and is a positive program, benefiting everyone- benefiting current and future owners with increased flexibility, availability, ease of booking/reserving weeks by directly booking rather than exchanging through II and benefiting Marriott with good will and income from the program, then it could even have a positive effect on resale pricing.

IF it excludes resale owners then I agree it will negatively impact pricing- but that's still a speculative "IF."


----------



## PerryM

*I believe...*



m61376 said:


> Perry- only the last two "facts" are actually facts; whether or not Marriott will actively hurt current or future resale owners is fraught with speculation. It is entirely possible (and highly probably according to some sources at least) that the new program will include at least current resale owners, it may include future resale owners as well, in which case it would not likely depress resale prices. If it includes all weeks, regardless of how purchased, and is a positive program, benefiting everyone- benefiting current and future owners with increased flexibility, availability, ease of booking/reserving weeks by directly booking rather than exchanging through II and benefiting Marriott with good will and income from the program, then it could even have a positive effect on resale pricing.
> 
> IF it excludes resale owners then I agree it will negatively impact pricing- but that's still a speculative "IF."



My salesrep, at OceanWatch, gave me the above 5 items - he speaks for Marriott.

I believe him.

He acknowledged that when he brought up the rumor it blew up in his face many times - seems that smart Marriott owners own and visit OceanWatch and were irritated by the rumor.

He said that ONLY Marriott sold weeks could belong to the new Marriott Internal Exchange System.

He said that Marriott resale prices would fall - don't by resales now.

Like I said, I believe him.


----------



## RandR

SueDonJ said:


> Isn't there a significant distinction to be made between weeks being converted to points for all aspects of ownership as opposed to only for the internal exchange system?
> 
> If the internal exchange system is rolled out as what's been termed here "an overlay," then there could be absolutely no change at all in any other aspect of the ownership terms.  MF would not be impacted in that case.



Susan, Hilton's program charges MF's based on unit size not points.  So the way it works out is that Gold weeks pay less per point for their purchase but more per point for MF's. Something like that would work just fine.


----------



## ondeadlin

Two dominant thoughts after reading this thread:

1. It's way, way too early to be getting as worked up, and as disagreeable with each other, as some posters are. Until there are some hard facts, this is all speculation and noise, and certainly not worth this many pages of debate and argument IMO. We all get worked up on message boards - I'm as guilty as anyone - but if when you look back on it a month later, it's going to seem pretty silly.

2. Any possible Marriott point system, and any uncertainty created by that possibility, just underscores the most important commandment of timesharing - buy where you want to vacation.

Whether is developer or resale, buy where you want to vacation.

If you do that, you'll always have that option, and presumably an option you're happy with.


----------



## PerryM

ondeadlin said:


> Two dominant thoughts after reading this thread:
> 
> 1. It's way, way too early to be getting as worked up, and as disagreeable with each other, as some posters are. Until there are some hard facts, this is all speculation and noise, and certainly not worth this many pages of debate and argument IMO. We all get worked up on message boards - I'm as guilty as anyone - *but if when you look back on it a month later, it's going to seem pretty silly*.
> 
> 2. Any possible Marriott point system, and any uncertainty created by that possibility, just *underscores the most important commandment of timesharing - buy where you want to vacation*.
> 
> Whether is developer or resale, buy where you want to vacation.
> 
> If you do that, you'll always have that option, and presumably an option you're happy with.



Silly? - well Marriott will still be pushing the rumor - resales are going to get screwed.  They have not stopped for 3 years now - I don't expect them to stop for another 3 years.

This is great advice but Marriott seems to now want to target that very concept - if you need to sell your timeshare they promise reduced resale prices.


----------



## SueDonJ

RandR said:


> Susan, Hilton's program charges MF's based on unit size not points.  So the way it works out is that Gold weeks pay less per point for their purchase but more per point for MF's. Something like that would work just fine.



DVC, too, charges differing MF's based on your home resort and number of points owned.  I'm not saying that MF based on something other than what is currently in effect with MVCI resorts wouldn't work, just that a different exchange system than the one currently in effect wouldn't necessarily mean that MF's would be impacted at all.


----------



## hotcoffee

Latravel said:


> _"That scenerio might well cause some direct purchasers to snicker - until for whatever reason they themselves one day have to sell. Then it ceases to be funny."_
> 
> Incorrect.  People who purchased from Marriott were informed by sales management to NOT expect any resale value.  If I sell, I am aware I may not (and probably would not) get my money back.



So, you are equating a disclaimer informing buyers not to expect to get their money back with "NOT expect _any_ resale value"?  I think that the intent of the disclaimer is to merely soften the brutal reality that buyers will eventually discover that the timeshare they are buying will probably lose more than 50% of its value as soon as they finish signing the documents.  The intent is not to inform them that they are buying something completely worthless (as, in fact, almost _is_ the case for buyers of off-season weeks at seasonal resorts).


----------



## hotcoffee

ondeadlin said:


> . . . .
> 1. It's way, way too early to be getting as worked up, and as disagreeable with each other, as some posters are. Until there are some hard facts, this is all speculation and noise, and certainly not worth this many pages of debate and argument IMO. We all get worked up on message boards - I'm as guilty as anyone - but if when you look back on it a month later, it's going to seem pretty silly.



Overall, I think that this thread, although long, has been very informative and useful.  A lot of good information has been posted here.  Moreover, there is good reason to feel a little uneasy about what the ramifications will be when this system is finally rolled out (_if_ it is finally rolled out).  Its been the Marriott sales staff that has planted the seeds of speculation and/or discontent.  Surely they have been doing that with their management's full knowledge.  What has been their motive?



ondeadlin said:


> 2. Any possible Marriott point system, and any uncertainty created by that possibility, just underscores the most important commandment of timesharing - buy where you want to vacation. . . .



It is a good point to make that it makes sense to buy where you want to vacation.  Even so, many people value the option of going to a different resort occasionally.  It is not surprising that some of them might wonder how all of this is going to impact their abiltiy to continue doing that.


----------



## hotcoffee

PerryM said:


> . . . The developer bypasses residual value and resales by simply saying "That deed lets you pass down your timeshare to your heirs" (_Like saddling them with MFs for the rest of their lives is a great thing for you to do; it is for the developer_). . . .



I've read this statement so often.  It is used as a good argument to buy a timeshare.  Inheriting a timeshare at an old resort with expensive MFs in reality might not appeal to one's heirs - especially if it would be nearly impossible to sell it!  Oh, wait a moment: selling is not an important issue (as we have learned on this forum).  So, there would be no problem!  The heirs would never want to sell it!


----------



## SueDonJ

hotcoffee said:


> I've read this statement so often.  It is used as a good argument to buy a timeshare.  Inheriting a timeshare at an old resort with expensive MFs in reality might not appeal to one's heirs - especially if it would be nearly impossible to sell it!  Oh, wait a moment: selling is not an important issue (as we have learned on this forum).  So, there would be no problem!  The heirs would never want to sell it!



There is a difference between knowing that you will take a loss when you sell your timeshare and not being able to sell your timeshare.  Some of us can say that we consider more important the lifestyle value of our purchases, less important the financial value upon reselling (especially as we understand MVCI does not make any guarantee as to that value.)  None of us can say with certainty that any and every internal exchange system that MVCI may develop and/or implement will result in every MVCI purchase being worthless.

I think that we all worry about saddling our heirs with unwanted financial burdens, and we all hope that we have been or will be able to make provisions for whatever may occur after we're gone.


----------



## PerryM

SueDonJ said:


> There is a difference between knowing that you will take a loss when you sell your timeshare and not being able to sell your timeshare.  Some of us can say that we consider more important the lifestyle value of our purchases, less important the financial value upon reselling (especially as we understand MVCI does not make any guarantee as to that value.)  None of us can say with certainty that any and every internal exchange system that MVCI may develop and/or implement will result in every MVCI purchase being worthless.
> 
> I think that we all worry about saddling our heirs with unwanted financial burdens, and we all hope that we have been or will be able to make provisions for whatever may occur after we're gone.



I think the next time I sit through a timeshare sales presentation and the salesrep gets to the part "That deed allows you to pass your timeshare to your heirs" I'm going to jump in and say:

"I don't want to presume for a second that our children want to be saddled with a lifetime of maintenance fees - I want to instruct my executor to sell all the timeshares - just how much can I get in cash for the week I'm about to buy?"

Oh I can't wait for the squirming to start - "Oh you will live to be 100", or "The kids will love your timeshare" or "The kids will have to pay taxes on the resale amount - that just diminishes your estate".

Yep, I'm going to spring this on the next salesrep


----------



## davidvel

FlyerBobcat said:


> Yes, you may had initialed something related to that topic at the end of the sale, but that's just another data point showing the pitch was not as up-front as you seem to claim all the time, IMO..





Latravel said:


> Have you guys been reading the previous posts where SueDon and I have been showing the language in the purchase documents?  In those documents, they specifically state that no representation of resale value has been made.  I can't be any more clear so yes, i'm serious.





PerryM said:


> I've been tempted to sit through a sales presentation with a tape recorder running and my cell phone browser open and fact checking taking place in real time. But once you introduce anything into that sales gallery that doesn't belong there the salesreps don't act normal they act like lawyers on TV - CYA.



The issue that others and I have tried to raise is that we believe it is an unfair and unethical trade practice for a sales person to tell you something during a sales pitch that is directly contradicted (and in fact disclaimed) in the ultimate contract they will make you sign. For example I and many others have been shown the II Resort Directory (or online in II) and being told "This is a RED week with II. You can trade this summer week in the desert for a week in Hawaii," among other representations as to trading potential. However, as we know the contract says you acknowledge that no statements were made as to trading potential, and there is no guarantee about the ongoing availability of II or any other trading opportunity. So, the salesperson told you this but you have to falsely “acknowledge” that such statements were NOT made...

People think this is unfair, whether they make misstatements to everyone or not. Anyone who has been involved in sales knows all these tricks. Car salesmen use it, and in almost every area of sales, but his does not make it right. (AND YES, I agree that its what is in the contract that ultimately governs unless you can prove a fraud case.)

A great way to deal with this in any sales transaction is to *bring a pad of paper and write down each great "benefit" the sales person touts to you, one line each*. Then at the end of the presentation when they say "What will it take to get you into this car today?" Or, “What do I need to do to get you to buy this timeshare today?” you state: 

"*Before we get into details, please initial each paragraph of the benefits you spent the last 90 minutes telling me about, and write at the bottom: "The buyer will receive each of the above benefits notwithstanding any other term in the contract or other disclosure," and please have your manager sign it*. Then we will talk turkey...” After the expletives from the sales person you can pick up your gift. 

[Alternative to cut the 90 minutes down to about 15-20: At the beginning of the presentation, show salesperson your notepad and state, “I am taking down what you tell me the benefits are and will ask you and your sales manager to initial them at the end of your presentation, before we discuss purchasing.” Pick up gift.]


----------



## SueDonJ

davidvel said:


> The issue that others and I have tried to raise is that we believe it is an unfair and unethical trade practice for a sales person to tell you something during a sales pitch that is directly contradicted (and in fact disclaimed) in the ultimate contract they will make you sign. For example I and many others have been shown the II Resort Directory (or online in II) and being told "This is a RED week with II. You can trade this summer week in the desert for a week in Hawaii," among other representations as to trading potential. However, as we know the contract says you acknowledge that no statements were made as to trading potential, and there is no guarantee about the ongoing availability of II or any other trading opportunity. So, the salesperson told you this but you have to falsely “acknowledge” that such statements were NOT made...
> 
> People think this is unfair, whether they make misstatements to everyone or not. Anyone who has been involved in sales knows all these tricks. Car salesmen use it, and in almost every area of sales, but his does not make it right. (AND YES, I agree that its what is in the contract that ultimately governs unless you can prove a fraud case.)
> 
> A great way to deal with this in any sales transaction is to bring a pad of paper and write down each great "benefit" the sales person touts to you, one line each. Then at the end of the presentation when they say "What will it take to get you into this car today?" Or, “What do I need to do to get you to buy this timeshare today?” you state:
> 
> "Before we get into details, please initial each paragraph of the benefits you spent the last 90 minutes telling me about, and write at the bottom: "The buyer will receive each of the above benefits notwithstanding any other term in the contract or other disclosure," and please have your manager sign it. Then we will talk turkey...” After the expletives from the sales person you can pick up your gift.
> 
> [Alternative to cut the 90 minutes down to about 15-20: At the beginning of the presentation, show salesperson your notepad and state, “I am taking down what you tell me the benefits are and will ask you and your sales manager to initial them at the end of your presentation, before we discuss purchasing.” Pick up gift.]



Nothing to disagree with here - deceptive sales tactics should not be tolerated by MVCI or purchasers.  Those ideas of tape recordings and telling the salesperson that you will be asking them to validate their words are good ideas - and the more folks use them or similar demands, the less deceptive practices any of us would experience.

But at some point, Buyer Beware comes into play.  The required rescission period for developer purchases was legislated to protect against the deceptions we're discussing, but the responsibility for reviewing the ownership documents in a timely fashion rests on the purchaser.  If you know you have a certain period of time to rescind the contract, doesn't it follow that you know you will be bound to the terms of that contract if you don't rescind?


----------



## PerryM

*I know who was the first timeshare salesrep...*



davidvel said:


> The issue that others and I have tried to raise is that we believe it is an unfair and unethical trade practice for a sales person to tell you something during a sales pitch that is directly contradicted (and in fact disclaimed) in the ultimate contract they will make you sign. For example I and many others have been shown the II Resort Directory (or online in II) and being told "This is a RED week with II. You can trade this summer week in the desert for a week in Hawaii," among other representations as to trading potential. However, as we know the contract says you acknowledge that no statements were made as to trading potential, and there is no guarantee about the ongoing availability of II or any other trading opportunity. So, the salesperson told you this but you have to falsely “acknowledge” that such statements were NOT made...
> 
> People think this is unfair, whether they make misstatements to everyone or not. Anyone who has been involved in sales knows all these tricks. Car salesmen use it, and in almost every area of sales, but his does not make it right. (AND YES, I agree that its what is in the contract that ultimately governs unless you can prove a fraud case.)
> 
> A great way to deal with this in any sales transaction is to bring a pad of paper and write down each great "benefit" the sales person touts to you, one line each. Then at the end of the presentation when they say "What will it take to get you into this car today?" Or, “What do I need to do to get you to buy this timeshare today?” you state:
> 
> "Before we get into details, please initial each paragraph of the benefits you spent the last 90 minutes telling me about, and write at the bottom: "The buyer will receive each of the above benefits notwithstanding any other term in the contract or other disclosure," and please have your manager sign it. Then we will talk turkey...” After the expletives from the sales person you can pick up your gift.
> 
> [Alternative to cut the 90 minutes down to about 15-20: At the beginning of the presentation, show salesperson your notepad and state, “I am taking down what you tell me the benefits are and will ask you and your sales manager to initial them at the end of your presentation, before we discuss purchasing.” Pick up gift.]



Ahhh, its fun to dream.

We have been "secret shoppers" for Bass Pro Shops twice now for the BlueGreen timeshares sold there.  RCI (yes that RCI) has a division where they offer the service to ANY developer.  Marriott should use this service and check on what their salesreps are saying.

We had to buy the 3 nite, 2 day package and sign all the paperwork at the store.  We were reimbursed by RCI later and paid handsomely to be secret shoppers.

All this bilge can be easily addressed by the developers if they wanted - they want to play Sergeant Schultz of Hogan's Heros:

* "I see nothing"*

Sergeant Schultz was the first timeshare salesrep....


----------



## SueDonJ

PerryM said:


> ... We have been "secret shoppers" for Bass Pro Shops twice now for the BlueGreen timeshares sold there.



Bass Pro Shops sells TIMESHARES?!?!  Geeze, I thought Christmas Tree Shops had the most diverse product offerings out there ...


----------



## Dean

Clemson Fan said:


> Are you serious?  :hysterical:
> 
> I've never had a Marriott salesperson come out and say that what they were proposing to sell me would in the end have no resale value and essentially be worthless.  I'd dare say that that is a statement nobody has ever heard from a Marriott salesperson because it would be sales suicide for them to say anything like that.  When asked directly what the potential resale value would be (I know b/c I've asked this question many times to Marriott salespeople), they spin it and flip the question around to something like, "Consider it an investment in your families future vacations" or "Your buying your future vacations in todays dollars rather than tomorrows dollar" etc etc.
> 
> They also like to hype that Marriott will sell your week for you if you needed to sell it and they DO say that Marriott's prices are always INCREASING.  They neglect to mention the 40% commission and that Marriott will really only take back premium weeks to sell and they won't bother with a bronze or silver week.


The comment was made about purchases and not tours.  For purchases this is indeed correct and the buyer signed that this was the case and were given the legal documents verifying the same.  That's not to excuse lies but the written and signed documentation will win in every case unless you can prove that other promises were indeed made.  Proof is tough since family and friends are usually not reliable witness in such a situation.  You need video, something written by the seller, or similar.  


m61376 said:


> One more thing- as Sue and others have pointed out, the majority of direct purchasers aren't "uninformed idiots." Clearly, many of them made an informed decision BUT I do agree that I don't think most were fully informed.


There are a group that are an exception but I think it's fair to say that the majority of direct buyers, likely OVER 90%, are not truly well informed and are often making an impulse buy.  If you exclude those that already own timeshares and don't visit TUG or a similar site before or during their cancelation period, that number likely approaches 100%.


----------



## SueDonJ

Dean said:


> ... There are a group that are an exception but I think it's fair to say that the majority of direct buyers, likely OVER 90%, are not truly well informed and are often making an impulse buy.  If you exclude those that already own timeshares and don't visit TUG or a similar site before or during their cancelation period, that number likely approaches 100%.



You're probably correct, but man alive, it floors me that folks will make such a significant purchase without putting in the little bit of effort that it takes to understand exactly what they're buying.  You sure are shattering my illusions.


----------



## Dean

PerryM said:


> Marriott has made it clear, in 3 years of 24/7 pushing the rumor of a Marriott Internal Exchange System, that they welcome a lively debate on their rumor.
> 
> Why else would Marriott push the same rumor for 3 years?
> 
> We are simply taking our knowledge of other Point systems and making a best effort guess as to what Marriott will do.
> 
> We know 5 facts that Marriott has shared with us:
> 
> 
> The new exchange system will hurt resale owners
> 
> The new exchange system will be for Marriott only sold weeks
> 
> The new exchange system will depress resale prices - don't buy resale
> 
> The new exchange system will leave out 3,000 other timeshare resorts so II membership must be used outside of the new system
> 
> The new exchange system will be Points oriented and there is great doubt as to the ability to make an exchange versus II
> Beyond that Marriott gives us little guidance.
> 
> Hey, its Marriott's rumor they know folks will talk....
> 
> Marriott has only itself to blame - it can just shut its mouth and stop pushing the rumor.


Perry, as I've already pointed out, you are dramatically exaggerating the rumors and posting your interpretations as facts.  It has not been 3 years of 24/7 rumors about this, that is simply incorrect.  There are no facts about a new system, only rumors and facts about rumors.  To say otherwise is disingenuous at best.  We don't know what will happen if anything and we don't know what the affects will be though we can guess depending on given scenarios.  I have no problem discussing what we think might happen and what we think the affects will be.  NONE of this is fact.  And even if we knew the current and exact Marriott plan now it could change or never happen going forward.  Unfortunately your misrepresentation lessens the effectiveness of your other opinions.


----------



## Dean

SueDonJ said:


> You're probably correct, but man alive, it floors me that folks will make such a significant purchase without putting in the little bit of effort that it takes to understand exactly what they're buying.  You sure are shattering my illusions.


Even in todays internet age, impulse purchase (car, timeshare, etc) are still rampant.  This is true even for very intelligent and well informed people otherwise.  Even when they are informed, some people simply can't bring themselves to buy resale even when getting no benefit retail and paying many thousands more $$$.  I give you DVC's SSR as an example.


----------



## PerryM

*Rumors say...*



Dean said:


> Perry, as I've already pointed out, you are dramatically exaggerating the rumors and posting your interpretations as facts.  It has not been 3 years of 24/7 rumors about this, that is simply incorrect.  There are no facts about a new system, only rumors and facts about rumors.  To say otherwise is disingenuous at best.  We don't know what will happen if anything and we don't know what the affects will be though we can guess depending on given scenarios.  I have no problem discussing what we think might happen and what we think the affects will be.  NONE of this is fact.  And even if we knew the current and exact Marriott plan now it could change or never happen going forward.  Unfortunately your misrepresentation lessens the effectiveness of your other opinions.



All I can do is report here what has happened during our last 5 Marriott sales presentations - Marriott's rumor reverberated through 5 different Marriott salesreps who basically said the same thing; Marriott has declared war against their owners who decide to sell their timeshare outside of Marriott's repurchase, resale, and closing services.

Let's not forget that Marriott is the one pushing this rumor and they invite all kinds of rumors in return.

That's what I'm reporting, my rumor to a rumor...  facts are missing from all points of view.  This is exactly what Marriott wants....


----------



## Dean

PerryM said:


> All I can do is report here what has happened during our last 5 Marriott sales presentations - Marriott's rumor reverberated through 5 different Marriott salesreps who basically said the same thing; Marriott has declared war against their owners who decide to sell their timeshare outside of Marriott's repurchase, resale, and closing services.
> 
> Let's not forget that Marriott is the one pushing this rumor and they invite all kinds of rumors in return.
> 
> That's what I'm reporting, my rumor to a rumor...  facts are missing from all points of view.  This is exactly what Marriott wants....


Reporting what they tell you is fair, reporting what you consistently see others are stating is somewhat risky but fair to a degree.  But that is not 3 yrs of 24/7 rumors, that was my point, in part.  Marriott is not pushing this rumor.  We have an internal source that gave Dave some info and we have salespeople hype that usually means nothing anyway, even with Marriott over the years.  Other than reporting what the rumors say, there are essentially no other facts.  And any interpretation on a given scenario is not fact either no matter how likely it is to be true in the end.  

This may truly end up exactly as you state in every way, we simply don't know.  I for one, doubt the worst case scenarios are likely but it may indeed be negative for many of us.  And we get to discuss it a few more times over the next couple of years.  

Regardless, thanks for not taking my comments too personally, I struggled with the words to say what I wanted but not be any more personal than required to say what I felt I needed to.


----------



## SueDonJ

Dean said:


> Even in todays internet age, impulse purchase (car, timeshare, etc) are still rampant.  This is true even for very intelligent and well informed people otherwise.  Even when they are informed, some people simply can't bring themselves to buy resale even when getting no benefit retail and paying many thousands more $$$.  I give you DVC's SSR as an example.



That's one purchase, DVC SSR or OKW even, that I would be comfortable making resale, because there is a ton of inventory and during all the years that I've been reading the disboards, there has never been any slight hint that DVC may eventually try to distinguish between resale and developer.


----------



## sdtugger

*Trading System vs. Reservation System*

I've done some reading on the Marriott Asia points system (that also includes Hawaii and Las Vegas) and I'm troubled by the potential use of that system for a new Marriott point system.

If I undersand correctly, the Asia system is a trading AND reservation system.  Frankly, I'm not sure how that works in Hawaii and Vegas where most of the units are held as week units.  But, here is the bottom line for me (Marriott if you are reading please pay close attention):  You can play with the trading system all you want.  I may not like it, but not much I can do about it.  But, do not mess with my reservation rights!!  If I (and many others just like me) find that I can't reserve the prime weeks that I could reserve in the past because they've all been taken by some new hybrid points system, there will be trouble.  I know I'm dreaming that they are reading this, but it is cathartic . . .


----------



## m61376

SueDonJ said:


> You're probably correct, but man alive, it floors me that folks will make such a significant purchase without putting in the little bit of effort that it takes to understand exactly what they're buying.  You sure are shattering my illusions.



Think about your own friends, if any of them are owners. Do you consider any of them well informed? I personally know and am also friends with several owners, some multiple week owners, who are all highly educated, professionally successful people. Some of the purchases were vacation impulse buys, some weren't, but not one is truly cognizant of either fully utilizing their purchases or the limitations of the system.

I think the bottom line is that life intervenes. For many of us here, this is a hobby and/or obsession  , but most people don't want to bother putting that much thought into vacation planning and thus largely ignore the details of purchasing and ownership. We forget that people here on Tug are not the norm (and maybe not normal either  ).


----------



## davidvel

sdtugger said:


> I've done some reading on the Marriott Asia points system (that also includes Hawaii and Las Vegas) and I'm troubled by the potential use of that system for a new Marriott point system.
> 
> If I undersand correctly, the Asia system is a trading AND reservation system.  Frankly, I'm not sure how that works in Hawaii and Vegas where most of the units are held as week units.  But, here is the bottom line for me (Marriott if you are reading please pay close attention):  You can play with the trading system all you want.  I may not like it, but not much I can do about it.  But, do not mess with my reservation rights!!  If I (and many others just like me) find that I can't reserve the prime weeks that I could reserve in the past because they've all been taken by some new hybrid points system, there will be trouble.  I know I'm dreaming that they are reading this, but it is cathartic . . .



Absolutely a real, known concern about the "new system."

They cannot manipulate the system so that they automatically reserve the week you will deposit into their points system, or othewise give any priority ahead of non-participants. . . . If Marriott is not completely transparent here, they (and each resort's HOA) will face litigation.


----------



## Dean

SueDonJ said:


> That's one purchase, DVC SSR or OKW even, that I would be comfortable making resale, because there is a ton of inventory and during all the years that I've been reading the disboards, there has never been any slight hint that DVC may eventually try to distinguish between resale and developer.


But how many times have you heard that someone bought retail because they were more comfortable.  Or worse, that financing was easy.



sdtugger said:


> If I undersand correctly, the Asia system is a trading AND reservation system.  Frankly, I'm not sure how that works in Hawaii and Vegas where most of the units are held as week units.  But, here is the bottom line for me (Marriott if you are reading please pay close attention):  You can play with the trading system all you want.  I may not like it, but not much I can do about it.  But, do not mess with my reservation rights!!  If I (and many others just like me) find that I can't reserve the prime weeks that I could reserve in the past because they've all been taken by some new hybrid points system, there will be trouble.  I know I'm dreaming that they are reading this, but it is cathartic . . .


I won't venture to say for sure how they do it because I am not totally certain.  However, there are several ways to approach such a situation to have points be everything.  For an all points resort, it's easy, you just decide what the rules will be and how you use the points.  For a resort that has both weeks and points, you have several options and decisions.  You have to decide how the weeks are proportioned as well as the reservation system.  You can essentially convert the weeks that are in points to fixed weeks based on the deed or you can take the total number and  spread out over the given season.  One of the better ways to allow an all points system to reserve the underlying week is to give a delay from when the weeks reservation system starts until the points system starts, that's problematic for a floating weeks system.  If you take your week, you don't get points but you have to take the whole week.  Since the weeks and points inventory is held separately, the delay doesn't hurt you as a points or weeks member.  However, it is more complicated with a floating weeks system, esp one with a longer season like HI.  Now if you don't hold the inventory separately or have a way to separate them that is inherently unfair, that can be a real problem for one side or the other.  To me the question of how they will proportion the division of which weeks go to which side is the major issue.  Take Grande Ocean for example, it has a 10 week Platinum season.  Say 50% of plat owners convert, the most fair way to proportion would be half of the units for each week or as close as they can approximate it.  If points got 24-29 & weeks 30-34 that would be an inherently unfair situations, IMO.


----------



## m61376

sdtugger said:


> I've done some reading on the Marriott Asia points system (that also includes Hawaii and Las Vegas) and I'm troubled by the potential use of that system for a new Marriott point system.
> 
> If I undersand correctly, the Asia system is a trading AND reservation system.  Frankly, I'm not sure how that works in Hawaii and Vegas where most of the units are held as week units.  But, here is the bottom line for me (Marriott if you are reading please pay close attention):  You can play with the trading system all you want.  I may not like it, but not much I can do about it.  But, do not mess with my reservation rights!!  If I (and many others just like me) find that I can't reserve the prime weeks that I could reserve in the past because they've all been taken by some new hybrid points system, there will be trouble.  I know I'm dreaming that they are reading this, but it is cathartic . . .



I also have qualms about that system, which is why I have referenced that thread earlier. I think there stands to be a lot of losers IF a similar system is enacted and, from what I've been told, the system being developed will have preferred resorts which will be higher valued, presumably with higher point values although this was not detailed. What I heard was consistent with the other program at least in rough form. I fear that there will be a lot of very unhappy Platinum owners at very nice but perhaps not what Marriott considers their Category 7 resorts in the MR program and owners of lesser season weeks even more discontented and possibly disenchanted.

That said, from my understanding is that Marriott can only control the portion of weeks in the program, so that, for argument's sake, if 25% of owners convert to points, then 25% of each eligible resort/week/view/size designation would be available for reservations in that program. Marriott cannot commandeer a disproportionate amount of inventory in any program. There may ultimately be more prime week availability under a points reservation system, because Marriott may control which weeks get deposited into II for external exchanges; in Starwood, for example, owners at mandatory resorts get to reserve weeks for use but Starwood decides which weeks and even which resorts to deposit for trading purposes. Thus, for example, there may be more 4th of July weeks available for personal use or for renting but the days of reserving those weeks to maximize trade value may be gone.

Of course, since they control the inventory we also have to rely on their integrity in managing and policing the system, but hopefully that will be a non issue.


----------



## JimIg23

Is there a Marriott site that explains the Asia point system?


----------



## hotcoffee

Originally Posted by Clemson Fan  
Are you serious?  

"I've never had a Marriott salesperson come out and say that what they were proposing to sell me would in the end have no resale value and essentially be worthless. I'd dare say that that is a statement nobody has ever heard from a Marriott salesperson because it would be sales suicide for them to say anything like that. When asked directly what the potential resale value would be (I know b/c I've asked this question many times to Marriott salespeople), they spin it and flip the question around to something like, "Consider it an investment in your families future vacations" or "Your buying your future vacations in todays dollars rather than tomorrows dollar" etc etc. 

They also like to hype that Marriott will sell your week for you if you needed to sell it and they DO say that Marriott's prices are always INCREASING. They neglect to mention the 40% commission and that Marriott will really only take back premium weeks to sell and they won't bother with a bronze or silver week."




Dean said:


> The comment was made about purchases and not tours.  For purchases this is indeed correct and the buyer signed that this was the case and were given the legal documents verifying the same. . . .



I guess I don't understand your response to the above post.  Are you saying that your documents DID say that your timeshare had no resale value and was essentially worthless?  The posts in this thread that quote documents only quoted disclaimers warning the buyer to not expect investment potential or any particular resaleability.  I did not see anything about a timeshare having _no_ resale value and being essentially worthless.

If Marriott treats resale buyers fairly (both current _and_ future), market forces will determine how much Marriott timeshares are worth resale.  And that is the way it should be.  If the seller can only get $1 to get someone to take his unit off his hands, then $1 is how much his is worth, regardless of how much he paid for it retail.


----------



## PerryM

Dean said:


> Reporting what they tell you is fair, reporting what you consistently see others are stating is somewhat risky but fair to a degree.  But that is not 3 yrs of 24/7 rumors, that was my point, in part.  Marriott is not pushing this rumor.  We have an internal source that gave Dave some info and we have salespeople hype that usually means nothing anyway, even with Marriott over the years.  Other than reporting what the rumors say, there are essentially no other facts.  And any interpretation on a given scenario is not fact either no matter how likely it is to be true in the end.
> 
> This may truly end up exactly as you state in every way, we simply don't know.  I for one, doubt the worst case scenarios are likely but it may indeed be negative for many of us.  And we get to discuss it a few more times over the next couple of years.
> 
> Regardless, thanks for not taking my comments too personally, I struggled with the words to say what I wanted but not be any more personal than required to say what I felt I needed to.



I have stated that what Marriott is doing with their rumor is despicable but the aggressor in any contest sets the rules.  Marriott has elected to use their new system as a way to control owners via their own reservations - a drastic departure from their benign resale approach with MRPs.

This new system will completely change the way owners use their Marriott weeks.  I've shown that even Marriott bought owners will feel the impact of less inventory in the exchange system since many owners won't convert or can't convert.

I'm assuming Marriott has thought this out and decided a more antagonistic approach to their owner base is in their best interests.

As more and more rumors are released by Marriott this antagonistic outlook will become more evident - that's my guess.  We can't change their minds but just warn others that Marriott has given us fair warning of their actions well in advance of release.

My advice to all is to not buy Marriott timeshares until the new system is released - there are way too many possible outcomes to take any kind of risk.


----------



## SueDonJ

m61376 said:


> Think about your own friends, if any of them are owners. Do you consider any of them well informed? I personally know and am also friends with several owners, some multiple week owners, who are all highly educated, professionally successful people. Some of the purchases were vacation impulse buys, some weren't, but not one is truly cognizant of either fully utilizing their purchases or the limitations of the system.
> 
> I think the bottom line is that life intervenes. For many of us here, this is a hobby and/or obsession  , but most people don't want to bother putting that much thought into vacation planning and thus largely ignore the details of purchasing and ownership. We forget that people here on Tug are not the norm (and maybe not normal either  ).



I know only two other couples who own timeshares, neither of them at an MVCI resort.  One owns DVC and knows it inside out - they were the first ones who sent me to the disboards way back when.  The other owns whatever is up at Loon Mountain in NH - they've paid their dues faithfully every year but no longer go ("it's not the same as it used to be") and have never tried (I don't think) to exchange.  They give their week to their kids, though.

You're correct, I'm sure, that we here at TUG are compulsive about making the absolute best out of our purchases, no matter which way we purchased.  Dean and others agree with you that a good number of people make major impulse purchases all the time.  Don't know why it shocks me, but it does.

And you're definitely correct that we TUGGERs may not all be normal.


----------



## SueDonJ

m61376 said:


> I also have qualms about that system, which is why I have referenced that thread earlier. I think there stands to be a lot of losers IF a similar system is enacted and, from what I've been told, the system being developed will have preferred resorts which will be higher valued, presumably with higher point values although this was not detailed. What I heard was consistent with the other program at least in rough form. I fear that there will be a lot of very unhappy Platinum owners at very nice but perhaps not what Marriott considers their Category 7 resorts in the MR program and owners of lesser season weeks even more discontented and possibly disenchanted.
> 
> That said, from my understanding is that Marriott can only control the portion of weeks in the program, so that, for argument's sake, if 25% of owners convert to points, then 25% of each eligible resort/week/view/size designation would be available for reservations in that program. Marriott cannot commandeer a disproportionate amount of inventory in any program. There may ultimately be more prime week availability under a points reservation system, because Marriott may control which weeks get deposited into II for external exchanges; in Starwood, for example, owners at mandatory resorts get to reserve weeks for use but Starwood decides which weeks and even which resorts to deposit for trading purposes. Thus, for example, there may be more 4th of July weeks available for personal use or for renting but the days of reserving those weeks to maximize trade value may be gone.
> 
> Of course, since they control the inventory we also have to rely on their integrity in managing and policing the system, but hopefully that will be a non issue.



All of this is why I much prefer the "overlay" point-based internal exchange system with absolutely no impact on usage or fees at your purchased resort.  In any given year that you don't choose to exchange, any exchange program should have no impact on what you purchased.


----------



## SueDonJ

Dean said:


> But how many times have you heard that someone bought retail because they were more comfortable.  Or worse, that financing was easy...



Well, if people who bought for those reasons were completely informed about their purchase, then I don't have a problem with them finding those reasons to be valid.  I don't want my reasons questioned, why should I object to others?

DVC, I think, has more brand-loyalty purchasers than any other.  Granted, DVC is a good product and the company protects its value better than any other timeshare company.  But some DVC purists will pay more for the exact same product if it means that they're buying direct from Disney.  (And that's true for the smallest items such as tee shirts that might be sold bootleg at a flea market, all the way up to their big-ticket SSR points.)


----------



## PerryM

*Much much more.....*



SueDonJ said:


> All of this is why I much prefer the "overlay" point-based internal exchange system with absolutely no impact on usage or fees at your purchased resort.  *In any given year that you don't choose to exchange, any exchange program should have no impact on what you purchased.*



I wouldn't make that assumption at all.

The new exchange system can easily be a combo reservation/exchange system - you do both at the same time.  The rumor is not clear about this but that's how I would design a new system for Marriott owners who bought from Marriott.

Within each season (Platinum for example) there are some weeks that are far more desirable than others - who get's those weeks?  Marriott has a tremendous advantage over us mortal owners - they can write their new program to take advantage of VIP status.

I don't assume for a second that Marriott is just going to introduce an exchange & reservation system but an entire spectrum of VIP benefits.  One of those benefits could easily be the pre-placement of reservations for a highly desirable week.

Lets say Marriott follows Wyndham and introduces an exchange system and VIP system that go hand-in-hand.  The more points you deposit/buy the more VIP benefits you get.  Let's say that Marriott offers pre-placement of high demand weeks 13 weeks out.  You, as a Diamond level VIP member, get 14 months to pre-book your reservations - that means you can deposit your weeks 14 months in advance too.  (No actual reservations take place 14 months out - just pre-placement of reservations which will be executed 30 days later)

Now 13 months out and at 8:00 am CST the new exchange & reservation system dumps 20,000 booking orders which are processed seconds before a mortal human can enter the first reservation - all inventory snatched up by Marriott.  Nothing violated in any way here folks.

Anything that takes 3 years to program is going to be very complex and do a lot more than just handle reservation swaps between owners.

That's why its taking 3 years - a brand new set of software programs and sales programs are going to be implemented not just an exchange system.

P.S.
Once Marriott creates a caste system, the possibilities are limitless as to how they treat each caste.  Each time they do, resale prices will reflect the supply of weeks overpowering the demand for weeks and an implosion of resale prices results.  Marriott will benefit with the ROFR and will then implement even more castes.  This is exactly what Wyndham did and resales are 5 cents on the sales dollar.


----------



## SueDonJ

PerryM said:


> I wouldn't make that assumption at all.
> 
> The new exchange system can easily be a combo reservation/exchange system - you do both at the same time...



But Perry, I'm not making any assumptions, only saying that the "overlay" system which would not impact usage or fees at the resorts where I purchased, is the system I would prefer to see implemented.  That's assuming a new one is to be implemented, which isn't definite.  Yet.


----------



## davidvel

PerryM said:


> I wouldn't make that assumption at all.
> The new exchange system can easily be a combo reservation/exchange system - you do both at the same time.  The rumor is not clear about this but that's how I would design a new system for Marriott owners who bought from Marriott.


Not legally (meaning without breaching their duties as manager) and causing the HOA to be in breach of contract, among other various torts. 


PerryM said:


> Within each season (Platinum for example) there are some weeks that are far more desirable than others - who get's those weeks?  *Marriott has a tremendous advantage over us mortal owners - they can write their new program to take advantage of VIP status.*


Not legally (meaning without breaching their duties as manager) and causing the HOA to be in breach of contract, among other various torts. 


PerryM said:


> I don't assume for a second that Marriott is just going to introduce an exchange & reservation system but an entire spectrum of VIP benefits.  *One of those benefits could easily be the pre-placement of reservations for a highly desirable week.*


Not legally (meaning without breaching their duties as manager) and causing the HOA to be in breach of contract, among other various torts. 


PerryM said:


> The more points you deposit/buy the more VIP benefits you get.  Let's say that Marriott offers pre-placement of high demand weeks 13 weeks out. * You, as a Diamond level VIP member, get 14 months to pre-book your reservations - that means you can deposit your weeks 14 months in advance too.*  (No actual reservations take place 14 months out - just pre-placement of reservations which will be executed 30 days later)


Not legally. 


PerryM said:


> Now 13 months out and at 8:00 am CST the new exchange & reservation system dumps 20,000 booking orders which are processed seconds before a mortal human can enter the first reservation - all inventory snatched up by Marriott.  *Nothing violated in any way here folks.*


*ABSOLUTELY inaccurate. As manager, Marriott has to treat each owner the same, and cannot auto-reserve, or otherwise create a caste-system among owners as you have suggested multiple times. * 


PerryM said:


> Anything that takes 3 years to program is going to be very complex and do a lot more than just handle reservation swaps between owners.
> 
> That's why its taking 3 years - a brand new set of software programs and sales programs are going to be implemented not just an exchange system.
> . . .
> P.S.
> Once Marriott creates a caste system, the possibilities are limitless as to how they treat each caste.


Not legally (see above).

I know, I know, Perry,  I am dreaming, but those dreams pay the mortgage each month.


----------



## Latravel

_"I guess I don't understand your response to the above post. Are you saying that your documents DID say that your timeshare had no resale value and was essentially worthless? The posts in this thread that quote documents only quoted disclaimers warning the buyer to not expect investment potential or any particular resaleability. I did not see anything about a timeshare having no resale value and being essentially worthless."_


No one here on tug or at Marriott every said our timeshare was worthless.  That conclusion is a big jump from the language in our purchase documents which I have been repeating.    What I have been saying is Marriott does not make you any promises regarding resale value.  They do not feel any obligation to protect your resale value as others have been saying.  This is explained when you purchase, not just when you attend a sales tour.  Dean understood my post clearly.


----------



## m61376

Heidi- I guess the issue here is that even if Marriott makes buyers initial that they have no obligation to protect the resale value (which makes sense, because besides losing value as soon as you buy, the market is volatile), that is a far cry from actively taking steps which would decimate it.


----------



## PerryM

*Slathering....*



SueDonJ said:


> But Perry, I'm not making any assumptions, only saying that the "overlay" system which would not impact usage or fees at the resorts where I purchased, is the system I would prefer to see implemented.  That's assuming a new one is to be implemented, which isn't definite.  Yet.



True, Marriott's new exchange system should "sit on top" of the existing system of usage and not add to costs; I agree with that - kind of like icing on a cake.

But that icing defines the cake the moment it is slathered on.  It can become an angel food cake or a devil's food cake - depends on who does the slathering.

So no matter how we believe the new system won't impact our usage it will redefine Marriott completely and our units...


----------



## PerryM

davidvel said:


> Not legally (meaning without breaching their duties as manager) and causing the HOA to be in breach of contract, among other various torts.
> 
> Not legally (meaning without breaching their duties as manager) and causing the HOA to be in breach of contract, among other various torts.
> 
> Not legally (meaning without breaching their duties as manager) and causing the HOA to be in breach of contract, among other various torts.
> 
> Not legally.
> 
> *ABSOLUTELY inaccurate. As manager, Marriott has to treat each owner the same, and cannot auto-reserve, or otherwise create a caste-system among owners as you have suggested multiple times. *
> 
> Not legally (see above).
> 
> I know, I know, Perry,  I am dreaming, but those dreams pay the mortgage each month.



Marriott won't do anything against the law but they wrote all the documents we signed and they know just how far they can bend them to suit its needs.

I can cook up dozens of systems that don't violate any real estate laws or contract laws but completely change how Marriott timeshares operate.  We will have to wait and see just how much Marriott wants to change its relationship with the owners and how much of a bully they want to become.


----------



## CMF

Superchief said:


> I suggest that everyone who has a concern about a potential new point system send a letter regarding their concerns to David Babich, Chief Customer officer.




I sent my e-mail yesterday.  Has anyone else sent an e-mail to Marriott?  

Charles


----------



## SueDonJ

PerryM said:


> True, Marriott's new exchange system should "sit on top" of the existing system of usage and not add to costs; I agree with that - kind of like icing on a cake.
> 
> But that icing defines the cake the moment it is slathered on.  It can become an angel food cake or a devil's food cake - depends on who does the slathering.
> 
> So no matter how we believe the new system won't impact our usage it will redefine Marriott completely and our units...



Even the best pastry chef can't manage to turn a white angel food cake into a chocolate devil's food cake, no matter how prettily s/he ices it.  HA.

(Thanks, Perry, now you've made me hungry for cake.)

Do you honestly believe that ANY new internal exchange system would completely redefine your MVCI product?  Sure, the system that you're convinced will be offered would have that impact, but I'm not convinced that any one (your) particular new system would be implemented or that all of the exchange system options would contain your extremes.


----------



## PerryM

SueDonJ said:


> Even the best pastry chef can't manage to turn a white angel food cake into a chocolate devil's food cake, no matter how prettily s/he ices it.  HA.
> 
> (Thanks, Perry, now you've made me hungry for cake.)
> 
> Do you honestly believe that ANY new internal exchange system would completely redefine your MVCI product?  Sure, the system that you're convinced will be offered would have that impact, but I'm not convinced that any one (your) particular new system would be implemented or that all of the exchange system options would contain your extremes.



My answer is based upon how insane Marriott has become.

They could have introduced a great new Point oriented internal exchange system that would allow ALL Marriott owners to exchange reservations with a 21st century system.

But noooooooooooooo

Marriott has decided to pit owner against owner by installing a caste system.  I have viewed the ugly head of the caste system here - the We Bought from Marriott crowd and the blood sucking pond scum resale owners like me.  Just you wait until the salesreps spend 24/7 dragging the resellers through the mud.

I can imagine Marriott hurting from years and years of low to no profits and developing a Screw the Owners mentality to make up for those years of lost revenue.

But one thing is obvious to me - Marriott has changed the way it views its customers and not for the better.


----------



## davidvel

PerryM said:


> Marriott won't do anything against the law but they wrote all the documents we signed and *they know just how far they can bend them to suit its needs.*


That may be so, and I appreciate all your normative commentary, but I am just trying to correct the inaccurate positive statements so at least the opinions are based  on a few facts.  


PerryM said:


> I can cook up dozens of systems that don't violate any real estate laws or contract laws *but completely change how Marriott timeshares operate*.  We will have to wait and see just how much Marriott wants to change its relationship with the owners and how much of a bully they want to become.


Again, I beg to difffer. The new system cannot "completely change how Marriott timeshares operate." In terms of your prior post, Marriott *cannot* do any of the following:

>>>Marriott has a tremendous advantage over us mortal owners - they can write their new program to take advantage of VIP status. . . One of those benefits could easily be the pre-placement of reservations for a highly desirable week. 

>>>Let's say that Marriott offers pre-placement of high demand weeks 13 weeks out. You, as a Diamond level VIP member, get 14 months to pre-book your reservations - that means you can deposit your weeks 14 months in advance too.

>>>Now 13 months out and at 8:00 am CST the new exchange & reservation system dumps 20,000 booking orders which are processed seconds before a mortal human can enter the first reservation - all inventory snatched up by Marriott.



PerryM said:


> Marriott has decided to pit owner against owner by installing a caste system.  I have viewed the ugly head of the caste system here - the We Bought from Marriott crowd and the blood sucking pond scum resale owners like me.  Just you wait until the salesreps spend 24/7 dragging the resellers through the mud.


The caste system as you described it (priority reservation for your week) will not happen legally. As to offering a *new* program on terms different for direct vs. resale purchasers, I'll leave that to the anti-trust gurus to opine on its validity. But from a normative standpoint, I agree with you that it would be bad for ALL OWNERS.


----------



## PerryM

davidvel said:


> That may be so, and I appreciate all your normative commentary, but I am just trying to correct the inaccurate positive statements so at least the opinions are based  on a few facts.
> 
> Again, I beg to difffer. The new system cannot "completely change how Marriott timeshares operate." In terms of your prior post, Marriott *cannot* do any of the following:
> 
> >>>Marriott has a tremendous advantage over us mortal owners - they can write their new program to take advantage of VIP status. . . One of those benefits could easily be the pre-placement of reservations for a highly desirable week.
> 
> >>>Let's say that Marriott offers pre-placement of high demand weeks 13 weeks out. You, as a Diamond level VIP member, get 14 months to pre-book your reservations - that means you can deposit your weeks 14 months in advance too.
> 
> >>>Now 13 months out and at 8:00 am CST the new exchange & reservation system dumps 20,000 booking orders which are processed seconds before a mortal human can enter the first reservation - all inventory snatched up by Marriott.
> 
> 
> The caste system as you described it (priority reservation for your week) will not happen legally. As to offering a *new* program on terms different for direct vs. resale purchasers, I'll leave that to the anti-trust gurus to opine on its validity. But from a normative standpoint, I agree with you that it would be bad for ALL OWNERS.




Too many points to address so I'll pick one - Marriott already has a caste system in place - it is the Marriott sold and Resale sold castes.

Right now there is a big difference between the two ways of buying a Marriott week.  That difference, however, has not spilled into enjoying your resort or other Marriott resorts.

Marriott has decided to change this - ALL owners at a Marriott resort will get screwed by the new caste system involving reservations.  There will be LESS opportunities to exchange for BOTH castes with the new exchange system since they are segregated.

This is a fundamental assault on Marriott ownership - the natural consequence of starting more castes pitting one owner against another owner.

To me that is a HUGE assault on my enjoyment of being a Marriott owner.

I can see this bubbling under the surface right here in this thread.  (We bought from Marriott and paid a lot more than resales so we should get more)


----------



## SueDonJ

PerryM said:


> ... I have viewed the ugly head of the caste system here - the We Bought from Marriott crowd and the blood sucking pond scum resale owners like me.



Perspective is a fickle thing.  From this side of the aisle, it sometimes appears here on TUG that, "Developer-purchasers have zero intelligence and no money sense and deserve whatever devaluation they stupidly paid for."

Of course no one has ever said those exact words, but neither has anyone said the exact words you've attributed to developer-purchasers.  Can't we at least agree that extremism doesn't offer anything positive to any discussion?



PerryM said:


> But one thing is obvious to me - Marriott has changed the way it views its customers and not for the better.



It's not obvious to me.  Not to say that it won't be true someday, but it's not yet.  And I hope it never is.


----------



## PerryM

SueDonJ said:


> Perspective is a fickle thing.  From this side of the aisle, it sometimes appears here on TUG that, "Developer-purchasers have zero intelligence and no money sense and deserve whatever devaluation they stupidly paid for."
> 
> Of course no one has ever said those exact words, but neither has anyone said the exact words you've attributed to developer-purchasers.  Can't we at least agree that extremism doesn't offer anything positive to any discussion?
> 
> 
> 
> It's not obvious to me.  Not to say that it won't be true someday, but it's not yet.  And I hope it never is.



I have been a HUGE proponent of buying developer and I've taken a lot of fire-breathing heat for it.  I did recommend buying direct from Marriott many times in past years.   That has changed.

I no longer recommend anyone buy ANY timeshare now either from the developer or resale.  The real estate market has yet to bottom out and start a healthy recovery - when that day happens buying timeshares with idle cash is perfectly ok.

Marriott is a another matter - they are obviously bent out of shape by resales - one Marriott owner finding someone to replace them and to take over the MFs in the resort.  Marriott now views this something so hideous that it is cooking up an exchange system to battle it.

Marriott has lost its way and is spending way too much time worrying about their owners finding replacements for themselves.  This is insane.


----------



## SueDonJ

PerryM said:


> .. I no longer recommend anyone buy ANY timeshare now either from the developer or resale.  The real estate market has yet to bottom out and start a healthy recovery - when that day happens buying timeshares with idle cash is perfectly ok.



Now see, THERE we are in perfect agreement!


----------



## davidvel

PerryM said:


> Too many points to address so I'll pick one - Marriott already has a caste system in place - it is the Marriott sold and Resale sold castes.


The post you were responding to actually had only one point: "The caste system as you described it *(priority reservation for your week)* can not happen legally."

I was not addressing the question of the ability to exchange or join Marriott's new program. The issue is further confused when you state the following:


PerryM said:


> Marriott has decided to change this - ALL owners at a Marriott resort will get screwed by *the new caste system involving reservations*.  There will be LESS opportunities to exchange for BOTH castes with the *new exchange system *since they are segregated.


There is no "new system involving reservations."  You continue to refer to this but it's not part of what Dave M or anyone else has described (other than some mis-informed salespeople), and cannot be changed as I have illustrated above. 

As I understand the new proposed system, it does not seek to alter the owner's fundamental rights to reserve, use and trade your purchased week. 

I also don't see how the direct vs. resale situation is a "caste system" at all.  Direct purchasers have a contract with Marriott (that resale buyers do not), which is separate and distinct from their rights as an owner of the deeded interest (which resale purchasers do have.) That contract (giving right to trade points) is not transferable or assignable (except possibly to family members). Resale purchasers obviously don't have that separate contract with Marriott, so don't have the rights thereunder.

Why would (or should) Marriott have any obligation to the resale purchaser as to the benefits in a contract that they don't have with them? If you buy a used car on the resale market can you demand that GM give you 1 year of free ONSTAR service, or a free oil change? Of course not. Resale buyers buy the deed and its attendant rights from the prior owner (NOT MARRIOTT). Any perks the original purchaser contracted with Marriott to receive are a separate deal.

Any new system will be subject to the terms of a new "contract" that has nothing to do with what rights any owner (DIRECT or RESALE) currently has.


----------



## PerryM

davidvel said:


> The post you were responding to actually had only one point: "The caste system as you described it *(priority reservation for your week)* can not happen legally."
> 
> I was not addressing the question of the ability to exchange or join Marriott's new program. The issue is further confused when you state the following:
> 
> There is no "new system involving reservations."  You continue to refer to this but it's not part of what Dave M or anyone else has described (other than some mis-informed salespeople), and cannot be changed as I have illustrated above.
> 
> As I understand the new proposed system, it does not seek to alter the owner's fundamental rights to reserve, use and trade your purchased week.
> 
> I also don't see how the direct vs. resale situation is a "caste system" at all.  Direct purchasers have a contract with Marriott (that resale buyers do not), which is separate and distinct from their rights as an owner of the deeded interest (which resale purchasers do have.) That contract (giving right to trade points) is not transferable or assignable (except possibly to family members). Resale purchasers obviously don't have that separate contract with Marriott, so don't have the rights thereunder.
> 
> Why would (or should) Marriott have any obligation to the resale purchaser as to the benefits in a contract that they don't have with them? If you buy a used car on the resale market can you demand that GM give you 1 year of free ONSTAR service, or a free oil change? Of course not. Resale buyers buy the deed and its attendant rights from the prior owner (NOT MARRIOTT). Any perks the original purchaser contracted with Marriott to receive are a separate deal.
> 
> Any new system will be subject to the terms of a new "contract" that has nothing to do with what rights any owner (DIRECT or RESALE) currently has.



Too many items to fully respond so let me recap what I said/believe:

Marriott will NOT violate any laws or contracts at all - they will simple do what lawyers do - take advantage of all the small print.

There is nothing wrong by taking pre-orders 14 months in advance in a brand new system of reservations and exchanges.  13 months to the second they dump thousands of requests into the OLD system and you can still talk to the operator and by the time you say Hello the inventory is gone.  They probably will allow owners to use the internet at 13 months too.  Good luck fighting that in court.

The existing caste system is pretty benign it has nothing to do with reservations.  However the new caste will make a caste system where the Marriott bought caste is separate from the resale bought caste.  These are now segregated systems that don't interact with each other; the very definition of a caste system.

It used to be that an "owner is an owner" that no longer is true at your own resort.  There will be units that you CAN NOT exchange into - fellow owners at your own resort.

How long before the separate check-in line for "Marriott sold owners"?  Or special services available to ONLY Marriott sold owners?  Those concepts exist at many other timeshare developers.


----------



## davidvel

PerryM said:


> There is nothing wrong by taking pre-orders 14 months in advance in a brand new system of reservations and exchanges.  *13 months to the second they dump thousands of requests into the OLD system and you can still talk to the operator and by the time you say Hello the inventory is gone.*  They probably will allow owners to use the internet at 13 months too.  *Good luck fighting that in court.*


The HOA (whom you "contract" with for your usage rights) is obligated to treat all owners equally in terms of their rights under the deed and governing documents. Any disparate treatment (or ability to reserve) would be a clear violation of teh governing docs and the law (in CA at least, where my TS is.)

I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree on this point. I have done everything I can to set forth the legal reasons why they can't do this but you continue to believe they legally can.

I usually go in on more than luck, but thanks for the words of encouragement if they do this.  


PerryM said:


> It used to be that an "owner is an owner" that no longer is true at your own resort.  There will be units that you CAN NOT exchange into - fellow owners at your own resort.
> 
> *How long before the separate check-in line for "Marriott sold owners"?  Or special services available to ONLY Marriott sold owners? * Those concepts exist at many other timeshare developers.


There currently are owners whose units you can't exchange into. If they are part of Red Week and you are not. If they deposit to II and you are not a member of II. Any ability to currently trade is merely happenstance. Whether people deposit their weeks with II, Redweek, or whomever is the reason you can or cannot trade back to your resort or anywhere else. Nothing to do with your rights. The same will be true under any new system. 

Now one point I agree with you and others on is that if Marriott completely excludes resale buyers from their system or makes costs inequitable without good justification, there will be serious anti-trust issues to consider. We'll have to wait and see what they do!

As to the separate treatment of owners, I'll take it up with my HOA (see above.)


----------



## PerryM

davidvel said:


> The HOA (whom you "contract" with for your usage rights) is obligated to treat all owners equally in terms of their rights under the deed and governing documents. Any disparate treatment (or ability to reserve) would be a clear violation of teh governing docs and the law (in CA at least, where my TS is.)
> 
> I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree on this point. I have done everything I can to set forth the legal reasons why they can't do this but you continue to believe they legally can.
> 
> I usually go in on more than luck, but thanks for the words of encouragement if they do this.
> 
> *There currently are owners whose units you can't exchange into. If they are part of Red Week and you are not.* If they deposit to II and you are not a member of II. Any ability to currently trade is merely happenstance. Whether people deposit their weeks with II, Redweek, or whomever is the reason you can or cannot trade back to your resort or anywhere else. Nothing to do with your rights. The same will be true under any new system.
> 
> Now one point I agree with you and others on is that if Marriott completely excludes resale buyers from their system or makes costs inequitable without good justification, there will be serious anti-trust issues to consider. We'll have to wait and see what they do!
> 
> As to the separate treatment of owners, I'll take it up with my HOA (see above.)



True, but ANY Marriott owner can simply join RedWeek and use their exchange system.

This is a far cry from a caste system that bars you from exchanging your Marriott reservations and no matter how much groveling you do you can't be part of the ruling caste.


----------



## davidvel

PerryM said:


> True, but ANY Marriott owner can simply join RedWeek and use their exchange system.
> 
> *This is a far cry from a caste system that bars you from exchanging your Marriott reservations and no matter how much groveling you do you can't be part of the ruling caste.*



I am not aware of any such system, or any such proposed system with Marriott.


----------



## Michigan Czar

Perry, I have always enjoyed your posts up until now. I am starting to tune you out. You are now acting like the boy who cried Wolf! What facts do you have to back up anything you are saying about the reservation changes, trade requests at 14 months, etc.? 

That is what I thought, none. You really need to take a deep breath and see how this plays out. The change will only impact trades and how can you be sure it is going to be so horrible for everyone but Marriott? Think about it, if they botch it up that bad it will impact developer sales at some point so why would they want to do that.


----------



## PerryM

Michigan Czar said:


> Perry, I have always enjoyed your posts up until now. I am starting to tune you out. You are now acting like the boy who cried Wolf! What facts do you have to back up anything you are saying about the reservation changes, trade requests at 14 months, etc.?
> 
> That is what I thought, none. You really need to take a deep breath and see how this plays out. The change will only impact trades and how can you be sure it is going to be so horrible for everyone but Marriott? Think about it, if they botch it up that bad it will impact developer sales at some point so why would they want to do that.



Thanks for the concern.

I have nothing new to add just answer questions.  I'd love Marriott to just stop the rumors and I can get back to my normal activities.  But this is the least I can do to try to analyze what Marriott is trying to do to us.


----------



## KathyPet

Keep those cards and letters coming!  Only 1300 more and we will have that Aruba thread beat by a country mile.


----------



## hotcoffee

Latravel said:


> No one here on tug or at Marriott every said our timeshare was worthless.  That conclusion is a big jump from the language in our purchase documents which I have been repeating.    What I have been saying is Marriott does not make you any promises regarding resale value.  They do not feel any obligation to protect your resale value as others have been saying.  This is explained when you purchase, not just when you attend a sales tour.  Dean understood my post clearly.



How is that every time I decide to quit posting in this thread someone posts something that I have to respond to?

I cannot believe you are saying this.  I'm sure I was not dreaming when I read language like "worthless" and "no value" in your previous posts.  I understand the terrible depreciation timeshares go through as soon as they are purchased.  So, Marriott's disclaimers make sense in that light.

But as far as resale prices are concerned, market forces currently do and should continue to dictate resale values.  An off-season week at a seasonal resort is probably nearly worthless on the resale market, but a 2 BR OF at a MVC resort in Maui will probably command considerable value - that is, unless Marriott decides to exclude resale buyers from being able to join the new trading system (and this assumes that existing resale owners are grandfathered in some way).


----------



## Latravel

_"I'm sure I was not dreaming when I read language like "worthless" and "no value" in your previous posts."_

Wow.  If I wrote that my timeshare is worthless (i'm 100% sure I didn't), that would absolutely be incorrect!  My valuable timeshares are not worthless.  My posts were stating there is language in our purchase documents where Marriott states they have no obligation to _*protect*_ our resale value.  They make no promises about resale value.  It is a big leap to conclude that, therefore, our timeshares are worthless.

Could you direct me to my post where I wrote the words "my timeshare is worthless" since you keep attributing these comments to me?


----------



## m61376

davidvel said:


> Now one point I agree with you and others on is that if Marriott completely excludes resale buyers from their system or makes costs inequitable without good justification, there will be serious anti-trust issues to consider. We'll have to wait and see what they do!
> 
> As to the separate treatment of owners, I'll take it up with my HOA (see above.)



I just wanted to underscore the IF. While Perry's salespeople have evidently used the threat of resale owners being excluded from the prospective new system, at least in Aruba owners are being told that all owners will definitely be included. Obviously, no one has the true inside track on this, but I don't think we can /should condemn Marriott before the fact.

I do appreciate some legal insight as offered above. Maybe I'm a foolish optimist, but I have faith in Marriott as a company and I think they will do the right thing, even if it's for the wrong reason, at least insofar as current owners are concerned. The bottom line is they will want to protect their reputation and not create ill will, and they have nothing to gain by excluding any current owner; in contrast, including everyone will increase the participation and help the program get off the ground, and increase revenue.

The issue is what happens to future purchasers and resale values....


----------



## Pit

Latravel said:


> Wow.  If I wrote that my timeshare is worthless (i'm 100% sure I didn't), that would absolutely be incorrect!  My valuable timeshares are not worthless.  My posts were stating there is language in our purchase documents where Marriott states they have no obligation to _*protect*_ our resale value.  They make no promises about resale value.  It is a big leap to conclude that, therefore, our timeshares are worthless.
> 
> Could you direct me to my post where I wrote the words "my timeshare is worthless" since you keep attributing these comments to me?



Well, yeah, that's pretty much what you said. Here is the quote that baffled me (and apparently several others).



Latravel said:


> People who purchased from Marriott were informed by sales management to NOT expect any resale value.  If I sell, I am aware I may not (and probably would not) get my money back.



It seems pretty clear from this post and others that you are not expecting any resale value, and that you couldn't care less about resale value. 

That which doesn't have any resale value is worthless.


----------



## Latravel

Well, i'll wait until you show me where I wrote my timeshare is worthless, not where you mistakenly concluded this fact.  It's a true stretch to make this conclusion.  Did you also read where I expect to get something back when I sell?

I think you have to follow the entire thread to understand the post you quoted.  I don't want to repeat again.


----------



## Dean

hotcoffee said:


> I guess I don't understand your response to the above post.  Are you saying that your documents DID say that your timeshare had no resale value and was essentially worthless?  The posts in this thread that quote documents only quoted disclaimers warning the buyer to not expect investment potential or any particular resaleability.  I did not see anything about a timeshare having _no_ resale value and being essentially worthless.
> 
> If Marriott treats resale buyers fairly (both current _and_ future), market forces will determine how much Marriott timeshares are worth resale.  And that is the way it should be.  If the seller can only get $1 to get someone to take his unit off his hands, then $1 is how much his is worth, regardless of how much he paid for it retail.


To paraphrase, the documents (both checklists and legal documents) state that one is not buying it as an investment, that no representation of resale is included and for resorts in active sales, that there is NO resale option through Marriott.  Same is true for rental value as well.  Often these words are required by state law for many places, I know FL does for some of the situations.  They do not SPECIFICALLY say no resale value per se, nor do they need to.  Market forces will prevail based on all the factors, many of which might be different over time such as a new internal exchange system that MAY shift the balance.



PerryM said:


> I have stated that what Marriott is doing with their rumor is despicable but the aggressor in any contest sets the rules.  Marriott has elected to use their new system as a way to control owners via their own reservations - a drastic departure from their benign resale approach with MRPs.
> 
> This new system will completely change the way owners use their Marriott weeks.  I've shown that even Marriott bought owners will feel the impact of less inventory in the exchange system since many owners won't convert or can't convert.
> 
> I'm assuming Marriott has thought this out and decided a more antagonistic approach to their owner base is in their best interests.
> 
> As more and more rumors are released by Marriott this antagonistic outlook will become more evident - that's my guess.  We can't change their minds but just warn others that Marriott has given us fair warning of their actions well in advance of release.
> 
> My advice to all is to not buy Marriott timeshares until the new system is released - there are way too many possible outcomes to take any kind of risk.


There you go again.  First, this is a rumor, nothing more, at this point.  We don't know that it's an orchestrated one by Marriott and definitely we do not know any purpose for it's existence though you are obviously convinced of both items.  We don't know what Marriott has plans to do and we don't know what they will do, we only have rumors at this point.  Further, we don't know what (or even if) a new system will be and we don't know, but can speculate, what the effects will be.  That was part of my point, that you're posting your opinion, and you may very well be right, as fact and based on a rumor that you presume to be true, complete and that will come to pass.


----------



## Pit

Latravel said:


> Well, i'll wait until you show me where I wrote my timeshare is worthless, not where you mistakenly concluded this fact.  It's a true stretch to make this conclusion.  Did you also read where I expect to get something back when I sell?
> 
> I think you have to follow the entire thread to understand the post you quoted.  I don't want to repeat again.



Not to worry; I've been following this thread from the start. Your timeshare is not worthless, despite what your Marriott salesman told you. 

However, when Marriott introduces this internal exchange system, it will be worth less.


----------



## Dean

SueDonJ said:


> Well, if people who bought for those reasons were completely informed about their purchase, then I don't have a problem with them finding those reasons to be valid.  I don't want my reasons questioned, why should I object to others?
> 
> DVC, I think, has more brand-loyalty purchasers than any other.  Granted, DVC is a good product and the company protects its value better than any other timeshare company.  But some DVC purists will pay more for the exact same product if it means that they're buying direct from Disney.  (And that's true for the smallest items such as tee shirts that might be sold bootleg at a flea market, all the way up to their big-ticket SSR points.)


This is where it gets sticky.  Lets say I post that to buy mainly for Marriott reward points is stupid as a general statement and you bought for points.  Or I say that to buy from DVC simply for comfort or financing issues alone is stupid but you did just that.  I have not questioned your actions, only an action in general that coincidentally happens to apply to your situation.  There are reasons to buy retail but they are few and far between for those that are truly informed and may be things like fixed weeks, platinum plus, new resort early pre-construction, and the like.  As I noted previously, I have made 3 retail purchases but they were for very special situations.  Minimal Bluegreen to convert a boatload of points, smaller DVC contract (4*25) at AKV and Surfwatch pre-construction but also moved 2 resale purchases to retail status in the deal.



davidvel said:


> Not legally (meaning without breaching their duties as manager) and causing the HOA to be in breach of contract, among other various torts.


It would be legal as long as it were fair and divided up the units and weeks equitably between both the weeks and points groups.  

I will point out that Marriott can essentially change the reservation system any way they wish.  If you have an older resort that is floating, read your old documents as to the reservation system in place at the onset.  The 12/13 month issue has only been around some 10-11 years or so.


----------



## AceValenta

Dean said:


> There you go again.  First, this is a rumor, nothing more, at this point.  We don't know that it's an orchestrated one by Marriott and definitely we do not know any purpose for it's existence though you are obviously convinced of both items.  We don't know what Marriott has plans to do and we don't know what they will do, we only have rumors at this point.  Further, we don't know what (or even if) a new system will be and we don't know, but can speculate, what the effects will be.  That was part of my point, that you're posting your opinion, and you may very well be right, as fact and based on a rumor that you presume to be true, complete and that will come to pass.



AMEN!!! 

I have been following this thread from the beginning as well. This rumor has turned into an argument between developer / resale buyers. It has morphed into items seemingly being posted as fact. 

Face it, it is a rumor...RUMOR! That is all....Nothing more and nothing less. Amazing how one acorn fell from the tree and now the sky is falling all around us.


----------



## RandR

The more we all "argue" with each other the more I think this is an episode of Twilight Zone.  Marriott feeds people info knowing it will get to TUG, then they sit back and watch (or read in this case.)  Someone before mentioned a focus group.  I think this is a definite possibility.  Marriott may very well be reading this thread and seeing how we react to different things.  It's genius actually.  Focus groups can be expensive and time consuming.  This is a very cheap way to do it.

Think about it.  They have direct buyers, resale buyers, old hands, newbies.  They have people even making suggestions on how things could work giving them ideas they may not have thought of.  And here we all are, disecting, evaluating and commenting on all of it.

I'm wondering, where do we send our bill for time served?


----------



## PerryM

*Around and around it goes....*



AceValenta said:


> AMEN!!!
> 
> I have been following this thread from the beginning as well. This rumor has turned into an argument between developer / resale buyers. It has morphed into items seemingly being posted as fact.
> 
> Face it, it is a rumor...RUMOR! That is all....Nothing more and nothing less. Amazing how one acorn fell from the tree and now the sky is falling all around us.



Haven't you guys played the birthday party game where one kid whispers into the ear of the next kid and it goes around the table - what comes around has everyone's biases added into the whisper.

Marriott cooked up this rumor and is passing it around - I've bumped into it in the last 5 sales tours and its amazing how similar they are.  If this were the normal type of rumor it would have morphed.  My conclusion is that this rumor comes from Marriott HQ and it serves a purpose - to scare the daylights out of folks who seem to not want to buy that day.

We have every right to add our 2 cents to this rumor and pass it around the table - this is the game Marriott is playing.

But I'm done with this thread, I'm unsubscribing and will wait for another thread to pop up - this rumor has a life of its own.

Until then, don't buy a Marriott under any circumstances until the new exchange system is released and we can figure out just how much damage Marriott is impaling on us owners.


----------



## hotcoffee

RandR said:


> The more we all "argue" with each other the more I think this is an episode of Twilight Zone.  Marriott feeds people info knowing it will get to TUG, then they sit back and watch (or read in this case.)  Someone before mentioned a focus group.  I think this is a definite possibility.  Marriott may very well be reading this thread and seeing how we react to different things.  It's genius actually.  Focus groups can be expensive and time consuming.  This is a very cheap way to do it.
> 
> Think about it.  They have direct buyers, resale buyers, old hands, newbies.  They have people even making suggestions on how things could work giving them ideas they may not have thought of.  And here we all are, disecting, evaluating and commenting on all of it.
> 
> I'm wondering, where do we send our bill for time served?



I hope you are right about this!  Marriott should listen to its customers - especially those who are informed.


----------



## hotcoffee

Latravel said:


> _"I'm sure I was not dreaming when I read language like "worthless" and "no value" in your previous posts."_
> 
> Wow.  If I wrote that my timeshare is worthless (i'm 100% sure I didn't), that would absolutely be incorrect!  My valuable timeshares are not worthless.  My posts were stating there is language in our purchase documents where Marriott states they have no obligation to _*protect*_ our resale value.  They make no promises about resale value.  It is a big leap to conclude that, therefore, our timeshares are worthless.
> 
> Could you direct me to my post where I wrote the words "my timeshare is worthless" since you keep attributing these comments to me?



I'd rather not.  I'm satisfied that we are apparently saying the same thing.  Timeshares when sold have a market-driven value.  It might be negative, or it might be significant, but it will never be what it was originally sold for.

My point from the beginning is that it would be sleazy of Marriott to deliberately do something to destroy an owner's ability to sell his unit when necessary to just to maybe pick up a few more direct sales.


----------



## Dean

hotcoffee said:


> I'd rather not.  I'm satisfied that we are apparently saying the same thing.  Timeshares when sold have a market-driven value.  It might be negative, or it might be significant, but it will never be what it was originally sold for.
> 
> My point from the beginning is that it would be sleazy of Marriott to deliberately do something to destroy an owner's ability to sell his unit when necessary to just to maybe pick up a few more direct sales.


As I noted before, I'd agree that it would be sleazy if the intent were only to destroy value, however, if the intent is to generate sales and the effect is the same, so be it and I would disagree with the sleazy characterization.  Timeshares are market driven (somewhat) but there is not a mature reasonable broad based market for them.  It's like parking a vintage car on the side of a road where only a few people pass by, it's unlikely you'll be able to match up with a truly interested and knowledgeable buyer and those few that are, will be looking to get something for nothing because they know it's unlikely enough people will be involved to truly match the worth of the item.  And in a down market, the prices will drop more dramatically than more broad based items in the market.


----------



## jimf41

Dean said:


> There you go again.  First, this is a rumor, nothing more, at this point.  We don't know that it's an orchestrated one by Marriott and definitely we do not know any purpose for it's existence though you are obviously convinced of both items.  We don't know what Marriott has plans to do and we don't know what they will do, we only have rumors at this point.  Further, we don't know what (or even if) a new system will be and we don't know, but can speculate, what the effects will be.  That was part of my point, that you're posting your opinion, and you may very well be right, as fact and based on a rumor that you presume to be true, complete and that will come to pass.





AceValenta said:


> AMEN!!!
> 
> I have been following this thread from the beginning as well. This rumor has turned into an argument between developer / resale buyers. It has morphed into items seemingly being posted as fact.
> 
> Face it, it is a rumor...RUMOR! That is all....Nothing more and nothing less. Amazing how one acorn fell from the tree and now the sky is falling all around us.



Thank you Dean
Thank you Ace


----------



## taffy19

*Exactly and they have done it once before...*



Dean said:


> This is where it gets sticky. Lets say I post that to buy mainly for Marriott reward points is stupid as a general statement and you bought for points. Or I say that to buy from DVC simply for comfort or financing issues alone is stupid but you did just that. I have not questioned your actions, only an action in general that coincidentally happens to apply to your situation. There are reasons to buy retail but they are few and far between for those that are truly informed and may be things like fixed weeks, platinum plus, new resort early pre-construction, and the like. As I noted previously, I have made 3 retail purchases but they were for very special situations. Minimal Bluegreen to convert a boatload of points, smaller DVC contract (4*25) at AKV and Surfwatch pre-construction but also moved 2 resale purchases to retail status in the deal.
> 
> It would be legal as long as it were fair and divided up the units and weeks equitably between both the weeks and points groups.
> 
> *I will point out that Marriott can essentially change the reservation system any way they wish. If you have an older resort that is floating, read your old documents as to the reservation system in place at the onset. The 12/13 month issue has only been around some 10-11 years or so.*


They did this with the resort where we owned (MDSV-I). We bought there before the 13 months' reservation window was introduced and 50% of our inventory was no longer available to single week owners just like that.  

It made it very hard for us to book the few weeks that we could go to our own resort during March so we finally decided to get rid of it and traded up to a fixed week/unit in Maui so that can never happen again. It was only through TUG that I found out that we should have tried to call later again because some weeks were released by the multi week owners but, by that time, we didn't own there anymore.

I talked to the MVCI and II this week and asked them questions about the new Marriott internal exchange system again but only the higher ups seem to know what is going on. Right now, it is still safe to deposit a week with II and still qualify for trading up or a flexchange in 2010 so that is good to know.

I also heard that the point system in the Orient is not handled by the same department that handles our floating weeks or the fixed week/units in Maui or the platinum plus weeks anywhere else in the USA. The two resorts in the USA that belong to the Orient point system already are completely separate from our system here. They must have allocated them right from the start to this new system so they must have been planning this for quite awhile. There are some clauses in our new contract that may be there for a reason too that they may want to go to a point system as it allows us to go floating from a fixed week. Why else would they put that in there?

If Marriott wants the new internal exchange system to be successful, they are not going to punish present re-sale owners or new re-sale buyers as that would only hurt them to get the new system to be a total success and fast. I only hope that it will be on a voluntary basis only as some people do not exchange or very seldom. There are resorts where people go year after year and stay multiple weeks as it is considered their second home away from home without the headaches of taking care of it. This is how they sold the fixed week/units in Maui to some of the well to do people who could afford multiple weeks so they could stay there without having to move from unit to unit as they had all the weeks one after another in the same condo. I doubt if they would want to go to a floating point system and giving up the benefit of their fixed week/unit, if they own multiple weeks. JMHO.

PS. The MDSV-I is one of the oldest resorts in the system and doesn't even have the ROFR clause in the contract either!


----------



## taffy19

Did I kill the thread? I hope not.  I was looking forward to read what else had been posted here today but I see nothing.  

*Marriott*, if you monitor this thread, why don't you stop the rumors for once and for all and hurry up with introducing the new system so we don't have to worry about it so much.

You are stopping your own sales as several people have mentioned already that they are going to wait with buying direct or re-sale too until you introduce the new system so we know where we stand.

The people, who are buying from you today, will search the Internet most likely after buying a timeshare on impulse and they will end up here and you may get one cancellation after another. Is that what you want? Not very smart, imho.

With all the emails you send out constantly, is it so hard to send a notice to us that you are working on a new system but that it is on a voluntary basis and that nobody is going to be treated as second class owners. This is what many people worry about, if they bought re-sale.

Sooner or later, everybody has to sell so will they be severely restricted too? What type of system is that? Buying a timeshare is hardly worth it then if you lose all your money which wasn't the case before. You don't want to follow Wyndham by Cendant, I hope. The Marriott has always been better than that. Please, continue that way.


----------



## davidvel

iconnections said:


> The people, who are buying from you today, will search the Internet most likely after buying a timeshare on impulse and they will end up here and you may get one cancellation after another. Is that what you want? Not very smart, imho.


Whether they see this thread or not if they end up at TUGBBS they will get a barrage of Rescind anyway!!!!


----------



## SueDonJ

davidvel said:


> Whether they see this thread or not if they end up at TUGBBS they will get a barrage of Rescind anyway!!!!



Yes, and every other "Rescind NOW!" will be in a gigantic 36 pt. bold red font, just in case they're hard of hearing.


----------



## hotcoffee

Dean said:


> As I noted before, I'd agree that it would be sleazy if the intent were only to destroy value, however, if the intent is to generate sales and the effect is the same, so be it and I would disagree with the sleazy characterization.



And I would say again that if they were to exclude resale owners (or future buyers) from the new program, the only possible intent would be to destroy resale value and thereby improve (in their view) direct sales.


----------



## Dean

hotcoffee said:


> And I would say again that if they were to exclude resale owners (or future buyers) from the new program, the only possible intent would be to destroy resale value and thereby improve (in their view) direct sales.


I would disagree but I suspected that would be your point.  Actually I suspect there will be some that hold that any action that might take away from a resale purchase will cry foul no matter how slight the impact or perceived impact is.  The intent in your example would be to encourage current and future buyers to buy retail by giving value to those retail owners that one cannot get resale.  You have it listed backwards, it's encourage retail which MAY reduce resale value.   As several have noted, there is a good chance that those who bought retail in the past will have little advantage over those that bought resale IF any of this comes to pass.


----------



## davidvel

Dean said:


> I would disagree but I suspected that would be your point.  Actually I suspect there will be some that hold that any action that might take away from a resale purchase will cry foul no matter how slight the impact or perceived impact is.  The intent in your example would be to encourage current and future buyers to buy retail by giving value to those retail owners that one cannot get resale.  You have it listed backwards, it's encourage retail which MAY reduce resale value.   As several have noted, there is a good chance that those who bought retail in the past will have little advantage over those that bought resale IF any of this comes to pass.



Just when I thought this thread was fading away.....


----------



## Dean

davidvel said:


> Just when I thought this thread was fading away.....


I predict 3 more years of discussion on this topic.


----------



## James1975NY

Not a lot of facts to go on here so I am not sure why there is so much concern with the "proposed" program.

For many, I am sure that they will see added benefits and flexibilty that they can _choose_ on their own if the program makes sense.

Also, I see assumptions that there will be fees involved to make reservations and that Marriott is trying to capture the exchange money that II typically gets. I am sure there will be a yearly membership fee to participate as many clubs require but a reservation fee does not make sense to me. Further, a membership fee to II is being paid as well as the exchange fee anyway.

I need to have more facts which I am sure will unfold in the near future.


----------



## icydog

*Yes I believe this will come to fruitition.*

I believe it is going to happen, but how it will impact anyone, retail or resale, has not been resolved yet IMHO. I think, again my beliefs, that Marriott will put this into action for all of its current owners and that it will be totally voluntary for all. I just wish Marriott didn't nickel and dime us to death, a fee here and a fee there certainly adds up. Now to add one more fee to go from one resort to the next seems like another Marriott money maker. Maybe it would be better if II gave Marriott a piece of their action. Maybe then Marriott would be happy.


----------



## NboroGirl

*Message from Marriott*

Today I received a letter from the Marriott salesman that I dealt with when I bought my first Marriott timeshare at Grande Vista.  He is now working at Grand Chateau in Vegas. 

The letter reminded owners to reserve, exchange, or trade-for-points their 2009 timeshares if they haven't already done so, before the end of the year.  Then there was this paragraph at the end:

*Next year we will unveil a major improvement in the Marriott Vacation Club program that is extremely exciting…It will add flexibility and value to our program….I will keep you posted….*

 Hmmm.... kind of cryptic. (?)


----------



## icydog

NboroGirl said:


> Today I received a letter from the Marriott salesman that I dealt with when I bought my first Marriott timeshare at Grande Vista.  He is now working at Grand Chateau in Vegas.
> 
> The letter reminded owners to reserve, exchange, or trade-for-points their 2009 timeshares if they haven't already done so, before the end of the year.  Then there was this paragraph at the end:
> 
> *Next year we will unveil a major improvement in the Marriott Vacation Club program that is extremely exciting…It will add flexibility and value to our program….I will keep you posted….*
> 
> Hmmm.... kind of cryptic. (?)



I heard the same thing. It's coming, but the details are unknown.


----------



## billymach4

*Rubbish*

All of these comments from the so called mail from the Sales Force are not endorsed by the Marriott Corporate office. 

These same Sales people troll around here on Tug and read the same silly rumor that is being proliferated in this thread.

In other words this thread is feeding the sales force in to purpetuating this rumor. Don't believe a word any Salesman says or writes. Remember they have only one goal in mind. To separate you from your money!


----------



## AceValenta

NboroGirl said:


> :
> 
> *Next year we will unveil a major improvement in the Marriott Vacation Club program that is extremely exciting…It will add flexibility and value to our program….I will keep you posted….*
> 
> Hmmm.... kind of cryptic. (?)



What resorts are opening next year?


----------



## CMF

billymach4 said:


> All of these comments from the so called mail from the Sales Force are not endorsed by the Marriott Corporate office.
> 
> These same Sales people troll around here on Tug and read the same silly rumor that is being proliferated in this thread.
> 
> In other words this thread is feeding the sales force in to purpetuating this rumor. Don't believe a word any Salesman says or writes. Remember they have only one goal in mind. To separate you from your money!



I contacted Marriott Corporate and they confirmed that there is a new "product" in development:



> _we are planning to introduce a new product form (sic?) next summer, many of the details of that program and the roll-out are still in development.  In fact, there is very little that I can confirm at this time as we work through the program detail and ensure the maximum value for our loyal owners._



Charles


----------



## m61376

Cancun is slated to begin sales in May/June and coincide with the new program. Supposedly it will be a completely points based release.


----------



## taffy19

m61376 said:


> Cancun is slated to begin sales in May/June and coincide with the new program. Supposedly it will be a completely points based release.


Did you hear that from a sales person or from Marriott Corporate?  It is going to be interesting when they let us know what the new system will be.  Will they take full control of the inventory of all floating units?  

They can't do this with fixed week/units unless we give up that right.  I agree with Larry in his earlier post.



Lawlar said:


> I cannot really justify the purchase of a timeshare from Marriott.  The value doesn't equal the amount paid.
> 
> Nonetheless, I am happy that my emotional, not to smart, decision to purchase a fixed week TS, in a fixed ocean front unit, protects me from any decision Marriott might make to switch to a points system.  I will be happy sitting in room 1208, on the fourth week of each year, watching the whales swim by.  My deed says I have that right.
> 
> Would I pay Marriott thousands more to "upgrade" to their points system.  No way.



I still believe that all the changes by the big developers are for one reason only and that is to get or keep more control over the whole operation and to make it more profitable for them.  Read about Starwood and Worldmark plus an interesting question here in another big thread.  It never ends as I linked to a similar DRI thread before with the same story.  I can't keep track of all these threads as there are so many.

Give me the little independent resorts that are run by a board consisting of owners for our benefit and not the management company that is owned by the developer.  No conflicts here.


----------



## lessthanjake

*funny*

I work for Marriott Vacation Club.  There is no such thing that has been announced or implemented that I nor anyone is aware of.  I am personal friends with many people with very high positions in the company and although it would be "confidential" i feel they would tell me.  Or at the very least I would think SOMEONE at our work would get wind of it.

The only time I ever hear *anything* about Marriott Internal exchanges is through Owners themselves.  

there are so many flaws with internal exchanging.  The first being Owner Services is way too small to handle the huge influx of call flow.  I could go on, but just trust me, it's not as simple as you all would like to make it seem.

From what I've noticed most people who want "Marriott Exchanges" are very close-minded people (in terms of ownership) who see the whole thing as "If I do it directly with Marriott, I won't have to pay fees at all!" This would be totally untrue.  You would be surprised how many people I talk to daily who think this.

"I am not getting what I want, so Interval must be lying to me".  Also bogus.  If you aren't getting what you want the majority of the time it is because A) the week you bought sucks for trading and nobody has the heart to tell you or B) you are asking for a ridiculous exchange because you are stubborn and can only go on vacation to one place, one week out of the year. "I want to go to Maui for spring break, weeeee!"

Exchanges won't get any better for "these particular people".   Stop blaming Interval and figure out how to work the Interval system.  And maybe I am wrong, maybe there is something in the works that nobody at Marriott Vacation Club knows about.......but I doubt it.


----------



## davidvel

lessthanjake said:


> I work for Marriott Vacation Club.


Are you a salesperson? If not, what general area do you work in?


----------



## m61376

Lessthanjake-
You are right that a lot of customer dissatisfaction steps from unrealistic expectations. While it is true that some people are just plain unreasonable, part of the onus falls on the sales reps for many of these, because lower value weeks are sold with the buyers being told of the wonderful exchanges they can make. Customers aren't told if they buy a cheaper week off season, for example, to expect only similar trades or that they better have a large travel window to get a match. That too is unfortunate.

As for the rest- this rumor mill has almost seen a life of its own.


----------



## dougp26364

lessthanjake said:


> I work for Marriott Vacation Club.  There is no such thing that has been announced or implemented that I nor anyone is aware of.  I am personal friends with many people with very high positions in the company and although it would be "confidential" i feel they would tell me.  Or at the very least I would think SOMEONE at our work would get wind of it.
> 
> The only time I ever hear *anything* about Marriott Internal exchanges is through Owners themselves.



DaveM has pretty good contacts and, to date has received basic info that has generally been spot on. BUT, all he's been told is that there is an internal exchange program coming and it's supposed to be released sometime next year. The qualifier of delay's are possible has been tossed in.

As far as not hearing it from anyone other than owners, well, spend some time on the sales floors as some of the Marriott resorts. On our last stay the owners meeting (not a sales presentation but how to use your Marriott ownership lecture/question/answer session) it was mentioned that Marriott was working on an internal exchange program.

Either your not as well connected as you say you are or, you're not who you claim to be. 



> there are so many flaws with internal exchanging.  The first being Owner Services is way too small to handle the huge influx of call flow.  I could go on, but just trust me, it's not as simple as you all would like to make it seem.
> 
> From what I've noticed most people who want "Marriott Exchanges" are very close-minded people (in terms of ownership) who see the whole thing as "If I do it directly with Marriott, I won't have to pay fees at all!" This would be totally untrue.  You would be surprised how many people I talk to daily who think this.
> 
> "I am not getting what I want, so Interval must be lying to me".  Also bogus.  If you aren't getting what you want the majority of the time it is because A) the week you bought sucks for trading and nobody has the heart to tell you or B) you are asking for a ridiculous exchange because you are stubborn and can only go on vacation to one place, one week out of the year. "I want to go to Maui for spring break, weeeee!"
> 
> Exchanges won't get any better for "these particular people".   Stop blaming Interval and figure out how to work the Interval system.  And maybe I am wrong, maybe there is something in the works that nobody at Marriott Vacation Club knows about.......but I doubt it.



Again you obviously DON'T have a good grib on internal exchange programs. The only point you make is that nothing is free. You're right, nothing is free. It's just less expensive to do internal exchagnes. The two internal exchange programs I can speak from experience on would be Hilton and Diamond Resorts. 

Hilton has a $99 club fee that includes RCI membership for owners. There are nominal fee's associated with internal exchanges but, they're in the $39 range. That's FAR below RCI's fee's for making external exchanges. We much prefer to make internal exchanges because it is considerably less expensive and we know what we're going to get. 

Diamond Resorts has a $255 membership fee for their internal exchange program but, that fee includes the annual dues for Interval Gold. That's ~$140/year of the cost members would pay anyway. Internal exchanges have no additional fee associated with them. Each internal exchange saves members $149 in fee's. The membership pays for itself with just one internal exchange rather than exchanging through Interval. 

Another point you make is about exchange value, not getting the exchanges owners want/expect/demand and owning weeks that suck. Internal points based systems spell out CLEARLY what you week's true value is and, makes those now impossible exchanges possible. How do they become possible you're asking? In most points based systems, points can be saved to the next year and/or borrowed from the future years. Both DRI and Hilton offer that option. I'd guess many other internal points based exchange programs offer it as well. Combining low value weeks points make it possible for one to grab a high value week they'll never be able to get in the current week for week system. Exchanges might not get any better but, they'll have another option that will allow them to get that impossible trade. 

And by the way, Marriott already HAS an internal points exchange system in place. If you don't know about it, you're definately NOT a Marriott employee or, you're so new you're to green to know about it. Look at Marriott's Asian system. MGC in Las Vegas participates in that internal points system already.

Sorry but your story doesn't match some of the basic facts. Pretenders are easy to spot on TUG. IMHO, you're either a pretender or to new to really know what's going on. Yes there's to much speculation on this thread. No one really knows what Marriott will do, if they do anything. But I'll take DaveM's word that something is in the pipeline.


----------



## Dean

lessthanjake said:


> I work for Marriott Vacation Club.  There is no such thing that has been announced or implemented that I nor anyone is aware of.  I am personal friends with many people with very high positions in the company and although it would be "confidential" i feel they would tell me.  Or at the very least I would think SOMEONE at our work would get wind of it.
> 
> The only time I ever hear *anything* about Marriott Internal exchanges is through Owners themselves.
> 
> there are so many flaws with internal exchanging.  The first being Owner Services is way too small to handle the huge influx of call flow.  I could go on, but just trust me, it's not as simple as you all would like to make it seem.
> 
> From what I've noticed most people who want "Marriott Exchanges" are very close-minded people (in terms of ownership) who see the whole thing as "If I do it directly with Marriott, I won't have to pay fees at all!" This would be totally untrue.  You would be surprised how many people I talk to daily who think this.
> 
> "I am not getting what I want, so Interval must be lying to me".  Also bogus.  If you aren't getting what you want the majority of the time it is because A) the week you bought sucks for trading and nobody has the heart to tell you or B) you are asking for a ridiculous exchange because you are stubborn and can only go on vacation to one place, one week out of the year. "I want to go to Maui for spring break, weeeee!"
> 
> Exchanges won't get any better for "these particular people".   Stop blaming Interval and figure out how to work the Interval system.  And maybe I am wrong, maybe there is something in the works that nobody at Marriott Vacation Club knows about.......but I doubt it.


I can't speak to your knowledge or lack of for any upcoming Marriott changes but I did want to address the MVCI-II exchange system as it relates to your post.  First, as noted by others, much of the onus has to fall on the salesperson for those that bought retail.  While I am a big believer in the "buyer beware" approach, there is not doubt that some sales people (inc MVCI) are not always honest and/or do not understand the system they are selling and the exchange options.  And while I would also agree that many have unrealistic exchange expectations, I would say they were often given those expectations by the sales staff and they are perpetuated by both Marriott and II.  II has a part to play in that they don't tell you that you have little or no chance of a given exchange.  And, IMO, II IS dishonest by omission because they don't reveal the info that would tell you where you stand.  They should tell you specific information that tells you what you're resort rating and trade power is.  A good points system does this though there may be other issues with even a good points system.


----------



## CMF

*Nothing to see here, folks, move along . . .*

Marriott hosted a webinar today at 1PM ET (US) and I logged in to see and hear.  Here is my exchange with some of the Marriott reps for you entertainment:


_From Charles  to All: Host: please let me know if you plan to discuss the new reservations/exchange product that Marriott intends to introduce in 2010.  Thank you.
From Advisor-Jessica-Owner Services to Charles :  Please hold all questions until the end of the webinar, we will address any concerns or questions at that time.
From Charles to All: Jessica, will you entertain my question regarding the new product that Marriott is planning for next year?
From Advisor-Jessica-Owner Services to Charles :  Currently we haven't heard anything about a new product to be rolled out in 2010.  Mr.  . . . . . , could I have your phone number or owner number so that I can have your Vacation Owner Advisor contact you?
From Advisor Lori to All:  For any additional questions please call Marriott's Owner Services at 800-845-4226 or Interval International at 800-622-1747
From Charles to Advisor-Jessica-Owner Services: My number is  . . . . .  I've been in contact with Keith XXXXXXX of Marriott and he confirmed that there is a new product in development.  The moderator contradicted this during the webinar saying that no changes are planned.
From Advisor-Jessica-Owner Services to Charles :  Marriott does not have any plans to change the partnership with Interval International and their exchange process.  I will send your VOA a request to have them contact you if you have further questions or concerns on the information you were given.
From Charles  to Advisor-Jessica-Owner Services: Are there also no plans to change the reservation process?
From Advisor-Jessica-Owner Services to Charles :  Concerning booking your home resorts or the exchange process?
From Charles  to Advisor-Jessica-Owner Services: Booking the home resort - I understood that you said that Marriott has no plans to change the exchange process.
From Advisor-Jessica-Owner Services to All:  Charles, Again, we haven't heard anything about changing the process for booking at your home resort._


----------



## dioxide45

CMF said:


> From Advisor-Jessica-Owner Services to All:  Charles, Again, we haven't heard anything about changing the process for booking at your home resort.[/I]



And they don't. They basically avoided the real question.


----------



## Dave M

Dredging this up....

It would appear from information I have obtained that "lessthanjake" works for or is closely associated with Starwood, not Marriott.


----------



## pwrshift

Welcome home, Dave.   

Have you finished all your travels and bridge for the year now?  

Brian


----------



## m61376

What a nice surprise- welcome back Dave! Hope all is well and you'll recap your adventures!


----------



## Dave M

No, still more traveling to go. But I'll be around more often now.


----------



## KathyPet

Dave, So happy to have you back "on board".  We missed you.  What has the favorite place that you have been to so far????


----------



## Dave M

No question about it - New Zealand! I'm going back in January.


----------



## SueDonJ

Hey Dave, good to see you, welcome back!


----------



## taffy19

Dave M said:


> No question about it - New Zealand! I'm going back in January.


How interesting and it will be summer there.   

I was starting to wonder if you were ever coming back to this forum again.  Welcome back, Dave.  Resale prices have gone down a lot during your absence.

PS.  This is hard to swallow if you bought direct from the developer   but not for resale buyers, of course.


----------



## LAX Mom

Dave M said:


> No question about it - New Zealand! I'm going back in January.



That's the #1 place my DH really wants to go! He wants to rent a car and drive around (the South island?, whichever is the most scenic). 

Welcome back Dave! We've missed you here on TUG and will be looking forward to more posts in the future. Glad to hear you are enjoying retirement!


----------

