# Marriott Vacations Worldwide to Acquire ILG to Create a Leading Global Provider of Premier Vacation



## WBP

*Moderator Note:  Open threads in the two other forums directly impacted by this acquisition here -
Marriott Vacations Worldwide, Marriott Vacations Worldwide (VAC) purchase of Interval Leisure Group (ILG) discussion!
Hyatt Residence Club, Marriott and ILG

***************************

http://ir.marriottvacationsworldwid...s-worldwide-acquire-ilg-create-leading-global

*Marriott Vacations Worldwide to Acquire ILG to Create a Leading Global Provider of Premier Vacation Experiences*
FINAL VAC-ILG Transaction Release (00980771xA26CA).PDF
*Leading upper-upscale and luxury vacation ownership and exchange company will have over 100 vacation properties around the world and approximately 650,000 ownersExclusive access to the world-class customer loyalty programs of Marriott International and Hyatt for vacation ownershipGlobal licensee of seven upper-upscale and luxury vacation brands including Marriott Vacation Club, Grand Residences by Marriott, Ritz-Carlton Destination Club, Sheraton Vacation Club, Westin Vacation Club, St. Regis Residence Club and Hyatt Residence ClubPremier exchange networks with nearly two million members and over 3,200 resorts worldwideCombined company will have pro-forma revenues of $2.9 billion and a diversified and complementary platform with significant contribution from recurring and fee-based revenue streamsTransaction structured to maintain strong and flexible balance sheet that will support future growth and shareholder returnsExpected to be accretive to MVW's adjusted earnings per share within the first year after close, with annual run-rate cost savings of at least $75 million within two years following closeCompanies to host conference call and webcast today at 8:00 a.m. Eastern Time*
ORLANDO, Fla. and MIAMI, April 30, 2018 /PRNewswire/ -- Marriott Vacations Worldwide Corporation(NYSE: VAC) ("MVW" or the "Company") and ILG (Nasdaq: ILG) today announced that they have entered into a definitive agreement under which MVW will acquire all of the outstanding shares of ILG in a cash and stock transaction with an implied equity value of approximately $4.7 billion. Under the terms of the agreement, ILG shareholders will receive $14.75 in cash and 0.165 shares of MVW common stock for each ILG share.

ILG is a leading provider of premier vacation experiences with over 40 properties and over 250,000 owners in its Vistana Signature Experiences and Hyatt Vacation Ownership portfolios, as well as exchange networks that comprise nearly two million members and over 3,200 resorts worldwide. As a combined entity, MVW and ILG will be a leader in the vacation experiences industry with significant scale, an expanded presence in key leisure destinations, the largest portfolio of upper-upscale and luxury brands in the industry and world-class exchange networks. The combined company will be the global licensee of seven upper-upscale and luxury vacation brands, including Marriott Vacation Club, Grand Residences by Marriott, Ritz-Carlton Destination Club, Sheraton Vacation Club, Westin Vacation Club, St. Regis Residence Club, and Hyatt Residence Club. It will also have exclusive access for vacation ownership to the Marriott Rewards, Starwood Preferred Guest and Ritz-Carlton Rewards loyalty programs for its six Marriott vacation ownership brands. With respect to its Hyatt business, the combined company will have rights to develop, market and sell under the Hyatt Vacation Ownership programs, including access to the almost 10 million members of the World of Hyatt loyalty platform. Finally, strengthening MVW's vacation properties' affiliation with ILG's exchange networks will reinforce Interval International's industry leading position and advance our objective of creating shareholder value.

"This transaction will combine two of the premier global vacation ownership companies to create a more diversified company with significantly enhanced marketing potential and scale to drive sales growth and value for both MVW and ILG shareholders," said Stephen P. Weisz, President and Chief Executive Officer of Marriott Vacations Worldwide. "With ILG, we will bring together six world-class vacation ownership brands under one licensing relationship with Marriott International, which will enable us to leverage high-value marketing and sales channels, including those provided by Marriott International's platforms, and enhance the benefits of our access to Marriott International's loyalty programs, call transfer and hotel linkage programs. We will also diversify our vacation ownership business with the addition of the Hyatt Vacation Ownership platform, providing exciting growth opportunities outside of the Marriott and Vistana platforms. Additionally, with ILG's leading exchange networks, we will gain recurring, high-margin revenue streams."

Mr. Weisz continued, "ILG shares our dedication to customers and commitment to creating an unparalleled vacation experience for our Owners. Together, I am confident that we will be better positioned to fulfill the dreams of Owners, Members and guests around the world by providing them with memories that will last a lifetime."

"We are very pleased to achieve this outcome for shareholders, as it provides them with immediate and compelling cash value and the opportunity to meaningfully participate in the long-term growth potential of a powerful combined company," said Craig M. Nash, Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer of ILG. "The strategic rationale for this transaction is clear. Combining these two highly complementary businesses will create an industry leader with enhanced scale and a broader product portfolio that will have great benefits for our members, owners and guests. Thanks to the dedication and hard work of our more than 10,000 talented associates around the world, we have been able to successfully adapt to changing industry dynamics throughout our history, and this transaction is another step in that evolution. MVW associates share the same values and goals that we have championed for so long, and we are confident that MVW and ILG are as strong a cultural fit as they are strategic."

*Compelling Strategic and Financial Benefits*

*Creates a leading global luxury and upper-upscale vacation ownership operator with access to world-class loyalty programs and an expanded portfolio of highly demanded vacation destinations: *Combining MVW and ILG will create a leading global vacation ownership and exchange company comprising approximately 650,000 owners, seven upper-upscale and luxury brands, over 100 vacation properties and more than 20,000 vacation ownership units around the world. With ILG's four resorts in Mexico and one on St. John (USVI), MVW will gain an important foothold in popular vacation destinations in Mexico and expand its presence in the Caribbean. Additionally, it will diversify its long history of upper-upscale brand management with the Hyatt Residence Club properties. ILG's resort management businesses across the U.S., Caribbean, Mexico and Europe will also significantly expand MVW's resort management capabilities and scope across the globe.
*Creates a platform to accelerate sales growth: *Through their agreements with Marriott International, MVW and ILG will have exclusive access for vacation ownership to the Marriott Rewards, Starwood Preferred Guest and Ritz-Carlton Rewards loyalty programs, which have over 100 million members and which are expected to be combined into a single loyalty program in early 2019. They will also be able to leverage the exclusive call transfer and hotel linkage rights that MVW gained through its recently amended agreement with Marriott International to drive valuable incremental tours and sales at ILG's Vistana properties, significantly enhancing the sales potential of these locations. In addition to these opportunities, the Hyatt Vacation Ownership business will benefit from continued access to almost 10 million World of Hyatt loyalty platform members for marketing opportunities and growth in highly desirable destinations.
*Diversifies revenues and expands margins with significant contribution from recurring and fee-based revenue streams: *The Company will benefit from premier exchange networks, which provide incremental, high-margin, recurring, fee-based revenue streams. ILG's Interval International, Vistana Signature Network, Hyatt Residence Club and Trading Places International exchange networks will comprise nearly two million members and over 3,200 resorts.

ILG's exchange networks and resort management business represent profitable revenue streams that will further diversify the Company's revenue profile and expand its margins. Additionally, owning Marriott Vacation Club, Vistana Signature Experiences and Hyatt Vacation Ownership, which on a combined basis represent over 50% of the corporate members of Interval International, will provide increased stability of cash flows from this business. The additional revenue streams that ILG would bring to the combined company would raise its total 2017 revenue to $2.9 billionwhile further diversifying its revenue mix.

Interval International, ILG's leading exchange business, will maintain its headquarters in Miami, Florida, where it has been based since its founding in 1976. Marriott Vacations Worldwide has deep respect for the Interval International leadership team and looks forward to working with them as the combined company take steps to grow this business into the future.
*Transaction structure will result in a strong and flexible balance sheet to support future growth and shareholder returns: *The combination will significantly enhance and diversify MVW's cash flows. ILG will contribute strong and recurring revenue streams that will enable the combined company to maintain flexibility for continued organic growth, strategic acquisitions, continued capital returns to shareholders and de-levering. On a pro-forma basis, the combined company would have 2017 adjusted EBITDA of $737 million[1]. Over the past four years, MVW has returned $775 million to its shareholders through dividends and share repurchases, and it expects to pay a pro-forma annual dividend of $1.60 per share following the close of the transaction.
*Immediately accretive to MVW's earnings and free cash flow profile and generates significant near-term cost savings: *The transaction is expected to be accretive to MVW's adjusted earnings per share within the first full year after close. It has identified and expects to achieve at least $75 million of annual run-rate cost savings within two years following the close of the transaction. Savings are expected to come primarily from the rationalization of redundant general and administrative, operating and public company costs.
*Integration Planning and Leadership*

Marriott Vacations Worldwide's President and Chief Executive Officer, Mr. Stephen Weisz, and its Chief Financial and Administrative Officer, Mr. John Geller, will continue to serve in their roles following the close of the transaction. The Marriott Vacations Worldwide Board of Directors will be expanded from eight to 10 members to include two current members of the ILG Board, and Mr. William Shaw will remain Chairman of the Board. MVW's headquarters will remain in Orlando, and the combined company will maintain a significant operating presence in Miami.

Following the close of the transaction, the combined company will trade on the NYSE under ticker symbol VAC.

*Transaction Details*

Under the terms of the merger agreement, which has been unanimously approved by the Boards of both companies, ILG shareholders will receive $14.75 in cash and 0.165 shares of MVW common stock for each ILG share. Following the close of the transaction, ILG shareholders will own approximately 43% of MVW's common shares on a fully-diluted basis, based on the number of MVW common shares outstanding today. Qurate Retail, Inc. has entered into a voting agreement with ILG in support of the transaction.

MVW has received financing commitments from J.P. Morgan and BofA Merrill Lynch. The completion of the transaction is not subject to a financing contingency.

*Approvals*

The transaction, which is expected to close in the second half of 2018, is subject to the satisfaction of customary closing conditions, including regulatory approvals and approval by shareholders of both companies.

*Advisors*

J.P. Morgan is acting as exclusive financial advisor to MVW and Kirkland & Ellis LLP is serving as legal advisor. Goldman Sachs & Co. LLC and Moelis & Company LLC are serving as financial advisors to ILG and Paul Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison LLP is serving as legal advisor.

*Conference Call / Webcast*

The companies will host a joint conference call today at 8:00 a.m. Eastern Time. To access the call, listeners should dial (877) 407-8289 and provide the access code 13679635. A replay of the call will be available. A live webcast of the conference call will also be available in the investor relations sections of both companies' websites at www.marriottvacationsworldwide.com or www.ilg.com.

Additional information with respect to the transaction will be posted in the investor relations sections of both companies' websites.

*About Marriott Vacations Worldwide Corporation*

Marriott Vacations Worldwide Corporation is a leading global pure-play vacation ownership company, offering a diverse portfolio of quality products, programs and management expertise with over 65 resorts. Its brands include Marriott Vacation Club, The Ritz-Carlton Destination Club and Grand Residences by Marriott. Since entering the industry in 1984 as part of Marriott International, Inc., the company earned its position as a leader and innovator in vacation ownership products. The company preserves high standards of excellence in serving its customers, investors and associates while maintaining a long-term relationship with Marriott International. For more information, please visit www.marriottvacationsworldwide.com.

*About ILG*

ILG (Nasdaq: ILG) is a leading provider of professionally delivered vacation experiences and the exclusive global licensee for the Hyatt®, Sheraton®, and Westin® brands in vacation ownership. The company offers its owners, members, and guests access to an array of benefits and services, as well as world-class destinations through its international portfolio of resorts and clubs. ILG's operating businesses include Aqua-Aston Hospitality, Hyatt Vacation Ownership, Interval International, Trading Places International, Vacation Resorts International, VRI Europe, and Vistana Signature Experiences. Through its subsidiaries, ILG independently owns and manages the Hyatt Residence Club program and uses the Hyatt Vacation Ownership name and other Hyatt marks under license from affiliates of Hyatt Hotels Corporation. In addition, ILG's Vistana Signature Experiences, Inc. is the exclusive provider of vacation ownership for the Sheraton and Westin brands and uses related trademarks under license from Starwood Hotels & Resorts Worldwide, LLC. Headquartered in Miami, Florida, ILG has offices in 15 countries and more than 10,000 associates. For more information, visit www.ilg.com

*Cautionary Statement Regarding Forward Looking Statements  *
Information included or incorporated by reference in this communication, and information which may be contained in other filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the "SEC") and press releases or other public statements, contains or may contain "forward-looking" statements, as that term is defined in the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 or by the SEC in its rules, regulations and releases. These forward-looking statements include, among other things, statements of plans, objectives, expectations (financial or otherwise) or intentions.

Forward-looking statements are any statements other than statements of historical fact, including statements regarding ILG's and MVW's expectations, beliefs, hopes, intentions or strategies regarding the future. Among other things, these forward-looking statements may include statements regarding the proposed combination of ILG and MVW; our beliefs relating to value creation as a result of a potential combination with ILG; the expected timetable for completing the transactions; benefits and synergies of the transactions; future opportunities for the combined company; and any other statements regarding ILG's and MVW's future beliefs, expectations, plans, intentions, financial condition or performance. In some cases, forward-looking statements can be identified by the use of words such `as "may," "will," "expects," "should," "believes," "plans," "anticipates," "estimates," "predicts," "potential," "continue," or other words of similar meaning.

Forward-looking statements are subject to risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially from those discussed in, or implied by, the forward-looking statements. Factors that might cause such a difference include, but are not limited to, general economic conditions, our financial and business prospects, our capital requirements, our financing prospects, our relationships with associates and labor unions, our ability to consummate potential acquisitions or dispositions, our relationships with the holders of licensed marks, and those additional factors disclosed as risks in other reports filed by us with the Securities and Exchange Commission, including those described in Part I of our most recently filed Annual Report on Form 10-K and subsequent reports on Forms 10-Q and 8-K as well as on MVW's most recently filed Annual Report on Form 10-K and subsequent reports on Forms 10-Q and 8-K.

Other risks and uncertainties include the timing and likelihood of completion of the proposed transactions between ILG and MVW, including the timing, receipt and terms and conditions of any required governmental and regulatory approvals for the proposed transactions that could reduce anticipated benefits or cause the parties to abandon the transactions; the possibility that ILG's stockholders may not approve the proposed transactions; the possibility that MVW's stockholders may not approve the proposed transactions; the possibility that the expected synergies and value creation from the proposed transactions will not be realized or will not be realized within the expected time period; the risk that the businesses of ILG and MVW will not be integrated successfully; disruption from the proposed transactions making it more difficult to maintain business and operational relationships; the risk that unexpected costs will be incurred; the ability to retain key personnel; the availability of financing; the possibility that the proposed transactions do not close, including due to the failure to satisfy the closing conditions; as well as more specific risks and uncertainties. You should carefully consider these and other relevant factors, including those risk factors in this communication and other risks and uncertainties that affect the businesses of ILG and MVW described in their respective filings with the SEC, when reviewing any forward-looking statement. These factors are noted for investors as permitted under the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. We caution readers that any such statements are based on currently available operational, financial and competitive information, and they should not place undue reliance on these forward-looking statements, which reflect management's opinion only as of the date on which they were made. Except as required by law, we disclaim any obligation to review or update these forward-looking statements to reflect events or circumstances as they occur.

*NO OFFER OR SOLICITATION  *
This communication is for informational purposes only and is not intended to and does not constitute an offer to buy, nor a solicitation of an offer to sell, subscribe for or buy any securities or the solicitation of any vote or approval in any jurisdiction pursuant to or in connection with the proposed transaction or otherwise, nor shall there be any sale, issuance or transfer of securities in any jurisdiction in contravention of applicable law. No offer of securities shall be made except by means of a prospectus meeting the requirements of Section 10 of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, and otherwise in accordance with applicable law.

*IMPORTANT INFORMATION AND WHERE TO FIND IT  *
The proposed transaction involving MVW and ILG will be submitted to ILG's stockholders and MVW's stockholders for their consideration. In connection with the proposed transaction, MVW will prepare a registration statement on Form S-4 that will include a joint proxy statement/prospectus for ILG's stockholders and MVW's stockholders to be filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission ("SEC"). ILG will mail the joint proxy statement/prospectus to its stockholders, MVW will mail the joint proxy statement/prospectus to its stockholders and ILG and MVW will file other documents regarding the proposed transaction with the SEC. This communication is not intended to be, and is not, a substitute for such filings or for any other document that MVW or ILG may file with the SEC in connection with the proposed transaction. SECURITY HOLDERS ARE URGED TO READ ALL RELEVANT DOCUMENTS FILED WITH THE SEC, INCLUDING THE REGISTRATION STATEMENT ON FORM S-4 AND THE JOINT PROXY STATEMENT/PROSPECTUS, CAREFULLY AND IN THEIR ENTIRETY IF AND WHEN THEY BECOME AVAILABLE, BECAUSE THEY WILL CONTAIN IMPORTANT INFORMATION. The registration statement, the joint proxy statement/prospectus and other relevant materials (if and when they become available) and any other documents filed or furnished by MVW or ILG with the SEC may be obtained free of charge at the SEC'sweb site at www.sec.gov. In addition, security holders will be able to obtain free copies of the registration statement and the joint proxy statement/prospectus from MVW by going to its investor relations page on its corporate web site at www.marriottvacationsworldwide.com and from ILG by going to its investor relations page on its corporate web site at www.ilg.com.

*PARTICIPANTS IN THE SOLICITATION  *
MVW, ILG, their respective directors and certain of their respective executive officers and employees may be deemed to be participants in the solicitation of proxies in connection with the proposed transaction. Information about MVW directors and executive officers is set forth in its Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2017, which was filed with the SEC on February 27, 2018, and in its definitive proxy statement filed with the SEC on April 3, 2018, and information about ILG's directors and executive officers is set forth in its Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2017, which was filed with the SEC on March 1, 2018 and in its definitive proxy statement filed with the SEC on April 3, 2017. These documents are available free of charge from the sources indicated above, and from MVW by going to its investor relations page on its corporate web site at www.marriottvacationsworldwide.com and from ILG by going to its investor relations page on its corporate web site at www.ilg.com. Additional information regarding the interests of participants in the solicitation of proxies in connection with the proposed transaction will be included in the registration statement, the joint proxy statement/prospectus and other relevant materials MVW and ILG file with the SEC.

*Contacts:

For Marriott Vacations Worldwide

Investors:*
Jeff Hansen,
Investor Relations
407.206.6149
jeff.hansen@mvwc.com 

*Media:*
Ed Kinney or Jacqueline V. Ader-Grob,
Corporate Communications
407.206.6278 / 407.513.6950
ed.kinney@mvwc.com or jacqueline.ader-grob@mvwc.com


*For ILG*

*Investors: *
Lily Arteaga
305.925.7302
Lily.Arteaga@ilg.com

*Media:*
Christine Boesch
305.925.7267
Chris.Boesch@ilg.com

George Sard / Stephen Pettibone / David Millar
Sard Verbinnen & Co.
ILG-SVC@sardverb.com

_[*TUG Moderator Note:* Info/tables that didn't copy as readable have been deleted from this post; see link for complete info.]_






 View original content:http://www.prnewswire.com/news-rele...f-premier-vacation-experiences-300638848.html

SOURCE Marriott Vacations Worldwide Corporation


----------



## WBP

Hopefully, Diamond Resorts will pull their affiliation from Interval International, and move to RCI, where Diamond will make the perfect bedfellows with Wyndham at RCI.


----------



## VacationForever

This is H(Y)UGE!


----------



## WBP

Notice mentioned access to Marriott and Hyatt brand loyalty programs for all members. HUGE!


----------



## pedro47

This is an awesome move by Marriott and Hyatt.


----------



## DannyTS

Most people here are in a better position for an educated guess than i am. What could this mean for mandatory and voluntary resorts? We are in the process of closing WLR and SVV Bella. 

Does it mean that we may have priority for II exchanges with Hyatt, Ritz and Marriott (currently only Vistana resorts if i am not mistaken). 
Does it mean we may have more options for booking with Staroptions? Probably not i would think.
Does it mean that it is going to be harder to book your own resort at WLR if they give access to more people in the system?


----------



## VacationForever

WJS said:


> Notice mentioned access to Marriott and Hyatt brand loyalty programs for all members. HUGE!


Devil is in its details.


----------



## VacationForever

DannyTS said:


> Most people here are in a better position for an educated guess than i am. What could this mean for mandatory and voluntary resorts? We are in the process of closing WLR and SVV Bella.
> 
> Does it mean that we may have priority for II exchanges with Hyatt, Ritz and Marriott (currently only Vistana resorts if i am not mistaken).
> Does it mean we may have more options for booking with Staroptions? Probably not i would think.
> Does it mean that it is going to be harder to book your own resort at WLR if they give access to more people in the system?


No one knows.

If it uses the RCI/Wyndham model, developer purchased points will have access to the other systems under the umbrella, that is Wyndham, Shell and Worldmark at 10 months or 9 months out.

Or VAC may throw everything into one basket with Marriott trust, which may make sense for Sheration Vacation Club and Westin Vacation Club, aka Vistana, but hard to comprehend for Hyatt Vacation Club.  Then the question is whether they will do it like what was done with Marriott legacy weeks to get these weeks into their trust, with a cutoff date.


----------



## DannyTS

VacationForever said:


> No one knows.
> 
> If it uses the RCI/Wyndham model, developer purchased points will have access to the other systems under the umbrella, that is Wyndham, Shell and Worldmark at 10 months or 9 months out.
> 
> Or VAC may throw everything into one basket with Marriott trust, which may make sense for Sheration Vacation Club and Westin Vacation Club, aka Vistana, but hard to comprehend for Hyatt Vacation Club.  Then the question is whether they will do it like what was done with Marriott legacy weeks to get these weeks into their trust, with a cutoff date.


It reinforces my happy feeling to be on my way to becoming an owner at Westin Lagunamar, at least i know that my vacations there should  not be affected by subsequent possible dilutions. I know they will claim that any changes will be better for us but we also know that their bottom line is the actual priority.


----------



## VacationForever

Until the details are announced as to how the various programs will work together, I am second guessing our decision to divest our Vistana portfolio the past couple of years.  We realized through time that we have strong preference for Marriott's timeshare resorts over Vistana's and hence the re-balancing of our ownership.  We will kick ourselves if everything gets lumped together.


----------



## Ken555

VacationForever said:


> Until the details are announced as to how the various programs will work together, I am second guessing our decision to divest our Vistana portfolio the past couple of years.  We realized through time that we have strong preference for Marriott's timeshare resorts over Vistana's and hence the re-balancing of our ownership.  We will kick ourselves if everything gets lumped together.



My guess is that will not occur, at least not equally. The brands are a part of the value of the transaction, not just the existing owners/customers. 

Ironically, I find this transaction less worrisome than I initially felt about the Marriott/Starwood merger.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## WBP

It could have been a lot worse; remember, a few weeks ago, Diamond Resorts/Apollo was on course to acquire ILG. Thank God that imploded.


----------



## WBP

Fact Sheet:

http://ir.marriottvacationsworldwide.com/static-files/9398e4bc-c058-433a-a9b7-6d7f099394e2


----------



## DannyTS

daydreaming: they are going to set up a comprehensive points system like Hilton, they are going to include all resorts and give everyone (mandatory and voluntary, resale and developer) an optional  annual allocation of points while continuing to use your home resort the way you have been used to.


----------



## GregT

All, 

I would speculate that if Starwood owners are going to directly access the Marriott properties, we will have to buy trust points in able to enroll our Starwood weeks. That is my guess, but it would make sense to me. 

It will be interesting to see this develop.

Best,

Greg


----------



## bizaro86

I have two speculative ideas. They could end SVN completely. This would effectively remove the mandatory resorts, which they hate. Then they give a free option for developer purchased weeks to become "elected" weeks in the MVC trust.

The other option would be to keep SVN as is but offer new purchasers access to MVC trust inventory through the MVC exchsnge company. In that case anyone requalifying would likely get it as well.

I could see some sort of equivalent to Wyndham club pass for weeks owners, but since they own II as well they are more likely to do it through there.


----------



## CalGalTraveler

Prediction: I could envision infrastructure cost efficiencies to service properties (e.g. housekeeping, maintenance, gardening, supply purchasing power) in places like Kaanapali beach where most of the TSs on the beach will now now managed by VAC (MOC, Hyatt Residence, WKORV, WKORVN, Nanea). They could leverage repair crews, renovation costs across properties.

Hopefully the savings will be passed along to the owners MFs - or at least keep MFs from rising as quickly.


----------



## DeniseM

I am hopeful that this is good news:

-I believe customer service has deteriorated under ILG.

-Remember the ILG money grab when they tried to start charging owners $59 for Guest Confirmations for home resort reservations?  I believe that was indicative of things to come.

-Many owners, do not like the name "Vistana Signature Experiences."  Since Marriott owns the "Starwood" name, maybe it can go back to Starwood or something better than "VSE."


----------



## buzglyd

DeniseM said:


> I am hopeful that this is good news:
> 
> -I believe customer service has deteriorated under ILG.
> 
> -Remember the ILG money grab when they tried to start charging owners $59 for Guest Confirmations for home resort reservations?  I believe that was indicative of things to come.
> 
> -Many owners, do not like the name "Vistana Signature Experiences."  Since Marriott owns the "Starwood" name, maybe it can go back to Starwood or something better than "VSE."



Marriott hotels owns the name. The timeshare group is a separate entity. But it still could happen I suppose. 

This is going to take a long time to complete and then any changes would take a long time to roll out. I'll bet everything stays the same for at least 3 years.


----------



## DannyTS

CalGalTraveler said:


> Prediction: I could envision infrastructure cost efficiencies to service properties (e.g. housekeeping, maintenance, gardening, supply purchasing power) in places like Kaanapali beach where most of the TSs on the beach will now now managed by VAC (MOC, Hyatt Residence, WKORV, WKORVN, Nanea). They could leverage repair crews, renovation costs across properties.
> 
> Hopefully the savings will be passed along to the owners MFs - or at least keep MFs from rising as quickly.


we wish. The savings will most likely go straight to their bottom line


----------



## CalGalTraveler

bizaro86 said:


> I have two speculative ideas. They could end SVN completely. This would effectively remove the mandatory resorts, which they hate. Then they give a free option for developer purchased weeks to become "elected" weeks in the MVC trust.
> 
> The other option would be to keep SVN as is but offer new purchasers access to MVC trust inventory through the MVC exchsnge company. In that case anyone requalifying would likely get it as well.
> 
> I could see some sort of equivalent to Wyndham club pass for weeks owners, but since they own II as well they are more likely to do it through there.



I could envision SVN ending (in several years) and the weeks becoming more akin to the MOC weeks in which resale owners need to deposit in II but get preferential SVN trades.  Makes me glad that I own where I want to stay (WKORVN).

Why would they limit the free election to developer purchased weeks and not resale?  Why would they care if they are increasing inventory for the trust to keep up with demand? I presume they would grandfather.

I can also envision your other option too.

What will happen to the Flex/points program?


----------



## hurnik

OK, so I don't own MVC, Sheraton/Starwood/Vistana, or Hyatt.
But this intrigues me (I had looked at Marriott but because of the treatment of resale, it added several thousand onto the costs).

Someone had mentioned in the Marriott forum that maybe (again, just speculation) it would be prudent to buy a resale Trust Points now so you could potentially be grandfathered in (IMO, a likely event that Marriott would eventually do to resales like they did for Marriott).

Could someone point me to a link here that I could read up more on how Vistana works?
I wouldn't necessarily be opposed to Hyatt either.

But I think I'll do some reading first and then post questions separately as to which program may be right for me.

Currently I own 4 HGVC Resales.


----------



## DeniseM

*Vistana FAQ: * https://tugbbs.com/forums/index.php...-to-timesharing-or-starwood-start-here.63224/

BUT, be aware that Staroptions (internal timeshare trading), and Starpoints (hotel points), are not deeded rights, so that part of Vistana could change under Marriott ownership.  No way to know at this point.


----------



## JohnPaul

WJS said:


> Notice mentioned access to Marriott and Hyatt brand loyalty programs for all members. HUGE!



I read that to mean that the company would have access to the members of the loyalty programs for marketing - not that TS owners would get access to the loyalty programs.


----------



## NNerland

*04/30/18   MARRIOTT VACATIONS WORLDWIDE AND ILG COMBINING TO CREATE A LEADING GLOBAL PROVIDER OF PREMIER VACATION EXPERIENCES*
The combined company will bring together several of the most coveted lifestyle vacation ownership brands under a single entity, providing an unparalleled collection of world-class vacation ownership resorts and services.

https://www.vistana.com/news-faq#faq20180430

With the FAQ sure doesn't sound like anything on the horizon with change -- simply a merger of companies.  Time will tell, but they re-affirm our ownership structures and talk about the value of both companies.  Time wil tell; but found the FAQ interesting that they were no questions about future potential or things they are looking at.


----------



## DannyTS

DeniseM said:


> I am hopeful that this is good news:
> 
> -I believe customer service has deteriorated under ILG.
> 
> Typically the bigger the company the worse the





NNerland said:


> *04/30/18   MARRIOTT VACATIONS WORLDWIDE AND ILG COMBINING TO CREATE A LEADING GLOBAL PROVIDER OF PREMIER VACATION EXPERIENCES*
> The combined company will bring together several of the most coveted lifestyle vacation ownership brands under a single entity, providing an unparalleled collection of world-class vacation ownership resorts and services.
> 
> https://www.vistana.com/news-faq#faq20180430
> 
> With the FAQ sure doesn't sound like anything on the horizon with change -- simply a merger of companies.  Time will tell, but they re-affirm our ownership structures and talk about the value of both companies.  Time wil tell; but found the FAQ interesting that they were no questions about future potential or things they are looking at.


I do not see any change for a while. With that being said, big companies do not like fragmented systems because it reduces their efficiency and capacity to manage so it not inconceivable that eventually they will propose an unified system if it favors their balance sheet.


----------



## Sicnarf

My hope is that they will merge the 3 vacation clubs and somehow normalize the internal exchange structure like what Marriott did with MRP,  SPG and Ritz programs.  That way owners of any of the existing clubs will have access to all properties within the new program subject to non-home resort restrictions (e.g. 8 months for VSE, 6 months for HRC).  From a VAC perspective,  a single program will eliminate the complexity of having to market 3 different programs to Marriott customers.


----------



## CalGalTraveler

Sicnarf said:


> My hope is that they will merge the 3 vacation clubs and somehow normalize the internal exchange structure like what Marriott did with MRP,  SPG and Ritz programs.  That way owners of any of the existing clubs will have access to all properties within the new program subject to non-home resort restrictions (e.g. 8 months for VSE, 6 months for HRC).  From a VAC perspective,  a single program will eliminate the complexity of having to market 3 different programs to Marriott customers.



Would love this but it will likely require a hefty upgrade fee to participate. This is most likely why Wyndham continues to run separate systems for their acquisitions and have not been able to integrate after several years. Perhaps Marriott would make the leap to better efficiencies but they still need to figure out a way to make money from doing it.


----------



## pharmgirl

We own both Marriott KoOlina in Oahu and Westin Kaanapali so happy that we’ll only have to deal with one set of rules

Also will be glad to get rid of name Vistana - never liked it


----------



## DavidnRobin

Non-VSE people able to reserve VSE resorts at 8-months thereby competing with VSE Owners using SOs?
...and this is good?
Nope
IMO



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## lizap

CalGalTraveler said:


> Would love this but it will likely require a hefty upgrade fee to participate. This is most likely why Wyndham continues to run separate systems for their acquisitions and have not been able to integrate after several years. Perhaps Marriott would make the leap to better efficiencies but they still need to figure out a way to make money from doing it.




They're going to have their work cut out for them if they intend to merge the Hyatt and Vistana system into MVC.  ILG made a complete mess with Hyatt by creating Hyatt Pure Points (HPP).  There is speculation that ILG was/is having trouble selling this product. I'm surprised MVC paid as much as they did for ILG.


----------



## CalGalTraveler

Any word on what's happening to the CEO of ILG? It sounds like MVC management will lead this new entity. Makes sense because they will know how to culturally manage/negotiate with Marriott Hotels for branding and promotion.


----------



## lizap

CalGalTraveler said:


> Any word on what's happening to the CEO of ILG? It sounds like MVC management will lead this new entity. Makes sense because they will know how to culturally manage/negotiate with Marriott Hotels for branding and promotion.



I hope they get rid of him. Complete lack of leadership skills, IMO.


----------



## Palmtreelady1

It sounds like they want our Caribbean properties! Would we have access to their properties in St Thomas and Aruba??!!!!


----------



## Sicnarf

DavidnRobin said:


> Non-VSE people able to reserve VSE resorts at 8-months thereby competing with VSE Owners using SOs?
> ...and this is good?
> Nope
> IMO
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


But then VSE owners will have lots of other places to choose from...


----------



## Helios

My take is that this good news overall.  Depending on how this unfolds, more competition at 8 months but I rarely reserve within 8 months. 

Now I may access to more Marriott properties (and Hyatt) and will combine my MKO unit with vistana.  Sounds good to me.  Plus this cements the hotel side relationship.


----------



## Sicnarf

CalGalTraveler said:


> Would love this but it will likely require a hefty upgrade fee to participate. This is most likely why Wyndham continues to run separate systems for their acquisitions and have not been able to integrate after several years. Perhaps Marriott would make the leap to better efficiencies but they still need to figure out a way to make money from doing it.


Of course, that is what a business is for.  But VAC has to provide compelling value to generate additional revenue from existing owners.  I'm certainly content with my VSE, HRC and HGVC VOIs but expanding access to VAC is an option I'll definitely consider depending on the price point.


----------



## YYJMSP

DavidnRobin said:


> Non-VSE people able to reserve VSE resorts at 8-months thereby competing with VSE Owners using SOs?
> ...and this is good?
> Nope
> IMO
> 
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk



All depends on the currency conversion of SO's to whatever.  If it's like the new Marriot/Starwood/Ritz joint program, I found it quite fair (in the short-term, until they realign redemption rates)

Could be the owners in the other systems won't have enough "new options" to book our properties anyways.


----------



## controller1

DavidnRobin said:


> Non-VSE people able to reserve VSE resorts at 8-months thereby competing with VSE Owners using SOs?
> ...and this is good?
> Nope
> IMO
> 
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk



I agree that part does not sound good. It's like two months of limbo for VSE people.  Instead of making a 8-month SO reservation I wait to make 6-month reservation somewhere else just to find that the date and/or resort I want is not available. I go back to make a SO reservation but, low and behold, non-VSE people have already taken the desirable dates/resorts the past two months!


----------



## WatsonC2

I'll add my own speculation after reading the FAQs.  

-They use the word "brands" and the phrase "complementary product portfolios".  I think that is noteworthy and most big consumer companies have many brands.  Look at how many hotel brands are under the Hilton or Starwood umbrellas.  No reason to believe they would combine brands.  They reach different consumers groups.
-Interval makes its money on exchanges.  Why would they combine anything and reduce this profit line?  I could see new product lines where new trusts are created and offered, however, (imagine a Hawaiian trust or a Mexican trust) but it would probably be points based as that seems to be the new normal in timeshares.  These would most likely align on quality/pricepoint like Westin Flex is different than Sheraton Flex.  This idea though I think is unlikely.
-The use the phrase "greater scale" which in the business world means combined systems to gain efficiency, like maybe combining call centers or maybe their IT systems.


----------



## CalGalTraveler

Bottom line: I am thankful this was not Diamond or Wastegate takeover. I believe we are in good hands with Marriott because Marriott owners seem happy.

If they provide an attractive offer for DC Trust points or some other program, then we will participate. Worst case, we bought our Vistana to use (WKORVN) and will simply use or rent it out rather than trade.

I am thankful that all but one of our timeshares are heavily discounted resale purchases so we don't have much to lose if we ultimately have to give them away someday.


----------



## Ken555

I tend to doubt there will be the integration many of you are mentioning. I suspect the systems will remain separate.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## dioxide45

Ken555 said:


> I tend to doubt there will be the integration many of you are mentioning. I suspect the systems will remain separate.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


Even if they don't fully integrate, there is a likelihood they will offer some type of system like Wyndham/Shell/Worldmark. Offer up some type of higher level exchange program that allows cross access. It of course doesn't come cheap and requires a developer purchase. I would expect some type of program like this to use as a selling tool. However, most will find it is usually not a good use of ownership.


----------



## Ken555

dioxide45 said:


> Even if they don't fully integrate, there is a likelihood they will offer some type of system like Wyndham/Shell/Worldmark. Offer up some type of higher level exchange program that allows cross access. It of course doesn't come cheap and requires a developer purchase. I would expect some type of program like this to use as a selling tool. However, most will find it is usually not a good use of ownership.



Sure, anything is possible...


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## VacationForever

DavidnRobin said:


> Non-VSE people able to reserve VSE resorts at 8-months thereby competing with VSE Owners using SOs?
> ...and this is good?
> Nope
> IMO
> 
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Which is the same way I feel about non-Marriott owners booking Marriott resorts, not good.


----------



## VacationForever

Ken555 said:


> I tend to doubt there will be the integration many of you are mentioning. I suspect the systems will remain separate.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


I hope they will be kept separate.


----------



## Carol C

DeniseM said:


> *Vistana FAQ: * https://tugbbs.com/forums/index.php...-to-timesharing-or-starwood-start-here.63224/
> 
> 
> 
> VacationForever said:
> 
> 
> 
> I hope they will be kept separate.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And I hope they remain uppity and ultra upper upscale!
Click to expand...


----------



## Helios

dioxide45 said:


> Offer up some type of higher level exchange program that allows cross access. It of course doesn't come cheap and requires a developer purchase.


I like the idea of full integration at no cost.

However, it probably won’t happen.  But, if you bring new money (lots of it) you can make it happen...just buy more...and when MVC gets bought in the future then you have to do it all over again...

The cross access or fully integrated system is my hope...


----------



## VacationForever

Helios said:


> I like the idea of full integration at no cost.
> 
> However, it probably won’t happen.  But, if you bring new money (lots of it) you can make it happen...just buy more...and when MVC gets bought in the future then you have to do it all over again...
> 
> The cross access or fully integrated system is my hope...


Nothing comes free.  It is all about making more money for their shareholders.

Personally, as Marriott owners and we have carefully made that decision in recent years, we have no interest in Hyatt and Vistana resorts beyond the existing access we have through our Vistana ownership.


----------



## Julian926

I'm liking the merger overall since we'll likely have access to other portfolios. However, for me, we have a 2 bedroom non-lockout. We have Staroptions that allows us to get 1bd rooms.   I'm hoping they won't remove the Staroptions that give us a lot of flexibility.  Would hate to be forced to use the same ILG system where we have to trade the entire 2bedroom.


----------



## suzannesimon

GregT said:


> All,
> 
> I would speculate that if Starwood owners are going to directly access the Marriott properties, we will have to buy trust points in able to enroll our Starwood weeks. That is my guess, but it would make sense to me.
> 
> It will be interesting to see this develop.
> 
> Best,
> 
> Greg



It would be nice if Marriott would let us enroll our weeks in the Destination Club like they did when they rolled out the points program. They have recently been allowing this for free.  That way you keep your week but have the option to trade it for points to use in the Destination Club.  Then they will be able to sell more Trust points to us to hit the next level of perks.


----------



## suzannesimon

DavidnRobin said:


> Non-VSE people able to reserve VSE resorts at 8-months thereby competing with VSE Owners using SOs?
> ...and this is good?
> Nope
> IMO
> 
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk



But you would also have the option to book Marriott and Hyatt properties as well.  If that happens at all, you’ll have a lot more choices.  I’m hoping they keep the 3 systems separate and give us an exclusive right to book all 3 brands in Interval during the first 3 weeks something is deposited in II, similar to what Marriott has had for years.  After all, Marriott will now have to feed the Interval beast now that they own it.


----------



## DannyTS

my best bet: in the medium term this acquisition will probably mean for us:

1) more booking options
2) a bit more costly if you want to benefit from 1)
3) a worse customer service experience

Number 3) usually follows mergers and acquisitions; a lower aggregate number or client service people that have to deal with more types of problems. Any problem that is not straight forward will be harder to fix and no one will take responsibility.
1) and 2): the companies do not mind giving more options IF they can profit from it.


----------



## bizaro86

VAC headquarters are in Orlando, and the combined company will be headquartered there.


----------



## DannyTS

bizaro86 said:


> VAC headquarters are in Orlando, and the combined company will be headquartered there.


good point, thank you. i am going to edit that part


----------



## JIMinNC

Ken555 said:


> I tend to doubt there will be the integration many of you are mentioning. I suspect the systems will remain separate.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk



It may not (probably won't?) be a full, seamless integration, but given that VAC is paying a premium for ILG, they have to be able to show significant benefit/growth from the transaction. Just the $75 million in administrative and operational savings won't cut it on Wall Street. If that's all they can do, VAC stock will be pummeled more than it was pummeled yesterday. They also have to be able to grow top line revenue, and the way to do that is to sell more DC Trust points in MVC and more StarOptions in the old VSN. To increase sales, they need to be able to sell the benefits of access to all three main resort systems - MVC, VSN, and HRC. Too sell that benefit, they need some sort of integration to facilitate some sort of points-based exchange mechanism within the new company. It may wind up being separate from the existing systems themselves, but if they want to grow shareholder value, it will be a necessity. Investors will demand it.


----------



## Ken555

JIMinNC said:


> It may not (probably won't?) be a full, seamless integration, but given that VAC is paying a premium for ILG, they have to be able to show significant benefit/growth from the transaction. Just the $75 million in administrative and operational savings won't cut it on Wall Street. If that's all they can do, VAC stock will be pummeled more than it was pummeled yesterday. They also have to be able to grow top line revenue, and the way to do that is to sell more DC Trust points in MVC and more StarOptions in the old VSN. To increase sales, they need to be able to sell the benefits of access to all three main resort systems - MVC, VSN, and HRC. Too sell that benefit, they need some sort of integration to facilitate some sort of points-based exchange mechanism within the new company. It may wind up being separate from the existing systems themselves, but if they want to grow shareholder value, it will be a necessity. Investors will demand it.



Obviously, MVC needs to make money from the acquisition. 


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## Salinemi1

With the purchase of Interval will MVC be able to pull Marriott weeks deposited with interval and put these weeks in their inventory to then be reserved by people with MVC points?  (i.e. take any high demand weeks deposited with II and use them for the points progesm instead of letting them trade in the II exchange system).  This wouldn’t be good for Marriott owners who exchange in II.


----------



## JIMinNC

suzannesimon said:


> But you would also have the option to book Marriott and Hyatt properties as well.  If that happens at all, you’ll have a lot more choices.  I’m hoping they keep the 3 systems separate and give us an exclusive right to book all 3 brands in Interval during the first 3 weeks something is deposited in II, similar to what Marriott has had for years.  After all, Marriott will now have to feed the Interval beast now that they own it.



They may do something like that as an initial, easy step (sorta like Marriott International's decision to allow to transfer of points between Rewards and SPG well prior to the full integration of the two loyalty programs), but given that selling points is the lifeblood of the primary corporate revenue stream, I think you should expect any ultimate inter-program exchanges to be primarily points based. That's where the primary profit potential exists and is without question the future of the overall Marriott Vacations Worldwide strategy. They will of course need to keep Interval viable, but Exchanging only represents 17% of the new company's Net Revenue. Sale of Vacation Ownership interests accounts for 42%.


----------



## TravelTime

Since we are all making guesses, I'll jump in too. I think they will merge MVC, Vistana and Hyatt into one Points system, just like they are merging their hotel points programs. I am guessing they will get rid of the Westin mandatory resorts that come with StarOptions going forward. They will probably grandfather in those of us with mandatory resorts and offer us some amount in the new points program instead. I suspect like they did with the post-2010 Marriott weeks, none of this will transfer when we sell, hence lowering our resale value. I think they will do the same with Hyatt. In the future, I am guessing all weeks bought resale will trade through Interval. I am not sure if they will sell us DC Trust points for Marriott weeks that are post-2010 to qualify them since they rarely do that now but they might. I doubt they will force owners of Vistana StarOptions or Hyatt points to buy additional points unless it is heavily discounted and optional. Usually Marriott is fair when they convert programs. After the conversion, though, I suspect resale week owners for Westin, Sheraton and Hyatt will get a lot less, just like the post-2010 Marriott weeks owners. Hence, buy where you want to own or buy a strong trader with low MFs.


----------



## DavidnRobin

There are no Mandatory resorts in active sales by VSE, and have not been since WKORVN.


----------



## TravelTime

DavidnRobin said:


> There are no Mandatory resorts in active sales by VSE, and have not been since WKORVN.



My guess was they will get rid of the resale benefits that come with Mandatory resorts, like they did with anyone buying a Marriott week after 2010. Right now, Vistana and Hyatt are great because you get almost all the benefits of buying direct except hotel points conversion. Then they will probably more actively buy back Westin, Sheraton and Hyatt weeks to sell hybrid packages or resale weeks directly with points, like they do now. This is assuming they are legally allowed to do this.


----------



## DavidnRobin

TravelTime said:


> My guess was they will get rid of the resale benefits that come with Mandatory resorts, like they did with anyone buying a Marriott week after 2010. Right now, Vistana and Hyatt are great because you get almost all the benefits of buying direct except hotel points conversion. Then they will probably more actively buy back Westin, Sheraton and Hyatt weeks to sell hybrid packages or resale weeks directly with points, like they do now. This is assuming they are legally allowed to do this.



Are you asserting that they may remove the ability to use SOs for VSN reservations for resale Mandatory VOIs already owned and future purchases???

They would have to amend the current CCRs and VSN agreements, and defend multiple lawsuits by Owners that will have their ownerships serious devalued (observed with the resale value of every Voluntary resort).

The new Flex systems are already VSN Voluntary - so this is not new.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## DannyTS

TravelTime said:


> My guess was they will get rid of the resale benefits that come with Mandatory resorts, like they did with anyone buying a Marriott week after 2010. Right now, Vistana and Hyatt are great because you get almost all the benefits of buying direct except hotel points conversion. Then they will probably more actively buy back Westin, Sheraton and Hyatt weeks to sell hybrid packages or resale weeks directly with points, like they do now. This is assuming they are legally allowed to do this.


They wish they could, but they can’t:

CC&Rs for SVV Bella on the Orange County Florida Comptrollers website. The Starwood Vacation Club Resort Affiliation Agreement

Page 91:

III. Membership in the Network

A purchaser of a Vacation Ownership Interest in a Club Resort automatically is enrolled in the Network as a Network Member at the time that the Network Member acquires the Network Member's Vacation Ownership Interest. (…) Membership in the Network is granted to all purchasers of Club Resort Vacation Ownership Interests. (…) If the Network Member no longer owns a Club Resort Vacation Ownership Interest, the person no longer will be a Network Member and the new owner of that Club Resort Vacation Ownership Interest automatically will become the Network Member.


There are other paragraphs that would create a lot of legal and PR problems for them if they tried to kick out mandatory resale owners from the club.


----------



## JIMinNC

TravelTime said:


> Since we are all making guesses, I'll jump in too. I think they will merge MVC, Vistana and Hyatt into one Points system, just like they are merging their hotel points programs.



Just remember the company that is merging the Marriott Rewards and SPG hotel points programs is NOT the same company that has agreed to buy ILG. The hotel programs are run by Marriott International (ticker: MAR) and the company that is buying ILG is Marriott Vacations Worldwide (ticker: VAC). These are two totally different companies with separate boards and management, so how "they" (Marriott International) handled the hotel points conversion has no real bearing on how VAC will handle this integration. VAC's relationship with MAR is just contractual, giving them the right to use Marriott International-owned trademarks and allowing cooperative marketing arrangements. They way MAR does business is different from the way VAC does business.


----------



## bizaro86

DannyTS said:


> They wish they could, but they can’t:
> 
> CC&Rs for SVV Bella on the Orange County Florida Comptrollers website. The Starwood Vacation Club Resort Affiliation Agreement
> 
> Page 91:
> 
> III. Membership in the Network
> 
> A purchaser of a Vacation Ownership Interest in a Club Resort automatically is enrolled in the Network as a Network Member at the time that the Network Member acquires the Network Member's Vacation Ownership Interest. (…) Membership in the Network is granted to all purchasers of Club Resort Vacation Ownership Interests. (…) If the Network Member no longer owns a Club Resort Vacation Ownership Interest, the person no longer will be a Network Member and the new owner of that Club Resort Vacation Ownership Interest automatically will become the Network Member.
> 
> 
> There are other paragraphs that would create a lot of legal and PR problems for them if they tried to kick out mandatory resale owners from the club.



They couldn't kick mandatory owners out of the VSN club. However, I think they could shut it down and start a new club and then not invite the resale mandatory resort owners.

They could call it the "No Homers Club"


----------



## DannyTS

bizaro86 said:


> They couldn't kick mandatory owners out of the VSN club. However, I think they could shut it down and start a new club and then not invite the resale mandatory resort owners.
> 
> They could call it the "No Homers Club"


Again, big legal problems. And we are not talking about Mugabe heading this company.


----------



## TravelTime

bizaro86 said:


> They couldn't kick mandatory owners out of the VSN club. However, I think they could shut it down and start a new club and then not invite the resale mandatory resort owners.
> 
> They could call it the "No Homers Club"



This is what I was thinking they might do. Again, we are all speculating here. I am a Westin mandatory owner too so it would impact the resale value of one of my timeshares if they did this but if they gave me enough DC points and the new program were better, I would not care. I might get better trades through a new and improved Marriott DC Points program than through StarOptions. If so, I would be happier.


----------



## mjm1

I just can’t see them alienating a large portion of owners in Vistana and Hyatt by eliminating benefits that you now have, whether you were a direct purchaser or a resale purchaser. They are paying a premium to acquire the opportunity for additional revenue streams, so they will want to retain the current owners as much as possible and will see them as potential buyers in the future. I can see a program where they let current owners enroll their ownerships in the DC program, or whatever they may create in the future, if anything, just like like did with the current DC program.

Time will tell, but I think we will have more opportunities with the combined entity. I am an optimist and hope I am right.

Best regards.

Mike


----------



## duke

pharmgirl said:


> Also will be glad to get rid of name Vistana - never liked it



AGREED!!!!


----------



## DannyTS

TravelTime said:


> This is what I was thinking they might do. Again, we are all speculating here. I am a Westin mandatory owner too so it would impact the resale value of one of my timeshares if they did this but if they gave me enough DC points and the new program were better, I would not care.



Personally i think they would have more to lose that just dealing with few pissed off mandatory resort owners. This would give everyone the feeling that we are dealing with a company that changes things arbitrarily and (most likely) illegally. And i do not see a judge being fooled by this kind of move.

It is clear what mandatory resort owners have to lose. But voluntary resorts would lose value as well when a fresh bunch of deeds will be on the market with negative resale value. How easy will be for the company to sell new weeks when they have to deal with  thousands of upset current owners and an overhanging lawsuit? I would make it my FB page for sure! And i do not even see what they would gain from this. Would people jump to buy developer weeks/ points or the opposite with all the negative publicity? I just do not see it happening; again this is not banana republic, in the end they want to keep owners (moderately) happy. Big companies like to screw people slowly not in a dramatic fashion. I am an optimist, like others  I think that we will have more options in the future.


----------



## DannyTS

duke said:


> AGREED!!!!





duke said:


> AGREED!!!!


100%


----------



## Berea1

Quick - provide us with the top 20 codes for these newly acquired resorts so I can add them to my top 20 Marriott codes that I do my Monday morning searches for.   Patrick


----------



## TravelTime

I was not around for the roll out of the DC Points program. However, from what I understand, MVC devalued resale weeks because the option to enroll into the DC Points program did not transfer with resale weeks. You can only trade Marriott resale weeks on Interval. Was there a lawsuit following this?


----------



## JIMinNC

mjm1 said:


> I just can’t see them alienating a large portion of owners in Vistana and Hyatt by eliminating benefits that you now have, whether you were a direct purchaser or a resale purchaser. They are paying a premium to acquire the opportunity for additional revenue streams, so they will want to retain the current owners as much as possible and will see them as potential buyers in the future. I can see a program where they let current owners enroll their ownerships in the DC program, or whatever they may create in the future, if anything, just like like did with the current DC program.
> 
> Time will tell, but I think we will have more opportunities with the combined entity. I am an optimist and hope I am right.
> 
> Best regards.
> 
> Mike



Agree 100%. According to VAC's 2017 10-K annual report, about 66% of their sales of vacation ownership products come from current owners. I don't know what ILG's % is, but I bet it is similar. These are smart, publicly-traded companies that would not want to anger two-thirds of their sales prospects by significantly and suddenly de-valuing their products. As someone else posted, negative changes tend to be gradual so as to have minimal short-term impact.


----------



## DannyTS

TravelTime said:


> I was not around for the roll out of the DC Points program. However, from what I understand, MVC devalued resale weeks because the option to enroll into the DC Points program did not transfer with resale weeks. You can only trade Marriott resale weeks on Interval. Was there a lawsuit following this?



You are being too negative, the legal ground is very solid in our case, please review one of my previous posts; they would have done it already otherwise. By the way, what mandatory resort do you own?


----------



## TravelTime

JIMinNC said:


> Agree 100%. According to VAC's 2017 10-K annual report, about 66% of their sales of vacation ownership products come from current owners. I don't know what ILG's % is, but I bet it is similar. These are smart, publicly-traded companies that would not want to anger two-thirds of their sales prospects by significantly and suddenly de-valuing their products. As someone else posted, negative changes tend to be gradual so as to have minimal short-term impact.



I agree that they will probably implement changes slowly. First, they need to complete the merger. That could take a while. I doubt there will be many changes to the programs for a few years.


----------



## JIMinNC

TravelTime said:


> I was not around for the roll out of the DC Points program. However, from what I understand, MVC devalued resale weeks because the option to enroll into the DC Points program did not transfer with resale weeks. You can only trade Marriott resale weeks on Interval. Was there a lawsuit following this?



It doesn't seem they devalued weeks at all as far as I can see. Weeks owners prior to June 2010 when the DC was announced still have the exact same ability to use and book their week as they always have. Many weeks owners enrolled their weeks (According to the 2017 10-K, as of the end of 2017, approximately 176,000 weeks-based owners have enrolled nearly 280,000 weeks in the Destination Club since its launch), but these folks can still use their weeks as they always have - they have just added the option to convert their week to points in any year that they choose to.

Post-2010 buyers like me can't typically enroll, but we knew that going in.

Yes, there have been lawsuits, but many of these seem to be the typical kind of nuisance lawsuits that happen to companies all the time.


----------



## TravelTime

JIMinNC said:


> It doesn't seem they devalued weeks at all as far as I can see. Weeks owners prior to June 2010 when the DC was announced still have the exact same ability to use and book their week as they always have. Many weeks owners enrolled their weeks (According to the 2017 10-K, as of the end of 2017, approximately 176,000 weeks-based owners have enrolled nearly 280,000 weeks in the Destination Club since its launch), but these folks can still use their weeks as they always have - they have just added the option to convert their week to points in any year that they choose to.
> 
> Post-2010 buyers like me can't typically enroll, but we knew that going in.
> 
> Yes, there have been lawsuits, but many of these seem to be the typical kind of nuisance lawsuits that happen to companies all the time.



So why has the cost to buy Marriott weeks on the resale market gone down so much?


----------



## TravelTime

DannyTS said:


> my best bet: in the medium term this acquisition will probably mean for us:
> 
> 1) more booking options
> 2) a bit more costly if you want to benefit from 1)
> 3) a worse customer service experience
> 
> Number 3) usually follows mergers and acquisitions; a lower aggregate number or client service people that have to deal with more types of problems. Any problem that is not straight forward will be harder to fix and no one will take responsibility.
> 1) and 2): the companies do not mind giving more options IF they can profit from it.



Why are you being so negative? LOL Just teasing you.


----------



## DannyTS

TravelTime said:


> So why has the cost to buy Marriott weeks on the resale market gone down so much?


New to TS so i might be wrong but my understanding is that in the last 10 years most resorts have gone down regardless of company and location.


----------



## VacationForever

TravelTime said:


> I was not around for the roll out of the DC Points program. However, from what I understand, MVC devalued resale weeks because the option to enroll into the DC Points program did not transfer with resale weeks. You can only trade Marriott resale weeks on Interval. Was there a lawsuit following this?


There was no devaluation of weeks system because there was never a DC system in the first place.


----------



## VacationForever

TravelTime said:


> So why has the cost to buy Marriott weeks on the resale market gone down so much?


All resale timeshare prices have gone down through time, not just Marriott's.  Ken reported paying for WKV for 20K back in the days, now you can buy one for 12K.


----------



## VacationForever

Duplicate.


----------



## TravelTime

VacationForever said:


> All resale timeshare prices have gone down through time, not just Marriott's.  Ken reported paying for WKV for 20K back in the days, now you can buy one for 12K.



Why do folks think the resale value of timeshares is going down? I understand why buying from developers loses value as soon as you walk out the door but why would the resale market also lose value? Disney does not lose value.


----------



## VacationForever

TravelTime said:


> Why do folks think the resale value of timeshares is going down? I understand why buying from developers loses value as soon as you walk out the door but why would the resale market also lose value? Disney does not lose value.


I stand corrected as Disney is indeed an exception.  I guess it may be that DVC offers an unique experience.

I attribute decreasing price, not the intrinsic value, to better informed public as well as more owners wanting to get out due to age and life changes than new owners wanting in.  As TUGgers often tout that renting as better than buying, the rise of AirBnB etc, have given more options to stay at somewhere new without the burden of ownership.


----------



## JIMinNC

TravelTime said:


> So why has the cost to buy Marriott weeks on the resale market gone down so much?





TravelTime said:


> Why do folks think the resale value of timeshares is going down? I understand why buying from developers loses value as soon as you walk out the door but why would the resale market also lose value? Disney does not lose value.



As others have said, it seems all timeshare prices, independent of which system, have dropped - except for Disney (which is indeed a unique animal for many reasons). It think the Great Recession started the process, and once values plummeted, it's hard to go back up since more and more units are showing up on the resale market for all the reasons VacationForever mentioned. Because the resale market is so fragmented, with very little inventory visibility to the average Joe or Josephine, there are very few market forces to cause prices to rise substantially, making it harder for the market to recover from the 2008-2012 carnage. I guess it's possible that the inability to enroll resale weeks has helped keep prices at depressed levels, but the reality is, the Marriott weeks people bought and owned prior to June 2010 have pretty much the same capability as today's external resale weeks - they can be used at the home resort and traded through II. People who still own pre-2010 weeks can add an additional option via enrollment, but when those weeks are re-sold, they basically revert to the exact same product that existed for everyone prior to June 2010. So, if anything, I think the DC has been an enhancement (for pre-2010 owners) or a non-issue (for post-2010 resale buyers) rather than a devaluation.

The reason DVC may be different could be that it is a very targeted product with locations concentrated in places where no one else can be (the Disney parks). That makes it impossible to replicate - so low supply with high demand keeps prices up.


----------



## CalGalTraveler

FWIW the total $ amount of decline on resale is much less than of decline after a developer purchase. Although our original developer unit still gives me heartburn as to how much it has devalued (tens of thousands), I don't lose sleep over our resales because we bought them for $7 - 12k.  If we lose half of the value - or even all value - after 10 - 20 years, so what? 

The difference is tens of thousands  = developer vs. thousands or hundreds = resale.


----------



## dioxide45

DannyTS said:


> They wish they could, but they can’t:
> 
> CC&Rs for SVV Bella on the Orange County Florida Comptrollers website. The Starwood Vacation Club Resort Affiliation Agreement
> 
> Page 91:
> 
> III. Membership in the Network
> 
> A purchaser of a Vacation Ownership Interest in a Club Resort automatically is enrolled in the Network as a Network Member at the time that the Network Member acquires the Network Member's Vacation Ownership Interest. (…) Membership in the Network is granted to all purchasers of Club Resort Vacation Ownership Interests. (…) If the Network Member no longer owns a Club Resort Vacation Ownership Interest, the person no longer will be a Network Member and the new owner of that Club Resort Vacation Ownership Interest automatically will become the Network Member.
> 
> 
> There are other paragraphs that would create a lot of legal and PR problems for them if they tried to kick out mandatory resale owners from the club.


This or similar language is in all the the CC&Rs for the mandatory resorts. With this, I don't think they will just replace VSN with DC. They will keep VSN and run it along side the DC program. If they eliminate VSN and replace it with DC, there is a good legal argument that DC is the new club. They really don't want to provide a cheap or easy access in to DC. I suspect they will setup an overlay. Either on top of the underlying week or a way to convert StarOptions to DC points. Then they can still lock out resale owners, even if they are resale owners in mandatory properties.



bizaro86 said:


> They couldn't kick mandatory owners out of the VSN club. However, I think they could shut it down and start a new club and then not invite the resale mandatory resort owners.
> 
> They could call it the "No Homers Club"


I don't think they can just shut down VSN and move everyone to DC. The argument is that DC is now the club. If they don't invite mandatory resort owners in to DC, then they are also locking out a lot of developer purchasers as well. Also consider that the Sheraton Flex Trust owns weeks at mandatory resorts.



TravelTime said:


> This is what I was thinking they might do. Again, we are all speculating here. I am a Westin mandatory owner too so it would impact the resale value of one of my timeshares if they did this but if they gave me enough DC points and the new program were better, I would not care. I might get better trades through a new and improved Marriott DC Points program than through StarOptions. If so, I would be happier.





Berea1 said:


> Quick - provide us with the top 20 codes for these newly acquired resorts so I can add them to my top 20 Marriott codes that I do my Monday morning searches for.   Patrick





TravelTime said:


> I was not around for the roll out of the DC Points program. However, from what I understand, MVC devalued resale weeks because the option to enroll into the DC Points program did not transfer with resale weeks. You can only trade Marriott resale weeks on Interval. Was there a lawsuit following this?





TravelTime said:


> So why has the cost to buy Marriott weeks on the resale market gone down so much?


Additional value was given to resale owners that owned prior to June 20, 2010. However, their value dropped because once resold, they can't enroll. Pretty much the same as a voluntary resort in Vistana.


----------



## dioxide45

JIMinNC said:


> The reason DVC may be different could be that it is a very targeted product with locations concentrated in places where no one else can be (the Disney parks). That makes it impossible to replicate - so low supply with high demand keeps prices up.


Also consider that DVC has a pretty active ROFR program. They need to keep resale prices high to protect their core product which is the resort hotels on site.


----------



## JIMinNC

dioxide45 said:


> Additional value was given to resale owners that owned prior to June 20, 2010. However, their value dropped because once resold, they can't enroll. Pretty much the same as a voluntary resort in Vistana.



Is there any data to support this? That the Marriott values declined just because resale can't enroll? Prior to June 2010, there was no enrollment for resold weeks (because the DC didn't exist) and after June 2010 there is still no enrollment. It would seem to me that the value proposition in a resale week is essentially the same both before and after June 2010. My opinion would be the decline in resale values was more an artifact of the economy at that time than the invention of the DC. It seems that the value provided by a resale week prior to June 2010 looks a lot like the value provided by a resale week after June 2010.


----------



## CalGalTraveler

One data point is that mandatory Vistana resorts (with the exception of SVV Bella/Key West) tend to command a higher price than voluntary resorts. 

+ Timeshare companies that strip resale buyers of key program elements tend to have worthless deeds to sell.


----------



## chemteach

JIMinNC said:


> It doesn't seem they devalued weeks at all as far as I can see.


Marriott may not have devalued the actual usage, but the post 2010 system caused Marriott resale prices to plummet.  Newport Coast Villas were typically about $16,000 to $18,000 per platinum week pre 2010.  In 2012, they were about $12,000.  In 2018, they sell for $6000 to $8000.  There was a large decrease in resale value right after 2010, and the value continued to decrease over the next 5 years.  It's true that many other systems also had a decrease in value over the last decade, but Marriott resale prices had quite a sharp decrease in value post 2010.  I've been watching Newport Coast and Palm Desert units for about 15 years.  The resale values were pretty steady up until 2010.


----------



## JIMinNC

CalGalTraveler said:


> One data point is that mandatory Vistana resorts (with the exception of SVV Bella/Key West) tend to command a higher price than voluntary resorts.
> 
> + Timeshare companies that strip resale buyers of key program elements tend to have worthless deeds to sell.



But the Vistana mandatory/voluntary situation is different than the Marriott example that was in question. In Vistana, mandatory weeks that can be resold WITH points rights co-exist alongside voluntary resorts where points rights DO NOT transfer. So it makes total sense that the mandatory resorts should command a higher price than the voluntary ones.

In Marriott, by contrast, NO resale weeks carry enrollment rights. So they have the exact same usage rights pretty much as they did before June 2010.


----------



## JIMinNC

chemteach said:


> Marriott may not have devalued the actual usage, but the post 2010 system caused Marriott resale prices to plummet.  Newport Coast Villas were typically about $16,000 to $18,000 per platinum week pre 2010.  In 2012, they were about $12,000.  In 2018, they sell for $6000 to $8000.  There was a large decrease in resale value right after 2010, and the value continued to decrease over the next 5 years.  It's true that many other systems also had a decrease in value over the last decade, but Marriott resale prices had quite a sharp decrease in value post 2010.  I've been watching Newport Coast and Palm Desert units for about 15 years.  The resale values were pretty steady up until 2010.



That's excellent data and what I was really looking for by posing the question in post #90 above. The only thing I would say is the economy was in a bad place at the same time, so I'm not sure how much of that decline you note should be attributed to the economy versus the invention of the DC. I do know that the traditional residential and vacation home real estate market didn't completely bottom until 2012 or 2013, so I suspect some significant portion of that decline was the economy. But since that was all going on at the same time, it is hard to isolate the variables.


----------



## dioxide45

JIMinNC said:


> Is there any data to support this? That the Marriott values declined just because resale can't enroll? Prior to June 2010, there was no enrollment for resold weeks (because the DC didn't exist) and after June 2010 there is still no enrollment. It would seem to me that the value proposition in a resale week is essentially the same both before and after June 2010. My opinion would be the decline in resale values was more an artifact of the economy at that time than the invention of the DC. It seems that the value provided by a resale week prior to June 2010 looks a lot like the value provided by a resale week after June 2010.


I could very well be, but there is no way we will ever really know. The economy was the biggest driver behind the drop in resale prices, however if resales were permitted to enroll, I suspect that the lost value would have returned by now.


----------



## dioxide45

My biggest concern is regarding inventory. If they keep all the systems separate, then I really have no concern. However depending on if they somehow find a way to bring everything together, it could certainly negatively impact Vistana owners.

We bought an SVV Bella 81,000 week mainly to book 13 nights in a 1BR in Lagunamar during Gold Plus season. It worked once and would continue to book baring any changes Marriott may implement. Would it work in a realigned DC system? I doubt that it would. Marriott Friday and Saturday nights are super expensive using DC points. Vistana is similar, but the delta doesn't seem to be as high. Without a property in Cancun, I suspect Marriott may price this at a premium in the DC program. There would is a huge number of new owners that would be gaining access. Of course, Vistana now has another property just opened in Cancun.

It will be interesting to see how it plays out and I guess I could always bail if I needed to by giving away what I paid very little to acquire.


----------



## bizaro86

While Marriott didn't take any rights away from post-2010 resale buyers (they couldn't enroll before because it didn't exist, and still can't) they did hurt resale values in a serious way. Pre-2010, Marriott employed a sales force of highly skilled salespeople, and paid out compensation to get them qualified prospects, and then had those salespeople spend a concentrated 90 minutes telling the prospects how great owning a Marriott week was. 

Post 2010, that same sales force tells everyone how great Marriott points are, and will either generally not mention weeks options or denigrate them (or at suggest a package). 

People who go to a sales presentation and are interested but don't buy or rescind are probably one of the biggest sources of resale buyers, especially of high priced deeds. After all, a Newport Coast for $16k sounds pretty good if you just about bought one from the developer for $30-40k (or whatever they were).


----------



## CalGalTraveler

It appears that resale prices decline when there is a rise in maintenance fees. Our WKORVN OF EOY should be worth much more than the $12k resale price we paid but the steep maintenance fees (approaching $3k for the week) gave us pause. There are currently 45 units for sale on Redweek.

I have heard that high maintenance fees have driven down prices at Harborside as well.

To compare, how have Newport fees risen over that time period?


----------



## dioxide45

CalGalTraveler said:


> It seems that the resale price declines when there is a rise in maintenance fees. Our WKORVN OF EOY should be worth much more than the $12k resale price we paid but the steep maintenance fees (approaching $3k for the week gave us pause.) There are currently 45 units for sale on Redweek.
> 
> I have heard that high maintenance fees have driven down prices at Harborside as well.
> 
> To compare, how have Newport fees risen over that time period?


High MFs are definitly a driving factor on resale price. I think also the value of SO to MF helps keep prices up. Another factor is the ability to rent the week at a margin over MFs, the higher the margin the higher the resale value. This is why WKV seems to have high resale prices.


----------



## CalGalTraveler

VAC has deep pockets. This will make them an attractive target for lawyers with wrongful class action suits by owners if they strip the benefits of VSN. Bad publicity will affect their VOI sales.

For this reason, they should tread carefully and would be smart to provide carrots.


----------



## mjm1

dioxide45 said:


> My biggest concern is regarding inventory. If they keep all the systems separate, then I really have no concern. However depending on if they somehow find a way to bring everything together, it could certainly negatively impact Vistana owners.
> 
> We bought an SVV Bella 81,000 week mainly to book 13 nights in a 1BR in Lagunamar during Gold Plus season. It worked once and would continue to book baring any changes Marriott may implement. Would it work in a realigned DC system? I doubt that it would. Marriott Friday and Saturday nights are super expensive using DC points. Vistana is similar, but the delta doesn't seem to be as high. Without a property in Cancun, I suspect Marriott may price this at a premium in the DC program. There would is a huge number of new owners that would be gaining access. Of course, Vistana now has another property just opened in Cancun.
> 
> It will be interesting to see how it plays out and I guess I could always bail if I needed to by giving away what I paid very little to acquire.



Marriott has property in Cancun just north from the Marriott and Ritz hotels and they have a sales staff at the Marriott hotel. We didn’t have a chance to talk with them while we were at Lagunamar in early January, but apparently there are plans to build a new property there. Hard to say if they will continue with those plans if the acquisition is approved, since Westin has two properties in the hotel zone. I would think they would, but time will tell.

Best regards.

Mike


----------



## chemteach

There are at least three ways Marriott could get Hyatt and/or Vistana units into the Marriott DC Trust:

1) give Hyatt and Vistanta week owners the ability to put their week into Marriott's DC Trust  
2) put any/all unsold inventory in Hyatt and/or Vistana into the trust 
3) ROFR weeks that are ROFRable from Hyatt and/or Vistana and put them into the DC trust.

VAC could assign DC points to these weeks as they see fit.  No one would be forced to put their weeks into the trust.  This is basically what Marriott did with the pre-trust Marriott weeks.  Marriott owners who purchased resale or direct pre-2010 have the option of joining the DC trust.  If they do join the DC Trust, they have the option each year of using their week, depositing their week into II, or putting their week into the DC Trust in exchange for DC Trust points according to Marriott's published "exchange point value" for the unit.  This could work exactly the same for Hyatt/Vistana/Westin Flex/Sheraton Flex owners - IF Marriott gives an option to Hyatt/Vistana owners to join the DC Trust.  If Marriott followed their post 2010 DC Trust model for Hyatt/Vistana, Vistana owners would still have the option to use their week for Star Option exchanges, use their home week, or put the week into the DC trust in exchange for DC points for any particular year.  

Of course, all of this is just one of the myriad possibilities.  We will know when we will know...  

AND... Marriott could choose to keep all the systems separate, and all this babble we have going will have just been fun babbling


----------



## cubigbird

We have to remember this is a buyout of one publicly traded company by another publicly traded company.  The objective here is for VAC to create further value for their shareholders, not for TS owners.  Consumers rarely win in the long term.  The usual outcome is higher prices and less benefit in some form.  Look at the airline mergers and hotel mergers as a prime example.  Excluding MR buying SPG......it's too early to tell.  With that said, VAC will not just let VSE owners in, another churn of some kind will be required.  Remember, who is supposed to benefit here???....the shareholders!

There is precedent in the TS industry.  Look at HICV buying Silver Leaf as a more recent example, those TS owners have to pay a HEFTY upgrade fee just go be able to book into legacy HICV resorts.  Then there is Wyndham buying other systems and Diamond.  Diamond swoops in, buys / updates resorts and raises prices giving TS owners little benefit.

I'll believe it when I see it, the proof will be in the pudding. If history is a precedent, there is reason to worry....


----------



## dsmrp

Like others here and on the Marriott forum, I think Marriott will eventually try to fold-induce-transform VSE and Hyatt owners into some kind of points program, either DC or a new one.  But they'll keep the current systems status quo for a year or so after the sale closes while they plan and prepare. Just like the hotel loyalty programs. VSE seems so fractured with respect to flex programs and other home option micro programs; keeping the inventory pools straight sounds costly to maintain.

Any speculation on what Marriott would do with the VSE elite levels?  I don't have Marriott weeks, so don't know what perks their elite levels give to its members.

Also does anyone have a SWAG on what percentage of weeks/units would be considered "developer sold" (including requalified weeks and Flex).  I could imagine Marriott giving developer weeks the best buy in price (free or nominal) to DC or new points program, and increasing the buy in for mandatory weeks to re-sale voluntary weeks. For a new program there has to be a critical mass converting or adopting new program to make it (profitably) work.  And enough positive incentive for people to want to join up.


----------



## CalGalTraveler

For the initial conversion of ILG properties, why would VAC care who purchased Hyatt or Vistana from the developer vs resale? That is irrelevant history because it is not a potential revenue source for VAC...that ship has sailed. But going forward it will matter.

More likely they will incent with free or low DC enrollment ALL owners at properties in highly desireable locations such as WSJ, Hawaii, Bahamas, Key West and complementary locations that add to the Marriott portfolio eg  Cancun.

Duplicate or less desirable eg Orlando will have more expensive buy in


----------



## VacationForever

CalGalTraveler said:


> For the initial conversion of ILG properties, why would VAC care who purchased Hyatt or Vistana from the developer vs resale? That is irrelevant history because it is not a potential revenue source for VAC...that ship has sailed. But going forward it will matter.
> 
> More likely they will incent with free or low DC enrollment ALL owners at properties that are in highly desireable locations such as WSJ, Hawaii, Bahamas, Key West and complementary locations that add to the Marriott portfolio eg  Cancun.
> 
> Duplicate or less desirable eg Orlando will have more expensive buy in


There is more money for VAC if they keep the 3 systems separate and allow developer purchase to book into the other 2 systems at say, 9 months.  They have to make a compeling case to buy from the developers.  They get to sell as many as up to 3 times by keeping the systems separate.


----------



## CalGalTraveler

Going forward I agree, however they have to get the inventory for these locations somehow.


----------



## chemteach

CalGalTraveler said:


> For the initial conversion of ILG properties, why would VAC care who purchased Hyatt or Vistana from the developer vs resale? That is irrelevant history because it is not a potential revenue source for VAC...that ship has sailed. But going forward it will matter.
> 
> More likely they will incent with free or low DC enrollment ALL owners at properties in highly desireable locations such as WSJ, Hawaii, Bahamas, Key West and complementary locations that add to the Marriott portfolio eg  Cancun.
> 
> Duplicate or less desirable eg Orlando will have more expensive buy in


When Marriott went to the DC trust, they didn't differentiate purchase prices for the higher demand vs. lower demand resorts.  They incentivized the higher demand resorts by offering more DC Trust point values to higher demand weeks.  (This is very different from Star Options - where Palm Desert/Rancho Mirage gets that same number of StarOptions as Hawaii...)


----------



## dsmrp

CalGalTraveler said:


> For the initial conversion of ILG properties, why would VAC care who purchased Hyatt or Vistana from the developer vs resale? That is irrelevant history because it is not a potential revenue source for VAC...that ship has sailed. But going forward it will matter.
> 
> More likely they will incent with free or low DC enrollment ALL owners at properties in highly desireable locations such as WSJ, Hawaii, Bahamas, Key West and complementary locations that add to the Marriott portfolio eg  Cancun.
> 
> Duplicate or less desirable eg Orlando will have more expensive buy in



If I purchased from developer for tens of thousands of $ in Hawaii, and a resale owner at same resort for far less, I would be really annoyed if the resale owner was given same price access to new club program as I.  That would not be a motivator to buy more club points from developer.  When Starwood brought the original Florida Vistana resort into their network, I think they grandfathered the direct purchase owners in to the network for little/no cost.  



chemteach said:


> When Marriott went to the DC trust, they didn't differentiate purchase prices for the higher demand vs. lower demand resorts.  They incentivized the higher demand resorts by offering more DC Trust point values to higher demand weeks.  (This is very different from Star Options - where Palm Desert/Rancho Mirage gets that same number of StarOptions as Hawaii...)



Yes I agree, the more highly desirable/in demand resorts would be worth/given higher point values than lower demand resorts.  And owners at the high demand resorts would still have home resort advantage to reserve first.


----------



## VacationForever

CalGalTraveler said:


> Going forward I agree, however they have to get the inventory for these locations somehow.


They already have inventories in Vistana and Hyatt systems, called Sheraton Flex, Westin Flex, Aventuras and HPP.


----------



## r1lee

Would like for the vsn network to stay the same. 12-8 months home resort, 8 months all vsn resorts and 7 months open up for all resorts, that would be cool. Lol


----------



## DannyTS

If they offer DC enrollment they will do it to have access to "our" inventory and to streamline their operation. Do you think that in their book a developer week is worth any more money than a resale week? My voluntary is WLR resale and i am fine regardless of what happens because we intend to use it to the max for ourselves. But if they need more Lagunamar weeks I do not see how the source (developer or resale) makes any difference for them whatsoever. 

I also want to challenge the idea, promoted by the developers, that the resale buyers are  the pariahs of the TS world. If we have not bought those deeds, these companies would be in jeopardy since some owners may not be able to pay the MF etc and resorts would eventually deteriorate.


----------



## DannyTS

VacationForever said:


> They already have inventories in Vistana and Hyatt systems, called Sheraton Flex, Westin Flex, Aventuras and HPP.


True, we do not know though if in their models that inventory is enough for a big family. I suspect it is not but i have no data to justify it either way.


----------



## bigbillf

I believe we all just need to see how this all plays out.  Some may win, some may stay the same and some may lose.  I own at VV.  Up until now, we have had good experience making home resort and vacation network reservations and II exchanges.  I hope that continues with the new company with better access to Marriott resorts.  And that they abandon the Sheraton Flex program that IMHO does nothing for existing owners but churn more revenue for ILG while diluting our home resort reservation rights.  If not, then maybe it is time to divest some of our Vistana units and buy into HGVC.  Their home resort/point system seems simple and fair to me.  And they allow resales to buy into their network.


----------



## VacationForever

DannyTS said:


> If they offer DC enrollment they will do it to have access to "our" inventory and to streamline their operation. Do you think that in their book a developer week is worth any more money than a resale week? My voluntary is WLR resale and i am fine regardless of what happens because we intend to use it to the max for ourselves. But if they need more Lagunamar weeks I do not see how the source (developer or resale) makes any difference for them whatsoever.
> 
> I also want to challenge the idea, promoted by the developers, that the resale buyers are  the pariahs of the TS world. If we have not bought those deeds, these companies would be in jeopardy since some owners may not be able to pay the MF etc and resorts would eventually deteriorate.



Marriott introduced junk fees to make resale points "whole" in order to be eligible to play.


----------



## dioxide45

If VAC was to go the route of a streamlined system and try to allow easy cross access, here is how I think it would work for Vistana owners.


Owners in Vistana Flex trusts (Aventuras, Westin Flex, Nanea, WSJ, Sheraton Flex) - You can enroll your Home Options in the DC program. For a fee, fee probably dependent on if you bought resale or developer. You would be able to then convert Home Options to DC points at a 30-40 Home Option to 1 DC point ratio. The ratio may even be different for the different flex ownership types. Hawaii higher, Sheraton Flex lower. You could then use your Home Options to book within your home flex or convert to DC points on an annual basis.
Weeks based voluntary owners (resale) - You can enroll your week in the Marriott DC program for a fee. Mostly likely a higher fee than direct purchasers (this keeps it in line with how they treated Marriott resale owners at DC inception). You are allotted a certain number of DC points for your week. You can either book your home resort week or elect DC points on an annual basis and your week goes in to the DC exchange company. Use your DC points to book at any Marriott, Westin or Sheraton property based on availability. You will pay a new annual DC fee that is currently $195+.
Mandatory resort owners and direct purchases - You can enroll your week in the Marriott DC program for a fee. Resale owners will likely pay more. You can continue to book your home resort, use StarOptions at 8 months or elect DC points on an annual basis. Use your DC points to book at any Marriott, Westin or Sheraton property based on availability. One thing here is that on top of your VSN fee of $145+, you would also pay a DC fee of $195. Now it is also possible that those that bought direct but own at a voluntary resort, Marriott could make it easy to drop out of VSN and just use DC or your home resort.

My concerns here would be with how inventory works. Currently if you own a Vistana week there are no constraints at the 12 month mark. Vistana doesn't hold inventory back for VSN reservations. If there are 200 units at a resort for week 52, 200 home resort owners can call at the 12 month mark and book. This locks out VSN reservations for prime weeks and why VSN reservations are so hard for those prime weeks. However, if say 40% of owners enroll in DC and half of them elect points in a year, then Marriott could potentially hold back 20% of those prime weeks for DC point reservations. This could make it harder for weeks owners to get prime reservations, but it seems to make prime reservations easier for DC points users. This of course does open up the option for people other than owners to get tough reservations that they want. However, they do pay a price because there is a cost to convert to DC points, what Marriott owners have long called the skim.

It will be interesting to see how it all plays out. The above is obviously very optimistic that Marriott doesn't take anything away and just provides more flexibility in the program. Of course all of it comes at a cost and they will target the new ownership base that they bring in to their system to try to sell them new DC points.


----------



## Quilter

dioxide45 said:


> My concerns here would be with how inventory works. Currently if you own a Vistana week there are no constraints at the 12 month mark. Vistana doesn't hold inventory back for VSN reservations. If there are 200 units at a resort for week 52, 200 home resort owners can call at the 12 month mark and book. This locks out VSN reservations for prime weeks and why VSN reservations are so hard for those prime weeks. However, if say 40% of owners enroll in DC and half of them elect points in a year, then Marriott could potentially hold back 20% of those prime weeks for DC point reservations. This could make it harder for weeks owners to get prime reservations, but it seems to make prime reservations easier for DC points users. This of course does open up the option for people other than owners to get tough reservations that they want. However, they do pay a price because there is a cost to convert to DC points, what Marriott owners have long called the skim.



Wouldn't the competition for those high demand weeks remain the same?

Using your example of 40% of the owners enrolling in DC.   Without the DC, that same 40% could be your "resort owners" and compete to reserve the high demand weeks.   With the DC, they opt to gamble in the DC, and hence, give their "resort owner" opportunity to Marriott.  

I don't claim to understand the Vistana system, I'm just going by what I understand (or not understand) from implications in the quoted post.

After reading it, here's a thought that popped into my head.   Will Vistana and Hyatt inventory in the II-type trading pool dwindle just as the Marriott inventory did after more and more owners opted into the DC?   (This may have already been discussed, I haven't read all 5 pages in both forums).


----------



## nokaoi9

With all the speculation floating around, I thought I would throw in my two cents.

·        No change for owners at mandatory resorts.  They will have the option to continue using their StarOptions as they always have, but the competition will be fiercer.

·        Owners of mandatory and non-mandatory resorts will have the option to enroll their week(s) to current DC program at $1995-$2495 for a single week, or $2495-$2995 for multiple weeks.  I suspect a good amount of people will choose to enroll due to fear of missing out, or the belief that it will give them more flexibility.

·        Interval International membership will increase for owners at mandatory resorts and non-mandatory resorts from the current rate to $195/year should they choose to enroll.  I am hopeful the $195 per year will cover any exchange fee within the Marriott/Vistana/HGVC unless exchanging into a larger unit.  For those who choose not to enroll, I suspect no change and to continue Interval International as they always have.  If they choose to enroll their week(s), they will also fall into the $195/year membership fee.

·        I suspect there to be a skim on Vistana similar to those of Marriott weeks, but don’t expect the skim to be as bad.  My thought behind this is they will try and entice as many people as possible to enroll in the DC.  As one who enrolled in the DC in the very beginning and has not once elected DC points, I still question my reason for joining. I shell out the $195 per year on a couple of weeks, rarely exchange, and each year swear this will be the last year I pay the $195.  I then begrudgingly pay the $195 hoping this year will be different, either by electing points or capitalizing on a free exchange, but zero change.  I also struggle with knowing I paid the upfront fee to enroll and have gotten zero return on investment.  I think it will be a much harder sell for those who own at mandatory resorts as to why they would want to give up something very simple, with no skim, for a program with mixed reviews.  The only way I see achieving this is by being over generous with the points offered per week to enroll.


----------



## Julian926

Wow, with all the fees and additional capital to get in the Super DC club, I'm more inclined to go to HGVC.  This whole thing feels like Marriott (VAC) is going to tack on fee after fee. 

I think I can live a one-time entrance fee, but having another $200 added every year, sounds like it's going to boost up MF's and make it less enticing.  There are other programs with simpler and cheaper fees like HGVC.

I know these are just speculations, but noticing the history Marriott, it sounds like their are going to try to milk this thing.


----------



## Steven Dingeldein

Basic question. What is the relationship between Marriott International and Marriott Vacation Club? Two separate entities with licensing agreement for the use of names or is Marriott International the owner of Marriott Vacation Club?


----------



## DannyTS

what does DC stand for ? thanks


----------



## controller1

Steven Dingeldein said:


> Basic question. What is the relationship between Marriott International and Marriott Vacation Club? Two separate entities with licensing agreement for the use of names or is Marriott International the owner of Marriott Vacation Club?



It's the same relationship that Starwood Vacations (prior to purchase by ILG) had with Starwood Hotels. Marriott Vacation Club was spun off from Marriott International in late 2011/early 2012.


----------



## nokaoi9

Sorry, DC is Destination Club.  This is the program rolled out by Marriott almost ten years ago.

Also worth noting, my maintenance fees at Marriott Ko Olina and Newport Coast go up about 1-2% higher on average than my Sheraton Vistana Villages week.  The Marriott weeks I own could be outliers, but have some concern that fees could go up at a higher percentage than in the past.  From a business standpoint, this makes sense.  People will get so fed up with the increasing maintenance/miscellaneous fees such as Interval, they either sell their week, which Marriott could snatch up through ROFR, or people offer their weeks back to Marriott so they can walk away.  This will increase what Marriott has available to whatever new system they roll out where if you buy new points, you'll have access to Marriott, Vistana, and Hyatt.


----------



## dioxide45

nokaoi9 said:


> Sorry, DC is Destination Club.  This is the program rolled out by Marriott almost ten years ago.
> 
> Also worth noting, my maintenance fees at Marriott Ko Olina and Newport Coast go up about 1-2% higher on average than my Sheraton Vistana Villages week.  The Marriott weeks I own could be outliers, but have some concern that fees could go up at a higher percentage than in the past.  From a business standpoint, this makes sense.  People will get so fed up with the increasing maintenance/miscellaneous fees such as Interval, they either sell their week, which Marriott could snatch up through ROFR, or people offer their weeks back to Marriott so they can walk away.  This will increase what Marriott has available to whatever new system they roll out where if you buy new points, you'll have access to Marriott, Vistana, and Hyatt.


It is worth noting that the SVV maintenance fee actually went down a little in 2018.


----------



## nokaoi9

dioxide45 said:


> It is worth noting that the SVV maintenance fee actually went down a little in 2018.


The maintenance fees for Starwood seem more reasonable than for Marriott.  My point was that my Marriott fees go up at a higher percentage than my Starwood week.   My concern is that they will go up more than they have in the past.  Sorry if my previous message was misleading.


----------



## dioxide45

Quilter said:


> Wouldn't the competition for those high demand weeks remain the same?
> 
> Using your example of 40% of the owners enrolling in DC.   Without the DC, that same 40% could be your "resort owners" and compete to reserve the high demand weeks.   With the DC, they opt to gamble in the DC, and hence, give their "resort owner" opportunity to Marriott.
> 
> I don't claim to understand the Vistana system, I'm just going by what I understand (or not understand) from implications in the quoted post.
> 
> After reading it, here's a thought that popped into my head.   Will Vistana and Hyatt inventory in the II-type trading pool dwindle just as the Marriott inventory did after more and more owners opted into the DC?   (This may have already been discussed, I haven't read all 5 pages in both forums).


This was of course a long hashed out discussion in the Marriott forums when they created DC. Would it impact home resort reservations? No one really knows for sure. With people electing points it does take inventory out of the home resort reservation program, but it also reduces demand since those same owners can't book. So it could very well be a wash.

I don't think you will see much decrease in Vistana inventory there. There has already been a huge decrease over the last three years. I don't know that it can go much lower


----------



## dioxide45

Also say goodbye to the owner friendly polices of Vistana. When the hurricanes tore through the Caribbean last fall and they closed the Westin St John, Vistana still found a way to give owners use of their week. Either through StarOptions or converting to StarPoints. Marriott owners in similar situations were SOL. They got nothing and even if they had the Marriott purchased insurance, it didn't cover a lot of people because of a 30 day cancellation clause in the policy. Marriott owners were rather upset. Certainly that is the future of Vistana as well.


----------



## duke

You need to read the press releases to see what is important to them:
1.  Marriott Timeshares hold an exclusive 100 year right to market to Marriott Hotel and Credit Card members.
2.  Marriott Timeshares hold a 100 year right to have access/use to Marriott Points.
3.  Same as above for Vistana (except don't know time).
4.  This is all about Sales and more importantly collecting Maintenance Fees.

SO, They will NOT create a system that makes it more difficult to book high demand weeks for current or new owners.

They will do same as Marriott Hotel is doing with the SPG merger and that is make a very desirable ELITE program (VSE did same for 5*Elite with regard to SPG Platinum 50 nights credit) , offer lots of Points to exchange instead of using weeks (to make the expanded hotel portfolio look good in sales presentations), AND somehow create an exchange system so owners can have access to the other properties.

I am not worried and look forward to the changes.


----------



## chemteach

dsmrp said:


> If I purchased from developer for tens of thousands of $ in Hawaii, and a resale owner at same resort for far less, I would be really annoyed if the resale owner was given same price access to new club program as I.  That would not be a motivator to buy more club points from developer.



I don't think owner annoyance would stop Marriott from trying to get money from whomever currently owns at Vistana.  I believe they will make any current owners able to purchase into whatever new system they develop.  Resale owners who purchase after the creation of the new system likely wouldn't be able to participate.  That's how Marriott handled the DC Trust system.  All purchased weeks - resale or developer - were allowed to join the DC Trust.  But anyone who purchase a week (not trust points) resale could not buy into the trust.


----------



## dioxide45

dsmrp said:


> If I purchased from developer for tens of thousands of $ in Hawaii, and a resale owner at same resort for far less, I would be really annoyed if the resale owner was given same price access to new club program as I. That would not be a motivator to buy more club points from developer. When Starwood brought the original Florida Vistana resort into their network, I think they grandfathered the direct purchase owners in to the network for little/no cost.


The cost for resale owners to enroll their weeks in DC when it was first introduced was more expensive. $595/$695 for direct purchasers vs $1495/$1995 for resale owners. If they find a way to merge the programs, I suspect it would be the same. They aren't worries about annoying direct owners and they really don't have anything to lose by doing this. The motivator to buy more points is not based on how someone else got in to the system, it would be based on the need of the individual. Marriott did very well selling DC points to both direct week owners as well as those that bought resale. They need to feed the system with inventory and getting as many people to enroll as possible would be the goal.


----------



## Quilter

dioxide45 said:


> The cost for resale owners to enroll their weeks in DC when it was first introduced was more expensive. $595/$695 for direct purchasers vs $1495/$1995 for resale owners. If they find a way to merge the programs, I suspect it would be the same. They aren't worries about annoying direct owners and they really don't have anything to lose by doing this. The motivator to buy more points is not based on how someone else got in to the system, it would be based on the need of the individual. Marriott did very well selling DC points to both direct week owners as well as those that bought resale. They need to feed the system with inventory and getting as many people to enroll as possible would be the goal.



We enrolled right after the DC was rolled out.   Our 7 weeks were a combo of direct purchase and resale so we paid $1995.   Just had to grin and bear it when pre'10 owners were recently offered enrollment for free.   Marriott wasn't troubled by my annoyance.


----------



## DannyTS

Quilter said:


> We enrolled right after the DC was rolled out.   Our 7 weeks were a combo of direct purchase and resale so we paid $1995.   Just had to grin and bear it when pre'10 owners were recently offered enrollment for free.   Marriott wasn't troubled by my annoyance.


So the fee was $1995 for 2 weeks and up?


----------



## DavidnRobin

No way they are going to allow competition for weeks in the HomeResort period (8-12 months) for  VSE Owners unless they own the deeds for those VOIs (Timeshare weeks) - VSE already owns around 10% of the VOIs at a given resort that they rent out.

If they obtain them via conversion, trade backs, or ROFR (or?) then they certainly can use the 8-12 month HomeResort period, but no Marriott Owner is going to compete with VSE Owners during the HR period.  That would be against the CCRs and akin to selling more inventory than held.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## dioxide45

DannyTS said:


> So the fee was $1995 for 2 weeks and up?


Yes, for externally purchased weeks. Those that bought direct could enroll two or more weeks for $695.


----------



## Maui_ed

duke said:


> You need to read the press releases to see what is important to them:
> 1.  Marriott Timeshares hold an exclusive 100 year right to market to Marriott Hotel and Credit Card members.
> 2.  Marriott Timeshares holds a 100 year right to have access/use to Marriott Points.
> 3.  Same as above for Vistana (except don't know time).
> 4.  This is all about Sales and more importantly collecting Maintenance Fees.
> 
> SO, They will NOT create a system that makes it more difficult to book high demand weeks for current or new owners.
> 
> They will do same as Marriott Hotel is doing with the SPG merger and that is make a very desirable ELITE program (VSE did same with 5*Elite) , offer lots of Points to exchange instead of using weeks (to make the expanded hotel portfolio look good in sales presentations), AND somehow create and exchange system so owners can have access to the other properties.
> 
> I am not worried and look forward to the changes.



Good analysis, well though through and to the point.  I, too, look forward to the changes.


----------



## Markus

duke said:


> You need to read the press releases to see what is important to them:
> 1.  Marriott Timeshares hold an exclusive 100 year right to market to Marriott Hotel and Credit Card members.
> 2.  Marriott Timeshares holds a 100 year right to have access/use to Marriott Points.
> 3.  Same as above for Vistana (except don't know time).
> 4.  This is all about Sales and more importantly collecting Maintenance Fees.
> 
> SO, They will NOT create a system that makes it more difficult to book high demand weeks for current or new owners.
> 
> They will do same as Marriott Hotel is doing with the SPG merger and that is make a very desirable ELITE program (VSE did same with 5*Elite) , offer lots of Points to exchange instead of using weeks (to make the expanded hotel portfolio look good in sales presentations), AND somehow create and exchange system so owners can have access to the other properties.
> 
> I am not worried and look forward to the changes.


I like this scenario Duke

Markus


----------



## dioxide45

DavidnRobin said:


> No way they are going to allow competition for weeks in the HomeResort period (8-12 months) for  VSE Owners unless they own the deeds for those VOIs (Timeshare weeks) - VSE already owns around 10% of the VOIs at a given resort that they rent out.
> 
> If they obtain them via conversion, trade backs, or ROFR (or?) then they certainly can use the 8-12 month HomeResort period, but no Marriott Owner is going to compete with VSE Owners during the HR period.  That would be against the CCRs and akin to selling more inventory than held.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Once the week is in the trust and if the trust owns x% of weeks, they could allocate that percentage of weeks to be bookable to the trust in the 8-12 month HR period. Remember, the 8-12 month period is really just a creation of VSN which allows StarOption bookings at the 8 month mark. Of course a lot of people have argued that Marriott doesn't have the right to allocate x% of weeks inside their DC program today, that doesn't necessarily stop them from doing it. The only way to stop them is to take it to a costly court fight that probably isn't worth fighting.


----------



## DavidnRobin

If they own the weeks that qualify for the 8-12 month reservation (Trust or otherwise) they certainly can.

The HR period of 8-12 months is in the CCRs (not some arbitrary date range), and is the main pillar of the 4 pillars of VSE Ownership.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## dioxide45

DavidnRobin said:


> If they own the weeks that qualify for the 8-12 month reservation (Trust or otherwise) they certainly can.
> 
> The HR period of 8-12 months is in the CCRs (not some arbitrary date range), and is the main pillar of the 4 pillars of VSE Ownership.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


That may be true for mandatory resorts where the VSN club rules are written in to the CCRs. This is what the Bella CCRs have to say about Home Resort preference.

_Each Unit Week has been assigned to a specific Season. Unit Weeks 7-17, 23-34, and
51-52 are in the Prime Season, and Unit Weeks 1-6, 18-22, and 35-50 are in the High Season. During
the term of the Club Resort Affiliation Agreement for the Condominium, Owners may request a
reservation (or Owners of Ultra Premium Unit Weeks, if any, automatically will receive a confirmed
reservation) of a Vacation Period in the same Unit type and Season as they have purchased, subject to
and in accordance with the Club Documents during the *Home Resort Preference Period (defined in the
Club Rules*), and, with respect to Owners other than Owners of Unit Weeks subject to Fixed Time or Ultra
Premium Unit Weeks, on a first-come first-served basis. If the Club Resort Affiliation Agreement for the
Condominium is terminated, Association shall be responsible for promulgating rules and regulations with
respect to the reservation procedures with respect to Seasons.
_
From the looks of that, the preference period is defined in the club rules, meaning the VSN. If you can find otherwise, I would suggest posting actual language from the CCRs.

ETA: In fact, the above doesn't even come from the recorded CCRs, it is contained in the public offering statement.


----------



## Helios

dioxide45 said:


> Yes, for externally purchased weeks. Those that bought direct could enroll two or more weeks for $695.


Trying to compare costs as best as you can, how much people would have paid if they had developer weeks (some via retros) and resale weeks (not retroed) but at mandatory resorts.  I realize there is no direct comparison, just what your take is...


----------



## WatsonC2

We own deeds for Vacation Ownership Interests (VOIs) at resorts that have agreements  between the management companies that run the resort (as empowered via their HOAs) and "the club" AKA VSN.  From the 2015 club rules (maybe there's an update version out there now): "Membership in the Network also is dependent on the continued affiliation between the Network and the Club Resort where the Network Member owns a VOI."  Any one of our resorts or VSN could cease to do business together if one party was in breach or if the agreement were to simply expire.  Its also possible for parties to try to renegotiate if they saw fit to do so.   Not that I would expect to have my SVV Bella no longer have star options but it COULD happen and I would simply have a right to stay in my season in the unit type at SVV Bella.  Nothing in the deed will protect me from that.   I'll paraphrase:  VSN exists because of an agreement and is not something guaranteed on anyone's deeds.


----------



## dioxide45

Corey Watson said:


> We own deeds for Vacation Ownership Interests (VOIs) at resorts that have agreements  between the management companies that run the resort (as empowered via their HOAs) and "the club" AKA VSN.  From the 2015 club rules (maybe there's an update version out there now): "Membership in the Network also is dependent on the continued affiliation between the Network and the Club Resort where the Network Member owns a VOI."  Any one of our resorts or VSN could cease to do business together if one party was in breach or if the agreement were to simply expire.  Its also possible for parties to try to renegotiate if they saw fit to do so.   Not that I would expect to have my SVV Bella no longer have star options but it COULD happen and I would simply have a right to stay in my season in the unit type at SVV Bella.  Nothing in the deed will protect me from that.   I'll paraphrase:  VSN exists because of an agreement and is not something guaranteed on anyone's deeds.


True, they could come in and get rid of VSN all together. I highly doubt that will happen. If they opt to say they are getting rid of VSN and putting the resorts in Marriott DC program, then there is an argument for the mandatory resorts that DC is now The Club since club affiliation is mandatory and written in to the CCRs (as a deeded right as long as The Club exists).


----------



## WatsonC2

I agree changes to VSN are unlikely.  My comment was really to address what I interpret as a lot of people thinking that VSN is somehow forever guaranteed to them.  I could envision new trust products that cross brands though.   They could package some Hyatt properties with some of the better Westins and call it something new (Premium Flex?) or go with lower end (Starter Package) and hit a different demographic.


----------



## DannyTS

Corey Watson said:


> We own deeds for Vacation Ownership Interests (VOIs) at resorts that have agreements  between the management companies that run the resort (as empowered via their HOAs) and "the club" AKA VSN.  From the 2015 club rules (maybe there's an update version out there now): "Membership in the Network also is dependent on the continued affiliation between the Network and the Club Resort where the Network Member owns a VOI."  Any one of our resorts or VSN could cease to do business together if one party was in breach or if the agreement were to simply expire.  Its also possible for parties to try to renegotiate if they saw fit to do so.   Not that I would expect to have my SVV Bella no longer have star options but it COULD happen and I would simply have a right to stay in my season in the unit type at SVV Bella.  Nothing in the deed will protect me from that.   I'll paraphrase:  VSN exists because of an agreement and is not something guaranteed on anyone's deeds.



IMHO your interpretation is wrong. The language of the mandatory resorts does not allow to make a distinction between the resale and retail owners (it mentions automatic enrollment for everyone) . Resale will always be part of the club the retail belongs to. If they kick you out they have to kick out developer weeks as well! Legally they would be on very shaky grounds if they tried to do it and they know it.


----------



## DannyTS

dioxide45 said:


> True, they could come in and get rid of VSN all together. I highly doubt that will happen. If they opt to say they are getting rid of VSN and putting the resorts in Marriott DC program, then there is an argument for the mandatory resorts that DC is now The Club since club affiliation is mandatory and written in to the CCRs (as a deeded right as long as The Club exists).


100%


----------



## WatsonC2

DannyTS said:


> IMHO your interpretation is wrong. The language of the mandatory resorts does not allow to make a distinction between the resale and retail owners (it mentions automatic enrollment for everyone) . Resale will always be part of the club the retail belongs to. If they kick you out they have to kick out developer weeks as well! Legally they would be on very shaky grounds if they tried to do it and they know it.


Sorry for confusion.  I was not distinguishing how an owner acquired their unit.  Just that the units have options because the resort has an agreement with VSN and that it can be terminated or can expire.  The deeds themselves don’t guarantee anything except the VOI at the specific resort in the type of unit in the specific season.


----------



## DannyTS

Corey Watson said:


> Sorry for confusion.  I was not distinguishing how an owner acquired their unit.  Just that the units have options because the resort has an agreement with VSN and that it can be terminated or can expire.  The deeds themselves don’t guarantee anything except the VOI at the specific resort in the type of unit in the specific season.


That would make retail owners very very angry since they would be kicked out as well. And if they enroll them in a new club we would be part of that as well. Moreover, no judge would buy this kind of tactics like : she married me when i was  Smith but i changed my name to  Jones so now we are no longer married!

One more thing if i may add: some people here think that the executives at Vistana or Marriott are losing sleep over how to screw resale owners at the mandatory resorts! Let's be realistic, they have better and more productive things to do.


----------



## dioxide45

DannyTS said:


> One more thing if i may add: some people here think that the executives at Vistana or Marriott are losing sleep over how to screw resale owners at the mandatory resorts! Let's be realistic, they have better and more productive things to do.


They probably do, though Marriott doesn't want to give resale owners an in to DC on the cheap. By just re-branding VSN as DC, they would do this with the mandatory properties. I thin what they will do is just make DC an overlay and keep VSN. You can then enroll your deeded week in DC but keep your home resort or VSN use if you don't take DC points.


----------



## WatsonC2

So I’ve been looking at Marriott as a purchase for some time due to the number of great resorts they have.  It would come down to cost but having access to those resorts would be great.  A more likely scenario noted elsewhere by others on this post is a surcharge to access Marriott.  Of course they have that revenue stream through interval already so it would probably come in the form of a buy in like the pre 2010 Marriott buyers had.


----------



## dsmrp

dioxide45 said:


> The cost for resale owners to enroll their weeks in DC when it was first introduced was more expensive. $595/$695 for direct purchasers vs $1495/$1995 for resale owners. If they find a way to merge the programs, I suspect it would be the same. They aren't worries about annoying direct owners and they really don't have anything to lose by doing this. The motivator to buy more points is not based on how someone else got in to the system, it would be based on the need of the individual. Marriott did very well selling DC points to both direct week owners as well as those that bought resale. They need to feed the system with inventory and getting as many people to enroll as possible would be the goal.



I did say in my earlier post that I thought the direct purchasers would likely pay less than the resale owners to get into any new club program. Possibly the terms of agreement for ILG sale might have some provisions for direct vs resale; maybe not... Marriott can't make it too prohibitive for Vistana and Hyatt owners to join the club if they want inventory.  I know they have to make up for the purchase price and then some.




Corey Watson said:


> We own deeds for Vacation Ownership Interests (VOIs) at resorts that have agreements  between the management companies that run the resort (as empowered via their HOAs) and "the club" AKA VSN.  From the 2015 club rules (maybe there's an update version out there now): "Membership in the Network also is dependent on the continued affiliation between the Network and the Club Resort where the Network Member owns a VOI."  Any one of our resorts or VSN could cease to do business together if one party was in breach or if the agreement were to simply expire.  Its also possible for parties to try to renegotiate if they saw fit to do so.   Not that I would expect to have my SVV Bella no longer have star options but it COULD happen and I would simply have a right to stay in my season in the unit type at SVV Bella.  Nothing in the deed will protect me from that.   I'll paraphrase:  VSN exists because of an agreement and is not something guaranteed on anyone's deeds.



I think if Marriott could find a legal way to get out of the mandatory membership in the VSN, they would.  Because those mandatory resales won't make them any money and diverts from potential developer sales.  Maybe not so many people out there know about the mandatory resorts, WKV and SVV, but it's still a "hole".
All these networks and options, trust and points are just additional contrived $$ layers to sell us more choices than the ones we have with our home resorts.  I'll wait and see what
Marriott eventually offers.  I don't like their skim either.  If it's too rich for my blood, I don't think it would be difficult to external exchange for the Vistana non-Hawaii resorts.
I'm glad my other TS unit is in HGVC and Hawaii...


----------



## TravelTime

dsmrp said:


> I did say in my earlier post that I thought the direct purchasers would likely pay less than the resale owners to get into any new club program. Possibly the terms of agreement for sale might have some provisions for direct vs resale; maybe not... Marriott can't make it too prohibitive for Vistana and Hyatt owners to join the club.  I know they have to make up for the purchase price and then some.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I think if Marriott could find a legal way to get out of the mandatory membership in the VSN, they would.  Because those mandatory resales won't make them any money and diverts from potential developer sales.  Maybe not so many people out there know about the mandatory resorts, WKV and SVV, but it's still a "hole".
> All these networks and options, trust and points are just additional contrived $$ layers to sell us more choices than the ones we have with our home resorts.  I'll wait and see what
> Marriott eventually offers.  I don't like their skim either.  If it's too rich for my blood, I don't think it would be difficult to external exchange for the Vistana non-Hawaii resorts.
> I'm glad my other TS unit is in HGVC and Hawaii...



I agree that Marriott is probably scheming to get out of the VSE mandatory resorts. I own at WKOVR-N ocean front 2 bedroom. I get 176K SOs. If Marriott offers me enough DC points to convert and allows me to then exchange in their 100+ resorts, I would be a happy camper because I would have more equivalent exchanges in the combined program than through the current VSE SO program. I suspect WKOVR will retain its value even if SOs or DC Points do not transfer because the Westin Maui resorts are cheaper than the equivalent Maui Marriott resorts. We really wanted to buy Marriott Napili/Lahaina Towers but it was too expensive. So for those of us who own deeded Westin timeshares in Hawaii, I think we would be better off under a combined new program.


----------



## DannyTS

TravelTime said:


> I agree that Marriott is probably scheming to get out of the VSE mandatory resorts.


what do you base it on?


----------



## TravelTime

This thread is about theories and hypotheses. I think Westin owners of Hawaii and St John properties will end up better off. I am excited about the future possibilities!


----------



## DannyTS

TravelTime said:


> This thread is about theories and hypotheses.


As I understand it, most people with knowledge to the legal details take the view that it will not happen but i agree with you, we are all speculating.


----------



## Markus

All Marriott has to do is buy Vistana resales on the open market. They sell at a fraction of the price of new inventory. The margins are huge for them. They will get enough product to populate any type of flex product and they can then cross pollinate with Marriott inventory and market a new hybrid product. They avoid any legal issues, keep the current owners happy, and get a new product to their salesforce. Let’s remember the on site sales offices are full of new clients. This is where the money is. They can keep the legacy ownership programs going for quite some time before the become a significant drag on operations. This transaction is about more opportunities for sales, a significant revenue source, all the while being able to make the claim that these are the best resorts....and they are.

This begs the question of where do the new or re-developped properties go.....likely the new product. 

Markus


----------



## dioxide45

Markus said:


> All Marriott has to do is buy Vistana resales on the open market. They sell at a fraction of the price of new inventory. The margins are huge for them. They will get enough product to populate any type of flex product and they can then cross pollinate with Marriott inventory and market a new hybrid product. They avoid any legal issues, keep the current owners happy, and get a new product to their salesforce. Let’s remember the on site sales offices are full of new clients. This is where the money is. They can keep the legacy ownership programs going for quite some time before the become a significant drag on operations. This transaction is about more opportunities for sales, a significant revenue source, all the while being able to make the claim that these are the best resorts....and they are.
> 
> This begs the question of where do the new or re-developped properties go.....likely the new product.
> 
> Markus


They could, but developers usually don't go out to the open market. The open market is somewhat of a gray area full of PCCs and brokers they probably don't want to get involved with. They are more likely to offer a buyback program directly to their owner base. They did this a few years ago to Marriott owners. Usually offering a premium over what they could have bought them for on the open market. It seems to be easier for them as they can control the process better.


----------



## TravelTime

Markus said:


> All Marriott has to do is buy Vistana resales on the open market. They sell at a fraction of the price of new inventory. The margins are huge for them. They will get enough product to populate any type of flex product and they can then cross pollinate with Marriott inventory and market a new hybrid product. They avoid any legal issues, keep the current owners happy, and get a new product to their salesforce. Let’s remember the on site sales offices are full of new clients. This is where the money is. They can keep the legacy ownership programs going for quite some time before the become a significant drag on operations. This transaction is about more opportunities for sales, a significant revenue source, all the while being able to make the claim that these are the best resorts....and they are.
> 
> This begs the question of where do the new or re-developped properties go.....likely the new product.
> 
> Markus



Yes, I agree. I don’t think Marriott will have any legal problems with resale buyers. As an owner of a Westin mandatory resort purchased on the resale market, I can say if they make me a fair offer, I would prefer to be part of the new DC Points program than the SO program. I would get more choices and the opportunity for equivalent views to what I own - oceanfront. I will not exchange or trade in SOs or II because I can’t easily beat my Westin Kannapali Maui unit or view. Plus I pay big dollars in MFs for Maui. It is a waste to exchange for a downgrade. Only WSJ or the other Westin Kannapali oceanfront units are equivalent. But within Marriott, I would have so many more choices for a Hawaii or Caribbean oceanfront units to exchange for with DC Points.


----------



## Markus

dioxide45 said:


> They could, but developers usually don't go out to the open market. The open market is somewhat of a gray area full of PCCs and brokers they probably don't want to get involved with. They are more likely to offer a buyback program directly to their owner base. They did this a few years ago to Marriott owners. Usually offering a premium over what they could have bought them for on the open market. It seems to be easier for them as they can control the process better.


This would work also, and would treat owners wanting to sell or deed back more fairly.

Markus


----------



## TravelTime

All I care about is a fair program. Marriott seems to do the right thing. I have no doubt that if they integrate the 3 programs, they will be fair to current owners (whether they bought resale or from developers). Some of us will benefit more than others based upon how desirable our locations are, but I believe the end result will be fair.


----------



## controller1

DannyTS said:


> As I understand it, most people with knowledge to the legal details take the view that it will not happen but i agree with you, we are all speculating.



What is the "it" that will not happen?


----------



## TravelTime

No one on this thread has any legal experience in this area. We are all speculating. I think a lawsuit would be frivolous. I am sure I will be happy with whatever the new VAC develops because I truly think Marriott will do the right thing for business reasons. I am not so tainted as to believe that business and ethics can’t work in tandem. Ethical business decisions lead to better business results. Eventually unethical businesses fail. I think Marriott is an ethical business or I would not have bought any timeshares from them.


----------



## dioxide45

TravelTime said:


> No one on this thread has any legal experience in this area. We are all speculating. I think a lawsuit would be frivolous. I am sure I will be happy with whatever the new VAC develops because I truly think Marriott will do the right thing for business reasons. I am not so tainted as to believe that business and ethics can’t work in tandem. Ethical business decisions lead to better business results. Eventually unethical businesses fail. I think Marriott is an ethical business or I would not have bought any timeshares from them.


Not sure that a lawsuit would be frivolous. It would seem if Vistana was able to get rid of mandatory resales, they would have done so by now. The issue is that they simply can't. The issue will come up if Marriott tries to replace VSN with DC and say that DC is not The Club as spelled out in the CCRs for the mandatory resorts. I don't think they will try do to that. I think they will just add another option allowing Vistana weeks to be enrolled in DC. They know that they won't get 100% of Vistana owners to enroll their weeks, just like they didn't get 100% or even 50% of Marriott owners to enroll.


----------



## DannyTS

TravelTime said:


> No one on this thread has any legal experience in this area. We are all speculating. I think a lawsuit would be frivolous. I am sure I will be happy with whatever the new VAC develops because I truly think Marriott will do the right thing for business reasons. I am not so tainted as to believe that business and ethics can’t work in tandem. Ethical business decisions lead to better business results. Eventually unethical businesses fail. I think Marriott is an ethical business or I would not have bought any timeshares from them.


I agree that in general they have to keep owners moderately happy since we are their best source of income and future sales. At the same time, bad things can happen and big companies have to be reminded when they goof up.


----------



## TravelTime

dioxide45 said:


> Not sure that a lawsuit would be frivolous. It would seem if Vistana was able to get rid of mandatory resales, they would have done so by now. The issue is that they simply can't. The issue will come up if Marriott tries to replace VSN with DC and say that DC is not The Club as spelled out in the CCRs for the mandatory resorts. I don't think they will try do to that. I think they will just add another option allowing Vistana weeks to be enrolled in DC. They know that they won't get 100% of Vistana owners to enroll their weeks, just like they didn't get 100% or even 50% of Marriott owners to enroll.



Makes sense. My point is I believe Marriott will be fair. I personally do not believe in lawsuits. It would need to be really terrible for me to participate in a lawsuit. A change in a vacation club program that attempts to make me whole would not justify a lawsuit, IMO.


----------



## DannyTS

dioxide45 said:


> Not sure that a lawsuit would be frivolous. It would seem if Vistana was able to get rid of mandatory resales, they would have done so by now. The issue is that they simply can't. The issue will come up if Marriott tries to replace VSN with DC and say that DC is not The Club as spelled out in the CCRs for the mandatory resorts. I don't think they will try do to that. I think they will just add another option allowing Vistana weeks to be enrolled in DC. They know that they won't get 100% of Vistana owners to enroll their weeks, just like they didn't get 100% or even 50% of Marriott owners to enroll.


% of the overall business, the few mandatory resorts are a much smaller problem for Marriott than for the current Vistana so you would have expected Vistana to have been much more motivated to do it.


----------



## DannyTS

TravelTime said:


> Makes sense. My point is I believe Marriott will be fair. I personally do not believe in lawsuits. It would need to be really terrible for me to participate in a lawsuit. A change in a vacation club program that attempts to make me whole would not justify a lawsuit, IMO.


I would, at least out of principle. Besides, these are not like personal lawsuits that need you to be very actively involved.


----------



## TravelTime

DannyTS said:


> % of the overall business, the few mandatory resorts are a much smaller problem for Marriott than for the current Vistana so you would have expected Vistana to have been much more motivated to do it.



If I could keep my SOs in VSE, my deeded week and enroll my WKOVR-N OF into DC Points, that would be the best of all worlds. I am just being realistic that we will probably need to compromise eventually. Probably not immediately but I would assume over the longer term, Marriott will try to combine the 3 programs. However, I think they will be fair and offer Vistana owners a fair amount of DC points in exchange of SOs.


----------



## TravelTime

DannyTS said:


> I would, at least out of principle. Besides, these are not like personal lawsuits that need you to be very actively involved.



Lawsuits are a good way to increase MFs.


----------



## DannyTS

TravelTime said:


> Lawsuits are a good way to increase MFs.



They also hurt Marriott's bottom line. Since some people assume that Marriott is  prepared to do the first step, unfair and i believe illegal, they should be aware of the possible consequences.  It is rather unproductive to advance the idea that owners will not defend their rights because this invites abuse. But again, I take a positive view, i do not think that it will be necessary.


----------



## nokaoi9

If SVV Bella is currently worth 81,000 StarOptions, which is also the equivalent of a 1BR at Westin Kannapali, what are the thoughts on how this would work if Marriott tries to offer DC points in place of StarOptions?  I suspect the points offered for the Bella unit would not be enough to get a week at Westin Kannapali.


----------



## TravelTime

nokaoi9 said:


> If SVV Bella is currently worth 81,000 StarOptions, which is also the equivalent of a 1BR at Westin Kannapali, what are the thoughts on how this would work if Marriott tries to offer DC points in place of StarOptions?  I suspect the points offered for the Bella unit would not be enough to get a week at Westin Kannapali.



The problem is not how much SOs a resort is worth but where is your home resort. At 8 months, it is nearly impossible to book Kaanapali with SOs especially in high seasons or with the best views. So the point value is almost irrelevant. I suspect any Orlando resort would not be worth much in DC Points. Have you been able to book a 1 br at Westin Kaanapali at 8 months with SVV Bella? If so, what season, what view type, what room size, how often and for how long?


----------



## nokaoi9

Yes, I’ve been able to book pretty regularly.  We’ve booked Spring Break a couple times but tend to go in Fall, which is off season but what we prefer.


----------



## DannyTS

nokaoi9 said:


> If SVV Bella is currently worth 81,000 StarOptions, which is also the equivalent of a 1BR at Westin Kannapali, what are the thoughts on how this would work if Marriott tries to offer DC points in place of StarOptions?  I suspect the points offered for the Bella unit would not be enough to get a week at Westin Kannapali.


Traveltime is correct. And for some reasons all the weeks in Hawaii are platinum although the II TDI shows a different picture. I guess that they were trying to balance somewhat.


----------



## TravelTime

nokaoi9 said:


> Yes, I’ve been able to book pretty regularly.  We’ve booked Spring Break a couple times but tend to go in Fall, which is off season but what we prefer.



Then I would hope you would get a good conversion rate for your 81,000 SOs if (and that’s a big if) Marriott combines the programs so you can continue your travels to Hawaii using SOs, DC Points or whatever new “currency” they develop. Hopefully, the merger will be a win-win for current owners.


----------



## dioxide45

TravelTime said:


> Lawsuits are a good way to increase MFs.


A lawsuit should have zero impact on MFs. MFs are the entire costs to operate a resort by the HOA. Sure, Marriott may want to increase their management fee to cover the costs of a lawsuit, but that isn't unlikely to happen. Costs would likely be incurred by charging more on the sales of VOIs. I get that the customer pays for everything, but owners of the resorts should see little impact in costs because of something like this.


----------



## NJDave

nokaoi9 said:


> If SVV Bella is currently worth 81,000 StarOptions, which is also the equivalent of a 1BR at Westin Kannapali, what are the thoughts on how this would work if Marriott tries to offer DC points in place of StarOptions?  I suspect the points offered for the Bella unit would not be enough to get a week at Westin Kannapali.



Here is the list of points required in the Marriott program.  You can speculate a conversion rate to see what you would be able to obtain in the Marriott program.

http://vacationpointexchange.com/pointschart/points_charts_2019.pdf


----------



## dioxide45

TravelTime said:


> The problem is not how much SOs a resort is worth but where is your home resort. At 8 months, it is nearly impossible to book Kaanapali with SOs especially in high seasons or with the best views. So the point value is almost irrelevant. I suspect any Orlando resort would not be worth much in DC Points. Have you been able to book a 1 br at Westin Kaanapali at 8 months with SVV Bella? If so, what season, what view type, what room size, how often and for how long?


Don't expect Marriott to give you enough DC points to book your home resort in high season. RIght now, Marriott doesn't do that with their resorts. They will assign a number of DC points in a complex way with many different variables. Holiday, summer and spring break weeks will have high DC point values assigned in order to book those weeks. Fall will have lower numbers. The amount of points they actually give you will be somewhere in between. If you want to go to Maui, best to use your home resort preference or perhaps even StarOptions.

I was able to book a 2BR at Kaanapali with SVV Bella StarOptions. It was pretty easy, but we went the first week of December. Certainly not a prime week. I would expect that prime weeks will be easier to book when they are in DC because Marriott will charge a premium to book them but they really won't give you a premium because you own them.


----------



## TravelTime

dioxide45 said:


> A lawsuit should have zero impact on MFs. MFs are the entire costs to operate a resort by the HOA. Sure, Marriott may want to increase their management fee to cover the costs of a lawsuit, but that isn't unlikely to happen. Costs would likely be incurred by charging more on the sales of VOIs. I get that the customer pays for everything, but owners of the resorts should see little impact in costs because of something like this.



My hope is the merger will be a win-win for current owners so there will be no lawsuits. I am looking forward to a combined program that would allow owners of Westin and Marriott to have more trading options across the new combined resorts. I am not a believer in lawsuits in general.


----------



## Julian926

I also own SVV Bella.  That would be a huge problem if our 81k wouldn't get a week of a typical Hawaiian 1bd week.  If the Orlando properties get devalued, you will have a lot of unhappy Vistana owners. 

The Vistana letter to owners indicated that we will receive the same "valuable" benefits.   Although this can anything, I hope they live up to this promise at all levels.


----------



## dioxide45

Here is a chart that was put together by a Tugger of how many points Marriott assigns to their owned weeks when someone elects DC Points. I would expect Orlando Prime season to perhaps get about 2,100 DC points and Hawaii to perhaps get about 6,000. You can use the chart in post #176 to see what you can actually book with those.


----------



## TravelTime

dioxide45 said:


> Don't expect Marriott to give you enough DC points to book your home resort in high season. RIght now, Marriott doesn't do that with their resorts. They will assign a number of DC points in a complex way with many different variables. Holiday, summer and spring break weeks will have high DC point values assigned in order to book those weeks. Fall will have lower numbers. The amount of points they actually give you will be somewhere in between. If you want to go to Maui, best to use your home resort preference or perhaps even StarOptions.
> 
> I was able to book a 2BR at Kaanapali with SVV Bella StarOptions. It was pretty easy, but we went the first week of December. Certainly not a prime week. I would expect that prime weeks will be easier to book when they are in DC because Marriott will charge a premium to book them but they really won't give you a premium because you own them.



Yes, you are correct. It is generally better to book your home resort as a week, rather than with points.


----------



## DannyTS

dioxide45 said:


> Here is a chart that was put together by a Tugger of how many points Marriott assigns to their owned weeks when someone elects DC Points. I would expect Orlando Prime season to perhaps get about 2,100 DC points and Hawaii to perhaps get about 6,000. You can use the chart in post #176 to see what you can actually book with those.



If i read the  Marriott chart correctly,  many  2 bedroom prime weeks in Orlando give you between 2500-2900. Some top weeks are higher (an outlier at 4175), some weeks lower at around 2000-2200 points. I would expect your 81,000 SO Orlando to be able to get maybe 2600-2800 points which can still buy Hawaii 1 bedroom but it certainly feels like a downgrade. But again, i do not think that the SOs will disappear, this would be just another option.


----------



## Ken555

DannyTS said:


> If i read the  Marriott chart correctly,  many  2 bedroom prime weeks in Orlando give you between 2500-2900. Some top weeks are higher (an outlier at 4175), some weeks lower at around 2000-2200 points. I would expect your 81,000 SO Orlando to be able to get maybe 2600-2800 points which can still buy Hawaii 1 bedroom but it certainly feels like a downgrade. But again, i do not think that the SOs will disappear, this would be just another option.



81k is a 1-bed, so why would that feel like a downgrade if the trade capability is the same as it is currently?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## Ken555

TravelTime said:


> At 8 months, it is nearly impossible to book Kaanapali with SOs especially in high seasons or with the best views.



Absolute nonsense. And FYI, Vistana treats Hawaii as a single year long season.






Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## DannyTS

Ken555 said:


> 81k is a 1-bed, so why would that feel like a downgrade if the trade capability is the same as it is currently?
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


2 bedroom platinum Bella is 81k Staroptions which gets you 1 bedroom anytime in Hawaii. You may still get the same under a DC but more limited on the calendar if i read it correctly


----------



## Ken555

DannyTS said:


> 2 bedroom platinum Bella is 81k Staroptions which gets you 1 bedroom anytime in Hawaii. You may still get the same under a DC but more limited on the calendar if i read it correctly



Ah, ok. Changing season value from one season all year to multiple seasons would not surprise me. If some periods require more points than the current program, then that would be a devaluing of ownership and yet not much of a surprise.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## nokaoi9

Looking at the DC points chart for Hawaii, you would need a minimum of 2925 for a 1BR week at Ko Olina, and 3100 at Maui Ocean Club (Lahaina and Napili Villas).  While I would love to believe they would offer a minimum of 2925 for SVV Bella, I don't see that happening.  It will definitely be interesting to see how this plays out.


----------



## TravelTime

It’s interesting that at least half of the money I have spent in timeshares are in Marriott and Westin yet I am not worried about the program change. Technically, if the new program does not benefit existing owners, I have a lot to lose. However, I am excited about the possibilities. If it stays the same as three separate programs, that’s fine. If it changes, I suspect Marriott will be fair and give us options for enrolling in the new program. I am optimistic it will be better for most, if not all, of us. No need to worry in advance. This could take years to come to fruition.


----------



## TravelTime

Ken555 said:


> Absolute nonsense. And FYI, Vistana treats Hawaii as a single year long season.
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk



I am new to Star Options so I defer to you. However, I just did a search for a 1 or 2 bedroom for a week in September 2018 (shoulder season) in WKOVR and the Calendar showed availability but the system would not give me an available booking date.

The other thing I noticed is the system only says you can trade for a unit size but not by view. So is there a way to pick your view when you exchange internally with Star Options?

Just an FYI, when I logged into Vistana.com, the two announcements at the top of my screen were about the Marriott-ILG merger. Right under that was the announcement of the combination of the 3 hotel rewards points programs. Just an interesting observation of what the future might hold. Again, no need to worry. I am sure they will be fair. I think we are coming out better off with the new hotel rewards points program. But definitely not worse off.


----------



## dsmrp

TravelTime said:


> I am new to Star Options so I defer to you. However, I just did a search for a 1 or 2 bedroom for a week in September 2018 (shoulder season) in WKOVR and the Calendar showed availability but the system would not give me an available booking date.
> 
> The other thing I noticed is the system only says you can trade for a unit size but not by view. So is there a way to pick your view when you exchange internally with Star Options?
> /QUOTE]
> 
> In your availability search, if there is an oceanfront unit available, it will come up as a separate selectable reservation item.  And will cost more star options than a non-ocean front reservation.  AFAIK, that's the only way you can get a specific 'view' type when reserving.


----------



## controller1

TravelTime said:


> I am new to Star Options so I defer to you. However, I just did a search for a 1 or 2 bedroom for a week in September 2018 (shoulder season) in WKOVR and the Calendar showed availability but the system would not give me an available booking date.
> 
> The other thing I noticed is the system only says you can trade for a unit size but not by view. So is there a way to pick your view when you exchange internally with Star Options?



I just checked and there are plenty of 1- and 2-bedroom units available at WKORV and WKORV-N in September for seven-day periods beginning mid-September and I was able to go through the reservation process.

Not sure where you see that "the system only says you can trade for a unit size but not by view".  If you believe you would be able to make a StarOption reservation for an Ocean Front 1- or 2-bedroom unit then you will be sorely disappointed.  Ocean Front units cost us owners a premium when purchased and they are nearly always reserved within the Home Resort period.  The rule of thumb is one should not pay the premium for Ocean Front at those two resorts unless one plans on using them regularly within the Home Resort period.  When Ocean Front is available for StarOption reservations it is nearly always a Studio unit.


----------



## TravelTime

controller1 said:


> I just checked and there are plenty of 1- and 2-bedroom units available at WKORV and WKORV-N in September for seven-day periods beginning mid-September and I was able to go through the reservation process.
> 
> Not sure where you see that "the system only says you can trade for a unit size but not by view".  If you believe you would be able to make a StarOption reservation for an Ocean Front 1- or 2-bedroom unit then you will be sorely disappointed.  Ocean Front units cost us owners a premium when purchased and they are nearly always reserved within the Home Resort period.  The rule of thumb is one should not pay the premium for Ocean Front at those two resorts unless one plans on using them regularly within the Home Resort period.  When Ocean Front is available for StarOption reservations it is nearly always a Studio unit.



I own WKOVR oceanfront 2 bedroom lockoff and already reserved my 2019 trip. I was just doing a search because someone commented that it is easy to trade and get Maui at the 8 month mark. I am new so I was just wondering how easy it is to be an owner at the Orlando resorts with SOs and book at Kaanapali. I was wondering because, like you, I pay a lot in maintenance fees and paid a lot for my unit.


----------



## DavidnRobin

TravelTime said:


> I own WKOVR oceanfront 2 bedroom lockoff and already reserved my 2019 trip. I was just doing a search because someone commented that it is easy to trade and get Maui at the 8 month mark. I am new so I was just wondering how easy it is to be an owner at the Orlando resorts with SOs and book at Kaanapali. I was wondering because, like you, I pay a lot in maintenance fees and paid a lot for my unit.



From 8-12 months out, OF WKORV reservations (7 days; Sat-Sat or Sun-Sun) can only be made by Owners (or villas owned by VSE), and you do not compete with others.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## dioxide45

dioxide45 said:


> Here is a chart that was put together by a Tugger of how many points Marriott assigns to their owned weeks when someone elects DC Points. I would expect Orlando Prime season to perhaps get about 2,100 DC points and Hawaii to perhaps get about 6,000. You can use the chart in post #176 to see what you can actually book with those.


I forgot to actually include the chart link in my original post. Here it is. I also had the number of points for a prime Orlando week wrong. I listed the number for a High season. I suspect prime will probably garner closer to 2,750 DC points.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1fbFUDNeQFORFJxzlWufN5LoXo9b9eJhegQ326PFHBP8/edit?usp=sharing


----------



## dioxide45

TravelTime said:


> I own WKOVR oceanfront 2 bedroom lockoff and already reserved my 2019 trip. I was just doing a search because someone commented that it is easy to trade and get Maui at the 8 month mark. I am new so I was just wondering how easy it is to be an owner at the Orlando resorts with SOs and book at Kaanapali. I was wondering because, like you, I pay a lot in maintenance fees and paid a lot for my unit.


We pay about $1300 in MFs for our SVV prime 2BR. Per the MF database, the MF on a WKORVN 2BR is $2500. When you take the 81,000 from the SVV Prime to stay in a 1BR in Hawaii, it seems that you are probably paying close to the same in MFs as an owner.


----------



## r1lee

2 bedrooms are next to impossibl at kaanapoli.  1 bedroom is gone at 12:01am, studio a few minutes or hours after.


----------



## dioxide45

r1lee said:


> 2 bedrooms are next to impossibl at kaanapoli.  1 bedroom is gone at 12:01am, studio a few minutes or hours after.


It all depends on the when you are traveling. I have no problems booking a 2BR at WKORVN at 8 months out calling the next morning on the phone. I had to call because we were borrowing StarOptions. We made a reservation for the first week of December.


----------



## WatsonC2

We used our 81k SOs from our SVV Bella in 2017 to make a 1 bedroom reservation at WKORN the first week of April (Spring Break).  Ended up cancelling and rolling over the SOs due to some schedule issues and then booked a 2 bedroom at WKORN the same week in 2018.  Both reservations made online precisely when it openned. They were my only two attempts but it worked fine for us.  I live by an outlook calendar and set reminders to log in whenever I make reservations so maybe that's the difference.  My observation is that there are more 2 bedroom units available than 1 bedrooms generally but maybe thats just when I have looked.


----------



## Ken555

TravelTime said:


> I am new to Star Options so I defer to you. However, I just did a search for a 1 or 2 bedroom for a week in September 2018 (shoulder season) in WKOVR and the Calendar showed availability but the system would not give me an available booking date.



Oh, so you want SPECIFICS! Lol

I have had almost no issues booking at eight months. When you’re trying less than eight months then it does get more difficult...for the obvious reasons. Planning works.

I was there in March and made another reservation for Dec without any issues. YMMV. Obviously. But my 12 years of booking Maui shows only positive results.



> The other thing I noticed is the system only says you can trade for a unit size but not by view. So is there a way to pick your view when you exchange internally with Star Options?



It’s only a relatively new option to book ocean front for higher amounts of SOs than the other views. When booking via SO you technically only get an island view (unless you specifically book OF), but I’ve had many more ocean views than island views.



Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## blondietink

TravelTime said:


> The problem is not how much SOs a resort is worth but where is your home resort. At 8 months, it is nearly impossible to book Kaanapali with SOs especially in high seasons or with the best views. So the point value is almost irrelevant. I suspect any Orlando resort would not be worth much in DC Points. Have you been able to book a 1 br at Westin Kaanapali at 8 months with SVV Bella? If so, what season, what view type, what room size, how often and for how long?


We have been able to book Ka-anapali North twice now at 8 months out with Options from SVV St. Augustine and extended it to 11 days in a one bedroom.  Did the same thing at Princeville.


----------



## TravelTime

dioxide45 said:


> We pay about $1300 in MFs for our SVV prime 2BR. Per the MF database, the MF on a WKORVN 2BR is $2500. When you take the 81,000 from the SVV Prime to stay in a 1BR in Hawaii, it seems that you are probably paying close to the same in MFs as an owner.



Based on what you said above, the good news is that owning WKOVRN 2 br Ocean Front is not a rip off in MFs.


----------



## DannyTS

Will the mandatory status be challenged after the MVC takover of ILG?
Some said that the mandatory status is shaky because it is not in the deed. I challenge that idea, the original deeds do reference the Declaration of Condominium .






And the CC&Rs is pretty clear: 
SVV Bella on the Orange County Florida Comptrollers website. The Starwood Vacation Club Resort Affiliation Agreement

Page 91:

III. Membership in the Network

A purchaser of a Vacation Ownership Interest in a Club Resort* automatically is enrolled* in the Network as a Network Member at the time that the Network Member acquires the Network Member's Vacation Ownership Interest. (…) Membership in the Network *is granted to all *purchasers of Club Resort Vacation Ownership Interests. (…) If the Network Member no longer owns a Club Resort Vacation Ownership Interest, the person no longer will be a Network Member and *the new owner* of that Club Resort Vacation Ownership Interest *automatically will become the Network Member.*


There are other paragraphs that would create a lot of legal and PR problems for them if they tried to kick out mandatory resale owners from the club.


So to me it looks rock solid.  Please do not forget, if possible Vistana would have changed it a very long time ago. Disclosure, i own both mandatory and voluntary weeks.


----------



## Maui_ed

Compelling arguments.  Thanks for sharing.  I am sure this topic will generate lots of discussion on both sides.


----------



## SunnyVI

I believe they’re going to keep program rules in place and allow resale owners to become owners of the integrated system with a minimum enrollment or purchase. I own both and when Marriott launched its points program in 2010, they had a brief period at the beginning where a resale owner could pay like $1500 and have all developer benefits added. Not bad if you ask me. The integration will take at least a year after closing if not longer in my opinion.


----------



## Helios

DannyTS said:


> Disclosure, i own both mandatory and voluntary weeks.



I do too: a mix of developer, retroed, and mandatory (not retroed) and even a MVC post 6/10 week (and a lonely HGVC week in HI not related to this topic but why not throw in the list). I am optimistic about the takeover.  My worry is that the doc you posted referenced a club that can be history depending on what happens.  So, if the club as we know it now is dissolved and our mandatory units can be converted to DC, does that document hold any water?


----------



## Helios

SunnyVI said:


> I believe they’re going to keep program rules in place and allow resale owners to become owners of the integrated system with a minimum enrollment or purchase. I own both and when Marriott launched its points program in 2010, they had a brief period at the beginning where a resale owner could pay like $1500 and have all developer benefits added. Not bad if you ask me. The integration will take at least a year after closing if not longer in my opinion.


Something like this would be ideal IMO.


----------



## CalGalTraveler

Agree with @SunnyVI.

I predict that they will keep mandatory status and staroptions program in the short to mid-term.

They will likely pursue an overlay to enroll in a Super DC program. However, doing so could indirectly devalue the benefits of the StarOption program.  For example if the most desirable inventory has been enrolled in the DC program, there may only be limited availability for SO trades.  At the extreme, all that will remain will be silver or mud weeks in the non-view rooms at the 'worst' locations. It becomes irrelevant over many many years.

For phase I, I believe they will offer the largest incentives for the most demanded Vistana properties regardless of mandatory/non-mandatory (e.g. Nanea/WKORV/WSJ/Harborside/ski weeks). They will also grandfather developer and resale (by re-qualifying them) at the most demanded resorts if they enroll in the first phase of Super DC. Why should they care - they need the inventory to attract new buyers and upsell Marriott DC owners to the Super DC; these were not Marriott developer sales.

If they differentiate resale, then I envision a second amnesty re-qualifying incentive if they don't get enough developer weeks into the Super DC system in round 1.

What they will do at other properties will be similar but will have a lower incentive for enrollment.

They could also incent owners to give up their mandatory SO status by giving incentives to enroll in Super DC. FWIW I would see this as a deal-breaker unless it is huge. I also am not sure how successful this will be because it is a stick - people don't like change and they don't like to give up something - even if it has minimal value.


----------



## DannyTS

Helios said:


> My worry is that the doc you posted referenced a club that can be history depending on what happens.  So, if the club as we know it now is dissolved and our mandatory units can be converted to DC, does that document hold any water?



if the current club is swallowed by DC then DC is the new club for mandatory. IMHO MVC will have to have a sweeter deal for mandatory resort weeks. Again, I own both mandatory and voluntary so i am very curious how this is going to evolve. I am actually very optimistic. 

Sent from my SM-G930W8 using Tapatalk


----------



## dioxide45

DannyTS said:


> Will the mandatory status be challenged after the MVC takover of ILG?
> Some said that the mandatory status is shaky because it is not in the deed. I challenge that idea, the original deeds do reference the Declaration of Condominium .
> 
> View attachment 6360
> 
> 
> And the CC&Rs is pretty clear:
> SVV Bella on the Orange County Florida Comptrollers website. The Starwood Vacation Club Resort Affiliation Agreement
> 
> Page 91:
> 
> III. Membership in the Network
> 
> A purchaser of a Vacation Ownership Interest in a Club Resort* automatically is enrolled* in the Network as a Network Member at the time that the Network Member acquires the Network Member's Vacation Ownership Interest. (…) Membership in the Network *is granted to all *purchasers of Club Resort Vacation Ownership Interests. (…) If the Network Member no longer owns a Club Resort Vacation Ownership Interest, the person no longer will be a Network Member and *the new owner* of that Club Resort Vacation Ownership Interest *automatically will become the Network Member.*
> 
> 
> There are other paragraphs that would create a lot of legal and PR problems for them if they tried to kick out mandatory resale owners from the club.
> 
> 
> So to me it looks rock solid.  Please do not forget, if possible Vistana would have changed it a very long time ago. Disclosure, i own both mandatory and voluntary weeks.


I would agree that it is a deeded right, as long as the Network exists. It it is possible that they kick out all of the mandatory resorts from the network and sell management rights to another developer, but I seriously doubt they will do that.


----------



## dioxide45

Helios said:


> I do too: a mix of developer, retroed, and mandatory (not retroed) and even a MVC post 6/10 week (and a lonely HGVC week in HI not rested to this topic but why not throw in the list). I am optimistic about the takeover.  My worry is that the doc you posted referenced a club that can be history depending on what happens.  So, if the club as we know it now is dissolved and our mandatory units can be converted to DC, does that document hold any water?


They would be on shaky ground to say they are eliminating the VSN program and then put the properties in DC. It would be a good argument to make that DC is now the new Network as referenced in the CCRs.


----------



## bizaro86

CalGalTraveler said:


> Agree with @SunnyVI.
> 
> I predict that they will keep mandatory status and staroptions program in the short to mid-term.
> 
> They will likely pursue an overlay to enroll in a Super DC program. However, doing so could indirectly devalue the benefits of the StarOption program.  For example if the most desirable inventory has been enrolled in the DC program, there may only be limited availability for SO trades.  At the extreme, all that will remain will be silver or mud weeks in the non-view rooms at the 'worst' locations. It becomes irrelevant over many many years.
> 
> For phase I, I believe they will offer the largest incentives for the most demanded Vistana properties regardless of mandatory/non-mandatory (e.g. Nanea/WKORV/WSJ/Harborside/ski weeks). They will also grandfather developer and resale (by re-qualifying them) at the most demanded resorts if they enroll in the first phase of Super DC. Why should they care - they need the inventory to attract new buyers and upsell Marriott DC owners to the Super DC; these were not Marriott developer sales.
> 
> If they differentiate resale, then I envision a second amnesty re-qualifying incentive if they don't get enough developer weeks into the Super DC system in round 1.
> 
> What they will do at other properties will be similar but will have a lower incentive for enrollment.
> 
> They could also incent owners to give up their mandatory SO status by giving incentives to enroll in Super DC. FWIW I would see this as a deal-breaker unless it is huge. I also am not sure how successful this will be because it is a stick - people don't like change and they don't like to give up something - even if it has minimal value.



I could see them only offering the super DC for converting WKV/SVV deeds to the respective flex trust. While those deeds would still be mandatory,  the flex ownerships are voluntary so it wouldn't really matter. If they did this at low cost and offered marriott/Hyatt access they'd get lots of takers I bet.


----------



## dioxide45

CalGalTraveler said:


> Agree with @SunnyVI.
> 
> I predict that they will keep mandatory status and staroptions program in the short to mid-term.
> 
> They will likely pursue an overlay to enroll in a Super DC program. However, doing so could indirectly devalue the benefits of the StarOption program.  For example if the most desirable inventory has been enrolled in the DC program, there may only be limited availability for SO trades.  At the extreme, all that will remain will be silver or mud weeks in the non-view rooms at the 'worst' locations. It becomes irrelevant over many many years.
> 
> For phase I, I believe they will offer the largest incentives for the most demanded Vistana properties regardless of mandatory/non-mandatory (e.g. Nanea/WKORV/WSJ/Harborside/ski weeks). They will also grandfather developer and resale (by re-qualifying them) at the most demanded resorts if they enroll in the first phase of Super DC. Why should they care - they need the inventory to attract new buyers and upsell Marriott DC owners to the Super DC; these were not Marriott developer sales.
> 
> If they differentiate resale, then I envision a second amnesty re-qualifying incentive if they don't get enough developer weeks into the Super DC system in round 1.
> 
> What they will do at other properties will be similar but will have a lower incentive for enrollment.
> 
> They could also incent owners to give up their mandatory SO status by giving incentives to enroll in Super DC. FWIW I would see this as a deal-breaker unless it is huge. I also am not sure how successful this will be because it is a stick - people don't like change and they don't like to give up something - even if it has minimal value.


You can't really give up your mandatory ownership status, it is mandatory. They could offer enrollment for those at voluntary resorts (even those that bought direct) to enroll and give up their membership in VSN for membership in DC. They go from having a VSN fee of $145 (+$50 for additional week) for a new DC annual fee of $195+. Those people will no longer have the ability to convert to StarOptions at 8 months. You do have to elect DC points by September 30th of the year prior to use year (later dates for higher DC ownership status). If you don't elect, your only options are home resort usage or II exchange. I think that would be a tough sell. You could also opt to enroll in DC and keep VSN membership, but you would have to pay two annual fees, one for VSN and the other for DC. This would be required of mandatory owners since they can't opt out of VSN.

I see them simply putting DC in as an overlay on the deeded weeks. You can still use your home resort week, use StarOptions or convert to DC points. If you convert to DC points, you can no longer use your home resort week or StarOptions. Your only option is an exchange using DC points. This would be the best of both worlds for everyone. For the foreseeable future there would still be plenty of inventory in the StarOption pool and those that opt to enroll in DC would have the added option of using DC points across all properties.

I really don't see them offering a "Super DC". It is possible to use as a potential selling point. But I like the idea of a single streamlined system. Vistana went the route of multiple trusts where Marriott has a single simple trust.


----------



## GregT

It is interesting that the Marriott press releases specifically called out St. John and the Mexico properties, but was silent on Harborside.  I suspect that it is because there is significant unsold inventory at these properties that could be placed in the Marriott Trust.

I agree with Dioxide and that VSN will remain intact and that Marriott will offer an overlay that permits Starwood owners to enroll their weeks (for a fee) and get Marriott Elected Points to use to exchange to Marriott properties.  I believe that unsold inventory at St. John and the Mexico properties (and others) will be placed into the Trust.

I don't think there will be a blanket 40:1 or 30:1 exchange, but I think that is the right range.   I believe Marriott will (correctly) place premiums on certain properties, as they did with their own properties.

Accordingly, I would propose the following point values (in the Marriott system), based upon my opinion of how Marriott valued it's own portfolio.

WKORV OF - 7,500 points (consistent with Maui Ocean Club -- edited: MOC new towers)
WKORV OV - 6,000 points
WKORV IV - 5,000 points
WPORV - 4,500 points
Harborside Platinum - 6,000 points
WSJ 3BR Platinum - 6,000 points
WSJ 2BR Platinum - 4,000 points (consistent with Frenchman's Cove)
WSJ 1BR Platinum - 3,000 points
WSJ Studio Platinum - 2,000 points
SVV 2BR Platinum - 2,000 points
SVV 1BR Platinum - 1,000 points
WDW 2BR Platinum - 3,500 points (consistent with Shadow Ridge)

These are the properties that I track most in Starwood system -- my opinion is that Marriott overweighted the Hawaii properties because they need them available for exchanges, and underweighted everything else because they needed customers to buy points.  The same will apply, IMO, to Starwood weeks.   I think Marriott will want those owners to buy points, and will give them a good base of points, but not enough to widely exploit the system.   Plus, they know that many owners can already exchange with points to other Starwood properties, so there is a built-in "competitor" to Marriott point systems, so that is a consideration.

Finally, I think Marriott will adjust the seasons, and fix some errors -- like Harborside in the summer will be at a higher point value than currently attributable with StarOptions.  And voluntary resale properties (that close prior to the merger) will finally have a point value.

It's a fascinating consideration.  I thought about buying a WPORV (because I love that property) and I believe it will be eligible for enrollment -- but I can't see Marriott assigning more points to it then they did their own properties (Waiohai/Kauai Lagoons in particular) and the MFs are still too much of a hurdle for a non-core property for me.  And like Dioxide, I think StarOptions will be viable for the medium term and I don't need to own WPORV to access it.    Interesting stuff.

Best,

Greg

Edited: I clarified that voluntary properties need to close prior to the merger to be eligible for enrollment.  I believe those post-merger resales will be blocked, like they are with Marriott.


----------



## Helios

GregT said:


> It is interesting that the Marriott press releases specifically called out St. John and the Mexico properties, but was silent on Harborside.  I suspect that it is because there is significant unsold inventory at these properties that could be placed in the Marriott Trust.
> 
> I agree with Dioxide and that VSN will remain intact and that Marriott will offer an overlay that permits Starwood owners to enroll their weeks (for a fee) and get Marriott Elected Points to use to exchange to Marriott properties.  I believe that unsold inventory at St. John and the Mexico properties (and others) will be placed into the Trust.
> 
> I don't think there will be a blanket 40:1 or 30:1 exchange, but I think that is the right range.   I believe Marriott will (correctly) place premiums on certain properties, as they did with their own properties.
> 
> Accordingly, I would propose the following point values (in the Marriott system), based upon my opinion of how Marriott valued it's own portfolio.
> 
> WKORV OF - 7,500 points (consistent with Maui Ocean Club)
> WKORV OV - 6,000 points
> WKORV IV - 5,000 points
> WPORV - 4,500 points
> Harborside Platinum - 6,000 points
> WSJ 3BR Platinum - 6,000 points
> WSJ 2BR Platinum - 4,000 points (consistent with Frenchman's Cove)
> WSJ 1BR Platinum - 3,000 points
> WSJ Studio Platinum - 2,000 points
> SVV 2BR Platinum - 2,000 points
> SVV 1BR Platinum - 1,000 points
> WDW 2BR Platinum - 3,500 points (consistent with Shadow Ridge)
> 
> These are the properties that I track most in Starwood system -- my opinion is that Marriott overweighted the Hawaii properties because they need them available for exchanges, and underweighted everything else because they needed customers to buy points.  The same will apply, IMO, to Starwood weeks.   I think Marriott will want those owners to buy points, and will give them a good base of points, but not enough to widely exploit the system.   Plus, they know that many owners can already exchange with points to other Starwood properties, so there is a built-in "competitor" to Marriott point systems, so that is a consideration.
> 
> Finally, I think Marriott will adjust the seasons, and fix some errors -- like Harborside in the summer will be at a higher point value than currently attributable with StarOptions.  And voluntary resale properties will finally have a point value.
> 
> It's a fascinating consideration.  I thought about buying a WPORV (because I love that property) and I believe it will be eligible for enrollment -- but I can't see Marriott assigning more points to it then they did their own properties (Waiohai/Kauai Lagoons in particular) and the MFs are still too much of a hurdle for a non-core property for me.  And like Dioxide, I think StarOptions will be viable for the medium term and I don't need to own WPORV to access it.    Interesting stuff.
> 
> Best,
> 
> Greg


I’ll propose a motion to name Greg an official advisor to MVC.

How many points do you think a Plat Pool Villa would get?


----------



## dioxide45

GregT said:


> WKORV OF - 7,500 points (consistent with Maui Ocean Club)
> WKORV OV - 6,500 points
> WKORV IV - 5,000 points
> WPORV - 4,500 points
> Harborside - 6,000 points
> WSJ 3BR Platinum - 6,000 points
> WSJ 2BR Platinum - 4,000 points (consistent with Frenchman's Cove)
> WSJ 1BR Platinum - 3,000 points
> WSJ Studio Platinum - 2,000 points
> SVV 2BR Platinum - 2,000 points
> SVV 1BR Platinum - 1,000 points
> WDW 2BR Platinum - 3,500 points (consistent with Shadow Ridge)



Greg, I think some of these numbers might be a little off if you compare them to Marriott's current offerings at similar resorts. I am looking at Steven's chart.

WKORV OF - 7,500 *6450 *points (consistent with Maui Ocean Club)
WKORV OV - 6,500 *5825* points
WKORV IV - 5,000 points *- Not referenced in Steven's chart.*
WPORV - 4,500 points
Harborside - 6,000 points
WSJ 3BR Platinum - 6,000 *5025 *points
WSJ 2BR Platinum - 4,000 *3650* points (consistent with Frenchman's Cove)
WSJ 1BR Platinum - 3,000 points
WSJ Studio Platinum - 2,000 points
SVV 2BR Platinum - 2,000 *2775 *points _- This is inline with Platinum 2BR at Grande Vista_
SVV 1BR Platinum - 1,000 *1850 *points _- This is inline with Platinum 1BR at Grande Vista_
WDW 2BR Platinum - 3,500 *3075 *points (consistent with Shadow Ridge)


----------



## GregT

Helios said:


> I’ll propose a motion to name Greg an official advisor to MVC.
> 
> How many points do you think a Plat Pool Villa would get?



Can I second the motion?

I think there should be a point premium for the pool villa -- guessing at 500 points?  They may call it a Deluxe unit to differentiate it from others and give it the extra points -- they did this at Lakeshore Reserve and Shadow Ridge Enclaves.

Best,

Greg


----------



## vacation dreaming

Star Options allow the owner to lock off the property and use one side for home reservation while taking star options for the other side.  I use this often and don't believe that is an option with Marriott DC.


----------



## GregT

dioxide45 said:


> Greg, I think some of these numbers might be a little off if you compare them to Marriott's current offerings at similar resorts. I am looking at Steven's chart.
> 
> WKORV OF - 7,500 *6450 *points (consistent with Maui Ocean Club)
> WKORV OV - 6,500 *5825* points
> WKORV IV - 5,000 points *- Not referenced in Steven's chart.*
> WPORV - 4,500 points
> Harborside - 6,000 points
> WSJ 3BR Platinum - 6,000 *5025 *points
> WSJ 2BR Platinum - 4,000 *3650* points (consistent with Frenchman's Cove)
> WSJ 1BR Platinum - 3,000 points
> WSJ Studio Platinum - 2,000 points
> SVV 2BR Platinum - 2,000 *2775 *points _- This is inline with Platinum 2BR at Grande Vista_
> SVV 1BR Platinum - 1,000 *1850 *points _- This is inline with Platinum 1BR at Grande Vista_
> WDW 2BR Platinum - 3,500 *3075 *points (consistent with Shadow Ridge)



Dioxide, good comments here -- my only adjustment would be that I think WKORV is more in line with Lahaina/Napili than the original MOC, and I will edit and clarify my original note.   I believe a 2BR OF at MM1 redeems at 7,650 points.

That's interesting about Grande Vista 1BR -- if so, we should all be looking hard at the 1BR SVV units, if they translate to anything close to 1,850 points.  Wow!

Best,

Greg


----------



## DannyTS

GregT said:


> It is interesting that the Marriott press releases specifically called out St. John and the Mexico properties, but was silent on Harborside.  I suspect that it is because there is significant unsold inventory at these properties that could be placed in the Marriott Trust.
> 
> I agree with Dioxide and that VSN will remain intact and that Marriott will offer an overlay that permits Starwood owners to enroll their weeks (for a fee) and get Marriott Elected Points to use to exchange to Marriott properties.  I believe that unsold inventory at St. John and the Mexico properties (and others) will be placed into the Trust.
> 
> I don't think there will be a blanket 40:1 or 30:1 exchange, but I think that is the right range.   I believe Marriott will (correctly) place premiums on certain properties, as they did with their own properties.
> 
> Accordingly, I would propose the following point values (in the Marriott system), based upon my opinion of how Marriott valued it's own portfolio.
> 
> WKORV OF - 7,500 points (consistent with Maui Ocean Club)
> WKORV OV - 6,000 points
> WKORV IV - 5,000 points
> WPORV - 4,500 points
> Harborside Platinum - 6,000 points
> WSJ 3BR Platinum - 6,000 points
> WSJ 2BR Platinum - 4,000 points (consistent with Frenchman's Cove)
> WSJ 1BR Platinum - 3,000 points
> WSJ Studio Platinum - 2,000 points
> SVV 2BR Platinum - 2,000 points
> SVV 1BR Platinum - 1,000 points
> WDW 2BR Platinum - 3,500 points (consistent with Shadow Ridge)
> 
> These are the properties that I track most in Starwood system -- my opinion is that Marriott overweighted the Hawaii properties because they need them available for exchanges, and underweighted everything else because they needed customers to buy points.  The same will apply, IMO, to Starwood weeks.   I think Marriott will want those owners to buy points, and will give them a good base of points, but not enough to widely exploit the system.   Plus, they know that many owners can already exchange with points to other Starwood properties, so there is a built-in "competitor" to Marriott point systems, so that is a consideration.
> 
> Finally, I think Marriott will adjust the seasons, and fix some errors -- like Harborside in the summer will be at a higher point value than currently attributable with StarOptions.  And voluntary resale properties will finally have a point value.
> 
> It's a fascinating consideration.  I thought about buying a WPORV (because I love that property) and I believe it will be eligible for enrollment -- but I can't see Marriott assigning more points to it then they did their own properties (Waiohai/Kauai Lagoons in particular) and the MFs are still too much of a hurdle for a non-core property for me.  And like Dioxide, I think StarOptions will be viable for the medium term and I don't need to own WPORV to access it.    Interesting stuff.
> 
> Best,
> 
> Greg


i believe that the points you are suggesting mean  selling ourselves short considering that Marriott in Hawaii OF ranges between 7 to 10 k and more for certain weeks. It looks to me that a range of 2800-3000  Bella platinum to 9000 OF Hawaii makes more sense for 2 bdr. Also guys, be certain that Marriott monitors these forums to take the pulse of the market.  Please do not give the impression that people will accept whatever offered. it is not inconceivable that some posts will be written by their employees to test the reaction 

Sent from my SM-G930W8 using Tapatalk


----------



## DannyTS

and if i may add, in the papers we are going to sign for the new system, for the mandatory resorts the language should be clear that they stay mandatory.  we do not want any confusion and arbitrary interpretation in the future, better to have this in writing upfront

Sent from my SM-G930W8 using Tapatalk


----------



## CalGalTraveler

@GregT Great chart! 

Does MOC/Towers have more variation in seasons? If so, they will also need to figure out how to align platinum season at WKORV and WKORVN with MOC/Towers platinum. VSE runs 1 - 50 weeks on Maui.


----------



## DannyTS

CalGalTraveler said:


> @GregT Great chart!
> 
> Does MOC/Towers have more variation in seasons? If so, they will also need to figure out how to align platinum season at WKORV and WKORVN with MOC/Towers platinum. VSE runs 1 - 50 weeks on Maui.



excluding 51-52, depending on the week there is an approx 26% variation in points at the Marriott resorts in Hawaii (for the same resort i mean). Please see attached.

Do not forget, Marriott is a big company and they will keep it simple. The system the owners have been used to, have bought into (and is validated by the market) is the SO system. I agree that MVC may offer some incentives in some cases (free enrollment?) but they will avoid litigious situations, so a system based on conversion of SOs is the most likely.

Any other conversion may lead to endless (and arbitrary) discussions, everyone claiming that his property deserves more. It is hard to claim that you do not like the SO chart since you have entered into an agreement based on that chart and have accepted it for 10-15 years. Do not forget that 15 years ago for example, the developer sold the weeks of all these resort not based on what we think now about the rental market etc but with the promise of you being able to use your own week or to exchange to another Vistana resort based on that chart.


----------



## GregT

DannyTS said:


> i believe that the points you are suggesting mean  selling ourselves short considering that Marriott in Hawaii OF ranges between 7 to 10 k and more for certain weeks. It looks to me that a range of 2800-3000  Bella platinum to 9000 OF Hawaii makes more sense for 2 bdr. Also guys, be certain that Marriott monitors these forums to take the pulse of the market.  Please do not give the impression that people will accept whatever offered. it is not inconceivable that some posts will be written by their employees to test the reaction
> 
> Sent from my SM-G930W8 using Tapatalk



Marriott gives ~7,700 Points to an owner redeeming a 2BR OF week for Points in the new towers.  It costs 8,650 Points to Reserve that room.  I get 10,225 for prime summer weeks in my 3BRs.   Those 3Br weeks cost 11,800 to reserve and the delta is what we call the skim. 

It’s hard for me to see Marriott awarding more points for WKORV than they do for their own developed properties (which were brand new when the system came out), but maybe they will. 

I also believe Marriott will view it as they are doing Starwood owners a favor by allowing them to enroll their weeks - and Marriott doesn’t have to do that.  

I believe that it is in Marriott self-interest to do so, but they want all the WKORV/WPORV/WLR/HRA weeks to be enrolled and available, and they don’t care about SVV, where there is already massive capacity in Orlando —- and Marriott can also fill an SVV reservation from II. 

Marriott considers themselves to be a very fair organization (and with the exception of the skim, I agree), and I don’t think they will block the enrollment of the SVV/similar stuff that they may not want or need, they just won’t give a bunch of points for them. 

I expect an inconsistency where StarOptions are the better value than Marriott DC Points because of the flatness of the StarOptions charts, but in the long term, it’s hard to predict how available the inventory will be to StarOptions.  Why would a summer HRA owner accept 95K StarOptions if they could get 6,000 DC points (my estimate only). 

We will see ....  interesting stuff. 

Best,

Greg


----------



## DannyTS

GregT said:


> I also believe Marriott will view it as they are doing Starwood owners a favor by allowing them to enroll their weeks - and Marriott doesn’t have to do that.
> 
> 
> 
> Greg



I respectfully disagree. They need us as much as we need them. Their growth is based on new sales and new sales are based on how successful they are in projecting the image of the 100's upscale resorts in the mind of the prospect. Trust me, they care less about how fair the system is (not that they want it to be unfair), they will just want this incorporation to be done smoothly and fast so they can go back to executing the big plan. Again, we should not start this partnership from the position of the poor cousins that need help. As a matter of fact, i think that we were doing just fine and this new system does not come without potential headaches (that I do not actually need) despite the potentially added flexibility. In the end they are the ones who are going to add billions to their bottom line (corporately) and millions personally (the executives) if this is well implemented. 

Watch MVC's CEO Steve Weisz on Cramer, it is all about new sales


----------



## VacationForever

I still believe that Marriott will seek to maximize sales and profits by keeping the 3 systems separate, but make each system more integrated within it.  The conduit to book into the other systems will be based on whether the owners have converted their timeshare into each point system through developer purchase or requalification or maybe what some of you have indicated - some sort of expensive enrollment.


----------



## Helios

GregT said:


> Can I second the motion?
> 
> I think there should be a point premium for the pool villa -- guessing at 500 points?  They may call it a Deluxe unit to differentiate it from others and give it the extra points -- they did this at Lakeshore Reserve and Shadow Ridge Enclaves.
> 
> Best,
> 
> Greg


Sorry Greg, but for the process to be legit we’ll need a third to second the motion before we can get vote.  I am assuming we have quorum...


----------



## GregT

DannyTS said:


> I respectfully disagree. They need us as much as we need them.



I definitely agree that this is about sales - and selling the dream to their owners (and prospective owners).

I mentioned in the Marriott thread that Marriott sales offices will now prominently feature St John, Cancun and Cabo.  Starwood sales offices will show Aruba, Big Island and Newport Coast.  This will be a great selling point and it is about sales.

Time will tell how Marriott rolls this out.   I understand your comment about poor cousins, but at the time of the original roll-out, I overestimated how much value Marriott placed on its partners (us, the rightful owners of the inventory that they’d just rolled out a point system to reserve at).

It was brilliant - they started selling points to make reservations at properties where they had no inventory.  And they enticed the existing owners to enroll their weeks to provide that critical inventory  (at skimmed values) and to buy more points.

All of my comments are based upon that experience, and the 8 years since studying these guys and how they pulled it off.  My comments about them doing the ownership a favor by allowing enrollment is not original with me, I’ve heard that exact view from Marriott Customer Advocacy.  Letting us enroll was the easiest way to get access to that inventory, and there were serious debates at Marriott about not allowing it, and what alternatives they had to fill reservations.

So now a similar situation occurs at Starwood.  We have a good point system already and a weaker II trading system. I believe Marriott will keep both intact and tell us (correctly) that we need do nothing - and they’ve taken nothing away.

Then they will entice the owners of the Starwood inventory that they really want through the point allocations that Dioxide and I are talking about.

We will see.

Best,

Greg


----------



## DannyTS

VacationForever said:


> I still believe that Marriott will seek to maximize sales and profits by keeping the 3 systems separate, but make each system more integrated within it.  The conduit to book into the other systems will be based on whether the owners have converted their timeshare into each point system through developer purchase or requalification or maybe what some of you have indicated - some sort of expensive enrollment.



This  is certainly the most likely outcome and the route with the lowest number of legal and PR issues.


----------



## sail27bill

FWIW, I am an owner of 2 developer weeks that I never trade through Vistana. Instead I have enjoyed great uptrades as I see them through Interval. I have been to the following Marriotts: Aruba, Hilton Head, Oceanwatch, Ocean Point etc all during platinum season using SVV. My Harborside I don’t trade (except for one time). I would totally enroll my weeks in the DC if offered the opportunity. Waiting for a trade to come through is sometimes lengthy, so if given the opportunity, and a fair allotment of points I would totally enroll and cut out the middleman. I am guessing so would others. I have been hoping that this deal would happen, so I for one am greatly excited.


----------



## Helios

I am very excited as well.  Thinking about all new places I could have access.  So, in a sense, I see it as a favor to the Vistana users.  

Vistana is pretty limited on locations.  I highly welcome the possibility of some many more locations.


----------



## DannyTS

Helios said:


> I am very excited as well.  Thinking about all new places I could have access.  So, in a sense, I see it as a favor to the Vistana users.
> 
> Vistana is pretty limited on locations.  I highly welcome the possibility of some many more locations.


Right now I am curious and excited but i will treat it as a favor when i see the details if that will be the case. Corporations do not generally do favors but i cherish the optimism of the group (I am optimistic in general too)


----------



## CalGalTraveler

Are the DC and Weeks inventories separate? If not, how does Marriott preserve weeks inventory at 12 months for owners at their home resort when there are also DC users vying for reservations at the same time?

To compare, the Hilton (HGVC) and the Starwood systems provides 12 - 9 (or 8 for Starwood) month preference to home (weeks) owners to reserve their week.  At 9 months they open up what's left to points users (Club or SOs). This structure ensures that owners get first crack at the inventory they own.

If Marriott provides a DC overlay with a combined inventory, how do they ensure Vistana owners have first crack at the weeks they own?  Wouldn't this also devalue SOs because SO users have to wait until 8 months to reserve when DC (and owners) can reserve all or most of the inventory at 12, leaving SO users with the crumbs if Marriott and HRC are also vying for the inventory.

P.S. I am intrigued by the idea of a points exchange and renting or selling points. Cannot do this with HGVC and SOs


----------



## controller1

CalGalTraveler said:


> Are the DC and Weeks inventories separate? If not, how does Marriott preserve weeks inventory at 12 months for owners at their home resort when there are also DC users vying for reservations at the same time?
> 
> . . .
> 
> If Marriott provides a DC overlay with a combined inventory, how do they ensure Vistana owners have first crack at the weeks they own?
> 
> . . .
> 
> P.S. I am intrigued by the idea of a points exchange and renting or selling points. Cannot do this with HGVC and SOs



I'm also very interested in this!


----------



## GregT

Marriott has a Trust that includes deeds for all properties, with varied coverage for the different properties. This is one bucket of inventory available to cover point reservations.  The weeks inventory is a separate bucket of inventory, some of which will be made available for point reservations.

Marriott will estimate/forecast/project the number of weeks that will be:

1) Redeemed for Marriott Reward Points
2) Redeemed for Vacation Club Points (called Elected Points)

They will “hold back” these projected weeks from what is available to deeded week owners.

50% of these net available weeks are released 13 months out for owners to make a week reservation.

The other 50% is released 12 months out, again for a week reservation.

Therefore what is available for Points reservations is the combination of #2 above (the projected number of weeks that will be redeemed) plus whatever inventory is in the Trust.  Dioxide and I monitored the Trust filings carefully for a number of years and I believe the Trust holds (as of a few years ago) about 20% of all Maui Ocean Club OF weeks so there is a reasonable/consistent source of weeks for that important property.

With respect to Starwood, I would think Marriott would do the same process - estimating how many weeks would be redeemed for Marriott DC points, and hold those back from release in the same manner.

I would suspect Starwood is doing somewhere similar now, and that the 8 month mark represents the difference between expected owner reservations and actual reservations.  Is that correct?  That would still be the same under the new system (this is hypothetical) except that there would be the new impact from forecasted point elections.   This is my theory of course.

Best,

Greg


----------



## DeniseM

> I would suspect Starwood is doing somewhere similar now, and that the 8 month mark represents the difference between expected owner reservations and actual reservations. Is that correct?



Vistana does not disclose it's practices, so who knows!


----------



## CalGalTraveler

DeniseM said:


> Vistana does not disclose it's practices, so who knows!



Is this because of Flex? For HGVC it's very straightforward. Either the reservation dates are available after home week reservations are taken, or they are not. So there is nothing else to compete with the pool other than estimating what to deposit in RCI for owners that exchange but I imagine that is not significant because they have leeway to deposit the silver weeks, with parking lot views - it's usually what no one else wants.


----------



## vikingsholm

VacationForever said:


> I still believe that Marriott will seek to maximize sales and profits by keeping the 3 systems separate, but make each system more integrated within it.  The conduit to book into the other systems will be based on whether the owners have converted their timeshare into each point system through developer purchase or requalification or maybe what some of you have indicated - some sort of expensive enrollment.


I'm not so sure of that, assuming I'm interpreting what you're saying correctly. I speculate somewhat of a variant on this.

I think they will make it cheap and easy for existing owners (of all systems in the merger) to get into a trading pool of whatever sort they devise for the multi-system points overlay, at least at a basic or entry level. I bet they'll want to increase that availability pool of reservable units among the different systems pretty fast up front, and that's a good way to do that. Marriott, Vistana, and Hyatt owners who have already either enrolled in points systems or purchased additionally into points or weeks may feel somewhat tapped out already, especially if they ponied up more cash beyond their original purchases already. As a Marriott-only owner, I wouldn't mind better access for example to Westin Princeville or a few of the Hyatts where Marriott doesn't have properties, but there are still other decent trading alternatives outside of those systems in most of those areas. So I'm not about to pay anything much more than an additional pittance to access those, at least at a basic level.

I think where the sales and revenue will be focused is on new points buyers with starry eyes about this shiny new expanded system, and owners of very few weeks/points currently who can upgrade their access to all of the multiple systems by buying more points - through Marriott setting different levels of access to the other systems based on level of points/weeks owned within any of the existing systems. 

Then, the access within our own systems that we currently have would not be changed that much, IMO, as that's sort of what Marriott did by adding DC points options to legacy weeks, but making all that optional.  Certain favoritisms that now exist for trading within one's owned system currently will probably largely stay intact as well. All of that tends to favor existing owners of multiple weeks and higher number of points, and I think Marriott may continue that approach as it develops the new system, but extend those favoritisms to the owners of more weeks/points with Hyatt and Vistana too. The incentive for those people with fewer points or weeks would be that buying even more points will give better access in some ways to trading into both one's own and the other new systems (that may exist in some overlay system).


----------



## DeniseM

> Is this because of Flex?


No, it's because Vistana, and Starwood before them, were secretive about what goes on behind the scenes.  We know they manipulate the inventory, but we don't know how or why.  For instance, 2 years ago, at 8 months before check-in, they did not release any summer inventory in Hawaii - none.  Then several months later, they released a small amount of summer inventory all at one time. If you ask about this, you can't get any answers.  Now that there are multiple, but separate flex programs, it is even murkier than it was before.


----------



## DannyTS

DeniseM said:


> No, it's because Vistana, and Starwood before them, were secretive about what goes on behind the scenes.  We know they manipulate the inventory, but we don't know how or why.  For instance, 2 years ago, at 8 months before check-in, they did not release any summer inventory in Hawaii - none.  Then several months later, they released a small amount of summer inventory all at one time. If you ask about this, you can't get any answers.  Now that there are multiple, but separate flex programs, it is even murkier than it was before.


Is it possible that they keep a certain amount of weeks to rent them through online travel agencies (Expedia etc) for pure profit?


----------



## CalGalTraveler

GregT said:


> Marriott has a Trust that includes deeds for all properties, with varied coverage for the different properties. This is one bucket of inventory available to cover point reservations.  The weeks inventory is a separate bucket of inventory, some of which will be made available for point reservations.
> 
> Marriott will estimate/forecast/project the number of weeks that will be:
> 
> 1) Redeemed for Marriott Reward Points
> 2) Redeemed for Vacation Club Points (called Elected Points)
> 
> They will “hold back” these projected weeks from what is available to deeded week owners.
> 
> 50% of these net available weeks are released 13 months out for owners to make a week reservation.
> 
> The other 50% is released 12 months out, again for a week reservation.
> 
> Therefore what is available for Points reservations is the combination of #2 above (the projected number of weeks that will be redeemed) plus whatever inventory is in the Trust.  Dioxide and I monitored the Trust filings carefully for a number of years and I believe the Trust holds (as of a few years ago) about 20% of all Maui Ocean Club OF weeks so there is a reasonable/consistent source of weeks for that important property.
> 
> With respect to Starwood, I would think Marriott would do the same process - estimating how many weeks would be redeemed for Marriott DC points, and hold those back from release in the same manner.
> 
> I would suspect Starwood is doing somewhere similar now, and that the 8 month mark represents the difference between expected owner reservations and actual reservations.  Is that correct?  That would still be the same under the new system (this is hypothetical) except that there would be the new impact from forecasted point elections.   This is my theory of course.
> 
> Best,
> 
> Greg



Thanks.  This is helpful.  I am assuming that they allocate the type of unit based on what is actually in the trust or enrolled e.g. OF for OF, Island for Island.

How does MVC handle seasonality for DC in a place like Maui where they could technically reserve all 20% of inventory in summer and whale season with platinum float inventory. Is it evenly spaced out across the year?


----------



## DeniseM

> Is it possible that they keep a certain amount of weeks to rent them through online travel agencies (Expedia etc) for pure profit?



Yes and no:  Until 60 days before check-in, they are only supposed to rent weeks that they own, or weeks that the owner has converted to Starpoints, etc.  But at 60 days before check-in, Vistana can hoover up any unreserved reservations, put them in their own inventory, rent them, and put the proceeds in their pocket.


----------



## DannyTS

DeniseM said:


> Yes and no:  Until 60 days before check-in, they are only supposed to rent weeks that they own, or weeks that the owner has converted to Starpoints, etc.  But at 60 days before check-in, Vistana can hoover up any unreserved reservations, put them in their own inventory, rent them, and put the proceeds in their pocket.


i got it. but who is keeping them honest? 

Sent from my SM-G930W8 using Tapatalk


----------



## dioxide45

GregT said:


> Dioxide, good comments here -- my only adjustment would be that I think WKORV is more in line with Lahaina/Napili than the original MOC, and I will edit and clarify my original note. I believe a 2BR OF at MM1 redeems at 7,650 points.


Good point about WKORV. I do agree it should be compared to Lahaina Napili. I was comparing to MOC.


----------



## DeniseM

> i got it. but who is keeping them honest?



No one...


----------



## DannyTS

DeniseM said:


> No one...



Some owners complained that in the last 2-3 years it has been much more difficult to book 51 and 52 at Lagunamar. Is there an explanation for that? Since i understand that there is no one looking over their shoulder, is it impossible that they "save" 30 apartments and release them 60 days before check in  through Expedia  ( or Hotwire, even better since you don't even know the hotel in advance) ?

Do not forget that, besides the (alleged) possible direct profit, they would have another motive to do it: a fresh crop o prospects.


----------



## GregT

CalGalTraveler said:


> Thanks.  This is helpful.  I am assuming that they allocate the type of unit based on what is actually in the trust or enrolled e.g. OF for OF, Island for Island.
> 
> How does MVC handle seasonality for DC in a place like Maui where they could technically reserve all 20% of inventory in summer and whale season with platinum float inventory. Is it evenly spaced out across the year?



Yes it is spread evenly throughout the year (at least that is what I have been told).  The exception is fixed weeks - which are fixed of course. It’s the floats that are spread evenly. 

Best,

Greg


----------



## bobpark56

GregT said:


> It is interesting that the Marriott press releases specifically called out St. John and the Mexico properties, but was silent on Harborside.  I suspect that it is because there is significant unsold inventory at these properties that could be placed in the Marriott Trust.
> 
> I agree with Dioxide and that VSN will remain intact and that Marriott will offer an overlay that permits Starwood owners to enroll their weeks (for a fee) and get Marriott Elected Points to use to exchange to Marriott properties.  I believe that unsold inventory at St. John and the Mexico properties (and others) will be placed into the Trust.
> 
> I don't think there will be a blanket 40:1 or 30:1 exchange, but I think that is the right range.   I believe Marriott will (correctly) place premiums on certain properties, as they did with their own properties.
> 
> Accordingly, I would propose the following point values (in the Marriott system), based upon my opinion of how Marriott valued it's own portfolio.
> 
> WKORV OF - 7,500 points (consistent with Maui Ocean Club -- edited: MOC new towers)
> WKORV OV - 6,000 points
> WKORV IV - 5,000 points
> WPORV - 4,500 points
> Harborside Platinum - 6,000 points
> WSJ 3BR Platinum - 6,000 points
> WSJ 2BR Platinum - 4,000 points (consistent with Frenchman's Cove)
> WSJ 1BR Platinum - 3,000 points
> WSJ Studio Platinum - 2,000 points
> SVV 2BR Platinum - 2,000 points
> SVV 1BR Platinum - 1,000 points
> WDW 2BR Platinum - 3,500 points (consistent with Shadow Ridge)
> 
> These are the properties that I track most in Starwood system -- my opinion is that Marriott overweighted the Hawaii properties because they need them available for exchanges, and underweighted everything else because they needed customers to buy points.  The same will apply, IMO, to Starwood weeks.   I think Marriott will want those owners to buy points, and will give them a good base of points, but not enough to widely exploit the system.   Plus, they know that many owners can already exchange with points to other Starwood properties, so there is a built-in "competitor" to Marriott point systems, so that is a consideration.
> 
> Finally, I think Marriott will adjust the seasons, and fix some errors -- like Harborside in the summer will be at a higher point value than currently attributable with StarOptions.  And voluntary resale properties (that close prior to the merger) will finally have a point value.
> 
> It's a fascinating consideration.  I thought about buying a WPORV (because I love that property) and I believe it will be eligible for enrollment -- but I can't see Marriott assigning more points to it then they did their own properties (Waiohai/Kauai Lagoons in particular) and the MFs are still too much of a hurdle for a non-core property for me.  And like Dioxide, I think StarOptions will be viable for the medium term and I don't need to own WPORV to access it.    Interesting stuff.
> 
> Best,
> 
> Greg
> 
> Edited: I clarified that voluntary properties need to close prior to the merger to be eligible for enrollment.  I believe those post-merger resales will be blocked, like they are with Marriott.


I doubt the numbers will all be that even. Marriott currently assigns odd values (xx25 and xx75 DPs) to some ownerships so that they cannot be traded for xx00 units without breakage...points that Marriott often pockets when folks can't use their leftover small increments. Sounds like another form of skim, no?


----------



## dioxide45

bobpark56 said:


> I doubt the numbers will all be that even. Marriott currently assigns odd values (xx25 and xx75 DPs) to some ownerships so that they cannot be traded for xx00 units without breakage...points that Marriott often pockets when folks can't use their leftover small increments. Sounds like another form of skim, no?


With the ability to bank any amount of points for free, breakage of a small number of leftover points should be minimized.


----------



## controller1

DannyTS said:


> Some owners complained that in the last 2-3 years it has been much more difficult to book 51 and 52 at Lagunamar. Is there an explanation for that? Since i understand that there is no one looking over their shoulder, is it impossible that they "save" 30 apartments and release them 60 days before check in  through Expedia  ( or Hotwire, even better since you don't even know the hotel in advance) ?
> 
> Do not forget that, besides the (alleged) possible direct profit, they would have another motive to do it: a fresh crop o prospects.



Perhaps more of the fixed week owners are electing to utilize their fixed week reservations?

Also, @DannyTS you're definitely interested in timeshares and have been a prolific poster for the past six weeks.  I invite you to become a TUG Member and support this forum that way also....


----------



## DannyTS

controller1 said:


> Perhaps more of the fixed week owners are electing to utilize their fixed week reservations?
> 
> Also, @DannyTS you're definitely interested in timeshares and have been a prolific poster for the past six weeks.  I invite you to become a TUG Member and support this forum that way also....


i did sign up back in March when i became interested in TS and started to buy weeks. i see i have a BBS code... do you happen to know where to add it here?


----------



## dioxide45

DannyTS said:


> i did sign up back in March when i became interested in TS and started to buy weeks. i see i have a BBS code... do you happen to know where to add it here?


https://tugbbs.com/forums/index.php...g-the-bbs-member-code-in-your-bbs-profile.53/


----------



## DannyTS

dioxide45 said:


> https://tugbbs.com/forums/index.php...g-the-bbs-member-code-in-your-bbs-profile.53/


thank you, i put the code word. It is still showing me as guest but i understand it takes a bit


----------



## Helios

DeniseM said:


> But at 60 days before check-in, Vistana can hoover up any unreserved reservations, put them in their own inventory, rent them, and put the proceeds in their pocket.


Is this written somewhere?


----------



## dioxide45

Helios said:


> Is this written somewhere?


It would be in the individual resort CCRs. Marriott has similar written in to their condo docs. The actual time frame varies based on the resort.


----------



## VacationForever

bobpark56 said:


> I doubt the numbers will all be that even. Marriott currently assigns odd values (xx25 and xx75 DPs) to some ownerships so that they cannot be traded for xx00 units without breakage...points that Marriott often pockets when folks can't use their leftover small increments. Sounds like another form of skim, no?


Not really. You can bank them for free and the leftovers can be banked, or you can borrow.


----------



## VacationForever

DannyTS said:


> Some owners complained that in the last 2-3 years it has been much more difficult to book 51 and 52 at Lagunamar. Is there an explanation for that? Since i understand that there is no one looking over their shoulder, is it impossible that they "save" 30 apartments and release them 60 days before check in  through Expedia  ( or Hotwire, even better since you don't even know the hotel in advance) ?
> 
> Do not forget that, besides the (alleged) possible direct profit, they would have another motive to do it: a fresh crop o prospects.


I believe 50 percent of Phase 1 and 100 percent of Phase 2 for W 51 and 52 were sold as fixed weeks.  Owners of these weeks can rent them out for big bucks.  Not many left for floating weeks owners to book.


----------



## DannyTS

VacationForever said:


> I believe 50 percent of Phase 1 and 100 percent of Phase 2 for W 51 and 52 were sold as fixed weeks.  Owners of these weeks can rent them out for big bucks.  Not many left for floating weeks owners to book.


i understand that but were they sold in the last 2 years? people complain that it was much easier before


----------



## BLUE AYES

I am not sure of the reason, but I can confirm from my own experience that this is true. I own in LagunaMar since pre-build. With my floating Platinum,  I have always been able to book week 51 at precisely one year out. I have been closed out of every possible week 51 or week 52 scenario, all calling at one year out for years 2017 and 2018. One of my good friends who also owns floating Platinum has had the same result.


----------



## BLUE AYES

The previous poster is correct, for weeks 51 and 52, 50% of phase one was sold as event week and 100% of phase 2 was sold as event week. Additionally, although all the weekd 51/52 are completely sold out,  every year we run into people renting the units from SPG as hotel rooms.


----------



## DannyTS

BLUE AYES said:


> although all the weekd 51/52 are completely sold out,  every year we run into people renting the units from SPG as hotel rooms.



Let's assume that Vistana owns 20% of the platinum floating weeks. If they do not spread their weeks more or less evenly, they can just keep for themselves ALL the 51-52 weeks that are not owned as fixed.


----------



## DavidnRobin

DeniseM said:


> Yes and no:  Until 60 days before check-in, they are only supposed to rent weeks that they own, or weeks that the owner has converted to Starpoints, etc.  But at 60 days before check-in, Vistana can hoover up any unreserved reservations, put them in their own inventory, rent them, and put the proceeds in their pocket.



Vistana also owns VOIs - a while ago it was about 10% of WKORV/N and WSJ-VGV. They can do anything they like with these - including holding optimal renting weeks.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## DannyTS

DavidnRobin said:


> Vistana also owns VOIs - a while ago it was about 10% of WKORV/N and WSJ-VGV. They can do anything they like with these - including holding optimal renting weeks.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk



 Owners have bough based on a certain chart. Removing certain weeks (in practice) is wrong. The problem is not that they are competing with the owners for those weeks but rather that they just take them away. They leave one or 2 spots to create the appearance of availability.

1) selling based on a chart that is not real is deceptive and potentially illegal.
2) they create 2 classes of ownership, Vistana on one side and the rest of the owners on the other side. This fact was not known during the selling process. The legal documents have no EXPLICIT mentioning of this. You have to be an expert in TS to guess that this is what is happening.

 By doing this they actually reduce the value of the individual ownership arbitrarily and abusively i think since they are the ones that operate the system and they are supposed to enforce the rules. The flip  of the coin is that their rental revenue keeps on going up. Unjust enrichment?  Is it just me who sees it this way?


----------



## DeniseM

DavidnRobin said:


> Vistana also owns VOIs - a while ago it was about 10% of WKORV/N and WSJ-VGV. They can do anything they like with these - including holding optimal renting weeks.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk



Agreed - that’s why I wrote “weeks they own.”


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## DannyTS

DeniseM said:


> Agreed - that’s why I wrote “weeks they own.”
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


What does BO


DavidnRobin said:


> Vistana also owns VOIs - a while ago it was about 10% of WKORV/N and WSJ-VGV. They can do anything they like with these - including holding optimal renting weeks.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk



So  in a floating system, with 10% of the inventory they can completely block the best 5 weeks of the year. This does not seem ok to me. Since they control the system there should be some checks and balances and they should not be able to book more than X% of any given week. By the way, theoretically speaking they can continue to acquire weeks and block even more of the best weeks in the future.


----------



## DavidnRobin

DeniseM said:


> Agreed - that’s why I wrote “weeks they own.”
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk



Sorry - missed that - small screen syndrome.
Go Giants!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## DavidnRobin

DannyTS said:


> What does BO
> 
> 
> So  in a floating system, with 10% of the inventory they can completely block the best 5 weeks of the year. This does not seem ok to me. Since they control the system there should be some checks and balances and they should not be able to book more than X% of any given week. By the way, theoretically speaking they can continue to acquire weeks and block even more of the best weeks in the future.



The point was about lack of transparency and not that they do.

I haven’t had an issue with HR reservations and received great locations, but reserve at window opening and rarely travel high season.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## duke

The issue here is not Vistana as management company.  If the Board of Directors (which has a Fiduciary responsibility) allowed the Management Company to "Hoover" up all the good dates then you would have a great lawsuit etc.


----------



## DannyTS

duke said:


> The issue here is not Vistana as management company.  If the Board of Directors (which has a Fiduciary responsibility) allowed the Management Company to "Hoover" up all the good dates then you would have a great lawsuit etc.


You are making an excellent point. Yet I am not sure though that Vistana is off the hook


----------



## Ken555

DannyTS said:


> So  in a floating system, with 10% of the inventory they can completely block the best 5 weeks of the year. This does not seem ok to me. Since they control the system there should be some checks and balances and they should not be able to book more than X% of any given week. By the way, theoretically speaking they can continue to acquire weeks and block even more of the best weeks in the future.



Yup. Hate to say it, but we’ve been discussing this exact issue for over 10 years on TUG. It hasn’t really changed in all that time, nor would I expect it to in the future.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## DannyTS

Ken555 said:


> Yup. Hate to say it, but we’ve been discussing this exact issue for over 10 years on TUG. It hasn’t really changed in all that time, nor would I expect it to in the future.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


Was any action taken? Unless a formal procedure is followed, they will not bulge since status quo means millions of dollars in their pockets. They will not change just because of a few angry phone calls.


----------



## Ken555

DannyTS said:


> Was any action taken? Unless a formal procedure is followed, they will not bulge since status quo means millions of dollars in their pockets. They will not change just because of a few angry phone calls.



Not sure of your point. I have zero interest in fighting this battle, and many here likely have a similar opinion. It’s easy to get upset about these issues, it’s another matter to do something about it. Welcome to TUG.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## controller1

DannyTS said:


> Owners have bough based on a certain chart. Removing certain weeks (in practice) is wrong. The problem is not that they are competing with the owners for those weeks but rather that they just take them away. They leave one or 2 spots to create the appearance of availability.
> 
> 1) selling based on a chart that is not real is deceptive and potentially illegal.
> 2) they create 2 classes of ownership, Vistana on one side and the rest of the owners on the other side. This fact was not known during the selling process. The legal documents have no EXPLICIT mentioning of this. You have to be an expert in TS to guess that this is what is happening.
> 
> By doing this they actually reduce the value of the individual ownership arbitrarily and abusively i think since they are the ones that operate the system and they are supposed to enforce the rules. The flip  of the coin is that their rental revenue keeps on going up. Unjust enrichment?  Is it just me who sees it this way?



However, by doing this they actually increase the value of the individual ownership of those owners who purchased fixed weeks 51 or 52.


----------



## DannyTS

DannyTS said:


> Was any action taken? Unless a formal procedure is followed, they will not bulge since status quo means millions of dollars in their pockets. They will not change just because of a few angry phone calls.





Ken555 said:


> Not sure of your point. I have zero interest in fighting this battle, and many here likely have a similar opinion. It’s easy to get upset about these issues, it’s another matter to do something about it. Welcome to TUG.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk





controller1 said:


> However, by doing this they actually increase the value of the individual ownership of those owners who purchased fixed weeks 51 or 52.



Not really since Vistana is selling those weeks so they are still on the market. In the last 5-7 years Christmas and New Year;s eve have had big price increases at any other hotels.

Besides, this is not how it supposed to work. I rob Peter, Paul, John and Sandy, i keep the lion's share and give some to Mary. Also, if they do it for those 2 weeks what keeps them from doing it with other prime weeks?

The fact remains the same, everyone seems to believe that they are lining their pockets unjustly and this is the real issue.

I do not see it as a battle but things have to be discussed at an official level. Inaction invites abuse. The timing may also be good, before the acquisition they will certainly not want the waters to be muddied.


----------



## GregT

DannyTS said:


> The fact remains the same, everyone seems to believe that they are lining their pockets unjustly and this is the real issue.



I don’t believe they are lining their pockets unjustly.  I would love more transparency but that’s different from unethical behavior, which I do not believe is occurring.


----------



## TravelTime

I know Tuggers like to debate and hypothesize about the future and many people do it for fun. However. I think folks here are getting ahead of the facts (which is basically a PR release right now) and offering some pessimistic theories esp when talking about unfairness and lawsuits. Nothing has changed yet. No reason to get upset in advance. It may stay the same or even change for the better. I have not had any problems with any of my timeshares reserving what I want, regardless of the brand. I have no reason to believe that will change.

Originally I was interested in a combined DC Points program but after reading this thread, I am fine with StarOptions and Hyatt staying separate from the DC Points program. I would like Marriott to keep the DC Points program more exclusive with better benefits for people who own more points. I am not interested in a new version of the DC Points program where anyone could get in too easily since most DC Points owners paid a premium, even on the resale market, for their points. They just raised the activation fees for DC Points bought resale from $2 pp to $3 pp. The average resale price per point is now about $4. So that brings the average resale price to about $7 pp plus closing costs if purchased resale. Not much less than a hybrid package bought directly from MVC with full benefits and a quick and easy closing.

It is much cheaper to buy a resale week in Marriott, Vistana or Hyatt. I have those too. I bought different things for different purposes. I bought my resale weeks in places I was interested in visiting with the family, with OF/OV category and that are convenient for us to travel to. I bought DC Points for flexibility, benefits, ability to select view category and room size, staying at the Ritz, and visiting many places.

I have only used II and RCI for getaways. I have never traded using my weeks because 1) I like to know my view category in advance, 2) I do not like the uncertainty of waiting for a match to plan vacation, and 3) I have high MF timeshares so I suspect I would not find an equal value trade in II or RCI that easily.

I did not buy my Westin week for StarOptions, although I see that as a side benefit. Even within StarOptions, the two places I would be interested in internally exchanging to are Westin Princeville and Westin St John but there are no view categories there so I still find that to be a bit risky, although the detinations are wonderful so it would be worth the risk when we get bored of Maui. It’s just nice to know we have the option for internal trades with Westin.


----------



## DannyTS

GregT said:


> I don’t believe they are lining their pockets unjustly.  I would love more transparency but that’s different from unethical behavior, which I do not believe is occurring.




Say in a resort you have 100 units of a certain type, 50% are fixed so you should expect up to 50 units to be released to the  owners (of floating weeks) when the booking window opens 12 months before check in.

Say Vistana owns 10% of the floating units for the whole calendar year so an average of 5 units per calendar week.

You believe that

a)      Vistana keeps 0 units and releases 50

b)      Vistana keeps 5 units and releases 45

c)      Vistana keeps 25 units and releases 25 units

d)      Vistana keeps 45 units and releases 5

e)      Vistana keeps 50 units and releases 0

I would like to understand your comment. You think that a) or b) are standard procedure for the best weeks and not c), d) or e). Or that it is OK no matter what.


In our case it is not about revenue. But if I want to book Christmas for my family it is not that great to stay up for 3 nights in a raw when the window opens hoping to get something that does not exist.

In the name of transparency would you like counters like the ones used by airline companies?


----------



## VacationForever

DannyTS said:


> Say in a resort you have 100 units of a certain type, 50% are fixed so you should expect up to 50 units to be released to the  owners (of floating weeks) when the booking window opens 12 months before check in.
> 
> Say Vistana owns 10% of the floating units for the whole calendar year so an average of 5 units per calendar week.
> 
> You believe that
> 
> a)      Vistana keeps 0 units and releases 50
> 
> b)      Vistana keeps 5 units and releases 45
> 
> c)      Vistana keeps 25 units and releases 25 units
> 
> d)      Vistana keeps 45 units and releases 5
> 
> e)      Vistana keeps 50 units and releases 0
> 
> I would like to understand your comment. You think that a) or b) are standard procedure for the best weeks and not c), d) or e). Or that it is OK no matter what.
> 
> 
> In our case it is not about revenue. But if I want to book Christmas for my family it is not great at all to sit around the computer for 3 nights in the raw hoping to get something that does not exist.
> 
> In the name of transparency would you like counters like the ones used by airline companies?
> 
> View attachment 6408
> 
> View attachment 6407


I would say Vistana would likely do (b).

I have not explored enough with Vistana system, but can someone who owns multiple floating weeks book up Week 50, 51 and 52 at 12 months before Week 50?  If so, that is a likely reason for the difficulties in booking exactly 12 months before Week 51 and Week 52.


----------



## DannyTS

VacationForever said:


> I would say Vistana would likely do (2).
> 
> I have not explored enough with Vistana system, but can someone who owns multiple floating weeks book up Week 50, 51 and 52 at 12 months before Week 50?  If so, that is a likely reason for the difficulties in booking exactly 12 months before Week 51 and Week 52.


In the Vistana system it is not possible since according to the deeds:
Home Resort Preference Period means the period comprised of the Home Resort Priority Period and the Home Resort
Float Period. The Home Resort Priority Period begins one (1) year prior to the Check-In Day of a given Vacation
Period


----------



## VacationForever

DannyTS said:


> In the Vistana system it is not possible since according to the deeds:
> Home Resort Preference Period means the period comprised of the Home Resort Priority Period and the Home Resort
> Float Period. The Home Resort Priority Period begins one (1) year prior to the Check-In Day of a given Vacation
> Period


Did you try to book exactly at midnight Eastern time, the night before at 12 months?


----------



## BLUE AYES

VacationForever said:


> Did you try to book exactly at midnight Eastern time, the night before at 12 months?



YES    See my post above.


----------



## duke

Any Owner can find out the real answers to these speculations by just asking the Board of Directors to request an analysis from the Management Company.  Every Management Agreement has Audit Rights and Procedures.  The Board of Directors is entitled to full disclosure from the Management Company.  An Owner can send a letter or attend a meeting and ask the Board to do so.  If they refuse they are subject to Fiduciary problems.  This is easy and no cost to the Owner.


----------



## VacationForever

BLUE AYES said:


> YES    See my post above.


From your posts, I gather that you are a new WLR owner and have not tried booking exactly 12 months out for Week 51 and 52.  I believe you reported hearsay, so we do not know how bad is the problem.  You have to remember that there are many WLR owners and since these weeks rent for high dollars, owners who are interested in staying there during peak times are also competing with owners who rent out their weeks.


----------



## GregT

DannyTS said:


> Say in a resort you have 100 units of a certain type, 50% are fixed so you should expect up to 50 units to be released to the  owners (of floating weeks) when the booking window opens 12 months before check in.
> 
> Say Vistana owns 10% of the floating units for the whole calendar year so an average of 5 units per calendar week.
> 
> You believe that
> 
> a)      Vistana keeps 0 units and releases 50
> 
> b)      Vistana keeps 5 units and releases 45
> 
> c)      Vistana keeps 25 units and releases 25 units
> 
> d)      Vistana keeps 45 units and releases 5
> 
> e)      Vistana keeps 50 units and releases 0
> 
> I would like to understand your comment. You think that a) or b) are standard procedure for the best weeks and not c), d) or e). Or that it is OK no matter what.
> 
> 
> In our case it is not about revenue. But if I want to book Christmas for my family it is not that great to stay up for 3 nights in a raw when the window opens hoping to get something that does not exist.
> 
> In the name of transparency would you like counters like the ones used by airline companies?
> 
> View attachment 6408
> 
> View attachment 6407



I can only answer from what Marriott does -- understanding your question is about Starwood.

In your example, Marriott would do b.      IMO, Starwood would not do c, d or e.    

There have been many theories on the Marriott board that they are doing something inappropriate with the inventory (because it is not always predictable), but in the end, they aren't -- and they spend alot of time making sure 1) they didn't take anything away from owners and 2) owners are treated "equally", within the constraints of the different elite levels.

Best,

Greg


----------



## TravelTime

DannyTS said:


> Say in a resort you have 100 units of a certain type, 50% are fixed so you should expect up to 50 units to be released to the  owners (of floating weeks) when the booking window opens 12 months before check in.
> 
> Say Vistana owns 10% of the floating units for the whole calendar year so an average of 5 units per calendar week.
> 
> You believe that
> 
> a)      Vistana keeps 0 units and releases 50
> 
> b)      Vistana keeps 5 units and releases 45
> 
> c)      Vistana keeps 25 units and releases 25 units
> 
> d)      Vistana keeps 45 units and releases 5
> 
> e)      Vistana keeps 50 units and releases 0
> 
> I would like to understand your comment. You think that a) or b) are standard procedure for the best weeks and not c), d) or e). Or that it is OK no matter what.
> 
> 
> In our case it is not about revenue. But if I want to book Christmas for my family it is not that great to stay up for 3 nights in a raw when the window opens hoping to get something that does not exist.
> 
> In the name of transparency would you like counters like the ones used by airline companies?
> 
> View attachment 6408
> 
> View attachment 6407



This is so ridiculous. Maybe you should rescind and make your life easier.


----------



## TravelTime

This thread is descending into chaos now.


----------



## TravelTime

D


VacationForever said:


> From your posts, I gather that you are a new WLR owner and have not tried booking exactly 12 months out for Week 51 and 52.  I believe you reported heresay, so we do not know how bad is the problem.  You have to remember that there are many WLR owners and since these weeks rent for high dollars, owners who are interested in staying there during peak times are also competing with owners who rent out their weeks.



Yes, DannyTS is in escrow from what I understand. It is sad that new owners are so worked up over nothing yet.


----------



## VacationForever

TravelTime said:


> This is so ridiculous. Maybe you should rescind and make you life easier.


I take this as a tongue in cheek statement!? I put this down to absolutely unfounded fears by DannyTS.  Nothing in my years of several Vistana weeks ownership tells me that Vistana does not adopt either a or b.  Even for super difficult weeks at other resorts, like Spring Training in March in Scottsdale, my experience has been the early bird catches the worm.  No signs of manipulation by Vistana.


----------



## TravelTime

Yes it is tongue in cheek. I just don’t think worrying and threatening lawsuits is warranted right now.


----------



## DeniseM

My 2-cents:

In theory, the BOD's are supposed to hold Vistana accountable.  But because of the way Starwood and now Vistana control the election process, it's really the other way around:  Vistana controls the boards.  Except maybe at WSJ.

I don't think it is ridiculous to speculate that Vistana and Starwood before them, manipulate the inventory behind the scenes, because we have seen the evidence too many times.

As I posted above:  2 years ago, at the 8 month mark, Starwood/Vistana did not release any summer inventory at the Maui resorts at all - zero -  it was widely discussed on this forum because people were trying to make reservations for weeks, and there were zero summer reservations available.  Several months later, they released a small amount of summer inventory, all on the same day.  This is only possible if Starwood/Vistana were holding back summer inventory.

There are lots of other examples, but this is the most blatant one that I am aware of.

All that being said, I don't think a lawsuit is remotely feasible - the cards are stacked in Vistana's favor.


----------



## JIMinNC

DeniseM said:


> My 2-cents:
> 
> In theory, the BOD's are supposed to hold Vistana accountable.  But because of the way Starwood and now Vistana control the election process, it's really the other way around:  Vistana controls the boards.  Except maybe at WSJ.
> 
> I don't think it is ridiculous to speculate that Vistana and Starwood before them, manipulate the inventory behind the scenes, because we have seen the evidence too many times.
> 
> As I posted above:  2 years ago, at the 8 month mark, Starwood/Vistana did not release any summer inventory at the Maui resorts at all - zero -  it was widely discussed on this forum because people were trying to make reservations for weeks, and there were zero summer reservations available.  Several months later, they released a small amount of summer inventory, all on the same day.  This is only possible if Starwood/Vistana were holding back summer inventory.
> 
> There are lots of other examples, but this is the most blatant one that I am aware of.
> 
> All that being said, I don't think a lawsuit is remotely feasible - the cards are stacked in Vistana's favor.



Just because they released a bunch of weeks at once doesn't mean something sinister is going on with inventory.

All modern timeshare systems - particularly those affiliated with major hotel brands - have fairly complex inventory systems consisting of multiple "buckets" of inventory. In a simplistic example, think of it as two buckets (in reality there are probably more than 2):

Bucket 1: Owner Inventory
Bucket 2: House Inventory

Owner inventory is self-explanatory - the weeks controlled by owners for their use. The developer/manager is required by law to keep a balance between weeks/nights in that bucket and owners who can claim a week/nights from that bucket, so that every owner can book a week in their owned season, size, view, etc.

House inventory is the inventory controlled by the property manager/developer, and can be unsold weeks; weeks reacquired through ROFR, buyback, or foreclosure; and, in the case of the hotel brands, weeks that owners exchanged for loyalty points in the associated hotel loyalty program.

House Inventory is primarily used for revenue generation by the developer/manager - rentals, sales incentive tours, etc. But, if it looks like they may have more weeks in the House Inventory bucket than they have demand for cash rentals or tours, they can opt to transfer some of those weeks into the Owner bucket to satisfy owner demand, generate owner traffic, and ensure high resort occupancy. As always, because the inventory management processes are proprietary, we as owners don't have visibility into all the inner workings, but just because someone can't book the high demand week they want doesn't mean there is funny business going on.


----------



## duke

DeniseM said:


> My 2-cents:
> 
> In theory, the BOD's are supposed to hold Vistana accountable.  But because of the way Starwood and now Vistana control the election process, it's really the other way around:  Vistana controls the boards.  Except maybe at WSJ.
> 
> I don't think it is ridiculous to speculate that Vistana and Starwood before them, manipulate the inventory behind the scenes, because we have seen the evidence too many times.
> 
> As I posted above:  2 years ago, at the 8 month mark, Starwood/Vistana did not release any summer inventory at the Maui resorts at all - zero -  it was widely discussed on this forum because people were trying to make reservations for weeks, and there were zero summer reservations available.  Several months later, they released a small amount of summer inventory, all on the same day.  This is only possible if Starwood/Vistana were holding back summer inventory.
> 
> There are lots of other examples, but this is the most blatant one that I am aware of.
> 
> All that being said, I don't think a lawsuit is remotely feasible - the cards are stacked in Vistana's favor.


Thanks Denise - All that needs to be done now is to "request" the data via a letter to the Board of Directors from an Owner.  It would be quite difficult to sell Units if it was shown that there is an issue.  May even be self correcting.


----------



## DeniseM

> Just because they released a bunch of weeks at once doesn't mean something sinister is going on with inventory.



You don't understand how Vistana reservations work:

Vistana has two reservation windows for TIMESHARE OWNERS' reservations - hotel inventory is in a different bucket and should not impact timeshare owners.

8-12 months before check-in - home resort reservations only.
0-8 months before check-in - Staroption reservations (all Vistana owners can use their Staroptions to make reservations.)

At 8 months, any inventory that hasn't been reserved for home resort reservations is supposed to be available for Staroption reservations.  But two years ago, *there were no Maui reservations available for the whole summer*.  Then 2-3 months later, they released it all on one day.

There is no way this could happen if Starwood/Vistana weren't holding back the summer weeks, past the 8 month mark.  Also, this has never happened with Maui reservations before or after that summer.


----------



## DeniseM

> Thanks Denise - All that needs to be done now is to "request" the data via a letter from an Owner. It would be quite difficult to sell Units if it was shown that there is an issue. May even be self correcting.



When there were no Maui summer weeks available for Staroption reservations, lots of people contacted owner services and they were stonewalled.  We were told that every single week was booked by owners before the 8 month mark....right....


----------



## JIMinNC

DeniseM said:


> You don't understand how Vistana reservations work:
> 
> Vistana has two reservation windows for TIMESHARE OWNERS' reservations - hotel inventory is in a different bucket and should not impact timeshare owners.
> 
> 8-12 months before check-in - home resort reservations only.
> 0-8 months before check-in - Staroption reservations (all Vistana owners can use their Staroptions to make reservations.)
> 
> At 8 months, any inventory that hasn't been reserved for home resort reservations is supposed to be available for Staroption reservations.  But two years ago, *there were no Maui reservations available for the whole summer*.  Then 2-3 months later, they released it all on one day.
> 
> There is no way this could happen if Starwood/Vistana weren't holding back the summer weeks, past the 8 month mark.  Also, this has never happened with Maui reservations before or after that summer.




I'm familiar with the way Vistana handles reservations, even though we don't own VSE, because I have researched the system in case we had wanted to buy there. That really doesn't impact the basis of my point, however. The fact that you said in your earlier post that they released a "small amount of summer inventory all on the same day" implies that the mass release was small, and in my opinion, that would be consistent with a scenario where because of the large demand by Home Reservation and StarOptions owners, they decided to release some of their rental inventory into the Owner bucket to enable some StarOptions reservations. Maybe they got a lot of call center feedback from unhappy owners and tried to make a small concession. Based on what I heard on their earnings conference call, they transferred intervals from their "house inventory" into their owner inventory bucket to accommodate the displaced owners from the hurricane damage at WSJ, so doing the same on a smaller scale to alleviate a shortage of owner inventory in Maui would be consistent with your description.

What you describe does seem odd that all summer inventory would be booked by the 8 month mark, but I fail to see why Starwood/VSE would hold back inventory. What would be their benefit? Doing something like that would put them in huge legal jeopardy, so I can't imagine that a large, respected company like them would do that. In my opinion, an explanation like I posed above - that the weeks that showed up a few months later were actually a concession to try to make owners happy - is a more likely scenario than some sinister corporate plot to screw owners by confiscating inventory.


----------



## DannyTS

My comments were misinterpreted as an instigation to a lawsuit. It was not my intention but I still believe that a more formal approach should be taken because we should keep them in check and make sure this alleged practice does not become the accepted standard. I think that Vistana is an ethical company but sometimes  good companies can act in a less than honorable manner if not reminded of the rules and common sense. Sometimes the difference between a good and a bad company is how they choose to resolve the issues.

As duke suggests, maybe a simple letter from an owner (group of owners)  is a good way to start.
It is not that hard to make up a list of questions that identify potential problems for example:
- @ resort x, unit type y how many reservations were made by owners at midnight December 20th 2017 for the week starting December 21st 2018?
 -how many units were kept in reserve by the operator and why
 -how many reservations (if any) were made during the period... and ...

There are people smarter than me on this forum and with infinitely more knowledge about the reservation system  and i am sure that we can come up with a good list of questions

It does not have to be long, it does not have to be complicated, it does not have to be mean but sometimes just asking the questions in a serious and traceable manner can go a long way.

I am sure that a lot of TUGgers would sign the letter.


----------



## DeniseM

I am sure you could come up with a good list of questions - but I don't think Vistana will answer them, except to quote the published reservation rules.  Vistana, and Starwood before them, have always been very closed mouth.


----------



## DeniseM

> Doing something like that would put them in huge legal jeopardy, so I can't imagine that a large, respected company like them would do that.



You are giving them way too much credit - I have been a Starwood/Vistana owner for since 2002, and they have made some real bone head mistakes since I've been an owner.

Here are a couple of the worst:

About 10 years ago, Starwood created the Elite Owner program and sold a lot of timeshares to owners who wanted Elite Status.  One of the big perks was that all Elite Owners would get *automatic upgrades*.  Well any dummy could have told them that you can't give all Elite Owners upgrades, because their aren't enough upgrades to go around.  So within 18 mos. then sent out a letter saying that they were no longer giving everyone upgrades - instead they would "surprise and delight" a few Elite Owners with up grades.  I can't imagine how they instituted this program, without crunching the numbers to see if it was possible, but they did, and for more than a year, they sold a lot of timeshares based on a false promise.

More recently, Vistana announced that they were going to start charging everyone $59 for guest confirmations.  This was a super bone head move, because the published rules say that guest confirmations are *free* for home resort reservations.  So again, they created a new rule - without even researching it?

They are far from perfect...


----------



## JIMinNC

DeniseM said:


> You are giving them way to much credit - I have been a Starwood/Vistana owner for since 2002, and they have made some real bone head mistakes since I've been an owner.
> 
> Here are a couple of the worst:
> 
> About 10 years ago, Starwood created the Elite Owner program and sold a lot of timeshares to owners who wanted Elite Status.  One of the big perks was that all Elite Owners would get *automatic upgrades*.  Well any dummy could have told them that you can't give all Elite Owners upgrades, because their aren't enough upgrades to go around.  So within 18 mos. then sent out a letter saying that they were no longer giving everyone upgrades - instead they would "surprise and delight" a few owners with up grades.  I can't imagine how they instituted this program, without crunching the numbers to see if it was possible, but they did, and for more than a year, they sold a lot of timeshares based on a false promise.
> 
> More recently, Vistana announced that they were going to start charging everyone $59 for guest confirmations.  This was a super bone head move, because the published rules say that guest confirmations are *free* for home resort reservations.  So again, they created a new rule - without even researching it?
> 
> They are far from perfect...



Making boneheaded decisions is far different than committing fraud. 

All companies big and small make bad decisions sometimes - in my years in corporate marketing I witnessed many. But if Starwood/VSE were manipulating inventory as some here suggest, that is basically fraud and is illegal. I don't believe that most major companies willfully and frequently try to commit fraud. Does it happen from time to time - of course - that's why you occasionally see executives go to jail. But I believe most companies try to act ethically and in the best interest of their shareholders. Committing fraud is neither. My philosophy is if something can be explained by a logical, honest explanation or by an illegal conspiracy theory, the logical, honest explanation is most likely more accurate.


----------



## DeniseM

Here's another way that Starwood/Vistana changed the rules to make it easier for them to manipulate the inventory to their advantage:

A few years ago they stopped letting owners make a reservation for the dates of their choice, and deposit it with II or RCI.  Now, you just get a generic credit when you make a deposit. So you cannot reserve a high demand week and get the trading value of that week - instead you get a generic credit. 

And Vistana doesn't have to give II or RCI the week you deposit either - if you deposit an ocean front or ocean view week - they can keep it, put it in their rental pool, and rent it, and give the exchange company any old week.

So, I have lots of reasons to be suspicious of what goes on behind the scenes with Starwood/Vistana, and I am pleased that Marriott is taking over.


----------



## DannyTS

JIMinNC said:


> Making boneheaded decisions is far different than committing fraud.
> 
> All companies big and small make bad decisions sometimes - in my years in corporate marketing I witnessed many. But if Starwood/VSE were manipulating inventory as some here suggest, that is basically fraud and is illegal. I don't believe that most major companies willfully and frequently try to commit fraud. Does it happen from time to time - of course - that's why you occasionally see executives go to jail. But I believe most companies try to act ethically and in the best interest of their shareholders. Committing fraud is neither. My philosophy is if something can be explained by a logical, honest explanation or by an illegal conspiracy theory, the logical, honest explanation is most likely more accurate.



The Vistana system is pretty simple so there should be no mistake (presumably honest). But isn't their secrecy the one inviting for the conspiracy theories? Would it not make more sense for them to say  what actually happened when it happens? Sorry, it is just hard for me to see how the ones reporting the problem are the problem. The reality is that in the absence of official credible explanations people will come with their own theories.


----------



## Ken555

DannyTS said:


> The Vistana system is pretty simple so there should be no mistake (presumably honest). But isn't their secrecy the one inviting for the conspiracy theories? Would it not make more sense for them to say  what actually happened when it happens? Sorry, it is just hard for me to see how the ones reporting the problem are the problem. The reality is that in the absence of official credible explanations people will come with their own theories.



A lack of transparency is the root of most of the concern in all the years I’ve owned, IMHO. They must know this, so the continued lack of transparency, with the notable exception of very few situations, is an on-going issue which can only lead to more speculation of a negative nature about their motives for certain decisions.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## Ken555

JIMinNC said:


> […]so I can't imagine that a large, respected company like them would do that.



Respected? Let’s not confuse Starwood hotels and SVN...

I respected Starwood management, and I had some respect for the separate SVN management but I never had much respect for Interval. Hopefully Marriott will clear up some of this, but I’m not holding my breath.




Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## JIMinNC

DannyTS said:


> The Vistana system is pretty simple so there should be no mistake (presumably honest). But isn't their secrecy the one inviting for the conspiracy theories? Would it not make more sense for them to say  what actually happened when it happens? Sorry, it is just hard for me to see how the ones reporting the problem are the problem. The reality is that in the absence of official credible explanations people will come with their own theories.





Ken555 said:


> A lack of transparency is the root of most of the concern in all the years I’ve owned, IMHO. They must know this, so the continued lack of transparency, with the notable exception of very few situations, is an on-going issue which can only lead to more speculation of a negative nature about their motives for certain decisions.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk



I agree that lack of transparency is what creates all of these questions, but pretty much all of the major timeshare companies - Vistana, Marriott, Hilton, Diamond, and others - make their inventory management processes very opaque. The reality is only a small minority of owners would probably be interested in understanding what goes on inside those processes and probably even fewer would even _*understand*_ those processes. While most active TUGgers would love to see inside those "black boxes" ( I know I would), we are a very small minority of all timeshare owners. I would also love to know how airlines allocate their seats between fare classes, frequent flyer seats, etc. or how the Marriott/Westin/Hilton hotels allocate their various rates and free rooms. But in all of those cases, those systems and processes are part of their corporate intellectual property which they feel is proprietary. I'm sure VSE, Marriott Vacation Club, and HGVC all feel the same way about their inventory management processes.


----------



## Ken555

JIMinNC said:


> I agree that lack of transparency is what creates all of these questions, but pretty much all of the major timeshare companies - Vistana, Marriott, Hilton, Diamond, and others - make their inventory management processes very opaque. The reality is only a small minority of owners would probably be interested in understanding what goes on inside those processes and probably even fewer would even _*understand*_ those processes. While most active TUGgers would love to see inside those "black boxes" ( I know I would), we are a very small minority of all timeshare owners. I would also love to know how airlines allocate their seats between fare classes, frequent flyer seats, etc. or how the Marriott/Westin/Hilton hotels allocate their various rates and free rooms. But in all of those cases, those systems and processes are part of their corporate intellectual property which they feel is proprietary. I'm sure VSE, Marriott Vacation Club, and HGVC all feel the same way about their inventory management processes.



Yes. Obviously. 

We seem to have the same conversation everytime there’s any hint of a change.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## DannyTS

JIMinNC said:


> I agree that lack of transparency is what creates all of these questions, but pretty much all of the major timeshare companies - Vistana, Marriott, Hilton, Diamond, and others - make their inventory management processes very opaque. The reality is only a small minority of owners would probably be interested in understanding what goes on inside those processes and probably even fewer would even _*understand*_ those processes. While most active TUGgers would love to see inside those "black boxes" ( I know I would), we are a very small minority of all timeshare owners. I would also love to know how airlines allocate their seats between fare classes, frequent flyer seats, etc. or how the Marriott/Westin/Hilton hotels allocate their various rates and free rooms. But in all of those cases, those systems and processes are part of their corporate intellectual property which they feel is proprietary. I'm sure VSE, Marriott Vacation Club, and HGVC all feel the same way about their inventory management processes.



The major difference with the airlines, hotels etc is that this is a prepaid service so there must be some accountability. With an airline if you do not like the price, travel time etc you can just buy from the competition. Not the case here.

Let's not try to make the VSN booking system more complex that it is or should be. You have  basket of beans. At 12 months owners can start picking them. At 8 months, a second group of owners gets to  pick  what is left in the basket.


----------



## JIMinNC

DeniseM said:


> Here's another way that Starwood/Vistana changed the rules to make it easier for them to manipulate the inventory to their advantage:
> 
> A few years ago they stopped letting owners make a reservation for the dates of their choice, and deposit it with II or RCI.  Now, you just get a generic credit when you make a deposit. So you cannot reserve a high demand week and get the trading value of that week - instead you get a generic credit.



Of the major hotel-affiliated timeshares - HGVC, MVC, and VSE - I think Marriott is the only one which allows owners to deposit a specific high demand week. I know HGVC owners can't, we just spend our points in the RCI portal and the specific inventory gets deposited by HGVC. I bet MVC wishes they had structured their program more like HGVC or VSE where they could determine what gets deposited. Personally, I would rather it be done the HGVC/VSE way, as that should result in more of the high demand weeks being available for owner occupancy vs trade. Doing it that way also facilitates bulk banking and blended trading power, and can result in better trade results for all owners versus just those few who can grab the top weeks. I know the way old, fixed traditional timeshares worked the owner had a right to a specific week and thus had the right do do with it as they please. But in the more flexible world of floating time and points, I think it makes more sense to give greater deference to the general rights of the ownership as a whole to book the most popular weeks for their own use rather than allowing those to go to exchange.




DeniseM said:


> And Vistana doesn't have to give II or RCI the week you deposit either - if you deposit an ocean front or ocean view week - they can keep it, put it in their rental pool, and rent it, and give the exchange company any old week.



I could also easily take the counter side of this also. Since neither RCI nor II give an owner any greater trade power credit for view or guarantee exchangers any specific view, why should *any* timeshare company allow the better views to go to the exchange companies? If I were running any of these companies I wouldn't want to give my best views to an exchange company. I can get a lot more rental revenue from that ocean front week than a garden view week, so why waste that by giving it to RCI or II if they don't give my owners any more trading power credit for that OF week?




DeniseM said:


> So, I have lots of reasons to be suspicious of what goes on behind the scenes with Starwood/Vistana, and I am pleased that Marriott is taking over.



There are issues in Marriott as well - like the issues at Maui Ocean Club and the Marriotts in Aruba where multi-week owners will book up the top weeks and then rent them through Redweek, making it tough for owners who actually want to use the week we bought to book prime weeks. In my view, this is a worse outcome than the ones being discussed here. When external renters can book Maui Ocean Club easier than an owner, the system is not as owner-centric as it should be. So, no system is perfect.


----------



## JIMinNC

DannyTS said:


> Let's not try to make the VSN booking system more complex that it is or should be. You have  basket of beans. At 12 months owners can start picking them. At 8 months, a second group of owners gets to  pick  what is left in the basket.



Using you basket analogy, in addition to your basket of beans, there is also another smaller basket of beans that neither group of owners can pick from. That basket has identical beans, but it is still controlled by the farmer that planted them. That farmer can sell those beans to anyone he wants to, but sometimes (rarely) he might decide to throw a few of his beans into your basket if your basket is starting to run low on beans and there are still owners who want some.


----------



## DannyTS

JIMinNC said:


> Using you basket analogy, in addition to your basket of beans, there is also another smaller basket of beans that neither group of owners can pick from. That basket has identical beans, but it is still controlled by the farmer that planted them. That farmer can sell those beans to anyone he wants to, but sometimes he might decide to throw a few of his beans into your basket if your basket is starting to run low on beans and there are still owners who want some.


How generous of the farmer to add beans to our basket! The reality is that the best we can hope for is for the farmer to leave our basket alone.


----------



## JIMinNC

DannyTS said:


> How generous of the farmer to add beans to the owners basket! The reality is that the best we can hope for is for the farmer to leave the owners basket alone.



If the farmer doesn't leave the owners basket alone, the farmer could go to jail, so the farmer would be really stupid to try that.


----------



## Ken555

JIMinNC said:


> If the farmer doesn't leave the owners basket alone, the farmer could go to jail, so the farmer would be really stupid to try that.



What oversight exists to monitor the farmer and verify he isn’t cheating? We need a special counsel! Lol


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## JIMinNC

I guess there is also a third basket of beans in addition to the owners basket and the farmer's basket -- beans that the owners have said they don't want, so the farmer is allowed to go into the owners' basket and pick out some of those beans to put in that third basket which goes to  members of the bean exchange cooperative who are looking for those same beans.


----------



## JIMinNC

Ken555 said:


> What oversight exists to monitor the farmer and verify he isn’t cheating? We need a special counsel! Lol
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk



If there is credible evidence that the farmer is cheating, then the owners can bring legal action against the farmer or law enforcement can charge him with a crime. Simply not understanding what the farmer is doing, however, is not evidence of wrongdoing.


----------



## Ken555

JIMinNC said:


> If there is credible evidence that the farmer is cheating, then the owners can bring legal action against the farmer or law enforcement can charge him with a crime. Simply not understanding what the farmer is doing, however, is not evidence of wrongdoing.



Ah, but if we understand the stated rules but find inconsistent behavior, similar to what Denise mentioned, which is not adequately explained, then a lawsuit is the only remedy? This is just another example of why a lack of transparency encourages negative and critical opinions about the management.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## dsmrp

JIMinNC said:


> There are issues in Marriott as well - like the issues at Maui Ocean Club and the Marriotts in Aruba where multi-week owners will book up the top weeks and then rent them through Redweek, making it tough for owners who actually want to use the week we bought to book prime weeks. In my view, this is a worse outcome than the ones being discussed here. When external renters can book Maui Ocean Club easier than an owner, the system is not as owner-centric as it should be. So, no system is perfect.



This would drive me crazy.   I'm not much of a fan of the 13 month booking window for multi-week owners. In this respect I think  Vistana's/old Starwood 12 month rule for all owners is more egalitarian.


----------



## JIMinNC

Ken555 said:


> Ah, but if we understand the stated rules but find inconsistent behavior, similar to what Denise mentioned, which is not adequately explained, then a lawsuit is the only remedy? This is just another example of why a lack of transparency encourages negative and critical opinions about the management.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk



In most situations like that, I think the answer is, unfortunately, yes. In situations where companies feel they need to protect their intellectual property, you can always ask nicely, but if they are ultimately not as forthcoming as you would like, then usually some sort of class action is the typical next step.

That's actually how RCI was forced to create their current TPU system. There was suspicion, never proven, they they were engaging in monkey business with the whole trading power concept. A class action was successful in forcing them to create a system that offered a bit more transparency into the whole issue of trading power.


----------



## DavidnRobin

dsmrp said:


> This would drive me crazy.   I'm not much of a fan of the 13 month booking window for multi-week owners. In this respect I think  Vistana's/old Starwood 12 month rule for all owners is more egalitarian.



The 13 month rule is a major reason why I will not own Marriott.


----------



## DannyTS

JIMinNC said:


> I guess there is also a third basket of beans in addition to the owners basket and the farmer's basket -- beans that the owners have said they don't want, so the farmer is allowed to go into the owners' basket and pick out some of those beans to put in that third basket which goes to  members of the bean exchange cooperative who are looking for those same beans.


Until 2 months before check in there is no third basket. The existence of a third basket before would be cheating.


----------



## Ken555

JIMinNC said:


> In most situations like that, I think the answer is, unfortunately, yes. In situations where companies feel they need to protect their intellectual property, you can always ask nicely, but if they are ultimately not as forthcoming as you would like, then usually some sort of class action is the typical next step.



I hate lawsuits, but agree it might be needed at some point should sufficient numbers be convinced something fishy is going on. For myself, as stated earlier, I’m not inclined to do much of anything other than stay aware of the issue and hope for the best. I’ve been able to get the time I need so don’t have much to complain about, but the issues and experiences mentioned by others are concerning.



> That's actually how RCI was forced to create their current TPU system. There was suspicion, never proven, they they were engaging in monkey business with the whole trading power concept. A class action was successful in forcing them to create a system that offered a bit more transparency into the whole issue of trading power.



I did not know this (I know quite little about RCI though for the last few years I’ve been considering depositing one of my SDOs there to try it out). Thanks for the posting this info for reference.



Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## DannyTS

JIMinNC said:


> In most situations like that, I think the answer is, unfortunately, yes. In situations where companies feel they need to protect their intellectual property, you can always ask nicely, but if they are ultimately not as forthcoming as you would like, then usually some sort of class action is the typical next step.
> 
> That's actually how RCI was forced to create their current TPU system. There was suspicion, never proven, they they were engaging in monkey business with the whole trading power concept. A class action was successful in forcing them to create a system that offered a bit more transparency into the whole issue of trading power.



it looks like the action was in the UK

https://www.timesharecompensation.co.uk/verdict-rci-court-case-set-20-october/


----------



## TravelTime

JIMinNC said:


> There are issues in Marriott as well - like the issues at Maui Ocean Club and the Marriotts in Aruba where multi-week owners will book up the top weeks and then rent them through Redweek, making it tough for owners who actually want to use the week we bought to book prime weeks. In my view, this is a worse outcome than the ones being discussed here. When external renters can book Maui Ocean Club easier than an owner, the system is not as owner-centric as it should be. So, no system is perfect.



I would really like to see the timeshare rental business have more restrictions by the timeshare companies against purely commercial use. It does not seem right that people who are booking rooms for purely commercial reasons take the Owner inventory and lock others out at 13 months. I think it is fine to rent out weeks and points you can’t use, and it is fine to make a profit on that. I just would hate to try to book at 12 months and not get what I want because timeshare “commercial owners” are taking all the good weeks at 13 months. I don’t believe this was the intention of Marriott when they originally designed the program. Some of the timeshare companies have clauses that you can’t book rooms for purely commercial use. I know Disney has this in their contract and I think the MVC DC Points program may have this clause as well. I’d need to double check that. My goal is buy to use and I would only rent out if we can’t use it some years. But if I ever got to the point where we were no longer using what we own, I would probably consider selling rather than deal with the extra work and hassle of renting our timeshares out. I wonder how many owners actually buy weeks solely as a commercial business. I have read on TUG that it is a hard business to run and make a profit because the margins are generally small per unit.


----------



## dss

I'm guessing this isn't possible due to existing T&Cs, but is any chance that the 13 month "rule" could apply to new sales under a combined system? I know it's a long long ways off, but my biggest concern is that a combined multi brand system would somehow diminish my existing home booking window.


----------



## DannyTS

I am with you on most points you make, i feel the same about renting.  Yet, from a legal standpoint they cannot and should not try to change the rules, it would create a big mess.

I


----------



## JIMinNC

DannyTS said:


> Until 2 months before check in there is no third basket. The existence of a third basket before would be cheating.



No. The third bean basket is a metaphor for II exchanges. That obviously exists well before two months. As Denise noted earlier, Vistana can choose which weeks to deposit into II rather than the owner choosing, so using the bean metaphor, they are picking which beans to put in the third basket.)


----------



## JIMinNC

DannyTS said:


> it looks like the action was in the UK
> 
> https://www.timesharecompensation.co.uk/verdict-rci-court-case-set-20-october/



That is a more recent lawsuit, well after the creation of the TPU system.

The class action that created the TPU system was settled back in 2009 or so. See this link for a summary of the settlement:

http://www.classcounsel.com/pdf/rcinotice.pdf

See section 6: What Does the Settlement Provide?; subsection (2)



> (2) Second, the settlement requires RCI to make several disclosures regarding its operation of the Weeks Exchange Program. For example, if the settlement is approved, RCI will make a tool available on its website that allows members to estimate trading power of a proposed deposit and to see the available inventory for which the member is eligible to exchange at that moment.


----------



## JIMinNC

TravelTime said:


> I would really like to see the timeshare rental business have more restrictions by the timeshare companies against purely commercial use. It does not seem right that people who are booking rooms for purely commercial reasons take the Owner inventory and lock others out at 13 months. I think it is fine to rent out weeks and points you can’t use, and it is fine to make a profit on that. I just would hate to try to book at 12 months and not get what I want because timeshare “commercial owners” are taking all the good weeks at 13 months. I don’t believe this was the intention of Marriott when they originally designed the program. Some of the timeshare companies have clauses that you can’t book rooms for purely commercial use. I know Disney has this in their contract and I think the MVC DC Points program may have this clause as well. I’d need to double check that. My goal is buy to use and I would only rent out if we can’t use it some years. But if I ever got to the point where we were no longer using what we own, I would probably consider selling rather than deal with the extra work and hassle of renting our timeshares out. I wonder how many owners actually buy weeks solely as a commercial business. I have read on TUG that it is a hard business to run and make a profit because the margins are generally small per unit.



Marriott's program documents for both weeks and DC points expressly prohibit "commercial use", but Marriott has been fairly lenient in enforcing that provision. Here is the language from the DC Points system documents (which is the only docs I have in electronic form, bolding is mine), but I believe there is similar language in the T&Cs for weeks as well:



> B. Residential Use and Prohibition on Commercial Use. Accommodations, Special Benefits, and Use Periods may not be used for any commercial purpose. This prohibition on commercial use includes, but is not limited to, any illegal activity *or a pattern of occupancy, rental, leasing, or use by a Trust Owner that Program Manager, in its reasonable discretion, could conclude constitutes a commercial enterprise or practice.* In the event a Trust Owner is determined to be reserving or using the Accommodations, Special Benefits, and Use Periods for any commercial purpose Program Manager may immediately cancel any current reservation(s) made by such Trust Owner and may impose such additional penalties or restrictions as determined by Program Manager, in its sole discretion, from time to time. The restrictions of this paragraph do not apply to the Developer, Trust Manager, any Exchange Company, or their affiliates or designees.



The existence of the multi-week owners who primarily rent their units in what for all intents and purposes is a commercial enterprise as defined above is well documented (some are active TUG members). For whatever reason, MVC has chosen to look the other way.


----------



## DannyTS

DeniseM said:


> Here's another way that Starwood/Vistana changed the rules to make it easier for them to manipulate the inventory to their advantage:
> 
> A few years ago they stopped letting owners make a reservation for the dates of their choice, and deposit it with II or RCI.  Now, you just get a generic credit when you make a deposit. So you cannot reserve a high demand week and get the trading value of that week - instead you get a generic credit.
> 
> And Vistana doesn't have to give II or RCI the week you deposit either - if you deposit an ocean front or ocean view week - they can keep it, put it in their rental pool, and rent it, and give the exchange company any old week.
> 
> So, I have lots of reasons to be suspicious of what goes on behind the scenes with Starwood/Vistana, and I am pleased that Marriott is taking over.



I will keep it simple. Say your platinum plus week is worth between 60 and 100 points (based on the calendar week) and they only give the exchange companies 60s. Why would RCI value your floating at 80 (average)? Probably they will assign a trading power closer to 60 based on their experience and on what the internal data shows them. Basically they are devaluing your timeshare.

If Vistana owns 10% of the weeks and gets 10% through exchange deposits, theoretically speaking they can completely block 10 of the best weeks of the year. This is wrong and it does not pass the smell test, to say the least. Any neutral party would find this troubling.
I am surprised that people who do not work for the company could find this ok. If people who work for the company find this normal, it may be proof that this is part of the culture and part of a coordinated action and not random.

I will go a step further. The harder to book certain weeks, the more people will want to deposit for exchange. The more people deposit for exchange the more weeks the company has to game the booking process. It is a self reinforcing process. Negative for you but very lucrative for the company.

I want to make myself clear. I am not saying that this is happening but it is a problem if this is real.


----------



## CalGalTraveler

DavidnRobin said:


> The 13 month rule is a major reason why I will not own Marriott.



+1 The 13 week advantage was the key reason we selected Vistana over Marriott for our Maui OF. We surmised that in order to get the OF unit reserved during summer peak we would need to buy a second Marriott unit which effectively doubles the Marriott buy-in price and maintenance fee.


----------



## JIMinNC

DannyTS said:


> If Vistana owns 10% of the weeks and gets 10% through exchange deposits, theoretically speaking they can completely block 10 of the best weeks of the year. This is wrong and it does not pass the smell test, to say the least. Any neutral party would find this troubling.
> I am surprised that people who do not work for the company could find this ok. If people who work for the company find this normal, it may be proof that this is part of the culture and part of a coordinated action and not random.



Under your example, they can do whatever they want with the 5 weeks they own (hotel rental, sales promo packages, etc) - they are the owners after all. The relevant question is, how do they reserve these weeks? As floating weeks, no specific week is assigned for use by virtue of ownership. That is a debate we have often over on the Marriott board. The MVC program docs say Marriott (or the MVC Trust) has to reserve their floating usage on the same terms as all other owners (presumably meaning when the relevant reservation windows open), but doesn't specify exactly how that takes place. What do the Vistana docs say about how they can reserve their owned usage?

The other question from your example is what happens with the 5 weeks that get deposited for exchange. They are obviously obligated to provide 5 weeks to the exchange company, but have some discretion in choosing the weeks to deposit. What weeks do they choose? Those parameters are probably outlined in their contracts with the exchange company, but I see no reason why they would have incentive to give the best weeks to II.


----------



## CalGalTraveler

It makes sense to send the worst units/seasons to the exchange companies.  Why should someone paying a maintenance fee that is half or a quarter of what I pay, gain access to an OF unit in prime season?  Of course if I owned an II trader I would love this.  This is why people say that exchanging trades a Lexus for a bunch of Chevy's.

It seems the internal SO program is the closest we can get to a like for like exchange because you can select the unit type and season.

In terms of what Vistana takes as their owned units. I see this as similar to playing the house in a casino. They have an advantage but must be very careful not to cross the legal line.


----------



## DeniseM

> It makes sense to send the worst units/seasons to the exchange companies. Why should someone paying a maintenance fee that is half or a quarter of what I pay, gain access to an OF unit in prime season?



Yes, but you aren't looking at it from the Vistana owner's end:

-This means that Vistana keeps the ocean front unit that the Vistana owner deposits and *pockets the money.*

-It also means that the Vistana owner deposits a high value week, and gets an average deposit to trade with.


----------



## JIMinNC

DeniseM said:


> Yes, but you aren't looking at it from the Vistana owner's end:
> 
> -This means that Vistana keeps the ocean front unit that the Vistana owner deposits and *pockets the money.*
> 
> -It also means that the Vistana owner deposits a high value week, and gets an average deposit to trade with.



I don't necessarily see it this way.

If the owner deposits their summer OF unit and Vistana gives II a lesser unit, then why do you assume VSE pockets the money? I don't think they have a right to rent that unit just because it was deposited in II, because II deposits are still from the "Owners' Basket" not the "House Basket". Since under this example, VSE gives II a less demand unit, the OF unit that was freed up should be available for booking by VSE owners unless VSE has another way to move that unit into their House Inventory. So giving II the less popular weeks would seem to me to allow owners to access those best weeks, and so would be giving preference to owner use over exchange use, so that seems to me like the right prioritization.

I agree that swapping weeks may result, in theory, in diminished trading power compared to if an owner booked a high demand week (recognizing that view category does not impact trading power, only resort/location/date impacts TP). I have no idea what VSE's agreements with II say, but I do know that most of the other major systems have negotiated specific trading power agreements with the exchange companies that are somewhat independent of the specific weeks deposited. I know from our previous ownership in the Sunterra/Diamond family tree, that they make most of their deposits in bulk well in advance based on projected exchange deposits, with negotiated trade power with RCI or II. HGVC does something similar with RCI now (for example, most all of HGVC Hawaii 2019 deposits hit RCI in mid-March, before even home week owners can book most of the weeks). While these negotiated approaches may, in theory, hurt the engaged owner who proactively seeks out a very high value week to deposit (as a TUGger would), I suspect (but can't prove) that it may be a wash or even a benefit for the vast majority of owners who just call up and deposit a week without really getting too anal about maximizing their trade power.


----------



## DannyTS

This practice (if true) is not a victim-less crime as some are suggesting. The value of the TS you own is a function of usage, exchange and rental value and this practice can affect all 3.
I want the company to do well, even if that means stretching (not breaking) some rules. No question about it, you do not want them to be struggling. At the same time, people should be able to book what they thought they were promised when they purchased.


----------



## TravelTime

Has anyone had trouble booking what they bought if they do it when the booking window opens? I have not yet had a problem. I have even been able to change my reservations for new dates and get what I want in just about all my timeshare systems.


----------



## DeniseM

We have this discussion here frequently and here is a summary:

The WKORV ocean front center units can be difficult to book for prime holiday weeks, because there are so few of them.

The Westin Nanea 1 bedrooms are really difficult to book, because there are so few of them, and because of the structure of the Flex program, which essentially allows people with a lot of home options to book early.


----------



## CalGalTraveler

We should keep in mind that the instances of high value weeks trading in II are probably minimal, since most owners will use or rent it out for higher value. SO trades will be the most likely scenario of high value weeks coming under Vistana control.

I don't know if we can prove that they pocket the money or put it back in the SO/owner pool. What I do know is when they place low value deposits in II, VSE owners have a chance of seeing that high value deposit come back to them in the reservation system.


----------



## TravelTime

DeniseM said:


> We have this discussion here frequently and here is a summary:
> 
> The WKORV ocean front center units can be difficult to book for prime holiday weeks, because there are so few of them.
> 
> The Westin Nanea 1 bedrooms are really difficult to book, because there are so few of them, and because of the structure of the Flex program, which essentially allows people with a lot of home options to book early.



I was almost going to buy a WKOVR center oceanfront 2 br. My great sales agent, Syed, recommended against it because he said there was an availability issue. I am really glad I followed his advice!


----------



## DavidnRobin

TravelTime said:


> I was almost going to buy a WKOVR center oceanfront 2 br. My great sales agent, Syed, recommended against it because he said there was an availability issue. I am really glad I followed his advice!



Syed said not to buy OFC because of availability?  Or did he say not to buy OFC due to issues in reserving during peak weeks?

Big difference.
The former would surprise me.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## TravelTime

DavidnRobin said:


> Syed said not to buy OFC because of availability?  Or did he say not to buy OFC due to issues in reserving during peak weeks?
> 
> Big difference.
> The former would surprise me.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk



As I recall, he said booking into the oceanfront center units could be hard. I do not recall him saying anything about seasonality.


----------



## CalGalTraveler

I heard the same from Syed. He was referring to summer and peak times because there are fewer actual center OF units at WKORV.  There are many more WKORV-N OF units. Because platinum runs from 1 - 50 weeks there are not enough units if every OF owner wants July 4 week. Having more units increases your chances of reserving one during a peak time because it doesn't fill up as fast.


----------



## DavidnRobin

CalGalTraveler said:


> I heard the same from Syed. He was referring to summer and peak times because there are fewer actual center OF units at WKORV.  There are many more WKORV-N OF units. Because platinum runs from 1 - 50 weeks there are not enough units if every OF owner wants July 4 week. Having more units increases your chances of reserving one during a peak time because it doesn't fill up as fast.



I figured this - I couldn’t see Syed saying this to those not traveling during prime weeks. Also a higher number of fixed OFC villas during premium weeks.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## TravelTime

CalGalTraveler said:


> I heard the same from Syed. He was referring to summer and peak times because there are fewer actual center OF units at WKORV.  There are many more WKORV-N OF units. Because platinum runs from 1 - 50 weeks there are not enough units if every OF owner wants July 4 week. Having more units increases your chances of reserving one during a peak time because it doesn't fill up as fast.



If I recall correctly, this is what he told me so we bought WKORV-N OF instead, knowing that it is really a great ocean view unit rather than a true oceanfront unit because of the angling. I probably told him we would be traveling during summer the most so maybe that is why I do not recall him qualifying the statement. He did not say it was impossible to book, just harder because there are so few of the center OF units. Now that you mention it, I am sure he was referring to peak seasons.


----------



## SandyPGravel

Anyone have a "Marriott's Timesharing for Dummies" book I could borrow?  Gonna have to learn a whole new TS system.  

I've been reading this thread and I know some posts have touched on this, but could a new combined system change my Fixed/Fixed WSJ unit so we end up in a random unit? (Really like our ground floor end unit next to the pool)  Does Marriott have Fixed/Fixed units?  I've seen lots of posts about DC points which sounds like Flex.  If I can maintain my Fixed/Fixed would that mean I couldn't use my week to go somewhere else, like we do with SVN?  I realize this is all speculation.


----------



## VacationForever

Just go to the Marriott sub-forum and look for the stickies at the top.  I have read the stickies for the points system and weeks system twice and still cannot remember everything.  @SueDonJ did an absolutely fabulous job.  She is very systematical in explaining in detail.


----------



## TravelTime

SandyPGravel said:


> Anyone have a "Marriott's Timesharing for Dummies" book I could borrow?  Gonna have to learn a whole new TS system.
> 
> I've been reading this thread and I know some posts have touched on this, but could a new combined system change my Fixed/Fixed WSJ unit so we end up in a random unit? (Really like our ground floor end unit next to the pool)  Does Marriott have Fixed/Fixed units?  I've seen lots of posts about DC points which sounds like Flex.  If I can maintain my Fixed/Fixed would that mean I couldn't use my week to go somewhere else, like we do with SVN?  I realize this is all speculation.



I think anyone owning a fixed week of any sort will maintain it. They may just offer you an option to enroll it in the DC Points system like they did with pre-2010 weeks.


----------



## DeniseM

> I've been reading this thread and I know some posts have touched on this, but could a new combined system change my Fixed/Fixed WSJ unit so we end up in a random unit?



I don't think so - they can't change your deed.  What Marriott could change is things related to Staroptions, Elite Ownership, etc.


----------



## GregT

SandyPGravel said:


> could a new combined system change my Fixed/Fixed WSJ unit so we end up in a random unit?



No, you will keep your fixed/fixed week.  Depending on what the system looks like, you may get the option to redeem it and get Marriott DC points, but that redemption is a year-to-year decision, ie, one year you may trade it for DC points and use those DC points to travel elsewhere, and then the next year you occupy it yourself as you have always done.

I have two fixed/fixed weeks that are enrolled in the DC program and the options that are available every year to me are:

1) Occupy my fixed week in my fixed unit
2) Redeem my week and get Marriott DC points, which I then spend on available inventory
3) Rent my week
4) Deposit my week in II
5) Redeem my week and get Marriott Reward Points

Every year I have a choice, but they can not change what is in our deed. 

Best,

Greg


----------



## SandyPGravel

GregT said:


> No, you will keep your fixed/fixed week.  Depending on what the system looks like, you may get the option to redeem it and get Marriott DC points, but that redemption is a year-to-year decision, ie, one year you may trade it for DC points and use those DC points to travel elsewhere, and then the next year you occupy it yourself as you have always done.
> 
> I have two fixed/fixed weeks that are enrolled in the DC program and the options that are available every year to me are:
> 
> 1) Occupy my fixed week in my fixed unit
> 2) Redeem my week and get Marriott DC points, which I then spend on available inventory
> 3) Rent my week
> 4) Deposit my week in II
> 5) Redeem my week and get Marriott Reward Points
> 
> Every year I have a choice, but they can not change what is in our deed.
> 
> Best,
> 
> Greg



Thanx Greg that is what I was wondering.  Found this:

****Enrolling a Week IS NOT a permanent exchange of the Week for DC Points.**** The deed and all associated rights of an enrolled Week remain with the Owner. Enrollment simply gives the Weeks Owner another usage option, to elect annually to convert the Week to DC Points for use in the MVC Destinations program. It is basically an overlay internal exchange option.

which is what you are saying.  But the cost is $195/yr instead of the $150-ish+ 45 for second week with VSE ?  If Marriott doesn't want my SVV week, because Orlando is over saturated, I wonder what options I'll have for that week?  If we won't be able to go anywhere except SVV that would suck.  (My SVV week is an inherited, developer week, non-mandatory section.)


----------



## dioxide45

SandyPGravel said:


> If Marriott doesn't want my SVV week, because Orlando is over saturated, I wonder what options I'll have for that week? If we won't be able to go anywhere except SVV that would suck. (My SVV week is an inherited, developer week, non-mandatory section.)


Anything at this point is pure speculation. We have no idea how or if Marriott will even offer any type of integration and if they do what it would even look like. Does your inherited developer week have StarOptions? I know you mentioned non-mandatory, but I would think that StarOptions would transfer on an inherited developer week?

As mentioned, we don't know how or if VSN will live on, I suspect it will. So if you have StarOptions, you can continue to either use your week, trade in VSN or trade in II. If you don't have StarOptions, nothing would really change if Marriott either doesn't integrate the programs or excludes your ownership from any future program. You can only stay at SVV or trade through II today.


----------



## VacationForever

SandyPGravel said:


> Thanx Greg that is what I was wondering.  Found this:
> 
> ****Enrolling a Week IS NOT a permanent exchange of the Week for DC Points.**** The deed and all associated rights of an enrolled Week remain with the Owner. Enrollment simply gives the Weeks Owner another usage option, to elect annually to convert the Week to DC Points for use in the MVC Destinations program. It is basically an overlay internal exchange option.
> 
> which is what you are saying.  But the cost is $195/yr instead of the $150-ish+ 45 for second week with VSE ?  If Marriott doesn't want my SVV week, because Orlando is over saturated, I wonder what options I'll have for that week?  If we won't be able to go anywhere except SVV that would suck.  (My SVV week is an inherited, developer week, non-mandatory section.)


Why worry over something that you have no control over that may or may not happen 3 years down the line?  VAC won't take away from what you have.


----------



## SandyPGravel

dioxide45 said:


> Anything at this point is pure speculation. We have no idea how or if Marriott will even offer any type of integration and if they do what it would even look like. Does your inherited developer week have StarOptions? I know you mentioned non-mandatory, but I would think that StarOptions would transfer on an inherited developer week?
> 
> As mentioned, we don't know how or if VSN will live on, I suspect it will. So if you have StarOptions, you can continue to either use your week, trade in VSN or trade in II. If you don't have StarOptions, nothing would really change if Marriott either doesn't integrate the programs or excludes your ownership from any future program. You can only stay at SVV or trade through II today.



Yes I have SO, but had to fight for them because the title transfer was done wrong.  My mother didn't want the MF anymore so she transferred the ownership to me, but it was done incorrectly.  I mentioned non-mandatory because some sections of SVV are mandatory and those might be treated differently because of whats in the ccr's.  (BTW, what exactly does ccr stand for?)


----------



## SandyPGravel

VacationForever said:


> Why worry over something that you have no control over that may or may not happen 3 years down the line?  VAC won't take away from what you have.



My concern is I do have the ability to travel within the SVN network with my SVV unit.  I'm concerned if SVN is eliminated and my SVV is excluded from whatever new club is created, because of the glut of TS in Orlando, I will lose the "value" I have which is going to all the existing resorts in SVN.  Or the value that is assigned to SVV is so low I can't go to HRA or WKORV or WLR etc.


----------



## VacationForever

SandyPGravel said:


> My concern is I do have the ability to travel within the SVN network with my SVV unit.  I'm concerned if SVN is eliminated and my SVV is excluded from whatever new club is created, because of the glut of TS in Orlando, I will lose the "value" I have which is going to all the existing resorts in SVN.  Or the value that is assigned to SVV is so low I can't go to HRA or WKORV or WLR etc.


The answer is still the same.. do not worry over it. If it happens, it happens, but most likely whatever changes happen, you should not be worse off.


----------



## Henry M.

SandyPGravel said:


> (BTW, what exactly does ccr stand for?)



*Covenants*, *Conditions* & *Restrictions*, commonly called CC&Rs, are a set of rules established by a developer or homeowners association that govern residences in a particular neighborhood or *condominium*. CC&Rs may put *restrictions* on parking, paint colors, noise-levels and pets, for example.


----------



## gravitar

So VAC has rights to use the Marriott brand, VSN has the rights to use the Sheraton and Westin brands. Is there really a need to continue using the VSN name post merger regardless of how the systems operate going forward? 

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


----------



## VacationForever

gravitar said:


> So VAC has rights to use the Marriott brand, VSN has the rights to use the Sheraton and Westin brands. Is there really a need to continue using the VSN name post merger regardless of how the systems operate going forward?
> 
> Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


My speculation is that VSE (Vistana Signature Experience) will die.  In Marriott's press release, it mentioned Sheraton Vacation Club and Westin Vacation Club.


----------



## JohnPaul

TravelTime said:


> I would really like to see the timeshare rental business have more restrictions by the timeshare companies against purely commercial use.



Vacation Internationale (obviously a smaller player) put this to a vote of the owners (which are allowed to make changes like this) and the owners voted in a "no commercial use" rule.  I know they were having issues with renters but don't know how the new rule is working out in it's application.


----------



## taffy19

VacationForever said:


> My speculation is that VSE (Vistana Signature Experience) will die.  In Marriott's press release.,it mentioned Sheraton Vacation Club and Westin Vacation Club.


Where does Hyatt (Residence Club) fit in?


----------



## bizaro86

gravitar said:


> So VAC has rights to use the Marriott brand, VSN has the rights to use the Sheraton and Westin brands. Is there really a need to continue using the VSN name post merger regardless of how the systems operate going forward?
> 
> Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk



It depends whether they continue the staroption system or not. VSN is the abbreviation for Vistana Signature Network, which is the staroption trading system. Sheraton and Westin resorts do not necessarily come with access (I own a voluntary deed that doesn't get staroptions) so VSN will likely still exist, at least for awhile.


----------



## DannyTS

VacationForever said:


> My speculation is that VSE (Vistana Signature Experience) will die.  In Marriott's press release, it mentioned Sheraton Vacation Club and Westin Vacation Club.



I assume you are referring to the beginning of the press release:
"Global licensee of seven upper-upscale and luxury vacation brands including Marriott Vacation Club, Grand Residences by Marriott, Ritz-Carlton Destination Club, Sheraton Vacation Club, Westin Vacation Club, St. Regis Residence Club and Hyatt Residence Club"

IMHO Vistana was not mentioned at the beginning because it is not a top brand and because it would have diminished the message of that sentence (upper-upscale and luxury...) . You can randomly ask 30 people on the street, probably few if any know Vistana. As a matter of fact, most TUGgers do not even like the name and want back to Starwood.

However, Vistana was mentioned 7 times in the body of the press release so i do not read the tea leaves the same way as you.


----------



## VacationForever

DannyTS said:


> I assume you are referring to the beginning of the press release:
> "Global licensee of seven upper-upscale and luxury vacation brands including Marriott Vacation Club, Grand Residences by Marriott, Ritz-Carlton Destination Club, Sheraton Vacation Club, Westin Vacation Club, St. Regis Residence Club and Hyatt Residence Club"
> 
> IMHO Vistana was not mentioned at the beginning because it is not a top brand and because it would have diminished the message of that sentence (upper-upscale and luxury...) . You can randomly ask 30 people on the street, probably few if any know Vistana. As a matter of fact, most TUGgers do not even like the name and want back to Starwood.
> 
> However, Vistana was mentioned 7 times in the body of the press release so i do not read the tea leaves the same way as you.


VSE will no longer need to exist as a timeshare company.  Unlike II, II will survive as an exchange company.  VSE exists as a timeshare corporation because of the sale of Starwood timeshare company to ILG.  VSE as a company will cease to exist under VAC.


----------



## DannyTS

VacationForever said:


> VSE will no longer need to exist as a timeshare company.  Unlike II, II will survive as an exchange company.  VSE exists as a timeshare corporation because of the sale of Starwood timeshare company to ILG.  VSE as a company will cease to exist under VAC.


So what would the implications  be from a practical stand point for internal exchanges (SO, voluntary vs mandatory, developer vs retail etc)?


----------



## DeniseM

> So what would the implications be from a practical stand point for internal exchanges (SO, voluntary vs mandatory, developer vs retail etc)?



No one has any idea - this thread is fun, but it's pure speculation.

Two years ago, when ILG bought out Starwood and it became VSE, there was a lot of consternation among owners, but not a lot changed.  There was a money grab for confirmation fees, and IMNSHO, customer serviced deteriorated, but there were no  wholesale changes in the program.  So the definitive answer is:  *Who knows?*


----------



## TravelTime

I did not realize there were the two clubs mentioned in the press release: Grand Residences by Marriott and St Regus Residence Club. Does anyone know much about these clubs?


----------



## GregT

I know that Marriott has a Grand Residences in Tahoe where owners own a fractional - 13 weeks is what I have seen. 

Some of it has been deposited into the Trust and these weeks have also been a source of points for Mega-renters out there.  

I do not know about any other locations. 

Best,

Greg


----------



## bizaro86

St Regis has a fractional in Aspen, CO.

Vistana also had fractionals at the Phoenician, a luxury collection property. I haven't heard about them recently, so they may have sold that to the hotel ownerm


----------



## GregT

Do we know why Starwood took away the ability to reserve a week and then deposit it into II?

This will be another interesting thing to watch - if Marriott stays with their current approach (owner reserves a week and can deposit it) versus adopting Starwood’s approach - and perhaps Starwood could go back to the old way, since now there is an interest in strengthening II trade experience. 

Thoughts?  Thanks!

Best,

Greg


----------



## dioxide45

GregT said:


> Do we know why Starwood took away the ability to reserve a week and then deposit it into II?
> 
> This will be another interesting thing to watch - if Marriott stays with their current approach (owner reserves a week and can deposit it) versus adopting Starwood’s approach - and perhaps Starwood could go back to the old way, since now there is an interest in strengthening II trade experience.
> 
> Thoughts?  Thanks!
> 
> Best,
> 
> Greg


I certainly wasn't an owner when they took this option away, but it does seem to decrease demand for peak reservations just to deposit the unit in to II. I don't necessarily have a problem with it as it does open more of that peak inventory to owners, if that is actually who they would be providing it to instead of somehow skimming it for rental purposes.


----------



## dioxide45

VacationForever said:


> VSE will no longer need to exist as a timeshare company.  Unlike II, II will survive as an exchange company.  VSE exists as a timeshare corporation because of the sale of Starwood timeshare company to ILG.  VSE as a company will cease to exist under VAC.


We don't really know. VSE exists as a company under ILG right now. Marriott could keep VSE as a wholly owned subsidiary of the bigger corporation. There is really know telling how they will structure the combined corporation.


----------



## VacationForever

dioxide45 said:


> We don't really know. VSE exists as a company under ILG right now. Marriott could keep VSE as a wholly owned subsidiary of the bigger corporation. There is really know telling how they will structure the combined corporation.


True.  I am speculating, just like everyone else.


----------



## SMHarman

VacationForever said:


> VSE will no longer need to exist as a timeshare company.  Unlike II, II will survive as an exchange company.  VSE exists as a timeshare corporation because of the sale of Starwood timeshare company to ILG.  VSE as a company will cease to exist under VAC.


That could be an end state but near term / day one it will, it existed as Stanwoods Vacation Co before and will likely continue to after. To unwind it woukd involve novation lots if agreements etc and is likely not worth the legal headaches to remove one entity from the Corp structure.


----------



## VacationForever

taffy19 said:


> ..
> 
> Are you referring to this long thread here or the owner of II that happens to be ILG and they are the ones that voted for a "no commercial use" rule for the different timeshare developers that they now own but are now sold to Marriott?  What a plot and reads like a book.


Sorry, but I see no direct relevance of the other thread to the topic being discussed on this thread.


----------



## taffy19

VacationForever said:


> Sorry, but I see no direct relevance of the other thread to the topic being discussed on this thread.


You are right, VacationsForever so I am deleting my posts.


----------



## JohnPaul

As the plot of this thread weaved all over, someone commented that they wished timeshare companies would take a hard stance against "commcercial use".  I responded to that comment that one (small) company had done so.  No that company (Vacation Internationale) has nothing to do with Vistana or Marriott Vacation Club except that they are in the same business.


----------



## taffy19

JohnPaul said:


> As the plot of this thread weaved all over, someone commented that they wished timeshare companies would take a hard stance against "commcercial use".  I responded to that comment that one (small) company had done so.  No that company (Vacation Internationale) has nothing to do with Vistana or Marriott Vacation Club except that they are in the same business.


I deleted my posts because I confused you with another John who posted in another thread about the owners voting, etc.  Speculation may be fun but I don't like the changes that are taking place in this industry.  Where will the competition be and what more restrictions can they pose on us to their advantage?


----------



## JIMinNC

I listened to the Marriott Vacations Worldwide 1Q 2018 earnings conference call recording (from last week) that is archived on their Investor web page. There were a few tidbits on their thinking on the VAC/ILG merger integration. I posted a transcript of those relevant comments and replies to questions from analysts in this thread on the Marriott Forum:

https://tugbbs.com/forums/index.php...l-leisure-group-ilg-discussion.273384/page-11

It is in post #257. I thought it better to post the link and direct readers/comments there rather than reposting the long text here. But I think VSE owners may find it just as interesting as MVC owners.


----------

