# Definitive (I believe) answers to some important points program questions



## Dave M (Jun 29, 2010)

*Updated as of 10:00 a.m. EDT June 30, 2010*

Earlier today (June 29) I had a conversation with a high-ranking and knowledgeable corporate officer regarding some questions that either have not had good answers here or that I missed or that are still being responded to incorrectly by posters on this forum.

I submitted some questions in writing last Thursday and added some more over the weekend. Customer Advocacy assigned a specific officer to discuss the questions with me, knowing of my involvement here on the Marriott forum and approving publication here of the responses. If I get any of what he said wrong, I'm sure he will correct me. However, I have a lot of confidence in his answers.

Further, I can have further dialogue with this individual as appropriate. I promised that I would not bother him with every question posed here on TUG, especially where it appears that there aren't perfect answers (e.g., Why are more points required to reserve a week at my resort than what I received?) or where the questions have already been adequately answered on this forum.

*If I get more info, I will edit this initial post, either adding to the Q&A here or linking to other threads. This thread does not take the place of what eventually will be a guide to the new program in the FAQs for this forum.* 

With that intro, here goes (The response wording  is mine.):

*Who will pay for additional housekeeping and any other new expenses at my home resort that are necessitated by the new points program (e.g., for short stays)?*

Marriott response: An amount (not disclosed to me) for such expenses has been built into the $.40 MF per point that new points owners will pay. It's not clear what the amount of such additional expense will be. It depends on how many short stays there are, whether the rest of those weeks go unused or are used for other short stays, etc. In some cases, expenses might actually go down because a resort might be able to get by with fewer housekeeping personnel, some of whom work all week instead of only on weekends. The resort will be responsible for calculating and presenting to the administrators of the points trust the amount that the resort is owed. If you attend an HOA board or annual meeting in early 2012 or later, feel free to ask how your resort is affected. 

*If I Enroll my week(s) in the new program, will I have direct online access to II, just as I now do?*

Marriott's response: Yes, yes, yes. You will be able to search for available II inventory even though you have an ongoing exchange request in place. You will also be able to search for Flexchange opportunities, just as you do now. Marriott is committed to giving current owners the same opportunities they have now. However, if you are concerned about the accuracy of that promise, simply keep your current II account until you are sure.

*Edited to add: Unfortunately, Marriott did not anticipate the demand that we have for seeing available inventory online when  using one of the new II accounts. Thus, they are scurrying to fix their software so that they can fulfill the commitment to give us that online access. It will happen.*

*Will II's Comparable Exchange methodology apply to Marriott's requests to confirm exchanges through II for points owners, just as it does to us as existing weeks owners?* 

Marriott's response: Yes. II is a separate profit-making company and is not owned by Marriott. Marriott has no contract with II that would give Marriott the right to "raid" weeks in II inventory (Dave M note: as has been postulated by many here on TUG). Instead, Marriott will be requesting exchanges, just as we do. Marriott will have to offer "Comparable Exchange" weeks to get what it wants. If Marriott offers II too many top weeks to get so-so weeks in exchange, it will be impossible for Marriott to adequately serve its points owners. 

Additionally, note that if Marriott wants a week from II, it will give II one in exchange. So if one week isn't there for us to exchange into, another “comparable” one will be.

There might actually be more II inventory eventually. With the non-resort stay options (e.g., cruises and Explorer program) offered in exchange for points, there may be more weeks in the trust that stay in Marriott’s hands and go unused. Certainly, Marriott can rent some of them. But as anyone who has been rejected by Marriott's rental program can infer, Marriott will have excess weeks that it will deposit into II. Those weeks are in addition to the weeks Marriott will deposit to get its exchanges for points owners. 

*There is conflicting wording in the various documents on the website regarding whether current owners will pay II fees if they enroll in the points program. Would you please clarify?*

Marriott's response: There is some language in the II Buyers Guide (for Enrolled Owners) that erroneously states that Enrolled Owners will pay $109 for an internal Marriott-to-Marriott exchange. That wording will be corrected.

Bottom line? If you enroll, you will still pay fees for non-Marriott exchanges, but not for Marriott-to-Marriott exchanges where the only requested resorts are Marriotts.

*Will Enrolled Owners still be entitled to Accommodation Certificates when depositing a week that II wants? Also, will exchangers still enjoy the Marriott 24-day internal exchange priority? *

Marriott's response: Yes to both  questions. II will still need those prime weeks. Thus, it's up to II as to which weeks it will offer an AC for or whether it will offer 2-for-1 or other specials. No change to the Marriott internal priority rules.

As a footnote, there are a ton of owners who don't want to have to deal with II, in part because they don't know how to use II effectively. We know this from the many posts here at TUG on that topic. Those people, as Enrolled Owners, can now use an Owner Services rep to handle everything and might not get an AC. We know to wait until II offers an AC before depositing, so we can still "work" the system.

* As an Enrolled Owner, will I still have the same 13-month access to multiple week (concurrent or consecutive weeks) reservations that I do now?*

Marriott's response: Yes. Further, the available inventory at 13 months for all who seek to reserve (including Marriott on behalf of points owners) will still be limited to 50% of the weeks available at a resort for any single week of the year. Thus, at least 50% of weeks will still be available at 12 months. 

*Edited to note that reserving a week should be as easy for us as in the past. Just as in the past, Marriott (and now points purchasers) will have the ability to reserve weeks that Marriott owns and puts into the points trust and weeks given up by those who trade for Marriott Rewards points. In addition, those current weeks' owners who enroll and trade their weeks for points give Marriott / points owners another shot at reserving weeks. However the total number of weeks that points owners can reserve is limited to those categories, unless I have missed one. There will be enough weeks available in our seasons for all weeks owners to reserve a week.*

*Also, see posts #60 and #61 in this thread for a more detailed explanation of my view of why we should generally have the same success in trying to resereve weeks at our home resorts as we do now.*

There are various scenarios under which there could be more inventory available at 13 months and 12 months than there is now. Some of these scenarios have been discussed in other threads, but they include the point that it takes a lot of points (did I say skimming?) to reserve a prime week.

*Can a points purchaser rent weeks obtained with point?*

Marriott's response: Casual rentals by a points owner will be allowed. The language in the documents that prohibits commercial activity is to prevent the type of activity that often happens currently with owners of multiple weeks whereby they call in at 13 months, reserve many of the best weeks and then put them up for rent as a commercial enterprise. 

Note: Whether rentals constitute commercial activity will be decided on a case by case basis. But renting a week or two will definitely not be a problem.

*    *    *    *    *

As stated above, I will edit this post and add to the thread as appropriate.

*See posts #45, 60 and 61 in this thread for my latest follow-up and for my responses to a few questions posed later in this thread.*


----------



## qlaval (Jun 29, 2010)

Thank you very much Dave for these "directly from the Marriott's mouth" answers...


----------



## ccpinternational (Jun 29, 2010)

Thanks Dave!

Finally........


----------



## rdh1947 (Jun 29, 2010)

Thanks greatly!


----------



## Darlene (Jun 29, 2010)

Very interesting. Thanks, Dave


----------



## BocaBum99 (Jun 29, 2010)

Thanks Dave.  Good job.  It's good to get specific answers to questions where we can get them.

The only thing I would question is whether or not Marriott is treated just like another owner for exchange purposes. I seriously doubt that Marriott will just be given an account where they place requests based on deposits.  At a minimum, they won't be receiving ACs for deposits.  That in itself is a difference.

More likely, there will be exchange departments who contact each other to compare lists of exchange requests and make trades based on a table of pre-determined like kind exchanges.

In any such arrangement, they may do it once per day to fulfill requests.  My guess is it happens prior to general release of inventory by II into the system for exchange to maximize internal exchanges prior to external exchanges.


----------



## vincenzi (Jun 29, 2010)

Dave,

Thank you very much!


----------



## hotcoffee (Jun 29, 2010)

BocaBum99 said:


> Thanks Dave.  Good job.  It's good to get specific answers to questions where we can get them.
> 
> The only thing I would question is whether or not Marriott is treated just like another owner for exchange purposes. I seriously doubt that Marriott will just be given an account where they place requests based on deposits.  At a minimum, they won't be receiving ACs for deposits.  That in itself is a difference.
> 
> ...



I think it is possible that Marriott is saying what they have to say.  They could not admit to any priority within II.  However, not having any internal priority is still not a disadvantage in any way for points exchangers.  That just puts them on an equal footing with everyone else.  For the weeks exchangers, II is the only game in town. (I'm discounting other exchanging methods here because I assume a points exchangers could also take advantage of them.)  But, for the points exchangers, they have the Trust inventory, the MRP exchange inventory, and the points-exchanged inventory from which to fulfill their request.  That is why I am planning to capitulate to what I see as the inevitable advantage of points exchanging.


----------



## dualrated2 (Jun 29, 2010)

Excellent. Now maybe some of the hysteria will subside. Thank you.


----------



## JimIg23 (Jun 29, 2010)

Thanks Dave.


----------



## hipslo (Jun 29, 2010)

Dave M said:


> * As an Enrolled Owner, will I still have the same 13-month access to multiple week (concurrent or consecutive weeks) reservations that I do now?*
> 
> Marriott's response: Yes. Further, the available inventory at 13 months for all who seek to reserve (including Marriott on behalf of points owners) will still be limited to 50% of the weeks available at a resort for any single week of the year. Thus, at least 50% of weeks will still be available at 12 months.



Thanks so much Dave for posting, this is extremely helpful.

One question - the response as stated above suggests to me that, at 13 months, multiple weeks owners will be in direct, head to head competion with all premiere and premiere plus owners who seek to reserve prime weeks at 13 months, for the 50% of the inventory for each week that will be made available at 13 months, and that there will not be separate "pools" allocated to weeks and points owners at 13 months.  Is that your understanding, or am I reading too much into the wording of the response?


----------



## RedDogSD (Jun 29, 2010)

Thanks Dave.  It is nice to know that some of my theories were correct.


----------



## JimIg23 (Jun 29, 2010)

hipslo said:


> Thanks so much Dave for posting, this is extremely helpful.
> 
> One question - the response as stated above suggests to me that, at 13 months, multiple weeks owners will be in direct, head to head competion with all premiere and premiere plus owners who seek to reserve prime weeks at 13 months, for the 50% of the inventory for each week that will be made available at 13 months, and that there will not be separate "pools" allocated to weeks and points owners at 13 months.  Is that your understanding, or am I reading too much into the wording of the response?



I could see you asking that to a Marriott Rep that just learned the program in three days, their head would be spinning!     We probably know more about the program than 75% of the staff,,,,


----------



## billymach4 (Jun 29, 2010)

Well Done. 

Thanks to Dave, and Marriott Corp Exec for taking the time to iron out some of the details. 

By the way. 

It is my sincere belief that Marriott should reach out directly to this community. This method of communication is free to Marriott and Priceless to us Tuggers!


----------



## GregT (Jun 29, 2010)

Dave, thank you for the information, it is greatly appreciated.

Was there any perspective on the Bid/Ask spread and if there was a different way to view it than as a points skim?

Thanks very much,

Greg


----------



## hotcoffee (Jun 29, 2010)

Deleted post


----------



## LAX Mom (Jun 29, 2010)

Thanks Dave. The information you posted is very helpful. 

I do have an additional question which I've asked Marriott reps in several phone calls. They did not know an answer to this:

We all know that resale weeks sold after June 20, 2010 cannot enroll in the points system. But what about resale points? If an individual purchases points from another individual do those resale points participate in the Marriott points program? If not, what can you do with your points should you decide you don't want them anymore?


----------



## 5infam (Jun 29, 2010)

Thank you so much Dave - this clears some things up for me that were definitely in question. 

Assuming all is correct, I still have a concern about having to battle Marriott for booking my regular week. As it stands now, I am technically up against all owners at my resort who own my season and unit size and view, for prime weeks. This system opens it up to points people as well who do not own there (say at the 13 month window or 12 month window) that I now have to compete with. As I book today, I get up and log on at 6:00am Pacific time, and make my reservation as fast as I can - knowing others may sleep in or log on after me etc. - which I am basically saying it is up to individual people to reserve their weeks. How will Marriott gain access to the same reservation system? Is it automated based on requests they put into the system prior to the 13 or 12 month window? If it is, then I may have no shot at a prime week, sometime in the future when there are enough points owners. Dave, if you can find this out, that would be great.

If I am wrong with my assumptions and this is a non-issue, then by all means let me know that too.

Thanks!!


----------



## urple2 (Jun 29, 2010)

Thanks Dave for posting that info.

For many of us,not belonging to points may be the way to go. Especially, single resort owners or those that their point values appear ridiculous.

At this point, the only benefit I'm seeing ( so far ) would be to join points to leave the door open to purchase points on the resale market that could be added to my points account.

Have you heard anything about the resale of points?


----------



## m61376 (Jun 29, 2010)

I would actually appreciate a little more definitive answer to reserving priorities. I also have been told what you were about the 50% 13 month/50% 12 month. While alluded to perhaps no one has definitively stated that points owners would only have access to the proportion of points or weeks converted to points for that year in the trust and week owners to the percentage of week ownership being used that year divided evenly among every reservation period (week/arrival dates). I would like it confirmed that each group would only have access to their fair share percentage of each week/arrival date, so that week owners would not be competing with point owners for premium weeks and home resort priority would be kept intact for week owners.


----------



## mas (Jun 29, 2010)

Thanks Dave, this kind of info is invaluable in the decision making process.

I think someone alluded to this above, but could you inquire with your source as to the possibility of having some sort of Marriott Concierge, similar to what Andrew offers on flyertalk?


----------



## IngridN (Jun 29, 2010)

m61376 said:


> I would actually appreciate a little more definitive answer to reserving priorities. I also have been told what you were about the 50% 13 month/50% 12 month. While alluded to perhaps no one has definitively stated that points owners would only have access to the proportion of points or weeks converted to points for that year in the trust and week owners to the percentage of week ownership being used that year divided evenly among every reservation period (week/arrival dates). I would like it confirmed that each group would only have access to their fair share percentage of each week/arrival date, so that week owners would not be competing with point owners for premium weeks and home resort priority would be kept intact for week owners.



This also jumped out at me. I am in the process of finalizing a resale of Aruba Surf Club Oceanfront. While the Surf Club is not sold out with available Marriott inventory for the points program, the Oceanfront view is sold out in all seasons. If points can compete with me at the 13 or 12 month mark when no one has relinquished their week for points, I would have a huge problem with that because conceivably, I would never be able to reserve a week in my season.

Ingrid


----------



## hotcoffee (Jun 29, 2010)

GregT said:


> Dave, thank you for the information, it is greatly appreciated.
> 
> Was there any perspective on the Bid/Ask spread and if there was a different way to view it than as a points skim?
> 
> ...



The Marriott rep with whom I have been talking is claiming that the difference was implemented to protect owners' rights.  The logic: since existing owners will not use points to reserve, there will be less exchangers able to compete for the prime weeks due to their not having enough points. (Apparently, they are assuming that most enrollees will not purchase additional points.)


----------



## billymach4 (Jun 29, 2010)

mas said:


> Thanks Dave, this kind of info is invaluable in the decision making process.
> 
> I think someone alluded to this above, but could you inquire with your source as to the possibility of having some sort of Marriott Concierge, similar to what Andrew offers on flyertalk?




Yes I am the someone. I agree that we should have a direct Marriott Presence here just like the FT people have.


----------



## hotcoffee (Jun 29, 2010)

IngridN said:


> This also jumped out at me. I am in the process of finalizing a resale of Aruba Surf Club Oceanfront. While the Surf Club is not sold out with available Marriott inventory for the points program, the Oceanfront view is sold out in all seasons. If points can compete with me at the 13 or 12 month mark when no one has relinquished their week for points, I would have a huge problem with that because conceivably, I would never be able to reserve a week in my season.
> 
> Ingrid



I don't think you would have anything to worry about here, Ingrid, because the only way for points exchangers to get an OF week (since they are sold out) would be for one to be exchanged (either through points exchanges or II exchanges).  They cannot have more people competing than there are weeks.  That would deny a deeded owner his right to use his week.


----------



## BocaBoy (Jun 29, 2010)

*Must Relinquish Weeks at Sold Out Resorts or No Points Availability*

If no one has relinquished a week for points in your season at a sold out resort, there can be no inventory for points users.  It is as simple as that.


----------



## dioxide45 (Jun 29, 2010)

BocaBoy said:


> If no one has relinquished a week for points in your season at a sold out resort, there can be no inventory for points users.  It is as simple as that.



Not true. Once a week at a sold out resort is deposited in to II, Marriott can utilize that week for points exchangers.


----------



## m61376 (Jun 29, 2010)

BocaBum99 said:


> Thanks Dave.  Good job.  It's good to get specific answers to questions where we can get them.
> 
> The only thing I would question is whether or not Marriott is treated just like another owner for exchange purposes. I seriously doubt that Marriott will just be given an account where they place requests based on deposits.  At a minimum, they won't be receiving ACs for deposits.  That in itself is a difference.
> 
> ...



Actually, that's what has me wary. Marriott justifies the point spread and contends that current owners really needn't be concerned with their point allocation because they can still work in the weeks system, and that business will go on as usual. The benefit is they can have a single fee and the option for flexibility, albeit at a higher cost, and of course to those once in a lifetime packages. The contention is that Marriott will be a trader like everyone else, and that they will have to offer something comparable if they fill a point request with a deposited week. However, while they took umbrage at my suggestion that "comparable" could be multiple weeks, the sum of whose point values equal the week taken, I was not given confirmation that a singular week of equal value would, in fact, replace the week taken. 

My concern is that, despite all the assurances that Marriott will do what's best for its customers and that this program is only an enhancement and nothing changes within our current ownership, that the exchange environment will change over time with the points program. The change may be gradual, but  I'm a bit skeptical when I'm told "nothing changes.- do what you've always done."


----------



## Tommy_Boy (Jun 29, 2010)

*WOW*

WOW, my resale purchase of a Aruba Surf Club Oceanside just closed, and I got my Marriott Ownership Certificate in the mail last week.  After reading the post below, I SPRINTED downstairs to check on the date, terrified that they delayed my closing until after June 20th.  It is dated June 17!!!! Whew!  To be honest, I haven't the foggiest idea whether we will opt into this point system, I need to understand it alot better....but at least I have the option!



LAX Mom said:


> Thanks Dave. The information you posted is very helpful.
> 
> I do have an additional question which I've asked Marriott reps in several phone calls. They did not know an answer to this:
> 
> We all know that resale weeks sold after June 20, 2010 cannot enroll in the points system. But what about resale points? If an individual purchases points from another individual do those resale points participate in the Marriott points program? If not, what can you do with your points should you decide you don't want them anymore?


----------



## hipslo (Jun 29, 2010)

BocaBoy said:


> If no one has relinquished a week for points in your season at a sold out resort, there can be no inventory for points users.  It is as simple as that.



This is not an answer to the question of how the "prime" weeks are allocated between weeks and points inventory, assuming some weeks owners in the season in question do in fact give up their week for points, which is a very imporant question. So, it isnt "as simple as that", actually. 

Prime weeks could be allocated purely first come/ first serve, they could be allocated on a pro rata basis between weeks and points, or perhaps in some other manner.  This is a critical question.


----------



## hipslo (Jun 29, 2010)

JimIg23 said:


> I could see you asking that to a Marriott Rep that just learned the program in three days, their head would be spinning!     We probably know more about the program than 75% of the staff,,,,



I have asked that question of several reps already, have received all sorts of different answers, and do not think that any of them really even understand the question.  But it is a very important question.


----------



## hotcoffee (Jun 29, 2010)

dioxide45 said:


> Not true. Once a week at a sold out resort is deposited in to II, Marriott can utilize that week for points exchangers.



I don't think he was referring to exchanged inventory.  There can be a lot of points exchangers competing for prime weeks via exchanges, but the total number of OF weeks cannot be less than the total number of people competing for them.


----------



## ilene13 (Jun 29, 2010)

hipslo said:


> Thanks so much Dave for posting, this is extremely helpful.
> 
> One question - the response as stated above suggests to me that, at 13 months, multiple weeks owners will be in direct, head to head competion with all premiere and premiere plus owners who seek to reserve prime weeks at 13 months, for the 50% of the inventory for each week that will be made available at 13 months, and that there will not be separate "pools" allocated to weeks and points owners at 13 months.  Is that your understanding, or am I reading too much into the wording of the response?



Thank you Dave.  The quote from HIPSLO is my biggest concern.  I own 3 platinum 1 bedroom units at the Aruba Ocean Club.  I usually get weeks 50-52, sometimes trading the week 50 for a concurrent week 52 (for my adult children).  I hope i do not have to compete with point owners.  Most Marriott reps have told me that there will be 2 diferent pools.  This whole thing makes me nervous!!!


----------



## dioxide45 (Jun 29, 2010)

ilene13 said:


> Thank you Dave.  The quote from HIPSLO is my biggest concern.  I own 3 platinum 1 bedroom units at the Aruba Ocean Club.  I usually get weeks 50-52, sometimes trading the week 50 for a concurrent week 52 (for my adult children).  I hope i do not have to compete with point owners.  Most Marriott reps have told me that there will be 2 diferent pools.  This whole thing makes me nervous!!!



There are different pools but not the way you are thinking. A points exchanger or points owner can not reserve in to a specific resort/view/season unless Marriott holds some inventory for that resort/season/view. If points inventory exists and then it is exhausted then no further points reservations can be made.

If there are 10 villas in an OF view at resort X for week 52 during platinum season and Marriott has 50 platinum OF weeks in it's inventory, then you could conceivably be competing against 50 people. But these people just replaced owners that could have reserved the same time. Those 50 people are out of the picture because they gave up their week for points to go somewhere else.

In the end there is a finite number of people you can possibly compete with, that number doesn't increase with new points owners. There is only a finite number of weeks at any resort.


----------



## hotcoffee (Jun 29, 2010)

ilene13 said:


> Thank you Dave.  The quote from HIPSLO is my biggest concern.  I own 3 platinum 1 bedroom units at the Aruba Ocean Club.  I usually get weeks 50-52, sometimes trading the week 50 for a concurrent week 52 (for my adult children).  I hope i do not have to compete with point owners.  Most Marriott reps have told me that there will be 2 diferent pools.  This whole thing makes me nervous!!!



I must be missing something.  I cannot figure out what all of this concern is about.  You will have to compete with exchangers of both types.  But, I cannot believe that Marriott will give priority to points exchangers.  They might at best have equal footing on a first-come, first serve basis (except, of course, premier exchangers).


----------



## ilene13 (Jun 29, 2010)

hotcoffee said:


> I must be missing something.  I cannot figure out what all of this concern is about.  You will have to compete with exchangers of both types.  But, I cannot believe that Marriott will give priority to points exchangers.  They might at best have equal footing on a first-come, first serve basis (except, of course, premier exchangers).



The concern is that I do not want to compete with exchangers at all.  Prior to this nonsense I only competed with other owners who could book 13 months out.  I do not want to exchange.  I think my saving grace is that the Aruba Ocean Club is sold out.


----------



## hipslo (Jun 29, 2010)

dioxide45 said:


> There are different pools but not the way you are thinking. A points exchanger or points owner can not reserve in to a specific resort/view/season unless Marriott holds some inventory for that resort/season/view. If points inventory exists and then it is exhausted then no further points reservations can be made.
> 
> If there are 10 villas in an OF view at resort X for week 52 during platinum season and Marriott has 50 platinum OF weeks in it's inventory, then you could conceivably be competing against 50 people. But these people just replaced owners that could have reserved the same time. Those 50 people are out of the picture because they gave up their week for points to go somewhere else.
> 
> In the end there is a finite number of people you can possibly compete with, that number doesn't increase with new points owners. There is only a finite number of weeks at any resort.



I don't agree.  Let me give you an example that illustrates my concern.  I think a lot of people are missing this issue.  

At Mountainside there are 200 villas.  Lets say there are 18 weeks in platinum season (I didnt bother to count, but I think that is close).  So there are a total of 3600 platinum weeks at the resort.  

For the sake of argument, lets say that the four weeks from mid february through mid march are the most desireable weeks.  There are a total of 800 villas available during those four prime weeks.  That represents approximately 22 percent of the total platinum season inventory.

Half of those 800 units, or 400 units, are made available to multiple week owners at 13 months.  Under the current system, a multiple week owner who calls in at 13 months is competing ONLY against other multiple week owners for those 400 units.  Again, for the sake of argument, lets say that there are only 200 folks who are multiple week owners at Mountainside, all of whom own 2 weeks at Mountainside.  In my example, ALL 200 of those multiple week owenrs will be able to reserve two weeks (400 weeks total) during one of the four prime weeks betwen mid february and mid march at 13 months.

Now, let's assume that of the 3600 platinum units at Mountainside, 500 owners decide to turn their units in for points in a given year.  That represents only approximately 14 percent of all platinum units at Mountainside.  Let's assume further that everyone who turned in a week is a single week owner.  As a result, there are now a total of 500 platinum units at Mountainside available to reserve using points.  

ANY points owner who wants to reserve one of the prime weeks at Mountainside will be eligible to do so at 13 months, since it takes 6900 points to reserve one of those weeks at Mountainside, and anyone with that many points would qualify for premiere status (ignoring banking and borrowing for the moment).  

So, if ANYWHERE within the entire marriott system (of 400,000 owners!!!!) there are 500 points owners with at least 6900 points who desire to reserve one of the prime weeks at Mountainside, they can do so at 13 months, and they would be competing with the 400 multiple week owners at Mountainside, at 13 months, for the same inventory.

If inventory is allocated between weeks and points on a first come, first serve basis, then points owners could conceivably take ALL of the prime reservations otherwise available at 13 months to multiple weeks owners.  Maybe they get less than all, but they certainly get some.  On an even, head to head competition, if they were all to go for the prime weeks, points owners would likely get 5/9, and weeks owners would likey get 4/9, since that is how the number of owners eligible to reserve the units at 13 months is distributed.

The above would be true despite the fact that only 14% of platinum season units at Mountainside were in the points pool, if there is not a pro rata allocation of inventory between weeks and points for every single week in the platinum season, on a week by week basis. If there was a pro rata allocation, then 86% of the prime weeks, or 344 units, would remain available to multiple week owners who have not converted to points, and only 56 units would be available to points owners.  This would be fairer than a pure first come/ first serve allocation, but even a week by week pro rata allocation puts multiple week owners at a disadvantage compared to where they are currently, unless ALL of the folks who have converted to points are multiple week owners.  

If the only folks who turn their weeks in for points are single week owners, then there are STILL 400 multiple week owners who have not turned their weeks in for points, and they still would like to reserve one of the 400 prime weeks, but they are now competing against points owners, who are entitled to make 500 reservations at Mountainside in platinum season, which is more than the total number of prime weeks released at 13 months.

I hope that was clear.  Those of you who say that this is a non issue are, I believe, missing a critical point.


----------



## BocaBum99 (Jun 29, 2010)

hipslo said:


> I don't agree.  Let me give you an example that illustrates my concern.  I think a lot of people are missing this issue.
> 
> At Mountainside there are 200 villas.  Lets say there are 18 weeks in platinum season (I didnt bother to count, but I think that is close).  So there are a total of 3600 platinum weeks at the resort.
> 
> ...



I think there will be increased competition for prime weeks. I also believe that the number of slots competing for those slots will remain the same, but the intensity of competition will be fierce and those with Marriott on its side (ie points owners) will have an advantage.

I don't believe there will be equal or less competition.

Someone is going to lose.  It will either be fixed/floating week owners or point owners.  But make no mistake about it, someone is going to lose.


----------



## hipslo (Jun 29, 2010)

BocaBum99 said:


> I think there will be increased competition for prime weeks. I also believe that the number of slots competing for those slots will remain the same, but the intensity of competition will be fierce and those with Marriott on its side (ie points owners) will have an advantage.
> 
> I don't believe there will be equal or less competition.
> 
> Someone is going to lose.  It will either be fixed/floating week owners or point owners.  But make no mistake about it, someone is going to lose.



I agree, although I don't see how fixed week owners could lose, as they are guaranteed their fixed week, if they want it.


----------



## seatrout (Jun 29, 2010)

Hipslo,  why all the fear??

Points owner can only book at 13 months ahead.  As a several weeks owner, you have always booked earlier than the 13 months out and thus are always ahead of the line.  So there is really no worries. 

As a Hyatt owner with experience with points, I welcome the points as a secondary options.  Internal reservations with existing inventory are always easier than trading the peak time with II.


----------



## Cathyb (Jun 29, 2010)

*Every other year questions for Marriott*



Dave M said:


> Earlier today I had a conversation with a high-ranking and knowledgeable  corporate officer regarding some questions that either have not had good answers here or that I missed or that are still being responded to incorrectly by posters on this forum.
> 
> I submitted some questions in writing last Thursday and added some more over the weekend. Customer Advocacy assigned a specific officer to discuss the questions with me, knowing of my involvement here on the Marriott forum and approving publication here of the responses. If I get any of what he said wrong, I'm sure he will correct me. However, I have a lot of confidence in his answers.
> 
> ...



Dave:  Could you get them to clarify what fees/expenses Every Other Year owners would have and if they pay them in the year they are able to use their unit or have to pay some of them annually?  Thank you!


----------



## dioxide45 (Jun 29, 2010)

Cathyb said:


> Dave:  Could you get them to clarify what fees/expenses Every Other Year owners would have and if they pay them in the year they are able to use their unit or have to pay some of them annually?  Thank you!



It is my understanding that the annual fee of $169 or $199 is due annually regardless if you own an every year or every other year. This is because you will be able to take advantage of the program on an annual basis bu banking or borrowing points.


----------



## hipslo (Jun 29, 2010)

seatrout said:


> Hipslo,  why all the fear??
> 
> Points owner can only book at 13 months ahead.  As a several weeks owner, you have always booked earlier than the 13 months out and thus are always ahead of the line.  So there is really no worries.
> 
> As a Hyatt owner with experience with points, I welcome the points as a secondary options.  Internal reservations with existing inventory are always easier than trading the peak time with II.



Well, points owners can also book ahead of the 13 month window using the same techniques that we use currently in weeks.  If the playing field is somehow slanted in favor of points, I am concerned about the ever increasing costs to always be at the front of the line, especially given the "skim". 

Bottom line, I bought multiple weeks specifically to ensure my ability to reserve the weeks I need.  Anything that potentially impinges on my ability to do that causes me great concern.

If my fears are groundless, that would be great.  I suppose only time will tell.


----------



## seatrout (Jun 29, 2010)

did not get the PM. 

I think you will be OK.  It is not very cost effective to use points and string reservation  as we have done in the past.-- as  there is a large increase in point costs compared to point that was given for the weeks.  

The true demand is difficult to tell:  yes there is now the 13 months point owner reservation.  There is also a lesser demand for owner to reserve "prime" week to deposit for "trading  power" as points are points.  The need for multi-week owner to battle us to reserve our prime ski week to rent may also decrease as owner may deposit the points  to go elsewhere

I do think that it is now much easier for us to go to the newer resort "trust owned" during peak time.


----------



## Dave M (Jun 29, 2010)

I have a correction to my initial post, which I am making, and I'll try to respond to as many questions as practical.

*Correction*
I omitted (thanks, m61376) a critical piece of info related to *our ability to have online access to II* if be enroll and roll our existing II account into a new Enrollee II account. Marriott did not anticipate how important it is for us to have the online access that we need for searches. Thus, they are scurrying to fix it so that we will have access. What happened is that, in training, reps were told "no online access". It quickly became evident that it was a mistake to not provide it. So it's being fixed but, apparently, not all reps have the correct info.

*Responses to questions posed in this thread*
As I implied in my O.P. I won't be able to address questions for which there is no answer (e.g., Do you think Marriott will play fair?).





> the response as stated above suggests to me that ... there will not be separate "pools" allocated to weeks and points owners at 13 months. Is that your understanding, or am I reading too much into the wording of the response?


Whether it's actually a separate pool or not, I don't know for sure. However, I do know that Marriott is committed to ensuring that every weeks owner is able to reserve a week within their season. Thus, the only weeks at our home resorts that will be available to points owners to reserve at 13 and 12 months will be Marriott-owned weeks, weeks traded for Marriott Rewards points and weeks traded for points by Enrolled owners. I have spent enough time discussing this point that it doesn't worry me as to whether I will be able to reserve a week as easily as I have in the past. Stated another way, BocaBoy's comment above was directly on point: "If no one has relinquished a week for points in your season at a sold out resort, there can be no inventory for points users. It is as simple as that."





> I think someone alluded to this above, but could you inquire with your source as to the possibility of having some sort of Marriott Concierge, similar to what Andrew offers on Flyertalk?


That's what Owner Services reps are for. We are very, very small potatoes compared with FlyerTalk, especially since this site is primarily about timeshares and the FlyerTalk Marriott forum is about all of Marriott, but especially about the bigger picture - hotels! No concierge here.

*    *    *    *

Other questions have been appropriately answered herein or do not have answers as far as I know.


----------



## scrapngen (Jun 30, 2010)

Thanks, Dave, for getting some clarity for all of us!!


----------



## Luckybee (Jun 30, 2010)

hipslo said:


> Well, points owners can also book ahead of the 13 month window using the same techniques that we use currently in weeks.  If the playing field is somehow slanted in favor of points, I am concerned about the ever increasing costs to always be at the front of the line, especially given the "skim".
> 
> Bottom line, I bought multiple weeks specifically to ensure my ability to reserve the weeks I need.  Anything that potentially impinges on my ability to do that causes me great concern.
> 
> If my fears are groundless, that would be great.  I suppose only time will tell.



Isnt it also correct that the 13 month point owners have a 2 day advantage from looking at the charts at a number of resorts . As i saw it point inventory would open on a Tues...whereas weeks on a Thurs?


----------



## mightywyrm (Jun 30, 2010)

> Will II's Comparable Exchange methodology apply to Marriott's requests to confirm exchanges through II for points owners, just as it does to us as existing weeks owners?
> 
> Marriott's response: Yes. II is a separate profit-making company and is not owned by Marriott. Marriott has no contract with II that would give Marriott the right to "raid" weeks in II inventory (Dave M note: as has been postulated by many here on TUG). Instead, Marriott will be requesting exchanges, just as we do. Marriott will have to offer "Comparable Exchange" weeks to get what it wants. If Marriott offers II too many top weeks to get so-so weeks in exchange, it will be impossible for Marriott to adequately serve its points owners.
> 
> ...



Maybe this is much ado about nothing, at least right now.  However, like others here, I'm still VERY skeptical that Marriott is papering over the mechanisms it has put in place to ensure it can harvest weeks for its managed resorts that are deposited into II.  

As m61376 stated:
The contention is that Marriott will be a trader like everyone else, and that they will have to offer something comparable if they fill a point request with a deposited week. However, while they took umbrage at my suggestion that "comparable" could be multiple weeks, the sum of whose point values equal the week taken, I was not given confirmation that a singular week of equal value would, in fact, replace the week taken.​
I understand why a Marriott rep might not like the term "raid", and that as of the date of this response Marriott doesn't have contract with II that would allow whatever he means by that term.  That's a far cry from the allaying our concerns, however.  

Marriott is suggesting that everyone will be happy, but this points trust doesn't even own any inventory at almost 80% of Marriott resorts (meaning they will rely heavily on trading within II).  At the same time they're assuring 400K existing owners (who own all this inventory), that there's nothing to worry about:  Marriott won't cut in line, and it will pay for every premium week it obtains with one (1) equally valuable week.

_"Marriott will be requesting exchanges, just as we do."_  Really?  Hmmm...  I don't think that means what you think it means.  I could tell you that, "I play basketball, just like Michael Jordan."  Does this statement by me assert that MJ and I are equals?  Not really...

So how does their exchange request process differ from that which they require us to use?  


Will Marriott's deposit-first requests be subject to the same trading power requirements as the rest of us?  (Not that we have access to trading power assignments, mind you.)
For inventory the trust actually owns, does Marriott construe the trust's ownership of thousands of weeks to mean that it can stack consecutive weeks as far ahead of the 13 month limitation as need be, guaranteeing advance booking up to the 50% limit at 13 months?
Does Marriott have to supply it's comparable trade weeks at the time it withdraws them, or does it have a period of time to replenish the supply in "batch mode"? (I ask because this could mean that supplies are limited early in the year, and surpluses occur late in the year, or somesuch.)

Marriott and II greatly depend on each other.  Bearing in mind that Marriott was (is?) an investor in II, considering the level of integration among their business processes, it's tough to simply accept a reiteration that there's nothing to worry about and just blindly sign on the line which is dotted.

I'd really like to see a response under a Marriott signature, btw.  We're being asked to play this new game, but MVC has not been forthcoming and clear about the rules.  We're a little concerned that the deck is stacked.  

Perhaps even more important than the precise details are assurances.  Dealing with executives (and other politicians) is sometimes a struggle to pin them down enough to get a real, insightful answer.  Otherwise, we may be simply providing an opportunity to deflect our questions and use them to put our concerns to bed without actually "saying" much.

ps - thank you Dave, for working to refine and distill the details for us all.  It's not my purpose to criticize you.  I'm disappointed in Marriott, not you.

pps - I haven't been able to keep up with the flood of details, so if anything I mentioned is obsolete or already resolved, I apologize.


----------



## DanCali (Jun 30, 2010)

Dave M said:


> However, I do know that Marriott is committed to ensuring that every weeks owner is able to reserve a week within their season. Thus, the only weeks at our home resorts that will be available to points owners to reserve at 13 and 12 months will be Marriott-owned weeks, weeks traded for Marriott Rewards points and weeks traded for points by Enrolled owners. I have spent enough time discussing this point that it doesn't worry me as to whether I will be able to reserve a week as easily as I have in the past. Stated another way, BocaBoy's comment above was directly on point: "If no one has relinquished a week for points in your season at a sold out resort, there can be no inventory for points users. It is as simple as that."That's what Owner Services reps are for. We are very, very small potatoes compared with FlyerTalk, especially since this site is primarily about timeshares and the FlyerTalk Marriott forum is about all of Marriott, but especially about the bigger picture - hotels! No concierge here.



Dave - thanks for getting this info.

I'm trying to look at the cup half full, but unfortunately Marriott does not seem committed to fairness (as the "old Perry" speculated in the speculation thread).

*"Marriott is committed to ensuring that every weeks owner is able to reserve a week within their season."* - I'm touched that they are committed to ensuring we get our deeded rights... - did they at some point consider taking those away too?   But it is truly a problem if 20% of people convert and they can grab 100% of the desired weeks in a season. It makes the "season" not quite the season people bought...

I wonder if Marriott not addressing this question more appropriately is even in compliance with all state laws. FredM posted some information here regarding California laws (relevant to NCV and the Palm Springs area resorts). I'm not a lawyer, but hopefully some of the lawyers can comment on this. In my opinion, this is THE most disturbing aspect of the program (and I'm glad it's on other people's minds as well!).


----------



## DanCali (Jun 30, 2010)

Luckybee said:


> Isnt it also correct that the 13 month point owners have a 2 day advantage from looking at the charts at a number of resorts . As i saw it point inventory would open on a Tues...whereas weeks on a Thurs?



No. The 13 month window for weeks owners typically opens on a Tuesday if the first checkin day at the resort if Friday. Just do an example using a calendar and you'll see.


----------



## Andar (Jun 30, 2010)

*Thanks!*

Once again DaveM helps timeshare users wade through the mountains of (?) with simple, accurate information.  T   hanks so much for all you do here.


----------



## Latravel (Jun 30, 2010)

It's so much better and calmer to read posts based on facts and comments directly from Marriott versus posts based on analysis by people who may add some hysteria to the mix.  

Thanks Dave!  I think I may be reading only your posts from now on.


----------



## JimIg23 (Jun 30, 2010)

hipslo said:


> I agree, although I don't see how fixed week owners could lose, as they are guaranteed their fixed week, if they want it.



using you example, my read is that of the 400 units available for 13 month reservation, either pool can reserve it, but points cannot exceed 50% of their point allocation for season.  So, say in your resort "points" holds 100 platinum weeks, only 50 could be reserved by 13 months.


----------



## JimIg23 (Jun 30, 2010)

Cathyb said:


> Dave:  Could you get them to clarify what fees/expenses Every Other Year owners would have and if they pay them in the year they are able to use their unit or have to pay some of them annually?  Thank you!



I was told one EOY still pays annual 169


----------



## ilene13 (Jun 30, 2010)

hipslo said:


> Well, points owners can also book ahead of the 13 month window using the same techniques that we use currently in weeks.  If the playing field is somehow slanted in favor of points, I am concerned about the ever increasing costs to always be at the front of the line, especially given the "skim".
> 
> Bottom line, I bought multiple weeks specifically to ensure my ability to reserve the weeks I need.  Anything that potentially impinges on my ability to do that causes me great concern.
> 
> If my fears are groundless, that would be great.  I suppose only time will tell.


Touche,  I agree with you


----------



## hipslo (Jun 30, 2010)

DanCali said:


> No. The 13 month window for weeks owners typically opens on a Tuesday if the first checkin day at the resort if Friday. Just do an example using a calendar and you'll see.



Using check in days in February, it seems to me that weeks owners actually have an advantage over points owners, based on the info provided by the inventory calendar.  Most other months, it is the other way around.  I have checked this for the next several years and it seems to be consistently the case.

I have recently begun looking at this another way, though.  Perhaps it is the case that marriott itself, having the rights of a mutliple week owner with respect to weeks turned in for points, makes its reservations at 13 months out, in direct competition with multiple week owners, and the calendars only relate to when that inventory, already reserved by marriott for the points "pool", is then made available to points owners.  

If that is the case, then multiple week owners would be competing head to head with marriott itself for the prime weeks at 13 months.

Bottom line, I remain troubled by marriott's unwillingness to be forthcoming about how the allocation/ competition between weeks and points is going to work.

While I understand that Dave is comfortable that his ability to reserve the weeks he wants at 13 months will not change, and I respect that, he has not given us any information as to WHY he believes that to be the case, other than that he believes that less people may be seeking the prime weeks due to cost.  That doesnt seem realistic, though.  There are 400,000 weeks owners.  If only 100,000 of them convert to points, any of those owners who own enough points become elgiible to seek the prime weeks at issue, in some cases at 13 months.  And marriott will keep selling more points, so the universe of those eligible will be increasing all the time.  It seems unrealistic to think that competition would ever go down.  (I understand that all weeks owners who do not convert will still be able to reserve SOME week in their season, but that is not the question).

Dave, I sincerely appreciate all you do, and what you have done in putting this post together, but I still feel that the inventory allocation question has not been answered, and must conclude that is becuase marriott just doesnt want to answer it.  That troubles me.


----------



## hipslo (Jun 30, 2010)

JimIg23 said:


> using you example, my read is that of the 400 units available for 13 month reservation, either pool can reserve it, but points cannot exceed 50% of their point allocation for season.  So, say in your resort "points" holds 100 platinum weeks, only 50 could be reserved by 13 months.




That may be, though we haven't received any word on this yet from marriott.  Even if that is the case, it potentially gives points owners a much higher proportion of those prime weeks (12.5% in your example) that the points pool bears to the overall number of weeks in platinum season (2.7% in your example), which works to the detriment of current 13 month owners.


----------



## m61376 (Jun 30, 2010)

Dave M said:


> *Responses to questions posed in this thread*
> As I implied in my O.P. I won't be able to address questions for which there is no answer (e.g., Do you think Marriott will play fair?).Whether it's actually a separate pool or not, I don't know for sure. However, I do know that Marriott is committed to ensuring that every weeks owner is able to reserve a week within their season. Thus, the only weeks at our home resorts that will be available to points owners to reserve at 13 and 12 months will be Marriott-owned weeks, weeks traded for Marriott Rewards points and weeks traded for points by Enrolled owners. I have spent enough time discussing this point that it doesn't worry me as to whether I will be able to reserve a week as easily as I have in the past. Stated another way, BocaBoy's comment above was directly on point: "If no one has relinquished a week for points in your season at a sold out resort, there can be no inventory for points users. It is as simple as that.
> .


I understand what you are saying- but unfortunately it doesn't address the question of whether, as hipslo asked, there will be a pro rata allotment for each week. Doing it by the season assures everyone of a week in their season, but not that there won't be increased competition for the prime weeks. I think that is a very important distinction. 

Owners who trade in for points are trading in the right to any week in the season. If owners using points can have access then to "any week" there will necessarily be increased competition for the prime weeks, unless there is a pro rata distribution according to week/point ownership of EACH reservation period.


----------



## gblotter (Jun 30, 2010)

*the central question for me*



m61376 said:


> I understand what you are saying- but unfortunately it doesn't address the question of whether, as hipslo asked, there will be a pro rata allotment for each week. Doing it by the season assures everyone of a week in their season, but not that there won't be increased competition for the prime weeks. I think that is a very important distinction.
> 
> Owners who trade in for points are trading in the right to any week in the season. If owners using points can have access then to "any week" there will necessarily be increased competition for the prime weeks, unless there is a pro rata distribution according to week/point ownership of EACH reservation period.



Finally someone has encapsulated my primary concern about this new points program.  It would be great if DaveM could get a definitive answer from Marriott.


----------



## Dave M (Jun 30, 2010)

*Competition for reserving weeks*

I believe if you carefully read what I have written on the topic of trying to reserve a week, you'll have a hard time coming up with a real concern about reserving -unless you own at a very new resort such as Marco Island. 

I'll try one more time with an example.

Assume a resort that is 100% sold out. If no weeks owners at that resort (1) trade for Marriott Rewards points or (2) enroll and trade the use of their weeks for Club points, *there will be no inventory available at that resort that can be reserved by Marriott or anyone owning points.* Only to the extent that one of those two events happens will there be any competition from points owners, and that competition will be limited. 

Further, if Marriott owns some unsold weeks at that resort, Marriott has always been able to compete with us to  make reservations for those weeks and, similarly, will be able to do so for points owners once those unsold weeks are deposited in the trust. 

Essentially, no change. Same number of weeks available to points owners as are available to Marriott to reserve now.

The only significant difference is that some weeks owners might choose to enroll in the new program and trade the use of their weeks for Club points. That means more competition for those traded weeks from points but an equal lesser level of competition from the weeks owners who traded for points.

Thus, it’s a zero-sum game. There should be just as many weeks available and just the same competition for reserving weeks as there are now.

On the other hand, if you choose to believe a conspiracy theory - that Marriott has a plan to treat us unfairly in the reservation process and somehow circumvent the limitations on reservations to illegally shut out weeks owners, I can't help with that. But I don't believe it.


----------



## Dave M (Jun 30, 2010)

I'll also address this earlier post by Marilyn (m61376):





> I would like it confirmed that each group would only have access to their fair share percentage of *each week/arrival date*, so that week owners would not be competing with point owners for premium weeks and home resort priority would be kept intact for week owners.


I don't think you will get that confirmation, Marilyn, just as you wouldn't have been able to get a similar confirmation in the past that Marriott wouldn't try to reserve more than its fair share of weeks for (e.g.) July 4th week at a beach resort using weeks under its control. 

Bottom line: It's exactly the same competition from points owners that we have had in the past from Marriott with respect to weeks that were under its control.


----------



## hipslo (Jun 30, 2010)

Dave M said:


> I believe if you carefully read what I have written on the topic of trying to reserve a week, you'll have a hard time coming up with a real concern about reserving -unless you own at a very new resort such as Marco Island.
> 
> I'll try one more time with an example.
> 
> ...



In the aggregate that is true, and I believe that those calling in at 12 months should see no significant difference.  As to any particular week, especially those "prime" weeks that would otherwise become available at 13 months, it is not necessarily the case, as illustrated by my specific example.  Inventory allocation remains the key.  If a single week owner turns in a week for points, that single week owner couldnt have reserved at 13 months, but the week turned in could let a points owner reserve a prime unit at 13 months, thereby increasing competition at 13 months for prime units.  

Its as if more single week owners at a sold out resort begin buying more weeks to become multiple week owners (either resale at that resort, or elsewhere).  If that were to occur, there would be more competition at 13 months (this could happen under the prior system).  But now, they dont have to buy another week, all they have to do is turn in a single week for points, and someone else gets into the 13 month pool.

Its pretty simple, actually.  And I dont mean to imply that marriott will be screwing anyone, or treating anyone unfiarly.  Just that the new system, by its very nature, potentially increases competition at 13 months for prime weeks over what exists currently.


----------



## hipslo (Jun 30, 2010)

Dave M said:


> I'll also address this earlier post by Marilyn (m61376):I don't think you will get that confirmation, Marilyn, just as you wouldn't have been able to get a similar confirmation in the past that Marriott wouldn't try to reserve more than its fair share of weeks for (e.g.) July 4th week at a beach resort using weeks under its control.
> 
> Bottom line: It's exactly the same competition from points owners that we have had in the past from Marriott with respect to weeks that were under its control.



Right, but the weeks under its control could go up dramatically if lots of folks convert to points.  If those folks are single week owners, the competition at 13 months could also correspndingly go up dramatically.

I think we have our answer.


----------



## SueDonJ (Jun 30, 2010)

Thanks so much, Dave, for taking the time and having the patience to wade through all this, and knowing the right way to ask the questions.  Much appreciated.


----------



## BocaBum99 (Jun 30, 2010)

hipslo said:


> I agree, although I don't see how fixed week owners could lose, as they are guaranteed their fixed week, if they want it.



They can lose in unit assignments.


----------



## LAR (Jun 30, 2010)

*Thanks, Dave!*

Just one more expression of appreciation, Dave.  I dont know where you find the time to keep up with all of this but I'm very grateful for all you are doing on this board.


----------



## LAX Mom (Jun 30, 2010)

Dave M said:


> Assume a resort that is 100% sold out. If no weeks owners at that resort (1) trade for Marriott Rewards points or (2) enroll and trade the use of their weeks for Club points, *there will be no inventory available at that resort that can be reserved by Marriott or anyone owning points.* Only to the extent that one of those two events happens will there be any competition from points owners, and that competition will be limited.
> 
> 
> > This is one of my big concerns about the points system. There are many Marriott resorts that are sold out with high owner occupancy rates. Yet Marriott will tell prospective buyers that they can buy points to get a ski season week at Park City. Marriott won't have any ski season weeks at Park City unless some owners trade their weeks for Marriott Rewards points or trade their weeks for Club points. Just because a ski season owner at Park City enrolls doesn't give Marriott access to that week. The owner must actually trade for points.
> ...


----------



## LAX Mom (Jun 30, 2010)

Dave M said:


> Assume a resort that is 100% sold out. If no weeks owners at that resort (1) trade for Marriott Rewards points or (2) enroll and trade the use of their weeks for Club points, *there will be no inventory available at that resort that can be reserved by Marriott or anyone owning points.* Only to the extent that one of those two events happens will there be any competition from points owners, and that competition will be limited.



This is one of my big concerns about the points system. There are many Marriott resorts that are sold out with high owner occupancy rates. Yet Marriott will tell prospective buyers that they can buy points to get a ski season week at Park City. Marriott won't have any ski season weeks at Park City unless some owners trade their weeks for Marriott Rewards points or trade their weeks for Club points. Just because a ski season owner at Park City enrolls doesn't give Marriott access to that week. The owner must actually trade for points. 

I think a fair of amount of owners might enroll in this system, but just continue to use their weeks as in the past. This is going to make it tough for Marriott to deliver the inventory they are using to sell these points.

Essentially Marriott is using this points system to sell the popular resorts that have already sold out.


----------



## KarenP (Jun 30, 2010)

*Thanks, Dave! (and one question)*

Wow, Dave, you sure went above and beyond for us Tuggers!  Thank you so very much!

I'm on the fence about enrolling in points, but would probably go ahead in order to give me more options in the future if Marriott could DEFINITIVELY say:  
(1) whether points could be resold in the future, and 
(2) whether and how a legacy week with points could transfer the same ownership down the road.

Thank you again!!


----------



## Bunk (Jun 30, 2010)

KarenP said:


> Wow, Dave, you sure went above and beyond for us Tuggers!  Thank you so very much!
> 
> I'm on the fence about enrolling in points, but would probably go ahead in order to give me more options in the future if Marriott could DEFINITIVELY say:
> (1) whether points could be resold in the future, and
> ...



Dave:  As to Karen's questions above:
Is there any way there could be a disadvantage in selling a unit that has enrolled in the points program as opposed to a unit that has declined to participate in the new program.


----------



## m61376 (Jun 30, 2010)

Dave M said:


> I'll also address this earlier post by Marilyn (m61376):I don't think you will get that confirmation, Marilyn, just as you wouldn't have been able to get a similar confirmation in the past that Marriott wouldn't try to reserve more than its fair share of weeks for (e.g.) July 4th week at a beach resort using weeks under its control.
> 
> Bottom line: It's exactly the same competition from points owners that we have had in the past from Marriott with respect to weeks that were under its control.



Certainly you are much more experienced in this than I am, and maybe I am missing something, but I see a very big difference IF Marriott just sets the points/week pool as a percentage of the season and not of each week/reservation period- and let me emphasize it is an IF that I am awaiting verification about.

The reason is simple- right now I am competing with x number of deeded weeks owners in my season. All of a sudden, there can be any unknown numbers of owners who want to come to my resort, who don't own there. So, while the number of weeks available to reserve hasn't changed, the number of people who are looking to reserve into especially the more popular weeks can be any subsection of 400,000 owners (actually, 400,000+, with all the new point owners they hope to solicit), and not just the owners at my resort. 

Responding to your above example- As a resort gets sold out, in the past, Marriott has fewer and fewer weeks under its control. In this situation, over time Marriott will have more and more weeks in the point system, unless the system fails, which I consider unlikely. So the reality is that there will be more competition for reservations, because competition is no longer limited to only owners who purchased in a given season. 

As Hipslo pointed out, Plat. ski weeks were sold out long ago. Now Marirott is selling points- and telling skiers that if they buy enough points they too can reserve a Feb. ski week. Now, while it is true that only the number of ski weeks can be reserved that exist, and that, moreover, every deeded week owner has to be able to book a week in their season, now you not only have Summit Watch owners, for ex., competing for a Feb. ski week there, but you have any points owner- perhaps hundreds or thousands additional skiers- who are now trying to reserve the same weeks. Of course, there still has to be a week in the Plat. season for every week owner to reserve- but there may be double or triple (or more) competition for those Feb. weeks from point owners added to the pool. If point owners can book a majority of those Feb. weeks just because they were the majority of people calling in, it would not be fair to the week owners who may still be entitled to a majority of the total inventory (assuming that week owners own a majority of the inventory; in reality, each group is entitled to their share of the inventory). 

So that's why I think that it makes a big difference as to whether the inventory pool is a percentage of the season or the allotment is a percentage of each week/reservation period, because the outside point competition for certain weeks at many locations will be fierce.

NCV is a great example- I venture to guess that there will be many outside exchangers looking to use points to book those 10 summer weeks. Just because one week is turned in for points does not mean that there will be only one additional point owner looking to compete for those weeks. Unless I am missing something, that's where I think your explanation falls short. 

As Lisa points out- Marriott is selling points with the illusion of being able to book whenever and wherever you want to go- even if the resort was sold out long ago. That's why competition will only worsen over time for prime weeks, and current week owners should be able to book their fair share of each prime week in their season.


Just another bit of info. to add- as of now, the online II club account has complete week exchange access. Point exchanges will be available online by the end of July.


----------



## brigechols (Jun 30, 2010)

LAX Mom said:


> This is one of my big concerns about the points system. There are many Marriott resorts that are sold out with high owner occupancy rates. Yet Marriott will tell prospective buyers that they can buy points to get a ski season week at Park City. Marriott won't have any ski season weeks at Park City unless some owners trade their weeks for Marriott Rewards points or trade their weeks for Club points. Just because a ski season owner at Park City enrolls doesn't give Marriott access to that week. The owner must actually trade for points.
> 
> I think a fair of amount of owners might enroll in this system, but just continue to use their weeks as in the past. This is going to make it tough for Marriott to deliver the inventory they are using to sell these points.
> 
> Essentially Marriott is using this points system to sell the popular resorts that have already sold out.



AFAIK, Summitt Watch is not sold out.


----------



## bw3 (Jun 30, 2010)

*competition for prime gold weeks*



hipslo said:


> In the aggregate that is true, and I believe that those calling in at 12 months should see no significant difference.  As to any particular week, especially those "prime" weeks that would otherwise become available at 13 months, it is not necessarily the case, as illustrated by my specific example.  Inventory allocation remains the key.  If a single week owner turns in a week for points, that single week owner couldnt have reserved at 13 months, but the week turned in could let a points owner reserve a prime unit at 13 months, thereby increasing competition at 13 months for prime units.
> 
> Its as if more single week owners at a sold out resort begin buying more weeks to become multiple week owners (either resale at that resort, or elsewhere).  If that were to occur, there would be more competition at 13 months (this could happen under the prior system).  But now, they dont have to buy another week, all they have to do is turn in a single week for points, and someone else gets into the 13 month pool.
> 
> Its pretty simple, actually.  And I dont mean to imply that marriott will be screwing anyone, or treating anyone unfiarly.  Just that the new system, by its very nature, potentially increases competition at 13 months for prime weeks over what exists currently.



I agree with hipslo's concerns.  Using a slightly different example at Grande Ocean, there will be even more competition for the weeks from late May to mid June.  These are gold weeks at Grande Ocean but platinum at all the other ocean resorts on HHI.  These weeks are booked within one minute of availability.  Currently, I can reserve my 5 gold weeks around May 14 and run them all the way to platinum and add platinum weeks to the same reservation.  If Marriott owns bronze, silver and gold, they could see the 13 month window starting in December 2010 to book a reservation taking one unit for each week from Jan 1, 2012 through late May 2012 and then concurrently take all the 13 month gold units on the same reservation.  Yes, this is unlikely but I am going to expect more of these weeks gone long before current owners can reserve them.


----------



## DanCali (Jun 30, 2010)

Dave M said:


> The only significant difference is that some weeks owners might choose to enroll in the new program and trade the use of their weeks for Club points. That means more competition for those traded weeks from points but an equal lesser level of competition from the weeks owners who traded for points.
> 
> Thus, it’s a zero-sum game. There should be just as many weeks available and just the same competition for reserving weeks as there are now.



Dave,

Here is where I think the argument lacks...

Let me summarize your logic



First you say with respect to Marriott owned weeks nothing changed. They could have reserved them before and they still can. True - but now instead of reserving to rent, they also have an incentive to reserve on behalf of the Trust to make the points program successful. maybe it's a minor issue, but nevertheless an important issue that could prove to be major after all.



With respect to Owners who enroll and convert to points, you say that it washes out (zero sum game). My issue with that argument is: 

(i) "those traded weeks" are just weeks in a season. They are not trading in reserved weeks. In fact, owners who know they will convert to points will not bother to make a reservation at their home resort. So yes, these guys will not compete for the prime weeks

(ii) On the flipside, you now have the points people who compete for those weeks.

You equate this a zero sum game and say:  





> That means more competition for those traded weeks from points but an equal lesser level of competition from the weeks owners who traded for points.Thus, it’s a zero-sum game.



But that is not really the case because you do not take into consideration the number of resorts. When owners from a resort give up a week in a season to the points inventory, you can have owners from 50 other resorts competing for it. If it were a 2 resort system, you could say "zero sum game". But surely the number of resorts affects the competition? If any points owner could reserve summer Hawaii weeks in the points inventory, the competition is not the same if there are 2 resorts in the system versus 50 resorts.

The mitigating factor to what I said above is that points will be competing for prime weeks at all 50 resorts so the demand gets spread out, but you can imagine that some resorts/weeks may get impacted by the number of competing resorts much more than others.

I'll give an extreme example for illustrative purposes. Suppose there is a Hawaii resort and an Orlando resort (2 resort system). So when Hawaii owners convert to points, the Orlando points people now compete with Hawaii weeks people for prime weeks, and Hawaii points people compete with Orlando weeks people for prime Orlando weeks. I agree that this is similar to the zero sum game you describe.

Now think of the same system with 1 Hawaii resort and 15 Orlando resorts. Arguably, all Orlando people who convert to points want to go to Hawaii because if they wanted Orlando they would stay at their home resort (unaffected by skimming). Is it still a "zero sum game" when owners from the 15 resorts compete for Hawaii weeks in the points system? What about if it were 50 Orlando resorts?  

Obviously, it's an extreme example, and things are somewhat more balanced in Marriott's system, but the issue is there nevertheless.

The ONLY way to solve this problem is a separate inventory pool with pro-rata allocation of checkin days based on owners who convert to points.


----------



## RedDogSD (Jun 30, 2010)

DanCali said:


> Dave,
> 
> Now think of the same system with 1 Hawaii resort and 15 Orlando resorts. Arguably, all Orlando people who convert to points want to go to Hawaii because if they wanted Orlando they would stay at their home resort (unaffected by skimming). Is it still a "zero sum game" when owners from the 15 resorts compete for Hawaii weeks in the points system? What about if it were 50 Orlando resorts?  [/COLOR]
> 
> [/LIST]



I totally understand your concern, and even though Marriott did not say it explicitely, we HAVE to imply that they are keeping a somewhat seperate inventory.  Otherwise, lets just assume that EVERY owner at all 15 of your Orlando resorts converts their weeks to points and only 10% of Hawaii owners convert their weeks to points.  Lets further assume that all of the Orlando owners are going to try for Hawaii first, and then only take Orlando if they have to.  Now, the other 90% of Hawaii owners did not trade for points, so their ONLY option is to get a week in Hawaii.  

Marriott has said that all owners will have a week in their season.  If they let the owners from the 15 Orlando resorts reserve any more than 10% of the weeks, then the Hawaii owners will be unable to reserve them, which is contrary to what they are saying.  

Now, as to what weeks are available within their pool, good question.  For each time period that opens up, they would have to have some limitation.  They could not let the 15 Orlando resort owners, who only have the right to try to reserve 10% of the Hawaii weeks, all take 100% of the 4th of July weekly intervals, or something like that.  I am sure that the system was programmed in a somewhat fair manner where if 10% of the weeks are available to the Points pool, then they can only take 10% of the total weeks available within each weekly interval.  Maybe not EXACTLY 10%, but I am not worried about it being unfair.


----------



## BocaBum99 (Jun 30, 2010)

Dave M said:


> I'll also address this earlier post by Marilyn (m61376):I don't think you will get that confirmation, Marilyn, just as you wouldn't have been able to get a similar confirmation in the past that Marriott wouldn't try to reserve more than its fair share of weeks for (e.g.) July 4th week at a beach resort using weeks under its control.
> 
> Bottom line: It's exactly the same competition from points owners that we have had in the past from Marriott with respect to weeks that were under its control.



I don't think it is "exactly" the same competition as in the past.  I believe that a weeks owners will up their right to get in line for a reservation to a points owner and Marriott will find away to process the request of the points owner prior to the request of a weeks owner thereby making it more difficult than in the past for a weeks owner to get a reservation.

Sure, the process will be the same, but the competition will be more fierce within that process.

For instance, let's say there are 100 owners of platinum weeks fighting for various weeks in their season.  Further, let's assume that there are only 10 prime July 4th slots.  In the past, there may have only been 40 people wanting a July 4th slot.  So, only 1 in 4 would get their request fulfilled.

Now, with points owners substituted into weeks owner's slots, there may be 80 who want to go for July 4.  So, even if the assignment is random by lottery, the probability of assignment is only 1 in 8.  Someone is going to lose and the losers will be defined by the order in which Marriott process requests.


----------



## RedDogSD (Jun 30, 2010)

BocaBum99 said:


> I don't think it is "exactly" the same competition as in the past.  I believe that a weeks owners will up their right to get in line for a reservation to a points owner and Marriott will find away to process the request of the points owner prior to the request of a weeks owner thereby making it more difficult than in the past for a weeks owner to get a reservation.
> 
> Sure, the process will be the same, but the competition will be more fierce within that process.
> 
> ...



You are making two large assumptions:  

1.) Marriott is going to find a way to let the points owners get their weeks before weeks owners.  This is a very PerryM like statement about the corporation being out to screw the little guy.  I don't see it...but nothing I can say will convince you.  I don't think Marriott is trying to screw the weeks owners and I think they still want to keep us happy so that we may eventually join their program when we see that the flexibiilty is nice but our old system still works.

2.) You are also assuming that the points owners who take the places of weeks owners want the prime weeks more than the weeks owners that they replaced.  Why would you assume that?  The points system penalizes you for trying for prime weeks.  Frankly, if I convert, I am going to look for EVERY opportunity to take the lower points weeks so that I can stretch my points.  Why would you assume that everyone is going to try to get the TOP weeks which will suck up all of their points.  If they want prime weeks, they should reserve a good week at home resort and use Interval for a fair trade.


----------



## puckmanfl (Jun 30, 2010)

good afternoon

MVCD has "bet the ranch" on this one!!!  You can be sure they are not going blindly into this knowing that the only inventory in"points" will be unsold units, returned units for MR points and "rental" units from a non existental rental program.  With the "skim" they missed a golden opportunity to get many primo owner weeks in the system!!! Thus they are going to have do anything within the "letter" of the law for inventory in "points".  

The worst nightmare is a bunch of Premium Plus new points purchasers that can't trade weeks screaming that we bought all this and we can't go anywhere!!!


----------



## DanCali (Jun 30, 2010)

RedDogSD said:


> Now, as to what weeks are available within their pool, good question.  For each time period that opens up, they would have to have some limitation.  They could not let the 15 Orlando resort owners, who only have the right to try to reserve 10% of the Hawaii weeks, all take 100% of the 4th of July weekly intervals, or something like that.  I am sure that the system was programmed in a somewhat fair manner where if 10% of the weeks are available to the Points pool, then they can only take 10% of the total weeks available within each weekly interval.  Maybe not EXACTLY 10%, but I am not worried about it being unfair.



Don't be so sure...This is exactly the point people are worried about. What you describe above is how it should be. The only think Marriott has said that that, based on your example, Orlando owners will not reserve more than 10% of Hawaii weeks (generalized to 1-52 float). There is nothing about limiting availability of a given week. Since the 4th of July week is only about 2% of available weeks, it is definitely possible that points owners could get that entire week.



RedDogSD said:


> Marriott has said that all owners will have a week in their season.  If they let the owners from the 15 Orlando resorts reserve any more than 10% of the weeks, then the Hawaii owners will be unable to reserve them, which is contrary to what they are saying.



Also, please note that an owner is guaranteed a week in their season only as long as they call before the season starts. If a Hawaii owner calls in April wanting an October reservation, they can always be told some weeks in Feb went unused, but everything going forward is fully booked - so though luck. When you have owners from 50 resorts competing for the weeks, the odds of everything going forward being fully booked are also higher. This makes calling early much more critical, even if you don't care what week you get.


----------



## davidvel (Jun 30, 2010)

> *"Marriott is committed to ensuring that every weeks owner is able to reserve a week within their season."* - I'm touched that they are committed to ensuring we get our deeded rights... - did they at some point consider taking those away too?


The above sentiment is directly on point on this issue. Yes, you will always get a week in your season. Period, end of story. _Marriott is only committed to assuring our deeded rights?_  That's scary that their executive would even make such a statement. That's like saying they are committed to assuring the check-in clerk won't shoot you. Well, I hope so. 



Dave M said:


> Further, if Marriott owns some unsold weeks at that resort, Marriott has always been able to compete with us to  make reservations for those weeks and, similarly, will be able to do so for points owners once those unsold weeks are deposited in the trust.
> 
> Essentially, no change. Same number of weeks available to points owners as are available to Marriott to reserve now.
> . . .
> ...


There may not be a change in how they do it, *but that doesn't mean they have been doing it right to date*. And has been noted, Marriott may have much different incentives now for getting prime weeks than it did in the past; and it will likely control many more weeks than it did in the past.

People have always complained about calling in reservations 1 minute after they open and not getting a prime week. Was it because other non-Marriott owners all called in just before you? Or was it because Marriott's computers snapped up 10, 15, 25, 50% of the available reservations 5 minutes before they opened the phone/computer lines? 

The concern is that this problem may get even worse.

The problem is we don't know how Marriott has reserved its weeks up to now. Have they used their computers ahead of regular owners? (not allowed by my CCRs.) Have they used some percentage method? (not allowed by my CCRs.) Have they contended they own multiple weeks and always reserved the best weeks at 13 months?  (not allowed by my CCRs.)

The "theory" is based on facts. Marriott obviously reserved/will reserve its weeks through some computer process, not by hiring thousands of people to call in on their behalf. They control those computers. They don't tell us how the process works. They have incentives to "game the system." We would never know...

Now they set up a system where they are promising platinum members that they will reserve weeks for them (weeks Marriott's trust owns) 13 months in advance (if the week is available). *My CCRs state that the developer does not have the right to utilize 13 month priority. * Are they now going to argue the Trust can (that it's a distinctive entity)?

They tell us to blindly trust them.

Simply put, the concerns about priority reservations are valid. There are a lot of REAL, RATIONAL CONCERNS. Calling it a "conspiracy theory" unfairly denigrates the concerns as unfounded or kooky, and minimize the person's concerns as invalid.


----------



## RedDogSD (Jun 30, 2010)

DanCali said:


> Don't be so sure...This is exactly the point people are worried about. What you describe above is how it should be. The only think Marriott has said that that, based on your example, Orlando owners will not reserve more than 10% of Hawaii weeks (generalized to 1-52 float). There is nothing about limiting availability of a given week. Since the 4th of July week is only about 2% of available weeks, it is definitely possible that points owners could get that entire week.



I fall back to basic Economic theory.  Most Platinum Orlando, Platinum Palm Desert, Platinum Newport Coast, and many other places get 2500-4000 points per year.  The lowest trade in to Maui Ocean Club is 6400 points and the top week takes 9000 points.  I think that as many people as possible will try to figure out if they can find a way to use one of the lower demand weeks since it will be very hard for them to come up with the 8000-9000 points to get the TOP week.  So, while you might be right that they CAN reserve them, I have no fear that they are going to try.

I myself am planning on working as hard as I can to get the TOP weeks in top resorts.  However, I plan on using Interval as there, my Platinum desert week has a 1:1 relationship with any other top week in the system.  I would not be wiling to bank 2010 points, use 2011 points and borrow 2012 points ($3300 in MF's and 3 years of usage) just to get 1 great week in Maui.  No thanks.  If you think that is going to happen on a grand scale, then you do not understand human behavior.  Points are just like cash, and people do not part with them easily. 




DanCali said:


> Also, please note that an owner is guaranteed a week in their season only as long as they call before the season starts. If a Hawaii owner calls in April wanting an October reservation, they can always be told some weeks in Feb went unused, but everything going forward is fully booked - so though luck. When you have owners from 50 resorts competing for the weeks, the odds of everything going forward being fully booked are also higher. This makes calling early much more critical, even if you don't care what week you get.



That is no different than any Floating system....  At 12 months out, weeks are released.  By the time you get to the end of your season, most other owners should no longer be competing with you since they already got their reservation, so you should be fine.


----------



## m61376 (Jun 30, 2010)

RedDogSD said:


> Now, as to what weeks are available within their pool, good question.  For each time period that opens up, they would have to have some limitation.  They could not let the 15 Orlando resort owners, who only have the right to try to reserve 10% of the Hawaii weeks, all take 100% of the 4th of July weekly intervals, or something like that.  I am sure that the system was programmed in a somewhat fair manner where if 10% of the weeks are available to the Points pool, then they can only take 10% of the total weeks available within each weekly interval.  Maybe not EXACTLY 10%, but I am not worried about it being unfair.



That is exactly the clarification I have asked for and am awaiting. You cannot simply assume that; most people here aren't making that assumption. Most would LIKE it to be that way, but that doesn't mean those restrictions will, in fact, be in place.


----------



## RedDogSD (Jun 30, 2010)

m61376 said:


> That is exactly the clarification I have asked for and am awaiting. You cannot simply assume that; most people here aren't making that assumption. Most would LIKE it to be that way, but that doesn't mean those restrictions will, in fact, be in place.



I got $50 that points owners will be fighting harder over the weeks that are perceived as a better value than the top weeks.  For example....I think it will be very hard for them to get the last week in Palm Desert before the points switch from 2700 to 4200 and the last week in May at Newport where the points go from 2900 to 4225.  Anyone willing to take me up on that bet?  You will lose $50.  

Ever been to a SALE?  Why do people go.  They go to get items that are in less demand, but they are perceived as having a higher VALUE.  Anyone can buy stuff at full price, but people want value for their dollars, and these points will be no different.


----------



## m61376 (Jun 30, 2010)

RedDogSD said:


> I myself am planning on working as hard as I can to get the TOP weeks in top resorts.  However, I plan on using Interval as there, my Platinum desert week has a 1:1 relationship with any other top week in the system.  I would not be wiling to bank 2010 points, use 2011 points and borrow 2012 points ($3300 in MF's and 3 years of usage) just to get 1 great week in Maui.  No thanks.  If you think that is going to happen on a grand scale, then you do not understand human behavior.  Points are just like cash, and people do not part with them easily.



I think you are forgetting one major difference- in most (possibly all) resorts the first weeks to be sold out are the Platinum weeks. There are many resorts that are not quite sold out, but all the Platinum inventory is gone.

Now- along comes this wonderful new system- and Marriott can now sell ANY buyer who walks in the door the point equivalent and the expectation of booking that Platinum week. So, in essence, Marriott is packaging the points from less desirable weeks and selling them as having access to those premium weeks. And, yes, the same as all those people who were willing to shell out 50-80K before to book those summer or other prime weeks, will now be willing to buy enough points to book them. The only difference- and it is a big difference- is that before Marriott couldn't oversell weeks- they were limited to the deeded week inventory- but now there aren't those restrictions.

Many mocked Perry for his doomsday approach, but he was right in one thing- Marriott salespeople will be selling the dream of booking those high demand weeks, over and over again.

And you can't extrapolate your week owner's mentality to that of a new point's owner- a week's owner may choke at paying 3 years of MF's for that trade, when they could get it through II on an even basis with some luck before, but a new points owner- well- that's all they know, and sometimes ignorance is bliss.


----------



## SueDonJ (Jun 30, 2010)

I think the concern here that Marriott won't allocate inventory per check-in day is completely justified, especially as Dave has brought up the point that in the past we didn't have any reason to believe that Marriott did take their "fair share" of Owner inventory.

What some people did have, though, were verbal reassurances from Marriott that the 12- and 13-mo inventory was allocated on a per check-in day basis.  It doesn't appear to me that the existing contracts support that as a requirement, but for whatever reason it does appear to be the way that they implemented the Reservation Procedures.  It doesn't seem unreasonable for us to ask and get a definitive answer as to whether or not Marriott will act in all Owners best interests by implementing a similar per-check-in-day allotment for Weeks and Points owners now.

Granted, we did have some protection from Marriott reserving their weeks with 13-mo rule because the governing docs for certain resorts (SurfWatch is one, Barony Beach is not) excluded Marriott from using the 13-mo rule for the inventory it held as Owner.  But we don't know if they conformed to that, do we?  And as limited as that protection was (or if it was even practiced,) it appears we don't have any now.


----------



## m61376 (Jun 30, 2010)

RedDogSD said:


> I got $50 that points owners will be fighting harder over the weeks that are perceived as a better value than the top weeks.  For example....I think it will be very hard for them to get the last week in Palm Desert before the points switch from 2700 to 4200 and the last week in May at Newport where the points go from 2900 to 4225.  Anyone willing to take me up on that bet?  You will lose $50.
> 
> Ever been to a SALE?  Why do people go.  They go to get items that are in less demand, but they are perceived as having a higher VALUE.  Anyone can buy stuff at full price, but people want value for their dollars, and these points will be no different.



Fringe weeks were always in highest demand- equivalent to a sale, as you put it, on essentially the same quality.

That doesn't eliminate the fact that there will be many buyers for the real premium product- not the fringe one that's almost as good. There is always the market that wants what they want- or need. If you have kids that get out of school June 25th, that June 17th week just doesn't cut it, even f0or half off. Similarly, is doesn't matter if the first week in September is a bargain compared to the last week in August for those with kids in school.


----------



## FlyerBobcat (Jun 30, 2010)

bw3 said:


> ....Using a slightly different example *at Grande Ocean, there will be even more competition for the weeks from late May to mid June.  These are gold weeks at Grande Ocean but platinum at all the other ocean resorts on HHI.*  These weeks are booked within one minute of availability.  Currently, I can reserve my 5 gold weeks around May 14 and run them all the way to platinum and add platinum weeks to the same reservation.  If Marriott owns bronze, silver and gold, they could see the 13 month window starting in December 2010 to book a reservation taking one unit for each week from Jan 1, 2012 through late May 2012 and then concurrently take all the 13 month gold units on the same reservation.  Yes, this is unlikely but I am going to expect more of these weeks gone long before current owners can reserve them.


Not this this is exactly relevant to this interesting discussion...  but note that these "top" gold weeks are now peak season to those obtaining weeks with points at MGO.

May 27 – Aug 25, 2011......  Full Week = 4,500 (OS)  5,400 (OF)


----------



## hotcoffee (Jun 30, 2010)

ilene13 said:


> The concern is that I do not want to compete with exchangers at all.  Prior to this nonsense I only competed with other owners who could book 13 months out.  I do not want to exchange.  I think my saving grace is that the Aruba Ocean Club is sold out.



Actually you might be competing with some exchangers now.  If one of the OF owners deposits his unit into II, an exchanger would get it.  I don't see any difference in the future except that the exchanger might now be an enrolled points member rather than coming in via II.

How do you see things changing now that the points program has been rolled out.


----------



## rsackett (Jun 30, 2010)

Thanks Dave for getting answers to may of our questions.

One question I still have as a person who can only resurve my week at 12 months is; In the past reservations made under the 13 month rule were limited to 50% of any given week.  Is this still true?  Or are weeks members using their weeks to resurve limited to 50% and points users could take the other 50% leaving no reservations for a July 4th week avaiable at 12 months?

Ray


----------



## vincenzi (Jun 30, 2010)

We were only given 3,850 points for our gold front at MGO.  Is is because it is a resale?  

Before the new program came out, I reserved our week for next year.  We will stay from June 10 - 17th.


----------



## hipslo (Jun 30, 2010)

hotcoffee said:


> Actually you might be competing with some exchangers now.  If one of the OF owners deposits his unit into II, an exchanger would get it.  I don't see any difference in the future except that the exchanger might now be an enrolled points member rather than coming in via II.
> 
> How do you see things changing now that the points program has been rolled out.



An owner has to reserve the week before it is deposited into II.  So in your example there is not direct competition with exchangers for the initial reservation.


----------



## rsackett (Jun 30, 2010)

vincenzi said:


> We were only given 3,850 points for our gold front at MGO.  Is is because it is a resale?
> 
> Before the new program came out, I reserved our week for next year.  We will stay from June 10 - 17th.



All owners at a given resort were given the same number of points for the same season.  It did not matter how the week was bought.

Ray


----------



## DanCali (Jun 30, 2010)

FlyerBobcat said:


> Not this this is exactly relevant to this interesting discussion...  but note that these "top" gold weeks are now peak season to those obtaining weeks with points at MGO.
> 
> May 27 – Aug 25, 2011......  Full Week = 4,500 (OS)  5,400 (OF)






vincenzi said:


> We were only given 3,850 points for our gold front at MGO.  Is is because it is a resale?



Resale and retail got the short end of the stick equally.

You got less than the top Gold weeks because owners got about 88%-93% of the average points required to exchange into their resort in their season. The difference from 100% of the average points in the season is referred to as "skimming". It basically limits your ability to do "like for like" exchanges using points.


----------



## hotcoffee (Jun 30, 2010)

Wow.  This is almost like mass hysteria.  Since I plan to enroll, I hope you all are correct.  I would love to be given a huge advantage in grabbing those prime weeks at the best resorts.  Sigh! I doubt it will happen though, because unless you exchange them, I ain't gonna get them.


----------



## bw3 (Jun 30, 2010)

*Grande Ocean points*



FlyerBobcat said:


> Not this this is exactly relevant to this interesting discussion...  but note that these "top" gold weeks are now peak season to those obtaining weeks with points at MGO.
> 
> May 27 – Aug 25, 2011......  Full Week = 4,500 (OS)  5,400 (OF)



Tom,

Thanks for pointing that out.  All the more reason that Marriott might like to reserve these weeks because they can now require 4,500 (oceanside) instead of 3,450 (the remainder of gold season weeks).  

Bob


----------



## LAX Mom (Jun 30, 2010)

brigechols said:


> AFAIK, Summitt Watch is not sold out.



There might be some bronze (and possibly silver) weeks available at Summit Watch, but I'm pretty sure that both Mountainside and Summit Watch long ago sold out of the platinum (ski) weeks. 

My point is that there will be increased demand on many sold-out resorts/seasons. Prospective buyers will have the expectation that they can buy a bunch of points and trade into Hawaii, summer beach weeks, ski weeks, etc. 

In reality Marriott can only give them the inventory that a current owner trades in for points. I think there will be many new owners who will be very disappointed at the exchanges they can get for points.


----------



## m61376 (Jun 30, 2010)

vincenzi said:


> We were only given 3,850 points for our gold front at MGO.  Is is because it is a resale?
> 
> Before the new program came out, I reserved our week for next year.  We will stay from June 10 - 17th.



No- resales and direct purchasers receive the same allotment. It doesn't matter that you were able to reserve the best week in your season in the past- you are given either the average or in some cases less than it costs to book any week in your season.

oops- that's what you get for answering before reading- sorry for the repetition


----------



## hipslo (Jun 30, 2010)

hotcoffee said:


> Wow.  This is almost like mass hysteria.  Since I plan to enroll, I hope you all are correct.  I would love to be given a huge advantage in grabbing those prime weeks at the best resorts.  Sigh! I doubt it will happen though, because unless you exchange them, I ain't gonna get them.



I dont think points owners will have a "huge advantage", I am just not looking forward to competing with all of them at 13 months for the 50% of prime week inventory that had formerly been set aside only for multiple week owners.  Even on an even playing field, increased competition is increased competition.

That said, I dont think you're going to find that it is particularly easy to snag prime weeks in points, either.


----------



## RedDogSD (Jun 30, 2010)

hipslo said:


> I dont think points owners will have a "huge advantage", I am just not looking forward to competing with all of them at 13 months for the 50% of prime week inventory that had formerly been set aside only for multiple week owners.  Even on an even playing field, increased competition is increased competition.
> 
> That said, I dont think you're going to find that it is particularly easy to snag prime weeks in points, either.




Why does everyone keep saying "all of them".  I thought you had to have 6500 points in order to get the 13 month rule.  So, that means that anyone who has less but will be banking/borrowing in order to get enough points will have to wait until the 12 month reservation window opens.


----------



## hipslo (Jun 30, 2010)

RedDogSD said:


> Why does everyone keep saying "all of them".  I thought you had to have 6500 points in order to get the 13 month rule.  So, that means that anyone who has less but will be banking/borrowing in order to get enough points will have to wait until the 12 month reservation window opens.



Thats true, it just seemed to me that folks would be unlikely to pay 2 or 3 years worth of maintenance fees for a single week's vacation when the cost to rent the same week would would be less than that, but who knows.


----------



## BocaBum99 (Jun 30, 2010)

Dave M said:


> The only significant difference is that some weeks owners might choose to enroll in the new program and trade the use of their weeks for Club points. That means more competition for those traded weeks from points but an equal lesser level of competition from the weeks owners who traded for points.



The above is exactly why I believe there will be increased competition for prime weeks.  Before points, the competitors are other owners who don't necessarily know what they are doing.  They may wait until 5 months prior to check in to book their unit.  With points, that same unit is now actively managed by Marriott who will attempt to book a prime unit 1 micro second after the 13 or 12 month mark.  They can get into the call queue ahead of every other owner even as the phone lines open.  It is trivial to set up the PBX to accept calls in this way.

Even if they do it a bit more fair and assign a random variable that more evenly distributes assignment times, Marriott will in no way go back and track the prior history of the weeks owner's booking habits and adjust downward the booking interval for a given week assigned to a points owner.  Therefore, even when Marriott is trying to be a bit more fair than putting all of their managed clients at the front of the line, the relative reservation position of an average weeks owner will decline.

This can easily be modeled in a simulation.  I feel pretty confident that my conclusion will prove out.


----------



## BocaBum99 (Jun 30, 2010)

RedDogSD said:


> You are making two large assumptions:
> 
> 1.) Marriott is going to find a way to let the points owners get their weeks before weeks owners.  This is a very PerryM like statement about the corporation being out to screw the little guy.  I don't see it...but nothing I can say will convince you.  I don't think Marriott is trying to screw the weeks owners and I think they still want to keep us happy so that we may eventually join their program when we see that the flexibiilty is nice but our old system still works.
> 
> 2.) You are also assuming that the points owners who take the places of weeks owners want the prime weeks more than the weeks owners that they replaced.  Why would you assume that?  The points system penalizes you for trying for prime weeks.  Frankly, if I convert, I am going to look for EVERY opportunity to take the lower points weeks so that I can stretch my points.  Why would you assume that everyone is going to try to get the TOP weeks which will suck up all of their points.  If they want prime weeks, they should reserve a good week at home resort and use Interval for a fair trade.



1) Actually, that is NOT my assumption. See my example above.  Marriott will substituting less competitive weeks bookers with highly competitive points owners.  I highly doubt that Marriott will look at the booking history of a given weeks owner, declare that they are a late booker and make the points owner wait until the 5 month mark before requesting a week.

2) There has proven to be an unlimited demand of MOC in the summer.  The platinum season is too large.   So, even though the summer point value will be increased at MOC, I believe a stock out situation will continue to occur even with those high values.   As a result, incremental demand will leak into the system for prime weeks.  Therefore, the intensity of competition will increase for summer weeks at MOC.  This assumes that Marriott uses a lottery method for assigning weeks as a best case.  I doubt they will use the best case for reasons I explain in 1) above.

I feel pretty confident that Marriott will be putting its finger on the scale.  There is plenty of evidence that this is the case.  Just look at skim.  That is the most egregious example I've ever seen. 

If you believe that there won't be increased competition, I think you are too altruistic.  Resort Developers ALWAYS depreciate ownerships even in markets when real estate is booming.  If Marriott wanted a fair exchange system, they would have designed a completely different system.


----------



## RedDogSD (Jun 30, 2010)

This really comes down to how Marriott decides to get weeks to put into their points pool.  

Boca,you are saying that they might be pulling those weeks within seconds of the 13 and 12 month marks.  I think that depends if they are going to try to "stock up" the inventory before they have requests.

Let me build my model.  Take a look, and tell me which way you think they will go.

For all of my examples, we have a resort with 100 units, and there are 10 weeks in the season.  Those ten weeks are the last 3 weeks in June, 4 weeks in July and the first 3 weeks in August.  That gives us 1000 weeks in the system.  10% of the owners in this resort will trade for points or MR points.  I am assuming that Marriott does not own anything here for simplicity.  So, 100 weeks available to grab for the points pool.  

Model #1.  Marriott will NOT wait for requests from Points owners in order to grab weeks.  They will just grab what they consider to be the best weeks and then swap them when they need to.

In this example, they grab 50 units for 4th of July week at 13 months, and 50 units at 12 months.  

In this example, all 100 of the 4th of July weeks are gone and none of the weeks owners got to have them.  

Now, Marriott will get requests from Points owners for all of the 10 weeks in the season.  How will they deal with that?  Will they put weeks back into inventory and pull one out since they can only have 100 total weeks.  Will they trade them with Interval (seems silly).  Sure, their 4th of July is the strongest trader out there, but why would they want to deal with II when they can just pull the inventory that they want?

Model #2, which I think is more likely.

Same assumptions.  I think they will basically allocate 10% of each week into their points pool and make it available for reservation by points owners.  Then, they can break down the week into individual days for points users who do not want the whole week, rent out the weekends, etc.  

Inevitably, they will get more requests for some weeks over others.  In those cases, I think they will do some internal trading to match some of those requests.  So, say that they did not get requests for 30% of the weeks in the first 3 weeks that they were available.  So, they have some excess.  They can give them back to the weeks pool if they want, but they might need to keep them in the pool for those owners who request them later.  Marriott does not expect their points owners to only request at 13 and 12 months.   In this situation, they might pull more than 10% of the 4th of July weeks, but I don't think it will be enough to matter that much since they will still have to take requests for the other summer weeks  When we get to the point where 50% of weeks at a traditional resort are traded in for points or MR points, then the risk of Marriott taking more than its fair share of the prime weeks is a real concern.  Until then, they will probably take whatever percentage they are entitled to, and a bit more.  They already were doing that....but they would rent them out instead of giving them to points owners.


----------



## davidvel (Jun 30, 2010)

Either one of these theoretical models would violate the CCRs at my resort.


----------



## BocaBum99 (Jun 30, 2010)

RedDogSD said:


> This really comes down to how Marriott decides to get weeks to put into their points pool.
> 
> Boca,you are saying that they might be pulling those weeks within seconds of the 13 and 12 month marks.  I think that depends if they are going to try to "stock up" the inventory before they have requests.
> 
> ...



No, I don't think they will do either of your models.  I believe they will do a third.  Marriott is in a situation where they are selling across all resorts, equal access to all resorts and all seasons via a point system.  Wherever you buy, that's effectively your home resort.  You want to go to MOC every year, no problem.  Join points.  This is true even when Marriott has no deeds at MOC.  That's why you pay a premium for points.  We get you the reservations you want. That is the superiority of points over the old weeks system.  I feel pretty confident that is how Marriott will sell it even though they know they don't have the weeks in inventory to satisfy the demand they are creating.  They are creating an expectation imbalance that they will have to address and they will do it via the types of tools I am suggesting.  I guarantee it.

So, what they will do instead, is try to stay ahead of the curve by proactively managing and monitoring and estimating demand for each week by various historical trends.  They will build a predictive model for demand.  They will see a gap in their supply and demand analysis and they will implement inventory acquisition strategies within the rules specified to protect weeks owners and honor the II affiliation agreement.  Of course, those affiliation agreements will be written in a way that Marriott can say technically that the rules are equal across all parties including Marriott.  However, the rules for exchange in terms of visibility and action will be such that Marriott requests will be advantaged in ways that I describe.  Everyone is equal, but some people are more equal than others.

There is no way that Marriott is going to say, wow, we have 100 units and 10 owners in 10 platinum weeks, so we are going to request 1 unit of every week in the platinum season.  That would be the most trivial and brain dead inventory management program ever.  They may start that way, but as they evolve, I guarantee that they will improve on it.  That is what inventory managers do.  That's what I do in my business.  I don't go and say, hey, I need the same number of weeks in every resort for every season.  I predict based on historical records and my belief of the next and upcoming season to acquire inventory for my clients.  Marriott will be no different only they will be more sophisticated in their modelling so that they can be better at matching supply and demand.

Now, think about this scenario for a moment.  You are the Marriott VP of Product Management.  You are confronted with a situation where you have an imbalance of expectations created by your product model.  You have a stock out situation in MOC.  What do you do?  Do you try to be fair and allow weeks owners to have their priority in reservations and just tell owner services and the sales teams that it's just the way it is, live with the complaints of points owners who are not getting their exchanges.  Or, are you going to tip the scale in favor of the client base who is going to give you future sales?  Hmm. Future sales or past customer satisfaction.  Your bonus is based on sales results.  Which side are you going to favor?  I spent a 20 year career launching new products and services.  These are the real issues facing product managers and I can tell you that product managers do what they are compensated to do.  And, the timeshare industry is driven and controlled by the sales force.   If the sales force is losing sales because points owners aren't getting exchanges they want, they will put immense pressure on the product shop to give them what they want.  And, they will win the internal corporate battle of deciding between new sales and prior customer satisfaction.


----------



## hotcoffee (Jun 30, 2010)

hipslo said:


> I dont think points owners will have a "huge advantage", I am just not looking forward to competing with all of them at 13 months for the 50% of prime week inventory that had formerly been set aside only for multiple week owners.  Even on an even playing field, increased competition is increased competition.
> 
> That said, I dont think you're going to find that it is particularly easy to snag prime weeks in points, either.



I plan to enroll.  I'm also hoping that in the beginning we will have some exchange advantage because there are more pots to pull inventory from.  But, some years down the road, there may or may not be much of an exchange advantage.  It depends upon how much additional inventory Marriott can acquire.  I'm gambling that there will be at least some ongoing advantage over just depositing my week in II.  In any event, for me it is not a bad deal because, as a resale owner, it puts me back into equality with developer purchasers.  I will be able to make use of MRPs.  I also might be able to take 2-week vacations like I used to do prior to buying my timeshare.

I'm starting to get weary over all of the hysteria and speculation being expressed in this thread and some of the others.  I doubt that Marriott is trying to screw everyone over.  There is no advantage for them to do that. Some of the scenerios being described are just so unrealistic and unlikely to happen.  In the final analysis we will just have to see how well the system works.  If it seems to hurt those who did not join, the ones who purchased developer will still be able to enroll later.


----------



## qlaval (Jun 30, 2010)

Dave, what about an owner who enrolled his resale weeks and then after a while (a year or two...) decide to quit the new points program. Will he lose the ability to exchange his weeks for MRP? 
Also if he ever decide to rejoin the new points system after a while will he have to pay $695 or $1995 again.. (are we gone bear the "R" letter for ever...?)


----------



## 5infam (Jul 1, 2010)

If i can just chime in on how people use points...some of you have stated that people will never stay during the expensive prime weeks because it costs too many points - and others have stated that people will never trade in several years of usage (banking and borrowing) to stay just a single year. Well, I hate to admit it to you - but I am Mr. Never - in both situations.

I own DVC, which is points based only. When I first purchased, air fare to Orlando was dirt cheap, and I went every year. As air fare became more expensive, and my kids entered school, I had to bank my points and go during school breaks - thus, I used my points for Prime Expensive Weeks. I also bought when i had 2 kids, and now have 3, so i have to get 2 BDR units vs. 1 BDR before. Now, we have been several times, so what we do is go every 3 years through banking and borrowing. I go as much as 10 days if i can squeeze in some missed school for the kids, and if not, just a week. I still have value vs. renting and my maintenance/purchase price - unlike with Marriott where the maintenance fees have increased 50% since i bought my resale, and the spread vs. rentals is thin.

I can also tell you that the most expensive weeks in DVC, sell out almost immediately, and the parks are packed with people. Marriott made these weeks the most expensive for a reason, and that is supply and demand. They can get away with charging that much because there will be enough people who will be willing to pay the point cost. Trust me, I have seen it in DVC for many years. So yes, there will be people who can travel shoulder who will make some great and long trips with small point amounts; but there will be lots more willing to pay Marriott's point fee. I own at MOC; it is kid heaven in the summer when I go (usually around the 4th). Lots of people still need to travel around the school schedule - Marriott knows it - they have the stats on when they are the fullest, and have aligned their point chart to reflect just that.


----------



## JimIg23 (Jul 1, 2010)

hipslo said:


> That may be, though we haven't received any word on this yet from marriott.  Even if that is the case, it potentially gives points owners a much higher proportion of those prime weeks (12.5% in your example) that the points pool bears to the overall number of weeks in platinum season (2.7% in your example), which works to the detriment of current 13 month owners.



I agree on both.  We have gotten answers on some of the big questions, but not this one.


----------



## hipslo (Jul 1, 2010)

5infam said:


> I can also tell you that the most expensive weeks in DVC, sell out almost immediately, and the parks are packed with people. Marriott made these weeks the most expensive for a reason, and that is supply and demand. They can get away with charging that much because there will be enough people who will be willing to pay the point cost. Trust me, I have seen it in DVC for many years. So yes, there will be people who can travel shoulder who will make some great and long trips with small point amounts; but there will be lots more willing to pay Marriott's point fee. I own at MOC; it is kid heaven in the summer when I go (usually around the 4th). Lots of people still need to travel around the school schedule - Marriott knows it - they have the stats on when they are the fullest, and have aligned their point chart to reflect just that.



This does not surprise me in the least, and I am amazed that folks here seem to expect that the points system will somehow result in better availability of prime weeks. Dream on.....


----------



## m61376 (Jul 1, 2010)

hipslo said:


> This does not surprise me in the least, and I am amazed that folks here seem to expect that the points system will somehow result in better availability of prime weeks. Dream on.....



I agree- just look at which weeks sold out first in the weeks system.

I think that the biggest issue remains unanswered- whether or not the pro rata distribution of weeks/point will be based on the overall season or per week/reservation period equally. If it is per season I think it is a huge deal and really undermines Marriott's continued contention that if you use your weeks as they are nothing changes. It would be a significant impact on increased competition for peak weeks both from new point owners wanting to reserve at what may have even been sold out properties/seasons and week owners using points for that year to trade in, now having equal preference as home resort owners. Furthermore, although the issue has received little attention, the ability to rent point reservations opens up another can of worms- while potentially a nice feature for some owners, at resorts where the point allocation was significantly undervalued in comparison to rental rates, owners now have the right to reserve elsewhere in order to rent. So for those properties that were allocated less points than properties that rent for half or close to half the amount, there will likely be increased competition from savvy point owners trying to reserve those high demand weeks to rent as well as to use.

Hopefully Marriott will do the right thing by its owners and limit the percentage available to each pool evenly per week and not per season.


----------



## pacheco18 (Jul 1, 2010)

Thank you Dave.

I stayed away from TUG for a few days because there wasn't enough Tylenol in the world to stop the headache!

Your post clears up many questions. What I would like to see now (and I assume the rest of you would like as well) is a detailed FAQ from the mouth of Marriott, confirming what Dave posted and addressing the additional unanswered questions we have.

Perhaps, Dave, you could suggest that to your source.


----------



## DanCali (Jul 1, 2010)

m61376 said:


> I agree- just look at which weeks sold out first in the weeks system.
> 
> I think that the biggest issue remains unanswered- whether or not the pro rata distribution of weeks/point will be based on the overall season or per week/reservation period equally. If it is per season I think it is a huge deal and really undermines Marriott's continued contention that if you use your weeks as they are nothing changes. It would be a significant impact on increased competition for peak weeks both from new point owners wanting to reserve at what may have even been sold out properties/seasons and week owners using points for that year to trade in, now having equal preference as home resort owners.



I couldn't agree more. The fact that Marriott avoids this issue like the plague makes me wonder even more....




m61376 said:


> Furthermore, although the issue has received little attention, the ability to rent point reservations opens up another can of worms- while potentially a nice feature for some owners, at resorts where the point allocation was significantly undervalued in comparison to rental rates, owners now have the right to reserve elsewhere in order to rent. So for those properties that were allocated less points than properties that rent for half or close to half the amount, there will likely be increased competition from savvy point owners trying to reserve those high demand weeks to rent as well as to use.
> 
> Hopefully Marriott will do the right thing by its owners and limit the percentage available to each pool evenly per week and not per season.



This is a concern I also raised earlier. It would make the old days of people reserving prime weeks to deposit in II seem like the good old days...

However, I think this concern gets mitigated is there is an ability to rent points directly. It is much easier and less risky to rent generic points on eBay than to reserve a prime week and hope to find a match. Moreover, the prime weeks are priced expensively (unless booked as home resort) so the advantage of renting weeks over points may be minimal...

My guess is that the rental market for points will settle at around $0.40-$0.45 (given that MFs are $0.40). You can book a prime 2BR in Hawaii and rent it for $2500, or you can rent 6000 points for about the same amount.

Of course, if Marriott decides the point rental market hurts its own rentals of skimmed points and they prevent points transfers among owners this concern is real. What's the status of point transfers currently?


----------



## m61376 (Jul 1, 2010)

DanCali said:


> This is a concern I also raised earlier. It would make the old days of people reserving prime weeks to deposit in II seem like the good old days...
> 
> However, I think this concern gets mitigated is there is an ability to rent points directly. It is much easier and less risky to rent generic points on eBay than to reserve a prime week and hope to find a match. Moreover, the prime weeks are priced expensively (unless booked as home resort) so the advantage of renting weeks over points may be minimal...
> 
> ...


Maybe- but I think the point rental market will be lower, since you'll have week owners or point owners who will want to get rid of their leftovers.

Two years ago there were many prime weeks that easily rented for $4000; in fact, Marriott itself even gave that as rentals other than for holiday weeks at certain locations. So, there is the real possibility, and I am guessing probability, that those rates will rebound when the economy does. IF I am right, then some of those weeks may make great rentals to nab. Clearly, it's all just an educated guess on my part. But it does add another layer to consider.

I am actually surprised that they opened this loophole. On the flip side, I am sure there are many owners who will love it. Whether I think it is an issue depends upon how they ultimate regulate the week/point pools.


----------



## qlaval (Jul 1, 2010)

m61376 said:


> ...I think that the biggest issue remains unanswered- whether or not the pro rata distribution of weeks/point will be based on the overall season or per week/reservation period equally...



Exactly! Probably one of the biggest cause of concern for weeks owners....


----------



## Michigan Czar (Jul 2, 2010)

qlaval said:


> Exactly! Probably one of the biggest cause of concern for weeks owners....



Totall agree, I will not join the points program but I am very concerned about my reservation ability being adversely impacted with the new points program. I would like to see in writing how Marriott will handle the distribution of available weeks in prime season.


----------



## RBERR1 (Jul 2, 2010)

*The key question*

I think the key question for now will be how many people at each resort decide to redeem for points in a given year in each given season at the resorts where Marriott does not have a lot of inventory to put into the trust.

The lower that number the easier it will be to get prime weeks in your season at your home resort.

If no platnium weeks are redeemed then no change because Marriott has no deeds.

If a lot of weeks are redeemed then competition for prime weeks with the point members for prime weeks increases significantly.

The only offset to this may be the skim and the size of it and therefore people may not have enough points to do what they want.  The other possibility is if they do then may be able to do it by banking and borrowing but they can't keep it up every year because the bank of available points to one user would run dry.

The renting of points either for weeks or cash would add an interesting dimension to this and we will need to see how it works/impacts.


----------



## WelcomeHome (Jul 2, 2010)

m61376 said:


> I think that the biggest issue remains unanswered- whether or not the pro rata distribution of weeks/point will be based on the overall season or per week/reservation period equally



I think Marriott's silence is the loudest answer you could possibly get. Marriott has no intention of using a pro rata distribution - they're going to grab whatever weeks they need to support their new program - but think of how politically incorrect would it be for them to actually come out and say it?

They only reason for them to change their position would be if enough legacy members reject their new one-sided system unless they're forced to include "enhancements" like "fairness" and "customer satisfaction" in order to attract a respectable percentage of legacy owners. That's the only way you'll see a pro rated distribution.

Best wishes,
David


----------



## mikeb1 (Jul 2, 2010)

Dave M said:


> *Updated as of 10:00 a.m. EDT June 30, 2010*
> 
> *Can a points purchaser rent weeks obtained with point?*
> 
> ...



If enrolled owners are looked at as being different than points  purchaser/owner (new buyers)..then can enrolled owners who trade a week of use in for vac club points.. can they book a week, and then rent it out?  Or are we going to be prohibited from that, like we are supposed to b with II from renting out an exchange we’ve made?


----------



## 5infam (Jul 2, 2010)

Dave M said:


> I'll also address this earlier post by Marilyn (m61376):I don't think you will get that confirmation, Marilyn, just as you wouldn't have been able to get a similar confirmation in the past that Marriott wouldn't try to reserve more than its fair share of weeks for (e.g.) July 4th week at a beach resort using weeks under its control.
> 
> Bottom line: It's exactly the same competition from points owners that we have had in the past from Marriott with respect to weeks that were under its control.



Hi Dave,

Thank you for the updates (just read them), and went an re-read posts #60 and #61. I quoted #61 because this is my biggest overall concern that is left with the program, as a weeks owner. You stated that it is the same competition as before, but I have doubts that is the case. Marriott will soon have lots of points owners, who's sole purpose is to look to reserve somewhere - and many will want to book at the resort I own, Maui. Up until points, Maui owners had to go through II to relinquish their week, booking a specific week and trading in, and those weeks were spread out throughout the year (yes, I already know that many booked prime weeks for trades). Now with points, you don't have to give up a specific week, and since the platinum season in Maui is weeks 1 to 50, the holiday weeks will be the first to go on requests from the points owners.

So unlike today, where Marriott may have rented out it's inventory it owned - which I doubt people were calling in for rentals exactly 1 year or more in advance, for say a 4th of July week. Now, there will be a lot of people, owners and non-owners through points, that want that 4th of July week. Now, I understand your point that there is still the same number of weeks - I get that. What I am concerned about, is how Marriott is going to fill the points requests. This is the new "competition" I am worried about. If Marriott has an automated way to fill the request before I can get in and fill my request (6:00am Pacific time, 1 year in advance); then Marriott has an unfair advantage and is in effect changing everything about my weeks ownership.

I am not a conspiracy person, I don't hate Marriott and I do appreciate all of your info Dave. If there is anyway you can ask this question of your Marriott contacts, and post whatever answer is given, that would be fantastic!!


----------



## m61376 (Jul 2, 2010)

5infam-
It's not even a matter of Marriott calling in to fulfill the requests; that's not my concern. I'm not worried about Marriott being unfair and gaming the reservation system as some have suggested- I think they're more honorable than that. It is about having many point owners or users who suddenly are making that phone call the same time as you are for those high demand weeks, who don't even own at Maui, in your example. If they aren't restricted to reserving the proportionate share of weeks allocated to points for every week, but just that they can only reserve x percentage over the entire season (in this case almost the entire year), guess when the bulk of that competition might be? I'm guessing it will be higher for those premium weeks, even though they cost more points, because some people just need to travel then.

Years ago my travel agent used to say he couldn't wait until I didn't need to travel President's week. But for many years I paid the premium because I had kids and their schedule to work around. If you need to go during school vacations, you need that time, and will pay to go then. So, despite point cost differentials, there is no way to really equalize demand. Which is why I think there has to be proportionate inventory control.


----------



## 5infam (Jul 2, 2010)

Yes, I see what you are saying. In talking with Marriott, the first rep I spoke with told me that a points person can trade their week in for points in January, a year in advance, then put in their request, more than a year in advance. So to say it clearer, come January 2011, you can trade in your 2012 week. I was told that in January 2011, you can request the time in 2012 you wanted, and would be on a waiting list. This is why I was concerned that Marriott would pull the prime weeks before I got a chance to book on line, and Marriott would do so to fullfill the points waitlist. Again, this came direct from a Marriott rep, when I called in for info.

Well after reading your post, I called back into Marriott and just spoke to another rep. She told me that yes, I could turn my 2012 week in for points on January 1, 2011. However, I still had to call in at 12 or 13 months to make my reservation. So now I understand that the competition is not Marriott pulling the weeks directly, but that it is countless numbers of points people who now have access to call in for the same week I want, at my home resort, and book a week as if they owned there. 

This clarification made me feel better for about 30 seconds, then I realized I am still screwed just in a different way.


----------



## SueDonJ (Jul 2, 2010)

Dave, don't know if this is hi-jacking your thread in some way, but if you're still asking questions and getting answers then this might be the place you'll see questions.  (Maybe it's unfair to expect you to get all the answers, but it does seem that you have a pipeline to someone whose answers may be more legitimate than the reps currently answering the phones and emails.) 

Is there any reason to believe that the nights stayed on DC Points will NOT be counted toward MR Elite Status, the way that nights stayed on MRP are not counted?  I don't think so but it's worth checking ...


----------



## davidvel (Jul 2, 2010)

m61376 said:


> 5infam-
> It's not even a matter of Marriott calling in to fulfill the requests; that's not my concern. I'm not worried about Marriott being unfair and gaming the reservation system as some have suggested- I think they're more honorable than that. It is about having many point owners or users who suddenly are making that phone call the same time as you are for those high demand weeks, who don't even own at Maui, in your example.



There are not *more* people calling in to reserve than otherwise would be (at least not those who can reserve the week.) In order to give a reservation to a points user, Marriott has to control the week. Someone could have called to reserve this week under the "old way", either Marriott or the owner who traded it in for points. This only applies if Marriott does not jump the gun on reservations (see below).



5infam said:


> Well after reading your post, I called back into Marriott and just spoke to another rep. She told me that yes, I could turn my 2012 week in for points on January 1, 2011. However, I still had to call in at 12 or 13 months to make my reservation. So now I understand that the competition is not Marriott pulling the weeks directly, but that it is countless numbers of points people who now have access to call in for the same week I want, at my home resort, and book a week as if they owned there.
> 
> This clarification made me feel better for about 30 seconds, then I realized I am still screwed just in a different way.



If this is in fact how they do it (which seems logical), then it is at least somewhat less unfair than what we have feared. If a human points user has to call in then Marriott has to 1. see if they control a deed covering that week (if not waitlist them); 2. then see if the day is available to reserve. 

As long as points users have to manually call in/go to internet at 12/13 months, it is no different than if the original owner who turned it in for points did the same thing under the old system.   

(I am not addressing above the 12/13 month priority rules for simplification. If Marriott allows a point user to reserve at 13 months where the deed turned in only had 12 month priority THIS IS RIGGING the system in my opinion and WILL change the game.)


----------



## Dean (Jul 2, 2010)

BocaBum99 said:


> They can lose in unit assignments.


It is unclear HOW unit assignments will occur.  I've talked to one GM that's asked for clarification from corporate as to how points owners reserving on points will be assigned and whether unit assignments will still be given final say at the local resort level as they are now.  My GUESS is that those using their weeks will still be given the same priorities as they are now with points reservations coming in after weeks owners but ahead of Marriott exchangers.  

Thanks Dave, very nice job, much appreciated.


----------



## m61376 (Jul 2, 2010)

davidvel- I think you misunderstood my point. Heretofore, there were only the total number of owners that equaled the total number of reservations in a given season who can call in to reserve.

In the new system, points are being sold with the buyer having the expectation of being able to trade into even sold out seasons. So, there are likely to be some weeks at many properties in high demand where there are now a higher total of people calling in to reserve the week than there were before, so there will be increased competition.

You are right, Marriott cannot fill a point owner's reservation request unless they have control of those weeks, either from developer inventory or week owner's conversions to points for that year. However, for any season they have a percentage of point weeks and week weeks. Are they going to apportion them for the season or for each reservation week? If for the season, then all those extra point users vying for reservations can get a lion's share of the summer or other high demand weeks, and still have the same percentage of weeks for the season going to each group. Marriott hasn't stated how those inventory buckets will be divided- by season or by week/reservation period. In my opinion, that's a big issue, esp. for owners of resorts where there are certain weeks in the season that are very high demand.

I understand the argument that the point cost distribution is intended to equalize demand across the board, but regardless of the increased point cost, there are still many owners who must travel and will pay the heightened point cost over school vacations. Hotel rates are higher, airfare often double, cruise rates close to double during some school breaks, because people will pay it. With a whole new pool of owners looking to exchange into premium properties (and, let's face it, Marriott can now sell summer dessert weeks or other off season weeks for their point value, with the "promise" of easy reservations in many of the same resorts where owners already have difficulty making the reservations they want.


----------



## davidvel (Jul 2, 2010)

m61376 said:


> davidvel- I think you misunderstood my point. Heretofore, there were only the total number of owners that equaled the total number of reservations in a given season who can call in to reserve.
> 
> In the new system, points are being sold with the buyer having the expectation of being able to trade into even sold out seasons. So, there are likely to be some weeks at many properties in high demand where there are now a higher total of people calling in to reserve the week than there were before, so there will be increased competition.


I am slow, but I think I now get what you are saying: Essentially, there previously would be no more people calling in (or on the website) than the total number of people with unreserved weeks in a season at the time. Now, there could be 2, 3, 4x that many people calling in (even though they can't all get weeks because there aren't enough deeds controlled by Marriott.)

So the concern is that they will have an "unfair advantage," as they are sort of like reservation bots for points users, like the ticket scalpers who get 1000 people in a room to call ticketmaster for a limited amount of tickets (or that website that used to guarantee you an "A" boarding pass on Southwest); the scalpers end up with a high percentage. (light bulb now on.)

So although it seems it is first come first served as to each deed holder, the brute force of the number of people calling in (points users) which far exceeds the available points deeds (and "our" deeds) will result in points users getting a higher % of that week as compared to us people that only have the phone line.

Now I have to think about somehting else 

I guess we'll have to retain one of those india phone banks to call in simultaneously then transfer the call to us   .

Then again, is anyone who bought points in this hope and a prayer system based upon a salesperson's pitch that they can go anywhere, any time really going to be able to figure all this out and call at 7am? Not a chance.:ignore:


----------



## normab (Jul 2, 2010)

Dave,

Thanks for clarifying the online access issue.  I was not getting a straight answer and this is our main concern since we use that for last minute trades with our one silver unit.

Have you been able to determine if we will have to keep a separate account or will the annual fee cover that in the new II account?

Thanks again,

Norma


----------



## DanCali (Jul 3, 2010)

m61376 said:


> davidvel- I think you misunderstood my point. Heretofore, there were only the total number of owners that equaled the total number of reservations in a given season who can call in to reserve.
> 
> In the new system, points are being sold with the buyer having the expectation of being able to trade into even sold out seasons. So, there are likely to be some weeks at many properties in high demand where there are now a higher total of people calling in to reserve the week than there were before, so there will be increased competition.






davidvel said:


> I am slow, but I think I now get what you are saying: Essentially, there previously would be no more people calling in (or on the website) than the total number of people with unreserved weeks in a season at the time. Now, there could be 2, 3, 4x that many people calling in (even though they can't all get weeks because there aren't enough deeds controlled by Marriott.)



Davidvel - here is a link from a post I posted yesterday discussing the same issue. I hope it helps clarify.


----------



## m61376 (Jul 3, 2010)

normab said:


> Dave,
> 
> Thanks for clarifying the online access issue.  I was not getting a straight answer and this is our main concern since we use that for last minute trades with our one silver unit.
> 
> ...



The Club II acct. will cover all your Marriotts. Any Marriott trades, whether points or weeks, will be covered. If you trade externally, you can still do that within the club account, but will have to pay the II fee for the exchange.

You will only need a second II account if you have non-Marriott resorts.


----------



## m61376 (Jul 3, 2010)

davidvel said:


> Then again, is anyone who bought points in this hope and a prayer system based upon a salesperson's pitch that they can go anywhere, any time really going to be able to figure all this out and call at 7am? Not a chance.:ignore:



Well, since you're on the West coast, they will be at a distinct disadvantage if they call at 7AM PST :hysterical: 

Seriously, though, I agree- new point buyers are going to casually call in for their reservation the first time, then likely to call there VOA who will nicely inform them that, well, it  may be a "little" hard to get those prime vacation weeks. I'm venturing to guess that the learning curve will be short enough for enough people- after all, they'll have just spent some big bucks here- that there will likely be a lot more callers. Don't forget, some of those callers will be current owners converting to points to make an internal trade, so there will already be a pool of savvy owners vying for those premium spots.


----------



## m61376 (Jul 9, 2010)

*Marriott will fairly allocate inventory for reservations*

There has been a lot of concern over how Marriott will allocate inventory and whether each pool of inventory would be a percentage of the season or of each week in the season.

I have received a definitive response on good authority that Marriott intends to fairly distribute inventory from each pool evenly across the season, so that if 20% of the ownership is points (whether Marriott owned inventory, weeks turned in for reward points or week owners converting to points that year) and 80% weeks, Marriott will follow that same distribution for reserving every week in the season, such that point owners will not be able to monopolize reservations during peak periods.

I think this is a very big reassurance that week ownership will not be adversely impacted, at least wrt making reservations at one's home resort. We will still be competing with other owners for the percentage of villas that correlates with week ownership.


----------



## pharmgirl (Jul 9, 2010)

we have always used the online calender to reserve - hope this can still be used for our weeks at our home resort

Like this feature of marriott TS very much, also have a Starwood Westin and this requires an early call


----------



## gblotter (Jul 9, 2010)

m61376 said:


> I think that the biggest issue remains unanswered- whether or not the pro rata distribution of weeks/point will be based on the overall season or per week/reservation period equally. If it is per season I think it is a huge deal and really undermines Marriott's continued contention that if you use your weeks as they are nothing changes. It would be a significant impact on increased competition for peak weeks both from new point owners wanting to reserve at what may have even been sold out properties/seasons and week owners using points for that year to trade in, now having equal preference as home resort owners. Furthermore, although the issue has received little attention, the ability to rent point reservations opens up another can of worms- while potentially a nice feature for some owners, at resorts where the point allocation was significantly undervalued in comparison to rental rates, owners now have the right to reserve elsewhere in order to rent. So for those properties that were allocated less points than properties that rent for half or close to half the amount, there will likely be increased competition from savvy point owners trying to reserve those high demand weeks to rent as well as to use.
> 
> Hopefully Marriott will do the right thing by its owners and limit the percentage available to each pool evenly per week and not per season.



I think your hope is misplaced. I will use an example from Newport Coast Villas (NCV) to highlight what I believe Marriott will do.

My uncle owns a platinum season week at NCV. He bought there because he enjoys golfing at the nearby Pelican Hill Golf Course. He would call 12 months in advance (to the day, at 6am when phones opened up) hoping to reserve prime summer weeks.  He was told that no inventory was available. This scenario happened on repeated occasions when attempting to reserve different prime summer weeks. After many failed attempts, he went to marriott.com and discovered to his surprise that he could rent that same prime week at NCV for cash.

Finally he complained to his MVCI rep who gave him a very honest explanation. He was told that the inventory on marriott.com represented the unsold weeks that Marriott owns. Furthermore, he was told this problem would continue until NCV was sold out. Only then would owners would have access to all the weeks in their season. My uncle has now lost patience with the manipulations and has decided to dump his NCV week.

So you see, when a week comes under Marriott's control they are not shy about claiming the very best weeks in a season because they are naturally the most lucrative for Marriott.

I fully expect that Marriott will do the same thing with this new points system.  Whenever an owner deposits a week (in exchange for MRP or Club Points), Marriott will claim the the very best prime weeks in that season. But the situation will be even worse than many assume. Marriott will not make those prime weeks available to either weeks owners OR points owners - rather Marriott will rent those prime weeks for cash and keep the revenue for themselves. Everybody loses (except Marriott of course). They've already been doing it at NCV, so why would you expect otherwise under this points program?


----------



## hotcoffee (Jul 9, 2010)

--Deleted post--


----------



## gblotter (Jul 9, 2010)

m61376 said:


> There has been a lot of concern over how Marriott will allocate inventory and whether each pool of inventory would be a percentage of the season or of each week in the season.  I have received a definitive response on good authority that Marriott intends to fairly distribute inventory from each pool evenly across the season.



I would like to believe your information to be correct, but the example I just posted about Newport Coast Villas makes me very skeptical.  If you have the opportunity, please ask your "good authority at Marriott" about what has been going on at Newport Coast Villas.


----------



## RedDogSD (Jul 9, 2010)

gblotter said:


> I would like to believe your information to be correct, but the example I just posted about Newport Coast Villas makes be very skeptical.  If you have the opportunity, please ask your "good authority at Marriott" about what has been going on at Newport Coast Villas.



What probably happened is that your uncle depended on old technology (phone) when he shoudl have used the computer.  The people who have the best luck getting prime weeks in the system are logged into their Marriott account prior to 6am and ready to go.  This eliminates the need for the person on the phone to validate your account, name, phone number,etc.  Then, at the very second that the clock ticks over to 6am, they are starting the reservation process. So, they might be gone within 1-2 minutes which might be before your uncle gets them on the phone.  

Anyone who still calls Ticketmaster gets crappy seats.  That is the reality.  Only the Internet customers get the best seats because they are pulling from the pile first.   I am not sure how many NCV units there are, but there are 52 times that many intervals.  So, that means 52 owners competing for each unit on 4th of July.  Maybe some owners don't try, but there are probably 15 owners trying for each unit.  They can't all get them.  That is just the way it works.


----------



## gblotter (Jul 9, 2010)

m61376 said:


> I think this is a very big reassurance that week ownership will not be adversely impacted, at least wrt making reservations at one's home resort. We will still be competing with other owners for the percentage of villas that correlates with week ownership.



Personal note to m61376:  In all these posts over the last 2 weeks, it seems like a few of us (you, me, hipslo, etc) have focused on this central issue of how inventory will be allocated between legacy owners and points owners.  If your "good authority" turns out to be correct and my NCV example turns out to be non-representative, that will indeed be a relief.  I'm grateful for the work you have done to research this point and pass information back to the tug community.


----------



## Dean (Jul 9, 2010)

gblotter said:


> I would like to believe your information to be correct, but the example I just posted about Newport Coast Villas makes be very skeptical.  If you have the opportunity, please ask your "good authority at Marriott" about what has been going on at Newport Coast Villas.


I think your insinuation is that Marriott is inappropriately reserving the best weeks.  We really don't know that is accurate and I doubt it to be the case.  They should, and I believe are, reserving as any other owner is.  The issue though is that for multiple weeks up to 50% of the inventory can be reserved at 13 months out.  All the high demand resorts that I am aware of have issues at the 12 month window.  Maui is the poster child for such a situation.  Marriott is a multiple week owner.


----------



## camachinist (Jul 9, 2010)

I could stay tonight at NCV, for 399.00. Same next week, and the week after that. 7 day stays are a bit problematical, but, hey, it's July 

When I went to book 2011 this morning (BTW, what's up with forcing the earliest booking day back one day?), as I expected, and contrary to the last three years, no joy. That's OK, Marriott and I have a long history together. It always works out...



> I am not sure how many NCV units there are, but there are 52 times that many intervals. So, that means 52 owners competing for each unit on 4th of July.



It's a big resort and fully built out now (just recently). 700 villas x 52 weeks = 36,400 usage periods. July 4 is no competition. It's a fixed week (Platinum Plus). Otherwise, it's owners from June through December disemboweling each other for prime summer weeks. One of those owners now is Marriott, who happens to also run the reservation system and is a big landlord too. Of course, their ownership is in trust. Very appropriate


----------



## m61376 (Jul 9, 2010)

gblotter said:


> Personal note to m61376:  In all these posts over the last 2 weeks, it seems like a few of us (you, me, hipslo, etc) have focused on this central issue of how inventory will be allocated between legacy owners and points owners.  If your "good authority" turns out to be correct and my NCV example turns out to be non-representative, that will indeed be a relief.  I'm grateful for the work you have done to research this point and pass information back to the tug community.



I can tell you this was a big issue to me and I was talking with someone well placed, and he had actually told me this last week but was 99% sure at that point and asked me not to post anything until he fully verified it. Trust me when I say that I didn't leave the question open to misinterpretation, and literally presented something akin to if there were 10 villas in a resort and 20% of the total weeks was in the points inventory, then 1 villa per week would be released at 13 months and 1 at 12 months for point reservations, and 4 at 13 months for week reservations and 4 at 12 months for each week in the season. He assured me that point owners would not get a larger percentage of certain premium weeks and a smaller percentage of others, which was the concern several of us had.

While I have not agreed with everything he has said (like the way points were allocated) he has been nothing but honest and forthright and I do believe, at least at this point in time, that that's Marriott's policy. And I am a bit sanguine about this program, so it says a lot that at least that's something I'm comfortable with.

Another point of interest that I clarified was the issue of points expiration. The weeks or days reserved with the points must be used prior to the expiration date. There is no policy, like in II, that if you cancel you get a replacement week for a year, even if your original week would have expired. If you cancel points over 60 days they go into your regular account and less than 60 days into the holding account, but they expire at their regular expiration date. They don't want to allow people to keep on cycling points. 

I know in another post a salesman and then the GM confirmed that Premier Plus and Premier owners would be given priority in villa assignments over week owners using their home resort. I was told quite definitively that this was not the case and there was a bit of surprise that a GM was saying that.

Another query that someone had posted that I discussed was what weeks in II could be accessed by an enrolled week trader. Basically, if you trade weeks you have access to the same inventory whether you are enrolled or not enrolled. Only points owners and users have access to the Marriott inventory, enrolled weeks owner deposits to points, and weeks owners traded in for reward points. See post #149 below for clarification

I also clarified that enrolled owners can use points acquired from other sources in a given year even if not converting their weeks to points that year (they can borrow from friends, or rent points from strangers- as long as the point rental is not a commercial venture).


----------



## m61376 (Jul 9, 2010)

camachinist said:


> I could stay tonight at NCV, for 399.00. Same next week, and the week after that. 7 day stays are a bit problematical, but, hey, it's July
> 
> When I went to book 2011 this morning (BTW, what's up with forcing the earliest booking day back one day?), as I expected, and contrary to the last three years, no joy. That's OK, Marriott and I have a long history together. It always works out...



Shouldn't you have been booking yesterday morning, or am I missing something?


----------



## hipslo (Jul 9, 2010)

m61376 said:


> I can tell you this was a big issue to me and I was talking with someone well placed, and he had actually told me this last week but was 99% sure at that point and asked me not to post anything until he fully verified it. Trust me when I say that I didn't leave the question open to misinterpretation, and literally presented something akin to if there were 10 villas in a resort and 20% of the total weeks was in the points inventory, then 1 villa per week would be released at 13 months and 1 at 12 months for point reservations, and 4 at 13 months for week reservations and 4 at 12 months for each week in the season. He assured me that point owners would not get a larger percentage of certain premium weeks and a smaller percentage of others, which was the concern several of us had.



This is good to hear and hopefully will be borne out in practice.  Thanks for being so persistent in your search for an answer on this point.


----------



## camachinist (Jul 9, 2010)

m61376 said:


> Shouldn't you have been booking yesterday morning, or am I missing something?


Yes, I should have been, and attempted to, even though the inventory release calendar told me today was the day. No joy on either day. 

When I saw the dates on the calendar, I thought either I had a brain aneurysm or, gasp, something had changed. Then I thought of all those Gift of Time e-mails and wondered if Marriott had so much time to sell they had to move the reservation day up one. Then, I thought that I had missed a leap year or something. Then I realized, ta da, that it was an enhancement to align with the rollout of DC. 

Here's a screenshot

I'm sure there's a reasonable answer, since it appears no one else is asking the question. I looked around and couldn't find it, so figured I'd ask here 

I found the answer and it was right in the screenshot. Dummy me, I thought, since the calendar was in my account, it applied to me. Nuh-uh.... Just look at the title above the check-in date calendar... It says "Calendar for Vacation Club Points Owners and Enrolled Owners". Slap me in the face, I'm neither of those.  Someone get that thing outta my account...


----------



## Dave M (Jul 9, 2010)

Pat -

I believe the screen shot is only for those reserving with points. For enrolled owners, as well as for points purchasers, it's for those who elect to use points to reserve their weeks. 

For both enrolled owners and non-enrolled owners, the one-year rule for reserving a week the old fashioned way should still exist, meaning that yesterday should have been your call-in day.


----------



## camachinist (Jul 9, 2010)

LOL, Thanks Dave; it looks like we've been posting at the same time 

Got it figured now. I hit it yesterday just to be sure but now can sleep in on Fridays 

So, this apparent one day head start thing, is this something everyone is aware of, that traditional weeks owners get a one day head start over enrolled and points owners, at least at the 'seven nights or more level'? Interesting.......so, equal competition for direct owner resort reservations but a day delay for 'reservations' being requested through the internal exchange DCP system


----------



## DanCali (Jul 9, 2010)

m61376 said:


> Another query that someone had posted that I discussed was what weeks in II could be accessed by an enrolled week trader. Basically,* if you trade weeks you have access to the same inventory whether you are enrolled or not enrolled.* *Only points owners and users have access to the Marriott inventory, enrolled weeks owner deposits, and weeks owners traded in for reward points.*



This sound important.

So if I own at NCV and enroll and then deposit my reserved July week in II as a week, only people who use II with points can access that week? Meaning other people who are enrolled in points but trade weeks will not have access to that week either (you saw weeks traders inside or out see the same things)?
*
So unless you use II with points, the weeks available to you will shrink, no matter what?*

That what it sounds like to me, but if I misunderstand please clarify.

We may have hit on the key on how the enrooled weeks who join for the II savings will eventually be forced to use points after all. And so will the ones who haven't enrolled...


----------



## ArtsieAng (Jul 10, 2010)

DanCali said:


> This sound important.
> 
> So if I own at NCV and enroll and then deposit my reserved July week in II as a week, only people who use II with points can access that week? Meaning other people who are enrolled in points but trade weeks will not have access to that week either (you saw weeks traders inside or out see the same things)?
> *
> ...



This is significant......If I'm understanding this correctly, the point pool will contain the weeks deposited into II by enrolled owners, point owners, and weeks traded for MRP........The weeks pool will only contain weeks deposited by non-enrolled owners.  

In addition, Marriott has the right to take from the week pool to fill request from the point pool. 

I love when Marriott says that if you don't like the new system, keep the old system. Nothing changes unless you want it to change.....Nothing but my chances of getting an exchange, or booking a decent week at my home resort.


----------



## m61376 (Jul 10, 2010)

DanCali said:


> This sound important.
> 
> So if I own at NCV and enroll and then deposit my reserved July week in II as a week, only people who use II with points can access that week? Meaning other people who are enrolled in points but trade weeks will not have access to that week either (you saw weeks traders inside or out see the same things)?
> *
> ...


Sorry- I knew what I meant but I guess I wasn't clear- I meant "enrolled week owner deposits TO POINTS." Since I was talking about point owners I thought it was clear but that's because I was in my own head  .

So- week owners will be trading in II with the weeks deposited by both legacy week owners and week owners enrolled in the club but reserving and depositing a week.

Point users will have access to Marriott inventory, units from week owners who converted to points for that year, and inventory from week owners who exchanged for Marriott Reward points for the year.

If Marriott cannot fulfill a request it may look to the weeks deposited by week owners in II, but from what Marirott and II have posted, they become a regular exchanger and if they take a week they must deposit a comparable week.

Hopefully, their definition of comparable is comparable to ours. Other than that weak link, trading should be similar- there will be less inventory, but commensurately less competition for it. The only other rub I foresee is that week owners may or may not get access to Marriott bulk deposits. I would assume these would go to point users- HOWEVER- Marriott wants us owners to visit to enhance our ownership with points.


----------



## ArtsieAng (Jul 10, 2010)

m61376 said:


> Sorry- I knew what I meant but I guess I wasn't clear- I meant "enrolled week owner deposits TO POINTS." Since I was talking about point owners I thought it was clear but that's because I was in my own head  .
> 
> So- week owners will be trading in II with the weeks deposited by both legacy week owners and week owners enrolled in the club but reserving and depositing a week.
> 
> ...



Oh, OK, thanks for clearing that up.


----------



## Dean (Jul 10, 2010)

DanCali said:


> This sound important.
> 
> So if I own at NCV and enroll and then deposit my reserved July week in II as a week, only people who use II with points can access that week? Meaning other people who are enrolled in points but trade weeks will not have access to that week either (you saw weeks traders inside or out see the same things)?
> *
> ...


My understanding is that Marriott will fulfill requests with weeks NOT yet in II, but not have weeks they have already deposited to II segregated other than the current internal trading preference that we all know with II.  Basically many weeks given up by those enrolled will never make it to II but will potentially be available to other enrolled and points owners independent of II.



m61376 said:


> Hopefully, their definition of comparable is comparable to ours. Other than that weak link, trading should be similar- there will be less inventory, but commensurately less competition for it. The only other rub I foresee is that week owners may or may not get access to Marriott bulk deposits. I would assume these would go to point users- HOWEVER- Marriott wants us owners to visit to enhance our ownership with points.


As I understand it weeks owners would have access to the inventory deposited, the question is how the line is formed.  Currently and in the near future I feel it's likely that those trading high demand weeks at top quality resorts will actually be as well or better off but those trying to uptrade will be far worse off.  However, I anticipate the Internal trading preference to evaporate for non Club accounts at some point but I also expect the trade power for those high end options to increase in many situations.  I also expect the overall number of top deposits to decrease in favor of more shoulder season weeks but I do expect the mix of smaller to larger units to move slightly in favor of less smaller and more larger ones.


----------



## m61376 (Jul 10, 2010)

Dean-
I am not sure if I am misunderstanding you or not- but, from what I was told at least- your statement that "many weeks given up by those enrolled will never make it to II but will potentially be available to other enrolled and points owners independent of II" may not be right, unless you you mean enrolled owners giving up their weeks for points that year. 

The way it was portrayed to me, at least, is that week owners would be trading for week deposits, and point owners for enrolled week owners who converted to points for the year deposits, point owner inventory, Marriott unsold inventory, and Marriott inventory from people trading in for reward points. Of course, Marriott reserves the right to dip into the week deposit pool, but supposedly II will be requiring a comparable trade, like they do from everyone else. 

So, the way I see it, you might see a lot of high end newer resort availability from Marriott inventory as trades for higher demand sold out properties. 

An interesting twist to the issue of relatively undervalued weeks- those properties which command a high rental rate but whose point allotments were really out of whack with the rental market will be perceived as better point values. For example, Aruba weeks which rent for 6k by Marriott were awarded less points than weeks that rent for 3K. As a point user- which would you think was a better value for use of your points- somewhere which Marriott charges 3K for the week or where they charge 6K? I expect demand for the Caribbean properties to be high and where there is little Marriott inventory they will need the weeks owners' deposits to fill the requests. I expect that most owners of the properties where the point allocations aren't commensurate with perceived value will find better value in trading in weeks. I know I was told by several people that, basically, there were some properties where trading in weeks will be better for the owner because of the point allocations. So, it may be that high value properties that suffered in the point allocations will enjoy increased demand in II, because Marriott will need those weeks to fulfill requests.


----------



## Dean (Jul 10, 2010)

m61376 said:


> Dean-
> I am not sure if I am misunderstanding you or not- but, from what I was told at least- your statement that "many weeks given up by those enrolled will never make it to II but will potentially be available to other enrolled and points owners independent of II" may not be right, unless you you mean enrolled owners giving up their weeks for points that year.
> 
> The way it was portrayed to me, at least, is that week owners would be trading for week deposits, and point owners for enrolled week owners who converted to points for the year deposits, point owner inventory, Marriott unsold inventory, and Marriott inventory from people trading in for reward points. Of course, Marriott reserves the right to dip into the week deposit pool, but supposedly II will be requiring a comparable trade, like they do from everyone else.


You've got a number of pots of weeks.  These include weeks from non converted owners, weeks from enrolled owners who take their week itself, those who convert to points but want to secure other time at a Marriott resort, developer time (unsold, ROFR, Foreclosures) and units given up for MR points.  Of those and assuming we're talking internal Marriott trading, only the weeks from non converted options will automatically to go II the way I'm seeing it.  The other group that are LIKELY to get to II are those that have converted but are trading their full week independent of points.  It's possible that Marriott will screen those weeks and if they can match them internally, may do so bypassing II initially.  That approach would bring up some interesting discussions if you later decided to cancel though, I suppose Marriott could then put a "comparable" week into II later if need be.  I'm not yet convinced that those that convert will have the option of using their outside II account with converted weeks even if no points are elected, we'll see.  Obviously we're all in a learning curve here, fir the rules, then the applications of those rules in practice.


----------



## m61376 (Jul 10, 2010)

Dean- The problem, of course, is we're flying here with blind faith. Supposedly weeks whether use in our II account or in a club II account, whether or not enrolled, can be traded exactly the same as weeks are currently, with access to other week inventory. I understand what you are insinuating and, as you imply, practice may differ from what is being outlined.


----------



## dioxide45 (Jul 10, 2010)

Dean said:


> You've got a number of pots of weeks.  These include weeks from non converted owners, weeks from enrolled owners who take their week itself, those who convert to points but want to secure other time at a Marriott resort, developer time (unsold, ROFR, Foreclosures) and units given up for MR points.  Of those and assuming we're talking internal Marriott trading, only the weeks from non converted options will automatically to go II the way I'm seeing it.  The other group that are LIKELY to get to II are those that have converted but are trading their full week independent of points.  It's possible that Marriott will screen those weeks and if they can match them internally, may do so bypassing II initially.  That approach would bring up some interesting discussions if you later decided to cancel though, I suppose Marriott could then put a "comparable" week into II later if need be.  I'm not yet convinced that those that convert will have the option of using their outside II account with converted weeks even if no points are elected, we'll see.  Obviously we're all in a learning curve here, fir the rules, then the applications of those rules in practice.



If you are exchanging weeks for weeks, all of those exchanges go through II. Marriott will not give a week out of their points inventory for another week that you offer up. If you want to do a week for week exchange, Marriott does that exchange for you through II. If you have to cancel later, you get the normal II cancellation replacement week.

What I see Marriott doing however, it picking the week for you that will be deposited in to II or used for the request first search. Not providing the ability to book a week and then deposit/search with that week.


----------



## Dean (Jul 10, 2010)

m61376 said:


> Dean- The problem, of course, is we're flying here with blind faith. Supposedly weeks whether use in our II account or in a club II account, whether or not enrolled, can be traded exactly the same as weeks are currently, with access to other week inventory. I understand what you are insinuating and, as you imply, practice may differ from what is being outlined.


IMO, ultimately all we have ever had is faith in Marriott whether well founded or not.  That is about all that separates them from Spinnaker, Westgate, etc.  The faith results in $$$ that allow them to set themselves apart in other ways such as quality, upscale, etc.

As for trading, I think you're referencing the outbound options, not the match options.  I believe the answers may be different when you qualify what happens AFTER you proceed with a deposit and exchange request.  If you have a non enrolled week you deposit (or use request first) with II and place your appropriate request.  Those weeks are available to II either from day one for deposit first or at the time you match for request first.  Say you call your VOA and say I want to deposit with II but not request, I fully expect it to work just like I described above although there are possibilities that it may not.  However, lets stay you call your VOA and say you want to deposit and search for Maui for X date.  It is very possible, if not likely, that if they have what you want, they give it to you, take your week and everyone is happy.  Well everyone except the non enrolled II member searching for either the Maui week or the one you were depositing.


----------



## dioxide45 (Jul 10, 2010)

Dean said:


> IMO, ultimately all we have ever had is faith in Marriott whether well founded or not.  That is about all that separates them from Spinnaker, Westgate, etc.  The faith results in $$$ that allow them to set themselves apart in other ways such as quality, upscale, etc.
> 
> As for trading, I think you're referencing the outbound options, not the match options.  I believe the answers may be different when you qualify what happens AFTER you proceed with a deposit and exchange request.  If you have a non enrolled week you deposit (or use request first) with II and place your appropriate request.  Those weeks are available to II either from day one for deposit first or at the time you match for request first.  Say you call your VOA and say I want to deposit with II but not request, I fully expect it to work just like I described above although there are possibilities that it may not.  However, lets stay you call your VOA and say you want to deposit and search for Maui for X date.  It is very possible, if not likely, that if they have what you want, they give it to you, take your week and everyone is happy.  Well everyone except the non enrolled II member searching for either the Maui week or the one you were depositing.



I don't think this is correct and I don't expect it to work like this. Marriott isn't in the week for week exchange business. It would undermine the entire point system that they have setup. If you call your VOA and ask for a week for week exchange, they may check II first and let you know if they can instantly confirm your request. However if they can't and they see a week sitting in points inventory, they will offer it to you if you convert your week(s) to point to secure the reservation. If you opt not to convert to points, they will put in either a deposit or request first search with II. II will confirm the week if the search matches. Marriott won't be pulling time from their points pool to give to week for week exchangers.

I would bet that somewhere in the new contract between II and Marriott is a clause that doesn't allow Marriott to compete against II in the week for week exchange business. This would be a requirement of having their corporate account.


----------



## Dean (Jul 10, 2010)

dioxide45 said:


> I don't think this is correct and I don't expect it to work like this. Marriott isn't in the week for week exchange business. It would undermine the entire point system that they have setup. If you call your VOA and ask for a week for week exchange, they may check II first and let you know if they can instantly confirm your request. However if they can't and they see a week sitting in points inventory, they will offer it to you if you convert your week(s) to point to secure the reservation. If you opt not to convert to points, they will put in either a deposit or request first search with II. II will confirm the week if the search matches. Marriott won't be pulling time from their points pool to give to week for week exchangers.
> 
> I would bet that somewhere in the new contract between II and Marriott is a clause that doesn't allow Marriott to compete against II in the week for week exchange business. This would be a requirement of having their corporate account.


We'll see, I  think it's clear Marriott is already competing and like with DVC before them, II will cave to keep them in the system just to be able to list them if nothing else.  If Marriott were to change to RCI, the balance of quality vs quantity would truly flip to RCI on both sides of the isle.  The next 2-3 years should be fun.


----------



## dioxide45 (Jul 10, 2010)

Dean said:


> We'll see, I  think it's clear Marriott is already competing and like with DVC before them, II will cave to keep them in the system just to be able to list them if nothing else.  If Marriott were to change to RCI, the balance of quality vs quantity would truly flip to RCI on both sides of the isle.  The next 2-3 years should be fun.



I just don't see how providing week for week exchanges benefits Marriott. They don't get the profit from the "skim". It also completely eliminates the entire reason they created a points based system. They won't save money on II searches as I am sure they are paying one flat rate per enrollee for the corporate II account.

It is written in the II buyers guide that week for week exchanges go through II. There are no provisions in the disclosure documents that would permit Marriott to do week for week exchanges. I don't see RCI allowing Marriott to switch to them and then compete with them on a week for week basis. I just don't see it happening.


----------



## RedDogSD (Jul 10, 2010)

dioxide45 said:


> What I see Marriott doing however, it picking the week for you that will be deposited in to II or used for the request first search. Not providing the ability to book a week and then deposit/search with that week.



That could be a risk, but those who have spoken to Marriott teams who are in the know say that they are not going to repeat the Starwood mistake.


----------



## Dean (Jul 10, 2010)

dioxide45 said:


> I just don't see how providing week for week exchanges benefits Marriott. They don't get the profit from the "skim". It also completely eliminates the entire reason they created a points based system. They won't save money on II searches as I am sure they are paying one flat rate per enrollee for the corporate II account.
> 
> It is written in the II buyers guide that week for week exchanges go through II. There are no provisions in the disclosure documents that would permit Marriott to do week for week exchanges. I don't see RCI allowing Marriott to switch to them and then compete with them on a week for week basis. I just don't see it happening.


The potential benefit to Marriott is that it gives them a week to potentially fill a wait list or pending "exchange" to churn the points and to satisfy the person they most want happy, the points owner.  We'll see how this sorts out and what changes and/or is interpreted differently by Marriott and II than we are reading into it.  Should be fun for a while.  OTOH, With DVC's BVTC, full week exchanges for items that are potentially available through the exchange company are not eligible for exchanges through that system.  I wonder how long it'll take Marriott to establish 1 or more trading partners similar to DVC's BVTC or Bluegreen's Select Connections.


----------



## m61376 (Jul 10, 2010)

Dean-
I was specifically told that we could reserve and deposit the week that we book whether or not we are an enrolled weeks member (if we are dealing in weeks for that year, of course).

I don't know how it will ultimately work- but I was told the same as Dioxide is posting- if you are using weeks, enrolled or not, then all exchanges will be via the weeks pool in II. Of course, you may be right and they may switch to fulfill on on-going request, but as of now their intention is to keep the pools separate.


----------



## dioxide45 (Jul 10, 2010)

I just don't know what Marriott will use to determine trade power in a week for week system. Do you think they will take a silver Branson week and give back a Hawaii Christmas because that is what the Branson owner was wanting to try and trade through II for? I don't think so. Marriott has no mechanism for measuring trade value other than their points charts. II has their TDI and 30+ years of experience in determining trade value. Marriott has no experience in a week for week exchange system and I don't expect them to even try to fulfill those. As I indicated before, the whole thought of that undermines their entire points based concept.

There will be two types of Marriott to Marriott internal trades in the future. Points, give up your week for destination club points and secure a reservation with those points. The other will be the same "internal" system they have now that is handled through II.


----------



## Dean (Jul 10, 2010)

m61376 said:


> Dean-
> I was specifically told that we could reserve and deposit the week that we book whether or not we are an enrolled weeks member (if we are dealing in weeks for that year, of course).
> 
> I don't know how it will ultimately work- but I was told the same as Dioxide is posting- if you are using weeks, enrolled or not, then all exchanges will be via the weeks pool in II. Of course, you may be right and they may switch to fulfill on on-going request, but as of now their intention is to keep the pools separate.


I have not doubt one can reserve and deposit with weeks whether enrolled or not.  I was speculating about the situation where an enrolled owner wanted a given week and resort and Marriott had what they wanted (or could get it out of II).



dioxide45 said:


> I just don't know what Marriott will use to determine trade power in a week for week system. Do you think they will take a silver Branson week and give back a Hawaii Christmas because that is what the Branson owner was wanting to try and trade through II for? I don't think so. Marriott has no mechanism for measuring trade value other than their points charts. II has their TDI and 30+ years of experience in determining trade value. Marriott has no experience in a week for week exchange system and I don't expect them to even try to fulfill those. As I indicated before, the whole thought of that undermines their entire points based concept.
> 
> There will be two types of Marriott to Marriott internal trades in the future. Points, give up your week for destination club points and secure a reservation with those points. The other will be the same "internal" system they have now that is handled through II.


Actually they have the info directly from II to determine any trade power they might need to assess.  They could just use what's already agreed upon.  I'm sure they'll also have direct access to II's computer system like Disney did when they were with II.


----------



## dioxide45 (Jul 10, 2010)

Dean said:


> I have not doubt one can reserve and deposit with weeks whether enrolled or not.  I was speculating about the situation where an enrolled owner wanted a given week and resort and Marriott had what they wanted (or could get it out of II).
> 
> Actually they have the info directly from II to determine any trade power they might need to assess.  They could just use what's already agreed upon.  I'm sure they'll also have direct access to II's computer system like Disney did when they were with II.



I would find it very doubtful if II has provided Marriott or even DVC in the past access to how their TDI was determined. Sure they may know what the TDI for each week in each area is, but actual access to proprietary information would be very unlikely.

Marriott and II use points as a measure for trade power between the two. The thing I find interesting is that you can get a Hawaii week far cheaper using points through II than you can through Marriott. It appears that any 2BR peak week through II is 4500 points. Regardless if it is in Hawaii or Orlando. So this could make out for some cheap points trades with II vs booking with Marriott points.

A MMO (Maui) peak week is 6475 points through Marriott destination points, but you could try to exchange through II using points and go for only 4500. This may be something that can help eliminate the skim.


----------



## GregT (Jul 10, 2010)

dioxide45 said:


> A MMO (Maui) peak week is 6475 points through Marriott destination points, but you could try to exchange through II using points and go for only 4500. This may be something that can help eliminate the skim.



Dioxide,

There are other examples of this too -- a 2BR Ko Olina TDI 90-110 will take 4,050 points for mountain view and 4,975 for ocean view, if booked thru Marriott.

If you request an exchange for this 2BR with II, then it will cost you 3,000 points -- a delta of either 1,050 or 1,975 points from what Marriott wants.

However, the II guide that has this table states its the points requirements for trades to Non-Marriott resorts, so its not clear what they will do if I tell them I want to take 3,000 points and trade for Ko Olina in January.

Plus, it's not clear if Marriott points will have weak trading value (like Wyndham) or strong trading value (like Worldmark).

We will see -- thanks!

Greg


----------



## Dean (Jul 10, 2010)

dioxide45 said:


> I would find it very doubtful if II has provided Marriott or even DVC in the past access to how their TDI was determined. Sure they may know what the TDI for each week in each area is, but actual access to proprietary information would be very unlikely.
> 
> Marriott and II use points as a measure for trade power between the two. The thing I find interesting is that you can get a Hawaii week far cheaper using points through II than you can through Marriott. It appears that any 2BR peak week through II is 4500 points. Regardless if it is in Hawaii or Orlando. So this could make out for some cheap points trades with II vs booking with Marriott points.
> 
> A MMO (Maui) peak week is 6475 points through Marriott destination points, but you could try to exchange through II using points and go for only 4500. This may be something that can help eliminate the skim.


I know they did provide DVC with not only the information on ratings but direct access to their computer system.  That includes the QRS and the ABC rating systems that II has used.  I don't know if they provided them with the actual formula to determine trade power, I'd doubt they would.


----------



## Bear1980 (Jul 11, 2010)

Dean said:


> We'll see, I  think it's clear Marriott is already competing and like with DVC before them, II will cave to keep them in the system just to be able to list them if nothing else.  If Marriott were to change to RCI, the balance of quality vs quantity would truly flip to RCI on both sides of the isle.  The next 2-3 years should be fun.



If Marriott were to change to RCI, that might make it very interesting.  I have a little daughter now, and would love to be able to exchange into DVC.


----------



## Tommy_Boy (Jul 11, 2010)

hipslo said:


> Right, but the weeks under its control could go up dramatically if lots of folks convert to points.  If those folks are single week owners, the competition at 13 months could also correspndingly go up dramatically.
> 
> I think we have our answer.


So am I right, in reading this, that under your theory, it would greatly behoove a single week owner to join the system, b/c essentially you'd get to be able to try and reserve a week at the 13-month mark (or heck, even earlier, no?)  Of course, with the skimming in place, you'd not be able to get a full 7 days without buying more points....

Also - forgive me, this is, I'm sure, probably discussed elsewhere:  but if I join the new system, can I just reserve my desired week at my home resort via Marriott, and *then* convert it to the Marriott Vacation Points?  Would there be any benefit to doing that?


----------



## dioxide45 (Jul 11, 2010)

Tommy_Boy said:


> So am I right, in reading this, that under your theory, it would greatly behoove a single week owner to join the system, b/c essentially you'd get to be able to try and reserve a week at the 13-month mark (or heck, even earlier, no?)  Of course, with the skimming in place, you'd not be able to get a full 7 days without buying more points....
> 
> Also - forgive me, this is, I'm sure, probably discussed elsewhere:  but if I join the new system, can I just reserve my desired week at my home resort via Marriott, and *then* convert it to the Marriott Vacation Points?  Would there be any benefit to doing that?



A single week owner in many cases won't have been given enough points to be considered a Premier member. They would not have the ability to reserve at 13 months. So for a single week owner, reserving at 12 months is still how it will happen in most cases.

You can make a reservation for your regular owned week and later convert your week to destination points as long as you do that prior to the deadline to convert to the points. I think it is September 30 of the year prior to use year.


----------



## camachinist (Jul 12, 2010)

If Dave's still reading, here's a post from another thread that's worthy of clarification, as it was the result of a recent presentation at a resort....

Link:
http://www.tugbbs.com/forums/showpost.php?p=947638&postcount=16

Essentially, the poster believes they heard that enrolled weeks surrendered for points can use those points only in certain circumstances in the points program, one being *only* for week which other enrollees have surrendered, and excluding developer inventory and MRP surrenders and points-only (new) resorts. 

Sounds a bit far-fectched, but there's been a lot of that lately. If an answer or reference to the appropriate documentation is possible, I'm sure it would be helpful.

If nothing else, make Marriott aware of the perception so they can perhaps retrain their staff to communicate the features more clearly.


----------



## MikeM132 (Jul 12, 2010)

I'm getting a headache reading all of this. I have a couple questions:
1. I assume all unsold units at all resorts will ONLY be points now. That is a lot, even in Hawaii. Also, all units given up for points, bought back by Marriott, and (as I was told by Marriott today) those repossesed by Marriott for non-payment. I am guessing that all these "points" units will fulfill most of the demand by points traders so we should not have to worry so much about losing the existing opportunites at our own resorts.
2. I assume that Marriott will re-evaluate actual demand over time. If those prime ski weeks have super demand, I would expect the points requirement AND the points awarded to reliquish to climb. After awhile, supply and demand should help the situation if you really want that prime ski week. Nobody buy you (the week owner) will be able to afford it!
3. We seem to expect a flood of "points people" invading all the resorts with short prime seasons all the time. This cannot happen unless all these people cash in all they have and probably buy a lot more points. Even then, it is very unlikely to happen every year, as these same people will be rolling/borrowing to get that great week you want. I also see this as self-correcting over time. 
4. This sure seems to me to be the same hysteria (albeit at a higher level) over getting the exact week you want at the exact resort. Chances are your season covers weeks you don't really want, and that has been a risk since day one. I have never understood why anyone would buy a timeshare in a season when they really wanted a specific week (or a week in a very narrow window). Sorry, this has always struck me as unrealistic. I guess we'll see whether your situation improves or not, but I'm guessing with more options to use weeks other than at a Marriott should help. We just have to see how many people take the African safari and burn a couple years usage.


----------



## Lawlar (Jul 12, 2010)

*So Many Inconsistencies*

Dave M:  I have a question (or to anyone else to can figure this out).

I looked at the Disclosure Statement for MOC that Marriott gave me when I bought my deeded unit.  It describes how the program participants will be able to reserve weeks.  Multiple unit owners (and only MOC multiweek owners) will have 13 month priority; but limited to no more than 50% of the deeded interests; and the rest of the deed owners get 12 month priority.  

It doesn't provide for premium point owners, or anyone else, getting 13 month priority.  

The loyal customers of Marriott who purchased deeds had a reasonable expectation that only MOC owners who purchased multiple weeks could get priority for the best dates.  One could reasonable assume that less than 50% of the units would actually be owned by multiple week owners; probably a lot less than 50%. 

Is Marriott going to claim that all of the deeds it puts in its trust create multiweek ownership?  That seems rather far fetched. I thought the Lahaina Towers were sold out? Where is Marriott getting these deeded interests? 

Is Marriott going to give its premium points members 13 month priority only when MOC multiple unit owners turn in their weeks; or will Marriott treat all available weeks as subject to the 13 month availability for its premium points members?  If so, how can they change the rules by giving outsiders prioity that was reserved to deed owners?  

I have a bad feeling that our expectations; based on Marriott's representations and the Disclosure Statement they provided us are now being altered without our consent (based on some fine print exception in some unknown document that Marriott isn't explaining to us).

If anyone knows how Marriott is explaining how it can legally alter our priority system; described in the Disclosure Statement; I would love to hear their reasoning.


----------



## dioxide45 (Jul 12, 2010)

Lawlar said:


> It doesn't provide for premium point owners, or anyone else, getting 13 month priority....
> 
> Is Marriott going to claim that all of the deeds it puts in its trust create multiweek ownership?  That seems rather far fetched.



This is exactly what Marriott is doing. They are reserving weeks for point owners and enrolled converted owners under the multiple week ownership of the trust.



> I thought the Lahaina Towers were sold out? Where is Marriott getting these deeded interests?



If they were sold out, they sure did so very fast. These towers aren't much more than a few years old. I seriously doubt they sold them out that fast. Especially given the downturn in the economy and credit woes.


----------



## MikeM132 (Jul 13, 2010)

Lawlar:
 I'm not a lawyer, but I've heard this "multiple weeks" at 13 month discussion many times before. My understanding (and I've actually done this, and at MOC) is "multiple weeks owners" include people who own more than one week at ANY Marriott, not just MOC. I can tell you from personal experience that I can book a MOC week 13 months out by combining it back-to-back with my KoOlina week. So the pool of owners reserving at 13 months out has always been more than just multiple-week MOC owners.


----------



## aka Julie (Jul 13, 2010)

MikeM132 said:


> Lawlar:
> I'm not a lawyer, but I've heard this "multiple weeks" at 13 month discussion many times before. My understanding (and I've actually done this, and at MOC) is "multiple weeks owners" include people who own more than one week at ANY Marriott, not just MOC. I can tell you from personal experience that I can book a MOC week 13 months out by combining it back-to-back with my KoOlina week. So the pool of owners reserving at 13 months out has always been more than just multiple-week MOC owners.



You're right -- I've booked at 13 months out using a silver Barony Beach and a Platinum ShadowRidge as two concurrent weeks.


----------



## Lawlar (Jul 13, 2010)

*Why Am I Not Surprised?*



MikeM132 said:


> Lawlar:
> I'm not a lawyer, but I've heard this "multiple weeks" at 13 month discussion many times before. My understanding (and I've actually done this, and at MOC) is "multiple weeks owners" include people who own more than one week at ANY Marriott, not just MOC. I can tell you from personal experience that I can book a MOC week 13 months out by combining it back-to-back with my KoOlina week. So the pool of owners reserving at 13 months out has always been more than just multiple-week MOC owners.



I asked this question of the sales staff many times and they assured me that only MOC owners could use the 13 month reservation rights at MOC Lahaina Tower (and that is certainly the impression the Disclosure Statement gives).

Why am I not surprised that the system operates however Marriott says it will operate?

The biggest joke in the Disclosure Statement is the first line in paragraph 2 describing the Plan Manager:  "Owners of Ownership Interests will manage the Program through an association of owners."  Yeah, like that is really the way it works.


----------



## Dean (Jul 13, 2010)

Lawlar said:


> Dave M:  I have a question (or to anyone else to can figure this out).
> 
> I looked at the Disclosure Statement for MOC that Marriott gave me when I bought my deeded unit.  It describes how the program participants will be able to reserve weeks.  Multiple unit owners (and only MOC multiweek owners) will have 13 month priority; but limited to no more than 50% of the deeded interests; and the rest of the deed owners get 12 month priority.
> 
> ...


I think if you read the paperwork in it's entirety you'll see that Marriott reserves the right to unilaterally change the reservation system without input, the 13 month options and the new system would fall under those those issues.  I know all the ones I've seen for any floating reservation system (Marriott, DVC, etc) reserve this option.


----------



## pspercy (Jul 13, 2010)

In the published MVCI Points Charts for all resorts the resort names have an 'E' or 'T' or both against them 

Seem to remember that means "Exchange" and/or "Trust" resorts but what does that mean ? Does the "T" mean there's unsold inventory now in the points system ?


----------



## camachinist (Jul 13, 2010)

Last I read there are 11 'T' resorts where the trust has its points inventories.

My resort, Newport Coast, has a huge amount of points and is in the 'T' category from all the unsold inventory converted on or after June 20.


----------



## camachinist (Jul 14, 2010)

OK, another 'question' worth passing on, since we're getting multiple conflicting answers from Marriott employees. It's related to the post I made in this thread at #171.

Here's the thread:

http://www.tugbbs.com/forums/showthread.php?t=126203


----------



## Dave M (Jul 15, 2010)

I have posted in that thread, Pat. I'll be working on trying to get some info.


----------



## camachinist (Jul 15, 2010)

Thanks. Greatly appreciated. At this point, I'd kill for clarity. We've still got 11 days or so until it goes live. Plenty of time to figure it out.


----------

