# NO Access to trusts pool by enrolled owners (Marriott's response - post #447)



## siberiavol

*Moderator note*: Marriott's approved response to the controversy developed in this thread, along with a summary of the issues, is in post #447.

Dave M
BBS Moderator

The remainder of this post is as *siberiavol* originally posted it.

*    *    *    *    *

This BAD NEWS came from the post related to points presentation at MCV. I don't know how to link that information but thought this needed a new topic title . Puckman discovered that enrolled members would not be able to use their points to get properties owned by the trust. This seemed incredulous to me and beyond the realm of possibilities.

I just called and he was apparently told the truth. Those of us who enrolled and deposited our weeks for points will only see other enrolled members deposits. The unsold weeks will not be available to us. The way we could get into the newer properties is if an owner of those properties deposited a week.

The representative said it had always been that way and that was the way she was trained. She said it wouldn't be fair to let the people who just paid an entry fee have the same access as people buying points. This was after talking to a supervisor. She said it is in the documents.

I still don't know what Marriott will do with unsold properties.

Feel free to merge this with previous post or retitled that post but this topic in a headline of some form.


----------



## GregT

Siberiavol is referring to a potentially very important finding in the attached thread -- starting at Post #46 and continuing thereon.  It was first identified in Post #16 (on page 1 of that thread)

http://www.tugbbs.com/forums/showthread.php?t=126003&page=2

I agree that this is worthy of its own thread (this one).  SV, thanks for opening it.


----------



## tlwmkw

This is very bad if it is true.  Marriott is totally dissing anyone who owned weeks in the past- whether it was re-sale or direct.  They say there is no home resort advantage but this is like a home resort advantage for all the new points purchasers and the weeks owners don't get any advantage at all.  They say that if you enroll then you will have access to all the newer resorts that weren't sold out and were put into the truse (as well as any new, future resorts) but now this seems to indicate that weeks owners will be at a disadvantage when it comes to having points.  Some points are better than others (new points vs. legacy points). 

Hope someone can link this to the other thread and then it will become more clear what we are talking about.  I see it was done while I was typing this- thanks gregt.

Dave M.  Have you heard anything about this from your Marriott sources?  Please let us know if you do hear anything.

tlwmkw


----------



## rickxylon

*A rep just told me ALL inventory is available*

Rick : If I enroll in the new program, convert my weeks for points and then look for exchanges, do I have access to ALL points inventories?
Sadie B.: You have access to all the Marriott Vacation Club Timeshare inventory traded by owners.
Rick : Does that mean I do NOT have access to the inventory in the trust?
Sadie B.: The trust program is part of the program and yes you will have access to that inventory.
Rick : So I have access to those weeks traded by legacy weeks owners who also enrolled and exchanged their weeks for points as well as any weeks available in the trust. Is that correct?
Sadie B.: That is correct.
Rick : Thanks
Sadie B.: You're welcome


----------



## JMAESD84

:hysterical: 

Weeks converted for points can only see other weeks converted for points.  WOW!!

And those first to the enrolled points party think they are going to get exactly what for trades?

Weeks not available via weeks trades?


----------



## ocdb8r

Well, I read all the posts in the other thread and can really only say DITTO.  Quite a crappy discovery.  

What I am wondering is that if we don't have access to any weeks in the trust account (until someone trades out), how the hell is everyone going to use the 800 bonus points Marriott is making available to everyone for joining.  While skimming is putting some points into their pocket, I haven't seen anyone skimmed more than 10% and the 800 points received the first year exceeds the skim for everyone.  If that is the case...Marriott is basically giving out more points than can possibly be used (give the "pool" restrictions described in the other thread).

While people banking points forward may alleviate the problem, it doesn't change the fact that Marriott is essentially printing funny money...


----------



## jimf41

I just posted this on the other thread and reposted it here.


I just made a couple of phone calls to MVCI reference this heretofore unannounced two party system. Both times I was transferred to points specialist. The first call went well. The rep put me on hold for about 30 seconds or so while she checked with her supervisor. When she came back on she allayed my concerns with the statement"..Points are points, no matter where they came from". As soon as she said this a power outage occurred at my end and we were disconnected.

The second phone call didn't go as well. Again I was transferred to a points specialist and she put me on hold for about 3-4 minutes while she talked to her supervisor. She did indeed confirm everything that Puckman had put out in his original post on this topic. I was stunned. Legacy week owners can only use their points at resorts where other legacy week owners have handed over their weeks for points. We will have no access to the points in the beneficial trust. Not now, not ever.

As I had just enrolled last night I asked her to un-enroll me. She transferred me again to someone who tried to satisfy me by saying that I could still get a week in the beneficial trust if a beneficial owner deposited with II. I told her that wasn't worth $700 to join and $200 a year as I can do that already with II. I just received my cancellation notice back via E-mail.


As requested, the following inventories have been un-enrolled from the Marriott Vacation Club Destinations program. 
then it lists my resorts followed by;

If you have already elected your ownership week for Vacation Club Points, your Vacation Club Points will still be available for your use. The option to continue to elect your ownership week to Vacation Club Points will no longer be available.

If you purchased your ownership week outside of Marriott Vacation Club, your benefit of trading your Marriott Vacation Week for Marriott Rewards Points will also end with your un-enrollment in the program.

All I can say is I'm stunned by this development. I've been a fairly strong supporter of Marriott on this board but now I'm completely disillusioned.


----------



## Luckybee

And I thought this was giving me a migraine before....sheesh....ok so what would be the point for any week owner to join then? Shouldnt Marriott(or any company for that matter) when introducing a complete overhaul of their product provide clear cut easily interpreted rules. Truly, wouldnt everyone complain if they purchased a product that needed assembly and it came with no instructions, or better yet with 5 different sets all saying something different(except perhaps my dh who would try to pretend he knew what he was doing 

Possible small savings in xchng fees? possible shorter weeks(but that would be subject to an owners week being broken down now?)

Looking at the material, the other threads, and now this ....all I can say is I would have thought that Marriott must have some relatively intelligent individuals working for them and therefore they have intentionally made this as complicated as possible to assist in "selling" the "dream"....imho there are only 2 options, this mess was either intentional(and that could only be for sale purposes) or if im wrong....well lets just say that many people have been historically giving them way too much credit !


----------



## MikeZ

*Documents?*

Has anyone been able to find language in the documents that supports this position?  If so, can you please direct us to it, as I am very curious as to how I missed it up until this point!

Thanks for the good work being done here by so many TUGgers!


----------



## puckmanfl

good afternoon

Now the fun starts!!!!  Let the postings begin...

Come on Tombo, give me a big whopping I told you so.  I deserve it!!!!

you were right and I was wrong!!!

I can hear the black helicopters...


----------



## Luckybee

MikeZ said:


> Has anyone been able to find language in the documents that supports this position?  If so, can you please direct us to it, as I am very curious as to how I missed it up until this point!
> 
> Thanks for the good work being done here by so many TUGgers!



It isnt there....but then again neither are half the other things so we shouldnt be surprised. What is there is the legal interpretation of the "exchange program". Noticeably absent is a user friendly "guide" telling a purchasor how to use the program. Of course to provide such documentation would require Marriott to advise owners of the various priorities, what they intend to do vis a vie I.I. etc. , hence my previous post wherin I stated that this appears to be quite intentional on Marriotts part.


----------



## m61376

MikeZ said:


> Has anyone been able to find language in the documents that supports this position?  If so, can you please direct us to it, as I am very curious as to how I missed it up until this point!
> 
> Thanks for the good work being done here by so many TUGgers!



Look at tiel's post here


----------



## tiel

When we first heard of this limitation imposed on legacy point converters at our sales presentation, we were stunned.  We hadn't heard of this nuance before, and are still trying to determine its accurracy.  But, in the other related thread, we think dbbk may be on to the wording in the docs which delineates the separation.  Can't check that now though, limited access to a PC.

Also, our rep told us all the inventroy pools were described in detail on their website at one time, but it was taken down because it was so confusing.      :hysterical: 

Personally, I don't recall seeing it, but maybe it was there.  Anyway, he was right...it IS confusing, except it's the whole program, not just this part!


----------



## brigechols

This revelation further justifies recommendations to postpone enrollment.


----------



## tombo

puckmanfl said:


> good afternoon
> 
> Now the fun starts!!!!  Let the postings begin...
> 
> Come on Tombo, give me a big whopping I told you so.  I deserve it!!!!
> 
> you were right and I was wrong!!!
> 
> I can hear the black helicopters...



I don't have to say i told you so, Marriott did it for me.


----------



## windje2000

m61376 said:


> Look at tiel's post here



which references this post - 

here

I believe this is the operative language and reasoning. -  dbbk94404 nailed it


----------



## Ricci

puckmanfl said:


> good afternoon
> 
> Now the fun starts!!!!  Let the postings begin...
> 
> Come on Tombo, give me a big whopping I told you so.  I deserve it!!!!
> 
> you were right and I was wrong!!!
> 
> I can hear the black helicopters...





You gotta love a man who can admit he's wrong.


----------



## tombo

Ricci said:


> You gotta love a man who can admit he's wrong.



Without a doubt he manned up. He said oops, I messed up, I trusted Marriott to do what was right and they stabbed me in the back.

My turn. One of my biggest you were right I was wrongs has been before this was launched i told everyone it would cost several $1000 for retail owners to convert, and I didn't think resale owners would be given any chance to convert. Oops, I was wrong about how they were going to make profit using points on the backs of current owners. I didn't trust marriott to treat owners well, but they did give retail buyers a cheap buy in to the points program, and they gave resale owners a chance to convert too.I was way wrong. What I didn't foresee was that they wouldn't really screw the new owners over until they actually converted to points. The black helicopters were actually flying overhead, they just attacked a different target than I was anticipating.


----------



## craftr

*Now I'm bummed out.............*

I have been very interested in the points program despite ye olde skim but now am very unhappy.  This does not seem logical to me and to make two inventories-I am wondering if realistically it can be administered. This is a huge flaw if it is true and I am now going to hold off joining until there is more clarity.

It is time for Marriott to send out a clarifying document on this and the other questions that have come up from owners...................


----------



## windje2000

With 3 units, one of which locks off and 100% trading, the fee benefits alone looked good to me.  

But its increasingly clear the 800 one time one year bonus points may have little inventory into which they can be exchanged.

The primary reason for me to enroll was fee savings, assuming II stays the same for access in the Marriott corporate master II account.  

Given the 'gotchas' being unearthed in this program, I gotta believe there's a 'gotcha' or two buried in the so called access to the corporate master II account also.  

I just renewed II for 3 years.  That's where I'm staying till the dust settles.

Can you feel the love, Bill?


----------



## tombo

craftr said:


> I have been very interested in the points program despite ye olde skim but now am very unhappy.  This does not seem logical to me and to make two inventories-I am wondering if realistically it can be administered. This is a huge flaw if it is true and I am now going to hold off joining until there is more clarity.
> 
> It is time for Marriott to send out a clarifying document on this and the other questions that have come up from owners...................



It is simple for Marriott to administer 2 inventories. The computer deposits your week into a legacy pool and you can only access the legacy pool. 

Points owners who buy points directly from Marriott can access the trust inventory, and barring someone finding it to be specifically prohibited in writing, I would bet the retail points buyers can access the legacy weeks deposited into points too.


----------



## ArtsieAng

Just when you thought things couldn't get any worse...........




> jimf41
> 
> She did indeed confirm everything that Puckman had put out in his original post on this topic. I was stunned. Legacy week owners can only use their points at resorts where other legacy week owners have handed over their weeks for points. We will have no access to the points in the beneficial trust. Not now, not ever.





> tombo
> 
> Points owners can access the trust, and barring someone finding it to be sepcifically prohibited in writing, I would bet the points owners can access the legacy weeks deposited into points too.


----------



## siberiavol

I thought I had analyzed well the risk reward of this program. I sure never thought of this. Well what's a couple of thousand dollars to enroll resales when you can might get to use the explorer club for a bicycle trip.

In view of this news I still have some questions.

Why wasn't the sales force pushing the idea that you needed to spend $9200 to really get  the benefits of the new resorts? People had not mentioned this until Tiel reported it this week. Did they recognize they might get a backlash? Did some of them not even know it?

What is Marriott going to do with all those rooms in the trust they own? Could this all be a sham where they will release some new resort weeks out of their inventory to non new points buyers but are not going to acknowledge it. Some

This whole deal is a comedy of errors or a well conceived plan by a corporate type to intentionally deceive a large number of consumers. Word of mouth has helped Marriott over the years. A few hundred thousand people with a bad taste in their mouth is not good for business.


----------



## JMAESD84

tombo said:


> It is simple for Marriott to administer 2 inventories. The computer deposits your week into a legacy pool and you can only access the legacy pool.
> 
> Points owners who buy points directly from Marriott can access the trust inventory, and barring someone finding it to be specifically prohibited in writing, I would bet the retail points buyers can access the legacy weeks deposited into points too.



Of course (access to weeks deposited for points), isn't this the dream they are trying to sell to new Points Buyers.  

It would seem that they would have to replace this inventory with comparable inventory from the trust pool (or some other source) or there might be nothing for the legacy weeks owner with points from a deposit to reserve from the legacy pool.


----------



## puckmanfl

good afternoon

It's pretty simple folks...

Trust owners can access ANY week in the point inventory.  Legacy owners that convert a week to points can access ONLY the inventory that other legacy owners have converted to MR or DC points + units available from delinquencies...

There are some provisions for crossover for legacy point players if and when trust owners hit the legacy points inventory.

This is 10 times worse than the skim.  At least the skim was seen upfront and can be viewed as a feeble attempt to charge a fee for short stays, definitive dates and flexibility!!  The two sets of inventories for points players are hidden in a well crafted clause about affiliated resorts when describing the exchange company for enrollee's...

I'm stuck (out $695) and will test drive my 4550 pts on 7/26 to see just how bad it really is...The good news is that if I don't see anything in pointr inventory. I can keep my week as a week (as I have not yet converted it). I can then lock off and play in the II account. If they ever contact me about it!!!!

yikes...


----------



## RedDogSD

Wow, this is a big deal.  Did anyone find out if those owners who do pony up for 1000 more points (crazy I know) have access to the Trust inventory with ALL of their points, or will they only be able to use 1000 points with the trust inventory.  

Trust me, I would never even THINK about paying $9200 and $400 per year just to do that, but was curious none the less.


----------



## GrayFal

ArtsieAng said:


> Just when you thought things couldn't get any worse...........



Aren't you glad u own at properties u do not mind visiting - in fact you LIKE where u own!
It could always be worse....but I will have to think REALLY hard to think of what it could be.


----------



## windje2000

puckmanfl said:


> good afternoon
> 
> It's pretty simple folks...
> 
> Trust owners can access ANY week in the point inventory.  Legacy owners that convert a week to points can access ONLY the inventory that other legacy owners have converted to MR or DC points + units available from delinquencies...
> 
> There are some provisions for crossover for legacy point players if and when trust owners hit the legacy points inventory.
> 
> This is 10 times worse than the skim.  At least the skim was seen upfront and can be viewed as a feeble attempt to charge a fee for short stays, definitive dates and flexibility!!  The two sets of inventories for points players are hidden in a well crafted clause about affiliated resorts when describing the exchange company for enrollee's...
> 
> I'm stuck (out $695) and will test drive my 4550 pts on 7/26 to see just how bad it really is...The good news is that if I don't see anything in pointr inventory. I can keep my week as a week (as I have not yet converted it). I can then lock off and play in the II account. If they ever contact me about it!!!!
> 
> yikes...



Call them up and unenroll!  edited to add: Demand a refund.  What have you got to lose?


edited again to add - If they refused, I'd call the President of MVCI [Stephen Weiscz (sp?)] directly.  I called when they dragged their heels on processing my deeds.  Calling the CEO GET RESULTS.

If I got no satisfaction call Bill Marriott's office directly.  He has staff dedicated to irate customers.

You can also file in small claims court.  Win or lose, they need to retain an attorney to appear.  

File a complaint with the AG of your state.  

No refund makes me a squeaky wheel.  Get your money's worth.


----------



## SueDonJ

JMAESD84 said:


> Of course (access to weeks deposited for points), isn't this the dream they are trying to sell to new Points Buyers.
> 
> It would seem that they would have to replace this inventory with comparable inventory from the trust pool (or some other source) or there might be nothing for the legacy weeks owner with points from a deposit to reserve from the legacy pool.



That's my thought as well and I asked it in the other thread.  If yesterday we were all so worried that Legacy owners would somehow be able to raid all the good weeks out of the Weeks inventory, why today are we thinking that they won't do exactly that?  When they do, an interval from the Trust has to be released to the Legacy pool.  As well, Marriott is still holding developer inventory that has not been conveyed to the Trust and we don't know how/when that will be released to Trust/Legacy/Weeks owners.

But probably most important to consider, as far as how the inventory actually works within the set-up, is what siberiavol posted to that other thread:

*"We might be forgetting that Marriott Corp probably still owns 95% of trust at this point in time. They have the same right to turn in a week into new program as an enrolled member. Marriott as an owner has to do something with those weeks. They are not going to sit on them waiting for the 5% of the trust owners who are new point buyers to make up their mind on what they want.

They will wear their owner hat and deposit into points pool as requests come in. I had assumed they would be most of their inventory but I can't see it being none of their inventory. The likely worst case is they release it more gradually to give new point buyers a better opportunity to see trust properties."*

I just can't see Marriott not allowing Enrolled Points owners access to any Trust inventory as a punishment measure.  It would hurt them to let inventory sit unused much more than it hurts us to be thought of as second-class owners.  So if a Legacy owner has to put in a wait-list request for Trust inventory, does anybody really think that Marriott won't release it if Trust owners don't want it?  How is a wait-listed request in this new system any different from an II request, with respect to having to wait for a match?  At least with the Points system you will know before you make the request that what you're depositing is enough to get you the inventory when/if it becomes available.


----------



## ArtsieAng

GrayFal said:


> Aren't you glad u own at properties u do not mind visiting - in fact you LIKE where u own!
> *It could always be worse....but I will have to think REALLY hard to think of what it could be*.



Please, don't think of what could be worse. The last thing Marriott needs is more ideas on how to make the DC any worse than it already is.   LOL

Yes, I'm very happy that I bought where I like to vacation......If I feel like changing things up, I can always rent. That most likely is what I will be doing in the future.


----------



## tlwmkw

If you un-enroll will they give you the money back?  I was told that you have a five day recission period and after that you get no money back.  If so it's too late for me so I'll have to hope that this is not true.  If it is true then what use are my 800 plus points that they gave me?

I suppose if legacy owners complain about lack of availability at newer resorts then they will just say "Buy some of these shiny new points and you will have all the access in the world!  Come on, try it, you'll love it!".  Ugh- if this is true then I certainly will have lost respect for Marriott and MVCI and will not be buying anything from them.

tlwmkw


----------



## GregT

All,

This is very interesting, let's walk through a couple possible implications. Let's take PuckmanFL's desired trade, a 3BR in Kauai Lagoons.

Marriott has the desired week sitting in its Trust inventory.  Puckman will put in a trade request -- it's a practical impossibility that week will be available to Puck on July 26th, unless it is Marriott's Trust that provides the needed week.  Otherwise, Puckman will sit there waiting for some Kauai Lagoons owner to 1) enroll and 2) redeem their 3BR for the exact week Puck wants.  That's just not going to happen.  I bet Marriott makes the trade because otherwise they eat the KL week and they are awash in KL weeks.

Where the rubber will hit the road is for a sold-out property -- take Frenchman's Cove, where there may be modest inventory in the Trust, and Puck decides he wants to go there in 2012 and redeems his week for (skimmed) points and requests a MFC trade.

If there are few MFC weeks in the Trust and Puck is offering Ko Olina where the Trust is awash in weeks, I can easily see Marriott not making its precious MFC week available to Puck, and requiring that Puck wait until another enrolled owner redeems their MFC week for (skimmed) points, to match Puck.  Trade Power of the relative weeks, combined with scarcity of inventory in the Trust, means Puck has to wait for another enrolled/skimmed owner.

All they did, in the second example, was move the exchange marketplace from II to their internal system, but did not supplement the internal system with their own weeks.  I would assume that the trade chances are no better than from II.

Interesting stuff and I'm sure there is much we will still learn about this.  

Best to all,

Greg


----------



## puckmanfl

good evening

Sue, the difference between a wait list for a trust unit v. II exchange is that a trust point person doesn't have to wait list (exchange members do) for the same inventory.  Trust members get access to legacy weeks converted to points as well, competing with you for these as well...

At the end of the day MVCD is telling you that your legacy point is worth less than a trust point.  Counting for inflation,you paid as much for your points as trust owners!! In addition to this, you get "skimmed" to get less valuable points...  In 2004, I did not have the option of purchasing in a trust and becoming a trust owner,so Why is my conversion getting me to a weaker quality of point...

An II exchange is an independent transaction, monitored by a third party whose motive is to make deals, not promote sales of points...

I am with Tombo

Roll Tide Roll

I am sorry to be so argumentative, but I really feel betrayed by this!!!


----------



## ArtsieAng

> SueDonJ
> 
> 
> I just can't see Marriott not allowing Enrolled Points owners access to any Trust inventory as a punishment measure. It would hurt them to let inventory sit unused much more than it hurts us to be thought of as second-class owners. So if a Legacy owner has to put in a wait-list request for Trust inventory, does anybody really think that Marriott won't release it if Trust owners don't want it? How is a wait-listed request in this new system any different from an II request, with respect to having to wait for a match? At least with the Points system you will know before you make the request that what you're depositing is enough to get you the inventory when/if it becomes available.




jimf41 has stated that Legacy owners will never have access to the trust. Not now, not ever. Do you have different information?



> jimf41
> 
> We will have no access to the points in the beneficial trust. Not now, not ever.






> SueDonJ
> 
> How is a wait-listed request in this new system any different from an II request, with respect to having to wait for a match?


II is strictly an exchange company. They are not selling you vacation points, and then playing favorites with new DC owners vs old Legacy owners.


----------



## tlwmkw

Susan,

You mentioned that Marriott is holding inventory that isn't in the trust.  My understanding from conversations with a number of the MVCI folks is that Marriott will no longer hold anything other than the trust- all weeks are deposited into the trust as soon as they become MVCI property.  Why would they hold onto inventory that they won't be selling?  It doesn't make sense for them to do that.  Now they may say that the points that represent unsold units in the trust may be available to the legacy owners but that's not what everyone is saying here.  I'm guessing that this will have to happen otherwise how could you use your 800 plus points that we got for enrolling?

I am still hoping that this is not true and am waiting to see if Dave m. or someone with some Marriott contacts can explore this further for all of us.  There is so much bad information out there and this program is being so badly administered that I don't know who to believe.  I can't keep calling these folks or trying to chat with them, I feel like I'm just banging my head against the wall.

tlwmkw


----------



## K2Quick

<  deleted  >


----------



## puckmanfl

hi

my trade could not be made the old  II way!!! As I only have 2  (2 bedroom) Hawaii units (you cannot combine unit size or trade up in II).  With the new system, I was planning on using the flexibility of combining two units worth of points to snag a unit available in point inventory.  I give MVCD two Waiohai's units for their inventory and I get 8550 pts.  Then I snag my KL 3 bedroom for 5550 pts and keep the other 2900.  This plan assumed equal valuer on both legacy and trust points.  I can put this request on "wait list" but I MUST committ both my weeks to points (losing the usage).  This is no different than II. How many of us have heard that the motivation for all of this is angst with II.  Now we know what the motives are!!!


----------



## ArtsieAng

> tlwmkw
> 
> I am still hoping that this is not true and am waiting to see if Dave m. or someone with some Marriott contacts can explore this further for all of us. There is so much bad information out there and this program is being so badly administered that I don't know who to believe. I can't keep calling these folks or trying to chat with them, I feel like I'm just banging my head against the wall.



I completely agree. This info really needs to be verified, one way, or the other.


----------



## SueDonJ

puckmanfl said:


> good evening
> 
> Sue, the difference between a wait list for a trust unit v. II exchange is that a trust point person doesn't have to wait list (exchange members do) for the same inventory.  Trust members get access to legacy weeks converted to points as well, competing with you for these as well...
> 
> At the end of the day MVCD is telling you that your legacy point is worth less than a trust point.  Counting for inflation,you paid as much for your points as trust owners!! In addition to this, you get "skimmed" to get less valuable points...  In 2004, I did not have the option of purchasing in a trust and becoming a trust owner,so Why is my conversion getting me to a weaker quality of point...
> 
> An II exchange is an independent transaction, monitored by a third party whose motive is to make deals, not promote sales of points...
> 
> I am with Tombo
> 
> Roll Tide Roll
> 
> I am sorry to be so argumentative, but I really feel betrayed by this!!!



I don't see you as being argumentative at all, Puck - you're just trying to figure this all out the same way the rest of us are!

I guess I just go back to what I said in that other thread, not ever expecting to be on par with a Trust owner.  They're the darlings of the new system and we just have to figure out how Marriott can make their ownerships more usage-valuable than ours, so that we can then figure out how to make ours work the best they can for us.  If as an Enrolled member I am a second-class citizen, well, so be it.  The only thing that matters is how I can use my Weeks to their fullest potential - and the question still remains, is that as an Enrolled member trying to use the existing Points system, an Enrolled member trying to use the existing Weeks system, or as a Weeks member trying to figure out how all this new stuff changes things from what existed prior to June 20th?  I enrolled in Points not because I expected to be a darling in Marriott's grand scheme, but because it gives me options that are not available if I don't enroll and my costs are reasonable.  That hasn't changed with yours and tiel's findings here.

I think Greg's post should go a long way toward allaying some of the usage fears, even if it can't remove the stigma of second-class.


----------



## puckmanfl

good afternoon

windje...

I am so emotionally involved at this point, I want to see the game thru until 7/26 and see what happens. Worst case  is that it is truly awful and I don't re-enroll for 2012.  At this point it has gone past the $$$695.  I want to see this thru to the end game and report ALL of the trap doors to my friends here on TUG...

stay tuned for 7/26...

A better way for MVCD to handle this would have been to show upfront that trust points were better than legacy points.  They could have offered an equity exchange (legacy deeds for trust points) to owners that wanted to play a different way.  Weeks owners could also beleft alone.

This hybrid 12 headed albatross combo thing is a boondoggle and will bite them (oops can't say that on a family thread).  This is almost a game they are playing to see if they can alienate every legacy owner!!!!


----------



## windje2000

puckmanfl said:


> good afternoon
> 
> windje...
> 
> I am so emotionally involved at this point, I want to see the game thru until 7/26 and see what happens. Worst case  is that it is truly awful and I don't re-enroll for 2012.  At this point it has gone past the $$$695.  I want to see this thru to the end game and report ALL of the trap doors to my friends here on TUG...
> 
> stay tuned for 7/26...
> 
> A better way for MVCD to handle this would have been to show upfront that trust points were better than legacy points.  They could have offered an equity exchange (legacy deeds for trust points) to owners that wanted to play a different way.  Weeks owners could also beleft alone.
> 
> This hybrid 12 headed albatross combo thing is a boondoggle and will bite them (oops can't say that on a family thread).  This is almost a game they are playing to see if they can alienate every legacy owner!!!!



I feel your pain.  Please see my edited response above.  

Don't get mad - get even.


----------



## puckmanfl

good afternoon

Sue...

I really respect your graciousness!!!  It does come thru in cyberspace...

I don't plan on throwing my ownership out the window!!! I plan on making what I have work, just as you are doing!!! (all my 2011 weeks are planned except 1 in the legacy points game)  What irritates me is that the "trust" point thing might actually work better for my future needs but my 13,666 pts. are "trapped" as legacy points and they can't ever play with the other children (trust points)!!!

I don't have another $130K in handy money to purchase an equivalent number of points in the trust...

If there was to  be a dichotomy in points some system of equity exchange should have been made available to legacy owners...where they could (for a fee of course) convert to trust points... I am sure they would factor in the skim for this as well!!!


----------



## SueDonJ

ArtsieAng said:


> jimf41 has stated that Legacy owners will never have access to the trust. Not now, not ever. Do you have different information?



I don't first-hand, no, but I'm going by what Puck was told by his guru and posted in the other thread where this was first discussed:

*"... on the opening day of trading (7/26) Trust owners (new points purchasers) have access to BOTH pools #1 and #2, Exchange owners (legacy owners that have enrolled and converted to points) have access to only Pool #2. 

Here is where it gets tricky!!! If and ONLY if a Trust owner grabs a reservation from Pool #2, then a reservation becomes available to an Exchange owner from Pool #1. Legacy point users have to wait until Trust owners make moves before Legacy point users get access to Trust inventory...  ..."*



ArtsieAng said:


> II is strictly an exchange company. They are not selling you vacation points, and then playing favorites with new DC owners vs old Legacy owners.



Which is why I used the qualifier, "with respect to having to wait for a match."  I'm aware there are differences between Legacy and Points owners, and between Marriott's and II's systems.  The comparison I made was between an II request and a DC wait-list.


----------



## hotcoffee

Some of you might be panicking too soon.  This is from the Destination Club Disclosure Guide:

*Exchange Members.* This paragraph only applies to Exchange Members. In order to enjoy the benefits of Membership in the Program as a Exchange Member, *an owner of an Interest must have voluntarily entered into an Enrollment Agreement with Exchange Company.*

2.* Exchange Members. *This paragraph only applies to Exchange Members. In order to enjoy the benefits of Membership in the Program as a Exchange Member, an owner of an Interest must have voluntarily entered into an Enrollment Agreement with Exchange Company. Membership in the Program is not an appurtenance to Interests. *Exchange Members must comply with all of the terms and conditions for Membership in the Program. During the term of the Exchange Member’s Enrollment Agreement with Exchange Company and so long as a Exchange Member remains enrolled in the Program, Exchange Members will have the right to reserve and use the Accommodations and facilities that are a part of the Program in accordance with the Exchange Procedures. *If a Exchange Member desires to use the Accommodations outside the Exchange Member’s Affiliate Program or access Exchange Benefits, from time to time, the Exchange Member may voluntarily participate in the Program described in this Disclosure Guide and the Exchange Procedures. There is no guaranty that the renewal of any Enrollment Agreement will occur. Every Enrollment Agreement will have a one year term and may be renewed on a voluntary basis by the Exchange Member. Members must comply with all of the terms and conditions of the Program as determined by Exchange Company.


----------



## SueDonJ

tlwmkw said:


> Susan,
> 
> You mentioned that Marriott is holding inventory that isn't in the trust.  My understanding from conversations with a number of the MVCI folks is that Marriott will no longer hold anything other than the trust- all weeks are deposited into the trust as soon as they become MVCI property.  Why would they hold onto inventory that they won't be selling?  It doesn't make sense for them to do that.  Now they may say that the points that represent unsold units in the trust may be available to the legacy owners but that's not what everyone is saying here.  I'm guessing that this will have to happen otherwise how could you use your 800 plus points that we got for enrolling?
> 
> I am still hoping that this is not true and am waiting to see if Dave m. or someone with some Marriott contacts can explore this further for all of us.  There is so much bad information out there and this program is being so badly administered that I don't know who to believe.  I can't keep calling these folks or trying to chat with them, I feel like I'm just banging my head against the wall.
> 
> tlwmkw



I don't know the answer to this, either, tlw, unless Marriott is somehow conveying inventory to the Trust secretly.  I doubt that can happen, legally, and I doubt that Marriott is doing anything illegal with respect to the Trust inventory.  All I know is that a couple weeks before the roll-out on Jun 20th we met with our sales rep and saw a list of several SurfWatch and at least one Barony Beach intervals that Marriott had available for sale.  Those were not on the list of conveyed units that were included in the original docs and none of the TUG sleuths has come up with any evidence of further conveyances since the roll-out.  I'm sure that eventually Marriott will not hold Weeks inventory outside of the Trust, as you expect, but I'm not as certain that they've conveyed everything to date.


----------



## tombo

puckmanfl said:


> good evening
> 
> Sue, the difference between a wait list for a trust unit v. II exchange is that a trust point person doesn't have to wait list (exchange members do) for the same inventory.  Trust members get access to legacy weeks converted to points as well, competing with you for these as well...
> 
> At the end of the day MVCD is telling you that your legacy point is worth less than a trust point.  Counting for inflation,you paid as much for your points as trust owners!! In addition to this, you get "skimmed" to get less valuable points...  In 2004, I did not have the option of purchasing in a trust and becoming a trust owner,so Why is my conversion getting me to a weaker quality of point...
> 
> An II exchange is an independent transaction, monitored by a third party whose motive is to make deals, not promote sales of points...
> 
> I am with Tombo
> 
> Roll Tide Roll
> 
> I am sorry to be so argumentative, but I really feel betrayed by this!!!



Are you now rooting for Bama with me, just agreeing that you have given up on Marriot doing what is right for legacy owners, or both? 

Either way welcome.


----------



## SueDonJ

puckmanfl said:


> good afternoon
> 
> Sue...
> 
> I really respect your graciousness!!!  It does come thru in cyberspace...
> 
> I don't plan on throwing my ownership out the window!!! I plan on making what I have work, just as you are doing!!! (all my 2011 weeks are planned except 1 in the legacy points game)  What irritates me is that the "trust" point thing might actually work better for my future needs but my 13,666 pts. are "trapped" as legacy points and they can't ever play with the other children (trust points)!!!
> 
> I don't have another $130K in handy money to purchase an equivalent number of points in the trust...
> 
> If there was to  be a dichotomy in points some system of equity exchange should have been made available to legacy owners...where they could (for a fee of course) convert to trust points... I am sure they would factor in the skim for this as well!!!



We're guinea pigs for sure, Puck, but I refuse to believe that Marriott has offered us something that has less value than what we owned before we enrolled.  Even if the very worst predictions for Points usage were to come true (which I don't expect,) we are still able to use our Weeks on the exact same basis as every other Weeks owner.  We're not losing anything that we had, and we stand to make some gains.  That's not a bad position to be in.

Good luck with your test drive.  You're a step ahead of me for Jul 26th in that you at least know what you want to do with your weeks ... two of mine are in limbo.


----------



## californiagirl

So let me see if I understand this correctly.  My goal was to trade my garden view 2 bdrm MOC for points and trade back into MOC in a 1 bdrm ocean view or ocean front unit and have points left over to use somewhere else.  Since MOC is sold out, am I to understand that if another legacy week owner deposits the exact unit (into the points system) that I am seeking and I make the request, a trust owner can scoop it out from under me???  I would be in second place behind a trust owner even though I am exchanging legacy points for legacy points?

If this is the case, I am one very unhappy camper!   I had gotten past the skim and was thinking the flexibility was worth it for me.  This takes it to a whole new level of dissatisfaction.  I also would appreciate Dave M. requesting confirmation from his source in Marriott.  I agree that if this is the case, then this is the straw that breaks the camel's back.  I can not believe how poorly this program has been presented and delivered!!  That we are still calling and getting conflicting information from the Marriott specialists is beyond belief.  I am so disappointed with Marriott.  I have been a huge fan for several years and expected much more from them.  Right now I feel that in return for my loyalty to Marriott I am receiving a sucker-punch!


----------



## ArtsieAng

SueDonJ said:


> I don't first-hand, no, but I'm going by what Puck was told by his guru and posted in the other thread where this was first discussed:
> 
> *"... on the opening day of trading (7/26) Trust owners (new points purchasers) have access to BOTH pools #1 and #2, Exchange owners (legacy owners that have enrolled and converted to points) have access to only Pool #2.
> 
> Here is where it gets tricky!!! If and ONLY if a Trust owner grabs a reservation from Pool #2, then a reservation becomes available to an Exchange owner from Pool #1. Legacy point users have to wait until Trust owners make moves before Legacy point users get access to Trust inventory...  ..."*
> 
> OK thanks, I understand your point.....I think this all needs to be verified. Hopefully, this will happen sooner, rather than later.
> 
> Which is why I used the qualifier, "with respect to having to wait for a match."  I'm aware there are differences between Legacy and Points owners, and between Marriott's and II's systems.  The comparison I made was between an II request and a DC wait-list.



The difference is that Marriott is playing favorites, and II is not. If two identical weeks are deposited into II, they will be treated exactly the same when it comes to fulfilling their requests. The only difference between the two in the eyes of II would be when each week was deposited. 

Marriott is giving the clear advantage to points. If it does turn out that there is a wait list, it would be just another line I'd have to get behind now, in order to get an exchange. Sigh.


----------



## puckmanfl

Good evening


Sorry tombo

I live in Gatorland....

Congrats on last year, the better team won!!!!p


----------



## CMF

*Conversation with Marriott*

I just had in online chat with a rep.  There are two buckets.  Blended  owners (legacy owners that also buy points) have access to all the inventory.

Charles


----------



## tombo

Finding out about all the wrongs Marriott has done to Legacy owners with their points launch is like watching a soap opera. 

One day Marriott is charging resale owners more than retail. If it was a soap opera it would be a married person with lipstick on the collar. Signs of bad things to come.

Next the skim is found out about. In the soap opera it could be seeing a spouse in an embrace with another person. When Marriott is asked, oh no we aren't doing that, when asked again we are doing that, when asked again, maybe? 

 Now Marriott is later caught and grudgingly admits that they will never give legacy converters access to trust inventory. Too bad Legacy owners, take it or leave it. We care about the new purchasers, not our past customers. 

This is the final betrayal for many. In the soap opera it would be you catching your spouse in bed with another, and when confronted being told by your spouse, this is how it is , accept it or not. I have moved on. 

Some here will actually accept such treachery and say what can I do to make it better? The answer to that question from both Marriott and the  uncaring spouse is basically the same. Hop into bed with my new lover at any terms I choose or else I really don't care what you do. My new lover/points customer is all I care about, you are yesterday's news.

I wonder what twists and turns will be in next week's episode?


----------



## puckmanfl

good evening...

CMF...

Are you telling me that if I fork out another $9200 for 1000 purchased pts., my legacy points  can now play with the "big boys"???.   This actually makes it worse!!!  My legacy points are not part of the trust and thus it would be egregious for me to have access to trust inventory, however for $9200 extra all is forgiven and the trust owners really would not mind if I access their inventory!!!

yikes my $85K spent in 2004 isn't good enough!!! 

please forgive my sarcasm, I know you are just trying to help....


----------



## drp392

CMF said:


> I just had in online chat with a rep.  There are two buckets.  Blended  owners (legacy owners that also buy points) have access to all the inventory.
> 
> Charles



I really don't know why this is shocking to anyone.  This is how they get you to buy trust points if you are a legacy owner.  Wall Street, MAR, etc... need I say more.


----------



## CMF

tombo said:


> One day Marriott is charging resale owners more than retail.



Are you referring to the enrollment fee?  What else don't I know?

Charles


----------



## tombo

CMF said:


> I just had in online chat with a rep.  There are two buckets.  Blended  owners (legacy owners that also buy points) have access to all the inventory.
> 
> Charles



Isn't that special. If you own 8 weeks purchased retail from Marriott and convert to points, you will never have access to the trust inventory. If you own a bronze every other year  week purchased resale and buy some points from Marriott you get access to all inventory. Now everyone should feel free to buy points from Marriott secure in the knowledge that if you buy points directly from them that they will always treat you special in the future since you are their customer, just like they are treating their current customers so special as they roll out points.

After all they have done to current owners, who could ever trust Marriott to treat them right in the future no matter what they promise you now?


----------



## tombo

CMF said:


> Are you referring to the enrollment fee?  What else don't I know?
> 
> Charles



Just the enrollment fee(that I know of so far).


----------



## bogey21

*This is all nuts.  If enough you are right in your analysis, I suspect that it will devalue existing Weeks in sold out resorts (unless of course Marriott buys them).  I sold my 5 Marriotts (Orlando and Hilton Head) 7 or 8 years ago when I got mad at Marriott for changing their Owner Sales and Owner Rental Programs.  If I can buy back one or two of the Weeks I sold for 25 cents on the dollar, I might do it and just use them.

George*


----------



## dougp26364

siberiavol said:


> This BAD NEWS came from the post related to points presentation at MCV. I don't know how to link that information but thought this needed a new topic title . Puckman discovered that enrolled members would not be able to use their points to get properties owned by the trust. This seemed incredulous to me and beyond the realm of possibilities.
> 
> I just called and he was apparently told the truth. Those of us who enrolled and deposited our weeks for points will only see other enrolled members deposits. The unsold weeks will not be available to us. The way we could get into the newer properties is if an owner of those properties deposited a week.
> 
> The representative said it had always been that way and that was the way she was trained. She said it wouldn't be fair to let the people who just paid an entry fee have the same access as people buying points. This was after talking to a supervisor. She said it is in the documents.
> 
> I still don't know what Marriott will do with unsold properties.
> 
> Feel free to merge this with previous post or retitled that post but this topic in a headline of some form.



I have a different take on this.

Just like trust owners will have to have the exchange manager request an exchange through Interval from weeks depotited from legacy owners, Legacy owners will have to also do the same in reverse. Request weeks deposited by the trust manager with Interval to obtain legacy weeks for points owners. 

On the surface this looks like a bad deal but, in reality I don't believe anyone is going to notice. It's just how they have to keep inventory seperate rather than co-mingle.


----------



## SKH

*can not combine trust points with legacy DP points.*

I just got off the phone with Marriott.  If you convert your Legacy weeks for DP points, you will only have access to Legacy inventory.  If you buy new points youwill only have access to trust inventory.  You will not be able to combine them.  So this will make it harder for you to book a vacation.


----------



## Cathyb

*Sure sounds like what RCI did years ago*



tombo said:


> It is simple for Marriott to administer 2 inventories. The computer deposits your week into a legacy pool and you can only access the legacy pool.
> 
> Points owners who buy points directly from Marriott can access the trust inventory, and barring someone finding it to be specifically prohibited in writing, I would bet the retail points buyers can access the legacy weeks deposited into points too.



Remember when RCI had 'Weeks owners only' then they introduced points; eventually the Points owners had access to our Weeks inventory but not vice versa.


----------



## drp392

SKH said:


> I just got off the phone with Marriott.  If you convert your Legacy weeks for DP points, you will only have access to Legacy inventory.  If you buy new points youwill only have access to trust inventory.  You will not be able to combine them.  So this will make it harder for you to book a vacation.



Hold on, so if I get 5625 points converting my resale weeks then buy 1000 new points, I will only have access to the trust pool with the 1000 and not the 5625?  The 5625 will only have access to the legacy pool even after buying new points?  Sick.  No sale!


----------



## windje2000

drp392 said:


> Hold on, so if I get 5625 points converting my resale weeks then buy 1000 new points, I will only have access to the trust pool with the 1000 and not the 5625?  The 5625 will only have access to the legacy pool even after buying new points?  Sick.  No sale!



There was once a book written about Continental Airlines entitled _*From Worst to First*_ by Gordon Bethune, the CEO.

The title of the book about Marriott will be _*From First to Worst*_.  

Marriott is racing for the bottom, and winning.


----------



## hotcoffee

SKH said:


> I just got off the phone with Marriott.  If you convert your Legacy weeks for DP points, you will only have access to Legacy inventory.  If you buy new points youwill only have access to trust inventory.  You will not be able to combine them.  So this will make it harder for you to book a vacation.



I think you might have misunderstood the Marriott rep.  Legacy (meaning something left over from the past) inventory refers to the weeks inventory.  If you reserve a week at your home resort regardless of whether you are enrolled or are not enrolled, you are accessing legacy inventory at your home resort.  Points inventory refers to the inventory available to enrolled members or those who own only points.  Anyone accessing legacy inventory does not have access to the points inventory.  Those who use points do not have access to legacy inventory (other than weeks deposited into II - and then only if the Club Manager is unable to fulfill a trade request via the points inventory).


----------



## dougp26364

SKH said:


> I just got off the phone with Marriott.  If you convert your Legacy weeks for DP points, you will only have access to Legacy inventory.  If you buy new points youwill only have access to trust inventory.  You will not be able to combine them.  So this will make it harder for you to book a vacation.



Now that's a little twist that could make old owners who bought additional points a little less pleased with their purchase. 

Somehow I can't see Marriott, or any large developer, not forseeing the problems this can cause and not have some sort of work-around that smooths out the process. 

This is one of those reasons I've recommended exercising caution before moving ahead. If there's no deadline that's pushing you, it may be best to stand on the sidelines to see how all of this works itself out. I still have confidence that it won't be a problem in the end but, I'd still like to see the end result before laying down my cash. 

Marriott has done probably the WORST job of rolling out this program and, IMHO, made it considerably more complicated that was necessary fromt the start. They'd have been better off playing follow the leader taking lessons from some of the successful points overlay systems that are all around them.


----------



## hotcoffee

dougp26364 said:


> . . .
> Marriott has done probably the WORST job of rolling out this program and, IMHO, made it considerably more complicated that was necessary fromt the start. They'd have been better off playing follow the leader taking lessons from some of the successful points overlay systems that are all around them.



Marriott's own employees have made the points rollout into perhaps one of the worst new program rollouts in business history.  No two reps seem to tell people the same thing.  This is unbelievable.

Everyone here is panicking.  The documents define the new program, and none of them justify the conclusions posted in this thread.


----------



## gravitar

No two timeshare reps ever tell a customer the same thing. Why should this be any different?


----------



## larue

puckmanfl said:


> good afternoon
> 
> It's pretty simple folks...
> 
> Trust owners can access ANY week in the point inventory.  Legacy owners that convert a week to points can access ONLY the inventory that other legacy owners have converted to MR or DC points + units available from delinquencies...
> 
> There are some provisions for crossover for legacy point players if and when trust owners hit the legacy points inventory.
> 
> This is 10 times worse than the skim.  At least the skim was seen upfront and can be viewed as a feeble attempt to charge a fee for short stays, definitive dates and flexibility!!  The two sets of inventories for points players are hidden in a well crafted clause about affiliated resorts when describing the exchange company for enrollee's...
> 
> I'm stuck (out $695) and will test drive my 4550 pts on 7/26 to see just how bad it really is...The good news is that if I don't see anything in pointr inventory. I can keep my week as a week (as I have not yet converted it). I can then lock off and play in the II account. If they ever contact me about it!!!!
> 
> yikes...




I emailed a Marriott Vacation Club Points Specialist with whom I have been working and he says this is not the case.  Here is the correspondence:

From me to him:

Hi.  As I have previously mentioned, I look at a bulletin board on timeshares fairly frequently.  There is a discussion thread over there that is claiming that weeks owners that enroll into the points program do not have full access to resorts in the trust, but only into resorts where other weeks owners have also enrolled and traded their weeks for points.  Here is a link to the discussion thread:

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

Is this correct?  I have to say that if it is I am not happy and it would appear to contradict our previous conversations before I enrolled my weeks at Ko Olina.​
His reply to me:

Good afternoon,

I've been reading through the post and it does look like there is a lot of confusion circulating out there. I keep up on TUG myself just to be aware of any issues that might arise so I'm prepared to answer owners questions. 

I can assure you that those who enroll in the points program have access to all unsold inventory, any weeks in default, and, most importantly, all inventory provided by owners who Trade for Marriott Reward Points. 

To give you the specific numbers:

27% of Inventory each year is kept by owners staying in their home club. This is the ONLY inventory you do not have access to. 

43% of Inventory will be those who exchange into Interval or elect points for the year. As an enrolled owner, you have access to both of these pools - exchanged II weeks from owners who don't enroll and Elected Weeks.

21% of Inventory will come from owners who trade for Marriott Rewards Points

9% of Inventory will be all unsold weeks (and delinquent weeks).

This comes to 2,657,000 Nights that will be available in 2011. A total of 73% of the Inventory in the Marriott system is available to points members. 

I hope these numbers help. Again, I am happy you chose to come to me with your concerns.​
My reply to him:

People are saying that within the points there is a division between those owners like me who have enrolled their deeded weeks and owners under the new system who purchase points.  They are saying that there will be two pools of rooms within the points program and that the only rooms that I will be eligible to trade into using points (including the 800 bonus points for enrolling) will be from other deeded owners like myself who enrolled their weeks and then traded for destination points.  

Are they correct or do I have the same access to rooms available in the points system as everyone else in the points system, regardless of how they got there (whether through enrolling their deeded weeks or purchasing points under the new system)?

Thanks​
The agent's final reply:

Good afternoon again,

In the most simple terms, you have access to the same rooms as anyone else. The unsold inventory comes to 9% of all inventory in the points program. Those who elect points with their current week have the same rights to it as brand new owners.​


----------



## Lawlar

*Soooo Confusing*

An owner who bought a floating week deed at MOC Lahaina Tower was assured that he or she would have the right to use that deeded interest to reserve a week out of the total amount of weeks represented by the 99 units times 52 weeks (5,148 weeks). [putting aside, for this discussion, the 13 month / 12 month priority].

If the original deed owners want to remain in the old system, do they still have the right to reserve from the 5,148 weeks they were promised?  Or is Marriott placing some of those weeks out of the reach of those who purchased deeded units?

If Marriott is removing some of the available inventory from the original program, then every deed owner is getting shafted.

This sounds more and more like a ponzi scheme.


----------



## dougp26364

hotcoffee said:


> Marriott's own employees have made the points rollout into perhaps one of the worst new program rollouts in business history.  No two reps seem to tell people the same thing.  This is unbelievable.
> 
> Everyone here is panicking.  The documents define the new program, and none of them justify the conclusions posted in this thread.



That's why I'm not panicing about the new program. There are to many others before it for it not to be a decent program but, Marriott has made some mistakes I wouldn't have thought possible. The biggest is not having ALL of their employee's on the same page. This is probably the result of making the program more complex than it really needed to be.

Again, the sidelines not a bad place to be vs jumping in with both feet before seeing the program in action.

FWIW, I still plan on joining. I just don't see a great amount of risk involved and I still see the potential for significant upside. All these details will get worked out and, most of what has been worried about will end up being nothing to have been worried about in the first place.


----------



## DanCali

californiagirl said:


> If this is the case, I am one very unhappy camper!   I had gotten past the skim and was thinking the flexibility was worth it for me.  This takes it to a whole new level of dissatisfaction.



This is a very interesting trend.

The skim threads were arguments between the owners who were against enrolling and the owners who were for enrolling and the owners on the fence.

This thread it's arguments mostly between the owners who had made up their minds to enroll or already jumped on the bandwagon.

It seems that we all have different breaking points. For some it's skim, for some it's no access to trust pool... and some, who shall remain nameless, will defend Marriott no matter what can of worms opens up.

I'm still pretty speechless and somewhat skeptical about this, but it's a good read. For what it's worth I thought FredM had the best explanation earlier in the day in the other thread.


----------



## SueDonJ

hotcoffee said:


> Marriott's own employees have made the points rollout into perhaps one of the worst new program rollouts in business history.  No two reps seem to tell people the same thing.  This is unbelievable.
> 
> Everyone here is panicking.  The documents define the new program, and none of them justify the conclusions posted in this thread.





gravitar said:


> No two timeshare reps ever tell a customer the same thing. Why should this be any different?



I completely agree.  Marriott would have been so much better served if they'd designated certain reps as the go-to for all Points questions, and then ordered every other Marriott employee to refer all questions to those designated reps.  What a mess this has been made into, all attributable to the misinformation offered by obviously unprepared Marriott reps.


----------



## mjbaran

larue said:


> I emailed a Marriott Vacation Club Points Specialist with whom I have been working and he says this is not the case.  Here is the correspondence:
> 
> From me to him:
> 
> Hi.  As I have previously mentioned, I look at a bulletin board on timeshares fairly frequently.  There is a discussion thread over there that is claiming that weeks owners that enroll into the points program do not have full access to resorts in the trust, but only into resorts where other weeks owners have also enrolled and traded their weeks for points.  Here is a link to the discussion thread:
> 
> http://tugbbs.com/forums/showthread.php?t=126203
> 
> Is this correct?  I have to say that if it is I am not happy and it would appear to contradict our previous conversations before I enrolled my weeks at Ko Olina.​
> His reply to me:
> 
> Good afternoon,
> 
> I've been reading through the post and it does look like there is a lot of confusion circulating out there. I keep up on TUG myself just to be aware of any issues that might arise so I'm prepared to answer owners questions.
> 
> I can assure you that those who enroll in the points program have access to all unsold inventory, any weeks in default, and, most importantly, all inventory provided by owners who Trade for Marriott Reward Points.
> 
> To give you the specific numbers:
> 
> 27% of Inventory each year is kept by owners staying in their home club. This is the ONLY inventory you do not have access to.
> 
> 43% of Inventory will be those who exchange into Interval or elect points for the year. As an enrolled owner, you have access to both of these pools - exchanged II weeks from owners who don't enroll and Elected Weeks.
> 
> 21% of Inventory will come from owners who trade for Marriott Rewards Points
> 
> 9% of Inventory will be all unsold weeks (and delinquent weeks).
> 
> This comes to 2,657,000 Nights that will be available in 2011. A total of 73% of the Inventory in the Marriott system is available to points members.
> 
> I hope these numbers help. Again, I am happy you chose to come to me with your concerns.​
> My reply to him:
> 
> People are saying that within the points there is a division between those owners like me who have enrolled their deeded weeks and owners under the new system who purchase points.  They are saying that there will be two pools of rooms within the points program and that the only rooms that I will be eligible to trade into using points (including the 800 bonus points for enrolling) will be from other deeded owners like myself who enrolled their weeks and then traded for destination points.
> 
> Are they correct or do I have the same access to rooms available in the points system as everyone else in the points system, regardless of how they got there (whether through enrolling their deeded weeks or purchasing points under the new system)?
> 
> Thanks​
> The agent's final reply:
> 
> Good afternoon again,
> 
> In the most simple terms, you have access to the same rooms as anyone else. The unsold inventory comes to 9% of all inventory in the points program. Those who elect points with their current week have the same rights to it as brand new owners.​



Would be nice to know what sections of the Exchange Program documentation support the favorable responses above.


----------



## hotcoffee

The information that enrolled owners using points have access to different inventories from those who buy points is false.  There are only two inventories: the legacy inventory consisting of weeks, and the points inventory consisting of all the inventory available to points exchangers.

The documents make that clear, and the person I deal with at Marriott has also made that clear.


----------



## SueDonJ

DanCali said:


> This is a very interesting trend.
> 
> The skim threads were arguments between the owners who were against enrolling and the owners who were for enrolling and the owners on the fence.
> 
> This thread it's arguments mostly between the owners who had made up their minds to enroll or already jumped on the bandwagon.
> 
> It seems that we all have different breaking points. For some it's skim, for some it's no access to trust pool... and some, who shall remain nameless, will defend Marriott no matter what can of worms opens up.
> 
> I'm still pretty speechless and somewhat skeptical about this, but it's a good read. For what it's worth I thought FredM had the best explanation earlier in the day in the other thread.



Yep, Fred covered it all without lapsing into hyperbole, attributing anything sinister to Marriott, or implying insults against other TUGgers.  It's too bad we can't all speak so plainly or politely.


----------



## windje2000

DanCali said:


> This is a very interesting trend.
> 
> The skim threads were arguments between the owners who were against enrolling and the owners who were for enrolling and the owners on the fence.
> 
> This thread it's arguments mostly between the owners who had made up their minds to enroll or already jumped on the bandwagon.
> 
> It seems that we all have different breaking points. For some it's skim, for some it's no access to trust pool... and some, who shall remain nameless, will defend Marriott no matter what can of worms opens up.
> 
> I'm still pretty speechless and somewhat skeptical about this, but it's a good read. For what it's worth I thought FredM had the best explanation earlier in the day in the other thread.



His post is excellent, but it would seem Fredm may be laboring under the same disputed assumption as the rest of us when he states:



> Want the added flexibility and potential fee savings of the new exchange? $695, without surrendering existing functionality.



Fee savings - yes at least in year 1

Flexibility?  That 1,000 points won't buy much as a stand alone points interest.


----------



## DanCali

SueDonJ said:


> Yep, Fred covered it all without lapsing into hyperbole, attributing anything sinister to Marriott, or implying insults against other TUGgers.  It's too bad we can't all speak so plainly or politely.



More importantly, he gave a reasonable explanation why it could indeed be true. My first reaction was "what the _ _ _ _?" but when I read his post it clicked...


----------



## hotcoffee

Lawlar said:


> An owner who bought a floating week deed at MOC Lahaina Tower was assured that he or she would have the right to use that deeded interest to reserve a week out of the total amount of weeks represented by the 99 units times 52 weeks (5,148 weeks). [putting aside, for this discussion, the 13 month / 12 month priority].
> 
> If the original deed owners want to remain in the old system, do they still have the right to reserve from the 5,148 weeks they were promised?  Or is Marriott placing some of those weeks out of the reach of those who purchased deeded units?
> 
> If Marriott is removing some of the available inventory from the original program, then every deed owner is getting shafted.
> 
> This sounds more and more like a ponzi scheme.



Those reserving via points can only access the points inventory with only one exception.  Those who reserve their week can only access the legacy weeks inventory.  The only exception is when a person using points has requested a week at a resort that is unavailable in the points inventory.  The Club Manager will then check for the week in II, and if it is there, the Club Manager will provide II with a week that satisfies a need in II.


----------



## GregT

hotcoffee said:


> Those reserving via points can only access the points inventory with only one exception.  Those who reserve their week can only access the legacy weeks inventory.  The only exception is when a person using points has requested a week at a resort that is unavailable in the points inventory.  The Club Manager will then check for the week in II, and if it is there, the Club Manager will provide II with a week that satisfies a need in II.



Hotcoffee,

This would certainly make sense, and I hope practice bears this out.  It's amazing how much distrust there is of Marriott over this program.

Thanks for info, hopefully official confirmation will be forthcoming.

Best to all,

Greg


----------



## MRMarriott

*One Other Idea*

One way I try to sort out the true information from the false information is the "commission" test. 

That is, if a paid commission executive told me this, would it induce me to buy more points?

It sounds like a sales tactic - the executive creates fear in the owner that if they don't buy points, they won't have access to this large pool of inventory, but if they buy just 1,000, the floodgates open!

I don't think this is the case and won't be positive one way or the other until I see written documentation. I don't see it in my enrollment packet. Does anyone have more proof than the words or a rep?


----------



## CMF

*Please excuse the typos.*

Welcome!
Please wait while we contact the next available agent...
You are now speaking with Don P.!
Don P.: Hi! My name is Don P.. How may I help you?
Charles : Hello. I need some clarification on the new points system.
Don P.: Ok
Charles : The question pertains to inventory. Do legacy owners that convert their weeks to points have access to the same inventory as trust owners? Or is the inventory in two separate buckets?
Charles : In other words, do legacy owners only have access to inventory deposited by other legacy owners?
Don P.: I am not familiar with the term legacy owners. Is that referring to current weeks owner that enroll in the points program?
Charles : Correct.
Don P.: If an owner uses point to make a reservation, then this inventory would come out of the enrolled owner's inventory bucket.
Charles : I see. What about trust owners (folks that did not enroll a week and just purchased points) is there inventory limited as well?
Don P.: Their inventory would come from the points owners bucket
Charles : And, what about, for lack of a better term, blended owners? enrolled week owners that purchased points. How is their point account managed?
Don P.: They would have access to both buckets.
Charles : I don't know how to phrase this: individually or jointly? Do you get what I'm trying to explain?
Don P.: Yes, they have access to search for inventory through both buckets, if that is what you are referring to
Charles : So there would be one large bucket instead of two smaller buckets to choose from. Is there a simple way to explain why Marriott decided to put weeks in two buckets?
Don P.: I am not sure what you mean exactly.
Charles : I went to a presentation at OceanWatch and I was not made aware that there were different types of inventories. I am wondering why it is done this way.
Charles : In other words, why aren't points just points.
Don P.: I am not sure why it is done the way it is, it might be due to legal stipulations. I wish I could tell you why they have these differences in inventories.
Charles : OK. Thanks Don. You helped me better understand the system and now know that I need to buy the 1000 point minimum when I enrolled my weeks. I purchased my weeks externally and close on them before the 20th. Are there any deadlines that I should be aware of?
Don P.: I believe that the 800 bonus points have a deadline, which I believe are up until the end of this year, but let me check into that and get back to you on that.


----------



## DanCali

MRMarriott said:


> One way I try to sort out the true information from the false information is the "commission" test.
> 
> That is, if a paid commission executive told me this, would it induce me to buy more points?
> 
> It sounds like a sales tactic - the executive creates fear in the owner that if they don't buy points, they won't have access to this large pool of inventory, but if they buy just 1,000, the floodgates open!
> 
> I don't think this is the case and won't be positive one way or the other until I see written documentation. I don't see it in my enrollment packet. Does anyone have more proof than the words or a rep?




This is not the type of fear that would induce buying or enrolling.

The type of fear that induces and enrolling and possibly buying points is: "II inventory will dry up", "80% of our owners already signed up", "get an extra 1300 bonus points if you buy 1000 points, but the offer expires today" etc.

This is the type of fear that would cause you to rescind your enrollment, as has been evidenced by puckmanfl's actions.


----------



## dbbk94404

SKH said:


> I just got off the phone with Marriott.  If you convert your Legacy weeks for DP points, you will only have access to Legacy inventory.  If you buy new points youwill only have access to trust inventory.  You will not be able to combine them.  So this will make it harder for you to book a vacation.



I believe this not to be true. For a legacy owner that buys into the min. points (1000) purchase for $9,200, you can combined your points and be treated as a trust owner. It's called "reloading" as I've been told. I don't know if this applies to legacy owners who bought resale. So if your week is worth 3000 points EY and you bought the 1000 points EY, you would have 4000 points to exchange with as a Trust member EY.  I guess another way of Marriott trying to improve the economy.


----------



## JimIg23

CMF said:


> Welcome!
> Please wait while we contact the next available agent...
> You are now speaking with Don P.!
> Don P.: Hi! My name is Don P.. How may I help you?
> Charles : Hello. I need some clarification on the new points system.
> Don P.: Ok
> Charles : The question pertains to inventory. Do legacy owners that convert their weeks to points have access to the same inventory as trust owners? Or is the inventory in two separate buckets?
> Charles : In other words, do legacy owners only have access to inventory deposited by other legacy owners?
> Don P.: I am not familiar with the term legacy owners. Is that referring to current weeks owner that enroll in the points program?
> Charles : Correct.
> Don P.: If an owner uses point to make a reservation, then this inventory would come out of the enrolled owner's inventory bucket.
> Charles : I see. What about trust owners (folks that did not enroll a week and just purchased points) is there inventory limited as well?
> Don P.: Their inventory would come from the points owners bucket
> Charles : And, what about, for lack of a better term, blended owners? enrolled week owners that purchased points. How is their point account managed?
> Don P.: They would have access to both buckets.
> Charles : I don't know how to phrase this: individually or jointly? Do you get what I'm trying to explain?
> Don P.: Yes, they have access to search for inventory through both buckets, if that is what you are referring to
> Charles : So there would be one large bucket instead of two smaller buckets to choose from. Is there a simple way to explain why Marriott decided to put weeks in two buckets?
> Don P.: I am not sure what you mean exactly.
> Charles : I went to a presentation at OceanWatch and I was not made aware that there were different types of inventories. I am wondering why it is done this way.
> Charles : In other words, why aren't points just points.
> Don P.: I am not sure why it is done the way it is, it might be due to legal stipulations. I wish I could tell you why they have these differences in inventories.
> Charles : OK. Thanks Don. You helped me better understand the system and now know that I need to buy the 1000 point minimum when I enrolled my weeks. I purchased my weeks externally and close on them before the 20th. Are there any deadlines that I should be aware of?
> Don P.: I believe that the 800 bonus points have a deadline, which I believe are up until the end of this year, but let me check into that and get back to you on that.



this is really important.  I am going to call and ask tomorrow also. It almost seems silly that Marriott would create all these different "buckets"  They are going to have weeks, bucket 1, bucket 2, II requests..... They are going to have raise all their fees 10x to manage all this.....


----------



## DanCali

JimIg23 said:


> They are going to have raise all their fees 10x to manage all this.....



Maybe that's why they have the skim factor


----------



## JimIg23

on the phone now with them, they are asking a supervisor......


----------



## GregT

JimIg23 said:


> on the phone now with them, they are asking a supervisor......



Can you ask them where my 13.3% went? Maybe it's in the Trust inventory?  

Just kidding....


----------



## DanCali

GregT said:


> Can you ask them where my 13.3% went? Maybe it's in the Trust inventory?
> 
> Just kidding....



13.3% makes it sound a lot better than the 1400 points or so it actually is in your case...


----------



## JimIg23

JimIg23 said:


> on the phone now with them, they are asking a supervisor......



She said this 2 bucket thing was not right, all points in the inventory (exchange members and deeds owned by Marriott) are all together and that exchange members have access to all it.  I asked her to ask a supervisor, they said the same thing.  

I may email MVC also.......  Way too many on line chats with Marriott saying differently.

DAVE, if you are reading this, this would be a great question for you knowledgable sources....


----------



## hotcoffee

JimIg23 said:


> She said this 2 bucket thing was not right, all points in the inventory (exchange members and deeds owned by Marriott) are all together and that exchange members have access to all it.  I asked her to ask a supervisor, they said the same thing.
> 
> I may email MVC also.......  Way too many on line chats with Marriott saying differently.
> 
> DAVE, if you are reading this, this would be a great question for you knowledgable sources....



Maybe some of the confusion comes in because of the definition of what the "buckets" consist of.  There are indeed two buckets.  But, one bucket contains only weeks inventory.  This bucket cannot be touched by people using points (except when exchanged through II).  The other bucket contains the points inventory.  This bucket cannot be touched by people using weeks (except when a points II exchange results in a trade out of the points inventory).


----------



## AMJ

I spoke with a Marriott Points Specialist today and was told the 2 bucket answer. He stated that legacy owners converting their weeks to destination points can not access the trust pool.


----------



## CMF

I think this is evidence of a bad training program.  All the Marriott reps are telling the truth as they know it.

Charles


----------



## JimIg23

Robin C.: Hi! My name is Robin C.. How may I help you?
Jim : Good evening. I have a question. I was told by Marriott that when a deeded weeks owner joins the points system as an exchange member, they have access to all of the point inventory, both other exchange members points and any inventory owned by Marriott, including new resorts in the future. I have heard now this may not true. I have heard that there are two seperate points inventories, one for exchange owners and one for points owners. Do exchange members have accesss to all point inventories, including those points owned by Marriott in the trust or do exchange members only have access to points given to the system by exchange members? Thanks.
Robin C.: One moment.
Jim : ok, thanks
Robin C.: Yes there are 2 inventories. The Trust Owner has access to the Trust,accounts the Weeks have access to the weeks account, BUT if those inventories are not being used then the resort puts them up for usage,
Jim : when you say "weeks" does that means the "points" that exchange members convert to points to use. For example, as an exchange member, if I convert to points and try to use the points, I cannot have access to Marriott owned inventory in the points trust? Could I only use points for inventories deposited by other exchange members?
Robin C.: Excuse me, the weeks owners would be considered the Enrolled owners.

????


----------



## tiel

CMF said:


> Welcome!
> Please wait while we contact the next available agent...
> You are now speaking with Don P.!
> Don P.: Hi! My name is Don P.. How may I help you?
> Charles : Hello. I need some clarification on the new points system.
> Don P.: Ok
> Charles : The question pertains to inventory. Do legacy owners that convert their weeks to points have access to the same inventory as trust owners? Or is the inventory in two separate buckets?
> Charles : In other words, do legacy owners only have access to inventory deposited by other legacy owners?
> Don P.: I am not familiar with the term legacy owners. Is that referring to current weeks owner that enroll in the points program?
> Charles : Correct.
> Don P.: If an owner uses point to make a reservation, then this inventory would come out of the enrolled owner's inventory bucket.
> Charles : I see. What about trust owners (folks that did not enroll a week and just purchased points) is there inventory limited as well?
> Don P.: Their inventory would come from the points owners bucket
> Charles : And, what about, for lack of a better term, blended owners? enrolled week owners that purchased points. How is their point account managed?
> Don P.: They would have access to both buckets.
> Charles : I don't know how to phrase this: individually or jointly? Do you get what I'm trying to explain?
> Don P.: Yes, they have access to search for inventory through both buckets, if that is what you are referring to
> Charles : So there would be one large bucket instead of two smaller buckets to choose from. Is there a simple way to explain why Marriott decided to put weeks in two buckets?
> Don P.: I am not sure what you mean exactly.
> Charles : I went to a presentation at OceanWatch and I was not made aware that there were different types of inventories. I am wondering why it is done this way.
> Charles : In other words, why aren't points just points.
> Don P.: I am not sure why it is done the way it is, it might be due to legal stipulations. I wish I could tell you why they have these differences in inventories.
> Charles : OK. Thanks Don. You helped me better understand the system and now know that I need to buy the 1000 point minimum when I enrolled my weeks. I purchased my weeks externally and close on them before the 20th. Are there any deadlines that I should be aware of?
> Don P.: I believe that the 800 bonus points have a deadline, which I believe are up until the end of this year, but let me check into that and get back to you on that.



Just got a response from a vacation advisor about the weeks owners access limitations unless points are also purchased:  "If you get the 1000 Vacation club points you can use those to book with in the Trust inventory.  *Keep in mind that you would still not be able to use the points you get from your weeks that you own to use in the trust inventory.*  Those weeks based Vacation club points would still have to be used in the World Vacation Collection."

Sooo, yet another response a bit different than most of the others we've gotten. Is there anyone with enough influence with Marriott to get their FINAL answer on this issue?  It is an improtant issue!  We need to know who can have access to what and with what!!  Is there anything a weeks owner can do to have FULL ACCESS to ALL inventory besides buying bunches of points (which will have to be managed by the owner, separately, forever)?  

This is too too much, if the provided statement above is accurate.  :annoyed: :annoyed:


----------



## tombo

AMJ said:


> I spoke with a Marriott Points Specialist today and was told the 2 bucket answer. He stated that legacy owners converting their weeks to destination points can not access the trust pool.



So the majority of Points specialists agree, Marriott has first class customers who buy points retail from Marriott who get access to all points inventory (including trust weeks and Legacy weeks deposited into points), and then there are the second class Legacy owners who convert and  will never be able to access trust inventory. 

The documents are so hard to read that this might very well be true, it also might be a lie salesmen are telling, and it might be a misunderstanding, but to not be able to answer a simple question like this with no if's and's or but's is NO WAY for a huge company like Marriott to launch a new program. People should be fired for introducing a system they can't even explain to their own employees.


----------



## JimC

If you can not explain a program to your own people, how in the world is anyone else supposed to figure it out?

I emailed MVCI several specific questions regarding the points program several days ago and am still waiting a response.  One of the questions dealt with inventories.


----------



## CMF

I really think that now it's the time for Marriott to appoint a thick skinned spokesperson to answer questions on this forum.

Charles


----------



## KathyPet

I asked that same question of the Consumer Advocacy group at Marriott Corp and was assured that all current "legacy owners" would be able to trade for all future new Marriott properties that were sold under the new points system so someone is speaking with the usual Marriott doubletalk.


----------



## tombo

tiel said:


> Just got a response from a vacation advisor about the weeks owners access limitations unless points are also purchased:  "If you get the 1000 Vacation club points you can use those to book with in the Trust inventory.  *Keep in mind that you would still not be able to use the points you get from your weeks that you own to use in the trust inventory.*  Those weeks based Vacation club points would still have to be used in the World Vacation Collection."
> 
> :



So legacy weeks converted to points can only be used in the World Vacation Collection which I assume is the weeks pool of inventory deposited for points. Has anyone heard the term World Vacation Collection before?

So possibly one pool is called the World Vacation Collection. Is there a term for the other pool which contains trust weeks?


----------



## hotcoffee

For my final post in this thread.  Here again is the applicable section of the Destination Points Disclosure Guide.  It is the document that defines the two groups of program members:

IV. Membership in the Program​
1. Trust Members. This paragraph only applies to Trust Members. For so long as the Association governing the Trust Member maintains its Affiliation Agreement with the Exchange Company, such Trust Member will be granted privileges in the Program as a Member, subject to the terms and conditions set forth in this Disclosure Guide. Other than the Affiliation Agreement, there is no Program contract with any Trust Member separate and distinct from the Trust Member’s contract with the Developer for the acquisition of an Interest at an Affiliate Program. Membership in the Program is not an appurtenance to Interests. In order for a Trust Member to enjoy the benefits of Membership in the Program, the Affiliate Program Manager and/or the Association of the Trust Member’s Affiliate Program must have voluntarily entered into and maintain an Affiliation Agreement with Exchange Company. During the term of the Affiliation Agreement, Trust Members will have the right to voluntarily reserve and use the Accommodations that are a part of the Program as described in the Exchange Procedures. If a Trust Member desires to use the Accommodations outside the Trust Member’s Affiliate Program (e.g., outside the Trust Member’s trust) or access Exchange Benefits, from time to time, the Trust Member may voluntarily participate in the Program described in this Disclosure Guide and the Exchange Procedures. There is no guaranty that the renewal of any Affiliation Agreement will occur. Every Affiliation Agreement will have a two year term and may be renewed on a voluntary basis by mutual agreement of the applicable Association and Exchange Company. Members must comply with all of the terms and conditions of the Program as determined by Exchange Company. 
2. Exchange Members. This paragraph only applies to Exchange Members. In order to enjoy the benefits of Membership in the Program as a Exchange Member, an owner of an Interest must have voluntarily entered into an Enrollment Agreement with Exchange Company. Membership in the Program is not an appurtenance to Interests. Exchange Members must comply with all of the terms and conditions for Membership in the Program. During the term of the Exchange Member’s Enrollment Agreement with Exchange Company and so long as a Exchange Member remains enrolled in the Program, Exchange Members will have the right to reserve and use the Accommodations and facilities that are a part of the Program in accordance with the Exchange Procedures. If a Exchange Member desires to use the Accommodations outside the Exchange Member’s Affiliate Program or access Exchange Benefits, from time to time, the Exchange Member may voluntarily participate in the Program described in this Disclosure Guide and the Exchange Procedures. There is no guaranty that the renewal of any Enrollment Agreement will occur. Every Enrollment Agreement will have a one year term and may be renewed on a voluntary basis by the Exchange Member. Members must comply with all of the terms and conditions of the Program as determined by Exchange Company.


----------



## tiel

tombo said:


> So the majority of Points specialists agree, Marriott has first class customers who buy points restail from Marriott who get access to all points inventory (including trust weeks and Legacy weeks), and then there are the second class Legacy owners who convert and  will never be able to access trust inventory.
> 
> *The documents are so hard to read* that this might very well be true, it also might be a lie salesmen are telling, and it might be a misunderstanding, but to not be able to answer a simple question like this with no if's and's or but's is *NO WAY for a huge company like Marriott to launch a new program.* People should be fired for introducing a system they can't even explain to their own employees.



I tried to make these very comments on Bill's blog, but it never made it past the moderator.  There is no doubt this is a complex program, BUT, it is clear they were just meeting an arbitrary release date on June 20.  They were not, and still are not, ready to release this program, though of course it's way too late to do anything about that.  At a minimum, their documentation should be in plain English;  there should be clear, understandable rules laid out so we can all (Marriott staff AND weeks/points/combo owners) know what is going on.

Just wondering what is going to happen on JUL 26, when the website is supposed to be operational!?!?!?!  Guess we'll be relying on the programmers to indirectly tell us what the rules are, by making our transactions possible or impossible to accomplish.  That is truly scary.


----------



## KathyPet

*DAVE,*

Yoo Hoo!  Dave where are you when we need clarification on this point from your "Marriott buddy"?


----------



## puckmanfl

good evening...

just a tidbit to raise the comedy level a little...

On 7/26 the "death star" will NOT be operational.  If you wish to play with "points" on this day as either an Exchange owner or trust owner, you must call owner services and get your VOA on the "line".  The VOA will be able to check inventory and make your transaction...

I can't wait to test drive this!!!  It will be worth the $695 just to "make a call" in the poker game so that I may finally see the other guys hand!!!  I promise to report back with my results!!!!


----------



## Janette

If you want to use your deeded week as usual, you don't want points folks to have access to that inventory. Once you turn in your week for points, then you are on the same level with those who bought points and will pull from that pool. I'm at Grande Ocean this week and am not worried about my future vacations.


----------



## JimIg23

Long conversation with yet another Marriott rep, who was actually very nice and understood my problems.  She thinks what this thread is saying IS correct and that exchange members will only have access to other inventory after Marriott decides to release it, which could be 10 months, whenever.  They said exchange owners have 10 days to cancel their memberships if they already signed or emailed back.  

I was on the fence, but was willing to try the system based on the understanding points are points.  This is crazy.  No way I am going to pay for something like this.


----------



## hipslo

The concern expressed in this thread seems unlikely to be valid to me.  Just a hunch, nothing more.

Think about how happy with marriott everyone will be when they clear this up definitively, and it works the way enrolled owners would like it to work.....


----------



## ondeadlin

SueDonJ said:


> Yep, Fred covered it all without lapsing into hyperbole, attributing anything sinister to Marriott, or implying insults against other TUGgers.  It's too bad we can't all speak so plainly or politely.



What's the quote? Ah yes, the world is made for people who aren't cursed with self-awareness, lol.

Here's a hint, Sue: Just because something is phrased in passive aggressive manner doesn't make it any less of an implied insult.


----------



## DanCali

Janette said:


> Once you turn in your week for points, then you are on the same level with those who bought points and will pull from that pool.



There are numerous posts in this thread that reach an opposite conclusion based on conversations with Marriott reps. 

Your conclusion is based on...?


----------



## DanCali

JimIg23 said:


> I was on the fence, but was willing to try the system based on the understanding points are points.  This is crazy.  No way I am going to pay for something like this.



You mean you were willing to pay $2K to get an edge on weeks owners but you won't pay $2K to be a second class citizen?


----------



## tombo

hipslo said:


> The concern expressed in this thread seems unlikely to be valid to me.  Just a hunch, nothing more.
> 
> Think about how happy with marriott everyone will be when they clear this up definitively, and it works the way enrolled owners would like it to work.....



How could an owner later be pleased that owners had to call marriott employees repeatedly asking questions about inventory and they kept getting different answers? It should be an embarassment for Marriott and it is another slap in the face for owners. 

Right now the best we can do is go on the majority rule. The majority of Marriott employees have told the owners who called and inquired that Legacy owners who deposit weeks will not be able to access trust inventory. If that is later proven to be wrong, or if it is in fact correct, the ineptitude of marriott's roll out and the lack of training of it's employees is something that significantly reduces most owner's confidence in Marriott as a well run organization. In addition after not getting a straight answer for weeks at a time, when they finally give a supposedly definitive answer, how can you trust them to not change it later and say oops you were told wrong again?


----------



## DanCali

hotcoffee said:


> For my final post in this thread.  Here again is the applicable section of the Destination Points Disclosure Guide.  It is the document that defines the two groups of program members:
> 
> IV. Membership in the Program​
> 1. Trust Members. This paragraph only applies to Trust Members. For so long as the Association governing the Trust Member maintains its Affiliation Agreement with the Exchange Company, such Trust Member will be granted privileges in the Program as a Member, subject to the terms and conditions set forth in this Disclosure Guide. Other than the Affiliation Agreement, there is no Program contract with any Trust Member separate and distinct from the Trust Member’s contract with the Developer for the acquisition of an Interest at an Affiliate Program. Membership in the Program is not an appurtenance to Interests. In order for a Trust Member to enjoy the benefits of Membership in the Program, the Affiliate Program Manager and/or the Association of the Trust Member’s Affiliate Program must have voluntarily entered into and maintain an Affiliation Agreement with Exchange Company. *During the term of the Affiliation Agreement, Trust Members will have the right to voluntarily reserve and use the Accommodations that are a part of the Program as described in the Exchange Procedures.* If a Trust Member desires to use the Accommodations outside the Trust Member’s Affiliate Program (e.g., outside the Trust Member’s trust) or access Exchange Benefits, from time to time, the Trust Member may voluntarily participate in the Program described in this Disclosure Guide and the Exchange Procedures. There is no guaranty that the renewal of any Affiliation Agreement will occur. Every Affiliation Agreement will have a two year term and may be renewed on a voluntary basis by mutual agreement of the applicable Association and Exchange Company. Members must comply with all of the terms and conditions of the Program as determined by Exchange Company.
> 2. Exchange Members. This paragraph only applies to Exchange Members. In order to enjoy the benefits of Membership in the Program as a Exchange Member, an owner of an Interest must have voluntarily entered into an Enrollment Agreement with Exchange Company. Membership in the Program is not an appurtenance to Interests. Exchange Members must comply with all of the terms and conditions for Membership in the Program. During the term of the Exchange Member’s Enrollment Agreement with Exchange Company and so long as a Exchange Member remains enrolled in the Program, Exchange Members will have the right to reserve and use the Accommodations and facilities that are a part of the Program in accordance with the Exchange Procedures. If a Exchange Member desires to use the Accommodations outside the Exchange Member’s Affiliate Program or access Exchange Benefits, from time to time, the Exchange Member may voluntarily participate in the Program described in this Disclosure Guide and the Exchange Procedures. There is no guaranty that the renewal of any Enrollment Agreement will occur. Every Enrollment Agreement will have a one year term and may be renewed on a voluntary basis by the Exchange Member. Members must comply with all of the terms and conditions of the Program as determined by Exchange Company.



hotcoffee - based on your posts I assume you think the above text proves there is one inventory pool. 

This is getting VERY interesting because I just downloaded the "Exchange Procedures" document from Marriott's website and it reads as follows on page 1 (note the highlighted differences):



> II.
> EXERCISE OF MEMBERSHIP PRIVILEGES; MEMBER’S DISTRIBUTION
> A. Trust Members. This section only applies to Trust Members. Membership in the Program is not an appurtenance to Interests. In order to enjoy the benefits of Membership in the Program as a Trust Member, the Affiliate Program Manager and/or Association of your Affiliate Program must have voluntarily entered into an Affiliation Agreement with Exchange Company, where the Affiliate Program Manager and/or Association is a member of the Program. Trust Members must comply with all of the terms and conditions of Membership in the Program. *During the term of the Affiliation Agreement, Trust Members will have the right to reserve and use the Accommodations, facilities, services, and experiences that are a part of the Program or an Affiliate Program in accordance with these Exchange Procedures.* Unless otherwise provided pursuant to the applicable Affiliation Agreement, Trust Members have the right to reserve and use the Accommodations, facilities, services, and experiences that are a part of the Trust Member’s Affiliate Program in accordance with that Affiliate Program’s Affiliate Program Reservation System. If a Trust Member desires to use the Special Benefits that may be offered by Exchange Company from time to time, the Trust Member may voluntarily participate in the Program as described in these Exchange Procedures.



this is clearly different and *leads me to a different conclusion than yours...*

(the Exchange members Paragraph reads similar to yours, implying the can only reserve "Accommodations and facilities that are a part of the Program in accordance with the Exchange Procedures. ")


----------



## SueDonJ

ondeadlin said:


> What's the quote? Ah yes, the world is made for people who aren't cursed with self-awareness, lol.
> 
> Here's a hint, Sue: Just because something is phrased in passive aggressive manner doesn't make it any less of an implied insult.



Funny how that works.


----------



## dioxide45

Still unsure if this is true or not (since no one can get the same answer), but if it is, here is how I see that it works.

There are technically three types of ownership entities in this.


Legacy non-enrolled weeks owners
Legacy enrolled week owners
The Trust (I don't indicate trust owners, because the trust is just another enrolled weeks owner)

Then you have the Exchange Program that all owners exchange through in the new program. The Exchange Program is a separate entity from the trust.


When a non-enrolled weeks owner wants to make an exchange, they do so as in the past, through II. No changes.

When a trust owner wants to make a reservation at a trust resort, they just make the reservation. This doesn't go through the exchange program as long as the trust still has inventory for the requested resort.

When a trust owner wants to make a non-Marriott exchange. The exchange manager deposits a week in to II equivalent to the points given up for the exchange. This inventory doesn't go through the new exchange program.

When a trust owner wants to make an exchange to a Marriott resort not in the trust. The trust makes available to the exchange program the number of points that they are exchanging with and the trust owner gets a week that a legacy enrolled owner deposited/converted for points. This same number of points now become available in the exchange company. Legacy weeks owners can now reserve via the exchange company for resorts in the trust equivalent to the amount of points that the trust has deposited to the exchange program.

When a legacy enrolled weeks owner converts and wants to exchange/reserve for any time, they can only reserve for inventory in the exchange program. That inventory is made up of weeks that were converted to DC points (perhaps also MR points) and points that were deposited to the exchange program. Legacy weeks enrolled owners can't access the points trust inventory until the trust makes it available to the exchange program.

The exchange program is a points in points out system. The trust and legacy owners put points in and then take time out. Trust owners can't access inventory that are not deposited to the exchange program, so I can see why enrolled weeks owners can't access points not deposited to the exchange program either.

This is all speculative and my analysis of what I have read in this thread.


----------



## camachinist

Another point of interest to legacy weeks owners wrt the influence of the new 'trust' is that, while methodically going through MARSHA looking at Marriott rental inventory, I'm seeing huge holes in inventory for next year (2011). A lot of 'unsuccessful sells'. For legacy owners who like to occupy/exchange and augment their week with a few revenue nights at the timeshare property, and often at the advantageous MOD rate, this is a point of value which may become much harder to acheive with the trust/points scheme in place.

One more datapoint...


----------



## brigechols

tombo said:


> Has anyone heard the term World Vacation Collection before?



Yes on MVCI in the FAQ link (requires log-in)

Where will the inventory come from to fulfill vacation reservations within the Marriott Vacation Club Collection?

Inventory throughout the Marriott Vacation Club Collection will be available for reservations for Enrolled Owners via other Marriott Vacation Club Owners who enroll their weeks and elect Vacation Club Points, and non-enrolled Owners who trade their usage for Marriott Rewards points or exchange their week through membership in Interval International.


----------



## DanCali

dioxide45 said:


> This is all speculative and my analysis of what I have read in this thread.



This is how I understand it too, assuming all this issue of 2 pools is correct.


----------



## dioxide45

hotcoffee said:


> For my final post in this thread.  Here again is the applicable section of the Destination Points Disclosure Guide.  It is the document that defines the two groups of program members:
> 
> 2. Exchange Members. This paragraph only applies to Exchange Members. *In order to enjoy the benefits of Membership in the Program as a Exchange Member, an owner of an Interest must have voluntarily entered into an Enrollment Agreement with Exchange Company. *Membership in the Program is not an appurtenance to Interests. Exchange Members must comply with all of the terms and conditions for Membership in the Program. During the term of the Exchange Member’s Enrollment Agreement with Exchange Company and so long as a Exchange Member remains enrolled in the Program, Exchange Members will have the right to reserve and use the Accommodations and facilities that are a part of the Program in accordance with the Exchange Procedures. If a Exchange Member desires to use the Accommodations outside the Exchange Member’s Affiliate Program or access Exchange Benefits, from time to time, the Exchange Member may voluntarily participate in the Program described in this Disclosure Guide and the Exchange Procedures. There is no guaranty that the renewal of any Enrollment Agreement will occur. Every Enrollment Agreement will have a one year term and may be renewed on a voluntary basis by the Exchange Member. Members must comply with all of the terms and conditions of the Program as determined by Exchange Company.



I think the portion in red better relates to what is being discussed. The owner of an interest is a trust owner or a weeks owner. In order for exchange members to enjoy all the benefits of the trust inventory, an owner in the trust must voluntarily enter in to an enrollment agreement with the exchange company. They enter in to this agreement by exchanging through the exchange company and depositing points as I indicated in my prior post.


----------



## SueDonJ

dioxide45 said:


> I think the portion in red better relates to what is being discussed. The owner of an interest is a trust owner (only trust owners own beneficial interests). In order for exchange members to enjoy all the benefits that owner of the interest must voluntarily enter in to an enrollment agreement with the exchange company. They enter in to this agreement by exchanging through the exchange company as I indicated in my prior post.



What do you think, Dioxide?  Is Marriott considered a Trust Owner of a beneficial interest because of their development holdings in the Trust?  Is it reasonable to expect, as siberiavol and others have concluded, that Marriott will "enter into an enrollment with the exchange company" to provide inventory that satisfies Enrolled owners' requests for exchanges to Trust properties?


----------



## dioxide45

SueDonJ said:


> What do you think, Dioxide?  Is Marriott considered a Trust Owner of a beneficial interest because of their development holdings in the Trust?  Is it reasonable to expect, as siberiavol and others have concluded, that Marriott will "enter into an enrollment with the exchange company" to provide inventory that satisfies Enrolled owners' requests for exchanges to Trust properties?



It is possible that the trust will bulk bank time (points) in to the exchange program, just like Marriott has done in the past with II. The exchange program will also bank time in to II just like in the past (likely also that trust time that was deposited to the exchange program).

The trust owners won't get anywhere close to reserving all of that time owned by the trust and won't exchange for enough time outside of the trust to use it up. So Marriott will now have two streams to bulk bank to. I don't think people really need to worry much about this. The trust owners can't use up all of that trust inventory themselves. There are probably only a couple thousand trust owners now.


----------



## urple2

This thread is another WOW...All this just to figure out how to go on a vacation. I had no reason to join from the beginning and this continuation of events keeps on reinforcing that. The tuggers on here flushing all this out though are remarkable!


----------



## californiagirl

puckmanfl said:


> good evening...
> 
> just a tidbit to raise the comedy level a little...
> 
> On 7/26 the "death star" will NOT be operational.



Thank you for the comic relief:rofl: :hysterical: :rofl:   Seriously, I can't tell which is the "dark side" at this point!


----------



## Dave M

Yes, this thread is a "WOW!” 

I'll try to find out something authoritative, but considering the variety of "authoritative" responses that people have reported in this thread, I don't have a lot of confidence that anything I find out can be relied upon. I will ask for a written statement for publication here and ask if Marriott can publish some clarifying information. I'm skeptical as to whether that request will be honored.

What a mess!

As I understand it there have basically been *four different responses* to the points access question for enrolled owners. Enrolled owners who elect to use points for a particular year...

1) have access to all inventory in Marriott's hands (trust inventory, enrolled week deposits, legacy weeks traded for Marriott Rewards points, etc.) or ...

2) have access only to weeks owned by other enrolled owners who elected to use points for the given year or ....

3) have access to all inventory in Marriott's hands, but only if they buy a minimum of 1,000 points at $9.20 each or ...

4) have access only to weeks owned by other enrolled owners who elected to use points for the given year if they use points. And if they buy a minimum of 1,000 points they will not be able to combine those points with their elected points for the year to access all inventory.

Does that about cover it? Or did I miss a major response?

Thursday is a very busy mostly non-TUG day for me, but I'll do my best to get the query started.


----------



## californiagirl

Thank you so much Dave for taking a stab at it with Marriott.


----------



## DanCali

Dave M said:


> Yes, this thread is a "WOW!”
> 
> I'll try to find out something authoritative, but considering the variety of "authoritative" responses that people have reported in this thread, I don't have a lot of confidence that anything I find out can be relied upon. I will ask for a written statement for publication here and ask if Marriott can publish some clarifying information. I'm skeptical as to whether that request will be honored.
> 
> What a mess!
> 
> As I understand it there have basically been *four different responses* to the points access question for enrolled owners. Enrolled owners who elect to use points for a particular year...
> 
> 1) have access to all inventory in Marriott's hands (trust inventory, enrolled week deposits, legacy weeks traded for Marriott Rewards points, etc.) or ...
> 
> 2) have access only to weeks owned by other enrolled owners who elected to use points for the given year or ....
> 
> 3) have access to all inventory in Marriott's hands, but only if they buy a minimum of 1,000 points at $9.20 each or ...
> 
> 4) have access only to weeks owned by other enrolled owners who elected to use points for the given year if they use points. And if they buy a minimum of 1,000 points they will not be able to combine those points with their elected points for the year to access all inventory.
> 
> Does that about cover it? Or did I miss a major response?
> 
> Thursday is a very busy mostly non-TUG day for me, but I'll do my best to get the query started.



Dave - I think you covered it.

Also - what is the status if the "original" inevntory question on you end? That's whether enrolled weeks that convert and available in the points inventory are allocated on a pro-rata basis or can owners using points theoretically book all the high demand inventory in a season? 

I know that m has spoken to a senior person in consumer advocacy who confirmed the pro-rata allocation. Until then, the issue has been very ambiguous. Has there been any further confirmation or news on this issue on your end?


----------



## BocaBoy

I have read everything in this thread and the other thread referenced.  I see NOTHING that backs up the conclusion everyone is ASSUMING to be correct.  It is not correct.  That is not what the documents say.  That is not what most reps are saying.  Some reps are even enrolling their own weeks to get the benefits of accessing all resorts. 

Do not forget that using a little logic might also be helpful:  There is little or no trust inventory at most resorts right now. If Marriott's trust acquires a few units, why would those few be kept separate from the larger pool?  An administrative hassle for no benefit.  Also, at a  newer resort the trust owns most of the units.  But remember that few points have been sold.  For quite aq while if not forever, the vast majority of points will come from legacy weeks owners.  So if legacy owners do not get access to the resort via points, the resort will either be (a) largely empty; or (b) there will be thousands of weeks on II and no points availability.  This will not happen.

I wish Dave M would post a response from Marriott on this point so it could be debunked to you guys' satisfaction and we could concentrate on real questions.


----------



## brigechols

BocaBoy said:


> I have read everything in this thread and the other thread referenced.  I see NOTHING that backs up the conclusion everyone is ASSUMING to be correct.  It is not correct.  That is not what the documents say.



What documents contradict the reports in this thread and the other referenced thread?


----------



## kedler

I agree that Marriott has done a HORRIBLE job of rolling out this program - it needed to spend 3 weeks NOT 3 days educating its sales force instead of forcing them to learn on the job and us to learn on our own. That said, Hot Coffee is right the legal documents that we sign when we enroll and/or purchase control this issue and those documents provide:

From the Disclosure Guide:

1. "For so long as the Association governing the Trust Member maintains its Affiliation Agreement with the Exchange Company, such*Trust Member*[defined as owner of interest in Trust] will be granted privileges in the Program as a Member ...In order for a Trust Member to enjoy the benefits of Membership in the Program, the Affiliate Program Manager and/or the Association of the Trust Member’s Affiliate Program must have voluntarily entered into and maintain an Affiliation Agreement with Exchange Company. During the term of the Affiliation Agreement, Trust Members will have the right to voluntarily reserve and use the Accommodations that are a part of the Program as described in the Exchange Procedures. _*If a Trust Member desires to use the Accommodations outside the Trust Member’s Affiliate Program (e.g., outside the Trust Member’s trust) or access Exchange Benefits, from time to time, the Trust Member may voluntarily participate in the Program described in this Disclosure Guide and the Exchange Procedures.*_"

2. "In order _to enjoy the benefits of Membership in the Program as a Exchange Member_, an owner of an Interest must have _voluntarily entered into an Enrollment Agreement_ with Exchange Company so long as a *Exchange Member*[defined as owner of interest in weeks] remains enrolled in the Program, *Exchange Members will have the right to reserve and use the Accommodations and facilities that are a part of the Program.*"

3. "Marriott Vacation Club Destinations Exchange Program (“*Program*”)"

From the Exchange Procedures:

1. "*Member* means a person (natural or otherwise) who owns an Interest in an Affiliate Program, a Component or Accommodation that is affiliated with the Program."

2. "*Affiliate Program* means a program of benefits and services, as they may exist from time to time, the operator of which has entered into an agreement with Exchange Company through which the Affiliate Program’s members participate in the Program. *Participation in the Program is made *available on a voluntary basis *to Members of an Affiliate Program* in accordance with the terms and conditions established by Exchange Company from time to time, in its sole and absolute discretion. Members have the right to reserve and use the Accommodations, facilities, services, and experiences that are a part of the Members’ Affiliate Program in accordance with the Affiliate Program Reservation System for that Member’s Affiliate Program. *If a Member desires to use the Accommodations, facilities, services, and experiences that are a part of another Affiliate Program, the Member may voluntarily participate in the Program described in these Exchange Procedures*.

Interpretation of Legaleze: 

Owners of Beneficial Interests in the Trust ("Trust Members") belong to the Trust Association who signed an Affiliation Agreement with Marriott's Exchange Company to provide Trust Members with the "right to reserve accommodations made available through the Exchange Program" [from Contract to Purchase Beneficial Interest]

Weeks Owners have the rights provided to them in their deed and the property is governed by the HOA and II is the predominent method of exchange. If Weeks Owners want the benefits of the Program they have to sign the Enrollment Agreement with the Exchange Company then, and only then, will they be given the right to reserve and use the Accommodations and facilities in the Program. If you don't enroll you have to use II or an alternate method or exchange and cannot access points related benefits or exchanges.

IMO the reason that everyone is getting two different answers to the same question is that there are TWO different groups - Points/Trust & Weeks/Exchange with different deeds, rights and affiliation agreements. 

Trust members are automatically part of the Exchange Program but Week/Exchange members have to enroll. Neither group can use the other groups' deeds UNLESS the owner of the deed chooses to use the interest granted by the deed to obtain a reservation. 

Trust members may use their points for reservations through the Exchange Company. The Contract to Purchase points says that the owner will be granted a right to use their interest to reserve property in the trust (which if you think about it only makes sense because the interest is deeded). The contract to purchase is still "pre-construction" and states that that right to use does not come into being until Marriott sends the owner a Notice of Right to Use. 

Trust members will not be able to make a points reservation and obtain  any of the Exchange members' weeks UNLESS the Exchange member enrolls AND decides to exchange their week for points or for MR points, etc., in which case the exchanged week is available for a points reservation or exchange.

Exchange Members will not have access to Trust Member's interests without exchanging their week for points thereby becoming eligible to make a points reservation or exchange.

Points are points but if you don't enroll and then convert your week to points you can't access the benefits (or burdens depending on your point of view) given to owners of points.

All members have the right to deposit their respective interests in II and obtain access to deposits made by weeks owners who choose not to enroll, weeks Marriott deposits in II, etc.

ALL RESERVATION REQUESTS ARE SUBJECT TO AVAILABILITY.

My opinion is based on my legal interpretation of the documents, not on answers from overwhelmed and confused sales/points personnel. 

If Dave has any official information directly from Marriott on how they are going to administer this system that would be great.


----------



## DanCali

kedler - not sure if you read what I wrote in post #111...

First, there is a subtle difference between what is written in the "Disclusure Guide" and what is in the "Exchange Procedures". The differences are highlighted in that post.

Please read post #111 and tell us what you think because if I read the stuff on Page 1 of the "Exchange Procedures" it sure sounds different (to me).


----------



## BocaBum99

What a mess.  Marriott really tried to do way too much with this product introduction.

It actually doesn't matter what anyone puts in writing.  Whatever they say will likely be wrong.

The only way for us to know for sure what is going on is to sign up for an account and compare inventory you can see in all three scenarios.

1) inventory seen with an enrolled week with points deposited

2) inventory seen with Trust points

3) inventory seen with a combination.

Once we see the inventory, it will be obvious how it's implemented.


----------



## korndoc

Can anyone please explain to me what are "legacy" "exchange" and "trust" owners? What is an affiliate?  My head is spinning!
This is all pretty overwhelming for someone who has had only one very enjoyable exchange in II since purchasing my Desert Springs Villas timeshare (which has relatively low points in the new system). I purchased Marriott so I could exchange into Marriott.  I purchased a lock-off unit so I could get more value for the money spent. Now Marriott timesharing appears to have gone down the crapper!  
Can't see any good reason to change to points, but am fearful that by staying with weeks only, I will lose the opportunity to trade into the Marriotts I want to trade to, like in Hawaii, etc.

Thanks, Jeff


----------



## Clemson Fan

kedler said:


> Interpretation of Legaleze:
> 
> Owners of Beneficial Interests in the Trust ("Trust Members") belong to the Trust Association who signed an Affiliation Agreement with Marriott's Exchange Company to provide Trust Members with the "right to reserve accommodations made available through the Exchange Program" [from Contract to Purchase Beneficial Interest]
> 
> Weeks Owners have the rights provided to them in their deed and the property is governed by the HOA and II is the predominent method of exchange. If Weeks Owners want the benefits of the Program they have to sign the Enrollment Agreement with the Exchange Company then, and only then, will they be given the right to reserve and use the Accommodations and facilities in the Program. If you don't enroll you have to use II or an alternate method or exchange and cannot access points related benefits or exchanges.
> 
> IMO the reason that everyone is getting two different answers to the same question is that there are TWO different groups - Points/Trust & Weeks/Exchange with different deeds, rights and affiliation agreements.
> 
> Trust members are automatically part of the Exchange Program but Week/Exchange members have to enroll. Neither group can use the other groups' deeds UNLESS the owner of the deed chooses to use the interest granted by the deed to obtain a reservation.
> 
> Trust members may use their points for reservations through the Exchange Company. The Contract to Purchase points says that the owner will be granted a right to use their interest to reserve property in the trust (which if you think about it only makes sense because the interest is deeded). The contract to purchase is still "pre-construction" and states that that right to use does not come into being until Marriott sends the owner a Notice of Right to Use.
> 
> Trust members will not be able to make a points reservation and obtain  any of the Exchange members' weeks UNLESS the Exchange member enrolls AND decides to exchange their week for points or for MR points, etc., in which case the exchanged week is available for a points reservation or exchange.
> 
> Exchange Members will not have access to Trust Member's interests without exchanging their week for points thereby becoming eligible to make a points reservation or exchange.
> 
> Points are points but if you don't enroll and then convert your week to points you can't access the benefits (or burdens depending on your point of view) given to owners of points.
> 
> All members have the right to deposit their respective interests in II and obtain access to deposits made by weeks owners who choose not to enroll, weeks Marriott deposits in II, etc.
> 
> ALL RESERVATION REQUESTS ARE SUBJECT TO AVAILABILITY.
> 
> My opinion is based on my legal interpretation of the documents, not on answers from overwhelmed and confused sales/points personnel.
> 
> If Dave has any official information directly from Marriott on how they are going to administer this system that would be great.



Excellent post!!! 

After reading this whole thread  along with reading a lot of the other stuff here over the past 3 weeks, I think you're interpretation of legaleze is right on the money!

I think the reason everybody is getting conflicting answers from Marriott is because the reps haven't been trained that well and they're frankly just pulling stuff out of their a$$.  The sales folks are even worse because they will twist things whichever way suits them best in order to try and make a sale, and this confusion allows them to get away with some of this crapola.

I'm in complete agreement with kedler and IMO this entire thread is much to do about nothing! :zzz:


----------



## pipet

Right now I am not feeling much love for Marriott , but it's hard to believe they aren't going to make all point inventory available to people with points to spend, whether they got those points by purchasing Trust points or exchanging their weeks for points. _ Otherwise, they just aren't going to be able to fulfill requests.  _It won't be just TUG readers who will be going ballistic.  I think they will want requests to be filled, and I still would guess they want point requests to be fulfilled with priority since they want the new system to appear to work.

However, I do think the wording pretty much allows them to do whatever they want with their mysterious "exchange procedures." They can treat legacy enrolled members differently if they want since they specifically define both Trust Members & Exchange Members and use slightly different wording.  I'm no lawyer, but it seems like they left a lot of wiggle room (I would assume on purpose), and that is why when everyone reads the document, they are able to see something in it one way or the other; that way how can you challenge the thing?

I'm actually still more concerned about the point requests taking priority in II over weeks exchangers!


----------



## JimIg23

dioxide45 said:


> Still unsure if this is true or not (since no one can get the same answer), but if it is, here is how I see that it works.
> 
> There are technically three types of ownership entities in this.
> 
> 
> Legacy non-enrolled weeks owners
> Legacy enrolled week owners
> The Trust (I don't indicate trust owners, because the trust is just another enrolled weeks owner)
> 
> Then you have the Exchange Program that all owners exchange through in the new program. The Exchange Program is a separate entity from the trust.
> 
> 
> When a non-enrolled weeks owner wants to make an exchange, they do so as in the past, through II. No changes.
> 
> When a trust owner wants to make a reservation at a trust resort, they just make the reservation. This doesn't go through the exchange program as long as the trust still has inventory for the requested resort.
> 
> When a trust owner wants to make a non-Marriott exchange. The exchange manager deposits a week in to II equivalent to the points given up for the exchange. This inventory doesn't go through the new exchange program.
> 
> When a trust owner wants to make an exchange to a Marriott resort not in the trust. The trust makes available to the exchange program the number of points that they are exchanging with and the trust owner gets a week that a legacy enrolled owner deposited/converted for points. This same number of points now become available in the exchange company. Legacy weeks owners can now reserve via the exchange company for resorts in the trust equivalent to the amount of points that the trust has deposited to the exchange program.
> 
> When a legacy enrolled weeks owner converts and wants to exchange/reserve for any time, they can only reserve for inventory in the exchange program. That inventory is made up of weeks that were converted to DC points (perhaps also MR points) and points that were deposited to the exchange program. Legacy weeks enrolled owners can't access the points trust inventory until the trust makes it available to the exchange program.
> 
> The exchange program is a points in points out system. The trust and legacy owners put points in and then take time out. Trust owners can't access inventory that are not deposited to the exchange program, so I can see why enrolled weeks owners can't access points not deposited to the exchange program either.
> 
> This is all speculative and my analysis of what I have read in this thread.



This is the way it was finally explained to me by MVC after my first set of call saying points are points.   I tend to think what you said is correct.  I am going to try to confirm with a point specialist today.


----------



## puckmanfl

good morning

Kedler

MVCD's interpretation of the legalese is different from yours.

In the MVCD interpretation, even after an Exchange member relinquishes his/her unit and turns it into "points", the Exchange member DOES NOT have access to "Trust Interests".  MVCD can release Trust Interest into availablity to the Exchange members when a Trust member takes a unit out of the Exchange company (generated from legacy weeeks).

It is a small but vital distinction!!!

Here is why.  let's say there are currently 100,000 units in the trust. Since June 20 there have only been 1000 point purchasers. On Day 1 7/26, these 1000 owners ave access to all 100,000 units + ALL point availability from legacy week conversions.  half (500) of these gran a week from the legacy side.  

Now take the legacy owners.  400,000 in total.  20% enroll leaving 80,000 enrolleees.  10% of these convert a week to points making 8000 legacy point players.  These 8000 legacy point converters have access to the legacy weeks converted to points  but ONLY 500 of the 100,000 weeks in the trust as these weeks were made available to compensate for the 500 legacy weeks claimed by trust owners.

It should concern everyone!!!  Even weeks and II players. Here's why!!!  Now MVCD will have tons of trust units (not used) in trust resorts such as Koolina, Kauai Lagoons, Oceana Palms and Marco.  Pretty nice places!!!  A deeded week owner at HHI wants to go skiing in park City. The HHI owner does an II "like for like" exchange (as always). A Trust owner wants to go to Park City, but there is no availability!!!  The Trust owner wait lists and the "exchange manager" tries to make an II request to fill the ski request for the Trust member.  MVCD has tons of trust inventory , not available to legacy point players, but great trading chips for II.  Who do you think is going to get the exchange???

MVCD has gone from partner in exchanges to a direct competitor.  The dichotomy in point inventory sets the table for this!!!

In a nutshell, MVCD has created a new point system that a legacy owner can't play in. Legacy points <= Trust points.  You also get skimmed points in the process...

Upon bringing these issues to MVCD, I was assured that although my legal interpretation is correct in practicality there will be significant co-mingling of inventory.  They encouraged me to continue my test drive on 7/26 and see for myself. I agreed...


----------



## puckmanfl

good morning

Dioxide...

As always great analysis, but I believe with a small crucial omission.  When a legacy owner converts a week to points that unit goes into the Exchange company and can be grabbed by either a legacy or trust owner.

When MVCD created the trust and converted those weeks to points, these units STAY  in the trust and do not go to an exchange company and can only be grabbed by trust owners.  Thus legacy owners never have access to All of the trust but point (trust owners do).  Legacy owners only get access to a small number of units corresponding to what Trust players take from the exchange company.


There are two big cookie jars filled with goodies.  The older kids can grab cookies from BOTH cookie jars immediately, but the little kids have to wait to see how many cookies the big kids take from the little cookie jar, then they can reach into the big boy jar and only take out what the big boys took from the other jar...

It's all a poker game but the odds are stacked in favor of the house...

legacy points <= trust points.  Yes I know they cost more, but that should not matter.  Just as the HHI purchaser in 1984 that has a platinum unit should ave equal trading power that I do in 2010 for the same unit.  Legacy owners should not be penalized for purchasing earlier!!!


----------



## KathyPet

Woo Hoo!  Dave to the rescue again!  Dave, we await your response from your Marriott contact with bated breath.  I , for one, will not get a moment's sleep until this issue is clarified.
One thing we may all agree on I think is that this is a textbook example of how not to introduce a new product.  It should be brought forth as a Harvard Business School Case study of what not to do.   I would think that with a corporation as large as Marriott with huge staff that they must have dedicated to marketing and introducing this new product they did a shoddy job of training staff, writing materials, and publicizing the new system.  Horrible!  Horrible!


----------



## CMF

Any contract that leaves this much room for interpretation and creates confusion is a bad contract.  Marriott needs better lawyers.

Charles


----------



## dioxide45

puckmanfl said:


> Now take the legacy owners.  400,000 in total.  20% enroll leaving 80,000 enrolleees.  10% of these convert a week to points making 8000 legacy point players.  These 8000 legacy point converters have access to the legacy weeks converted to points  but ONLY 500 of the 100,000 weeks in the trust as these weeks were made available to compensate for the 500 legacy weeks claimed by trust owners.



But Marriott still has to do someting with those other 99,500 units. They won't let them sit empty. The trust will bulk deposit points in to the exchange program so those weeks can be absorbed. Many of that time will also find its way to II just like it has in the past.


----------



## dioxide45

puckmanfl said:


> good morning
> 
> Dioxide...
> 
> As always great analysis, but I believe with a small crucial omission.  When a legacy owner converts a week to points that unit goes into the Exchange company and can be grabbed by either a legacy or trust owner.
> 
> When MVCD created the trust and converted those weeks to points, these units STAY  in the trust and do not go to an exchange company and can only be grabbed by trust owners.  Thus legacy owners never have access to All of the trust but point (trust owners do).  Legacy owners only get access to a small number of units corresponding to what Trust players take from the exchange company.
> 
> 
> There are two big cookie jars filled with goodies.  The older kids can grab cookies from BOTH cookie jars immediately, but the little kids have to wait to see how many cookies the big kids take from the little cookie jar, then they can reach into the big boy jar and only take out what the big boys took from the other jar...
> 
> It's all a poker game but the odds are stacked in favor of the house...
> 
> legacy points <= trust points.  Yes I know they cost more, but that should not matter.  Just as the HHI purchaser in 1984 that has a platinum unit should ave equal trading power that I do in 2010 for the same unit.  Legacy owners should not be penalized for purchasing earlier!!!



I agree. To expand. The big kids can look in both cookie jars first. If they like something in the little kids jar better than the big kids jar, they can take it from the little kids jar but they have to move a cookie from the big kids jar to the little kids jar to do so.

The little kids don't need to wait for all the big kids to finish before they get to pick. They can pick at any time and if there are some big kid cookies in there they can take them after the very first one is put in the little kids jar.


----------



## ArtsieAng

dioxide45 said:


> I agree. To expand. The big kids can look in both cookie jars first. If they like something in the little kids jar better than the big kids jar, they can take it from the little kids jar but they have to move a cookie from the big kids jar to the little kids jar to do so.
> 
> Are they going to move the cookie that nobody wants into the little kids jar, and take out the cookie that everybody is trying to get?
> 
> The little kids don't need to wait for all the big kids to finish before they get to pick. They can pick at any time and if there are some big kid cookies in there they can take them after the very first one is put in the little kids jar.



I'm envisioning a bunch of very unhappy little kids. They're crying because their older siblings have eaten all the good cookies from the big kid cookie jar, and they are now snatching the good cookies from the little kids cookie jar, and replacing them with crumbs.


----------



## tombo

BocaBoy said:


> I   That is not what most reps are saying.  Some reps are even enrolling their own weeks to get the benefits of accessing all resorts.
> 
> .



Count the response from reps that have been posted here.  Most responses  posted here that owners have gotten from reps/point advisers is that Legacy weeks are NOT eligible to use points to access trust inventory. Some reps dispute whether buying 1000 points will make all points eligible for trust inventory, or if purchasing 1000 points would only make those 1000 points eligible for trust inventory, but very few have said that lagacy weeks will be able to access trust inventory whether they purchase additional points or not.

You made the point for 2 separate groups in your own post on a previous thread. You said a trust member is one who buys points. A converted legacy member did not buy points and unless they do they never will own points, which would mean legacy owners would never have access to the trust inventory unless they BUY POINTS. Why would you feel any different now?



BocaBoy said:


> It is clear:  Trust members are those who have an ownership intgerest in the trust, which is what owns the points that have been sold.  So a trust member is one who buys POINTS.  The distinction is based on what they own



BTW you seem to know what reps are saying and doing often. You are always on the side of Marriott no matter what the discussion. Just curious, are you a Marriott sales rep or employee?


----------



## windje2000

ArtsieAng said:


> I'm envisioning a bunch of very unhappy little kids. They're crying because their older siblings have eaten all the good cookies from the big kid cookie jar, and they are now snatching the good cookies from the little kids cookie jar, and replacing them with crumbs.



*Marriott has become the cookie monster!*  (Click to enlarge)


----------



## puckmanfl

Good morning

dioxide....

You are 100 % bang on correct with your last two posts.  You do have an amazing clarity of vision!!!!

any rep stating that Legacy points= trust points has not had advanced training....

Remember that it took Tuggers 3 weeks to catch this one


I am going to let my guru rest and not push for the answer regarding the purchase of extra trust points and inventory


----------



## ArtsieAng

windje2000 said:


> *Marriott has become the cookie monster!*  (Click to enlarge)



:hysterical:  :hysterical:  :hysterical:


----------



## ArtsieAng

puckmanfl said:


> Good morning
> 
> dioxide....
> 
> You are 100 % bang on correct with your last two posts.  You do have an amazing clarity of vision!!!!
> 
> any rep stating that Legacy points= trust points has not had advanced training....
> 
> Remember that it took Tuggers 3 weeks to catch this one
> 
> 
> I am going to let my guru rest and not push for the answer regarding the purchase of extra trust points and inventory



I agree....*And, thank you both!!!!* You have both explained the situation very well, and made it so that finally, we can now all understand, and know what to expect.


----------



## newowner

Weeks that have been deposited in the Trust at this point have not yet been paid for (ie this is develloper inventory).  It actually makes sense to me that Marriott maintains full contol over these weeks.  

Marriott can then choose to make weeks in the trust available to point owners in exchange for their deposited weeks if they think it is in their interest to do so (ie if they need a week from a sold out resort to maintain inventory).

Weeks that have been deposited by legacy owners and converted to points are not owned by Marriott (ie they have been paid for) and, as such, need to be maintained separately.


----------



## puckmanfl

Good morning....

Here is my most recent try at simplifying this.....

Today, if youbwalk into a sales center and spent $140k,you get over 13000 points.  these are like Disney points(except deeded).  these points are good to make reservations for any unit in point inventory....

If you are legacy owner that has enrolled, you become a member of a new exchange company.  When you convert a unit to points, you do not have acess to all point inventory,but the ability to deposit your points into the exchange company and EXCHANGE for any inventory already deposited into the company!!!

points were sold to me as a currency used to avoid an Exchange company (II orMVCEC).  After enrolling and getting skimmed, I find out I am still exchanging!!!


----------



## ArtsieAng

puckmanfl said:


> Good morning....
> 
> Here is my most recent try at simplifying this.....
> 
> Today, if youbwalk into a sales center and spent $140k,you get over 13000 points.  these are like Disney points(except deeded).  these points are good to make reservations for any unit in point inventory....
> 
> If you are legacy owner that has enrolled, you become a member of a new exchange company.  When you convert a unit to points, you do not have acess to all point inventory,but the ability to deposit your points into the exchange company and EXCHANGE for any inventory already deposited into the company!!!
> 
> points were sold to me as a currency used to avoid an Exchange company (II orMVCEC).  After enrolling and getting skimmed, I find out I am still exchanging!!!



Yup....Now, think of the Legacy owner who does not have enough points to be a Premier/Premier Plus member. Aren't they now being placed behind three different groups of owners? Premier, Premier Plus & Trust Owners?


----------



## rsackett

dioxide45 said:


> I agree. To expand. The big kids can look in both cookie jars first. If they like something in the little kids jar better than the big kids jar, they can take it from the little kids jar but they have to move a cookie from the big kids jar to the little kids jar to do so.
> 
> The little kids don't need to wait for all the big kids to finish before they get to pick. They can pick at any time and if there are some big kid cookies in there they can take them after the very first one is put in the little kids jar.



Bingo!  Best post yet, even simple enough for me. 

Ray


----------



## tombo

ArtsieAng said:


> I'm envisioning a bunch of very unhappy little kids. They're crying because their older siblings have eaten all the good cookies from the big kid cookie jar, and they are now snatching the good cookies from the little kids cookie jar, and replacing them with crumbs.



If the big boys take all of the good cookies out of the little boys cookie jar, Marriott can fill the little boy's jar back up with crumbs from the big boy's jar, and as long as the total volume of the little boy's cookie jar remains the same everything is equal. 

It actually isn't the same as we all know. One 6000 point Hawaii week taken out of the little boys cookie jar does not really equal six 1000 point shoulder weeks deposited to replace it, but it is supposed to according to points rules.


----------



## puckmanfl

Good morning....

New owner....

In the current system legacy point<=trust point....

if MVCD made their inventory available to All point players...
Then Legacy points = Trust points...

In my perfect world, legacy owners can trade weeks with II or play with points on a level playing fields with trust owners...

Conversely, Trust players use their points as legacy players and can deposit their points in II and make weeks exchanges...


The best off BOTH worlds for both groups!!!!!


----------



## ArtsieAng

> tombo
> 
> It actually isn't the same as we all know. One 6000 point Hawaii week taken out of the little boys cookie jar does not really equal six 1000 point shoulder weeks deposited to replace it, but it is supposed to according to points rules.



So, if Marriott so chooses, they can take as many premium weeks as they need to fill requests from trust owners, and replace them with weeks from any season.  As long as the amount of points being taken, equals the amount of points being replaced, they are in compliance. Is that correct?


----------



## rsackett

tombo said:


> If the big boys take all of the good cookies out of the little boys cookie jar, Marriott can fill the little boy's jar back up with crumbs from the big boy's jar, and as long as the total volume of the little boy's cookie jar remains the same everything is equal.
> 
> It actually isn't the same as we all know. One 6000 point Hawaii week taken out of the little boys cookie jar does not really equal six 1000 point shoulder weeks deposited to replace it, but it is supposed to according to points rules.




I have no dog in this fight.  I have already decided that the new Marriott Points system is not for me.  But Tombo's post brings up an interesting question.

But I was wondering, what does the "Trust" deposit into the "Exchange" system?  

We know that each weeks owner that converts to the Points Exchange System does not deposit a week, but instead deposits the points allotted his season at his resort.  He then has those points to get any exchanges he wants until his points are gone.  Now anybody looking for a time at his resort has access to up to 7 days at his resort in his season.  If they have enough points they could reserve the best week in his season, since he did not deposit a week in his season , but access to ANY week in his season at his resort (just like he had before he converted to points).

What does the "Trust" deposit into the Points Exchange system when a Trust owner pulls a week from the Exchange System?  A Trust owner does not own at any particular resort or season.  Does the Trust deposit a resort, season and number of days that equal the points needed for the week the Trust Owner took from the Exchange Pool?  Does the Trust just deposit Trust Points than any Exchange member can use for any resort and timeframe in the Trust?  Just what will the Exchange System get from the Trust? 

Ray


----------



## tombo

ArtsieAng said:


> So, if Marriott so chooses, they can take as many premium weeks as they need to fill requests from trust owners, and replace them with weeks from any season.  As long as the amount of points being taken, equals the amount of points being replaced, they are in compliance. Is that correct?



Yep. Points is points. 100,000 points out, 100,000 points in. No matter what the actuall inventory taken and deposited, 100,000 points equals 100,000 points.


Oops points are points unless your points come from depositing your legacy week into the legacy points inventory, then they are step child points. Points purchaser's points is points. Legacy weeks points conversions are points which are not as good as points points. Does that make it clearer?


----------



## ArtsieAng

tombo said:


> Yep. Points is points.  100,000 points out, 100,000 points in. No matter what the actuall inventory taken and deposited, 100,000 points equals 100,000 points.
> 
> *Oops points are points unless your points come from depositing your legacy week into the legacy points inventory, then they are step child points. Points purchaser's points is points. Legacy weeks points conversions are points which are not as good as points points. Does that make it clearer?*


*
*


Yup, it's perfectly clear, unfortunately!


----------



## puckmanfl

good morning....

I think everyone gets it now!!!!!

My work is done....  for now!!!!

I will report the test drive on 7/26....


----------



## m61376

tombo said:


> If the big boys take all of the good cookies out of the little boys cookie jar, Marriott can fill the little boy's jar back up with crumbs from the big boy's jar, and as long as the total volume of the little boy's cookie jar remains the same everything is equal.
> 
> It actually isn't the same as we all know. One 6000 point Hawaii week taken out of the little boys cookie jar does not really equal six 1000 point shoulder weeks deposited to replace it, but it is supposed to according to points rules.



This is a very important point, not only for this but for trading of weeks in II. This was my concern with the language that Marriott can fill a point request from a week deposit in II by offering a comparable exchange. Marriott reps assured me that if they took a week out a comparable single week would be put in, and the language on the II website appears to verify that. 

We basically have Marriott's assurances that it wouldn't make sense for them to do that- why would they want to hurt their own customers? And therein lies the conundrum....


----------



## BocaBum99

Clemson Fan said:


> Excellent post!!!
> 
> After reading this whole thread  along with reading a lot of the other stuff here over the past 3 weeks, I think you're interpretation of legaleze is right on the money!
> 
> I think the reason everybody is getting conflicting answers from Marriott is because the reps haven't been trained that well and they're frankly just pulling stuff out of their a$$.  The sales folks are even worse because they will twist things whichever way suits them best in order to try and make a sale, and this confusion allows them to get away with some of this crapola.
> 
> I'm in complete agreement with kedler and IMO this entire thread is much to do about nothing! :zzz:



When I read the first 20 or so posts of this thread, I was under the exact same impression as you were.  Most of the scenarios presented actually made no sense.  I would rule out, for instance, a scenario where a person enrolled a 3000 point week, bought 1000 points and were only able to 3000 points from weeks inventory converted to points and 1000 out of Trust inventory.  There is absolutely no way Marriott would implement such a system.  It would generate 1000's of customer service calls with no justifiable answer.

My guess is that DaveM will get official word from Marriott that points are points once an enrolled week is converted to points.

We can tell if this is the case if points granted from an enrolled week sees the exact same inventory as an account with Trust points in it.  That's the very simple way to verify the policy.

The main reason why I believe this will be the case is that implementing a system that accomplishes any other outcome with be next to impossible to develop.


----------



## m61376

puckmanfl said:


> good morning....
> 
> I think everyone gets it now!!!!!
> 
> My work is done....  for now!!!!
> 
> I will report the test drive on 7/26....



My guess is you will absolutely get your request filled on 7/26. Eyes are watching....

In reality, I would be shocked if Marriott did not reach into every conceivable pocket to fill those first requests, so that you and everyone else could report back with how satisfied you are. I think the truer tests will be a few months down the road, when we see how it works in everyday life. Unfortunately, we may not really know how the separate pool buckets (if they do, in fact, exist as separate buckets for trust point and enrolled point owners) will impact availability until several years down the road, when the trust inventory has had substantial sales. Until that point, Marriott will likely make mass deposits so that the trust properties are filled. So it could be several years before the competition is discernible.

Months ago there were many on this board who justified and supported the concept of resale owners remaining, shall we say, on the short end of the stick when the new program was introduced, based on the fact that one is only entitled to the provisions of the documents that one signed when purchasing and nothing more. I do wonder how developer purchasers will feel if now their enrolled points are not quite as powerful as a new class of direct purchasers; after all, they are subject to the same limitations of the documents that they originally signed. Personally, I think any segregation or creating of different ownership classes is a breeding ground for disaster, or at least widespread discontent.

One final thought- I agree that the roll out and the lack of consistent answers leaves a lot to be desired. I think Marriott sorely underestimated the impact of the information age. This may be the first time that a program of this magnitude has been rolled out in the industry where people can easily put their heads together and decipher things. Chat rooms make it easy to come up with issues that a single individual probably wouldn't take the time to question. For the same reason, I think Marriott will have a lot more problems with the skim issue and other program limitations than they expected, since it is far too easy to access these and similar threads.

Boca- I would agree with you- but is it possible that legally since an enrolled week owner converting to points cannot be part of the trust there has to be some distinction? When you think about it, it might make sense that enrolled point owners cannot have access to trust inventory unless some sort of exchange was made, since they aren't participants in the trust. Theoretically, my guess is Marriott will maintain that this is simply a legal distinction and the exchanges between the different pools will work seamlessly, but the more I think about it the more sense it makes for there to be a legal distinction. That's why I don't think we would see a difference for years, if ever- until there are a significant number of trust point owners reserving the premium weeks in the trust.


----------



## tombo

m61376 said:


> This is a very important point, not only for this but for trading of weeks in II. This was my concern with the language that Marriott can fill a point request from a week deposit in II by offering a comparable exchange. Marriott reps assured me that if they took a week out a comparable single week would be put in, and the language on the II website appears to verify that.
> 
> We basically have Marriott's assurances that it wouldn't make sense for them to do that- why would they want to hurt their own customers? And therein lies the conundrum....



Marriott doesn't consider people who bought in the past but will not buy in the new system customers that they are worried about anymore. You are a past customer and they are looking for new customers. They made money on you in the past, but if there is no more money to be made on you, you are not important. Weeks sales are gone, points sales are here. If people complain about weeks access to inventory, Marriott simply says that is why we came out with points to alleviate those problems. Marriott does want to support their NEW POINTS customers, unfortunatelly the same can not be said about their current weeks customers. 

Marriott will have a harder time sticking II with the majority of dog inventory while taking good inventory of equal points value. If II starts eating weeks it can't exchange or rent, it could cause them to rebell, and unlike owners II has some power until/if/when Marriott sells enough points to actually have their own internal trading system in place with no further need for II. Of course II can get rid of plenty of off season weeks to non Marriott exchangers who will jump on a Marriott week whenever they see one available, so they might actually be able to get rid of a lot of Marriott's junk inventory for them. Time will tell.

On the legacy weeks inventory deposited for points, it is a whole different story. Marriott owns tons of shoulder weeks they couldn't sell, and these are weeks that most points purchasers won't want to exchange their high dollar points for. So Marriott keeps all of it's good inventory in it's trust inventory for points purchaser's to access. Then Marriott withdraws the best inventory deposited in Legacy weeks for points inventory to put into the trust invenory for the use of points purchasers. Marriott replaces the withdrawn legacy prime weeks with their over abundance of unsold shoulder weeks. It will become a case of the haves and have nots with trust access being the people who have access to good inventory. 

This is where I am waiting on the clarification from Marriott. I truly believe that once you purchase 1000 points (or some level to be determined by Marriott), all points you own (including points from legacy deposits) will be able to access the trust, not just the purchased points. This will make any Legacy owner who wants to be able to effectivelly use points system be forced buy some points. It will make a lot of sales to people who really don't need any more weeks/points, but who do want access to good inventory they can't get unless they buy points.

It is not going to be too bad at first because the limited numbers of points purchasers will require little inventory. Marriott might actually place good weeks in the Legacy points inventory they don't need for the trust. However as this keeps growing (if they are successful selling points) Marriott will need more and more good inventory to keep their new buyers happy. Eventually the legacy inventory will consist mainly of weeks no one wants after being raided by Marriott to supply their ever increasing demand by points purchasers.


----------



## BocaBum99

m61376 said:


> My guess is you will absolutely get your request filled on 7/26. Eyes are watching....
> 
> In reality, I would be shocked if Marriott did not reach into every conceivable pocket to fill those first requests, so that you and everyone else could report back with how satisfied you are. I think the truer tests will be a few months down the road, when we see how it works in everyday life. Unfortunately, we may not really know how the separate pool buckets (if they do, in fact, exist as separate buckets for trust point and enrolled point owners) will impact availability until several years down the road, when the trust inventory has had substantial sales. Until that point, Marriott will likely make mass deposits so that the trust properties are filled. So it could be several years before the competition is discernible.
> 
> Months ago there were many on this board who justified and supported the concept of resale owners remaining, shall we say, on the short end of the stick when the new program was introduced, based on the fact that one is only entitled to the provisions of the documents that one signed when purchasing and nothing more. I do wonder how developer purchasers will feel if now their enrolled points are not quite as powerful as a new class of direct purchasers; after all, they are subject to the same limitations of the documents that they originally signed. Personally, I think any segregation or creating of different ownership classes is a breeding ground for disaster, or at least widespread discontent.
> 
> One final thought- I agree that the roll out and the lack of consistent answers leaves a lot to be desired. I think Marriott sorely underestimated the impact of the information age. This may be the first time that a program of this magnitude has been rolled out in the industry where people can easily put their heads together and decipher things. Chat rooms make it easy to come up with issues that a single individual probably wouldn't take the time to question. For the same reason, I think Marriott will have a lot more problems with the skim issue and other program limitations than they expected, since it is far too easy to access these and similar threads.
> 
> Boca- I would agree with you- but is it possible that legally since an enrolled week owner converting to points cannot be part of the trust there has to be some distinction? When you think about it, it might make sense that enrolled point owners cannot have access to trust inventory unless some sort of exchange was made, since they aren't participants in the trust. Theoretically, my guess is Marriott will maintain that this is simply a legal distinction and the exchanges between the different pools will work seamlessly, but the more I think about it the more sense it makes for there to be a legal distinction. That's why I don't think we would see a difference for years, if ever- until there are a significant number of trust point owners reserving the premium weeks in the trust.



I would be surprised if Marriott did not understand there would be significant discussion and debate on TUG.  I would be even more surprised if some product manager of the system isn't reading these threads religiously.

The assumption I've made (which could be in error) is that the Marriott points system will be set up like a reservation system.  All the inventory is loaded into the reservation system and it becomes available to any points holder (whether Trust or deposited enrolled week) on a first come, first served basis.  You get enhanced access to the inventory if you are a Premier owner of some type.

The other way they could implement it is that the Trust points are set up with a reservation system and the exchange system is set up differently.  For instance, Trust members could see online availability of all inventory and the book anything available.   

Then, there could be a separate system that is used for exchange.  It would be more like a request first exchange system where an owner puts in a wish list for exchange and they later try to match it.  Then, the system checks availability in the Trust inventory (and other sources such as II) to see if there is a match.  If there is one, then an exchange is offered.

That would require the development of 2 distinct systems.  That is more double the work since both systems would need to be developed and all of the combinations of how the systems can interact with each other would need be defined and tested.

If Marriott chooses the latter.  It would be a monster to develop.  The cost and time to deliver would be ages.  There would have to be some massive benefit to keeping the inventory separate.  I don't see it.


----------



## puckmanfl

Good morning....

Let me make sure I get this.  Legal reasons make it necessary to keep legacy point inventory and trust point inventory distinct, but once I fork out $9200 for 1000 more points than these legal issues go away and points really are points

I do believe that legally the inventories will be distinct,but in practice they will functionally co mingle...


----------



## puckmanfl

Good morning...

boca...

Mvcd has chosen the latter...
Trustbowners have a reservation system for point inventory

Legacy point players. Work thru the MVCEC, an exchange company...
Thus...

Legacy points <= Trust points....


----------



## SueDonJ

windje2000 said:


> *Marriott has become the cookie monster!*  (Click to enlarge)



   Who doesn't love Cookie Monster?


----------



## BocaBum99

puckmanfl said:


> Good morning...
> 
> boca...
> 
> Mvcd has chosen the latter...
> Trustbowners have a reservation system for point inventory
> 
> Legacy point players. Work thru the MVCEC, an exchange company...
> Thus...
> 
> Legacy points <= Trust points....



I can't wait to see the system / systems they develop to support their program.  Presumably, it was completed prior to program launch.

I just don't see the benefit to Marriott of having 2 separate inventory pools.  What are they thinking it will accomplish?

The only think I can think of is that they want to keep Trust inventory separate and they plan to expand exchange services in the future to beyond just Marriott inventory.

It would be really interesting to hear from someone who designed the system.  I'd like to hear what goal they had in the program and therefore how it was developed to support those goals.

The more I hear about this system, the crazier it sounds.

Even if Marriott wanted to create a differential advantage to Trust Points owners vs. enrolled points owners, it would still be much more efficient from a development point of view to create ONE system with ONE inventory pool.  For instance, they could have enrolled members have access to inventory at the 10 month mark, but the Trust Points members having access to inventory at the 13 or 12 month mark.    That would give advantage to Trust owners and everyone can see all inventory. 

This approach eliminates a significant amount of development.  My guess would be at least 60-70% less development than creating an online system for the Trust and a separate system for exchange.

I'll say it again.  Why would Marriott want to keep these inventory pools separate?  What is the value to Marriott?


----------



## tlwmkw

Puckman,

What you have heard appears to be correct.  It was explained to me that the difference between points and weeks is due to Florida TS law.  There must, by law, be an underlying real estate interest that represents the time/or points that are being sold otherwise the company could just keep selling more and more points that had no timeshares that could be occupied.  With the weeks they have to have a week at the resort that you bought at that you have on your deed.  Now with the trust there has to be a finite number of points that are attached to whatever weeks are in the trust.  There are only so many points available to be sold.  Just as you release your week into the exchange pool when you get points the points owners have to release some inventory into the exchange pool to get a vacation.  The confusing part to me is who decides what in the trust is released into the exchange pool?  I presume someone administers this to ensure that it all equals out but what a headache this must be.  The bottom line is that just as the trust owners can't touch your week unless you release it, the legacy owner can't touch trust weeks unless they are released.  This system is very confusing indeed but at least this shows that Marriott isn't just creating more and more points without underlying weeks to support them and that there are protections for us via Florida laws.  

tlwmkw


----------



## windje2000

tlwmkw said:


> Puckman,
> 
> What you have heard appears to be correct.  It was explained to me that the difference between points and weeks is due to Florida TS law.  There must, by law, be an underlying real estate interest that represents the time/or points that are being sold otherwise the company could just keep selling more and more points that had no timeshares that could be occupied.  With the weeks they have to have a week at the resort that you bought at that you have on your deed.  Now with the trust there has to be a finite number of points that are attached to whatever weeks are in the trust.  There are only so many points available to be sold.  Just as you release your week into the exchange pool when you get points the points owners have to release some inventory into the exchange pool to get a vacation.  The confusing part to me is who decides what in the trust is released into the exchange pool?  I presume someone administers this to ensure that it all equals out but what a headache this must be.  The bottom line is that just as the trust owners can't touch your week unless you release it, the legacy owner can't touch trust weeks unless they are released.  This system is very confusing indeed but at least this shows that Marriott isn't just creating more and more points without underlying weeks to support them and that there are protections for us via Florida laws.
> 
> tlwmkw



You might want to read this post from another thread.

http://www.tugbbs.com/forums/showpost.php?p=947795&postcount=39

I was actually hoping someone would point to a section of the documents that I had missed that would preclude this scenario, but based on the responses, no one seems to be able to find such a section.


----------



## BocaBum99

tlwmkw said:


> Puckman,
> 
> What you have heard appears to be correct.  It was explained to me that the difference between points and weeks is due to Florida TS law.  There must, by law, be an underlying real estate interest that represents the time/or points that are being sold otherwise the company could just keep selling more and more points that had no timeshares that could be occupied.  With the weeks they have to have a week at the resort that you bought at that you have on your deed.  Now with the trust there has to be a finite number of points that are attached to whatever weeks are in the trust.  There are only so many points available to be sold.  Just as you release your week into the exchange pool when you get points the points owners have to release some inventory into the exchange pool to get a vacation.  The confusing part to me is who decides what in the trust is released into the exchange pool?  I presume someone administers this to ensure that it all equals out but what a headache this must be.  The bottom line is that just as the trust owners can't touch your week unless you release it, the legacy owner can't touch trust weeks unless they are released.  This system is very confusing indeed but at least this shows that Marriott isn't just creating more and more points without underlying weeks to support them and that there are protections for us via Florida laws.
> 
> tlwmkw



This rings true.  If that is the case, then the benefit to Marriott is that this approach allows them to sell points that aren't tied to any specific real estate interest.

Seems a huge price to pay in terms of development for disembodying points from specific real estate.


----------



## tlwmkw

To clarify what I just posted above my understanding now is that there are really three pools:

1. Trust owners- all own a portion of the pooled weeks in the trust.

2. Legacy owners weeks- owned individually (you are your own pool and own your week)

3. Exchange pool

It appears that the trust weeks and legacy weeks can pull from their own pools but can only pull from the group 3 if someone in group 1 or 2 releases inventory into group 3.  In practice  this means that if a trust member wants to book time at a trust owned property then they get first dibs since they "own" it just as we own our weeks and have first dibs on those.  The choice that the trust owners have is much wider because they "own all the resorts in the trust" (salesman talk) whereas week owners own only their week and not a wide group of resorts.  Will this mean that group 3 will not contain good weeks?  Who knows- the proof will only come once this beast is really up and running.

tlwmkw


----------



## puckmanfl

good morning....

I can do the same thing with a more simplistic solution!!!

There are two pools of inventory...

weeks and points.  
weeks consists of non enrollee weeks and enrolleee weeks not converted for points.  These weeks are bartered for by weeks in II as always.  Trust members can deposit their points in II and access these weeks too!!

points.  Points inventory comes from the folowing inventory.  Trust units converted to points by MVCD.  Legacy weeks turned in for MR or DC points by legacy owners.  Delinquent units also can be put in point inventory.  If a legacy owner converts to points (my 13666) for instance, I should be entitled to ALL point inventory up to my 13666 points (forget the skim). Points still stay constant and no "funy money " is being printed.

In this system Legacy points = Trust points.
If legalities make this impossible and in fact Legacy points < Trust points, than MVCD should have been clear about this and offered Legacy owners the opportunity to become Trust owners.  It would take a simple equity exchange.  I return my deeds to MVCD and they give me an equivalent (minus the skim) points in the trust.  This way the point customer can determine, what kind of point player they wish too be!!!

In this system, after $85 K invested, I cannever be a "true" points player..

we canhave the BEST of both worlds, not the worst.

thanks for listening!!!


----------



## Fredm

BocaBum99 said:


> I'll say it again.  Why would Marriott want to keep these inventory pools separate?  What is the value to Marriott?



Separate pools are necessary to comply with the various laws which govern timeshares. The points pool is governed by Florida law. However, when dealing with how a multi-destination program interacts with home resort laws in the various states, home resort use protections must be accounted for.
For example, every points trade is "subject to availability".
In California, a home resort owner has a 60 day priority on reservations before a multi-destination club can access the inventory of that resort. 
Terms and Conditions of the D Club aside, it is all subject to the local laws which protect an owners use rights. So, it is all "subject to availability". Separate pools are necessary to accomplish this, if for no other reason.


----------



## BocaBum99

puckmanfl said:


> good morning....
> 
> I can do the same thing with a more simplistic solution!!!
> 
> There are two pools of inventory...
> 
> weeks and points.
> weeks consists of non enrollee weeks and enrolleee weeks not converted for points.  These weeks are bartered for by weeks in II as always.  Trust members can deposit their points in II and access these weeks too!!
> 
> points.  Points inventory comes from the folowing inventory.  Trust units converted to points by MVCD.  Legacy weeks turned in for MR or DC points by legacy owners.  Delinquent units also can be put in point inventory.  If a legacy owner converts to points (my 13666) for instance, I should be entitled to ALL point inventory up to my 13666 points (forget the skim). Points still stay constant and no "funy money " is being printed.
> 
> In this system Legacy points = Trust points.
> If legalities make this impossible and in fact Legacy points < Trust points, than MVCD should have been clear about this and offered Legacy owners the opportunity to become Trust owners.  It would take a simple equity exchange.  I return my deeds to MVCD and they give me an equivalent (minus the skim) points in the trust.  This way the point customer can determine, what kind of point player they wish too be!!!
> 
> In this system, after $85 K invested, I cannever be a "true" points player..
> 
> we canhave the BEST of both worlds, not the worst.
> 
> thanks for listening!!!



I completely agree with this post.  

Why would anyone create a "currency" that can only access a portion of the products?  It would be like the USA creating a currency called the dollar that could be used in all 50 states from 2005 and beyond.  But, a dollar printed before 2005 could only be used in the 13 original colonies.  If a customer wanted to buy the toothpaste Crest in Massachusetts, a dollar printed in 2003 can be used to purchase it.  If you are in California, that same dollar can't buy that same tube of Crest.  But, if the dollar want printed in 2006, it can buy Crest in MA or CA.

If there is two inventory pools, they should call the points something different  Trust Points should be called one thing.  Enrolled points should be called something else.


----------



## BocaBum99

Fredm said:


> Separate pools are necessary to comply with the various laws which govern timeshares. The points pool is governed by Florida law. However, when dealing with how a multi-destination program interacts with home resort laws in the various states, home resort use protections must be accounted for.
> For example, every points trade is "subject to availability".
> In California, a home resort owner has a 60 day priority on reservations before a multi-destination club can access the inventory of that resort.
> Terms and Conditions of the D Club aside, it is all subject to the local laws which protect an owners use rights. So, it is all "subject to availability". Separate pools are necessary to accomplish this, if for no other reason.



I understand your logic, but I do not agree that this view mandates the system that Marriott created or has presumably created by some on this thread.

I am a Florida Broker and I am an expert in the Bluegreen Vacation Club.  The BVC is a timeshare plan based on the Florida multi-site timeshare plan statutes.  I believe the Marriott Trust is based on the same statutes.

In the BVC, there is a Trust where most deeds of the Club are held.  There are deeds recorded in other states (none of which are California) which are also part of the Club.  In addition, Bluegreen allows one time "deposit" of external weeks (mostly non-Bluegreen resorts) for which they grant one time points but with differing expiration rules.  ALL of the points have access to the SAME inventory pool for booking reservations according to the reservation rules of the Club.

So, there is an existence proof of one very large point system based on the same timeshare plan as the Marriott Club where there is ONE pool of inventory for points Trust and external weeks which are treated like an exchange relationship.

But, the Bluegreen Vacation Club has points that are allocated based on a specific resort, deeded week and unit number.  The points granted are exactly same as the points required to book such unit and the individual days associated with that week.  And, owners get priority access to their underlying fixed week if they want it.  At 11 months prior to check in, if those rights aren't elected, then the inventory automatically goes into the Bluegreen reservation system where inventory is made available to all owners on a first come, first served basis.  All points owners, whether they are Trust owners, enrolled weeks owners, or external weeks owners depositing one time weeks in the system have the EXACT same reservation rights and access to a single consolidated inventory pool.

Therefore, I understand and acknowledge that each state has varying laws regulating access into home resorts.  However, there is absolutely ways to construct a multi-site timeshare plan that consolidates inventory into a single system where points are points and reservations are made on a first come, first served basis.


----------



## puckmanfl

good morning...

Let me create the system...

Let's create an exchange company.  Let's call it MVCEC (sounds familiar).  Let's deposit the following inventory into it...

#1 Trust inventory.
#2 Legacy deeded weeks converted for MR or DCpoints
#3 Delinquency weeks

In old system , there was a currency for exchanges.  They are called weeks.  Let's create a new currency called points! Each point must be attached to a deeded week somewhere (trust or Legacy).  These points are the new currency and can be used in the MVCEC or II(the old way).  

MVCD sells these points to new members (trust owners) and can convert old legacy weeks to points as well (the unit is then placed in the exchange inventory). Now there are two types of point owners (trust and legacy), both than can use their  points in the new MVCEC or old II exchange companies.

I would even be wiling to accept the "skim" as a legacy fee for keeping home resort priority and the ability to keep my week in "weeks" and trade as before...

Hook, Line sinker 

done!!!

now Legacy Points = Trust points..


----------



## JanT

My head is literally spinning from all the posts in the last several weeks.  It's like a bad train wreck that I can't look away from.  

We haven't decided if we will now or ever join the points system.  We own a 1 br EOY Grand Chateau week that garners 2200 points.  For us that is sufficient because we don't like to travel peak time.   The beauty of the points system for us would be the ability to book 1-4 nights at a time to extend our stay that we booked with another week.  

There is a part of us that says well maybe we'll buy the extra 1,000 points but I seriously doubt we will because as I said, the 1-4 night booking would work for us just fine.  We're just not into spending another $9200 for points plus the additional $400 a year maintenance fee.

BUT, if we decided to do that (and I don't need a long drawn out discussion on WHY we shouldn't), I simply want to know one thing:

Can we join those 1,000 points with our current 2,200 points to use together?  Honestly, reading through the posts on this particular subject, I can't figure out if we can or not.  Does anyone have a definitive answer to this question?


----------



## winger

*All this uncertainty and fear just to buy points?*

how about I enroll (just to save expenses every yr), then just deposit my platinum week on Dec 30th for Marriott Reward Points.  At that point, I don't even care what buckets there are and Marriott would conceivably NOT get a good week to use.


----------



## winger

I have only read up to this post...so forgive if my post is 'old'



tiel said:


> They were not, and still are not, ready to release this program,


I have a suspicion this was a business call on Marriott's side to introduce a working program (regardless how screwed up it is) on x date , whether it be competitive advantage or whatever. 




tiel said:


> ...
> Just wondering what is going to happen on JUL 26, when the website is supposed to be operational!?!?!?!  Guess we'll be relying on the programmers to indirectly tell us what the rules are, by making our transactions possible or impossible to accomplish.  That is truly scary.


Tiel, you are not too far from how things sometimes work in the real world...I have seen numerous times where the business asks the programmar "so how does the system work now" ?  Hmmm, that sounds good, ok that would be the 'business rule', then.  Next...


----------



## BocaBum99

JanT said:


> Can we join those 1,000 points with our current 2,200 points to use together?  Honestly, reading through the posts on this particular subject, I can't figure out if we can or not.  Does anyone have a definitive answer to this question?



I do not have such definitive answer.  However, if Marriott did this, it would be the all time most stupid points program ever created.

It would result in 100% customer dissatisfaction for existing weeks owners both retail and resale.

For that reason alone, I give it a 99.99% probability that such points can be combined to make a single reservation.  Heck, even Wyndham allows that scenario.  Just not at the 13 month mark.


----------



## BocaBum99

winger said:


> Tiel, you are not too far from how things sometimes work in the real world...I have seen numerous times where the business asks the programmar "so how does the system work now" ?  Hmmm, that sounds good, ok that would be the 'business rule', then.  Next...



I completely agree. I've seen this happen time and time again.  The programmer has to program rules. If the business guys don't define them, the developer will.


----------



## Dave M

DanCali said:


> Dave - I think you covered [the summary of the four different response peolle are getting to the primary issue raised in this thread].
> 
> Also - what is the status if the "original" inevntory question on you end? That's whether enrolled weeks that convert and available in the points inventory are allocated on a pro-rata basis or can owners using points theoretically book all the high demand inventory in a season?
> 
> I know that m has spoken to a senior person in consumer advocacy who confirmed the pro-rata allocation. Until then, the issue has been very ambiguous. Has there been any further confirmation or news on this issue on your end?


*I have sent a detailed message off to my contact*, including links to seven posts in this and one other thread to demonstrate how different the responses from MVCI are on this topic. My message also asks about the "original" inventory issue. 

I have asked for a lot - correct answers that I can post, links to or quotes from any legal documents that Marriott believes support whatever answers I am given, permission to quote the response to my questions, especially if the supporting language isn't in the existing documents, etc. I have also made a couple of suggestions, the results of which I hope to be able to report back here. 

Based on the complexity of the way I have asked the questions and Marriott's demonstrated desire to ensure they have the best possible answers for me before responding, it wouldn't surprise me if it's Monday or Tuesday before I have answers that I can post here. 

When I do have answers, if the answers are meaningful, I will start a new thread on this topic as well as reference it in my "Definitive" answers thread so that no one need wade through many, many posts in this thread to find out what I learn.

Meanwhile, please be patient....


----------



## NJMOM2

BocaBum99 said:


> I completely agree. I've seen this happen time and time again.  The programmer has to program rules. If the business guys don't define them, the developer will.



I am a programmer and I completely agree with you.  I keep trying to come up with a 'rule' for the reservation system in my head if I were to create the reservation program.  I would make points be points and would have a hard time creating a system with different types of points....but I am NOT the programmer.  Let's hope Marriott does the right thing.


----------



## DanCali

Dave M said:


> *I have sent a detailed message off to my contact*, including links to seven posts in this and one other thread to demonstrate how different the responses from MVCI are on this topic. My message also asks about the "original" inventory issue.
> 
> I have asked for a lot - correct answers that I can post, links to or quotes from any legal documents that Marriott believes support whatever answers I am given, permission to quote the response to my questions, especially if the supporting language isn't in the existing documents, etc. I have also made a couple of suggestions, the results of which I hope to be able to report back here.
> 
> Based on the complexity of the way I have asked the questions and Marriott's demonstrated desire to ensure they have the best possible answers for me before responding, it wouldn't surprise me if it's Monday or Tuesday before I have answers that I can post here.
> 
> When I do have answers, if the answers are meaningful, I will start a new thread on this topic as well as reference it in my "Definitive" answers thread so that no one need wade through many, many posts in this thread to find out what I learn.
> 
> Meanwhile, please be patient....



Thank you.


----------



## JanT

Boca,

I'm sorry I'm not following you.  If allowing the points to be combined, why would that be the "most stupid points ever created?"  Why would it result in 100% customer dissatisfaction across the board?

And if those two things are true then why do you give it a 99.99% probability that Marriott will allow it?  Do you really think Marriott wants to piss off it's customer base?



BocaBum99 said:


> I do not have such definitive answer.  However, if Marriott did this, it would be the all time most stupid points program ever created.
> 
> It would result in 100% customer dissatisfaction for existing weeks owners both retail and resale.
> 
> For that reason alone, I give it a 99.99% probability that such points can be combined to make a single reservation.  Heck, even Wyndham allows that scenario.  Just not at the 13 month mark.


----------



## pipet

BocaBum99 said:


> But, the Bluegreen Vacation Club has points that are allocated based on a specific resort, deeded week and unit number.  The points granted are exactly same as the points required to book such unit and the individual days associated with that week.  And, owners get priority access to their underlying fixed week if they want it.  At 11 months prior to check in, if those rights aren't elected, then the inventory automatically goes into the Bluegreen reservation system where inventory is made available to all owners on a first come, first served basis.  All points owners, whether they are Trust owners, enrolled weeks owners, or external weeks owners depositing one time weeks in the system have the EXACT same reservation rights and access to a single consolidated inventory pool.



Why didn't Marriott just do this (including the part about being about to book your own week)!  Think of all the mayhem they could have avoided.

_Still, I hope the exchange part works like it does with Bluegreen._  It doesn't make sense to me NOT to match up possible exchanges when they are there just because they come from different sources.  

I know there is the possibility they might reserve certain properties for Trust owners, and screw with the II inventory, but I hope not.  In the end, II still wants trades (seems like there would be some commission for them even in corporate accounts) and Marriott needs to make trades or the whole thing implodes.

LOL, I sure hope they communicated more clearly to their programmers than they did to their customers.

JanT, I think BocaBumm is saying that forever keeping all the pools separate is about the dumbest thing he's ever heard (which I agree), and that's why they _will_ allow trust & exchange points to be combined.


----------



## mjbaran

*Can we talk to the programmers?*

At this point the programmers could provide better answers to our questions than the sales reps!


----------



## DPat54

*Basic Questions*

I'm new here (just registered today), but my family owns six weeks of MVCR, and I'm more than a little concerned.

1.  What is meant by "properties held in a Marriott trust"?
2.  Am I right in saying that someone, anyone, with 6,500 points, no matter where they got them, can book in my home resort, any season, for just 7 nights, and they can book there a month before I can book there ?
3.  Has all of this been made possible because Marriott had some weeks in inventory, at disadvanted locations, and they "converted" those weeks into "points" that could be spent anywhere?  Thus increasing the interest level, and the value, of those weak weeks?
4.  So they've increased the competition for bookings at MY home resorts, by selling "weeks" (points) at weak resorts ?  And if those newbies are resourceful, they can book a full month before me ?


----------



## sandytoes

So what is the difference between a Legacy owner and a trust owner? . . .  I purchased two weeks directly from Marriott . . . what does that make me?


----------



## camachinist

> I'm new here



Hey, welcome  Heck of a time you picked to climb on board this train 

Firstly, amongst your ownerships, do you have any seasons which overlap, IOW where you are booking or can book multiple weeks at the same time? If so, the 13 month rule can apply to you too, simply by being a deeded owner. No points required 

The underlying system is very complex, hence what you're seeing here in this thread. Take a couple days and read through the threads related to the points system and I think a clearer picture will emerge. If you get a headache, you're in good company 



> So what is the difference between a Legacy owner and a trust owner? . . . I purchased two weeks directly from Marriott . . . what does that make me?



You're a legacy developer weeks owner, just like me  If you decide to purchase 'points' @ 9.20/pt per 1000, or whatever the future price is, then you'll become a 'mixed' owner, having legacy weeks *and* points in the trust. Clear as mud?


----------



## gravitar

mjbaran said:


> At this point the programmers could provide better answers to our questions than the sales reps!



One inventory database (pool)

Deposit coded as it goes in
x-points
y-legacy
z-undefined

Owner accounts get permissions assigned. Permissions based on what inventory is allowed to be viewed

On the assumption that you had legacy and points and that you were restricted to legacy inventory for legacy booking and points inventory for points booking, when you select the type of exchange (points or legacy), as you would have both in your account, the system would look-up the permissions for that type of search and return only the inventory with the assigned code.

Not that complicated


----------



## tiel

JanT said:


> My head is literally spinning from all the posts in the last several weeks.  It's like a bad train wreck that I can't look away from.
> 
> We haven't decided if we will now or ever join the points system.  We own a 1 br EOY Grand Chateau week that garners 2200 points.  For us that is sufficient because we don't like to travel peak time.   The beauty of the points system for us would be the ability to book 1-4 nights at a time to extend our stay that we booked with another week.
> 
> There is a part of us that says well maybe we'll buy the extra 1,000 points but I seriously doubt we will because as I said, the 1-4 night booking would work for us just fine.  We're just not into spending another $9200 for points plus the additional $400 a year maintenance fee.
> 
> BUT, if we decided to do that (and I don't need a long drawn out discussion on WHY we shouldn't), I simply want to know one thing:
> 
> Can we join those 1,000 points with our current 2,200 points to use together?  Honestly, reading through the posts on this particular subject, I can't figure out if we can or not.  Does anyone have a definitive answer to this question?



THAT is exactly what we are trying to find out! We have no definitive answer yet.  But, DaveM is attempting to get this and some other issues addressed as we type!  Hopefully, maybe, surely??? we will know something next week.  It is an important point that needs to be clearly delineated.


----------



## m61376

Welcome to Tug.
As posted above, spend a few days reading through the mess here and you'll have a clearer picture. Just to give you some basic answers though:


BhamDennis said:


> I'm new here (just registered today), but my family owns six weeks of MVCR, and I'm more than a little concerned.
> 
> 1.  What is meant by "properties held in a Marriott trust"?Marriott has taken the unsold inventory at 11 resorts and grouped it together, assigned point values, and placed those in a trust for sale in lieu of a deeded week like legacy owners were given.
> 2.  Am I right in saying that someone, anyone, with 6,500 points, no matter where they got them, can book in my home resort, any season, for just 7 nights, and they can book there a month before I can book there ?Yes and no- they can book at 13 months- but supposedly only up to 50% of the periods owned by the point inventory
> 3.  Has all of this been made possible because Marriott had some weeks in inventory, at disadvanted locations, and they "converted" those weeks into "points" that could be spent anywhere?  Thus increasing the interest level, and the value, of those weak weeks? A good basic premise
> 4.  So they've increased the competition for bookings at MY home resorts, by selling "weeks" (points) at weak resorts ?  And if those newbies are resourceful, they can book a full month before me ?See answer to #2- theoretically, you will only be competing with other week owners for the week owners' proportionate share of inventory. I was told unconditionally by someone high placed that this was, in fact, how it would work. There is no written documentation to this, however, but there is no reason to believe at least at this point in time that this is not their intention. However, everything is subject to change at anytime.


----------



## musical2

Maybe I am looking at this too simplistically.

1. We weeks owners own a pool of weeks
A.  We reserve our week like we always have.
B.  We exchange our week into II
C.  We exchange our week into Marriott point system through Marriott Exchange System
D.  Trust owners cannot raid our owned weeks unless exchanged​2.  Trust owners own a pool of point time.
A.  Trust owners reserve time from trust pool 
B. Trust owners exchange their points from pool for inventory in II
C.  Trust owners exchange their points into Marriott exchange for other Marriotts not in Pool through Marriott Exchange system
D.  Weeks owners cannot raid Trust owned point time unless exchanged​
I don't see the inequity and I only own weeks.  I believe whoever gets to the points in the exchange pool points first wins regardless of whether or not they are weeks owner exchanges or trust owner exchanges if that time is available in the exchange.


----------



## TheTimeTraveler

sandytoes said:


> So what is the difference between a Legacy owner and a trust owner? . . .  I purchased two weeks directly from Marriott . . . what does that make me?





Poor:hysterical:


----------



## DanCali

musical2 said:


> Maybe I am looking at this too simplistically.
> 
> 1. We weeks owners own a pool of weeks
> A.  We reserve our week like we always have.
> B.  We exchange our week into II
> C.  We exchange our week into Marriott point system through Marriott Exchange System
> D.  Trust owners cannot raid our owned weeks unless exchanged​2.  Trust owners own a pool of point time.
> A.  Trust owners reserve time from trust pool
> B. Trust owners exchange their points from pool for inventory in II
> C.  Trust owners exchange their points into Marriott exchange for other Marriotts not in Pool through Marriott Exchange system
> D.  Weeks owners cannot raid Trust owned point time unless exchanged​
> I don't see the inequity and I only own weeks.  I believe whoever gets to the points in the exchange pool points first wins regardless of whether or not they are weeks owner exchanges or trust owner exchanges if that time is available in the exchange.



The inequity you are missing is that trust owners can "see" your inventory and access it at will the moment you put your week in points in a given year. If they choose to exchange you then gain access to a "like for like" exchange from the trust.

You, on the other hand, can only see weeks enrolled in points by other weeks members. You ability to gain access to trust inventory depends on their willingness to access converted enrolled weeks.

There are rumors that Marriott will do a lot of comingling of inventory after all to satisfy enrolled weeks demand. But how much do you trust them at this point? The reality seems to be that the system is set up that your points are inferior to trust points in terms of what inventory you can see with them.


----------



## DanCali

BocaBoy said:


> It is clear:  Trust members are those who have an ownership intgerest in the trust, which is what owns the points that have been sold.  So a trust member is one who buys POINTS.  The distinction is based on what they own--no more, no less.





tombo said:


> BTW you seem to know what reps are saying and doing often. You are always on the side of Marriott no matter what the discussion. Just curious, are you a Marriott sales rep or employee?



Yeah, he was called on it a couple of weeks ago already but he keeps at it...

http://tugbbs.com/forums/showpost.php?p=940936&postcount=11


----------



## BocaBum99

pipet said:


> JanT, I think BocaBumm is saying that forever keeping all the pools separate is about the dumbest thing he's ever heard (which I agree), and that's why they _will_ allow trust & exchange points to be combined.



Thank you for clarifying my post.  This is exactly what I am saying.


----------



## rickxylon

*2 points inventories confirmed by Customer Advocacy!*

Just spent 45 minutes with them. Very helpful and clear. They confirmed the following:

1-There is a weeks inventory that can only be accessed by weeks owners whether they enroll or not
2- There is an "exchange" inventory of points made up of enrolled owner weeks that are converted to points + any put there by Marriott from the "trust" inventory
3- There is a "trust" inventory of points made up of the initial unsold weeks from the 11 properties plus probably all new future properties

Trust owners have access to "trust" points inventory ONLY. If there request cannot be filled from that inventory, Marriott must give a comparable week from the "trust" inventory to the "exchange" inventory in order to take the requested week from the "exchange" inventory.

Enrolled legacy owners have access to the weeks inventory and ONLY the "exchange" points inventory when they convert to points usage.

If no enrolled legacy weeks owner converts to points, there would be no "exchange" inventory. 

Competition for the weeks inventory would remain the same as now. If someone converts to points, they would not be able to compete in this inventory pool and their week would also not be available.

Competition in the "trust" points inventory will be among trust point owners only.

Competition in the "exchange" points inventory is among enrolled legacy owners who convert to points.

If an enrolled legacy owner buys trust points, those trust points DO NOT have access to the "exchange" points inventory ONLY to the "trust" points inventory.

Clear?


----------



## DanCali

rickxylon said:


> Just spent 45 minutes with them. Very helpful and clear. They confirmed the following:
> 
> 1-There is a weeks inventory that can only be accessed by weeks owners whether they enroll or not
> 2- There is an "exchange" inventory of points made up of enrolled owner weeks that are converted to points + any put there by Marriott from the "trust" inventory
> 3- There is a "trust" inventory of points made up of the initial unsold weeks from the 11 properties plus probably all new future properties
> 
> Trust owners have access to "trust" points inventory ONLY. If there request cannot be filled from that inventory, Marriott must give a comparable week from the "trust" inventory to the "exchange" inventory in order to take the requested week from the "exchange" inventory.
> 
> Enrolled legacy owners have access to the weeks inventory and ONLY the "exchange" points inventory when they convert to points usage.
> 
> If no enrolled legacy weeks owner converts to points, there would be no "exchange" inventory.
> 
> Competition for the weeks inventory would remain the same as now. If someone converts to points, they would not be able to compete in this inventory pool and their week would also not be available.
> 
> Competition in the "trust" points inventory will be among trust point owners only.
> 
> Competition in the "exchange" points inventory is among enrolled legacy owners who convert to points.
> 
> If an enrolled legacy owner buys trust points, those trust points DO NOT have access to the "exchange" points inventory ONLY to the "trust" points inventory.
> 
> Clear?



Yes - very clear, thanks!

So basically what I wrote in post #194 is correct?


----------



## BocaBum99

rickxylon said:


> Just spent 45 minutes with them. Very helpful and clear. They confirmed the following:
> 
> 1-There is a weeks inventory that can only be accessed by weeks owners whether they enroll or not
> 2- There is an "exchange" inventory of points made up of enrolled owner weeks that are converted to points + any put there by Marriott from the "trust" inventory
> 3- There is a "trust" inventory of points made up of the initial unsold weeks from the 11 properties plus probably all new future properties
> 
> Trust owners have access to "trust" points inventory ONLY. If there request cannot be filled from that inventory, Marriott must give a comparable week from the "trust" inventory to the "exchange" inventory in order to take the requested week from the "exchange" inventory.
> 
> Enrolled legacy owners have access to the weeks inventory and ONLY the "exchange" points inventory when they convert to points usage.
> 
> If no enrolled legacy weeks owner converts to points, there would be no "exchange" inventory.
> 
> Competition for the weeks inventory would remain the same as now. If someone converts to points, they would not be able to compete in this inventory pool and their week would also not be available.
> 
> Competition in the "trust" points inventory will be among trust point owners only.
> 
> Competition in the "exchange" points inventory is among enrolled legacy owners who convert to points.
> 
> If an enrolled legacy owner buys trust points, those trust points DO NOT have access to the "exchange" points inventory ONLY to the "trust" points inventory.
> 
> Clear?



Yes, but very stupid.  What you describe is one of the scenarios previously described.

An enrolled week owner once depositing their week for points could end up having less access to inventory than if they just kept their week.

Why would someone willingly and knowingly sign up for such a program?

If this is correct, then FredM has it completely correct.  What is does is gives Trust points owners first dibs on Trust inventory.  Whenever a Trust owner takes something from the exchange inventory, then something from the Trust needs to be placed into the exchange inventory based on the whims of some Marriott employee or computer algorithm.

Why didn't they just give Trust owners preferential access from 13-months to 11-months from checkin and allow everyone else to access all available inventory at 11 months or something like that?  Then, there is no need for an arbitrary algorithm and blocking trades from happening that would normally occur when all parties have access to all inventory?


----------



## rickxylon

DanCali said:


> Yes - very clear, thanks!
> 
> So basically what I wrote in post #194 is correct?



Yes, other than I didn't ask what anyone coud "see".


----------



## CMF

rickxylon said:


> Just spent 45 minutes with them. Very helpful and clear. They confirmed the following:
> 
> 1-There is a weeks inventory that can only be accessed by weeks owners whether they enroll or not
> 2- There is an "exchange" inventory of points made up of enrolled owner weeks that are converted to points + any put there by Marriott from the "trust" inventory
> 3- There is a "trust" inventory of points made up of the initial unsold weeks from the 11 properties plus probably all new future properties
> 
> Trust owners have access to "trust" points inventory ONLY. If there request cannot be filled from that inventory, Marriott must give a comparable week from the "trust" inventory to the "exchange" inventory in order to take the requested week from the "exchange" inventory.
> 
> Enrolled legacy owners have access to the weeks inventory and ONLY the "exchange" points inventory when they convert to points usage.
> 
> If no enrolled legacy weeks owner converts to points, there would be no "exchange" inventory.
> 
> Competition for the weeks inventory would remain the same as now. If someone converts to points, they would not be able to compete in this inventory pool and their week would also not be available.
> 
> Competition in the "trust" points inventory will be among trust point owners only.
> 
> Competition in the "exchange" points inventory is among enrolled legacy owners who convert to points.
> 
> If an enrolled legacy owner buys trust points, those trust points DO NOT have access to the "exchange" points inventory ONLY to the "trust" points inventory.
> 
> Clear?



And smart Marriott people bet the bank that this would work.  I'm not smart enough to believe in it I guess.

Charles


----------



## DanCali

BocaBum99 said:


> An enrolled week owner once depositing their week for points could end up having less access to inventory than if they just kept their week.
> 
> Why would someone willingly and knowingly sign up for such a program?



At the extreme - if there are no trust points owners yet (so no exchanges from trust), and Marriott sticks by the rules they defined, and you are the only person converting in a given year then you have access to zero inventory in points?


----------



## BocaBum99

DanCali said:


> Yes - very clear, thanks!
> 
> So basically what I wrote in post #194 is correct?



What is the trade algorithm between the Trust and Exchange system and how and when is it executed?

This seems like a completely unnecessary complexity.


----------



## BocaBum99

DanCali said:


> At the extreme - if there are no trust points owners yet (so no exchanges from trust), and Marriott sticks by the rules they defined, and you are the only person converting in a given year then you have access to zero inventory in points?



Exactly. Why would they develop such a bad system?  I don't see the advantage to anyone in this model.

I think I may need to re-evaluate my predictions based on new information.  I assumed that there were reasonably intelligent people working on this program.  If this is indeed how the program has been implemented, I can only assume that the business and product teams who developed it are truly imbeciles.   They would be the single best sales prevention team in the industry.


----------



## musical2

DanCali said:


> The inequity you are missing is that trust owners can "see" your inventory and access it at will the moment you put your week in points in a given year. If they choose to exchange you then gain access to a "like for like" exchange from the trust.
> 
> You, on the other hand, can only see weeks enrolled in points by other weeks members. You ability to gain access to trust inventory depends on their willingness to access converted enrolled weeks.
> 
> There are rumors that Marriott will do a lot of comingling of inventory after all to satisfy enrolled weeks demand. But how much do you trust them at this point? The reality seems to be that the system is set up that your points are inferior to trust points in terms of what inventory you can see with them.



But won't we also get to see all the points they have already exchanged into the exchange pool when we deposit our converted weeks/points into the exchange pool?  Also, when trust owners deposit their points can't we "see" their inventory and access it at will the moment they put their points in a given year.  If so, isn't that the same thing?


----------



## BocaBum99

Well, there is some good news.  If indeed Marriott implemented a program where you deposit a week, get 7-10% points skimmed so that you can't make an equivalent trade, NOBODY can claim that the reason for skim is to sell you an additional 1000 points.  That because that extra 1000 points cannot be combined with your other skimmed points to book a ressie.

Just how stupid is that?


----------



## windje2000

BocaBum99 said:


> Yes, but very stupid.  What you describe is one of the scenarios previously described.
> 
> An enrolled week owner once depositing their week for points could end up having less access to inventory than if they just kept their week.
> 
> *Why would someone willingly and knowingly sign up for such a program?*



I think the operative word is knowingly.


----------



## SueDonJ

I just don't understand how anyone can believe whatever they hear about this inventory issue from any Marriott rep.  Why does anyone who has heard directly from a rep, whether in email or on the phone or through the website, think that what they've heard is any more valid than what someone else heard?  These aren't slight differences in interpretation that we're being treated to!

Think about it.  ALL of these (paraphrased) statements that completely contradict each other have been made by Marriott reps:

"Only Trust members will have access to the Trust inventory, no exceptions.  Enrolled Weeks members will never have access to Trust inventory."

"Enrolled Weeks members will have access to Trust inventory only after Trust members exchange into non-Trust inventory."

"Enrolled Weeks members will have access to the same Trust inventory above, as well as whatever inventory Marriott - as a Trust member by virtue of the developer inventory they've conveyed to the Trust - releases to the Exchange Company.'

"For practical purposes Enrolled Weeks members will have the exact same access to all Points inventory that Trust members do, but to satisfy the legal requirements the Trust and exchange inventory will be accounted for in separate pools."

"Enrolled Weeks members who purchase an interest in the Trust will be able to combine their total point values for usage on the same basis as a Trust member."

"Enrolled Weeks members who purchase an interest in the Trust will not be able to combine their total point values; their Trust and Enrolled Weeks memberships will remain distinct and be subject to the applicable usage rules of each."

I guess it doesn't hurt at all for folks to continue to post whatever they might learn from any rep, but I don't understand how anyone at this point can think that it helps.  Or maybe more importantly, that it's any more correct than any other info floating around here.  I'm with Dave here - the ONLY information we will be able to rely on will be that which is confirmed in an official statement from Marriott and can be substantiated by the governing docs.  Everything else is just noise.


----------



## BocaBum99

SueDonJ said:


> I guess it doesn't hurt at all for folks to continue to post whatever they might learn from any rep, but I don't understand how anyone at this point can think that it helps.  I'm with Dave here - the ONLY information we will be able to rely on will be that which is confirmed in an official statement from Marriott and can be substantiated by the governing docs.  Everything else is just noise.



Actually, I don't agree with your assertion that the ONLY information is that which is confirmed by an official statement.  

In my view, the ONLY information we can rely on is direct interaction with the system which is reported by owners doing trade tests with various ownership types.  Just because some executive says that it is supposed to work one way, it does NOT mean the developer coded it that way.


----------



## nwstar

*Can you define Legacy owner?*

I purchased a Marriott timeshare about four months ago and I'm completely confused about the terminology used here.  I know I have an option to convert the week at my resort to points after paying the one time initiation fee and a yearly fee of about $200.  My question is that if I do that, does it mean that I'll have problems booking at resorts like the Kauai Lagoons because Marriott sales are now based solely on points and therefore they are part of their inventory trust?  When I talked to a representative yesterday she told me that once I convert my weeks to points I will have access to all Marriott inventory including Kauai Lagoons.  

Thanks,
















tombo said:


> Finding out about all the wrongs Marriott has done to Legacy owners with their points launch is like watching a soap opera.
> 
> One day Marriott is charging resale owners more than retail. If it was a soap opera it would be a married person with lipstick on the collar. Signs of bad things to come.
> 
> Next the skim is found out about. In the soap opera it could be seeing a spouse in an embrace with another person. When Marriott is asked, oh no we aren't doing that, when asked again we are doing that, when asked again, maybe?
> 
> Now Marriott is later caught and grudgingly admits that they will never give legacy converters access to trust inventory. Too bad Legacy owners, take it or leave it. We care about the new purchasers, not our past customers.
> 
> This is the final betrayal for many. In the soap opera it would be you catching your spouse in bed with another, and when confronted being told by your spouse, this is how it is , accept it or not. I have moved on.
> 
> Some here will actually accept such treachery and say what can I do to make it better? The answer to that question from both Marriott and the  uncaring spouse is basically the same. Hop into bed with my new lover at any terms I choose or else I really don't care what you do. My new lover/points customer is all I care about, you are yesterday's news.
> 
> I wonder what twists and turns will be in next week's episode?


----------



## puckmanfl

good afternoon

yes, you will not be able to access unsold trust inventory at KL

no, you cannot access all of the resorts...

This is all explained in detail in the beginning of this thread...

yikes

Legacy points < Trust points...


----------



## SueDonJ

BocaBum99 said:


> Actually, I don't agree with your assertion that the ONLY information is that which is confirmed by an official statement.
> 
> In my view, the ONLY information we can rely on is direct interaction with the system which is reported by owners doing trade tests with various ownership types.  Just because some executive says that it is supposed to work one way, it does NOT mean the developer coded it that way.



That's true.  But if the controversy surrounding this issue is going to be cleared up prior to the system going on-line on July 26th, nothing less than an official statement from Marriott will satisfy as a definitive answer.  If one is made and then we find after July 26th that it was incorrect, well, then we would have a legitimate, recorded, official reason to legally challenge the results of the system in action.

Understand, I'm not saying that now we don't have a reason to challenge what we're hearing, just that we don't have a means to demand answers until we see how the system actually works.  At this point an official statement is about the best we can hope for.

And DAN?  I am definitely NOT apologizing for or excusing or forgiving Marriott this mess.  There is absolutely no valid excuse for different Marriott reps to provide answers that are so completely contradictory, to the exact same questions.  None.  This is inexcusable.


----------



## DanCali

musical2 said:


> But won't we also get to see all the points they have already exchanged into the exchange pool when we deposit our converted weeks/points into the exchange pool?  Also, when trust owners deposit their points can't we "see" their inventory and access it at will the moment they put their points in a given year.  If so, isn't that the same thing?



It is not the same thing because your exchanges depend on their exchanges. 

If the trust points owners have enough inventory in the trust to get where they want to go you cannot get their inventory even if they have an exchange you want and can't get otherwise. Suppose, at the extreme, they all bank their points to next year - then the way the rules were set up you can't access their inventory this year even if they have what you want.

On the other hand, once you redeem for points in a given year, they have access to your week even if you haven't used them at all yet. Suppose you bank your points to next year - they can access your week this year.

See the difference?


----------



## jimf41

puckmanfl said:


> good afternoon
> 
> yes, you will not be able to access unsold trust inventory at KL
> 
> no, you cannot access all of the resorts...
> 
> This is all explained in detail in the beginning of this thread...
> 
> yikes
> 
> Legacy points < Trust points...



I've been told differently. Trust points and Legacy points are separate. They will never be co-mingled because of the Florida TS law. Weeks in II and weeks or trust points traded for MRP's are different. Evidently MVCI gets to decide where those points/weeks will be placed., either in the trust points pool or the legacy points pool.

If this is the case then anyone will be able to access any resort. I didn't think there would be enough II weeks or weeks traded for MRP's to satisfy demand until I was told historically 33% of owners trade for points. Combine that with the II weeks and let MVCI fill each pool evenly and this system could work.

That's a lot of IF though. Time to pack for a short vacation. Maybe Dave M will has some more definitive info next week.


----------



## DanCali

SueDonJ said:


> And DAN?  I am definitely NOT apologizing for or excusing or forgiving Marriott this mess.  There is absolutely no valid excuse for different Marriott reps to provide answers that are so completely contradictory, to the exact same questions.  None.  This is inexcusable.



Now that's a post for the sticky area!


----------



## BocaBum99

jimf41 said:


> I've been told differently. Trust points and Legacy points are separate. They will never be co-mingled because of the Florida TS law. Weeks in II and weeks or trust points traded for MRP's are different. Evidently MVCI gets to decide where those points/weeks will be placed., either in the trust points pool or the legacy points pool.
> 
> If this is the case then anyone will be able to access any resort. I didn't think there would be enough II weeks or weeks traded for MRP's to satisfy demand until I was told historically 33% of owners trade for points. Combine that with the II weeks and let MVCI fill each pool evenly and this system could work.
> 
> That's a lot of IF though. Time to pack for a short vacation. Maybe Dave M will has some more definitive info next week.



I have already debunked the theory that Florida Statutes are preventing the co-mingling of legacy inventory with Trust inventory.  Bluegreen does that today.  The system as defined in this thread is an implementation choice by Marriott.  Not a statutory requirement.


----------



## SueDonJ

DanCali said:


> Now that's a post for the sticky area!



:rofl:

Imagine?  I can hardly believe it myself!


----------



## ArtsieAng

BocaBum99 said:


> Well, there is some good news.  If indeed Marriott implemented a program where you deposit a week, get 7-10% points skimmed so that you can't make an equivalent trade, NOBODY can claim that the reason for skim is to sell you an additional 1000 points.  *That because that extra 1000 points cannot be combined with your other skimmed points to book a ressie.*
> 
> Just how stupid is that?



What if you rent points? There has been quite a bit of talk about renting points as an option, should you be short the amount of points required to book a particular reservation.


----------



## m61376

IF the current info. being disseminated by Customer Advocacy (as reported by rickxylon) ends up being verified as the official policy (and Customer Advocacy theoretically is espousing official policy) then the 80% of legacy owners that Marriott projects will not join will theoretically have a better source of inventory than the 20% that Marriott projects will join.

Theoretically, if I am understanding all this right, enrolled week owners converting to points will have the inventory of some fraction of the 20% who possibly joined the program to reserve, since even if 20% join, expectantly a large potion will either go to their owned resort or trade in weeks, so that inventory remains with the week inventory. They will have trust inventory available only insofar as trust owners have requested reservations in the converted owners trading for points pool.

Similarly, weeks owners trading in II will have access to inventory in the trust if a trust owner's request cannot be filled by the <20% of weeks owners who converted to points for the year inventory, in which case Marriott will give II a trust week in exchange for a week owner's deposited week.

If my analysis is correct- even though the converted weeks owners' pool would be the first one tapped for those point owners' trades, the likelihood is that with less than 20% of the inventory versus more than 80% of the inventory still being traded in weeks, more inventory exchanges will occur in II and more trust weeks may be available in II for exchange than to legacy week owners converting to points for direct reservations. 

Am I missing something here- because I know that wasn't the intention.

Boca- I understand why you say the real test is when the system goes live. But will that be a real test, or will bulk deposits due to the excess trust inventory at this point in time minimize the impact of these restrictions? I'm guessing the real impact won't be visible for several years, at least until enough trust points are sold to account for most of the peak reservation periods.

What I don't get totally is where either extra points purchased or rented fall in. Does that mean unless 100% of your points are trust points that your use will be limited to the second point pool of converted weeks points.


----------



## DanCali

ArtsieAng said:


> What if you rent points? There has been quite a bit of talk about renting points as an option, should you be short the amount of points required to book a particular reservation.



Good point... that's two more potential pools!

Points rented from trust owners
Points rented from enrolled weeks

..probably each can access the inventory its supposed to "see"? That makes "their" points more valuable on the rental market than "our" points.


----------



## windje2000

SueDonJ said:


> . . .
> 
> I guess it doesn't hurt at all for folks to continue to post whatever they might learn from any rep, but I don't understand how anyone at this point can think that it helps.  Or maybe more importantly, that it's any more correct than any other info floating around here.  I'm with Dave here - the ONLY information we will be able to rely on will be that which is confirmed in an official statement from Marriott and can be substantiated by the governing docs.
> 
> Everything else is just noise.



Sue, the existence of 'noise' is in and of itself an interesting tidbit of information.  Since all of the various representations cannot be correct, the existence of 'noise' indicates they appear to be telling their existing customer base whatever story will make the sale.

It tells you something about Marriott or perhaps at least some of the sales staff.

A customer base (and referrals) with an historical 50% close rate is a gold mine.  They treat it this way at their own peril.


----------



## SueDonJ

windje2000 said:


> Sue, the existence of 'noise' is in and of itself an interesting tidbit of information.  Since all of the various representations cannot be correct, the existence of 'noise' indicates they appear to be telling their existing customer base whatever story will make the sale.
> 
> It tells you something about Marriott or perhaps at least some of the sales staff.
> 
> A customer base (and referrals) with an historical 50% close rate is a gold mine.  They treat it this way at their own peril.



Granted, there is definitely some element of sales pitch included here.  But not everyone who has contacted Marriott has heard a sales pitch - some folks are simply asking questions and getting answers to those questions without any motive attached.  And some of those folks are hearing contradictory info from non-sales staff.

I do agree they're taking a huge risk here by allowing this Customer Relations nightmare to continue.  I seriously doubt that Marriott doesn't watch this website, and hasn't more closely watched it since the June 20th roll-out.  But we're going on more than 24 hours now that they've allowed this one thread to continue, and more than three days now since the topic was first introduced in that other thread.  What are they thinking?!  That's a lifetime in online forums, yet STILL posts continue to be made that prove Marriott is allowing this debacle to continue.  It makes no sense from a business standpoint, and even I with my reputation as a staunch Marriott supporter can't understand why this is happening.  

Every other thread that's been opened since the roll-out has contained some misinformation or confusion, but more because we weren't given enough information, or misconstrued the legal mumbo-jumbo, or misunderstood what Marriott reps were saying.  Eventually we've reached a consensus in those threads, though, that could be substantiated.  There's no way that the same type of resolution can be reached with respect to this thread - Marriott's contributing voices are far too contradictory to allow any middle ground.


----------



## CMF

SueDonJ said:


> I do agree they're taking a huge risk here by allowing this Customer Relations nightmare to continue.  I seriously doubt that Marriott doesn't watch this website, and hasn't more closely watched it since the June 20th roll-out.  But we're going on more than 24 hours now that they've allowed this one thread to continue, and more than three days now since the topic was first introduced in that other thread.  What are they thinking?!  That's a lifetime in online forums, yet STILL posts continue to be made that prove Marriott is allowing this debacle to continue.  It makes no sense from a business standpoint, and even I with my reputation as a staunch Marriott supporter can't understand why this is happening.



They see us as a tempest in a tea pot - a small tea pot at that.

Charles


----------



## gblotter

windje2000 said:


> A customer base (and referrals) with an historical 50% close rate is a gold mine.  They treat it this way at their own peril.


Marriott likely thinks that the unhappy opposition consists of just a few informed tuggers, and that this storm will pass soon enough.  Thus they aren't responding to complaints on Bill Marriott's blog, etc.  I'm sure they assume the vast uninformed masses will continue to be a gold mine for them if they can just get past this initial rocky phase.

I completely disagree.  The storm will not pass, but will in fact get worse as time goes by.  Remember, the MVDC is all about selling the dream.  When points users cannot reserve at the promised locations during the promised times, then the discontent will broaden way beyond just a few informed tuggers.  The confusing contortions of this points program with its different inventory pools and ownership classifications will make it even harder to provide customer satisfaction with reservation availability.

Personally, I wouldn't want to be a Marriott salesperson right now in this down economy.  If their job was hard before, it will be even worse now that they cannot make repeat sales of deeded-weeks to a loyal customer base who has become alienated and angered by this new points system.

Think about it ... if Marriott is predicting that only 10-20 percent of legacy owners will enroll in the new points system, that means Marriott is happy to walk away from any repeat business from 80-90 percent of their existing customer base.  Any legacy owner who rejects the points system now will be unlikely to embrace it later at an even higher cost.  And Marriott is forfeiting any repeat business from legacy owners for deeded-weeks - the only option there is now the resale market.

Good time for a career change to Disney I would think.


----------



## puckmanfl

good evening

gblotter...

I disagree moderately...

The trust resorts have some high value joints (koolina, NCV, Marco, kauai lagoons, lakeshore) etc.  There are going to be some good deals especially initially with such large inventory and not many owners.  When the points owner requests park city ski, the exchange manager will make an II request and put a 3 bedroom Kauai or Koolina back in the II and give the request to the points member ahead of a legacy week owner makingan II trade...


if given the opportunity with these rules,i would accept the skim and trade my deeds for my points minus skim in the new trust points world...my MF's would go up $4oo but it would be worth it..13666 trust points would be  more valuable than what i have... as orlando and hawaii are in the trust!!!

Think about it, MVCD HAS to make this work.  It is a zero sum game, every advantage given to a trust member comes in some way from a legacy owner.

The only issue with trust points is the CURRENT price


----------



## SueDonJ

CMF said:


> They see us as a tempest in a tea pot - a small tea pot at that.
> 
> Charles



No doubt, in general they think of TUG as a pain in the neck.  But my thought is, if ever this tempest develops to the point where a fair number of already-enrolled owners demand their money back after their rescission periods because their exchange opportunities do not materialize as they've been led to believe they will, then this thread with all of its quotes from Marriott employees can serve as proof of the inconsistencies and falsehoods that may substantiate a claim of misrepresentation.  It honestly shocks me that Marriott is allowing it to continue.

I can see why Marriott has traditionally ignored the individual posts on TUG claiming, "my sales rep lied to me!" - none of those were collective arguments, no two or more TUG contributors could prove that as a group Marriott sales reps were uninformed about the same aspect of the product.  But this thread is different - it's recording completely contradictory answers to the same questions from different people relative to the same system within a limited time.  It's mind-boggling, really.


----------



## m61376

I have been told by more than one person that they are reading and aware of the posts here, so that's not just an assumption.

My assumption is that they are aware of this post in particular too, but don't quite know how to couch the answer. I expect Dave will get a very nice response and, even if it verifies the 3 pool concept, it will talk about how wonderful the opportunities will be for all enrollees because new point owners can access legacy weeks and legacy owners converting to points have not only the trust but whatever crops up into the future at their exchange fingertips. They will paint the picture of one big happy Marirott family, with lots of prime inventory for everyone.

Now, doesn't that make everyone feel better?:rofl:


----------



## dioxide45

puckmanfl said:


> Good morning
> 
> dioxide....
> 
> You are 100 % bang on correct with your last two posts.  You do have an amazing clarity of vision!!!!
> 
> any rep stating that Legacy points= trust points has not had advanced training....
> 
> Remember that it took Tuggers 3 weeks to catch this one
> 
> 
> I am going to let my guru rest and not push for the answer regarding the purchase of extra trust points and inventory



I think I can expand further. It is a little more detailed than I first indicated with my scenario.

We really need to think of it in terms of three cookie jars. There is the big kids jar (trust owners), the little kids jar (weeks owners) and mom’s jar (exchange company). The little kids jar is full of cookies with their names on them. The big kids jar has cookies in it with no ones name on them. There are also green marbles. The number of green marbles is equal to the type, size, and quality of the cookies in the big kids jar. There is a can that holds the green marbles (unsold points), but the big kids also hold some marbles (points sold). There are also red marbles. Mom’s jar has red marbles in it equal to the type, size, and quality of the cookies in the little kids jar. There are no cookies in mom’s jar in the beginning.

The little kids can pick from their jar but only the cookies with their names on them. Now if a little kid doesn’t like the cookie with his name on it, he will give it to mom and mom will put it in to her jar (convert to points). Mom will give the little kid red marbles from her jar. The number of red marbles is determined by the quality, size and type of cookie that was put in mom’s jar.

The big kid holding green marbles can use the list to decide what cookie he wants from the big kids jar. He can use his green marbles to take a cookie from the big kids jar. If there are no cookies in the big kid jar that he wants, he can look in mom’s jar also and trade his green marbles for cookies in there also. He takes out the cookie he wants and puts his green marbles in mom’s jar.

The little kid with red marbles can use those marbles for cookies in mom’s jar. If he sees green marbles in moms jar though, he can swap out his red marbles for the green ones and go and use the green marbles to pick a cookie from the big kids jar. Once mom’s jar has no more green marbles in it, the picking from the big kids jar by little kids stops and they can only take cookies from mom’s jar.

Little Kids Jar – Weeks Owners (enrolled or not)
Big Kids Jar – Trust Owners
Red Marbles (Weeks owner points enrolled and converted)
Green Marbles (Trust owner points)

Marriott may also at some time take a bunch of green marbles and put them in to mom's jar. There is an abundance of them in the can. If they do, the little kids can switch out their red marbles for the green Marriott ones and look in the big kids jar. I am willing to bet that while the can is real full of unsold marbles they will do this at the begining of the year. So everyone will be able to get lots of access to the big kids jar. People will see this and think what has been discussed here is untrue, but the system is really just covering for what is really happening.

If this is truly how it works, it is a convoluted smoke and mirrors system. However in the concept of an exchange company, it makes the most sense.


----------



## lovearuba

*it starts small*



DanCali said:


> Now that's a post for the sticky area!



and eventually your opinion can change as well..:ignore:


----------



## windje2000

CMF said:


> They see us as a tempest in a tea pot - a small tea pot at that.
> 
> Charles



Just wait until some of the folks who bought points to 'recharge' the ownership find out what they've spent $10k on.  

I'm assuming, of course, the worst.  

I think the truth lies with the worst case here.  The best case (integrated points usage) can sell more points than the worst case (segregated points usage).   

No one has a motive to make up the worst case.  

Poolside chatter tends to spread news fast, especially news like they sold me points I can't use.


----------



## 5infam

I love cookies - but these cookies don't sound so tasty! 

So I have pretty much figured out that the point system costs me too much for the privilege, as I don't own a lock out, and I trade every other year into my home resort - so with skim I am screwed. However, I am one of those folks that is keeping an open mind just in case someone figures out something good here. So one thing I thought of was to use the 800 points if I enroll, next summer at Ko Olina for 2 nights in a 1 bedroom, which would add on to the 14 nights at MOC I already have booked. I previously assumed that there could be lots of ko Olina inventory that was unsold and now part of the Trust, and therefore, my 800 points would be easy to use at Ko Olina. 

However, based on what I am reading here, the only way to get that would be if a weeks owner deposits their week for points, or MRP, or through II - then I could possibly grab it. But the points that are part of the Trust, which is what I thought was available to make this happen, is not available to me unless I buy more points??? Do I have that right??? 

Maybe I should just take my $1,495 and go to Sam's Club and buy a pallet of Tylenol so I can get rid of this headache


----------



## DanCali

lovearuba said:


> and eventually your opinion can change as well..:ignore:



Yeah - I'll open the "DanCali Enrolls" thread for that one...


----------



## BocaBum99

puckmanfl said:


> The only issue with trust points is the CURRENT price



I think the MF are an issue, too.


----------



## windje2000

DanCali said:


> Yeah - I'll open the "DanCali Enrolls" thread for that one...



Not holding my breath waiting for that thread


----------



## puckmanfl

good evening

Boca...

after the "skim" I have 13666 with a $.34/pt mf....  I think that Trust points will be so  much better than legacy points that even increasing my mf's to $.40/point I would trade my deeds for "trust" points.  Please keep in mind that my home resorts are GV and Hawaii.  Plenty of trust inventory in these areas, so I don't think Home Resort priority is a big deal and I am getting a bit weary of hawaii...

I am a player/trader 13,666 trust beats the pants of 13666 legacy points to me!!!

With the above mentioned inventory issues...

I truly believe II  inventory will also dramatically decrease making week usage less of an option to trade...

I may change my tune after the 7/26 test drive...

will keep you posted...


----------



## BocaBum99

puckmanfl said:


> good evening
> 
> Boca...
> 
> after the "skim" I have 13666 with a $.34/pt mf....  I think that Trust points will be so  much better than legacy points that even increasing my mf's to $.40/point I would trade my deeds for "trust" points.  Please keep in mind that my home resorts are GV and Hawaii.  Plenty of trust inventory in these areas, so I don't think Home Resort priority is a big deal and I am getting a bit weary of hawaii...
> 
> I am a player/trader 13,666 trust beats the pants of 13666 legacy points to me!!!
> 
> With the above mentioned inventory issues...
> 
> I may change my tune after the 7/26 test drive...
> 
> will keep you posted...



My plans aren't changing with this revelation.  I will enroll when the dust settles.  I most likely will be able to rent either legacy or Trust points to get what I want.  I just don't like that there is so many inventory pools.  Makes it harder to build a plan of attack.


----------



## CMF

I confess: I have not read all of the documents.   I am dutifully ashamed of myself.  

Now questions for some one that has read the documents:


What are the provisions for addenda to the contract documents?  I am working under the assumption that these restrictions are in writing and not just a matter of poor interpretation.
Can Marriott easily modify the section of the contract responsible for the resulting points hierarchy?  Or have they written themselves into a corner?

Charles


----------



## DanCali

CMF said:


> I confess: I have not read all of the documents.   I am dutifully ashamed of myself.
> 
> Now questions for some one that has read the documents:
> 
> 
> What are the provisions for addenda to the contract documents?  I am working under the assumption that these restrictions are in writing and not just a matter of poor interpretation.
> Can Marriott easily modify the section of the contract responsible for the resulting points hierarchy?  Or have they written themselves into a corner?
> 
> Charles



My guess is that the structure is due to various state laws, as suggested earlier in the thread.

They can try to paint it as no big deal and take a bunch of green marbles and put them in to mom's jar... But all that does is hide an underlying fundamental issue that will remain there forever.


----------



## gblotter

puckmanfl said:


> good evening gblotter...
> 
> I disagree moderately...
> 
> The trust resorts have some high value joints (koolina, NCV, Marco, kauai lagoons, lakeshore) etc.



True - some desirable locations are in the trust.  I probably didn't use the best language in my previous post to illustrate my point.

For points owners, few reservations will be available at some sold-out resorts (like Waiohai) where little inventory will exist in the trust.  For enrolled owners, few reservations will be available at some newer resorts (like Kauai Lagoons) where little inventory will exist outside the trust.  The different inventory pools and ownership classifications will result in a reservation process full of frustrated aspirations and customer dissatisfaction.  This reality is far from the unrealizable dream that Marriott salespeople are promoting (that the points program will allow you to go anywhere at any time for the right number of points).



puckmanfl said:


> The only issue with trust points is the CURRENT price



The reservation availability issue I'm trying to describe will not be fixed by any adjustment in price.


----------



## Luckybee

Isnt a more significant problem that no matter what we are told "officially" either through Dave's channels or through Marriott that the reps are obviously still quite under trained and which could lead to absurd results.

Lets say Dave's person says no this thread is wrong...access is available to the trust for legacy owners......but many reps still think it isnt...what do you think will happen when one calls to reserve. The rep wont even look at that inventory. 

A further problem(and no disrespect intended Dave) is that how can anyone take as gospel what Dave's person...or anyone else at Marriott says at this point. That would by its very nature involve "trusting" that the interpretation will be the same throughout. I have reviewed the points "documentation", I have had 3 others do the same. The one thing we all agree on is that for virtually any issue that could possibly be contentious there are numerous interpretations open  and throughout the contradictions abound. Quite frankly it is drafted surprisingly poorly and is just the type of contract that courts love to crucify. That said, I dont expect anyone is going to take Marriott to court(at least not yet) so that the only interpretation to much of this that is important is what ends up happening when one joins the program and attempt to utilize it. And for that imho it will take a number of months to sort out.


----------



## pfrank4127

Luckybee said:


> Isnt a more significant problem that no matter what we are told "officially" either through Dave's channels or through Marriott that the reps are obviously still quite under trained and which could lead to absurd results.
> 
> Lets say Dave's person says no this thread is wrong...access is available to the trust for legacy owners......but many reps still think it isnt...what do you think will happen when one calls to reserve. The rep wont even look at that inventory.
> 
> A further problem(and no disrespect intended Dave) is that how can anyone take as gospel what Dave's person...or anyone else at Marriott says at this point. That would by its very nature involve "trusting" that the interpretation will be the same throughout. I have reviewed the points "documentation", I have had 3 others do the same. The one thing we all agree on is that for virtually any issue that could possibly be contentious there are numerous interpretations open  and throughout the contradictions abound. Quite frankly it is drafted surprisingly poorly and is just the type of contract that courts love to crucify. That said, I dont expect anyone is going to take Marriott to court(at least not yet) so that the only interpretation to much of this that is important is what ends up happening when one joins the program and attempt to utilize it. And for that imho it will take a number of months to sort out.



The written documents are all someone can trust.  I just re-read all the documents and their is nothing is writing about any of this being true.


----------



## SueDonJ

Luckybee said:


> Isnt a more significant problem that no matter what we are told "officially" either through Dave's channels or through Marriott that the reps are obviously still quite under trained and which could lead to absurd results.
> 
> Lets say Dave's person says no this thread is wrong...access is available to the trust for legacy owners......but many reps still think it isnt...what do you think will happen when one calls to reserve. The rep wont even look at that inventory.
> 
> A further problem(and no disrespect intended Dave) is that how can anyone take as gospel what Dave's person...or anyone else at Marriott says at this point. That would by its very nature involve "trusting" that the interpretation will be the same throughout. I have reviewed the points "documentation", I have had 3 others do the same. The one thing we all agree on is that for virtually any issue that could possibly be contentious there are numerous interpretations open  and throughout the contradictions abound. Quite frankly it is drafted surprisingly poorly and is just the type of contract that courts love to crucify. That said, I dont expect anyone is going to take Marriott to court(at least not yet) so that the only interpretation to much of this that is important is what ends up happening when one joins the program and attempt to utilize it. And for that imho it will take a number of months to sort out.



I agree completely, the problem here is that Marriott reps are giving out information that has no substantiation in the governing docs - it doesn't matter if one or more of them have happened to give the correct info in all these contradictory answers, because we have no way to verify what's correct and what isn't.

IMO, that's what makes this particular, "but they told me one thing and now I'm finding another is true!" complaint against Marriott different from all the others.  Usually you can look at the docs and find the correct answer (and 9 times out of 10, on TUG that means you end up hating Marriott even more because the docs usually prove them right  )  But with this one issue, even if we could make sense of the docs to get at the right answer, we would still be dis-proving something that one Marriott rep has said and proving something said by another at the same time.  It's just a total mess.


----------



## dioxide45

5infam said:


> However, based on what I am reading here, the only way to get that would be if a weeks owner deposits their week for points, or MRP, or through II - then I could possibly grab it. But the points that are part of the Trust, which is what I thought was available to make this happen, is not available to me unless I buy more points??? Do I have that right???



You will be able to book trust weeks as soon as trust owners grab a enrolled weeks owners inventory from the exchange company. That is as long as you are there soon enough to grab it. Once this gets rolling with hundreds of thousands of deposits, you won't even notice any of this that is happening.

Marriott doesn't get to pick what the trust deposits, the trust deposits points and gets time out. Those points are good for any trust time. Thus my analogy of cookies and marbles.


----------



## DanCali

pfrank4127 said:


> The written documents are all someone can trust.  I just re-read all the documents and their is nothing is writing about any of this being true.



It depends which documents you read... see my post #111


----------



## puckmanfl

good evening..

MVCD could fix this in a heartbeat!!!  All  inventory that comes from the trust, legacy weeks converted to MR or DC points and delinquencies all go into the Exchange company.  To get access to the exchange company you need to either purchase points or convert legacy weeks to points....  Theexchange company can use its inventory to then exchange with II to fulfill unavailable requests for BOTH trust and legacy point players...

with this system
Legacy Points = Trust points....


----------



## dioxide45

puckmanfl said:


> good evening..
> 
> MVCD could fix this in a heartbeat!!!  All  inventory that comes from the trust, legacy weeks converted to MR or DC points and delinquencies all go into the Exchange company.  To get access to the exchange company you need to either purchase points or convert legacy weeks to points....  Theexchange company can use its inventory to then exchange with II to fulfill unavailable requests for BOTH trust and legacy point players...
> 
> with this system
> Legacy Points = Trust points....



But then they can't guaranty that all points owners will get something that they own. They all own X points in trust properties. A soon as one night goes to a non trust owner without a like trust night going to weeks owner, they have an imbalance and not all trust owners can now get what they have the right to reserve.


----------



## dioxide45

Luckybee said:


> A further problem(and no disrespect intended Dave) is that how can anyone take as gospel what Dave's person...or anyone else at Marriott says at this point.



The problem is that any Marriott representative can say "Yes enrolled weeks owners will have access to trust inventory." This is true. Though there is a BUT in there that they don't need to disclose because to all owners all of this happening behind the scenes will be invisible.


----------



## pfrank4127

DanCali said:


> It depends which documents you read... see my post #111



Not really sure what you are trying to say in post #111; it seems to me you are pulling things out of context.  I copied the entire section not just the snippet from post #111.  

II EXERCISE OF MEMBERSHIP PRIVILEGES; MEMBER’S DISTRIBUTION

A. *Trust Members*. This section only applies to Trust Members. Membership in the Program is not an appurtenance to Interests. In order to enjoy the benefits of Membership in the Program as a Trust Member, the Affiliate Program Manager and/or Association of your Affiliate Program must have voluntarily entered into an Affiliation Agreement with Exchange Company, where the Affiliate Program Manager and/or Association is a member of the Program. Trust Members must comply with all of the terms and conditions of Membership in the Program. During the term of the Affiliation Agreement, Trust Members will have the right to reserve and use the Accommodations, facilities, services, and experiences that are a part of the Program or an Affiliate Program in accordance with these Exchange Procedures. Unless otherwise provided pursuant to the applicable Affiliation Agreement, Trust Members have the right to reserve and use the Accommodations, facilities, services, and experiences that are a part of the Trust Member’s Affiliate Program in accordance with that Affiliate Program’s Affiliate Program Reservation System. If a Trust Member desires to use the Special Benefits that may be offered by Exchange Company from time to time, the Trust Member may voluntarily participate in the Program as described in these Exchange Procedures.
Membership in the Program automatically terminates for a given Trust Member if the Trust Member voluntarily or involuntarily transfers the Trust Member’s Interest and owns no other Interest, or if the Trust Member’s Affiliate Program ceases to be affiliated with the Program because such Affiliate Program’s Affiliation Agreement is terminated or is not renewed.

B. *Exchange Members*. This section only applies to Exchange Members. Membership in the Program is not an appurtenance to Interests. In order to enjoy the benefits of Membership in the Program as an Exchange Member, an owner of an Interest must have voluntarily entered into an enrollment agreement with Exchange Company. Exchange Members must comply with all of the terms and conditions for Membership in the Program. *During the term of the Exchange Member’s enrollment agreement with Exchange Company and so long as an Exchange Member remains enrolled in the Program, Exchange Members will have the right to reserve and use the Accommodations, facilities, services, and experiences that are a part of the Program in accordance with these Exchange Procedures. *If an Exchange Member desires to use the Accommodations outside the Exchange Member’s
Affiliate Program or access Special Benefits, from time to time, the Exchange Member may voluntarily participate in the Program described in the Disclosure Guide and these Exchange Procedures.

Member if the Exchange Member voluntarily or involuntarily transfers the Exchange Member’s Interest and owns no other Interest.


----------



## puckmanfl

good evening...

If trust owners own in the trust, Why can they dip into the exchange company inventory outside the trust FIRST, and then enabling a exchange company member to take something out of the trust...

It's a game of chicken and trust owners get the first move!!!

anyway you slice the legalese  Legacy points < Trust points.  This is wrong!!!  Especially after the skim!!!

Another fix is for MVCD is to give the opportunity for legacy week owner to do an equity exchange to convert to trust points.  The skim could be the fee for this???

At the end of the day Trust owners are real points players and legacy point users are still "exchangers" and get charged 5%-&% in the "skim" for the privilege...

Do you think the sales reps are telling purchasers they only own in 11 resorts, or they own resorts.  Keep in mind until 5 days ago, none of us had this figured out either.  This wasn't even considered here or in the speculation thread until Tiel's famous post #16....


----------



## pfrank4127

puckmanfl said:


> good evening...
> 
> *If trust owners own in the trust, Why can they dip into the exchange company inventory outside the trust FIRST, and then enabling a exchange company member to take something out of the trust...
> 
> It's a game of chicken and trust owners get the first move!!!
> 
> anyway you slice the legalese  Legacy points < Trust points.  This is wrong!!!*  Especially after the skim!!!
> 
> Another fix is for MVCD is to give the opportunity for legacy week owner to do an equity exchange to convert to trust points.  The skim could be the fee for this???
> 
> At the end of the day Trust owners are real points players and legacy point users are still "exchangers" and get charged 5%-&% in the "skim" for the privilege...
> 
> Do you think the sales reps are telling purchasers they only own in 11 resorts, or they own resorts.  Keep in mind until 5 days ago, none of us had this figured out either.  This wasn't even considered here or in the speculation thread until Tiel's famous post #16....



Could you please tell me where in the written documents this is, because I haven't been able to find it in writing.


----------



## DanCali

pfrank4127 said:


> Not really sure what you are trying to say in post #111; it seems to me you are pulling things out of context.  I copied the entire section not just the snippet from post #111.
> 
> II EXERCISE OF MEMBERSHIP PRIVILEGES; MEMBER’S DISTRIBUTION
> 
> A. *Trust Members*. This section only applies to Trust Members. Membership in the Program is not an appurtenance to Interests. In order to enjoy the benefits of Membership in the Program as a Trust Member, the Affiliate Program Manager and/or Association of your Affiliate Program must have voluntarily entered into an Affiliation Agreement with Exchange Company, where the Affiliate Program Manager and/or Association is a member of the Program. Trust Members must comply with all of the terms and conditions of Membership in the Program. During the term of the Affiliation Agreement, *Trust Members will have the right to reserve and use the Accommodations, facilities, services, and experiences that are a part of the Program or an Affiliate Program in accordance with these Exchange Procedures*. Unless otherwise provided pursuant to the applicable Affiliation Agreement, Trust Members have the right to reserve and use the Accommodations, facilities, services, and experiences that are a part of the Trust Member’s Affiliate Program in accordance with that Affiliate Program’s Affiliate Program Reservation System. If a Trust Member desires to use the Special Benefits that may be offered by Exchange Company from time to time, the Trust Member may voluntarily participate in the Program as described in these Exchange Procedures.
> Membership in the Program automatically terminates for a given Trust Member if the Trust Member voluntarily or involuntarily transfers the Trust Member’s Interest and owns no other Interest, or if the Trust Member’s Affiliate Program ceases to be affiliated with the Program because such Affiliate Program’s Affiliation Agreement is terminated or is not renewed.
> 
> B. *Exchange Members*. This section only applies to Exchange Members. Membership in the Program is not an appurtenance to Interests. In order to enjoy the benefits of Membership in the Program as an Exchange Member, an owner of an Interest must have voluntarily entered into an enrollment agreement with Exchange Company. Exchange Members must comply with all of the terms and conditions for Membership in the Program. *During the term of the Exchange Member’s enrollment agreement with Exchange Company and so long as an Exchange Member remains enrolled in the Program, Exchange Members will have the right to reserve and use the Accommodations, facilities, services, and experiences that are a part of the Program in accordance with these Exchange Procedures. **If an Exchange Member desires to use the Accommodations outside the Exchange Member’s Affiliate Program or access Special Benefits, from time to time, the Exchange Member may voluntarily participate in the Program described in the Disclosure Guide and these Exchange Procedures.*



The thing that made it seem like Trust Members and Exchange members were not equivalent are the statemnts I highlighted in red.

But I am not a lawyer to really know what this means...


----------



## puckmanfl

good evening....

Dioxide...

Let's take this hypothetical.  There are 100,000 deeds in the trust.  10,000 new purchasers purchase enough points for 1 unit each.  This leaves 90,000 unsold units in the trust.  MVCD still owns these.  MVCD can put these in the exchange company, leaving the 10,000 newly purchased available for reservations  by trust owners.  The owners have access for reservations with their owned inventory (10,000) units.  MVCD owns the other 90,000 + those converted by legacy owners for MR  and DC points. ALL of the MVCD inventory is then put in the exchange company to be made available by any points player with enuf points and status to make the reservation.

I hope this makes sense...


----------



## pfrank4127

DanCali said:


> The thing that made it seem like Trust Members and Exchange members were not equivalent are the statemnts I highlighted in red.
> 
> But I am not a lawyer to really know what this means...



I'm not a lawyer either and I'm often wrong so.....

But here goes anyhow, the Affiliate program that you have highlighted and underlined seems to be just a potential extra special that Marriott might offer in the future.  I copied the definition from the Marriott documents.

"*Affiliate Program* means a program of benefits and services, as they may exist from time to time, the operator of which has entered into an agreement with Exchange Company through which the Affiliate Program’s members participate in the Program. Participation in the Program is made available on a voluntary basis to Members of an Affiliate Program in accordance with the terms and conditions established by Exchange Company from time to time, in its sole and absolute discretion. Members have the right to reserve and use the Accommodations, facilities, services, and experiences that are a part of the Members’ Affiliate Program in accordance with the Affiliate Program Reservation System for that Member’s Affiliate Program. If a Member desires to use the Accommodations, facilities, services, and experiences that are a part of another Affiliate Program, the Member may voluntarily participate in the Program described in these Exchange Procedures."


----------



## puckmanfl

good evening...

Does that  anyone in TUG land believe Legacy points = Trust points???

If Legacy points < Trust points, regardless of the reason or legalese the system is flawed!!!

We will all find out on 7/26!!!

Please keep in mind that if I wanted points on day 1 (2004), I would have purchased elsewhere!!! I was quite happy in the old world.  I never asked for this, but since it was given to us, I desire for legacy owners to have the BEST of both worlds, not the worst!!!

One could make the argument that Trust owners only get to play one game while legacy owners play 2 (weeks or points) but the legacy owners are not the ones that decided for MVCD to stop selling weeks!!!  Besides, the skim is a big enough price to pay for two "games"


----------



## SueDonJ

puckmanfl said:


> good evening...
> 
> If trust owners own in the trust, Why can they dip into the exchange company inventory outside the trust FIRST, and then enabling a exchange company member to take something out of the trust...
> 
> It's a game of chicken and trust owners get the first move!!!
> 
> anyway you slice the legalese  Legacy points < Trust points.  This is wrong!!!  Especially after the skim!!!
> 
> Another fix is for MVCD is to give the opportunity for legacy week owner to do an equity exchange to convert to trust points.  The skim could be the fee for this???
> 
> *At the end of the day Trust owners are real points players and legacy point users are still "exchangers" and get charged 5%-&% in the "skim" for the privilege...*
> 
> Do you think the sales reps are telling purchasers they only own in 11 resorts, or they own resorts.  Keep in mind until 5 days ago, none of us had this figured out either.  This wasn't even considered here or in the speculation thread until Tiel's famous post #16....



Puck, I can't figure out if what you're saying here (where I bolded) is that you understand the fundamental difference between Destination Club purchasers and Enrolled Weeks owners, or if you're surprised to learn now that there is a fundamental difference.  Because there is!  New owners who purchase a beneficial interest in the Trust ARE "real points players," and Weeks owners who enroll in the Exchange Program ARE "exchangers."

Of course this doesn't help to explain at all the inventory controversy that we're discussing in this thread, or let Marriott off the hook for the way their reps are responding to questions about it.  But I'm wondering what it is that makes you think Trust Members and Exchange Members are supposed to be subject to the same rules and procedures, if that is what you think.


----------



## dioxide45

puckmanfl said:


> good evening....
> 
> Dioxide...
> 
> Let's take this hypothetical.  There are 100,000 deeds in the trust.  10,000 new purchasers purchase enough points for 1 unit each.  This leaves 90,000 unsold units in the trust.  MVCD still owns these.  MVCD can put these in the exchange company, leaving the 10,000 newly purchased available for reservations  by trust owners.  The owners have access for reservations with their owned inventory (10,000) units.  MVCD owns the other 90,000 + those converted by legacy owners for MR  and DC points. ALL of the MVCD inventory is then put in the exchange company to be made available by any points player with enuf points and status to make the reservation.
> 
> I hope this makes sense...



Yes, this makes sense. Marriott would just be bulk banking points in to the exchange company. I think I referenced this in my cookies and marbles scenario. Marriott doesn't want those trust cookies to go uneaten and spoil.


----------



## pfrank4127

puckmanfl said:


> good evening...
> 
> *Does that  anyone in TUG land believe Legacy points = Trust points???
> 
> If Legacy points < Trust points, regardless of the reason or legalese the system is flawed!!!*
> 
> We will all find out on 7/26!!!
> 
> Please keep in mind that if I wanted points on day 1 (2004), I would have purchased elsewhere!!! I was quite happy in the old world.  I never asked for this, but since it was given to us, I desire for legacy owners to have the BEST of both worlds, not the worst!!!
> 
> One could make the argument that Trust owners only get to play one game while legacy owners play 2 (weeks or points) but the legacy owners are not the ones that decided for MVCD to stop selling weeks!!!  Besides, the skim is a big enough price to pay for two "games"



The funny or sad thing is I don't care;  I only really care is if I use points can I get the reservation I want.  If I get it then that will make me happy.  Marriott can pull the inventory from Mars for all I care.


----------



## puckmanfl

good evening...

Amen, all any of us want is today's vacations at yesterdays prices ( what we initially purchased)...We also want fair and verifiable rules that are clear!!!

This all started when my guru explained to me why I should NOT expect to get the reservations I want on 7/26...  I asked Why? and was sent down this path!!!

It is important for legacy owners to know this before they irreversibly convert a week to points...  Makes it even more important to hold on to your legacy week and ONLY convert if the inventory you desire is availabilty...

An educated player always performs better.  TUG has improved my "game"!!!!


----------



## bobcat

tombo said:


> If the big boys take all of the good cookies out of the little boys cookie jar, Marriott can fill the little boy's jar back up with crumbs from the big boy's jar, and as long as the total volume of the little boy's cookie jar remains the same everything is equal.
> 
> It actually isn't the same as we all know. One 6000 point Hawaii week taken out of the little boys cookie jar does not really equal six 1000 point shoulder weeks deposited to replace it, but it is supposed to according to points rules.



All I can say is keep your weeks. Also, let Marriott and sales team know you are not happy with the new program. As I said before, If owners do not give up their weeks, the pool for points at resorts will be small. Marriott said they were looking at 20 per  cent of owners moving to points.  We will keep our week. Whenever I have a problem with a Marriott resort or hotel I let them know about it. I always receive an answer. They do not like to receive complaints. The last hotel we had a problem. We did not spend any money at that hotel. They wanted to know why the charge was only 54.00. I told them I did not like the way we were treated and refused to spend at their hotel. I received an answer fast to my complaint. I even was given a complaint number to follow thru.


----------



## DanCali

pfrank4127 said:


> I'm not a lawyer either and I'm often wrong so.....
> 
> But here goes anyhow, the Affiliate program that you have highlighted and underlined seems to be just a potential extra special that Marriott might offer in the future.  I copied the definition from the Marriott documents.
> 
> "*Affiliate Program* means a program of benefits and services, as they may exist from time to time, the operator of which has entered into an agreement with Exchange Company through which the Affiliate Program’s members participate in the Program...



I think the Affiliate Program is not something futuristic... I think it is whatever bucket the enrolled weeks are in. I am basing this based on the statement below (now also highlghted in green in my previous post)

B. Exchange Members. This section only applies to Exchange Members. Membership in the Program is not an appurtenance to Interests. In order to enjoy the benefits of Membership in the Program as an Exchange Member, an owner of an Interest must have voluntarily entered into an enrollment agreement with Exchange Company. Exchange Members must comply with all of the terms and conditions for Membership in the Program. During the term of the Exchange Member’s enrollment agreement with Exchange Company and so long as an Exchange Member remains enrolled in the Program, Exchange Members will have the right to reserve and use the Accommodations, facilities, services, and experiences that are a part of the Program in accordance with these Exchange Procedures.* If an Exchange Member desires to use the Accommodations outside the Exchange Member’s Affiliate Program or access Special Benefits, from time to time, the Exchange Member may voluntarily participate in the Program described in the Disclosure Guide and these Exchange Procedures.*Given this interpretation, if you read the statement that says Trust Members can reserve in the Program AND Affiliate program it makes it sound they can reserve in both buckets...

*Trust Members will have the right to reserve and use the Accommodations, facilities, services, and experiences that are a part of the Program or an Affiliate Program in accordance with these Exchange Procedures.*

This is pretty much the extent of my interpretation...


----------



## DanCali

SueDonJ said:


> Puck, I can't figure out if what you're saying here (where I bolded) is that you understand the fundamental difference between Destination Club purchasers and Enrolled Weeks owners, or if you're surprised to learn now that there is a fundamental difference.  Because there is!  New owners who purchase a beneficial interest in the Trust ARE "real points players," and Weeks owners who enroll in the Exchange Program ARE "exchangers."
> 
> Of course this doesn't help to explain at all the inventory controversy that we're discussing in this thread, or let Marriott off the hook for the way their reps are responding to questions about it.  But I'm wondering what it is that makes you think Trust Members and Exchange Members are supposed to be subject to the same rules and procedures, if that is what you think.



Susan - you make it sound like it's obvious that Legacy points need to trade inventory with trust points. Until a couple of days ago everyone here was convinced that points are points. Nobody envisioned that they were going to trade inventory with the trust or that retail points are different ("better") than legacy points. In fact, why would they make you buy 1000 more points if you can't access the same inventory with your legacy points...?

If the story now is that the system is built that legacy points are inferior (or let's say unequal) to trust points, people have the right to be upset about that. Nobody had a clue it would work that way until very recently. Why would a resale buyer pay $2K to go from one asterisk to another? Why would a retail owner pay just so they can become a second class point owner?

If this is how the system is built Mariott should be the one paying us to enroll...


----------



## kedler

Clemson Fan said:


> Excellent post!!!
> 
> After reading this whole thread  along with reading a lot of the other stuff here over the past 3 weeks, I think you're interpretation of legaleze is right on the money!
> 
> I think the reason everybody is getting conflicting answers from Marriott is because the reps haven't been trained that well and they're frankly just pulling stuff out of their a$$.  The sales folks are even worse because they will twist things whichever way suits them best in order to try and make a sale, and this confusion allows them to get away with some of this crapola.
> 
> I'm in complete agreement with kedler and IMO this entire thread is much to do about nothing! :zzz:


Thanks!!!!


----------



## SueDonJ

DanCali said:


> Susan - you make it sound like it's obvious that Legacy points need to trade inventory with trust points. Until a couple of days ago everyone here was convinced that points are points. Nobody envisioned that they were going to trade inventory with the trust or that retail points are different ("better") than legacy points. In fact, why would they make you buy 1000 more points if you can't access the same inventory with your legacy points...?
> 
> If the story now is that the system is built that legacy points are inferior (or let's say unequal) to trust points, people have the right to be upset about that. Nobody had a clue it would work that way until very recently. Why would a resale buyer pay $2K to go from one asterisk to another? Why would a retail owner pay just so they can become a second class point owner?
> 
> If this is how the system is built Mariott should be the one paying us to enroll...



I'm not sure why anybody would think "points are points" and not think the inventory needs to be accounted for somehow - that's certainly not an impression I had of anyone's position a few days ago.  And I'm not trying to make it sound obvious at all that we should know how the inventory will be accessed by Trust Members or enrolled Exchange Members - I've said a number of times that there isn't enough substantiation in the docs for us to form a definitive answer without some kind of official statement from Marriott.

When the other thread and then this one really got rolling yesterday, my concern wasn't so much the issues of how inventory would be accounted for between the two groups of owners, but rather that some Marriott reps were quoted saying that enrolled Exchange Members would have NO access to Trust inventory, ever.  I honestly don't know how we could expect that the two different ownership groups would be subject to the same rules and procedures - the one thing the docs do make clear is that there are provisions which apply to only one or the other.  But no Trust access ever for exchanges by Enrolled Weeks owners?  That made no sense then, and still doesn't.

The fact that a Wait List provision is included in the Exchange Procedures led me to believe that exchanges would not always be available instantly, which naturally leads to expectations of some kind of inventory allocation.  I still don't know for certain how the inventory will be allocated but I suspect, as do others here, that Exchange Members will have access to Trust inventory whenever Trust Members exchange to non-Trust inventory or for Marriott Rewards Points or for other Destination Club options, etc...  And I don't believe that the points inventory in the Trust that will be available to Exchange Members is going to be affixed to a certain interval prior to an exchange request being made - I think it will be (as someone else here said so much more clearly) on a points-in-points-out basis.

Of course I could be totally wrong in thinking that this workable model is the one that Marriott will employ, just as wrong as anybody's conjectures in this thread are.  But there are some posts from others that back this set-up, and they're the ones I agree with.  Like everyone else, though, I want Marriott to step up and do the right thing here and make an official statement to clarify this issue - they never should have allowed their reps to be so completely unprepared or ill-informed which caused the contradictions in this thread.

As far as buying more Points and how that would mesh (or not) with the points allotted for enrolled week(s), I haven't given that any thought at all because I have no intention to buy more points.  My concern with it is only that, again, there have been two completely contradictory statements about it from several Marriott reps.  That's just not acceptable.

What I DO still believe, (and you'll say again that I'm a Marriott apologist, I'm sure) is that enrolling my Weeks was a good decision, despite the confusion.  For a relatively low cost I am gaining another usage option, however it ultimately works, while keeping access to all of the same usage options that are available to every un-enrolled Weeks owner.  And that's what has always been most important to me - getting the best usage value out of my purchases.


----------



## DanCali

SueDonJ said:


> What I DO still believe, (and you'll say again that I'm a Marriott apologist, I'm sure) is that enrolling my Weeks was a good decision, despite the confusion.  For a relatively low cost I am gaining another usage option, however it ultimately works, while keeping access to all of the same usage options that are available to every un-enrolled Weeks owner.  And that's what has always been most important to me - getting the best usage value out of my purchases.



You have so many point that geting skimmed 1500-2000 points probably doesn't affect you much. I still maintain you could do better exchanges in II if you bothered to learn that game, but you seem happier paying the hefty costs that comes with the (alleged) flexibily of the program.

I don't think you are a Marriott apologist for enrolling, but I am generally not an early adopter of anything (iPhone 4 - nuff said). I think it is premature for anyone to enroll in this program before they see how this works, especially with no imminent deadline (the only official deadline if Dec 31 to get 800 bonus points) and so many undisclosed issues. There is nothing wrong with waiting 12-18 months... If I don't have the itch to see the next James Cameron movie on day 1 at midnight, and I don't care if I buy the iPad on Christmas rather than now, then I certainly don't care if I'm there to make a reservation on July 26, but that's just me


----------



## SueDonJ

DanCali said:


> You have so many point that geting skimmed 1500-2000 points probably doesn't affect you much. I still maintain you could do better exchanges in II if you bothered to learn that game, but you seem happier paying the hefty costs that comes with the (alleged) flexibily of the program.
> 
> I don't think you are a Marriott apologist for enrolling, but I am generally not an early adopter of anything (iPhone 4 - nuff said). I think it is premature for anyone to enroll in this program before they see how this works, especially with no imminent deadline (the only official deadline if Dec 31 to get 800 bonus points) and so many undisclosed issues. There is nothing wrong with waiting 12-18 months... If I don't have the itch to see the next James Cameron movie on day 1 at midnight, and I don't care if I buy the iPad on Christmas rather than now, then I certainly don't care if I'm there to make a reservation on July 26, but that's just me



I couldn't care less about skim.  You think that's blasphemy, I know.     But "it is what it is," there's nothing I can do about it, and it makes no difference to me.  My first thought when it was mentioned 83 seconds after the docs were released on Jun 20th was "wtf" but right after that I looked at what I was getting along with the Points Charts for use.

As far as II, if I had been a recipient of that infamous survey I would have been one of the folks screaming, "give me something, anything!, that isn't II!"  I don't like it.  I don't like searching, I don't like not knowing until check-in which view we'll get, I don't like that they don't have uniform procedures for every user and that you have to be one of the "chosen few" to take advantage of their unpublished perks.  The only thing I really do like about II is Getaways and hopefully we'll have access to them as Enrolled Weeks owners but if we don't ... oh well.

On July 26th I'll be trying to do something with my points to match up to a 6/18/11 week that's already booked, so I wanted to be enrolled for that.  Even without the timing, though, I probably wouldn't have waited.  Patience isn't one of my virtues.


----------



## SueDonJ

PS Dan, totally unrelated to this --

If you're saying that you are an early iPhone4 buyer, do you know Apple is having a press conference tomorrow?  9 or 10AM I think?  My 25-yo is an Apple junkie and his iPhone4 is the very first Apple product that's made him curse.  He's thinking that they'll announce tomorrow that the bumper (?) which has been priced at $30 will be given freely to all iPhone4 buyers.  Check it out ...


----------



## DanCali

SueDonJ said:


> PS Dan, totally unrelated to this --
> 
> If you're saying that you are an early iPhone4 buyer, do you know Apple is having a press conference tomorrow?  9 or 10AM I think?  My 25-yo is an Apple junkie and his iPhone4 is the very first Apple product that's made him curse.  He's thinking that they'll announce tomorrow that the bumper (?) which has been priced at $30 will be given freely to all iPhone4 buyers.  Check it out ...



I buy my phones unlocked at full retail price so no iPhone for me. I'm actually more excited about the Nokia N8 coming out than the latest iPhone. Even if I was an Apple fanatic (which I'm not) I wouldn't buy any of their products on day one. In fact, I'd wait 6-12 months for them to come out with a better one at a lower price. So even if I was ecstatic about the points program, I would not rush to enroll and don't think anyone should.

Apple has good products but is a very arrogant company and it's evidenced by the recent debacle. As for their press conference, if they think a $30 piece of plastic will make this go away, they may be in for a surpise - but that's a topic for th TUG lounge...


----------



## puckmanfl

good morning

Sue...

Yes, I admit it!!!  I read all 2700 posts in the speculation thread.  On 6/20 I looked at the website new.  I watched "sophie" the cute MVCD rep in the "ease of use" videos.  I actually read the enrollment documents (painful stuff).  I don't know from timeshare laws etc.  I am just a poor sap who put out good money for a vacation product, which I have loved so far...  I learn about all of the advantages of points.  I listen to the "shpiel" about having it ALL.


Yes, I thought points were points.   So did everyone else here!!!!

BocaBum said it correctly.  There has to be legal ways to ensure 1 pool of points inventory.  I have outlined some MCVD doesn't want to!

I do not believe for a second that if I just stay in weeks, nothing changes.  II inventory has to diminish.  It is almost a physical certainty.  Thus the creation of this boondoggle, enhances opportunities for trust owners at the expense of legacy owners!!

At the end of the day, weeks usage diminishes and the legacy owner doesn't get ALL of the points benefits.

Legacy points < Trust points.

I am not happy about it.  I will test drive on 7/26 to try and make it work just as you are doing  but I will scream from the rooftops in the process...


----------



## windje2000

I have no experience with points and I am currently in wait and see mode, and mostly lurking on this thread.

One question to ponder - Is the point rental market going to be considerably more complicated than some anticipated if there are two classes of points?  With maybe two prices?  And . . . etc.


----------



## kedler

DanCali said:


> I think the Affiliate Program is not something futuristic... I think it is whatever bucket the enrolled weeks are in. I am basing this based on the statement below (now also highlghted in green in my previous post)
> 
> B. Exchange Members. This section only applies to Exchange Members. Membership in the Program is not an appurtenance to Interests. In order to enjoy the benefits of Membership in the Program as an Exchange Member, an owner of an Interest must have voluntarily entered into an enrollment agreement with Exchange Company. Exchange Members must comply with all of the terms and conditions for Membership in the Program. During the term of the Exchange Member’s enrollment agreement with Exchange Company and so long as an Exchange Member remains enrolled in the Program, Exchange Members will have the right to reserve and use the Accommodations, facilities, services, and experiences that are a part of the Program in accordance with these Exchange Procedures.* If an Exchange Member desires to use the Accommodations outside the Exchange Member’s Affiliate Program or access Special Benefits, from time to time, the Exchange Member may voluntarily participate in the Program described in the Disclosure Guide and these Exchange Procedures.*Given this interpretation, if you read the statement that says Trust Members can reserve in the Program AND Affiliate program it makes it sound they can reserve in both buckets...
> 
> *Trust Members will have the right to reserve and use the Accommodations, facilities, services, and experiences that are a part of the Program or an Affiliate Program in accordance with these Exchange Procedures.*
> 
> This is pretty much the extent of my interpretation...


The Exchange Members' Affiliate Program is MVC - our right to reserve our week in accordance with our deeded interest and pursuant to all the existing rules, terms and conditions.

The Trust Member's Affiliate Program is the MVCD Trust Plan/Agreement - the right to reserve, use and occupy Trust Property in accordance with their deeded interest and pursuant to all the terms and conditions of the Trust Plan.

If either side wants to make reservations outside their Affiliate Program they need to use one or more exchange companies - MEC or II. 

The average Trust or Exchange member will not understand any of this information but will just call up Marriott (or eventually go on the internet) to make an internal reservation or use II to make an external reservation.

Trust members don't have to pay an enrollment fee in MEC they are automatically enrolled and Club Dues are paid for one year.

Exchange members have to "enroll" if they want to use MEC to get the best (or worst depending on your point of view) of both worlds. 

TUG Members torture ourselves in an attempt to understand the system well enough to use it to maximum advantage! Frankly IMO only time and lots of posted information from people using the system when it goes live will really tell us how well the MEC Program works.

We enrolled and bought points because we think its right for our vacation needs. We know there are flaws in the system but the pros out weighted the cons for us. 

We, like many others, will see how it works on 7/26 when I try to make a reservation for 2011. I'll post my experiences with the MEC program when I get a reservation.


----------



## MikeM132

DanCali said:


> At the extreme - if there are no trust points owners yet (so no exchanges from trust), and Marriott sticks by the rules they defined, and you are the only person converting in a given year then you have access to zero inventory in points?



Good question. I had the same one. In this extreme case, a legacy person converts to points which are useless because there is nothing to spend them on. In theory, I guess, the only week "deposited" for points is his own, which, due to skim, he does not have enough points to buy back.  I have to think this is not legal and because of that there is no way Marriott creates this 2-class points pool. Imagine the problem for Marriott if an owner could show he paid a fee to "enroll" his weeks for points and now was given NOTHING. 
 I honestly believe this entire argument is hysteria over nothing.


----------



## BocaBum99

windje2000 said:


> I have no experience with points and I am currently in wait and see mode, and mostly lurking on this thread.
> 
> One question to ponder - Is the point rental market going to be considerably more complicated than some anticipated if there are two classes of points?  With maybe two prices?  And . . . etc.



It shouldn't be.  WorldMark has at least 3 different types of Credits and it is very easy to manage and track.

However, in WorldMark, credits are credits.

What isn't clear is if you are a legacy points owner.   Will your account be able to accept Trust points?

We need to understand the rules for how points can be combined for usage.

Marriott has some explaining to do.  I'll bet the executives that approved this program doesn't know the answers to these questions either.  The probably went into a room with a bunch of developers, gave the very high level direction they wanted to go and said "call me when it's done"

The way this program looks to be implemented is absolutely crazy.


----------



## Ricci

I was the OP of the original thread that infamously took a turn at post #16.  
When we were at the presentation at MCV, and after we refused to buy points or enroll our weeks, we had to sign a document that states we could not enroll our weeks later if we changed our mind.  It was now or never.
I HATE this tactic and simply made it easier to decline.

Diamond Resorts has the same policy and we declined their program as well.


----------



## camachinist

What would have happened if you had told them to f*ck off and just walked out? Try it sometime. Crazy is in 


> When we were at the presentation at MCV, and after we refused to buy points or enroll our weeks, we had to sign a document that states we could not enroll our weeks later if we changed our mind. It was now or never.


----------



## Cindala

Ricci said:


> I was the OP of the original thread that infamously took a turn at post #16.
> When we were at the presentation at MCV, and after we refused to buy points or enroll our weeks, we had to sign a document that states we could not enroll our weeks later if we changed our mind.  It was now or never.
> I HATE this tactic and simply made it easier to decline.
> 
> Diamond Resorts has the same policy and we declined their program as well.



Seriously??? Now I'm glad we refused to even attend the points presentation on our recent trip to MGC. It doesn't seem like this is legal to force you to sign a document saying you could never change your mind. Un-American!


----------



## Ricci

camachinist said:


> What would have happened if you had told them to f*ck off and just walked out? Try it sometime. Crazy is in



:hysterical:


----------



## camachinist

> What isn't clear is if you are a legacy points owner. Will your account be able to accept Trust points?



IMO, looking at the interface, it's unclear how the 'My Points' section will handle and combine or delineate enrolled points from trust points. My bet is there is some methodology to operate with *both* point types from that control panel. I say that because of the constant delineation between 'Vacation Club Points Owner' and 'Enrolled Owner' in most areas of the control panel.


----------



## musical2

DanCali said:


> It is not the same thing because your exchanges depend on their exchanges.
> 
> If the trust points owners have enough inventory in the trust to get where they want to go you cannot get their inventory even if they have an exchange you want and can't get otherwise. Suppose, at the extreme, they all bank their points to next year - then the way the rules were set up you can't access their inventory this year even if they have what you want.
> 
> On the other hand, once you redeem for points in a given year, they have access to your week even if you haven't used them at all yet. Suppose you bank your points to next year - they can access your week this year.
> 
> See the difference?



I don't buy that.  It seems to me that once the trust deposits points into the exchange to get one of the "weeks" inventory, I would have access to those trust points to use in the trust inventory.  Thus, it still seems to be the same.


----------



## MikeZ

*MY answer from Marriott*

After to days of research and supervisor interventions, this is the response that I received this morning.  It supports the majority of the posters here.  I think the "cookie jar" analogy is the best representation of what we are in for, if we enroll.  Sorry, "points are points" just isn't accurate...

_Good Morning,

I hope this answers your question, regarding how the inventory works between the Marriott Vacation Club Destinations program and the Weeks program, there are 3 types of inventory:

Weeks Inventory: The inventory set aside for Weeks Owners and Enrolled Owners who have purchased the traditional Weeks program at a specific resort. This inventory is only accessible to those Owners who own weeks.

Trust Inventory: The inventory set aside for Vacation Club Points Owners who have purchased in the Trust. Only Vacation Club Point Owners have access to this inventory.

Exchange Inventory: Inventory is added when Enrolled Owners elect to exchange for Vacation Club Points. Also, when a Vacation Club Points Owner reserves inventory from the Exchange Inventory, Trust inventory will be added to the Exchange Inventory in an equal value. Both Enrolled Owners who elect and Vacation Club Points Owners have access to the Exchange Inventory.

Please let me know if you have further questions._


----------



## CMF

Ricci said:


> I was the OP of the original thread that infamously took a turn at post #16.
> When we were at the presentation at MCV, and after we refused to buy points or enroll our weeks, we had to sign a document that states we could not enroll our weeks later if we changed our mind.  It was now or never.
> I HATE this tactic and simply made it easier to decline.
> 
> Diamond Resorts has the same policy and we declined their program as well.




This is lunacy. It deserves a thread of it's own.

Charles


----------



## puckmanfl

good afternoon

musical

the difference is subtle but real...

Trust owners have access to ALL point inventory( Trust and exchange company).  A legacy owner has access to exchange company and then TRUST inventory corresponding to any inventory taken from the Exchange company

For example..
100,000 units in trust.. + 20,000 legacy units in exchange
today 7/16 there are 1000 trust owners...
each one of of these owners has the"run of the house" for the 120,000 units in the point inventory.
A trust owner takes a leagacy week from the exchange company (1 unit)
ALL legacy owners have access to the point equivalent of that ONE unit...
not the 100,000 in the trust!!!

Trust owners have access to 120,000 units, legacy has access to 20,001



of course these are simplistic exaggerations to make the point!!!


----------



## 5infam

MikeZ said:


> After to days of research and supervisor interventions, this is the response that I received this morning.  It supports the majority of the posters here.  I think the "cookie jar" analogy is the best representation of what we are in for, if we enroll.  Sorry, "points are points" just isn't accurate...
> 
> _Good Morning,
> 
> I hope this answers your question, regarding how the inventory works between the Marriott Vacation Club Destinations program and the Weeks program, there are 3 types of inventory:
> 
> Weeks Inventory: The inventory set aside for Weeks Owners and Enrolled Owners who have purchased the traditional Weeks program at a specific resort. This inventory is only accessible to those Owners who own weeks.
> 
> Trust Inventory: The inventory set aside for Vacation Club Points Owners who have purchased in the Trust. Only Vacation Club Point Owners have access to this inventory.
> 
> Exchange Inventory: Inventory is added when Enrolled Owners elect to exchange for Vacation Club Points. Also, when a Vacation Club Points Owner reserves inventory from the Exchange Inventory, Trust inventory will be added to the Exchange Inventory in an equal value. Both Enrolled Owners who elect and Vacation Club Points Owners have access to the Exchange Inventory.
> 
> Please let me know if you have further questions._



Thanks Mike!

I guess if we as weeks owners, convert to points and put our week in, then how do they figure out what to put in from the trust? If trust points were tied to a specific home resort, then I guess it would look like II does today, but since it is anything, do they just put in for what they have requests for? Can't figure out how that is going to work in my brain yet - I guess I am still thinking weeks and not points.


----------



## GregT

*Who gets the Week?*

I'm reluctant to add further turbulence to this issue, but it does present a fundamental question:

Who gets a rare week first?

Assume for a moment that a July 4th NCV week is very desirable (and it is).

Let's assume the following have all requested that tough trade:

1) Premier legacy point owner who submitted exchange request on August 1, 2011
2) Premier Plus Trust Point owner who submitted identical exchange request on September 1, 2011
3) Interval International member who submitted exchange request in II on July 1, 2011 and has extremely strong deposit available

Then assume that the owner of the actual week deposits their July 4, 2012 NCV reservation into Interval International on September 15, 2011 -- which could match all three trade requests.

Unless Marriott points (or more importantly the week that Marriott offers in exchange) are very very strong traders in II, I would think the week would go to #3 above.

However, if Marriott points are very very strong traders in II, and we know that Marriott can make trades with II by making comparable exchanges (maybe they offer a summer Kauai Lagoons because they have KL to burn and it's scarce/strong to II), then Marriott gets the NCV week.

So, now Marriott has the NCV week -- who gets it, #1 or #2?  Is it the person who requested first?  Or the person with Trust Points (and Premier Plus?)

And, bummer for #3 above, because now they have to keep waiting (and may still sit behind #1/#2 that didn't get the trade).

There is much we will learn about the trading process and the pecking order, but like Puck, I'm not loving the the hypothesis: 

Legacy Points < Trust Points

Good luck to all,

Greg


----------



## GregT

MikeZ said:


> After to days of research and supervisor interventions, this is the response that I received this morning.  It supports the majority of the posters here.  I think the "cookie jar" analogy is the best representation of what we are in for, if we enroll.  Sorry, "points are points" just isn't accurate...
> 
> _Good Morning,
> 
> I hope this answers your question, regarding how the inventory works between the Marriott Vacation Club Destinations program and the Weeks program, there are 3 types of inventory:
> 
> Weeks Inventory: The inventory set aside for Weeks Owners and Enrolled Owners who have purchased the traditional Weeks program at a specific resort. This inventory is only accessible to those Owners who own weeks.
> 
> Trust Inventory: The inventory set aside for Vacation Club Points Owners who have purchased in the Trust. Only Vacation Club Point Owners have access to this inventory.
> 
> Exchange Inventory: Inventory is added when Enrolled Owners elect to exchange for Vacation Club Points. Also, when a Vacation Club Points Owner reserves inventory from the Exchange Inventory, Trust inventory will be added to the Exchange Inventory in an equal value. Both Enrolled Owners who elect and Vacation Club Points Owners have access to the Exchange Inventory.
> 
> Please let me know if you have further questions._



Wow, we legacy point owners are the red headed step child.


----------



## puckmanfl

good morning

It's worse than that. Inventory from the trust does not go in exchange pool for legacy owners UNTIL a trust owner pulls something out of exchange company.  It will most likely be "point for point"...

A trust owner pulls a ski week in Park city from exchange company. MVCD can take 6 (1000 dog weeks from the trust) and put them in exchange company for legacy owners to grab

Is everyone gettingthe negative ramifications now..


A legacy owner converts a week to points, gets skimmed %5-10% in the process and gets a substandard point for his troubles!!!!

yikes...

yikes, after the 7/26 test drive back to weeks for me!!!!


----------



## puckmanfl

good afternoon

Dan said it best....

some poor resale owner is going to pay 2K, to go from one asterisk to another...


----------



## SueDonJ

5infam said:


> Thanks Mike!
> 
> I guess if we as weeks owners, convert to points and put our week in, then how do they figure out what to put in from the trust? If trust points were tied to a specific home resort, then I guess it would look like II does today, but since it is anything, do they just put in for what they have requests for? Can't figure out how that is going to work in my brain yet - I guess I am still thinking weeks and not points.



I don't think it's a pre-determined interval that moves from the Trust to the Exchange Company when a Trust Member uses Points to exchange out - I think it's as Dioxide said, the first request from an Exchange Member with enough Points to book an equal or less-than (in Point value, not Week value) interval will get what s/he's requesting.


----------



## BocaBum99

MikeZ said:


> After to days of research and supervisor interventions, this is the response that I received this morning.  It supports the majority of the posters here.  I think the "cookie jar" analogy is the best representation of what we are in for, if we enroll.  Sorry, "points are points" just isn't accurate...
> 
> _Good Morning,
> 
> I hope this answers your question, regarding how the inventory works between the Marriott Vacation Club Destinations program and the Weeks program, there are 3 types of inventory:
> 
> Weeks Inventory: The inventory set aside for Weeks Owners and Enrolled Owners who have purchased the traditional Weeks program at a specific resort. This inventory is only accessible to those Owners who own weeks.
> 
> Trust Inventory: The inventory set aside for Vacation Club Points Owners who have purchased in the Trust. Only Vacation Club Point Owners have access to this inventory.
> 
> Exchange Inventory: Inventory is added when Enrolled Owners elect to exchange for Vacation Club Points. Also, when a Vacation Club Points Owner reserves inventory from the Exchange Inventory, Trust inventory will be added to the Exchange Inventory in an equal value. Both Enrolled Owners who elect and Vacation Club Points Owners have access to the Exchange Inventory.
> 
> Please let me know if you have further questions._



This appears to be emerging as the correct answer to the question of inventory pools.

It is absolutely lunacy to manage it this way.  

The hardest thing to figure out is the algorithm for what gets transferred between the Trust pool and the Exchange pool.  Is it done week for week?  Point for point?  Request first?  Deposit first?

What happens when an enrolled member wants only 3 nights from a week at Marco island?  Does only the 3 nights get moved to exchange inventory?  Or, does a whole week get moved to exchange to fulfill the request?
Where does the other 4 days of inventory go?  And, does it happen only after a Trust owner takes a week out?

This is the most ludicrously designed points system ever.  Marriott forces an answer to how inventory pools can interact instead of putting all inventory in one pool and set rules for when it can be reserved.

This whole 2 inventory pool issue could have been easily solved by having 1 inventory pool and allowing Trust points to have something like a 30-day exclusive window into the inventory.

The way Marriott has designed this system is that it is creating a point system that takes away one of the greatest benefits of a point system which is the predictability of inventory.


----------



## GregT

puckmanfl said:


> good morning
> 
> It's worse than that. Inventory from the trust does not go in exchange pool for legacy owners UNTIL a trust owner pulls something out of exchange company.  It will most likely be "point for point"...
> 
> A trust owner pulls a ski week in Park city from exchange company. MVCD can take 6 (1000 dog weeks from the trust) and put them in exchange company for legacy owners to grab
> 
> Is everyone gettingthe negative ramifications now..
> 
> 
> A legacy owner converts a week to points, gets skimmed %5-10% in the process and gets a substandard point for his troubles!!!!
> 
> yikes...
> 
> yikes, after the 7/26 test drive back to weeks for me!!!!




This sounds like exactly what Wyndham would do.    

Very sad, I remember the days (only 30 days ago) when I thought Marriott would do the right thing by its customers.

Now, we've got skimming, and Legacy Points < Trust Points.

Very disappointing.


----------



## GregT

BocaBum99 said:


> The hardest thing to figure out is the algorithm for what gets transferred between the Trust pool and the Exchange pool.  Is it done week for week?  Point for point?  Request first?  Deposit first?



Boca, what's tough is that at least with II trades, it was an independent company, and you could expect that II would only accept a comparably powered week if it is surrenduring a week to Marriott.

Now, however who watches over the fairness of trades between the Trust Points Inventory and the Legacy Points Inventory?   There's no transparency, and we have lost confidence in Marriott's judgment/fairness/treatment of existing owners.

It would be very very easy to manipulate/abuse this and transfer the valuable weeks from the Legacy Points Inventory into the Trust Points Inventory and get back who knows what?

Wow Wow Wow Wow Wow.  I am blown away.


----------



## DanCali

musical2 said:


> I don't buy that.  It seems to me that once the trust deposits points into the exchange to get one of the "weeks" inventory, I would have access to those trust points to use in the trust inventory.  Thus, it still seems to be the same.



But it's not...

Trust owners have priority because they can access enrolled weeks inventory at will. You can only access trust inventory after they make an exchange and are limited to that. 

If they have a week you need but trust owners use only trust inventory for their reservations you're out of luck. If you have a week they need they can grab it anytime, even if enrolled weeks were to trade only among themselves (in the latter example, one enrolled week member may be forced to roll points over because a trust member took a redeemed legacy week).

Will Marriott make it more seamless than that? I would hope so... but that doesn't change the underlying system and that at some point this will catch up to and bite legacy owners somewhere...


----------



## DanCali

5infam said:


> Thanks Mike!
> 
> I guess if we as weeks owners, convert to points and put our week in, then how do they figure out what to put in from the trust? If trust points were tied to a specific home resort, then I guess it would look like II does today, but since it is anything, do they just put in for what they have requests for? Can't figure out how that is going to work in my brain yet - I guess I am still thinking weeks and not points.



Yes, that is the point Tombo is screaming about. 6000 points can be a week in Hawaii or 6 Bronze weeks somewhere else.

According to the response MikeZ got:



> Also, when a Vacation Club Points Owner reserves inventory from the Exchange Inventory, Trust inventory will be added to the Exchange Inventory in an "equal value."


 - go figure what they mean by that...


----------



## SueDonJ

BocaBum99 said:


> This appears to be emerging as the correct answer to the question of inventory pools.
> 
> It is absolutely lunacy to manage it this way.
> 
> The hardest thing to figure out is the algorithm for what gets transferred between the Trust pool and the Exchange pool.  Is it done week for week?  Point for point?  Request first?  Deposit first?
> 
> What happens when an enrolled member wants only 3 nights from a week at Marco island?  Does only the 3 nights get moved to exchange inventory?  Or, does a whole week get moved to exchange to fulfill the request?
> Where does the other 4 days of inventory go?  And, does it happen only after a Trust owner takes a week out?
> 
> This is the most ludicrously designed points system ever.  Marriott forces an answer to how inventory pools can interact instead of putting all inventory in one pool and set rules for when it can be reserved.
> 
> This whole 2 inventory pool issue could have been easily solved by having 1 inventory pool and allowing Trust points to have something like a 30-day exclusive window into the inventory.
> 
> The way Marriott has designed this system is that it is creating a point system that takes away one of the greatest benefits of a point system which is the predictability of inventory.



Off in a little bit different direction ...

What if Marriott had introduced the Trust for Point sales as the new direction of their future timeshare business and the Enrollment option for Weeks owners to gain access to Trust inventory in some fashion as they have, but instead of introducing their own Exchange Company to handle the inventory they continued to use II as the exchange facilitator?

What would be different?  Better?  Worse?  I'm not understanding all the angst here - somebody has to be the Program Manager for exchanges between the two ownership groups.  Why are we expecting that Marriott's system will be any more cumbersome or difficult to navigate than II's would?  Especially as they're supplementing their own Exchange Company with II's in order to open up the inventory availability.

Would any of us have preferred that Marriott simply take their timeshare business in the new direction of Trust/Points for new owners, and NOT given Weeks owners the opportunity to become involved somehow?  I wouldn't.  I think like Puck says that Weeks inventory is diminished by the introduction of the Trust for new business and wouldn't want it to be my only option going forward, especially as Marriott has a means if they choose to use it to gain ownership of existing Weeks and deposit them into the Trust.

Just more to think about ...


----------



## hipslo

So my assumption is that all those who have always said that it would be perfectly acceptable for marriott to discriminate against resale owners should be ok with this, since legacy owners are not purchasing points from marriott.  Right? Shouldnt purchasers of points directly from marriott have advantages over those who haven't?


----------



## LAX Mom

Marriott has sold timeshares for 25+ years, many to individuals with a great deal of money invested with Marriott. These Marriott owners now have the option of enrolling in a new points program for a fee of $595 or $695 and will be treated as second class citizens with the new Marriott points program. 

This is almost unbelievable!!!! 

If I had paid Marriott $85,000 (or any amount) to purchase several timeshares I could be furious that I could only access the exchange inventory, not the trust inventory. What about new resorts (if and when Marriott ever builds anything), will legacy owners find it near impossible to exchange into new Marriott resorts? 

Is this the Marriott way to force legacy owners to purchase some additional points?

I wonder if Marriott didn't realize that this information about 3 buckets of inventory would be available to the owners?


----------



## SueDonJ

hipslo said:


> So my assumption is that all those who have always said that it would be perfectly acceptable for marriott to discriminate against resale owners should be ok with this, since legacy owners are not purchasing points from marriott.  Right? Shouldnt purchasers of points directly from marriott have advantages over those who haven't?



Just like with whatever advantages they've given to developer-direct buyers over external resale, and multi-week owners over single-week, and Platinum Elites over Gold over Silver in the MR program ... it is what it is.  Marriott has always determined for itself its priority customer, this is no different.

Not saying that those who feel like red-headed stepchildren don't have a right to those feelings here, just that IMO it doesn't serve any good purpose to foster those feelings.


----------



## auntdef

I have a very simple question and I apologize in advance if this is not the place to ask it. I have tried to keep up with all the info posted and am more confused then ever  

I own 2 EOY weeks at Waiohai and if I could not get a trade to another Marriott HI resort I would be very content staying at Waiohai for 2 weeks.

Will I have trouble booking my 2 weeks at my home resort of Waiohai if I don't join this new points system??? 

Our flexibility for 2012 & 2014 will be May thru August and December. 2016 and forward we will have total flexibility.

Many thanks in advance. 
Stephanie


----------



## SueDonJ

LAX Mom said:


> Marriott has sold timeshares for 25+ years, many to individuals with a great deal of money invested with Marriott. These Marriott owners now have the option of enrolling in a new points program for a fee of $595 or $695 and will be treated as second class citizens with the new Marriott points program.
> 
> This is almost unbelievable!!!!
> 
> If I had paid Marriott $85,000 (or any amount) to purchase several timeshares I could be furious that I could only access the exchange inventory, not the trust inventory. What about new resorts (if and when Marriott ever builds anything), will legacy owners find it near impossible to exchange into new Marriott resorts?
> 
> Is this the Marriott way to force legacy owners to purchase some additional points?
> 
> I wonder if Marriott didn't realize that this information about 3 buckets of inventory would be available to the owners?



But it isn't true that, "I could only access the exchange inventory, not the trust inventory."  As Trust Members exchange for Weeks intervals deposited to the Exchange Company and Marriott Rewards Points and other Destination Club options, the Trust inventory WILL be available to Exchange Members.

With II a Weeks owner does not have any access to any inventory that has not been deposited by another Weeks owner, right?  II didn't have any immediate inventory available on the day it was implemented, either.  And II has its own Priority system based on the values of what's deposited and what's requested.  So what's different here?

We only need to have clarified what the priority system will be and how inventory is allocated, and that will happen as the DC Exchange Program comes on-line.  Then we'll figure out how to work the system to our advantage the same way we had to learn II's.


----------



## DanCali

SueDonJ said:


> Off in a little bit different direction ...
> 
> What if Marriott had introduced the Trust for Point sales as the new direction of their future timeshare business and the Enrollment option for Weeks owners to gain access to Trust inventory in some fashion as they have, but instead of introducing their own Exchange Company to handle the inventory they continued to use II as the exchange facilitator?
> 
> What would be different?  Better?  Worse?  I'm not understanding all the angst here...
> 
> Would any of us have preferred that Marriott simply take their timeshare business in the new direction of Trust/Points for new owners, and NOT given Weeks owners the opportunity to become involved somehow?



But this whole "enrolling" is a sham because your points are not like points you buy retail... they charge you an enrollment fee for nothing. 

What exactly do you gain now by enrolling? Take an extreme example where Marriott priced retail points at $100/point and nothing sells... Do you gain anything by being enrolled in this scenario? In this case, you see none of the trust inventory and the only thing it allows you to do is downtrades with others who enrolled (and paid Marriott a hefty fee). Now suppose they actually do sell lots of points, but the Trust has sufficient inventory to satisfy them all and they don't need legacy inventory. You get the same result. The only way you get to see trust inventory is if your get to be the lackey for the trust and satisfy their overflow demand. That may take years and may never happen - but you do pay the initiation fee now.


----------



## kedler

From the My Vacation Club pages regarding Booking Vacations instructions for Enrolled Owners (there is a second link for VC Points Owners):

"When you elect to trade your Marriott Vacation Club week for Vacation Club Points, you will be able to reserve a vacation within the Marriott Vacation Club Collection 5, OR the World Traveler Collection 4; OR the Explorer Collection 3!"

When you click on #5 for Marriott Vacation Club Collection you get:

"The _Marriott Vacation Club Collection is comprised of timeshare interests owned by the MVC Trust and available for usage through the Marriott Vacation Club Destinations timeshare plan and timeshare interests available for usage through the MVC Exchange Company_; please see the applicable Marriott Vacation Club Destinations Exchange Program documents for more information. Resorts with property that comprise the MVC Trust are described in the documents provided at the time of sale, and more particularly on the exhibit entitled Component Site Chart, which may be revised from time to time. Request for occupancy at resorts with small amounts of property in the MVC Trust, as set forth in the Component Site Chart, will be fulfilled primarily through the Marriott Vacation Club Destinations Exchange Program. As of _6/20/2010, there are currently timeshare interests located at 11 resorts owned by the MVC Trust_ and those resorts are designated with the symbol . _As of 6/20/2010, there are currently 53 resorts, including the aforementioned 11 resorts, with timeshare interests available for exchange through the Marriott Vacation Club Destinations Exchange Program_, and those resorts are designated with the symbol . Please see the applicable Marriott Vacation Club Destinations Exchange Program documents for more information. " [emphasis supplied]

CONCLUSION: Enrolled (weeks) Owners can trade points for any MVC property subject to availability.

Under both VC Points Owners & Enrolled Owners:

When you are ready to reserve your vacation, just call your Vacation Ownership Advisor Team at (888) MVCI VOA (888-682-4862).

    * Vacations are available at 9 a.m. Eastern Time on the day the inventory is released, and may be confirmed on a first-come/first-served basis.
    * If the vacation is available, you will be confirmed instantly, it’s that simple!
    * If the vacation is not available, you may place your name on the Wait List. Click here to see the Wait List rules.

Regarding Availability:

"1 Marriott Vacation Club Destinations Exchange Program's ability to confirm a specific exchange request is dependent upon the timeshare interests and use periods available or as provided by the provider of accommodations or services. Therefore, Marriott Vacation Club Destinations Exchange Program cannot guarantee specific resort choices, dates of travel, or types or sizes of accommodations. The earlier an exchange is requested, the better the possibility that a specific request may be confirmed." 

CONCLUSION: We have to elect to use points v. weeks to get reservations "pure" VC Points Owners don't they only have points. Once we elect to use points the reservation process is the same for both owners. As far as what will be available that is anyone's guess!

We have more "options" (sales speak) than they do (after all we are able to reserve a week at our home resort and don't have to use points to exchange for a week at another MVC resort), but they may have "first dibs" (kid speak) on the property in the MVC Trust.


----------



## MikeZ

auntdef said:


> I have a very simple question and I apologize in advance if this is not the place to ask it. I have tried to keep up with all the info posted and am more confused then ever
> 
> I own 2 EOY weeks at Waiohai and if I could not get a trade to another Marriott HI resort I would be very content staying at Waiohai for 2 weeks.
> 
> Will I have trouble booking my 2 weeks at my home resort of Waiohai if I don't join this new points system???
> 
> Our flexibility for 2012 & 2014 will be May thru August and December. 2016 and forward we will have total flexibility.
> 
> Many thanks in advance.
> Stephanie



Stephanie, I believe that you should have no problem making your normal home resort reservations at Waiohai, regardless of whether or not you enroll in the program.


----------



## auntdef

Thank you Mike.
S.


----------



## BocaBum99

There is a partial way out of this mess if Marriott shows some intelligence.  Of course, given how this program was launched and designed, it is highly questionable whether or not they have smart people working on the project.

I think what Marriott could do is tag some of the inventory in the Trust as NOT available for exchange.  It would be the highest demand weeks in the trust which are going to be reserved for Trust owners.  Then, what they can do is make all of the rest of the Trust inventory available to all enrolled points owners.  In other words, all of this inventory can be seen by enrolled points owners.  The only thing left out is some units they know will be used by Trust owners.

Then, all they need to do is make sure that there is a rough balance of trade at the end of each quarter or year.  No super secret algorithm needs to be created to determine which units gets placed into exchange inventory.  The market of points owners decide the equilibrium point of trades between the inventory pool by the trades they make.

This is in essence what Bluegreen and Shell did when it created the Select Connections joint venture.  It is a points exchange facility where Bluegreen makes a portion of its real time inventory available to Shell owners and vice versa.  Bluegreen has a point table for Shell Resorts.  Shell has a point table for Bluegreen resorts.  It works pretty well.  Both sides give real time access to each others inventory.  Bluegreen takes out some resorts and some unit types and so does Shell.  It has access to all inventory, not just want gets traded.

This could work for Marriott.  I hope they thought of something like this if they have 2 inventory pools  If they did, then this isn't going to be too bad.  We will know when we can see the systems live.


----------



## SueDonJ

DanCali said:


> But this whole "enrolling" is a sham because your points are not like points you buy retail... they charge you an enrollment fee for nothing.
> 
> What exactly do you gain now by enrolling? Take an extreme example where Marriott priced retail points at $100/point and nothing sells... Do you gain anything by being enrolled in this scenario? In this case, you see none of the trust inventory and the only thing it allows you to do is downtrades with others who enrolled (and paid Marriott a hefty fee). Now suppose they actually do sell lots of points, but the Trust has sufficient inventory to satisfy them all and they don't need legacy inventory. You get the same result. The only way you get to see trust inventory is if your get to be the lackey for the trust and satisfy their overflow demand. That may take years and may never happen - but you do pay the initiation fee now.



Well, first, I find it hard to believe that there will not be inter-mingling of Trust and Enrolled Weeks inventory in the Exchange Program.  Consider that even if NO Trust Member ever wants an Enrolled or Un-enrolled Week as an exchange, any Trust Members' exchanges for Marriott Reward Points or other Destination Club options will result in Trust inventory being deposited into the Exchange Company.

But okay, lets go with your scenario that NO Trust inventory ever is made available by Trust Members to Exchange Members.

Then by enrolling now I would still get access to the fee structure for exchanging my Weeks through II, which is less than the fee structure if I do not enroll.  I would still get access to the other Destination Club options, as they exist now and as they develop in the future, including the ability to exchange to intervals which have been deposited in the Exchange Company by other Exchange Members.  I would still be able to use my Weeks at my home resort.

I think the better question is, what does an Exchange Member lose by enrolling now?  Considering that I believe what we all bought into, the Marriott Weeks system, no longer exists as it did prior to June 20th, we've all lost something.  Those who enroll now are "losing" our enrollment fees, but we're still gaining options that are not available if we do not enroll.


----------



## Cindala

BocaBum99 said:


> The hardest thing to figure out is the algorithm for what gets transferred between the Trust pool and the Exchange pool.  Is it done week for week?  Point for point?  Request first?  Deposit first?



That's the worst thing about all this....we won't be able to figure out where they are pulling their inventory from nor will we be able to prove where it's being pulled from or if it's correct or not. That's what Marriott is counting on; smoke and mirrors.


----------



## MikeM132

Ricci said:


> I was the OP of the original thread that infamously took a turn at post #16.
> When we were at the presentation at MCV, and after we refused to buy points or enroll our weeks, we had to sign a document that states we could not enroll our weeks later if we changed our mind.  It was now or never.
> I HATE this tactic and simply made it easier to decline.
> 
> Diamond Resorts has the same policy and we declined their program as well.



I'm giving you the benefit of doubt but ANYWHERE else on the internet I would accuse you of being a troll.


----------



## GregT

SueDonJ said:


> Well, first, I find it hard to believe that there will not be inter-mingling of Trust and Enrolled Weeks inventory in the Exchange Program.  Consider that even if NO Trust Member ever wants an Enrolled or Un-enrolled Week as an exchange, any Trust Members' exchanges for Marriott Reward Points or other Destination Club options will result in Trust inventory being deposited into the Exchange Company.
> 
> But okay, lets go with your scenario that NO Trust inventory ever is made available by Trust Members to Exchange Members.
> 
> Then by enrolling now I would still get access to the fee structure for exchanging my Weeks through II, which is less than the fee structure if I do not enroll.  I would still get access to the other Destination Club options, as they exist now and as they develop in the future, including the ability to exchange to intervals which have been deposited in the Exchange Company by other Exchange Members.  I would still be able to use my Weeks at my home resort.
> 
> I think the better question is, what does an Exchange Member lose by enrolling now?  Considering that I believe what we all bought into, the Marriott Weeks system, no longer exists as it did prior to June 20th, we've all lost something.  Those who enroll now are "losing" our enrollment fees, but we're still gaining options that are not available if we do not enroll.



Sue, I agree with you.

I also believe that the two pools will be functionally co-mingled, and therefore I expect most people will get the exchanges they want.  I think we are dealing with the previous expectation/belief that the Trust Inventory would be effectively be a bulk deposit that Legacy Points Members would be able to easily access -- we now suspect that there is a gatekeeper controlling that bulk deposit.  Even if we do get our trades this year, it is a little bit concerning if we will get it next year.

I also agree with your point on fees -- there is still a basis for enrollment for the fee reduction possibility, and importantly, to keep the options open to benefit from the system as it evolves (Flexchange, renting points, etc).  BocaBum is right that if you're in the system, you can figure out where the inventory is, and figure out how to get it most cost-effectively.

But it's getting even more difficult to rationalize ever actually redeeming weeks for points.  Why would I put my 3BR MOC in for (skimmed) points, and then take the chance that I will actually get the trade I want, if it's not immediately confirmable from the Trust?  

Best to all,

Greg


----------



## skimble

This is a long thread... so forgive if these points have already been brought up.
This resembles RCI Weeks to RCI Points transition in some ways:
1.  RCI skimmed Weeks to bolster Points.  It sounds like Marriott has been doing that. 
2.  RCI claimed that Points inventory was deposited into Weeks to offset those withdrawn.  This sounds like the legacy skim and the limited points weeks access legacy owners will have. 
3.  RCI rents a large portion of prime inventory.  There's no timeshare mini-system more apt, more prepared, and more able to rent than Marriott... and they can do it with ease and without justification.  They have direct websites, ties to Expedia and all the other hotel rental sites.  And, they can get premium $$ for it.  
Are they screwing the Marriott owners... yes and no.  Yes, legacy ownership changed, but you still have a tradeable ownership... but if it's like RCI, your access to decent trades are going to diminish slowly.


----------



## kedler

DanCali said:


> But this whole "enrolling" is a sham because your points are not like points you buy retail... they charge you an enrollment fee for nothing.
> 
> What exactly do you gain now by enrolling? Take an extreme example where Marriott priced retail points at $100/point and nothing sells... Do you gain anything by being enrolled in this scenario? In this case, you see none of the trust inventory and the only thing it allows you to do is downtrades with others who enrolled (and paid Marriott a hefty fee). Now suppose they actually do sell lots of points, but the Trust has sufficient inventory to satisfy them all and they don't need legacy inventory. You get the same result. The only way you get to see trust inventory is if your get to be the lackey for the trust and satisfy their overflow demand. That may take years and may never happen - but you do pay the initiation fee now.


The Trust Inventory presently consists of 11 out of 53 resorts. To think that all the Points Owners are just going to use the trust inventory and not want to go to the other 53 resorts does not make sense.

Prior to the release of the Points Program, and I think afterwards (I quit reading that thread) everyone was all agitated because we were afraid that the Points Owners were going to be able to take our weeks. People wanted two pools and now that people are realizing that there are three pools everyone is upset again.

Points or Weeks everyone gets a DEEDED interest in timeshare property - either a specific resort or a % of a MVC Property Trust.  If you deed a real estate interest you have to have a right to use that interest - legally - or the lawsuits would start flying starting with the State of FL suing Marriott. 

We can call up or go online and reserve our week. Nothing Marriott did changes that process so Marriott cannot give the Trust owners access to our weeks UNLESS we CHOOSE to give our week to Marriott's Exchange Company. Just as we chose to give our week to II in the past because Marriott did not have an internal exchange program. As I understand it many people were upset with II and wanted Marriott to develop at internal exchange program - there is a saying "be careful what you ask for you might just get it" that is applicable in this situation.

It makes sense that we don't have the right to use what the Points Owner bought unless the Points Owner CHOOSES to give us that right by exchanging points through Marriott's Exchange Company because that makes their rights = to our rights. WE each get to keep our deeded right and the other one can't have it unless we share!! MEC is the sandbox in which we all have to play nicely and Marriott is the referee!!

We also have a right to try to get internal week exchange through II without regard to points as we've always done (minus the fees) and Points owners do not have that right all their II requests are based on a Points chart.

All in all IMO Enrolled Owners > or = Points Owners


----------



## Fredm

kedler said:


> We can call up or go online and reserve our week. Nothing Marriott did changes that process so Marriott cannot give the Trust owners access to our weeks UNLESS we CHOOSE to give our week to Marriott's Exchange Company. Just as we chose to give our week to II in the past because Marriott did not have an internal exchange program. As I understand it many people were upset with II and wanted Marriott to develop at internal exchange program - there is a saying "be careful what you ask for you might just get it" that is applicable in this situation.
> 
> It makes sense that we don't have the right to use what the Points Owner bought unless the Points Owner CHOOSES to give us that right by exchanging points through Marriott's Exchange Company because that makes their rights = to our rights. WE each get to keep our deeded right and the other one can't have it unless we share!! MEC is the sandbox in which we all have to play nicely and Marriott is the referee!!
> 
> We also have a right to try to get internal week exchange through II without regard to points as we've always done (minus the fees) and Points owners do not have that right all their II requests are based on a Points chart.
> 
> All in all IMO Enrolled Owners > or = Points Owners



That's the way I look at it.


----------



## skimble

Marriott is just like all the rest... they care about:
1.  Maintaining Sales
2.  Filling units with paying (owners/customers.)  


To do these things in this economy, they have to make new ownership FAR greater to existing owners and new buyers.  The pot has to be SO much sweeter, you'll choose to change just to get back what you had 10 years ago. This is true for all the mini-systems.  
They must stifle the value of resales-- in a world where information abounds, resale timeshares are readily available.


----------



## SueDonJ

kedler, thanks so much for your posts - you have a good way of saying things so that they're easily understood, and it's very helpful to "read" you.

(I don't mean to imply that anyone else isn't as read-able or helpful, but for whatever reason kedler's posts resonate a little bit more with me.  YMMV)


----------



## MikeM132

I found this on another (ahem) website....some of you know where. It described useage of all Marriott units. From this, it appears "pure points" owners_ might_ have exclusive use of a pretty small block of units, all unsold. Unless I am missing something, Marriott can only sell points for available units (not sure about available seasons). If Grand Ocean is sold out for platinum, Marriott has nothing to sell there. They can only sell the number of platinum intervals they have at unsold (or future) resorts. Otherwise, they'd have sold the same interval twice. Even if just points in the trust, there must be an underlying interval there somewhere to be legal. At least that's how I understand it. Please take a look at the following (agree with it or not, supposedly came direct from Marriott) and see if you also conclude legacy owners dominate the inventory:

Some interesting numbers from a Marriott rep:

  27% of Inventory each year is kept by owners staying in their home club.   This is the ONLY inventory you do not have access to. 

  43% of Inventory will be those who exchange into Interval or elect   points for the year. As an enrolled owner, you have access to both of   these pools - exchanged II weeks from owners who don't enroll and   Elected Weeks.

  21% of Inventory will come from owners who trade for Marriott Rewards   Points

  9% of Inventory will be all unsold weeks (and delinquent weeks).


----------



## SueDonJ

GregT said:


> Sue, I agree with you.
> 
> I also believe that the two pools will be functionally co-mingled, and therefore I expect most people will get the exchanges they want.  I think we are dealing with the previous expectation/belief that the Trust Inventory would be effectively be a bulk deposit that Legacy Points Members would be able to easily access -- we now suspect that there is a gatekeeper controlling that bulk deposit.  Even if we do get our trades this year, it is a little bit concerning if we will get it next year.
> 
> I also agree with your point on fees -- there is still a basis for enrollment for the fee reduction possibility, and importantly, to keep the options open to benefit from the system as it evolves (Flexchange, renting points, etc).  BocaBum is right that if you're in the system, you can figure out where the inventory is, and figure out how to get it most cost-effectively.
> 
> But it's getting even more difficult to rationalize ever actually redeeming weeks for points.  Why would I put my 3BR MOC in for (skimmed) points, and then take the chance that I will actually get the trade I want, if it's not immediately confirmable from the Trust?
> 
> Best to all,
> 
> Greg



I know!  That's the same thing I hate about II - you have to wait!  I think there will be successful exchanges through the Exchange Company, although it may take some time for the inventory to co-mingle to the point where immediate exchanges can be confirmed and/or availability is spread over a wide range of intervals.  Again, hate to wait, but at least there's a light at the end of the tunnel.


----------



## mjbaran

*independent audit for Exchanges Program exchanges*

from the last page of the Disclosure Guide:

"As of February 1, 2010, there were no Members enrolled in the Program. If required by applicable law, an independent audit for Exchange Program exchanges will be conducted annually. The percentage of confirmed exchanges contained in any such audit will be a summary and should not be relied upon when determining probability of obtaining a particular requested reservation."

Results of this independent audit could make for good reading.


----------



## musical2

DanCali said:


> But it's not...
> 
> Trust owners have priority because they can access enrolled weeks inventory at will. You can only access trust inventory after they make an exchange and are limited to that.
> 
> If they have a week you need but trust owners use only trust inventory for their reservations you're out of luck. If you have a week they need they can grab it anytime, even if enrolled weeks were to trade only among themselves (in the latter example, one enrolled week member may be forced to roll points over because a trust member took a redeemed legacy week).
> 
> Will Marriott make it more seamless than that? I would hope so... but that doesn't change the underlying system and that at some point this will catch up to and bite legacy owners somewhere...



I don't think we are seeing this the same way.  And that's OK.  Just because I enroll my week, I don't think it comes available the inventory to take until I decide to trade it for the points it is worth.  The same way with the trust inventory.  Their points don't become available to me until they decide to trade it for something in the exchange pool.  I would hope I would be able to see what is in the exchange pool before I decide to trade my week for points in any given year.  Once I see inventory I want, then I can trade my week for points and grab it.  

By the way, I have not yet decided to join this thing.  I am just trying to think through the way it will work.


----------



## DanCali

musical2 said:


> I don't think we are seeing this the same way.  And that's OK.  Just because I enroll my week, I don't think it comes available the inventory to take until I decide to trade it for the points it is worth.  The same way with the trust inventory.  Their points don't become available to me until they decide to trade it for something in the exchange pool.



What you say is correct, but you are supporting my argument...

You week becomes available to the trust once you trade it for points. Once you trade for points, your points AUTOMATICALLY go to the exchange company and can be grabbed by trust owners. On the other hand, trust Owners' points go to the exchange company only if their inventory is not in the trust.

It would be more equitable if once you trade for points you can grab anything in the trust just as they can grab your week (i.e. points are points...). 

I think (maybe) a good analogy unrelated to cookies owners is thinking about the II world. In terms of possibilities with the exchange company, Trust Members can book at their home resort, or log into Marriott Exchange Co (think like it is "II")  and make an "instant exchange" (for enrolled weeks that were traded for points). A weeks owner can reserve their home resort or, to play with points, has to do a "deposit first" and then can grab any available inventory in the Exchange Co. Trust Members have access to Exchange Co Inventory without depositing, so you never see their inventory unless they exchange. 

It's the fact that to play in points, you are doing a "deposit first" action while retail points don't that bothers people here. If Trust Members don't like the Exchange Co inventory (which they see anytime), you never have access to their inventory (because you see it only when they exchange).


----------



## BocaBum99

GregT said:


> Boca, what's tough is that at least with II trades, it was an independent company, and you could expect that II would only accept a comparably powered week if it is surrenduring a week to Marriott.
> 
> Now, however who watches over the fairness of trades between the Trust Points Inventory and the Legacy Points Inventory?   There's no transparency, and we have lost confidence in Marriott's judgment/fairness/treatment of existing owners.
> 
> It would be very very easy to manipulate/abuse this and transfer the valuable weeks from the Legacy Points Inventory into the Trust Points Inventory and get back who knows what?
> 
> Wow Wow Wow Wow Wow.  I am blown away.



I agree that Marriott can cheat.  However, I need to give them the benefit of the doubt.  They will likely attempt to make the Exchange facility successful.  Otherwise, there won't be any weeks available to Trust owners.

If you read my post #303, there is an approach that Marriott can use to make 2 inventory pools work given the rules as stated.  Time will tell if they are smart enough to implement such an approach.  If they don't, there are 2 things that will happen that threatens the viability of the exchange facility.

1) There won't be much in the exchange pool.  If that lasts long, it doesn't matter how hard Marriott tries to sell, it will fail.  I don't think Marriott will allow it to fail especially since Marriott is collecting upfront and annual fees to make it work.

2) If they don't implement the approach I suggest or something similarly straight forward, it will be virtually impossible to manage the trades between the Trust and the Exchange facility.  They will want to implement a straight forward approach to make their job easier.  Barriers to exchange do not serve Marriott's needs.  Protecting inventory does for Trust owners.  But, not preventing exchanges from occurring.

The good news is that we will know shortly as we do some internal trade tests to see what the following owner types see in points:

1) enrolled points owners who deposit their week for points.

2) Trust owners.

3) Owners of both

The question is what happens to rental points that are transferred between owners?  My guess is that they default to exchange only points, not Trust points.

After thinking about it, this program can work.  We will know shortly.  If anyone converts or purchases Trust points, let me know and we can coordinate a trade test.


----------



## californiagirl

SueDonJ said:


> Just like with whatever advantages they've given to developer-direct buyers over external resale, and multi-week owners over single-week, and Platinum Elites over Gold over Silver in the MR program ... it is what it is.  Marriott has always determined for itself its priority customer, this is no different.
> 
> Not saying that those who feel like red-headed stepchildren don't have a right to those feelings here, just that IMO it doesn't serve any good purpose to foster those feelings.



I completely disagree.  I have been up until now one of Marriott's biggest fans.  The difference here is that all of the above advantages were transparent to a purchaser.  You could weigh the pros and cons of developer vs resale and the difference in seasons etc.  This is not in any way transparent.  Some people (including me) were being told that "points are points" by official Marriott reps.  Now there is a very good argument to make that points are entirely different depending on who you are in the Marriott system.  If this is true, then I absolutely feel like I am a red-headed stepchild and the purpose for me in fostering that feeling is to share with others "around the pool" at MOC is that Marriott has lost my trust big time.  They are not being honest with the product they are selling.  (Whether intentional or by ignorance doesn't matter because a company like Marriott should have all their ducks in a row before they launch something of this magnitude.)  Marriott needs to know that it is not okay to treat loyal customers so poorly.  The word Marriott is leaving a bad taste in my mouth.

Now if we are interpreting this incorrectly and points really are points, I will be very happy.  Unfortunately the way this new program has been administered has tarnished Marriott in my mind.


----------



## BocaBum99

californiagirl said:


> I completely disagree.  I have been up until now one of Marriott's biggest fans.  The difference here is that all of the above advantages were transparent to a purchaser.  You could weigh the pros and cons of developer vs resale and the difference in seasons etc.  This is not in any way transparent.  Some people (including me) were being told that "points are points" by official Marriott reps.  Now there is a very good argument to make that points are entirely different depending on who you are in the Marriott system.  If this is true, then I absolutely feel like I am a red-headed stepchild and the purpose for me in fostering that feeling is to share with others "around the pool" at MOC is that Marriott has lost my trust big time.  They are not being honest with the product they are selling.  (Whether intentional or by ignorance doesn't matter because a company like Marriott should have all their ducks in a row before they launch something of this magnitude.)  Marriott needs to know that it is not okay to treat loyal customers so poorly.  The word Marriott is leaving a bad taste in my mouth.
> 
> Now if we are interpreting this incorrectly and points really are points, I will be very happy.  Unfortunately the way this new program has been administered has tarnished Marriott in my mind.



There is no question that this program has been rolled out very poorly.  It's too bad that Marriott didn't create a focus group from a cross section of TUG members to review the product and the product guides.  If they did that, we could have provided them with great customer feedback on what the product should actually do and how it should be communicated.  More importantly, that focus group could act as a communication vehicle for the product and program.

That said, I believe it is possible for this program to work.  I think we need to now wait for the actual product to come out and kick the tires on it.

Up until now, we have been discussing a new product based on its brochure as opposed to the actual product.

We should probably reserve judgement until we see the real product.  It's still possible to make it really good.  Or, it could turn out to be as bad as well all feared.  The truth will probably be somewhere in the middle.


----------



## DanCali

BocaBum99 said:


> We should probably reserve judgement until we see the real product.  It's still possible to make it really good.  Or, it could turn out to be as bad as well all feared.  The truth will probably be somewhere in the middle.



But whatever smoke and mirrors they use to make it appear like it works doesn't change the fact that it was set up such that Trust Points > Legacy Points...



californiagirl said:


> If this is true, then I absolutely feel like I am a red-headed stepchild and the purpose for me in fostering that feeling is to share with others "around the pool" at MOC is that Marriott has lost my trust big time.  They are not being honest with the product they are selling.  (Whether intentional or by ignorance doesn't matter because a company like Marriott should have all their ducks in a row before they launch something of this magnitude.)  Marriott needs to know that it is not okay to treat loyal customers so poorly.  The word Marriott is leaving a bad taste in my mouth



I agree. The press could care less about this because (i) timeshares are not as sexy as cars or smartphone and (ii) this industry already has a shady reputation. Marriott will continue fleecing old customers in favor of new ones only it it feels that the benefits outweigh the costs. If several thousands of owners start blasting Marriott "around the pool" that will ultimately affect their cost-benefit analysis. 

This version of the points program is a result of lack of adult supervision and it is time for the parents to intervene or the house may burn down...


----------



## puckmanfl

Good evening

The new math

Legacy week -"skim"= legacy points < trust points....


----------



## GregT

puckmanfl said:


> Legacy week -"skim"= legacy points < trust points....



And we may not even be done yet.    

I like the new math.

Best,

Greg


----------



## hotcoffee

BocaBum99 said:


> We should probably reserve judgement until we see the real product.  It's still possible to make it really good.  Or, it could turn out to be as bad as well all feared.  The truth will probably be somewhere in the middle.



BocaBum,

You and others should not be jumping to conclusions.  The Destination Points Disclosure document does not support the conclusions that posters here seem to have arrived at.


----------



## DanCali

puckmanfl said:


> Good evening
> 
> The new math
> 
> Legacy week -"skim"= legacy points < trust points....



Correction...

Legacy week -"skim" - $165/$199 = legacy points < trust points....


----------



## CMF

hotcoffee said:


> BocaBum,
> 
> You and others should not be jumping to conclusions.  The Destination Points Disclosure document does not support the conclusions that posters here seem to have arrived at.



But that is part or the problem, there are aspects of the system that, apparently, are not _Disclosed._

Charles


----------



## hotcoffee

CMF said:


> But that is part or the problem, there are aspects of the system that, apparently, are not _Disclosed._
> 
> Charles



Which aspects in particular?


----------



## ArtsieAng

> Originally Posted by SueDonJ
> Just like with whatever advantages they've given to developer-direct buyers over external resale, and multi-week owners over single-week, and Platinum Elites over Gold over Silver in the MR program ... it is what it is. Marriott has always determined for itself its priority customer, this is no different.
> 
> Not saying that those who feel like red-headed stepchildren don't have a right to those feelings here, just that IMO it doesn't serve any good purpose to foster those feelings.



I'd have to disagree with your take on this.......Every advantage that Marriott has given to those mentioned above where given based entirely on money spent on/at Marriott. The more money spent, the more perks received from Marriott. Those loyalty type perks are the norm.

However, in this case, it doesn't matter how much one has spent on the same product "timeshares." Weeks vs points," the advantage is clearly being given to points.  All points currently being sold are coming from existing timeshare properties....It's the same exact product, being marketed differently. 

You could have spent 150,000 on timeshare purchases, and the person who now spends $10,000, $20,000, $30,000, etc., on points, is being given the advantage. The product is the same. It's being marketing differently, but it's the same timeshares that many have invested thousands of dollars into, and are now being treated as second class citizens. That's how I see it, at any rate.


It isn't what it's not.....And, that's a fair deal for Legacy owners. 

Assuming of course that the worse scenario described in this thread comes to fruition.


----------



## MikeZ

hotcoffee said:


> BocaBum,
> 
> You and others should not be jumping to conclusions.  The Destination Points Disclosure document does not support the conclusions that posters here seem to have arrived at.



Hotcoffee,

I am not sure which conclusions you are referring to, as many have been drawn on all sides of the issues!  There are at least three different perspectives, with different views of how the points play out, with much direct feedback from Marriott employees.

I have to say this has been a very instructive thread.  No big arguments, but a good sharing of fact and opinion as we all try to navigate the future in MarriottWorld!  I have picked up some pearls of wisdom reading this from many contributors to this thread, and I thank you all!

I am trying to make the best, most pragmatic decision for my family with the changes in front of us, and the best way to do that is to be thoroughly educated.  

I have stopped reacting emotionally to the issue, otherwise I would have sold my weeks on ebay a few weeks ago!  And, I am glad I have-with TUGgers here to help me work through this.

I doubt that you (or me, or anyone) can agree with all of the posts here.  The value is in looking for wisdom and discernment in them, whether or not we agree...


----------



## hotcoffee

MikeZ said:


> Hotcoffee,
> 
> I am not sure which conclusions you are referring to, as many have been drawn on all sides of the issues!  There are at least three different perspectives, with different views of how the points play out, with much direct feedback from Marriott employees.
> 
> I have to say this has been a very instructive thread.  No big arguments, but a good sharing of fact and opinion as we all try to navigate the future in MarriottWorld!  I have picked up some pearls of wisdom reading this from many contributors to this thread, and I thank you all!
> 
> I am trying to make the best, most pragmatic decision for my family with the changes in front of us, and the best way to do that is to be thoroughly educated.
> 
> I have stopped reacting emotionally to the issue, otherwise I would have sold my weeks on ebay a few weeks ago!  And, I am glad I have-with TUGgers here to help me work through this.
> 
> I doubt that you (or me, or anyone) can agree with all of the posts here.  The value is in looking for wisdom and discernment in them, whether or not we agree...



I extracted several excerpts from the disclosure document which were designed to be used by following along with your copy of the document.  I can send that to you if you would like.  I will not post it because it would be waste of time.


----------



## musical2

DanCali said:


> What you say is correct, but you are supporting my argument...
> 
> You week becomes available to the trust once you trade it for points. Once you trade for points, your points AUTOMATICALLY go to the exchange company and can be grabbed by trust owners. On the other hand, trust Owners' points go to the exchange company only if their inventory is not in the trust.



This is a good conversation because you are helping me think this through.  However, wouldn't I also not put my week in the exchange company if I didn't find my week inventory when I wanted it by using the weeks method?  In other words, I wouldn't trade for points to put in the exchange if I couldn't find the week I wanted in my inventory, just like they wouldn't trade points into the exchange unless their inventory didn't have what they wanted.



> It would be more equitable if once you trade for points you can grab anything in the trust just as they can grab your week (i.e. points are points...).



But they can't grab my week unless I put it there.  They can't touch my week in my weeks inventory or see my week in my weeks inventory just like I can't touch their trust inventory or see their weeks inventory until it is in the exchange.



> I think (maybe) a good analogy unrelated to cookies owners is thinking about the II world. In terms of possibilities with the exchange company, Trust Members can book at their home resort, or log into Marriott Exchange Co (think like it is "II")  and make an "instant exchange" (for enrolled weeks that were traded for points). A weeks owner can reserve their home resort or, to play with points, has to do a "deposit first" and then can grab any available inventory in the Exchange Co. Trust Members have access to Exchange Co Inventory without depositing, so you never see their inventory unless they exchange.
> 
> It's the fact that to play in points, you are doing a "deposit first" action while retail points don't that bothers people here. If Trust Members don't like the Exchange Co inventory (which they see anytime), you never have access to their inventory (because you see it only when they exchange).



But are we sure we have to do a "Deposit First" to see what is in the exchange?  Or can we have a look in the exchange then decide to convert to points to get what we want?  Does anyone really know, or like many things, is it speculation.  I know I have been speculating.


----------



## MALC9990

BocaBum99 said:


> There is no question that this program has been rolled out very poorly.  It's too bad that Marriott didn't create a focus group from a cross section of TUG members to review the product and the product guides.  If they did that, we could have provided them with great customer feedback on what the product should actually do and how it should be communicated.  More importantly, that focus group could act as a communication vehicle for the product and program.
> 
> That said, I believe it is possible for this program to work.  I think we need to now wait for the actual product to come out and kick the tires on it.
> 
> Up until now, we have been discussing a new product based on its brochure as opposed to the actual product.
> 
> We should probably reserve judgement until we see the real product.  It's still possible to make it really good.  Or, it could turn out to be as bad as well all feared.  The truth will probably be somewhere in the middle.



So this Points scheme has been roilled out badly - how do you think it looks to MVCI owners in European resorts - all excluded from the new program - my resorts show up as "Not Eligible Affiliation Code" when I look to see what their points value might be. BUT - the the "Benefits" says - Choose any Marriott Vacation Club. How will points be used in any of the European Resorts - all owners are excluded from enrolling and exchanging for points and they are still selling weeks in Paris, Majorca and Playa Andaluz.

The only place I can exchange my weeks is in II and what sort of inventory will I see at Marriott Resorts in the USA or Carribean.


----------



## puckmanfl

Good evening

Musical

Some good news....

If you enroll, you can call your VOA and see the points inventory in the exchange.  If you like something, you can then convert the week to points .

if you wait list you must convert the week to points!!!!

like to give both sides of the story


----------



## DanCali

musical2 said:


> This is a good conversation because you are helping me think this through.  However, wouldn't I also not put my week in the exchange company if I didn't find my week inventory when I wanted it by using the weeks method?  In other words, I wouldn't trade for points to put in the exchange if I couldn't find the week I wanted in my inventory, just like they wouldn't trade points into the exchange unless their inventory didn't have what they wanted.



I believe this is true with a couple of small exceptions.

While I believe you can search Exchange Co inventory prior to converting to points ("request first"), you cannot convert after Sep 30. Which means that for Oct-Dec (Nov-Dec for 13 months out) reservations you'll have to convert to points ("deposit first") without knowing if what you want is there.

Also, I think that if you want to use the "waitlist" feature of the program, you need to convert to points ("deposit first") and hope for the best.

On both these fronts retail points owners have an edge on you because they get to browse inventory all year and waitlist ("request first" in their case) without "depositing" unless they get what they want.

Did I convince you yet?


----------



## BocaBum99

puckmanfl said:


> Good evening
> 
> The new math
> 
> Legacy week -"skim"= legacy points < trust points....



Sure, but

Legacy week usage + option for Legacy points > trust points.

You are completely leaving out the option you have as a legacy week owner to NOT deposit your week and use it at your home resort or deposit it directly with II.


----------



## BocaBum99

hotcoffee said:


> BocaBum,
> 
> You and others should not be jumping to conclusions.  The Destination Points Disclosure document does not support the conclusions that posters here seem to have arrived at.



Actually, I am not jumping to conclusions at all.  I am interpreting what I am reading and coming up with a most likely case of what is actually going on.  And, I am doing some scenario based planning in terms of the likely potential outcomes.  I am then assigning probabilities for each scenario playing out and coming up with an expected program implementation.

Then, I am going to wait until I see the actual system to see if it reflects my understanding of how it should behave based on my theory.  If it doesn't, I'll adjust my theory to find out what Marriott actually did.

Once I know that, it will be much more obvious for what we should do or not do.


----------



## ArtsieAng

Nevermind.


----------



## puckmanfl

Good evening.....


Boca....

Do you believe that legacy weeks usage hasn't changed.  Yes, I can always use my home week but II inventory has to go down.  MVCD is now a competitor for II exchanges!!

the nice girl on the videos said I can have it all!!!


----------



## Cindala

MALC9990 said:


> So this Points scheme has been roilled out badly - how do you think it looks to MVCI owners in European resorts - all excluded from the new program - my resorts show up as "Not Eligible Affiliation Code" when I look to see what their points value might be. BUT - the the "Benefits" says - Choose any Marriott Vacation Club. How will points be used in any of the European Resorts - all owners are excluded from enrolling and exchanging for points and they are still selling weeks in Paris, Majorca and Playa Andaluz.
> 
> The only place I can exchange my weeks is in II and what sort of inventory will I see at Marriott Resorts in the USA or Carribean.



Eventually I'm sure Marriott will figure out a way to include the European resorts in this new point scheme. Also, I think you will find that many owners will still be depositing their weeks into II. My week is currently deposited in II for 2011 with a request in for several locations, including Europe.


----------



## puckmanfl

Good evening.....

cindala....

Now MVCD will be using your II deposit to fulfill a trust points request.  they have tons of good unsol trust inventory to put back..p

There will probably be MORE trust weeks in II than available to legacy point users using the Exchange company!!!!


I believe that functionally, this will all work out but the design is flawed!!!


----------



## Cindala

puckmanfl said:


> Good evening.....
> 
> cindala....
> 
> Now MVCD will be using your II deposit to fulfill a trust points request.  they have tons of good unsol trust inventory to put back..p
> 
> There will probably be MORE trust weeks in II than available to legacy point users using the Exchange company!!!!
> 
> 
> I believe that functionally, this will all work out but the design is flawed!!!



That's crappy! Although I have a Gold Orlando week....so who would want that! 
Well, there are other exchange companies out there like SFX if II doesn't work out. Time will tell.


----------



## MountainGal

I hope I'm not repeating the same thing someone else may have brought up.  It appears that if you convert to points you will never have access to future new resorts since all points at that time will be in the trust.  Am I missing something.


----------



## JimIg23

MountainGal said:


> I hope I'm not repeating the same thing someone else may have brought up.  It appears that if you convert to points you will never have access to future new resorts since all points at that time will be in the trust.  Am I missing something.



Last thing a rep told me is that you would, but when they decide to give them to the "exchange points bucket."

Has Dave gotten an answer yet?  The thread is moving too fast....


----------



## Venter

MALC9990 said:


> So this Points scheme has been roilled out badly - how do you think it looks to MVCI owners in European resorts - all excluded from the new program - my resorts show up as "Not Eligible Affiliation Code" when I look to see what their points value might be. BUT - the the "Benefits" says - Choose any Marriott Vacation Club. How will points be used in any of the European Resorts - all owners are excluded from enrolling and exchanging for points and they are still selling weeks in Paris, Majorca and Playa Andaluz.
> 
> The only place I can exchange my weeks is in II and what sort of inventory will I see at Marriott Resorts in the USA or Carribean.



All trades to Europe/Asia will have to be done through interval international.  Says so on the last page of the points calender.

I feel sorry for points owners having to trade through II for Europe as it seems quite high to trade with points especially high TDI.

Also I had a talk to both sides salesreps.  The US one assured me that Marriott is earnestly working on incorporating Europe as soon as possible(trying to get me to join) and the European one that it will not be done for the next ten years(Granted he was trying to sell me a week) because points is the way US owners wanted and the way they holiday but Europeans take their weeks as they have more anual leave. The European one went on to say that is why US is now called destinations club but Europe remains under MVCI(International) umbrella.

I am quite miffed because I feel that there is no good in this for me.  If I do not like it then it seems my Lake Shore week will be squeezed out of the system years down the line and if I do it is not a saving for me because I have to keep a different II account for Club Son Antem.

I will probably do calculations etc. after more is known about the program.


----------



## puckmanfl

Good evening from Lakeshore Reserve

so the distinct inventories are not based on some legal mumbo jumbo regarding ownership in the trust....

Jim's rep says MVCD can deposit trust inventory in the exchange at their discretion!


----------



## dioxide45

puckmanfl said:


> Good evening from Lakeshore Reserve
> 
> so the distinct inventories are not based on some legal mumbo jumbo regarding ownership in the trust....
> 
> Jim's rep says MVCD can deposit trust inventory in the exchange at their discretion!



This isn't any different from Marriott bulk banking with II. They have an oversupply of weeks that they don't want to go empty. So they give those to II to offer for exchanges.

So the legal requirements can still be there.

Enjoy Lakeshore Reserve. We are spending two nights there in November.


----------



## MikeM132

I'm certainly as interested as all of you about the outcome of this. I guess you can look at this giant discussion thread for the entertainment value. You seem to have the natural suspicion of a new program fueled by some conflicting statements made by semi-trained Marriott employees as well as timeshare salesmen. 
How does that old saying go that most of the things you worried about never happened? 
Signed, 
Alfred E Newman


----------



## hotcoffee

MikeM132 said:


> I'm certainly as interested as all of you about the outcome of this. I guess you can look at this giant discussion thread for the entertainment value. You seem to have the natural suspicion of a new program fueled by some conflicting statements made by semi-trained Marriott employees as well as timeshare salesmen.
> How does that old saying go that most of the things you worried about never happened?
> Signed,
> Alfred E Newman



There have been so many theories and hysterical conclusions being posted to TUG that many here are simply believing them without any supporting evidence.  Worse, the Marriott sales staff seem to know even less than those posting on TUG.  Right now, it is a mess.  

TUG is commonly read by Marriott staff personnel.  One would think that they would get their act together; but so far, there does not seem to be much evidence of that happening.  Hopefully, by July 26, at least most of the Marriott sales staff will know how the program works.


----------



## Dave M

Those numbers were posted in this thread (post #68 over 48 hours ago by the person who got them in response to a question to Marriott. 





MikeM132 said:


> I found this on another (ahem) website....some of you know where. It described useage of all Marriott units. From this, it appears "pure points" owners_ might_ have exclusive use of a pretty small block of units, all unsold. Unless I am missing something, Marriott can only sell points for available units (not sure about available seasons). If Grand Ocean is sold out for platinum, Marriott has nothing to sell there. They can only sell the number of platinum intervals they have at unsold (or future) resorts. Otherwise, they'd have sold the same interval twice. Even if just points in the trust, there must be an underlying interval there somewhere to be legal. At least that's how I understand it. Please take a look at the following (agree with it or not, supposedly came direct from Marriott) and see if you also conclude legacy owners dominate the inventory:
> 
> Some interesting numbers from a Marriott rep:
> 
> 27% of Inventory each year is kept by owners staying in their home club.   This is the ONLY inventory you do not have access to.
> 
> 43% of Inventory will be those who exchange into Interval or elect   points for the year. As an enrolled owner, you have access to both of   these pools - exchanged II weeks from owners who don't enroll and   Elected Weeks.
> 
> 21% of Inventory will come from owners who trade for Marriott Rewards   Points
> 
> 9% of Inventory will be all unsold weeks (and delinquent weeks).


----------



## dioxide45

MikeM132 said:


> 9% of Inventory will be all unsold weeks (and delinquent weeks).



So is this 9% inventory that is in the trust, or is it inventory that Marriott owned that they didn't convey to the trust?


----------



## hotcoffee

Dave M said:


> Those numbers were posted in this thread (post #68 over 48 hours ago by the person who got them in response to a question to Marriott.



Those numbers are the same ones that the Marriott points specialist that I have been working also quoted to me.  They are obviously the numbers being passed around internally at Marriott.


----------



## hotcoffee

dioxide45 said:


> So is this 9% inventory that is in the trust, or is it inventory that Marriott owned that they didn't convey to the trust?



I can tell you what my points specialist told me about the 9%.  This figure was quoted to me in response to my question about there being a lot of inventory in the Trust.  I interpreted his response to mean that the Trust did not account for a major portion of the available inventory.  Nothing was said about any other unsold weeks as if there were another pot of them unaccounted for.


----------



## DanCali

20% of inventory from MRP conversions?

I thought MRP conversions is Marriott's inventory to rent out. Why would they just give it away to timeshare owners? Doesn't make sense to me...


----------



## dioxide45

*Were We Naïve?*

Were we naïve to think that by enrolling that we would have unlimited access to trust inventory? Perhaps we were, without really looking at how this program works. In reality the trust is just another enrolled weeks owner. The trust owns weeks just like the rest of us. Why would we think we could get free pickings at those trust weeks. We know they don't get free picking of ours.

IN an exchange program, someone always has to deposit first. In the scenario outlined it would seem that we weeks owners have to be the first, but that isn't necessarily true. Those who convert to points, delinquent and unsold non-trust weeks will be available in the exchange company. Also with all the people just reserving weeks and depositing in to II. There will be lots of seed inventory for people who convert their enrolled week to points.

It also seems like you will have the option to search before you deposit just like in II. So in reality this system isn't much different from II. The problem that Marriott claims that many had with II were the waiting and the website problems. We all know that Marriott is not perfect on the website end. At 9:00 am on inventory release days there are constant lock ups on the website when trying to reserve a week. The phones are also jammed.

People also didn't like the waiting game with II. Though I don't see how Marriott plans to make this better. The inventory is the same, the waiting game will continue. Though the trade power now is transparent, so there is no waiting in hopes your week is powerful enough. You know what you can and can't get. Though many people know that it is at a cost. So now the complaints moves from non-transparent trade power to skimming points. Just going from one issue to another.

I believe that the trust will not be depositing actual time/weeks/days in to the exchange company. If a trust owner makes a three day reservation that costs 900 points, then 900 points become available to members of the exchange company to reserve trust inventory. So as soon as trust points are available in the exchange program, those points can be used to book the best Christmas HI week or the worst bronze HHI. Marriott won't get to pick what it gets to deposit, there won't be depositing the "crumbs" or worst weeks.

In reality enrollees have the power to pick what they want to do. Either reserve their week or see what is in the exchange program. You can look before you deposit just like II.

I am not a fan of the points program as I don't think it will get us the value we have received in the past, but I don't think the black helicopters are coming either.


----------



## Dave M

Naive? No. Premature? Possibly.

There were (and still are) so many unanswered questions that it seems too early to be making a positive decision to sign up, even for those who are inclined to do so. I don't see any need to rush into spending money that might or might not be well spent.


----------



## JimC

dioxide45 said:


> ...IN an exchange program, someone always has to deposit first.....



Not necessarily.  In DVC within seven months of check-in points are points and anyone can reserve at any resort in the system.  It does not require any "deposits".

That is what I was hoping MVCI would design for their own internal exchange program.  MVCI chose not to go that route.


----------



## dioxide45

JimC said:


> Not necessarily.  In DVC within seven months of check-in points are points and anyone can reserve at any resort in the system.  It does not require any "deposits".
> 
> That is what I was hoping MVCI would design for their own internal exchange program.  MVCI chose not to go that route.



True, but DVC isn't an exchange company. So as you said Marriott opted to go the exchange company route.


----------



## musical2

DanCali said:


> I believe this is true with a couple of small exceptions.
> 
> While I believe you can search Exchange Co inventory prior to converting to points ("request first"), you cannot convert after Sep 30. Which means that for Oct-Dec (Nov-Dec for 13 months out) reservations you'll have to convert to points ("deposit first") without knowing if what you want is there.
> 
> Also, I think that if you want to use the "waitlist" feature of the program, you need to convert to points ("deposit first") and hope for the best.
> 
> On both these fronts retail points owners have an edge on you because they get to browse inventory all year and waitlist ("request first" in their case) without "depositing" unless they get what they want.
> 
> Did I convince you yet?



I'm not convinced either way yet.  I am going to play wait and see for a while.  I received an "Enrollment Kit" from Marriott in the mail today.  It doesn't have much information in it.  It is more like a marketing brochure.


----------



## SueDonJ

ArtsieAng said:


> I'd have to disagree with your take on this.......Every advantage that Marriott has given to those mentioned above where given based entirely on money spent on/at Marriott. The more money spent, the more perks received from Marriott. Those loyalty type perks are the norm.
> 
> However, in this case, it doesn't matter how much one has spent on the same product "timeshares." Weeks vs points," the advantage is clearly being given to points.  All points currently being sold are coming from existing timeshare properties....It's the same exact product, being marketed differently.
> 
> You could have spent 150,000 on timeshare purchases, and the person who now spends $10,000, $20,000, $30,000, etc., on points, is being given the advantage. The product is the same. It's being marketing differently, but it's the same timeshares that many have invested thousands of dollars into, and are now being treated as second class citizens. That's how I see it, at any rate.
> 
> 
> It isn't what it's not.....And, that's a fair deal for Legacy owners.
> 
> Assuming of course that the worse scenario described in this thread comes to fruition.



Are you saying there aren't multi-week external resale owners who spent less for their multi-weeks than an owner of a single developer week?  Sure there are, and those owners who spent less money get the 13-mo reservation advantage, which is not available to the single-week owner who spent more.

As you say, it's not about how much any owners have spent, it's about what they've purchased.  Always has been.


----------



## dioxide45

Ricci said:


> I was the OP of the original thread that infamously took a turn at post #16.
> When we were at the presentation at MCV, and after we refused to buy points or enroll our weeks, we had to sign a document that states we could not enroll our weeks later if we changed our mind.  It was now or never.
> I HATE this tactic and simply made it easier to decline.
> 
> Diamond Resorts has the same policy and we declined their program as well.



This would support some of what Doug has been mentioning. In that the offer of 800 points and the price guaranty is only good until our reservation later this year and not 12/31.


----------



## skimble

dioxide45 said:


> Were we naïve to think that by enrolling that we would have unlimited access to trust inventory? Perhaps we were, without really looking at how this program works. In reality the trust is just another enrolled weeks owner. The trust owns weeks just like the rest of us. Why would we think we could get free pickings at those trust weeks. We know they don't get free picking of ours.
> 
> IN an exchange program, someone always has to deposit first. In the scenario outlined it would seem that we weeks owners have to be the first, but that isn't necessarily true. Those who convert to points, delinquent and unsold non-trust weeks will be available in the exchange company. Also with all the people just reserving weeks and depositing in to II. There will be lots of seed inventory for people who convert their enrolled week to points.
> .



For many on this thread, there seems to be confusion in semantics or a lack of understanding on the basic concept of a Trust.  Instead of buying ownership in a property, the timeshare owners who purchase in the Trust are purchasing shares of a business entity.  Marriott should have given it a different name to avoid confusion-- the Ttoirram Trust Inc.   
As a fractional owner in this business, you have the option to pull out your annual earnings-- your share of use time, or rent it out for profit.  _Within the Trust,_ there is no exchanging as we know it.  Owners in the trust are basically shifting pockets with the corporate inventory.  
Like Diox says, we wouldn't allow them to take our weeks and use them, why would anybody cry foul when they claim first rights to their week.  You will see inventory from the Trust if they choose to deposit it.  

The concept of a Trust for timeshare developers is brilliant... I can't say I like it, but it's brilliant.


----------



## puckmanfl

Good morning!!!


MVCD quotes surveys that states customers want a flexible point system that eliminates the uncertainty of exchange systems,then designs a point system that for legacy owners is essentially an "exchange system.....

there is a misconception that trust owners own the trust.

if there are100,000 units in the trust and 10,000 units purchase The trust owners own 10% of the trust. MVCD owns 90%.  Just like now,they can do what they please with the inventory.  they can easily place this inventory in the exchange giving access to ALL point players.  The system would self perpetuate as there would be incentive for legacy owners to convert and create MORE point inventory....

We now have a point system for legacy owners, that requires deposits and exchanging!!!!  And legacy owners don't get the first move....


----------



## JimIg23

9% Trust Units (that Marriott can release to exchange members after a while)

The trust only grows with new resorts and ROFR (what is there 6% resale owners?, not very big resale market unless there is a mass sell off)

20% Convert to MRP (Very High!  I was told Marriott could use those in the trust, but some could be rented, and some later given to exchangers)

20% week owners expected to become exchange members (Which may also be completely bad info we picked up)

Not alot of inventory for exchange weeks, considering not even half of the exchange members will add points, they will hold on to that week until they are confirmed points will have a match they want....). 

One of the major points of joining (for me) is if the point inventory becomes the only real way of getting Marriott exchanges, which is what I want.  There would have to be 1) massive deeded week owner conversion or 2) massive sell off to get even close.  Is that even realistic 5 years from now?


----------



## puckmanfl

good morning

If unsold inventory is only 9%, then MVCD has done a lot of tinkering for a product that by definition is 91% sold out...

I believe unsold inventory.  It is my belief that the 440,000 owners number is actually "weeks owned"".  My guru told me the average owner has 1.8 weeks.  If there are 440,000 owners, the would own 760,000 weeks.  There are only 750,000 week intervals in the entire system...


----------



## puckmanfl

good morning

For the Tuggers that have been involved at this longer than me....

is there any other  point system out there that is in actuality an "exchange" system.  In this system for the legacy owners.  Any point inventory has to be deposited by another owner.


----------



## puckmanfl

good morning


no more negative tidings from me!!  I am going to test drive the system on 7/26 and will report back to the gang!!!

I will keep a hand in both the weeks and points "cookie jar" and see how it goes!!!!

Lakeshore Reserve is a stunning property!!!  3 bedroom townhouse rocks!!!

seems to be a bunch of good II inventory today!!!!

maybe the doom scenarios are wrong!!!


----------



## MALC9990

I can understand the Marriott business case for moving to the points based system going forward. It has to be very similar to the case made for the Asia Pacific Club which is points based - it just uses different points values and volumes. When I bought into the Phuket Beach Club, it was still being developed and part of MVCI. However they found that sales in Asia were not as good as expected  and a majority of sales were going to Europeans like me who just loved the resort.  Thailand, whilst it is a long flight, is a very popular destination with Europeans. The following might help anyone still mulling over the new Destination Club points system.
The MVCAP points system was introduced to attract Asian sales where the market demanded more flexibility for short duration stays - 2 or 3 days over a weekend for example. What happened was that ALL the unsold units at Phuket Beach Club were transferred to MVCAP and all sales for weeks to customers ceased and points sales started - 4 years ago.
The MVCAP system now has units at a small number of MVC resorts across Asia (Phuket - 2 resorts, Hawaii - 2 Resorts, Bangkok - 1 resort and Las Vegas – 1 resort. The way my VOA in Phuket explained this was that the units at the resorts were all owned by MVCAP and MVCAP now pays the maintenance fees as any other owner would do. MVCAP sells points to customers and these points may be exchanged for time at the resorts.  The number of points required varies by resort and season at the resort and also depends on the length of stay – the weekly rate will be less than 7 times the daily rate and also day rate for weekend days is higher than weekday.
In addition to the resorts available for booking using points, MVCAP has the Club Connections programme in which MVCAP members can use MVCAP points to stay at a number of Marriott Hotels across Asia and Australia. The programme operates much like reserving at a Marriott using your MR points except that you do the reservation through the MVCAP members WEB site or via one of the MVCAP owners call centres. Among the list of Club Connections hotels are two MVCI resorts in Europe – Paris and Marbella.
So far I have used my MVCAP points to stay at the Singapore Marriott for three nights – this was a very good deal as the MVCAP points required was 9,000 which was equivalent to 45,000 MR points – the same three nights would have cost me 90,000 MR points so I regard this as a very good deal. My MVCAP points purchased initially can be exchanged for MR points at a rate of 5 MR points for 1 MVCAP points. More recent purchases only get 3 MR points for 1 MVCAP point.
Like the new Destinations Club programme, legacy owners of weeks at Phuket Beach Club have been offered the opportunity to exchange their week(s) for MVCAP points on an annual basis, - the fee in my case for this was to purchase a minimum number of extra points – something I was planning to do anyway as I had decided I needed a few more points. The big difference is thyat there is no “SKIM” – not at present anyway. Each week exchanged get enough points to book a week at the home resort in the same season.
MVCAP members can also exchange through II – all one needs to do is book a week at one of the 6 resorts and then either deposit or request first depending on your preference. Obviously you need an II membership for this to be possible.
Obviously there are some differences between the new Destinations Club scheme and the MVCAP scheme. MVCAP is not an exchange facility – to exchange to any other MVCI resort you need to use II (apart from Paris and Marbella).  Using MVCAP points to book MVCI at Paris or Marbella is actually quite expensive as the points rate per night is fixed at 6,000 per night for a 2 bed unit and 8000 per night for a three bed unit. It would cost fewer points to exchange a week via II. However it is more attractive for a few nights stay if required.
So far my experience using MVCA points is limited to booking a week at Phuket Beach in December this year which I have linked to two weeks exchanged through II and staying three nights at the Singapore Marriott whilst on my way to Australia from the UK. The experience so far is pretty positive, I get more certainty in booking than using II for exchanges but then my experience with II has always been exceptional - in 7 years of using II I have never failed to get my requested weeks and have had some great Getaways. 
Here is a list of the MVCAP Resorts and Cub Connections.
Club Resorts
Marriott’s Waiohai Beach Club
Kaua’i, Hawaii 
Marriott’s Ko Olina Beach Club
Oahu, Hawaii 
Marriott’s Grand Chateau
Las Vegas, Nevada 
Marriott’s Vacation Club at the Empire Place
Bangkok, Thailand 
Marriott’s Mai Khao Beach
Mai Khao, Thailand 
Marriott’s Phuket Beach Club
Phuket, Thailand 
Club Connections
Courtyard Surfers Paradise Resort
Gold Coast, Australia 
Sydney Marriott Hotel
Sydney, Australia 
Courtyard by Marriott Beijing
Beijing, China 
JW Marriott Hotel Beijing 
Beijing, China 
JW Marriott Hotel Hong Kong
Hong Kong, China 
Renaissance Harbour View Hotel Hong Kong
Hong Kong, China 
The Ritz Carlton, Sanya
Hainan, China 
Sanya Marriott Resort & Spa 
Hainan, China 
The Portman Ritz-Carlton, Shanghai
Shanghai, China 
Marriott’s Village d’Ile de France
Bailly-Romainvilliers, France 
Waikiki Beach Marriott Resort & Spa
Honolulu - Oahu, Hawaii 
Ayana Resort & Spa, Bali 
Bali, Indonesia 
Okinawa Marriott Resort & Spa
Nago City Okinawa, Japan 
Renaissance Sapporo Hotel 
Sapporo, Japan 
Courtyard by Marriott Tokyo Ginza Hotel 
Tokyo, Japan 
Renaissance Seoul Hotel
Seoul, Korea 
Renaissance Kuala Lumpur Hotel
Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia 
The Ritz-Carlton, Millenia Singapore
Singapore 
Singapore Marriott Hotel
Singapore 
Marriott’s Marbella Beach Resort
Marbella, Spain 
Renaissance Koh Samui Resort & Spa
Koh Samui, Thailand 
Renaissance Riverside Hotel Saigon
Saigon, Vietnam


----------



## MALC9990

puckmanfl said:


> good morning
> 
> 
> no more negative tidings from me!!  I am going to test drive the system on 7/26 and will report back to the gang!!!
> 
> I will keep a hand in both the weeks and points "cookie jar" and see how it goes!!!!
> 
> Lakeshore Reserve is a stunning property!!!  3 bedroom townhouse rocks!!!
> 
> seems to be a bunch of good II inventory today!!!!
> 
> maybe the doom scenarios are wrong!!!



I got an II request fullfilled today - requested just 1 week at 1 resort, only a few days ago and it came up exactly as I wanted. 1 week prime golfing time in Marriott Son Antem next May (Gold Season). Just what I wanted. I continue to be more than happy with II.


----------



## ArtsieAng

SueDonJ said:


> Are you saying there aren't multi-week external resale owners who spent less for their multi-weeks than an owner of a single developer week?  Sure there are, and those owners who spent less money get the 13-mo reservation advantage, which is not available to the single-week owner who spent more.
> 
> As you say, it's not about how much any owners have spent, it's about what they've purchased.  Always has been.







> Originally Posted by SueDonJ
> Just like with whatever advantages they've given to developer-direct buyers over external resale, and multi-week owners over single-week, and Platinum Elites over Gold over Silver in the MR program ... it is what it is. Marriott has always determined for itself its priority customer, this is no different.
> 
> Not saying that those who feel like red-headed stepchildren don't have a right to those feelings here, just that IMO it doesn't serve any good purpose to foster those feelings.



So, you take out one example from your original quote, and disregard all the others, to draw your conclusion.

Again, we will have to agree to disagree.....For the most part, up until now, with Marriott, you got what you paid for, IMO.


----------



## Dean

puckmanfl said:


> good morning
> 
> For the Tuggers that have been involved at this longer than me....
> 
> is there any other  point system out there that is in actuality an "exchange" system.  In this system for the legacy owners.  Any point inventory has to be deposited by another owner.


I think Hyatt works that way but don't know a lot about the system.  With RCI points and Bluegreen the default is points but you have the option of reserving your own fixed week and it not being available to the trust.  For DVC it is all UDI trust type inventory and is not actually based in a week at all though you have home resort priority.


----------



## saturn28

puckmanfl said:


> good morning
> 
> For the Tuggers that have been involved at this longer than me....
> 
> is there any other  point system out there that is in actuality an "exchange" system.  In this system for the legacy owners.  Any point inventory has to be deposited by another owner.



I own at Hyatt. With Hyatt you have a deeded week that you have up to 6 months before your check-in date to reserve. If you don't reserve your deeded fixed week by then, your week automaically turns into Hyatt Vacation Club Points. You can choose to convert your weeks to points before that should you wish. The earliest you can book your home week or convert to points is 1 year.

The number of points you receive is dependant on the season that you own. Each resort has seasons the same way as Marriott's weeks program has seasons. Of course the higher demand seasons get more points than the lower demand seasons. You are not able to trade, buy, or exchange for more points should you be short of points.

With Hyatt points you can reserve 1 week, 2, 3, or 4 night stays and there is no skimming. The number of points you get for your week equals the number of points you will have to pay when you stay during your season at any other Hyatt Resort. In addition, should you want to make an exhange through II you will receive the same amount of points.

The seasons in Hyatt are Diamond, Platinum, Gold, Silver, Bronze. Every Hyatt Resort has these seasons. Bronze is the lowest season and gets you 1300 points. When you trade through II the most points it will cost you to reserve a 2 bedroom unit at the highest demand resort during the highest demand season is 1300 points. The number of points required for lower demand seasons and resorts is less than 1300 points. In addition, the points required to reserve a studio or 1 bedroom through II would be 870 for a 1 bedroom and 430 for a studio. This is for the highest demand season and resort. It is less for less demand.

Now the other Hyatt Seasons get more points. The Diamond season gets 2200 Hyatt points and 2200 points when trading through II. Since it only takes 1300 points to reserve any 2 bedroom condo during the highest demand, you can see Hyatt points are worth a lot more than Marriott Points because you can reserve your week and still have points left over.

When you pay your maintenance fees, it includes membership in II as well as membership for trading internally to Hyatt resorts. You have to pay a fee of $39 for an internal exchange and the normal II fees for trading outside Hyatt. I can tell you that when I deposit my Hyatt points in II, I can pull the same Marriott Resorts that I pull using any of my Marriott weeks to search. 


Here is a link to the Hyatt points calander.

http://www.bywindkal.com/Hyatt/HVCPointsChartwithAspen.pdf

http://www.bywindkal.com/Hyatt/SeasonWeekR4.htm


Hyatt Interval World Points Chart

http://www.bywindkal.com/Files/HyattInterval.pdf


----------



## SueDonJ

ArtsieAng said:


> So, you take out one example from your original quote, and disregard all the others, to draw your conclusion.
> 
> Again, we will have to agree to disagree.....For the most part, up until now, with Marriott, you got what you paid for, IMO.



The three examples I gave were the MR Elite status, the multi-week 13-mo reservation advantage, and the resale v. direct advantage.  And actually, I agree with you that for the most part within the Marriott Rewards system you get what you pay for - you can't rack up Elite nights for Plat/Gold/Silver status without spending in the form of hotel and timeshare nights along with VISA card spending.

But this was your quote, "I'd have to disagree with your take on this.......*Every* advantage that Marriott has given to those mentioned above where given *based entirely on money spent* on/at Marriott. The more money spent, the more perks received from Marriott. Those loyalty type perks are the norm."

The 13-mo advantage isn't tied to spending.  Neither is the resale v. direct MRP-exchange option, if you consider that; 1) it's possible some folks have spent more on their resale week(s) than others have on direct, when you factor in the different resorts and the timing of the resale purchase (resales have sold for as much as $20K+ and direct for as little as $10K- over MVCI's history); and 2) the prevailing TUG sentiment is that the MRP-exchange option isn't worth the price differential between direct and resale.

So I guess I agree that MR is the loyalty program where spending is rewarded, but within the timeshare system it's just all about what you buy and not how much you spend.


----------



## ArtsieAng

SueDonJ said:


> The three examples I gave were the MR Elite status, the multi-week 13-mo reservation advantage, and the resale v. direct advantage.  And actually, I agree with you that for the most part within the Marriott Rewards system you get what you pay for - you can't rack up Elite nights for Plat/Gold/Silver status without spending in the form of hotel and timeshare nights along with VISA card spending.
> 
> But this was your quote, "I'd have to disagree with your take on this.......*Every* advantage that Marriott has given to those mentioned above where given *based entirely on money spent* on/at Marriott. The more money spent, the more perks received from Marriott. Those loyalty type perks are the norm."
> 
> The 13-mo advantage isn't tied to spending.  Neither is the resale v. direct MRP-exchange option, if you consider that; 1) it's possible some folks have spent more on their resale week(s) than others have on direct, when you factor in the different resorts and the timing of the resale purchase (resales have sold for as much as $20K+ and direct for as little as $10K- over MVCI's history); and 2) the prevailing TUG sentiment is that the MRP-exchange option isn't worth the price differential between direct and resale.
> 
> So I guess I agree that MR is the loyalty program where spending is rewarded, but within the timeshare system it's just all about what you buy and not how much you spend.



Susan.....In your original quote, you are the one who uses multi-week owners as getting an advantage over single week owners. 





> "multi-week owners over single-week."


 You then thought of the one scenario where that was not the case, and used it to draw your current conclusion.

As far as someone who spent more on a resale than someone who purchased retail directly from Marriott.......That's certainly possible, however, Marriott did not make the money from the sale, therefore it really has no consequence to them, and is not a good example in this discussion. 

In the old system, when you purchased a timeshare directly from Marriott, you were able to exchange that timeshare in for MRP. Each timeshare was given a particular amount of points. Was that amount not at least somewhat based on the actual cost of the timeshare? Also, bonus points for buying direct were given. Were those bonus points not somewhat based on the amount of money spent on your purchase?


----------



## SueDonJ

ArtsieAng said:


> Susan.....In your original quote, you are the one who uses multi-week owners as getting an advantage over single week owners.  You then thought of the one scenario where that was not the case, and used it to draw your current conclusion.
> 
> As far as someone who spent more on a resale than someone who purchased retail directly from Marriott.......That's certainly possible, however, Marriott did not make the money from the sale, therefore it really has no consequence to them, and is not a good example in this discussion.
> 
> In the old system, when you purchased a timeshare directly from Marriott, you were able to exchange that timeshare in for MRP. Each timeshare was given a particular amount of points. Was that amount not at least somewhat based on the actual cost of the timeshare? Also, bonus points for buying direct were given. Were those bonus points not somewhat based on the amount of money spent on your purchase?



Now I feel like I'm nitpicking, getting into whether we're talking about who gets the advantages or whether Marriott has given them.  What does it matter?  Multi-week owners get the 13-mo res advantage no matter if they purchased from Marriott or not, and the MRP-exchange advantage goes to whoever bought from Marriott regardless of how much they spent.  I don't know how many resale multi-week owners there are but I suspect there are quite a few.  I also don't know how many resale owners get better value from their price differential than if they bought direct and had the MRP-exchange option, but I suspect from reading TUG that most see more value in the money they've saved on their purchase.

As far as the MRP purchase incentives from MVCI, I honestly don't know if they were tied to the pricing structures.  I know that several years ago they began offering fewer incentive points as well as devalued the usage options throughout the program, and when they implemented the 20% "sale" pricing structure last year the MRP incentives were discontinued for those sales.

Your point that I was responding to is that, "You could have spent 150,000 on timeshare purchases, and the person who now spends $10,000, $20,000, $30,000, etc., on points, is being given the advantage."  And that's true, but it's no different than in the Weeks system where it doesn't matter how much you've spent, but what you've bought.


----------



## ArtsieAng

SueDonJ said:


> Now I feel like I'm nitpicking, getting into whether we're talking about who gets the advantages or whether Marriott has given them.  What does it matter?  Multi-week owners get the 13-mo res advantage no matter if they purchased from Marriott or not, and the MRP-exchange advantage goes to whoever bought from Marriott regardless of how much they spent.  I don't know how many resale multi-week owners there are but I suspect there are quite a few.  I also don't know how many resale owners get better value from their price differential than if they bought direct and had the MRP-exchange option, but I suspect from reading TUG that most see more value in the money they've saved on their purchase.
> 
> As far as the MRP purchase incentives from MVCI, I honestly don't know if they were tied to the pricing structures.  I know that several years ago they began offering fewer incentive points as well as devalued the usage options throughout the program, and when they implemented the 20% "sale" pricing structure last year the MRP incentives were discontinued for those sales.
> 
> *Your point that I was responding to is that, "You could have spent 150,000 on timeshare purchases, and the person who now spends $10,000, $20,000, $30,000, etc., on points, is being given the advantage."  And that's true, but it's no different than in the Weeks system where it doesn't matter how much you've spent, but what you've bought.*


*
*

I'm running out the door so, this will be my last post on this subject.

IMO......You are purchasing the same thing, just packed differently. But, I've already said that, and you disagree. The points being sold are for existing timeshares, that Legacy owners have already bought and paid for.


----------



## BocaBum99

puckmanfl said:


> Good evening.....
> 
> 
> Boca....
> 
> Do you believe that legacy weeks usage hasn't changed.  Yes, I can always use my home week but II inventory has to go down.  MVCD is now a competitor for II exchanges!!
> 
> the nice girl on the videos said I can have it all!!!



Sure, that's just life.  There is always a new competitor on the horizon for everything we do in life.  It also creates new opportunities.  It's what makes life and timesharing interesting.


----------



## tombo

ArtsieAng said:


> [/B]
> 
> I'm running out the door so, this will be my last post on this subject.
> 
> IMO......You are purchasing the same thing, just packed differently. But, I've already said that, and you disagree. The points being sold are for existing timeshares, that Legacy owners have already bought and paid for.



I am with you. I quit posting on this thread several days ago too, but I decided to post one more time. 

So many here on TUG complain about numerous posts, posts not on subject, posts that do many things that people don't like when they are posts they disagree with, but as long as they are pro Marriott they are good. I have not posted in a couple of days and still occasionaly some of my posts are referenced as being bad. However only my posts and your posts are bad to Susan because she dislikes any analytical posts that show Marriott to be treating owners badly. Post something good that MIGHT POSSIBLY come out of the changes whether it is guaranteed in writing or not, and it is a good post. You can post something saying that yes Marriott is treating all owners badly in some regard, but if you overall still like the new program, that too is a good post. When someone shows any positive feature or feeling about Marriott it is a good post. If as this thread was designed to do, Tuggers post warnings to other owners about how marriott is screwing them over then they don't serve any good purpose? Really?


SueDonJ said:


> Not saying that those who feel like red-headed stepchildren don't have a right to those feelings here, just that IMO it doesn't serve any good purpose to foster those feelings.



So if I convert to points and my points don't have access to all the inventory that points purchased from Marriott can access, then you really feel that posting about that inequity doesn't serve any purpose? Well yes it does serve a purpose and it is more informative than simply regurgitating Marriott's sales points. If someone wants endless praise for Marriott and their points rogram, there is unlimited acces to that info by simply contacting Marriott. If one wants to hear the downsides of the new program a forum like TUG is the only way to find out these things. Negatve Marriott posts exposing Marriott's tricks to devalue current owner's weeks  serve a great purpose, they help owners know the truth rather than converting on Marriott sales hype alone. I have a hard time figuring out how making pro Marriott posts no matter what the thread is about serves a purpose, but to each their own.



The discussion this thread was designed to discuss the hidden agenda where Marriott does not allow legacy owners who convert their weeks to points to access the trust inventory. It is to point out that even if you convert to points, then your points are not able to do the same things that points purchased from Marriott will do. This helps all weeks owners make more informed decisions about converting to points or not, and about whether to deposit their weeks for points if they do.

This thread has gone off course on many posts, but if they are pro Marriott posts it is still a good post to some. It has gone to proponents saying how Marriott might not actually restrict legacy weeks owners access to inventory even though they can (yes just trust Marriott no matter what is in writing), how it is similar to what marriott did in the past using seasons(it is not similar), how resale owners got value they didn't purchase (when resale points hit the market make the comparison, until then it is irrelevant),and many other off tanget pro Marriott GOOD posts. If a sales rep or points specialist says something good about points like that there are not 2 separate inventories, that points aren't skimmed, that acess through II will not change, etc, then these are good posts from reliable sources. If the majority of reps say something bad about the points program (like the majority have said here), then these are stupid unfounded posts by by idiots who believe lying sales reps. If sales reps say good things about points then that is a true statement, if they say bad things it is a lie to sell points. Give me a break.

If not for TUGGERS pointing it out, all (including myself) would have assumed that points were points. Now we understand that points purchased directly from Marriott are more valuable than the points you get from converting your week(s) to points. To simply listen to those with like views severelly limits learning, knowledge, and understanding of any subject. The best purpose of these threads is to listen to both side so you can make a knowledgable decision about the new points program. There is no constructive reason to state that posts you disagree with have no purpose.


Unless proven otherwise, there are 2 sets of inventories. The new points purchasers who buy directly from Marriott can access both the trust inventory and the legacy weeks inventory deposited for points. Legacy owners who convert to points can only access the legacy inventory, not the trust inventory. It is a very bad thing for owners who convert to points. Until found in writing that legacy owners can access the trust inventory, then the best purpose of this thread is to inform and educate owners to the crooked trickery built into the points program by Marriott to devalue what we all own. It can help prevent many weeks owners from unknowingly becoming "red headed step child" points owners.


----------



## BocaBum99

dioxide45 said:


> Were we naïve to think that by enrolling that we would have unlimited access to trust inventory?



I don't think it was naive to think enrolled weeks owners would have unlimited access to trust inventory simply because other timeshare systems provide it.  In fact, unless it's specifically stated, why would anyone believe otherwise?

I don't have a problem with limited access to Trust inventory and a concept of exchange inventory vs. Trust inventory as long as it is implemented in a way that makes sense.

To me, making sense is all inventory in the trust and in the exchange system can be seen by all, but there are simply rules for when inventory can be taken out of a pool.  This visibility into inventory is the essential feature that makes points systems work well.  When you can see the inventory and when you can get it, exchange or booking satisfaction increases enormously over the weeks exchange model.   If Marriott simply recreates II, then they have failed.  I don't think they will.




dioxide45 said:


> People also didn't like the waiting game with II. Though I don't see how Marriott plans to make this better. The inventory is the same, the waiting game will continue. Though the trade power now is transparent, so there is no waiting in hopes your week is powerful enough. You know what you can and can't get. Though many people know that it is at a cost. So now the complaints moves from non-transparent trade power to skimming points. Just going from one issue to another.



I think it's more than the waiting.  I think it's also the unknown of whether or not your exchange will ever be fulfilled.  I think that Marriott could make this situation better.  (On the other hand, they could make it worse. Time will tell)

In the model I pose above, all inventory is visible to all participants.  The only thing that varies is when each participant can access it.  If you see that something you want is only available to another type of participant, you can either take the risk that it will be there when you want it, or you upgrade your position in line by making a purchase that gets you into that other group possessing the access privileges you want.

After reading all of the posts and reflecting on the program, I am less worried about 2 inventory pools and much more interested in knowing if Marriott will give visibility to Trust inventory for enrolled members and any exclusive access rules they may institute for Trust owners.  Again, we will know this when we do a trade test on the system that is released.


----------



## dioxide45

DJmonkey said:


> So I gain another  trading option.



Exactly. What was initially thought by most everyone was that you gained another reservation option. As this thread points out, it is just another trading option. Same as II, just with a little more flexibility and different costs.


----------



## DJmonkey

*Home resort only*

I am so confused, so I'll just focus on my situation.
We own at stream side in vail. This is a very old timeshare that I think Marriott acquired. 
I can only use that resort and not exchange into other Marriott unless using II. 
Personally I have not had good luck with II. We try to only stay at Marriott and Starwood properties and have not had the best luck with this.

I am still trying to figure out the new system but I think it would be a huge improvement for us, but maybe i am being naive. I was under the impression that i would be able to exchange pre dumped to II inventory or II inventory if that allows better trading.

So I gain another  trading option. In addition I would have the ability to convert to points which I would not get enough of to make it worthwhile. Or to convert to hotel points every other year, which since we have a Prime week for we would get a high conversion rate, 110000 points I think.

I was hoping it would also add to my resale value but i don't think so and i don't really see much of a market to for selling a TS right now. 

Any thought if is make sense for us?
What do I gain vs what do I lose?

Thanks


----------



## SueDonJ

tombo said:


> ... So many here on TUG complain about numerous posts, posts not on subject, posts that do many things that people don't like when they are posts they disagree with, but as long as they are pro Marriott they are good. I have not posted in a couple of days and still occasionaly some of my posts are referenced as being bad. However only my posts and your posts are bad to Susan because she dislikes any analytical posts that show Marriott to be treating owners badly. ...



Well, this is probably against the rules and I'll get called on it, but I think this is a very unfair assessment of my posts (in particular because you named me) and anybody else who posts in a similar style.  And I honestly am surprised that it's coming from you, Tombo, because I think you were an unfair target when your posts were called out.  We're ALL entitled to our own opinions and I don't like when any of us are made to feel like it's not okay for us to share them on TUG.

I like Marriott, there's no reason for me to apologize for that or to pretend it's not the truth or the basis for most of my opinions.  We've been satisfied owners of Marriott timeshares and anticipate that we still will be after enrolling in the new Exchange system.  My experiences have not been similar to the 90% of TUG posters who believe they've been misled by Marriott sales staff, so I don't share the prevailing anti-developer sentiment that most participants do.

And I don't ever say that somebody else's posts are BAD, regardless of whether they disagree with me or not.  Tombo, you and I had a continuing discussion just last week about all this and I walked away from it convinced that some things you were saying were correct and some things were not, and that you and I weren't enemies because of our differences.  I never said that you weren't entitled to your opinions, and I never easily dismissed anything you said simply because I know that your opinions will usually not be shared by me.

I see these last few posts between me and ArtsieAng the same way - we simply disagree but I haven't intended to leave anyone with the impression that I'm right and she's wrong.  I do think that the ONE thing posted about "every" Marriott advantage being tied to the money spent is wrong, so I gave examples of why I think it's wrong.  But that doesn't translate to me saying that anyone isn't entitled to their feelings that Marriott is treating them like red-headed stepchildren.  I said I can understand that feeling and agreed that Points owners who spend less money are being given advantages that Weeks owners who spent more won't get.  I was only trying to make the point that that's not any different from what's been the norm with Marriott's Weeks system, and I don't understand why it's productive to foster the feelings.

I don't ever expect total agreement from everyone to my TUG posts - how boring would it be here if we all never had any reason to share different opinions?!  We all can choose to continue with a discussion or not and it doesn't make any difference to me who does or doesn't.  But anybody who reads here regularly knows that I'm not anywhere near a "hit-and-run" poster, I'll keep posting until I think I understand what other folks are trying to say and until I think they understand me.  Anybody who doesn't want to read me can make the choice to walk away.  But I don't like being critiqued for my opinions, as opposed to the points I'm trying to make, any more than you do.


----------



## SueDonJ

tombo said:


> ... Unless proven otherwise, there are 2 sets of inventories. The new points purchasers who buy directly from Marriott can access both the trust inventory and the legacy weeks inventory deposited for points. Legacy owners who convert to points can only access the legacy inventory, not the trust inventory. It is a very bad thing for owners who convert to points. Until found in writing that legacy owners can access the trust inventory, then the best purpose of this thread is to inform and educate owners to the crooked trickery built into the points program by Marriott to devalue what we all own. It can help prevent many weeks owners from unknowingly becoming "red headed step child" points owners.



You keep saying that, "Legacy owners who convert to points can only access the legacy inventory, not the trust inventory."  And that could be WRONG, Tombo, because kedler and others here have posted the substantiation from the governing docs that support a totally different working model of the system.  When Trust owners exchange their points to non-Trust properties, when they exchange their points for MRP, when they exchange their points for other Destination Club options, etc ..., there will be Trust inventory available in the Exchange Company to Enrolled Weeks members.

Maybe you believe the few reps who said, "Enrolled Weeks will NEVER EVER have access to the Trust inventory" because it suits your argument to put this new system in the worst light possible, but nowhere have you provided any substantiation from the governing docs to support that statement.  Other supportive documents, referenced here by knowledgeable TUGgers, do completely discount the "NEVER EVER have access to the Trust" contention, which makes me believe that it's incorrect.

Or maybe I'm misunderstanding you and what you mean to be saying is that Trust Members will have access to inventory that won't be available to Enrolled Weeks members until the Trust Members make it available to them?  That's what the docs support, how I believe the system will work.  But that's different from saying "NO ACCESS EVER AAAIIIEEE!!!" and if it's what you really mean, you should say so.



BocaBum99 said:


> ... After reading all of the posts and reflecting on the program, I am less worried about 2 inventory pools and much more interested in knowing if Marriott will give visibility to Trust inventory for enrolled members and any exclusive access rules they may institute for Trust owners.  Again, we will know this when we do a trade test on the system that is released.



I'm okay with the system I outlined above in which any inventory exchanged for Points is available from the Exchange Company, whether it's the Points from Trust Members or Exchange Members.  Like you I hope that we're all able to "see" what that inventory might be, whether it's available for instant confirmation or through a Wait-list.  What I want most, though, is for them to be able to tell me when there is no chance for a requested exchange, so that I don't waste time chasing rainbows.


----------



## BocaBum99

SueDonJ said:


> I'm okay with the system I outlined above in which any inventory exchanged for Points is available from the Exchange Company, whether it's the Points from Trust Members or Exchange Members.  Like you I hope that we're all able to "see" what that inventory might be, whether it's available for instant confirmation or through a Wait-list.  What I want most, though, is for them to be able to tell me when there is no chance for a requested exchange, so that I don't waste time chasing rainbows.



For me, I think it is totally different.  I am most likely going to enroll my week(s) for $595/$695 simply because I want to see "what is behind door number 3" and I can't resist the temptation.


----------



## Luckybee

SueDonJ said:


> Well, this is probably against the rules and I'll get called on it, but I think this is a very unfair assessment of my posts (in particular because you named me) and anybody else who posts in a similar style.  And I honestly am surprised that it's coming from you, Tombo, because I think you were an unfair target when your posts were called out.  We're ALL entitled to our own opinions and I don't like when any of us are made to feel like it's not okay for us to share them on TUG.
> 
> I like Marriott, there's no reason for me to apologize for that or to pretend it's not the truth or the basis for most of my opinions.  We've been satisfied owners of Marriott timeshares and anticipate that we still will be after enrolling in the new Exchange system.  My experiences have not been similar to the 90% of TUG posters who believe they've been misled by Marriott sales staff, so I don't share the prevailing anti-developer sentiment that most participants do.
> 
> And I don't ever say that somebody else's posts are BAD, regardless of whether they disagree with me or not.  Tombo, you and I had a continuing discussion just last week about all this and I walked away from it convinced that some things you were saying were correct and some things were not, and that you and I weren't enemies because of our differences.  I never said that you weren't entitled to your opinions, and I never easily dismissed anything you said simply because I know that your opinions will usually not be shared by me.
> 
> I see these last few posts between me and ArtsieAng the same way - we simply disagree but I haven't intended to leave anyone with the impression that I'm right and she's wrong.  I do think that the ONE thing posted about "every" Marriott advantage being tied to the money spent is wrong, so I gave examples of why I think it's wrong.  But that doesn't translate to me saying that anyone isn't entitled to their feelings that Marriott is treating them like red-headed stepchildren.  I said I can understand that feeling and agreed that Points owners who spend less money are being given advantages that Weeks owners who spent more won't get.  I was only trying to make the point that that's not any different from what's been the norm with Marriott's Weeks system, and I don't understand why it's productive to foster the feelings.
> 
> I don't ever expect total agreement from everyone to my TUG posts - how boring would it be here if we all never had any reason to share different opinions?!  We all can choose to continue with a discussion or not and it doesn't make any difference to me who does or doesn't.  But anybody who reads here regularly knows that I'm not anywhere near a "hit-and-run" poster, I'll keep posting until I think I understand what other folks are trying to say and until I think they understand me.  Anybody who doesn't want to read me can make the choice to walk away.  But I don't like being critiqued for my opinions, as opposed to the points I'm trying to make, any more than you do.



Sue...since you wish to make this about you let me just say you keep coming back to this on different threads and seem surprised when many on here refer to you as a Marriott apologist(or other terms meaning the same thing). Are you really as surprised by that as you seem to indicate? 

Perhaps you're just an eternal optimist , but it seems like anytime anyone ever has anything negative to say about any aspect of Marriott you are always one of the first to jump in and tell there where/why/how they are wrong. And you do so by picking apart their posts and finding the smallest point to do it with. It gets old after awhile .You can say its just your opinion and of course you're entitled to your opinion but it does seem that no matter what anyone says if it is a negative Marriott post=bad, positive Marriott post=good. There are a few others who are not unhappy with the new program and they dont do this when expressing their opinions and you'll note that they dont get called on being Marriott apologists.


----------



## dioxide45

I give this thread only a 7 more posts before its locked.


----------



## BocaBum99

dioxide45 said:


> I give this thread only a 7 more posts before its locked.


----------



## dioxide45

BocaBum99 said:


>



I think this is an important thread, as it will have an impact on all of those who enroll and convert their week in to points. However I don't think there is a whole lot more that can be discussed until we hear something definitive from Marriott (either through DaveM's contact or otherwise). I don't count salesperson or VOA information definitive. We always knew you couldn't rely on salespeople, but you should be able to rely on VOAs.

P.s. Every time I type VOA, I actually end up typing VOE, and have to correct it, I had to correct it in this post twice before submitting.


----------



## BocaBum99

dioxide45 said:


> I think this is an important thread, as it will have an impact on all of those who enroll and convert their week in to points. However I don't think there is a whole lot more that can be discussed until we hear something definitive from Marriott (either through DaveM's contact or otherwise). I don't count salesperson or VOA information definitive. We always knew you couldn't rely on salespeople, but you should be able to rely on VOAs.
> 
> P.s. Every time I type VOA, I actually end up typing VOE, and have to correct it, I had to correct it in this post twice before submitting.



I find this entire Marriott program fascinating.  This is an important thread.  Hopefully, it won't get closed until DaveM does get us the answers to our most pressing questions.


----------



## SueDonJ

Luckybee said:


> Sue...since you wish to make this about you let me just say you keep coming back to this on different threads and seem surprised when many on here refer to you as a Marriott apologist(or other terms meaning the same thing). Are you really as surprised by that as you seem to indicate?
> 
> Perhaps you're just an eternal optimist , but it seems like anytime anyone ever has anything negative to say about any aspect of Marriott you are always one of the first to jump in and tell there where/why/how they are wrong. And you do so by picking apart their posts and finding the smallest point to do it with. It gets old after awhile .You can say its just your opinion and of course you're entitled to your opinion but it does seem that no matter what anyone says if it is a negative Marriott post=bad, positive Marriott post=good. There are a few others who are not unhappy with the new program and they dont do this when expressing their opinions and you'll note that they dont get called on being Marriott apologists.



Well, since Tombo NAMED me in his critique I thought it was only fair to think that it was about me.

Anybody who wants to point to something that's not opinion-based in any of my posts and give reasons why it's wrong, have at it.  I'll admit, I pick apart a whole lot of things, but I don't simply say "THAT'S WRONG" and expect to be taken seriously.  That Aruba thread, for example, had quite a few examples - "Marriott has no right to vote its shares."  Well, it turned out they did have the right.  "Marriott owes us for the roof."  Well, it turned out the roofing company was responsible for the warranty coverage, but Marriott stepped up and paid you the pro-rated warranty coverage that wasn't available from the bankrupt roofing company.  Here, it was "every Marriott advantage has always been based on the money spent" and that's wrong too.

Anybody who wants to disagree with my opinions, again, have at it.  You say Marriott is a terrible, horrible company and I'll counter that in my experience they're not.  I'm not saying you're wrong, just that we don't share the same experiences.  The difference is, I'm not going to come back every time with, "oh you're just an anti-developer zealot, what else should we expect?"

Like I said, I don't expect that everybody will agree with me when I post.  Heck, I KNOW most people won't because it's very difficult to think positively about a company which you believe has not treated you well.  But quite honestly, I don't understand why it needs to be pointed out repeatedly that my point of view is not the predominant one here, or doesn't vary from thread to thread, or that some are tired of hearing it.  I guess eventually if that's the feeling I get more often than not, it'll drive me away from TUG.  Is that the general idea - to drive any pro-Marriott opinions from the largest timeshare users' group on the web?  Seems counter-productive to me.

I'll remind you that in the last few days I've been as outspoken as anyone on TUG about the extremely poor way that Marriott has prepared its employees for this rollout.  You can't get much more critical of Marriott than to say their actions have been "inexcusable."

Now can we get back to the issues, and not the people who are posting about them?


----------



## Luckybee

SueDonJ said:


> Well, since Tombo NAMED me in his critique I thought it was only fair to think that it was about me.
> 
> Anybody who wants to point to something that's not opinion-based in any of my posts and give reasons why it's wrong, have at it.  I'll admit, I pick apart a whole lot of things, but I don't simply say "THAT'S WRONG" and expect to be taken seriously.  That Aruba thread, for example, had quite a few examples - "Marriott has no right to vote its shares."  Well, it turned out they did have the right.  "Marriott owes us for the roof."  Well, it turned out the roofing company was responsible for the warranty coverage, but Marriott stepped up and paid you the pro-rated warranty coverage that wasn't available from the bankrupt roofing company.  Here, it was "every Marriott advantage has always been based on the money spent" and that's wrong too.
> 
> Anybody who wants to disagree with my opinions, again, have at it.  You say Marriott is a terrible, horrible company and I'll counter that in my experience they're not.  I'm not saying you're wrong, just that we don't share the same experiences.  The difference is, I'm not going to come back every time with, "oh you're just an anti-developer zealot, what else should we expect?"
> 
> Like I said, I don't expect that everybody will agree with me when I post.  Heck, I KNOW most people won't because it's very difficult to think positively about a company which you believe has not treated you well.  But quite honestly, I don't understand why it needs to be pointed out repeatedly that my point of view is not the predominant one here, or doesn't vary from thread to thread, or that some are tired of hearing it.  I guess eventually if that's the feeling I get more often than not, it'll drive me away from TUG.  Is that the general idea - to drive any pro-Marriott opinions from the largest timeshare users' group on the web?  Seems counter-productive to me.
> 
> I'll remind you that in the last few days I've been as outspoken as anyone on TUG about the extremely poor way that Marriott has prepared its employees for this rollout.  You can't get much more critical of Marriott than to say their actions have been "inexcusable."
> 
> Now can we get back to the issues, and not the people who are posting about them?



Im all for that....but perhaps you should refrain from saying what is "right " or "wrong" re: the Aruba issues until court determinations are made down the road...and leave that issue for its own thread.


----------



## DanCali

SueDonJ said:


> Is that the general idea - to drive any pro-Marriott opinions from the largest timeshare users' group on the web?  Seems counter-productive to me.



Gee - and I somehow was geting the vibe that the pro-Marriott people were trying to drive the other side away from this board...


----------



## Dave M

*Moderator warning to all:*
This thread will not be locked, as the topic is too important to do so. However, the primary combatants have been warned via PM to cease fire. Others should not join in the fray.

Get back to following the BBS "Be Courteous" rule and avoid criticism or attacks against others.

Also, if you have a comment about the moderating, please follow the rules and send a PM or e-mail. Do not comment in this thread.


----------



## cruisin

I for one hope this new twist on the 2 buckets thing is not true, but it does show that even the most anti Marriott points people would never have dreamed that Marriott would do something that seems so low. I will likely enroll and never turn in for points because I may save money on all the fees with splitting 3 lockoffs into II. I do not think Marriott has changed at all, their leadership is still the same, they have never cared about owners, they just don't get to hide the fact anymore.


----------



## Luckybee

Dave...now that you're here(or were)....do you think that there is merit to what I indicated earlier in this thread, (paraphrasing)that is, that even if your contact says X, until we see how the system is actually put in play, we're all just spinning our wheels? 

What concerns me is that many of us are making decisions based on what we're reading on Tug(and gawd help us getting contradictory info from owner services) which may turn out to be faulty or flawed. It concerns me in that say Joe Smith enrols, then 6 months later finds out that the program isnt for him, then wishes to unenroll, there may be ramifications to that as yet unforseen. Its not that Im seeing black helicopters but I seriously question how a program so raft with confusion, and documents so filled with contradictions and gigantic black holes can possibly work. If it does, then better for all of us but if it doesnt then......


----------



## JimIg23

BocaBum99 said:


> For me, I think it is totally different.  I am most likely going to enroll my week(s) for $595/$695 simply because I want to see "what is behind door number 3" and I can't resist the temptation.



would you join for $1495/$1995?


----------



## hotcoffee

cruisin said:


> I for one hope this new twist on the 2 buckets thing is not true . . .



You can find out for yourself.  If you have not done so already, retrieve the Destination Points Disclosure Guide (might require logging to MVCI):

https://www.my-vacationclub.com/common/vc/en-us/pdfs/enrollment_legal_docs/disclosure_guide.pdf

Skip to the bottom of the document (section VIII), and take note of the 11 resorts listed at the bottom.  These are the initial 11 resorts added to the Trust.  Read the paragraph just above the 11 resorts.  Take note of who can reserve accomodations at the 11 resorts.  Note that it is "members".  Go back to the top, and scroll down until you get to the sections that discuss Trust Members and Exchange Members (particularly section IV).  When you are satisfied that the term "members" refer to both Trust and Exchange members, take note of the following sentence under section IV, paragraph 2 (Exchange Members):

"Exchange Members will have the right to reserve and use the Accommodations and facilities that are a part of the Program in accordance with the Exchange Procedures."


----------



## Luckybee

hotcoffee said:


> You can find out for yourself.  If you have not done so already, retrieve the Destination Points Disclosure Guide (might require logging to MVCI):
> 
> https://www.my-vacationclub.com/common/vc/en-us/pdfs/enrollment_legal_docs/disclosure_guide.pdf
> 
> Skip to the bottom of the document (section VIII), and take note of the 11 resorts listed at the bottom.  These are the initial 11 resorts added to the Trust.  Read the paragraph just above the 11 resorts.  Take note of who can reserve accomodations at the 11 resorts.  Note that it is "members".  Go back to the top, and scroll down until you get to the sections that discuss Trust Members and Exchange Members (particularly section IV).  When you are satisfied that the term "members" refer to both Trust and Exchange members, take note of the following sentence under section IV, paragraph 2 (Exchange Members):
> 
> "Exchange Members will have the right to reserve and use the Accommodations and facilities that are a part of the Program in accordance with the Exchange Procedures."



Hotcoffee

Are you suggesting that the sections you've referred to are crystal clear because if you are i must humbly disagree. There are a number of possible interpretations open and that is a big part of the issue. The average person reads a document drafted in legal language and tends to not see the nuances, contingencies and variations . There are lawyers who do nothing other than specialize in contract drafting and interpretation and end up with bigger messes over contracts far less complicated and much better drafted than this. Imho we would all be far better off if we assume nothing and expect anything esp if the foundation for our expectations come from these documents.


----------



## hotcoffee

Luckybee said:


> Hotcoffee
> 
> Are you suggesting that the sections you've referred to are crystal clear because if you are i must humbly disagree. There are a number of possible interpretations open and that is a big part of the issue. The average person reads a document drafted in legal language and tends to not see the nuances, contingencies and variations . There are lawyers who do nothing other than specialize in contract drafting and interpretation and end up with bigger messes over contracts far less complicated and much better drafted than this. Imho we would all be far better off if we assume nothing and expect anything esp if the foundation for our expectations come from these documents.



I made that post for the benefit of those who choose to read the Disclosure Document.  They can make up their own minds as to whether it is clear or not.


----------



## Luckybee

I do understand what you're saying but this is my concern....you say to cruisin "make up your own mind as to what this means".

Even if cruisin(or anyone else who is digesting this...not picking on you cruisin ), then "interprets" the documents and does so in a manner that is not consistent with how Marriott(and by Marriott what Im really saying is the rep on the phone who one is dealing with because lets face it, thats where the problems will arise) "interprets" in the future, then they may interpret to their detriment. 

For example, if one interprets that because of what they've read here they accept that the various buckets/pools may put them at a disadvantage and because of that they dont join , and then later find out that it doesnt operate that way, or there are not various buckets/pools, and the cost to join goes up substantially they've operated to their detriment. The converse is also true. 

One solution would have been a user guide at a minimum written in simple language that leave no or little room for confusion. The other is wait and see what happens when the program is in play.


----------



## Dave M

Luckybee said:


> Dave...now that you're here(or were)....do you think that there is merit to what I indicated earlier in this thread, (paraphrasing)that is, that even if your contact says X, until we see how the system is actually put in play, we're all just spinning our wheels?
> 
> What concerns me is that many of us are making decisions based on what we're reading on Tug....


As I have stated a number of times, there are still so many unanswered questions that I haven't made up my mind what to do, even though I can see some personal advantages for me (e.g., short mid-week stays). Until we have some better answers to some of the open questions, I don't think it's wise, at least for me, to jump in.

There will be some questions that don't get answered to our satisfaction, just as there always have been - such as exactly how II's comparative exchange system works and why we can't get a reservation for the week we want even when we call at 9:00:01 a.m. on the first day reservations open up.

But we will eventually know more than we do now.

Did Marriott make mistakes? Sure. So do most companies when they roll out something new, especially if it's complex. Look at Apple's antenna problem. Look at all the regular recalls from hundreds (thousands?) of manufacturers. Just like other companies do, Marriott will fix some of the communication issues, but not as many as we would like.


----------



## BocaBum99

JimIg23 said:


> would you join for $1495/$1995?



I would be much more careful about spending that much to see what's behind the curtain.


----------



## Dave M

I have had contact with the person I deem most appropriate to respond to the topic of this forum. I gave him links to individual posts with all of the different responses from Marriott so that he doesn't have to wade through this entire thread. He is reviewing the info and I expect to hear back from him on Tuesday afternoon.

Dave


----------



## JimC

Thank you, Dave!


----------



## DanCali

*Hats off to BocaBoy*

It took lots of us more than two weeks to figure out that points are not points (Trust Points > Legacy Points) and that this is set up as an exchange company.

BocaBoy pointed this out on June 22 (in what appears to be his 5th post ever on TUG). All we had to do was listen...



BocaBoy said:


> Greg T's post shows again that TUG members are reacting negatively without understanding the new program as it relates to existing owners  *IT IS AN ADDITIONAL EXCHANGE PROGRAM* for us.  They are taking nothing away from us.



This is the earliest I found any reference to this idea - so kudos.


----------



## urple2

Well...ok...but regardless...how are they not taking anything away from us if they can raid II and take our deposits to shore up their points program?


----------



## Dave M

Bill -

We don't know that they are. 

Both Marriott and II represent that II still follows the comparable exchange methodology, meaning that if Marriott is able to take a week from II, it must give a comparable week, not a dog week, to II. 

II, which has a contract with Marriott but is not owned by Marriott, would be doing its shareholders a disservice if it allowed Marriott to "raid" II for the best weeks without putting comparable weeks in to replace them.


----------



## urple2

Ok Dave. Thanks for the clarification. I guess time will tell with all of this for all of us.


----------



## puckmanfl

good evening....

Let's for the moment cease any discussion regarding good points and evil points...  let's instead focus on the premise that for legacy owners, nothing really changes if we stay in weeks...

nothing changes EXCEPT for the ability to do II exchanges.  MVCI a previous participant (seller of the currency/weeks and depositor) now morphs into MVCD an active competitor (active exchanger) in the II exchange this.  How do we know this???  They put  it in large letters in the FAQ's regarding filling trust members requests!!!  There is nothing hidden in this game.  


in the old world MVCI depsoited if it was in a good mood but didn't exchange, now they are an active exchanger as well...

How can inventory in possibly remain the same when the major players moves from a depositor to an exchanger...Is there anyone in TUG land believe that II availability will remain constant or increase???


----------



## travelplanner70

If Legacy owners will most likely exchange their full weeks rather than convert to  points and get a fraction of the value of the timeshare, why would a legacy owner spend $1495 to join?  What are truly the benefits to Legacy owners to join?  If a Legacy owner does not want to go on a vacation for just  5 days or does not need to go Thursday through Sunday and use up the points they would normally have for a full week exchange, what compels Legacy owners to spend $1495?  Also, I have a resale week.  Marriott will sell my week for me, but as has been pointed out, how vigorously are they going to try to sell a deeded week when they need to sell points?  Am I missing something?  Thanks for your help to clarify.


----------



## puckmanfl

good evening....

In a nutshell, it all boils down to this!!!

There are now 2 owner types

#1 Legacy owners
#2 Trust owners.

Legacy owners are primarily weeks users and exchangers with the ability to enroll and dabble in 'points".  The point game is for the most part another exchange option without most of "reservation" power given to the trust points...

Trust owners are primarily "points" players whose points function as a reservation currency with more access to inventory than Legacy points.  Trust players can also play in weeks by depositing their points in II in exchange for "weeks", but this "weeks" option for the trust players is not as strong as the legacy use of weeks!!!

neither group truly has the "best of both worlds". Both have a mildly to moderately watered down version of both.  MVCD probably looks at this as a "wash"..

This is what happens when you take a mature 25 year old TS system weeks based and change the rules mid-stream...

I wish them well....

I am going to my sales presentation at Lakeshore 7/21.  I have already decided that if I forked over another $9200 it would be for a primo deeded week discounted resale somewhere that I really want to visit every year and would not enroll in new program (can't anyway!!!) and not points that I can't combine with my legacy points...  There is no way that MVCD wil lbe able to magically convert legacy points to trust points with a small purchase of trust points.  It would defeat every legal piece of logic regarding distinction of the "trust"...


----------



## windje2000

puckmanfl said:


> good evening....
> 
> In a nutshell, it all boils down to this!!!
> 
> There are now 2 owner types
> 
> #1 Legacy owners
> #2 Trust owners.
> 
> Legacy owners are primarily weeks users and exchangers with the ability to enroll and dabble in 'points".  The point game is for the most part another exchange option without most of "reservation" power given to the trust points...
> 
> Trust owners are primarily "points" players whose points function as a reservation currency with more access to inventory than Legacy points.  Trust players can also play in weeks by depositing their points in II in exchange for "weeks", but this "weeks" option for the trust players is not as strong as the legacy use of weeks!!!
> 
> neither group truly has the "best of both worlds". Both have a mildly to moderately watered down version of both.  MVCD probably looks at this as a "wash"..
> 
> This is what happens when you take a mature 25 year old TS system weeks based and change the rules mid-stream...
> 
> I wish them well....
> 
> I am going to my sales presentation at Lakeshore 7/21.  I have already decided that if I forked over another $9200 it would be for a primo deeded week discounted resale somewhere that I really want to visit every year and would not enroll in new program (can't anyway!!!) and not points that I can't combine with my legacy points...  There is no way that MVCD wil lbe able to magically convert legacy points to trust points with a small purchase of trust points.  It would defeat every legal piece of logic regarding distinction of the "trust"...



We're all 'resale' owners now


----------



## m61376

windje2000 said:


> We're all 'resale' owners now



If it wasn't so sad it would be a very funny comment. Last year when all the diatribe between direct and resale purchasers cropped up and a few people here suggested that, basically, resale buyers deserved whatever limitations were imposed because they had no right to expect anything more than what was specifically in their purchase agreements/deeds, I had admonished that we should be careful what we wish for, because once Marriott started imposing restrictions on one subset of owners that likely other owners would eventually suffer. It is unfortunate that Marriott has chosen to categorize its customer base; I think it devalues everyone's ownership.

No one really benefits from split inventory. While I understand that flipping between inventory "should" work seamlessly, the real life application remains to be seen. I'm guessing every owner group will see some erosion of availability just because of the logistics of the systems. There are very few winners in this system; more of us seem to be losing than gaining here. 

For a company that derives half its business from its existing customer base, it's particularly unfortunate that many existing customers will be reluctant at best to continue to recommend Marriott timeshares. The existing customers are like the unwanted stepchild- part of the "family" because they have to be incorporated, but never quite fully belonging and never quite able to enjoy all the family events.


----------



## Dave M

*Please read!*

As I stated in a post other than the one I am quoting here, I asked my Marriott contact about this issue. After he thoroughly investigated the issue and the responses, we talked this afternoon and I'm pretty comfortable with the response. Part of the problem is that people have asked slightly different questions and, thus, have gotten some different responses. (Please don't tear that statement apart, because it's not the key to the answer.) 

My contact is in the process of writing something that will be intended for publication here. That "should be" within the next 48 hours or so. I don't want to post the answer until then, because I would likely get it wrong!

When I post it here, I will also edit the first post in this thread, solely for the purpose of linking my conclusion post, but otherwise not altering that OP. 



Dave M said:


> Yes, this thread is a "WOW!”
> 
> I'll try to find out something authoritative, but considering the variety of "authoritative" responses that people have reported in this thread, I don't have a lot of confidence that anything I find out can be relied upon. I will ask for a written statement for publication here and ask if Marriott can publish some clarifying information. I'm skeptical as to whether that request will be honored.
> 
> What a mess!
> 
> As I understand it there have basically been *four different responses* to the points access question for enrolled owners. Enrolled owners who elect to use points for a particular year...
> 
> 1) have access to all inventory in Marriott's hands (trust inventory, enrolled week deposits, legacy weeks traded for Marriott Rewards points, etc.) or ...
> 
> 2) have access only to weeks owned by other enrolled owners who elected to use points for the given year or ....
> 
> 3) have access to all inventory in Marriott's hands, but only if they buy a minimum of 1,000 points at $9.20 each or ...
> 
> 4) have access only to weeks owned by other enrolled owners who elected to use points for the given year if they use points. And if they buy a minimum of 1,000 points they will not be able to combine those points with their elected points for the year to access all inventory.
> 
> Does that about cover it? Or did I miss a major response?
> 
> Thursday is a very busy mostly non-TUG day for me, but I'll do my best to get the query started.


----------



## BocaBum99

Dave M said:


> *Please read!*
> 
> As I stated in a post other than the one I am quoting here, I asked my Marriott contact about this issue. After he thoroughly investigated the issue and the responses, we talked this afternoon and I'm pretty comfortable with the response. Part of the problem is that people have asked slightly different questions and, thus, have gotten some different responses. (Please don't tear that statement apart, because it's not the key to the answer.)
> 
> My contact is in the process of writing something that will be intended for publication here. That "should be" within the next 48 hours or so. I don't want to post the answer until then, because I would likely get it wrong!
> 
> When I post it here, I will also edit the first post in this thread, solely for the purpose of linking my conclusion post, but otherwise not altering that OP.



Dave,

How could you just tease us like that?  I feel like I just saw the end of the Empire Struck back and I had to wait until the next movie before I find out what happened to Han Solo.


----------



## siberiavol

Dave M said:


> *Please read!*
> 
> As I stated in a post other than the one I am quoting here, I asked my Marriott contact about this issue. After he thoroughly investigated the issue and the responses, we talked this afternoon and I'm pretty comfortable with the response. Part of the problem is that people have asked slightly different questions and, thus, have gotten some different responses. (Please don't tear that statement apart, because it's not the key to the answer.)
> 
> My contact is in the process of writing something that will be intended for publication here. That "should be" within the next 48 hours or so. I don't want to post the answer until then, because I would likely get it wrong!
> 
> When I post it here, I will also edit the first post in this thread, solely for the purpose of linking my conclusion post, but otherwise not altering that OP.



I am looking forward to getting updated information and thanks for your work. I think most of us want to understand exactly what if anything is available to enrolled owners from the two entities that have ownership in the new trust. Those are Marriott who currently owns the majority of the trust and people who have purchased points.

II has been able to explain how their system works to my satisfaction.   A satisfactory answer from Marriott for me would include how Marriott as a partial owner in the trust will distribute their owned trust properties to the enrolled owners. If the answer is "they won't" then let us know. If the answer is they will release after requests or they will deposit some or all first  and an enrolled owner can find them let us know.


----------



## Dave M

BocaBum99 said:


> How could you just tease us like that?


I apologize. However, I had indicated last week that I expected to hear back by Tuesday - today. Thus, I wanted to report that Marriott is following through appropriately and that I will have an answer. If I tried to give you a synopsis, I know I would mess it up. That's why my contact agreed to write something for publication.


----------



## BocaBoy

It is now Wednesday.  Did they get back to you?


----------



## camachinist

Dave did start a new thread with a response from a Marriott contact. I don't know whether that answers your question or not...


----------



## BocaBoy

The "new thread" is a slightly different question and the Marriott response is a little earlier than Dave's post saying an answer is forthcoming.  The other thread concerns two pools of weeks--one to book weeks and one to use for points.  The current thread deals only with the weeks available FOR POINTS.  The question here is whether the weeks owners and the points owners have access to the same pool when using points and whether exchange points and purchased points can be combined when you book.


----------



## Michigan Czar

Dave - It is Friday, did you receive any written response yet? I am anxiously awaiting Marriott's response to your questions from this thread.


----------



## windje2000

Michigan Czar said:


> Dave - It is Friday, did you receive any written response yet? I am anxiously awaiting Marriott's response to your questions from this thread.



Patience is required 

It would appear that many lawyers, ad hoc committees, consultants and senior management meetings - with  numerous back and forth discussion drafts - are necessary to answer straightforward procedural questions about a program that's been in development for four years.

Unless they're simply stonewalling.


----------



## Dave M

Yes, I have received a written explanation. Still working with it. It could be Sunday or Monday before I post.

Thanks for checking.


----------



## Michigan Czar

Dave M said:


> Yes, I have received a written explanation. Still working with it. It could be Sunday or Monday before I post.
> 
> Thanks for checking.



Thanks for the update Dave!


----------



## tombo

windje2000 said:


> Patience is required
> 
> It would appear that many lawyers, ad hoc committees, consultants and senior management meetings - with  numerous back and forth discussion drafts - are necessary to answer straightforward procedural questions about a program that's been in development for four years.
> 
> Unless they're simply stonewalling.



The correct spin must be placed on the new program to make a silk purse out of a sow's ear. If it was simply points is points no matter whether it is a legacy week converted to points or points purchased from Marriott, that could have been answered in less than an hour in one simple statement. To formulate a game plan for days to respond to the TUG owners means some BS deflections, half truths, legal what ifs, possibilities, and other subterfuge responses are headed our way. 

The fact that Dave is still trying to figure out what Marriott's response really means days after he received it says enough. Points bought from Marriott are now or will be in the future more valuable than points derived from legacy weeks deposited for points. Points purchased from Marriott will have access to inventory not available for Legacy owners (unless they make exceptions for owners who also buy points). Simple response in plain english, in some legal way or another all points aren't equal.


----------



## Y-ASK

tombo said:


> Simple response in plain english, in some legal way or another all points aren't equal.


Yep!  I'd probaby have to agree with this evalution at this time.  My BS meter is going off big time, just waiting for the dance to begin...

Y-ASK


----------



## cbdmvci

*Unsustainable*

*It is going to be unsustainable.

It is going to be just too complicated.*

Can I get that tdi-x week with bought points?
Can I get that tdi-x week with enrolled ponts?
Can I get that tdi-x week with blended enrolled and bought points?

*Then week points rates change but there is languange in the documents that guarantees (to some degree) the purchasing value of the points at the time they are acquired, so then...*

Can I get tid-x week with a blend of points bought before the change and points bought after?

Can I get that tdi-x week with a blend of enrolled points and points bought before the rate change and points bought after?



*Then I buy some points on resale...*
Can I get that week with a blend of enrolled points and bought points before the rate change and points bought after the rate change and points bought on the resale market?

*And then point rates changes again.

Etc.
Etc.*


----------



## DanCali

Y-ASK said:


> Yep!  I'd probaby have to agree with this evalution at this time.  My BS meter is going off big time, just waiting for the dance to begin...
> 
> Y-ASK



The big issue here is not whether Trust Points > Legacy Points. I think most are pretty much in agreement by now that Trust Points can book trust inventory and exchange inventory while Legacy Points can only book exchange inventory. Dioxide's cookie jars and marbles analogy explains it very well.

The big issue, in my opinion, is whether buying 1000+ trust points can magically cause points awarded for converting a legacy week to book trust inventory directly without going through the Marriott Exchange Co. In other words, using Dioxide's analogy, if I am a "little kid" and I buy a few green marbles, do I now get to use my 1000 green marbles and 4000 red marbles to get a cookie worth 5000 green marbles from the Big Kid Cookie Jar?

*Do we really need to wait two weeks to get an answer from Marriott on this one?* I think is we use some common sense we all have a good idea what the answer is. The rules are clear: you can only use green marbles to get cookies from the big kids' jar. Red marbles can only be used to get cookies (or green marbles) from Mom's jar. In other words, I'd be really surprised and skeptical if buying 1000 points allows you to book anything in trust inventory directly when combining those points with legacy points. When combined, trust points are only as good as the legacy points, meaning you are limited by what is deposited in the Marriott Exchange Company.

Just my opinion. I'm waiting for the official answer, like everyone else - but I'd be very surprised to hear anything different.


----------



## Y-ASK

DanCali said:


> Just my opinion. I'm waiting for the official answer, like everyone else - but I'd be very surprised to hear anything different.


Yeah that is probably going to be the case and I'm going to be very disappointed next Monday when I convert my 2011 & 2012 Harbour Lake Plat. weeks for points and then borrow points from 2012 and request a 10 day stay at OceanWatch for next summer and I'm told that I will be going on a wait list, knowing full well they have plenty of weeks in the trust.

But you never know, it might work out fine .  Then I won't have to worry about it for another two years...


Y-ASK


----------



## tombo

DanCali said:


> .
> 
> Just my opinion. I'm waiting for the official answer, like everyone else - but I'd be very surprised to hear anything different.



I think that Marriott might allow legacy points to become "REAL" points if owners buy a certain number of points from Marriot. I have no feeling that they will do this out of an altruistic feeling of kindness, or do it out of loyalty to existing customers, but I think that marriott might offer legacy points owners the opportunity to buy points direct and in the process convert their legacy inferior points to the sure nuff real Marriott points. They will do this for the same reasdon they invented the points program, and that is to to increase Marriott sales and increase profits and for no other reason.

 A lot of owners who currently own plenty of weeks giving them plentyu of legacy points points will not consider buying points because they don't need them. Some of those owners will buy points if the incentive is large enough. Many owners here who are converting or have converted have stated that they aren't planning on using their weeks for points deposits ever, that they are converting for exchange savings, but they still might buy 1000points  for $10,000 if that would hedge their bet and get them access to all inventory in case II inventory becomes limited in the future. 

Marriott is greedy and wants to make big bucks on every sale, but even to the high dollar Marriott sales teams, making $10,000 sales to current owners is nothing to sneeze at. I guess we will know when Dave figures it all out, or there might still be questions as to the way it will all pan out. Either way I promise they will not get me to convert, and they will not get me to buy 1000 (or more) points from Marriott.


----------



## DanCali

tombo said:


> I think that Marriott might allow legacy points to become "REAL" points if owners buy a certain number of points from Marriot.



I just don't see that happening from a legal standpoint (although I am not a lawyer).

Can Marriott tell someone buying Marco Island that they will let them book Maui or Summit Watch Platinum reservations too as an incentive (without going through II)? It just can't work that way for many reasons which are pretty obvious in the "weeks world".

Similarly, if you think of the trust weeks as the home resort of the "real" points owners, then you can't let legacy week skimmed points (which are given as a result of an exchange of a deeded week to points) book someone else's "home resort" (i.e. trust inventory) without going through an exchange company. And it doesn't matter if you combine them with trust points, just like you can't book two Maui weeks without going through II if you own Maui and Marco Island. To me, it's as simple as that...


----------



## tombo

DanCali said:


> I just don't see that happening from a legal standpoint (although I am not a lawyer).
> 
> Can Marriott tell someone buying Marco Island that they will let them book Maui or Summit Watch Platinum reservations too as an incentive (without going through II)? It just can't work that way for many reasons which are pretty obvious in the "weeks world".
> 
> Similarly, if you think of the trust weeks as the home resort of the "real" points owners, then you can't let legacy week skimmed points (which are given as a result of an exchange of a deeded week to points) book someone else's "home resort" (i.e. trust inventory) without going through an exchange company. And it doesn't matter if you combine them with trust points, just like you can't book two Maui weeks without going through II if you own Maui and Marco Island. To me, it's as simple as that...



Ahh but you could make all points trust points if you purchased points and subsequently gave your legacy week(s) to the trust (whether temporarily or permanently).


----------



## DanCali

tombo said:


> Ahh but you could make all points trust points if you purchased points and subsequently gave your legacy week(s) to the trust (whether temporarily or permanently).



That would be interesting but (i) I am not sure if owners would want to part with their deeds in exchange for trust points (especially given the skim) and (ii) I would imagine that requires a whole bunch of paperwork to go along with a retail point purchase, and we have not heard of that.

Could it happen in the future? Maybe... What I think is more likely is that they will allow resale units purchased after June 20, 2010 into the points system if they buy developer points to go along with that. But I think that arrangement would be similar to what was offered to us, which I still believe implies that when combining the points you can only see Exchange inventory but can't book trust inventory directly.

Only 2-3 days till we get to see Marriott's answer. Then we'll (hopefully) know for sure...


----------



## DanCali

tombo said:


> I think that Marriott might allow legacy points to become "REAL" points if owners buy a certain number of points from Marriot.



Another problem I see with this is that if Marriott did this, they would be admitting that Trust Points are much more valuable than Legacy Points. They can't dance on two dance floors at the same time... 

On one hand, to get people to enroll in points, they can gloss over the issue and say trust points are somewhat different but don't worry - we'll comingle trust inventory/points with the exchange company and legacy points will get their trust weeks that way (not sure how well that resonates with the few "real" points owners). 

Now on the other hand they will say trust points are much better than legacy points but if you buy 1000 we'll add your legacy week to the trust so your skimmed points become trust points. I'm not sure that will resonate well with most owners. Enrolling is a tough sell already - it's be much tougher if they indirectly admitted the legacy points are very inferior to trust points.

Pretending like it's a non-issue is probably a better approach for Marriott at this point in time.


----------



## CMF

*Holy Complications!*



Dave M said:


> Yes, I have received a written explanation. Still working with it. It could be Sunday or Monday before I post.
> 
> Thanks for checking.



The answer must be a humdinger if Mr. Dave has to process it before posting it.  It can't be good.

Charles


----------



## GregT

CMF said:


> The answer must be a humdinger if Mr. Dave has to process it before posting it.  It can't be good.
> 
> Charles



I suspect we all know what Marriott is going to say (unfortunately).

My expectation is that they confirm the existence of the two pools but indicate it's not a problem as they intend to manage the two pools such that they are functionally co-mingled, and that it will feel like one pool to the exchange requestor.   How are we going to feel about that answer?  Queasy?  Happy?  Resigned to the reality?

Separately, I expect Puck will get his Kauai Lagoons request for 2011 straight away (and I mean, instantly) and that Y-ASK will get his request filled too if its in the Trust, to create the appearance of direct access to/co-mingling with the Trust Inventory.   

Marriott could use the positive press from these immediate exchanges (can you imagine TUG's reaction if Puck puts in his request for Kauai Lagoons and it takes a month to fill it?  Considering there's 5M in available points inventory for KL in the Trust?  Oy.)

Enrollees who redeem their weeks for points must trust that Marriott will be able to really get the desired trade for them.  This will be different from II where you have to give them X number of weeks/X different resorts -- here an enrollee may often be asking for a specific week at a specific resort.

BocaBum is spot on that only over time will we be able to tell where the inventory is, and how accessible it is.  Marriott's system is soooo different from an authentic points system where the inventory is 100% available for booking, and it's just a footrace to see who gets it first.  Marriott has to go get the inventory from the current owners to make it available to others.   

Very interesting experiment that is being run here....

Best to all,

Greg


----------



## tombo

DanCali said:


> Another problem I see with this is that if Marriott did this, they would be admitting that Trust Points are much more valuable than Legacy Points. They can't dance on two dance floors at the same time...
> 
> On one hand, to get people to enroll in points, they can gloss over the issue and say trust points are somewhat different but don't worry - we'll comingle trust inventory/points with the exchange company and legacy points will get their trust weeks that way (not sure how well that resonates with the few "real" points owners).
> 
> Now on the other hand they will say trust points are much better than legacy points but if you buy 1000 we'll add your legacy week to the trust so your skimmed points become trust points. I'm not sure that will resonate well with most owners. Enrolling is a tough sell already - it's be much tougher if they indirectly admitted the legacy points are very inferior to trust points.
> 
> Pretending like it's a non-issue is probably a better approach for Marriott at this point in time.



If you don't buy points Marriott doesn't really care if you enroll or not. Convert and give us $600, or don't convert, they don't care either way. They can take deposited inventory from weeks owners out of II to give to points purchasers. They have the entire trust inventory for trust points owners. Enrolling new owners is not a high priority which is why if you question them about the skim or anything else your points specialist will just say it might not be right for you, it is probably best if you don't enroll. Anything that is high priority for Marriott comes with high pressure. Go to a points sales presentation and wait until the 12th of never to hear any Marriott employee say that buying points is not for you. They will bring you a manager to help show you why purchasing additional points is for you. They WANT you to buy points because it is profit for them. They don't care if you convert or not because that is not profit, that is simply a way to tell past buyers we offered you a chance to get in to the new program for a cheap price.

It is somewhat hard to convert many owners to points as you said, however it is easier to convert legacy weeks owners and get them to BUY additional trust points when Marriott tells you that if you want to get on an equal footing with direct points purchasers it is going to cost you $10,000 or more to buy Marriott trust points. Simple sell to all. To the points buyers,we are selling you points that are better than the points weeks owners receive which is why so many weeks ownrs are buying additional points. To the legacy owners, if you convert you can use legacy points to get legacy inventory, but to access trust inventory you will have to purchase points direct from Marriott. Marriott is not being that blatant with it yet, but the advantages of trust points are there to be sold whenever Marriott feels the time is right.


----------



## m61376

I agree with most of what's posted. First of all, I'm only guessing that Dave is either trying to get further clarification and/or the response is so complex that even he's having a hard time grasping all its likely implications. Couple that with "not biting the hand that feeds you," so to speak, and he's in a difficult spot.

While everyone is harping on the perceived and likely advantages of trust points, we have to keep in mind that the two pools aren't good for either group. Yes, trust points are better for those 11 resorts in the trust. They are better today for those resorts that Marriott still has significant inventory in and for the near term when Marriott will likely deposit some of the weeks turned in for reward points. However, renting those weeks is a very profitable business for Marriott. There are sold out and nearly sold out properties where Plat. weeks. are renting out for thousands of dollars, and they are renting to capacity. So it is likely that, after Marriott makes the initial splash, it will resume renting those weeks. Then, the inventory for many weeks may be whatever is converted to points for a certain year (the legacy points pool). So, a trust point owner who wants a ski week, or a Caribbean Plat. week, or a GO or Barony HH summer week, etc., where there is little inventory in the trust (including developer owned weeks and weeks redeemed for reward points) will be at the same disadvantage as the legacy points user wanting a week in the trust. Both require an exchange. So, I think both groups lose when the groups are subdivided.

I also don't agree that they don't really care if any week owners convert. They need those Platinum weeks and sought after Gold weeks to make this work. Many prime properties are sold or almost sold out. If week owners don't play, they become another exchanger in II and, if II doesn't give them an advantage, I think they'll languish. I really think they need weeks owners to participate- and not just join.

I agree that those Tuggers who have prominently discussed their trial runs for Monday will have happy results. Marirott will dip into whatever inventory they have to make the first exchanges. Like Boca, I think the real test will come down the road, when we see in reality how this plays out. It is a fine line- I really believe they need those weeks- but if they get caught with their hand in II's "cookie jar" the outcry will be quite a slap.


----------



## tombo

m61376 said:


> I also don't agree that they don't really care if any week owners convert. They need those Platinum weeks and sought after Gold weeks to make this work. Many prime properties are sold or almost sold out. If week owners don't play, they become another exchanger in II and, if II doesn't give them an advantage, I think they'll languish. I really think they need weeks owners to participate- and not just join.



Marriott will never be just another II exchanger. Marriott made the contract with II regarding how and when they can access II inventory. Marriott controls more inventory than any other II exchanger, Marriott has access to Marriott inventory in II at the 13 month mark (if not before), and Marriott is without a doubt the 300 pound gorilla in the room. II is more worried about keeping Marriott happy than any exchanger or group of exchangers. 

If legacy owners get mad that Marriott is raiding II inventory before they can get access to it what are they going to do to hurt Marriott? Not buy anymore weeks? Marriott isn't selling weeks anymore so no big deal.  Legacy owners will not deposit their weeks in II for exchange and they won't deposit them with Marriott for points to teach Marriott a lesson. Does anyone believe that those 2 options will be a choice for the majority of owners used to exchanging? Nope becase then they will be left with home resort use only. As long as Marriott is happy, II is happy.

At 13 months  in advance (possibly sooner) Marriott can swap trust inventory into II taking out any legacy platinum weeks owners deposited by giving II comparable trust inventory (we assume comparable means weeks with equal number of points to the points value taken) to replace what they take to give to trust members. Marriott doesn't need weeks inventory deposited into points to get access to it, they just need legacy owners to deposit their weeks into II or or into points and they will be able to get reserve it  before most/any legacy weeks owners can access the II legacy inventory.


----------



## GregT

tombo said:


> Marriott will never be just another II exchanger. Marriott made the contract with II regarding how and when they can access II inventory. Marriott controls more inventory than any other II Marriott exchanger, Marriott minimum has access to Marriott inventory in II at the 13 month mark (if not before), and Marriott is without a doubt the 300 pound gorilla in the room. II is more worried about keeping Marriott happy than any exchanger or group of exchangers. If legacy owners get mad that Marriott is raiding II inventory before they can get access to it, so what. As long as Marriott is happy, II is happy.
> 
> At 13 months  in advance (possibly sooner) Marriott can swap trust inventory into II taking out any legacy platinum weeks owners deposited by giving II comparable trust inventory (we assume comparable means weeks with equal number of points to the points value taken) to replace what they take to give to trust members. Marriott doesn't need weeks inventory deposited into points to get access to it, they just need legacy owners to deposit their weeks somewhere (into II or or into points) and they will be able to get it before most/any legacy weeks owners can access the II inventory they are depositing.




I think both of you have excellent and valid points.  I do agree that Marriott is tough competition for getting a sought after week -- it's not that hard to envision a perpetual "Request First"  where Marriott has a exchange request(s) into II for those weeks that Marriott thinks it will need for points requests -- and then if that week is deposited into II, Marriott's request will be first in line to be matched.  This is a reason I think it will be very easy to get to Ko Olina via II as I bet Marriott uses it (and any other property that had lots of unsold inventory) as trade bait for its perpetual Request First (but therefore makes it very hard to get Hilton Head in July, if Marriott is competing to trade for those weeks).


----------



## puckmanfl

good evening...

will let you know about the results on 7/26...

the rate limiting step will be getting access to a "points" VOA.  They only have 42 of them ready to go on 7/26.  Every points player (legacy and trust) is going to be on the phone as soon as Perry's atomic clock hits 9:00:000001 EST...

happy huntin...


----------



## SueDonJ

puckmanfl said:


> good evening...
> 
> will let you know about the results on 7/26...
> 
> the rate limiting step will be getting access to a "points" VOA.  They only have 42 of them ready to go on 7/26.  Every points player (legacy and trust) is going to be on the phone as soon as Perry's atomic clock hits 9:00:000001 EST...
> 
> happy huntin...



I was thinking about this earlier, Puck, trying to figure out who would be calling because not everyone who has joined will be looking for 2011 reservations.  Any Enrolled Members who want to use their week(s) through June/July could already have made those reservations using the 12/13-mo dates prior to the rollout.  Sure, there are a few of us who have first-half 2011 reservations that we're going to use to try to finagle something else on Monday, but do you really think most Exchange Members will be looking to change what they've already reserved?  Plus, any Points or Exchange Members who are looking for September-December 2011 reservations won't be able to call in yet because their 12/13-mo windows won't be open on Monday.

I agree with you it's going to require some patience on Monday because there will definitely be more calls than reps, and with it being a brand-new system pretty much nothing is going to happen quickly, but I'm not thinking we'll be in a queue with every Points and Enrolled Member.  At least I hope not!


----------



## hotcoffee

SueDonJ said:


> . . . I agree with you it's going to require some patience on Monday because there will definitely be more calls than reps, and with it being a brand-new system pretty much nothing is going to happen quickly, but I'm not thinking we'll be in a queue with every Points and Enrolled Member.  At least I hope not!



I take it that most TUGGERs either don't work or are retired.  I still work in a post-retirement job.  I will not be able to call until mid-afternoon.  But, I still have hope that every unsold week in the inventory (plus those of the ones exchanging) will not be gone by mid-afternoon!


----------



## RedDogSD

hotcoffee said:


> I take it that most TUGGERs either don't work or are retired.  I still work in a post-retirement job.  I will not be able to call until mid-afternoon.  But, I still have hope that every unsold week in the inventory (plus those of the ones exchanging) will not be gone by mid-afternoon!



Ahhh, the advantage of being on the West Coast.  We can call before we get to work.

Anyways, why are you guys calling?  Isn't the computer going to be the better way.


----------



## SueDonJ

RedDogSD said:


> Ahhh, the advantage of being on the West Coast.  We can call before we get to work.
> 
> Anyways, why are you guys calling?  Isn't the computer going to be the better way.



Hmmmm.  I wasn't even sure that the computer system would be up and running completely?  But one reason I plan to call in is because a few reps have said that the VOA's will be able to tell you based on what you're requesting, whether it's better to work with week-to-week or points exchanges.  Plus none of them have been able to say with any certainty what kind of instant or wait-list requests can be done on Monday - I want to hear what they have to say.


----------



## DanCali

hotcoffee said:


> I take it that most TUGGERs either don't work or are retired.



Not really... just start telling people that the points program is awesome because they can use skimmed points to travel 3 weeks in the off-season... many of the ones who will agree with you are probably the retirees, or at least those who don't have school aged kids anymore


----------



## dioxide45

DanCali said:


> The big issue here is not whether Trust Points > Legacy Points. I think most are pretty much in agreement by now that Trust Points can book trust inventory and exchange inventory while Legacy Points can only book exchange inventory. Dioxide's cookie jars and marbles analogy explains it very well.
> .



This analogy applies with blended ownership also. If you have a week converted and also 1000 trust points, and you want to book 12 days at resort X, you better hope that there is the necessary inventory in the trust and the exchange company, or just enough in the exchange company. In order to use blended ownership you need to pick from multiple jars to get what you want.


----------



## Dave M

*The response from Marriott* 
I'm comfortable with the following, which is the exact wording I have been given by a Marriott person that I trust to know what he is talking about:





> The reservation rules and priorities that owners of Marriott Vacation Club weeks enjoyed prior to introduction of the new points program have been maintained.  The inventory that owners of the new points product have direct access to at any resort consists of weeks that are actually owned by the Trust.  Any other occupancy by owners of the new points product at a resort, is of inventory that owners of weeks have elected to place into the new points exchange program.
> 
> Owners of Marriott Vacation Club weeks continue to have access to inventory at their home resort and Interval International exchange inventory, as they have in the past.  Owners of Marriott Vacation Club weeks who enroll in the points product and elect to exchange for Vacation Club points have access to Marriott Vacation Club Destinations inventory and Interval International exchange inventory.
> 
> The above scenarios are not contingent upon a Marriott Vacation Club weeks owner purchasing additional points or making any additional investment beyond the one-time enrollment fee.  Once a Marriott Vacation Club weeks owner enrolls in the points program, they now have an additional usage option each year to exchange their week to Destination points.  This is in addition to the current options of occupying at the home resort, exchanging through Interval International, or trading their week for Marriott Rewards points.


 I don't have any more info. So it's unlikely that I will be able to respond well to any follow-up questions.

That language is for the various responses that posters in this thread have received from Owners Services and from Customer Advocacy to the topic of this thread, as summarized in the following quote from an earlier post:





> As I understand it there have basically been four different responses to the points access question for enrolled owners. Enrolled owners who elect to use points for a particular year...
> 
> 1) have access to all inventory in Marriott's hands (trust inventory, enrolled week deposits, legacy weeks traded for Marriott Rewards points, etc.) or ...
> 
> 2) have access only to weeks owned by other enrolled owners who elected to use points for the given year or ....
> 
> 3) have access to all inventory in Marriott's hands, but only if they buy a minimum of 1,000 points at $9.20 each or ...
> 
> 4) have access only to weeks owned by other enrolled owners who elected to use points for the given year if they use points. And if they buy a minimum of 1,000 points they will not be able to combine those points with their elected points for the year to access all inventory.
> 
> Does that about cover it? Or did I miss a major response?
> 
> Thursday is a very busy mostly non-TUG day for me, but I'll do my best to get the query started.


----------



## dioxide45

The trust has 42MM points, they have maybe sold 2MM max. There is lots of inventory there. I am willing to bet that the trust has bulk deposited plenty of points in to the exchange company for enrolled members. No one will have any issues Monday trying to book trust inventory.


----------



## JimIg23

The reservation rules and priorities that owners of Marriott Vacation Club weeks enjoyed prior to introduction of the new points program have been maintained. *The inventory that owners of the new points *product have direct access to at any resort consists of weeks that are actually owned by the Trust. *Any other occupancy by owners of the new points product at a resort, is of inventory that owners of weeks have elected to place into the new points exchange program*.

Sounds like 2 buckets......


----------



## dioxide45

JimIg23 said:


> The reservation rules and priorities that owners of Marriott Vacation Club weeks enjoyed prior to introduction of the new points program have been maintained. *The inventory that owners of the new points *product have direct access to at any resort consists of weeks that are actually owned by the Trust. *Any other occupancy by owners of the new points product at a resort, is of inventory that owners of weeks have elected to place into the new points exchange program*.
> 
> Sounds like 2 buckets......



Actually three. Cookies and marbles.


----------



## Luckybee

dioxide45 said:


> The trust has 42MM points, they have maybe sold 2MM max. There is lots of inventory there. I am willing to bet that the trust has bulk deposited plenty of points in to the exchange company for enrolled members. No one will have any issues Monday trying to book trust inventory.



Did you interpret the comments that legacy owners who enroll *do* get access to the trust inventory? The fact that the response seperated the new points owners from legacy owners as seen below led me to think the opposite

*The inventory that owners of the new points product have direct access to at any resort consists of weeks that are actually owned by the Trust.*

and

*Owners of Marriott Vacation Club weeks who enroll in the points product and elect to exchange for Vacation Club points have access to Marriott Vacation Club Destinations inventory and Interval International exchange inventory. *

Destination club inventory I understood to be weeks deposited by owners who wish to exchange for points. In other words not the trust inventory ? Imho this seems to me to confirm that there is no access to the trust inventory.


----------



## dioxide45

I envision a big boardroom at MVCI home offices with three big buckets full of cookies and a big barrel of marbles. Each time someone calls in on Monday, the rep puts them on hold and goes in to the boardroom to try and snag the reservation (errr, cookie).


----------



## dioxide45

Luckybee said:


> Did you interpret the comments that legacy owners who enroll *do* get access to the trust inventory? The fact that the response seperated the new points owners from legacy owners as seen below led me to think the opposite
> 
> *The inventory that owners of the new points product have direct access to at any resort consists of weeks that are actually owned by the Trust.*
> 
> and
> 
> *Owners of Marriott Vacation Club weeks who enroll in the points product and elect to exchange for Vacation Club points have access to Marriott Vacation Club Destinations inventory and Interval International exchange inventory. *
> 
> Destination club inventory I understood to be weeks deposited by owners who wish to exchange for points. In other words not the trust inventory ? Imho this seems to me to confirm that there is no access to the trust inventory.



In legal speak, there is no access to trust inventory. But Marriott doesn't want weeks to go to waste, they won't be able to rent them. They will bulk bank just like they do today with II. I just don't see it opperating a lot differently.


----------



## Luckybee

dioxide45 said:


> In legal speak, there is no access to trust inventory. But Marriott doesn't want weeks to go to waste, they won't be able to rent them. They will bulk bank just like they do today with II. I just don't see it opperating a lot differently.



I think we both agree they dont have to though and will only do so to get the weeks enrolled and exchanged for points ie: make it attractive now and who cares later ! It is imho abundantly clear that enrolled legacy owners will only get access to that inventory until such time as there are point owners who want that inventory (which may be a while).


----------



## californiagirl

_"Any other occupancy by owners of the new points product at a resort, is of inventory that owners of weeks have elected to place into the new points exchange program. "_

So it also seems that new points owners also have access to the weeks we trade for points as well.:annoyed:   We have less inventory and more people trying to take it.  This really stinks!   

I agree with a previous poster that initially Marriott will try every way they can to fulfill every request, so they can call their new program a success.  I think it will be months until we really see what the true limitations will be.


----------



## hotcoffee

From the Enrolled Owner page on the my-vacationclub.com WEB page:

As an Enrolled Owner, once you’ve elected Vacation Club Points, you may make a reservation directly within the Marriott Vacation Club Collection of resorts, book a vacation through the Explorer Colection, or use your Vacation Club Points for an Interval International confirmation. 

Marriott Vacation Club Collection 5
When can I make a reservation?
Seven or more nights: *Enrolled Owners may request and reserve any resort in the Marriott Vacation Club Destinations Exchange Program *(Exchange Program) starting 12 months prior to the first check-in date, based on availability. 

From the Points Owner page on the WEB my-vacationclub.com page:

Marriott Vacation Club Collection 5
When can I make a reservation?
Seven or more nights: *Vacation Club Points Owners may request and reserve any resort in the Marriott Vacation Club Destinations Exchange Program *(Exchange Program) starting 12 months prior to the first check-in date, based on availability. 


5
  The Marriott Vacation Club Collection is comprised of timeshare interests owned by the MVC Trust and available for usage through the Marriott Vacation Club Destinations timeshare plan and timeshare interests available for usage through the MVC Exchange Company; please see the applicable Marriott Vacation Club Destinations Exchange Program documents for more information. Resorts with property that comprise the MVC Trust are described in the documents provided at the time of sale, and more particularly on the exhibit entitled Component Site Chart, which may be revised from time to time. Request for occupancy at resorts with small amounts of property in the MVC Trust, as set forth in the Component Site Chart, will be fulfilled primarily through the Marriott Vacation Club Destinations Exchange Program. As of 6/20/2010, there are currently timeshare interests located at 11 resorts owned by the MVC Trust and those resorts are designated with the symbol . *As of 6/20/2010, there are currently 53 resorts, including the aforementioned 11 resorts, with timeshare interests available for exchange through the Marriott Vacation Club Destinations Exchange Program, and those resorts are designated with the symbol .* Please see the applicable Marriott Vacation Club Destinations Exchange Program documents for more information. 

Crumble go the cookies. . . .


----------



## windje2000

Dave M said:


> *The response from Marriott*
> I'm comfortable with the following, which is the exact wording I have been given by a Marriott person that I trust to know what he is talking about: I don't have any more info. So it's unlikely that I will be able to respond well to any follow-up questions.
> 
> That language is for the various responses that posters in this thread have received from Owners Services and from Customer Advocacy to the topic of this thread, as summarized in the following quote from an earlier post:



Thank you DaveM 

I'm sure there's more of your time and effort in this post than we'll ever know.


----------



## 5infam

So it sounds like most folks here were correct, in that Trust Points owners get access to all the options - and enrolled weeks owners have to wait for trust points to be deposited (either by a trust points owner or by Marriott) before they can access the trust points. So it is simply an exchange system, not a reservation system for enrolled weeks owners.

Now what about if you buy more points - has that been answered yet as to what you will or will not have access to - commingling, etc.?


----------



## puckmanfl

good evening....

We are back at square #1...

If a point was a point, they would have said so.  What they are saying is that Trust owners have access to the trust inventory + exchange inventory in its entirety.  Legacy point players have access to the Exchange company + the amount of trust inventory in points equal to that removed from the exchange inventory by trust owners. The legal interpretation is that a point is not a point..

However, MVCD probably owns 95% of the trust. As they do now with unsold inventory, they can do as they please with it.  They can rent, sell more, deposit in II and deposit in the Exchange company.  They do this now with unsold inventory....

I believe there will be a functional co-mingling and a legal distinction between the two...

My guru states that purchasing 1000 trust points does not magically make your legacy points perform like trust points...  It is a legal distinction of inventory, not a punitive plot by MVCD.  I do believe that it will be functionally seamless (I know I am drinking the Kool aid again)  I am an eternal cynical optimist...


----------



## NJDave

I wonder what meant by the phrase "elected to place into the new points exchange program"?  One can interpret this to mean exchanging for points.  If that was meant, why not phrase it that way? Such wording would be consistent with the wording in paragraph that follows in the response. Was the differing language intentional?

I have a suspicion that Marriott (i.e. the trust) gains access to inventory of enrolled members regardless of whether the member actually exchanges for points.  I thought this on day one and still have that concern.  I don't think it is far fetched to believe that a member gives up their week to the trust and the trust provides equivalent inventory to Interval.  


Quotes

The inventory that owners of the new points product have direct access to at any resort consists of weeks that are actually owned by the Trust. *Any other occupancy by owners of the new points product at a resort, is of inventory that owners of weeks have elected to place into the new points exchange program*. 

Owners of Marriott Vacation Club weeks continue to have access to inventory at their home resort and Interval International exchange inventory, as they have in the past. *Owners of Marriott Vacation Club weeks who enroll in the points product and elect to exchange for Vacation Club points have access to Marriott Vacation Club Destinations inventory and Interval International exchange inventory*.


----------



## tombo

What a great program Marriott launched for it's loyal customers. Marriott skims some of your points if you convert and deposit your week for points. Marriott takes away some of your voting rights if you convert to points. And now it is confirmed that the points you receive after Marriott takes their skim are not as valuable as points purchased from marriott because you can't access all the inventory that people who buy points from Marriott have access to. Top it off with the fact that as a legacy points owner you can't ever access the trust inventory, but the trust points owners can access all the legacy weeks points inventory on the same day and time that you can. This means that trust points owners are competing with you for all legacy inventory deposited for points on an equal footing while not allowing you any access to trust points ever. This program that I have hated from the get go is worse than I ever imagined it would be.


I hope Marriott points sales rival the success of the introduction of the Yugo auto in the US.


----------



## gblotter

3 buckets?  I don't see that from the "official" response posted by Dave.

From my reading, the "trust inventory" will be equally accessible by points owners and enrolled owners who elect to trade via points.  The only distinction seems to be that enrolled owners have an additional advantage over points owners with the option to access the "weeks inventory" in addition to the "trust inventory".

Am I missing something here?


----------



## hotcoffee

californiagirl said:


> _"Any other occupancy by owners of the new points product at a resort, is of inventory that owners of weeks have elected to place into the new points exchange program. "_
> 
> So it also seems that new points owners also have access to the weeks we trade for points as well.:annoyed:   We have less inventory and more people trying to take it.  This really stinks!
> 
> I agree with a previous poster that initially Marriott will try every way they can to fulfill every request, so they can call their new program a success.  I think it will be months until we really see what the true limitations will be.



From Dave’s post:

Owners of Marriott Vacation Club weeks who enroll in the points product and elect to exchange for Vacation Club points have access to *Marriott Vacation Club Destinations inventory* and Interval International exchange inventory.

From the MVCI WEB site:

As of 6/20/2010, there are currently timeshare interests located at *11 resorts owned by the MVC Trust* . . . . 

As of 6/20/2010, *there are currently 53 resorts, including the aforementioned 11 resorts*, with timeshare interests available for exchange through the *Marriott Vacation Club Destinations Exchange Program *. . . .


----------



## Michigan Czar

tombo said:


> I hope Marriott points sales rival the success of the introduction of the Yugo auto in the US.



....Or the success of New Coke!

Wow! I am glad I purchased where I want to vacation, no way would I ever join this point program.


----------



## hotcoffee

gblotter said:


> 3 buckets?  I don't see that from the "official" response posted by Dave.
> 
> From my reading, the "trust inventory" will be equally accessible by points owners and enrolled owners who elect to trade via points.  The only distinction seems to be that enrolled owners have an additional advantage over points owners by being able to access the "weeks inventory" in addition to the "trust inventory".
> 
> Am I missing something here?



Nope.  You got it exactly right.  Non-enrolled weeks owners have access to inventory at their own resort and II.  Enrolled weeks owners have access to inventory at their own resort and II plus all of the inventory in the Destination Points Program including all of the inventory of the 11 resorts in the Trust.


----------



## tombo

hotcoffee said:


> Nope.  You got it exactly right.  Non-enrolled weeks owners have access to inventory at their own resort and II.  Enrolled weeks owners have access to inventory at their own resort and II plus all of the inventory in the Destination Points Program including all of the inventory of the 11 resorts in the Trust.



They never said that, and Dave specifically asked. It would have been the simplest response ever:

"Legacy weeks owners who convert to points have access to everything that direct points purchasers have access to including the trust inventory."

Marriott did not say that in response to Dave. This is what they said:

" The inventory that owners of the NEW POINTS PRODUCTS HAVE DIRECT ACCESS TO ANY RESORT consists of weeks that are actually owned by the TRUST. Any other occupancy by owners of the new points product at a resort, is of INVENTORY THAT OWNERS OF WEEKS HAVE ELECTED TO PLACE INTO THE NEW POINTS EXCHANGE PROGRAM. 

Owners of Marriott Vacation Club weeks continue to have access to inventory at their home resort and Interval International exchange inventory, as they have in the past. OWNERS OF MARRIOTT VACATION CLUB WEEKS WHO ENROLL IN THE POINTS PRODUCT ELECT TO EXCHANGE FOR VACATION CLUB POINTS HAVE ACCESS TO MARRIOTT VACATION DESTINATIONS INVENTORY AND INTERVAL INTERNATIONAL EXCHANGE INVENTORY."

Nowhere does it say that weeks owners have access to the trust, and Dave specifically asked that question. The doublespeak is the answer. Trust get access to everything. Weeks don't get access to the trust.


----------



## hipslo

gblotter said:


> 3 buckets?  I don't see that from the "official" response posted by Dave.
> 
> From my reading, the "trust inventory" will be equally accessible by points owners and enrolled owners who elect to trade via points.  The only distinction seems to be that enrolled owners have an additional advantage over points owners with the option to access the "weeks inventory" in addition to the "trust inventory".
> 
> Am I missing something here?



that is how I read, it, too.


----------



## dioxide45

tombo said:


> They never said that, and Dave specifically asked. It would have been the simplest response ever:
> 
> "Legacy weeks owners who convert to points have access to everything that direct purchasers have access to including the trust."
> 
> Marriott did not say that in response to Dave. This is what they said:
> 
> " The inventory that owners of the NEW POINTS PRODUCTS HAVE DIRECT ACCESS TO ANY RESORT consists of weeks that are actually owned by the TRUST. Any other occupancy by owners of the new points product at a resort, is of inventory that owners of weeks have elected to place into the new points exchange program.
> 
> Owners of Marriott Vacation Club weeks continue to have access to inventory at their home resort and Interval International exchange inventory, as they have in the past. Owners of Marriott Vacation Club weeks who enroll in the points product and elect to exchange for Vacation Club points have access to Marriott Vacation Club Destinations inventory and Interval International exchange inventory."
> 
> Nowhere does it say that weeks owners have access to the trust, and Dave specifically asked that question. The doublespeak is the answer. Trust get access to everything. Weeks don't get access to the trust.



Exactly, the Marriott Vacations Club Destinations is the exchange company, not the trust.


----------



## Michigan Czar

tombo said:


> They never said that, and Dave specifically asked. It would have been the simplest response ever:
> 
> "Legacy weeks owners who convert to points have access to everything that direct points purchasers have access to including the trust inventory."
> 
> Marriott did not say that in response to Dave. This is what they said:
> 
> " The inventory that owners of the NEW POINTS PRODUCTS HAVE DIRECT ACCESS TO ANY RESORT consists of weeks that are actually owned by the TRUST. Any other occupancy by owners of the new points product at a resort, is of inventory that owners of weeks have elected to place into the new points exchange program.
> 
> Owners of Marriott Vacation Club weeks continue to have access to inventory at their home resort and Interval International exchange inventory, as they have in the past. Owners of Marriott Vacation Club weeks who enroll in the points product and elect to exchange for Vacation Club points have access to Marriott Vacation Club Destinations inventory and Interval International exchange inventory."
> 
> Nowhere does it say that weeks owners have access to the trust, and Dave specifically asked that question. The doublespeak is the answer. Trust get access to everything. Weeks don't get access to the trust.



This is exactly the way I interpret Marriott's statement too. If legacy weeks had access to the trust they would just say so.

It's obviously this way, why would it take days to respond if everyone had the same access to all of the inventory. Another "Marriott enhancement".


----------



## BocaBum99

Dave M said:


> *The response from Marriott*
> I'm comfortable with the following, which is the exact wording I have been given by a Marriott person that I trust to know what he is talking about: I don't have any more info. So it's unlikely that I will be able to respond well to any follow-up questions.
> 
> That language is for the various responses that posters in this thread have received from Owners Services and from Customer Advocacy to the topic of this thread, as summarized in the following quote from an earlier post:



Dave,

You feel comfortable.  So, you seemed to get some clarity from your Marriott contact.  For me, I am as confused as ever.  Can you answer one simple question?

Do enrolled weeks owners have EQUAL access to ALL points inventory or not?    That's the only thing we want to know and it's the only question that wasn't answered.


----------



## Michigan Czar

dioxide45 said:


> Exactly, the Marriott Vacations Club Destinations is the exchange company, not the trust.



Totally agree, you said it better than me.

3 buckets- Interval, Trust, and Marriott Vacations Club Destinations (Marriott exchange company).


----------



## hotcoffee

BocaBum99 said:


> Dave,
> 
> You feel comfortable.  So, you seemed to get some clarity from your Marriott contact.  For me, I am as confused as ever.  Can you answer one simple question?
> 
> Do enrolled weeks owners have EQUAL access to ALL points inventory or not?    That's the only thing we want to know and it's the only question that wasn't answered.



I agree that given the build-up it was a pretty poor statement from someone who was going to answer all of the questions.  Nothing but ambiguity with no substantive information at all.  

Fortunately, the WEB site does answer the questions, and the WEB site agrees with the documents and agrees with the points person I have been communicating with.

We will find out on Monday.


----------



## JimC

If I understand MVCI's response to Dave...

The 11 resorts are the only "real" inventory in the trust.  And the inventory at those 11 resorts are only the unsold, but built and available for occupancy inventory, most likely the least desirable weeks left over.

The 42 other resorts are only available if a weeks owner deposits or exchanges into the trust.  Same issue for the 11 trust resorts for the inventory already sold as weeks -- the inventory is only available in the trust if a weeks owner deposits or exchanges.

Any owner using points, whether purchased directly or exchanged from weeks, can access the trust inventory.

So only one bucket or am I still confused?


----------



## 5infam

Yes, I think enrolled owners have access to the Trust, but not as a reservation system. They only get access when a trust points owners puts in a request and Marriott needs to pull it (fullfill their request) out of the Weeks Exchange System. So advantage goes to the Trsut Points owner, who gets to see everything first. If it is not in the exchange company, weeks can not access the Trust.


----------



## tombo

hotcoffee said:


> I agree that given the build-up it was a pretty poor statement from someone who was going to answer all of the questions.  Nothing but ambiguity with no substantive information at all.
> 
> Fortunately, the WEB site does answer the questions, and the WEB site agrees with the documents and agrees with the points person I have been communicating with.
> 
> We will find out on Monday.



Get your point person to put it in writing on a Marriott letterhead that legacy weeks owners who convert to points will have access to all trust inventory. If that is the case, why does Marriott refuse to simply state it?

It took Dave's source days to respond, and after days spent researching and consulting he wouldn't make that statement. 

We found out the answer we already knew when they responded to Dave without promising that legacy weeks points owners would have access to trust inventory.


----------



## gblotter

BocaBum99 said:


> Do enrolled weeks owners have EQUAL access to ALL points inventory or not?  That's the only thing we want to know and it's the only question that wasn't answered.


The term used in the official response is "owners of the new points product".   If you believe that "owners of the new points product" does not include enrolled owners, then I guess one could claim some ambiguity.  Otherwise, it seems pretty clear to me.

Legacy weeks owners who do not enroll clearly do not have any claim to the trust inventory.  If they get access by some fashion through II trades, then consider themselves lucky.


----------



## hipslo

dioxide45 said:


> Exactly, the Marriott Vacations Club Destinations is the exchange company, not the trust.




On a closer reading of marriott's statement, and referring back to the defined terms in the legal documents, I now agree with you.  Points are not Points, and enrolled owners who convert to points do not have direct access to trust inventory.

Why couldnt they just "man up" and come out and say that directly, in response to our very pointed questions?


----------



## hipslo

5infam said:


> Yes, I think enrolled owners have access to the Trust, but not as a reservation system. They only get access when a trust points owners puts in a request and Marriott needs to pull it (fullfill their request) out of the Weeks Exchange System. So advantage goes to the Trsut Points owner, who gets to see everything first. If it is not in the exchange company, weeks can not access the Trust.



That is how I now read marriott's statement, as well.


----------



## gblotter

hipslo said:


> On a closer reading of marriott's statement, and referring back to the defined terms in the legal documents, I now agree with you.  Points are not Points, and enrolled owners who convert to points do not have direct access to trust inventory.
> 
> Why couldnt they just "man up" and come out and say that directly, in response to our very pointed questions?


So you believe that "owners of the new points product" does not include enrolled owners then?  I'm not being argumentative - just trying to understand what you see in the language.  I don't see it.


----------



## tombo

gblotter said:


> The term used in the official response is "owners of the new points product".   If you believe that "owners of the new points product" does not include enrolled owners, then I guess one could claim some ambiguity.  Otherwise, it seems pretty clear to me.
> 
> Legacy weeks owners who do not enroll clearly do not have any claim to the trust inventory.  If they get access by some fashion through II trades, then consider themselves lucky.



Simple technicality. Owners of the new points product bought points. Legacy weeks owners can convert their weeks to points but they are not buying the new points product which is based on the trust inventory. 

If it was true that all points have access to all inventory, why would Marriott not simply state it in their FAQ's or in a newsletter or e-mail to weeks owners? I don't understand any feasible reason Marriott would climb a tree to tell a lie when it would be easier to stand on the ground and tell the truth? The only reason to not specifically answer owners repeated questions is because they know we won't like the real answer.


----------



## gblotter

tombo said:


> Simple technicality. Owners of the new points product bought points. Legacy weeks owners can convert their weeks to points but they are not buying the new points product.


So you do not believe that "owners of the new points product" includes enrolled owners who convert their usage to points then?


----------



## hipslo

hotcoffee said:


> From the MVCI WEB site:
> 
> As of 6/20/2010, there are currently timeshare interests located at 11 resorts owned by the MVC Trust . . . .
> 
> As of 6/20/2010, there are currently 53 resorts, including the aforementioned 11 resorts, with timeshare interests *available for exchange through the Marriott Vacation Club Destinations Exchange Program .* . . .



It is the language *"available for exchange"* that is the key here.  While the resorts at issue may in a hypothectical sense be "available" through the exchange program, no one can "exchange" into any given inventory unless and until the inventory has been *deposited* to the exchange company. That is how exchange companies work.  Its just like II saying that interests in thousands of resorts are available for exchange through II.  True, but not until deposits are actually made to II.

Bottom line, enrolled owners do not have direct access to trust owned inventory. Direct purchasers of points from marriott do. 

Whether or not this makes any difference in practice, I suppose remains to be seen.


----------



## tombo

gblotter said:


> So you do not believe that "owners of the new points product" includes enrolled owners who convert their usage to points then?



No because the new program is selling points that are based on the Marriott owned inventory labelled the "trust". If you convert your week to points you are not depositing your week permanently into the trust and thus your converted points are not a part of the new points program based on trust inventory. You will still own your week, new points product purchasers own no specific week and are simply a part of the trust. A weeks owner is not ever going to be a part of the trust whether they convert their weeks to points or not.


----------



## hipslo

gblotter said:


> So you do not believe that "owners of the new points product" includes enrolled owners who convert their usage to points then?



Enrolled owners don't "own" points, they own weeks, but they can elect points in any given year (just like they can elect MR points - they don't "own" MR points).


----------



## gblotter

The interpretation seems to hinge on the definition of this unique phase "owners of the new points product".  To some, it is a clever use of language designed to deceive.  Others (like me) take it as an inclusive term intended to comprise both points owners and enrolled owners who opt for points.  Who is right?  (I've been known to be wrong before.)


----------



## hipslo

tombo said:


> The only reason to not specifically answer owners repeated questions is because they know we won't like the real answer.



That shouldnt be a sufficient reason.  Man up and answer the question directly.  Anything less is somewhat insulting, and disrespectful, in my view.  If its not an issue, go ahead and tell us why its not an issue, but don't avoid answering the question.


----------



## 5infam

gblotter said:


> The interpretation seems to hinge on the definition of this unique phase "owners of the new points product".  To some, it is a clever use of language designed to deceive.  Others (like me) take it as an inclusive term intended to comprise both points owners and enrolled owners who opt for points.  Who is right?  (I've been known to be wrong before.)



It is very clear...owners of the new points product means people who buy points only and who are now owners of the Trust. When you "enroll" your week, you are not enrolling into the points trust - you are enrolling into the Exchange Company. So you do not own the new product, you just get to exchange. Just like now with II - you do not own any part of II - you just get to exchange. Hope that helps.


----------



## hipslo

gblotter said:


> The interpretation seems to hinge on the definition of this unique phase "owners of the new points product".  To some, it is a clever use of language designed to deceive.  Others (like me) take it as an inclusive term intended to comprise both points owners and enrolled owners who opt for points.  Who is right?  (I've been known to be wrong before.)



I am an attorney.  No way are enrolled owners "owners of the new points product".  I don't view this as language designed to decive, I view it as a very clear distinction between purchasers of points and enrolled owners who have the right to excahnge their weeks for points on an annual basis.  Frankly, I don't even see any ambiguity on this particular point.


----------



## tombo

gblotter said:


> The interpretation seems to hinge on the definition of this unique phase "owners of the new points product".  To some, it is a clever use of language designed to deceive.  Others (like me) take it as an inclusive term intended to comprise both points owners and enrolled owners who opt for points.  Who is right?  (I've been known to be wrong before.)



When asked point blank to confirm that weeks owners who convert and deposit their weeks for points can reserve "trust" inventory, Marriott refuses to confirm in writing that in fact that is the case. Why would you assume it will work that way when Marriott refuses to say it will? If it would work that way wouldn't Marriott simply say so? Lack of confirmation is all you need to know.

When Marriott is asked if new points purchasers have access to the trust they have no problem confirming they will. We even have it in writing specifically stating that points purchasers can access the trust and weeks deposited for points, but not one specific response stating that  wekks converters will have access to trust inventory. Why is it so easy for them to state specifically that new points purchasers have access to the trust but so hard for them to state the same thing for weeks owners? Perhaps because weeks owners don't have access?

Many here are trying to read into the Marriott legal speak what they want to hear. Until it is stated in easy to understand terms it is not for sure and probably not a fact IMO.


----------



## dioxide45

gblotter said:


> The interpretation seems to hinge on the definition of this unique phase "owners of the new points product".  To some, it is a clever use of language designed to deceive.  Others (like me) take it as an inclusive term intended to comprise both points owners and enrolled owners who opt for points.  Who is right?  (I've been known to be wrong before.)



The inclusion of the bolded quote below indicate that Marriott considers owners of the points product and converting weeks owners different type of owners and not "owners of the new points product".



> The inventory that owners of the new points product have direct access to at any resort consists of weeks that are actually owned by the Trust. Any other occupancy by owners of the new points product at a resort, is of inventory that *owners of weeks have elected to place into the new points exchange program.*


----------



## tombo

dioxide45 said:


> The inclusion of the bolded quote below indicate that Marriott considers owners of the points product and converting weeks owners different type of owners and not "owners of the new points product".





hipslo said:


> I am an attorney.  No way are enrolled owners "owners of the new points product".  I don't view this as language designed to decive, I view it as a very clear distinction between purchasers of points and enrolled owners who have the right to excahnge their weeks for points on an annual basis.  Frankly, I don't even see any ambiguity on this particular point.




You are both correct. Weeks owners who convert do not buy points, they still own weeks. Weeks owners who convert have the OPTION to EXCHANGE their weeks for points each year, but THEY DO NOT OWN ANY POINTS. Points owners OWN points, but not weeks. These are 2 totally different types of ownership.


----------



## gblotter

OK.   Thanks to your various explanations, I now understand the difference you are trying to highlight.  Either Marriott did not understand the question being asked (not likely), or they deliberately used a term "owners of the new points product" that would avoid giving an explicit answer (more likely).  I guess I must I agree with your conclusions that enrolled owners remain weeks owners and are not points owners.  If Marriott wants to clarify the definition of the term "owners of the new points product", then I can reconsider.


----------



## dioxide45

Marriott's non answer tells the whole story.


----------



## gblotter

Marriott said:
			
		

> Owners of Marriott Vacation Club weeks who enroll in the points product and elect to exchange for Vacation Club points have access to Marriott Vacation Club Destinations inventory and Interval International exchange inventory.


Another clever use of language is the term "Marriott Vacation Club Destinations inventory".  Why would they use this term instead of simply saying "weeks owned by the Trust" as they did in their previous paragraph?  I would also appreciate a clearer definition of this unique term "Marriott Vacation Club Destinations inventory.

I hate to assume bad faith in the answer that Marriott gave to Dave, but their use of these two unique terms leaves me wondering.


----------



## tombo

gblotter said:


> Another clever use of language is the term "Marriott Vacation Club Destinations inventory".  Why would they use this term instead of simply saying "weeks owned by the Trust" as they did in their previous paragraph?  I would also appreciate a clearer definition of this unique term "Marriott Vacation Club Destinations inventory.
> 
> I hate to assume bad faith in the answer that Marriott gave to Dave, but their use of these two unique terms leaves me wondering.



Dave asked them specifically if weeks owners who converted to points had access to the trust inventory. In the Marriott response it SPECIFICALLY says that marriott points purchasers have access to inventory owned by the trust. In the next paragraph it glaringly omits the same statement about trust access when describing what is available to weeks owners who convert. 

Do you really have any doubt anymore?


----------



## GregT

dioxide45 said:


> Marriott's non answer tells the whole story.



Yes, this is a very legalistic response -- we were all hoping for a Plain English response that answered the question, but this was written to avoid a lawsuit and not answer the question.



hipslo said:


> I am an attorney.  No way are enrolled owners "owners of the new points product".  I don't view this as language designed to decive, I view it as a very clear distinction between purchasers of points and enrolled owners who have the right to excahnge their weeks for points on an annual basis.  Frankly, I don't even see any ambiguity on this particular point.



Hipslo, my interpretation was also two pools and that Marriott controls access -- but that's what I was expecting.  Any reason to see anything else?



All, I believe we are where we expected to be:  1) Two pools and 2) We should trust Marriott that they will be functionally co-mingled

By the way, I do believe they will be functionally co-mingled, as someone noted, the inventory would be totally frozen over if there wasn't significant trading activity between the pools.

I do believe that it will work, it is just an interesting process.  

I'm still missing the old Marriott......(the one I used to stay at).   

Best to all,

Greg


----------



## GregT

gblotter said:


> I hate to assume bad faith in the answer that Marriott gave to Dave, but their use of these two unique terms leaves me wondering.



I really don't think it's bad faith, I think that this was drafted by attorneys, not to educate the public, but to mitigate (legal) risk.


----------



## gblotter

GregT said:


> I really don't think it's bad faith, I think that this was drafted by attorneys, not to educate the public, but to mitigate (legal) risk.


I must agree.  As a re-read the Marriott response, I see attorney-speak all over it.


----------



## gblotter

So I'm summarizing this for my benefit - let me know if I've got anything wrong here.

There are three different classes of owners.

1. Legacy Weeks Owners = Own traditional deeded-week.  No ownership in trust weeks.  Cannot exchange via points system.

2. Enrolled Weeks Owners = Own traditional deeded-week. Paying for access to exchange via points system, but not an owner of trust weeks.  Enrolled owners are not "owners of the new points product".

3. Points Owners = Own trust weeks. Can only access traditional deeded weeks if enrolled owners choose to exchange via points method or via traditional II exchanges. Also known as "trust owners" or "owners of the new points product".

There are five different inventory pools. (By inventory pool, I mean a source where someone might go to obtain time at a Marriott Vacation Club resort.)

1. Weeks Inventory = Traditional deeded-weeks. Accessible by Legacy Weeks Owners and Enrolled Weeks Owners wishing to reserve full-week at home resort via the legacy method.

2. Trust Inventory = Weeks owned by the Trust. Accessible by Points Owners wishing to reserve via the points method.  Currently comprised of 11 resorts - maybe more in the future.

3. Marriott Vacation Club Destinations Inventory = Exchange pool accessible by Points Owners and/or Enrolled Weeks Owners wishing to exchange via the points method.  Marriott Vacation Club Destinations Inventory <> Weeks owned by the Trust.

4. Interval International Inventory = Exchange pool accessible by all using traditional II exchange methods (not using the points method).

5. MRP Inventory Pool = Weeks given to Marriott in exchange for Marriott Reward Points.  Marriott has full control over these weeks and can rent them out or use for other purposes as Marriott chooses.


----------



## dioxide45

gblotter said:


> So I'm summarizing this for my benefit - let me know if I've got anything wrong here.
> 
> Owners of the new points product <> Enrolled Owners


True. Trust Points > Enrolled Points



> Marriott Vacation Club Destinations Inventory <> Weeks owned by the Trust


True, but trust points can be deposited to become MVCD inventory.



> So then there are FOUR inventory pools. (By inventory pool, I mean a source where someone might go to obtain time at a Marriott Vacation Club resort.)
> 
> Weeks Inventory = accessible by Legacy Weeks Owners and Enrolled Weeks Owners wishing to reserve full-week at home resort via the legacy method
> 
> Marriott Vacation Club Destinations Inventory = accessible by Points Owners and/or Enrolled Weeks Owners wishing to exchange via the points method


Mostly true, trust owners can exchange for this inventory also



> Trust Inventory = accessible by Points Owners wishing to reserve via the points method
> 
> Interval International Inventory = accessible by all for full-week exchanges not using the points method


Trust owners and converted weeks owners can also use destination points to exchange for full week and ShortStay exchanges in II. Trust owners must use points, converted week owners can use points or their week. Though we are unsure if Marriott to Marriott trades are permitted with destination points.


----------



## siberiavol

Enrolled members can't get anything from trust unless a new point purchaser now known as NPP or Marriot puts it in the Destination Exchange program.The NPP can get anything they want from trust but only what is is deposited in the Destination Exchange program.

I assume my VOA will go to Marriott and ask for them to give up some trust property per my request. Maybe yes ,maybe no and nobody knows why but the NPP always gets a yes if it is there. THE NPP  also always gets a yes if it is there in the Destination Exchange program as do I as an enrolled member.

Am I understanding this correctly?


----------



## GregT

gblotter said:


> So then there are FOUR inventory pools. (By inventory pool, I mean a source where someone might go to obtain time at a Marriott Vacation Club resort.)
> 
> 1. Weeks Inventory = accessible by Legacy Weeks Owners and Enrolled Weeks Owners wishing to reserve full-week at home resort via the legacy method
> 
> 2. Trust Inventory = accessible by Points Owners wishing to reserve via the points method
> 
> 3. Marriott Vacation Club Destinations Inventory = accessible by Points Owners and/or Enrolled Weeks Owners wishing to exchange via the points method
> 
> 4. Interval International Inventory = accessible by all for full-week exchanges not using the points method



I believe this is correct, except that #4 would be sourced from the others, ie a week deposited by either legacy weeks owners, or from Marriott via exchange of a Trust Week or a week deposited from a points owner.

Someday, we'll have a flow chart!!!!


----------



## GregT

siberiavol said:


> Enrolled members can't get anything from trust unless a new point purchaser now known as NPP or Marriot puts it in the Destination Exchange program.The NPP can get anything they want from trust but only what is is deposited in the Destination Exchange program.
> 
> I assume my VOA will go to Marriott and ask for them to give up some trust property per my request. Maybe yes ,maybe no and nobody knows why but the NPP always gets a yes if it is there. THE NPP  also always gets a yes if it is there in the Destination Exchange program as do I as an enrolled member.
> 
> Am I understanding this correctly?




That is the current understanding.  I would add that I suspect Marriott will make alot of the Trust weeks available to the Destination Exchange Program to help facilitate legacy week members trade requests.

It would be an incredible debacle if legacy week members requested exchanges that we all know exist in the Trust (like Puck's pursuit of Kauai Lagoons) that weren't matched (and they can only be matched from the Trust inventory, as it is a new property).

Unfortunately, Trust Points > Legacy Points, and we must believe that Marriott will make manage the inventory such that they are functionally equal.

Interesting days ahead.

Best to all,

Greg


----------



## jimf41

gblotter said:


> So I'm summarizing this for my benefit - let me know if I've got anything wrong here.
> 
> Owners of the new points product <> Enrolled Owners
> 
> Marriott Vacation Club Destinations Inventory <> Weeks owned by the Trust
> 
> So then there are FOUR inventory pools. (By inventory pool, I mean a source where someone might go to obtain time at a Marriott Vacation Club resort.)
> 
> 1. Weeks Inventory = accessible by Legacy Weeks Owners and Enrolled Weeks Owners wishing to reserve full-week at home resort via the legacy method
> 
> 2. Trust Inventory = accessible by Points Owners wishing to reserve via the points method
> 
> 3. Marriott Vacation Club Destinations Inventory = accessible by Points Owners and/or Enrolled Weeks Owners wishing to exchange via the points method
> 
> 4. Interval International Inventory = accessible by all for full-week exchanges not using the points method



I would add one more pool. Weeks traded for MRP's. Marriott holds the pursestrings on that pool and they can decide which other pool they go into or choose to rent them.

Regardless of what pool contains what weeks and who gets to fish in what pool the only thing that matters to legacy owners is will the weeks we request be easier to get, harder to get or about the same as it has been in the past. I imagine we'll find out over the next year or so.


----------



## pipet

GregT said:


> Someday, we'll have a flow chart!!!!



Sorry, but that made me think of this article I saw in the NYT a while back about Powerpoint winning the war... with this lovely diagram:





Just substitute in pools, points, MRP points, marbles, cookies, and weeks, various exchange programs, trusts, etc... and we have the new Marriott system. Viola!


----------



## gblotter

jimf41 said:


> I would add one more pool. Weeks traded for MRP's. Marriott holds the pursestrings on that pool and they can decide which other pool they go into or choose to rent them.


Very true - I forgot about that scenario.  I modified my post to include this fifth inventory pool.


----------



## cruisin

If enrolled legacy owners had full access to all point inventory, Marriott would shout it from the rooftops, it would be a major selling point. They obviously dont, but this really does make sense, when a developer is anti owner, this would be the logical anti owner stance to take, its just who Marriott is. That answer from Marriott was pathetic, but expected.


----------



## SueDonJ

Somebody said it very clearly two weeks ago - Trust Members own points, Exchange Members own Weeks that can be converted to points, and the Exchange Company is the facilitator when each is requesting inventory that's not available within their respective ownership pools.  I believe like others have said that there will have to be co-mingling of the inventory if the new system is going to be a success for Marriott, and I have no doubt that Marriott is going to do everything possible to make this a success.

Their biggest mistake with this whole thing was in not making sure that every one of their reps was schooled to answer the questions that they should have expected.  But the legal mumbo-jumbo rolled out with this isn't any different than the Public Offering Statements that are given to every Weeks direct purchaser, and Marriott doesn't offer easy answers to every question raised by those either.  TUG knows all the Weeks answers because we've had years to review the docs and put the system to practice; eventually we'll have all the Points answers too.

But dang!  This is frustrating when you want the answers yesterday!


----------



## SueDonJ

Who was it who said weeks ago that he didn't care if Marriott got his week from Mars as long as he could go where he wanted?  I have decided that wins Best.Post.Ever.


----------



## 5infam

pipet said:


> Sorry, but that made me think of this article I saw in the NYT a while back about Powerpoint winning the war... with this lovely diagram:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Just substitute in pools, points, MRP points, marbles, cookies, and weeks, various exchange programs, trusts, etc... and we have the new Marriott system. Viola!



Ha - Too funny!!!:hysterical: :rofl: :hysterical:


----------



## Dr. Buck

For what it's worth, this verbatim from a Marriott Supervisor.

Marriott:  
You will only have access to the trust pool via Interval.  Now this will only happen when you elect for Vacation Club points. You can still exchange directly via Interval.

Question : So basically if I enroll, and if I buy into the trust, I have 2 classes of points....trust points with access to trust, and enrolled deposited points only with exchange rights through Interval?

Marriott:  
That is right. But you can still exchange directly with points if the week that you want has been elected for points.  

When you place a request for a 7 night stay using points, if there is not availability, we would put you on waitlist. We would then look for weeks that have been given up for Vacation club points and weeks that have been deposited to Interval by all owners.


----------



## gblotter

SueDonJ said:


> Somebody said it very clearly two weeks ago - Trust Members own points, Exchange Members own Weeks that can be converted to points, and the Exchange Company is the facilitator when each is requesting inventory that's not available within their respective ownership pools.


Well said.  I've been following all these tugbbs discussions since June 20, but I have never been able to glue together all the pieces in my mind.  I think I've had an epiphany today about how this all really works.  Wish I could have figured it out weeks ago.  Doubtless something will surface tomorrow that will turn my "clear understanding" on its head - lol.  Marriott is certainly not making it easy on anyone (owners or their own reps) to comprehend the details.


----------



## GregT

pipet said:


> Sorry, but that made me think of this article I saw in the NYT a while back about Powerpoint winning the war... with this lovely diagram:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Just substitute in pools, points, MRP points, marbles, cookies, and weeks, various exchange programs, trusts, etc... and we have the new Marriott system. Viola!



I like the flowchart!!!!!


----------



## DanCali

hotcoffee said:


> Nope.  You got it exactly right.  Non-enrolled weeks owners have access to inventory at their own resort and II.  Enrolled weeks owners have access to inventory at their own resort and II plus all of the inventory in the Destination Points Program including all of the inventory of the 11 resorts in the Trust.






5infam said:


> Yes, I think enrolled owners have access to the Trust, but not as a reservation system. They only get access when a trust points owners puts in a request and Marriott needs to pull it (fullfill their request) out of the Weeks Exchange System. So advantage goes to the Trsut Points owner, who gets to see everything first. If it is not in the exchange company, weeks can not access the Trust.



5infam is correct. Having access to something doesn't necessarily mean you can book it as a reservation system. Access < Direct Access.

I "have access" to 3000 resorts via II... I still need to make an exchange. That verbiage is misleading and I dare say it is misleading on purpose. The average owner will never realize that they don't have direct access to the trust.




hotcoffee said:


> We will find out on Monday.



I guarantee Marriott dropped at least enough points into the exchange company to satifsy all exchanges on Monday and the entire next few months. So what? That doesn't change the way the system is structured...

When REAL points owners will get what is going on and will complain that they don't want to compete for trust reservations at their "home resort" with converted weeks owners, that charade will stop...


----------



## Luckybee

One thing that strikes me as interesting is what effect having a good VOA might be under the new system. With II the week one is depositing determines, by the formula, whether one can obtain the desired week. Now if one has a VOA prepared to go the distance might there be preferential treatment, that is, might a good VOA have the "pull" so to speak in getting the trust to "depost" a week into the destination program for a "good" customer? And better yet, how would anyone ever know if this is happening?

The variety of variables and still unknowns here are rather astounding !


----------



## m61376

DanCali said:


> 5infam is correct. Having access to something doesn't necessarily mean you can book it as a reservation system. Access < Direct Access.
> 
> I "have access" to 3000 resorts via II... I still need to make an exchange. That verbiage is misleading and I dare say it is misleading on purpose. The average owner will never realize that they don't have direct access to the trust.
> 
> 
> 
> I guarantee Marriott dropped at least enough points into the exchange company to satifsy all exchanges on Monday and the entire next few months. So what? That doesn't change the way the system is structured...
> 
> When REAL points owners will get what is going on and will complain that they don't want to compete for trust reservations at their "home resort" with converted weeks owners, that charade will stop...



Very true.

In readying through the above posts no one else seemed to highlight the direct access versus access verbiage (sorry if I missed it while skimming through). From Dave's post:
"The inventory that owners of the new points product have direct access to at any resort consists of weeks that are actually owned by the Trust. Any other occupancy by owners of the new points product at a resort, is of inventory that owners of weeks have elected to place into the new points exchange program.

Owners of Marriott Vacation Club weeks continue to have access to inventory at their home resort and Interval International exchange inventory, as they have in the past. Owners of Marriott Vacation Club weeks who enroll in the points product and elect to exchange for Vacation Club points have access to Marriott Vacation Club Destinations inventory and Interval International exchange inventory." 

The only people who have direct access to inventory in the trust are, as expected, owners of the new points product.

This was a legally crafted document, purposefully written for reprint on Tug. It delineates what inventory each group has access or DIRECT access to, and I think was purposefully crafted so as not to imply what will likely be going on behind the scenes. Access is equivalent to exchanging and direct access is equivalent to being able to directly reserve, subject to availability.

In reality, everything is subject to availability- with some things being more available than others, and more available to some people than others. Trust point owners may theoretically have first crack at trust inventory, but that may be mitigated by Marriott having transferred some of those units into the destination club pool in exchange for non-trust inventory (ex.-enrolled weeks traded for points). So, as Greg stated above, this may be a seamless distinction and there may be enough to go around for everyone.

Until a substantial amount of the trust is actually sold, I have no doubt that this won't be an issue. That's why I think all the "let's see what happens on June 26th" is a meaningless determinant of how the system will really run down the road. The impact of trust point owners having first crack at all the inventory won't be felt for years to come, because at the onset Marriott will assuredly be putting trust inventory in the general club pool.

I think it will be years before we really know if trust points>legacy points will have a real functional difference. It is clear from Marriott's refusal to specifically address the questions that Dave presented, proffering a generalized response instead which outlines what each group has access (or direct access) to, that at least legally trust and legacy points are not equivalent.


----------



## windje2000

There's two kinds of points

First, there's the kind that represent ownership of real property and require a $.40 per annum payment of maintenance fees to the Trust.  That payment gets you first dibs on the trust inventory, which represents the equivalent of your home resort.  Just like your deed gets you first dibs on home resort reservations.

The second kind of points has no $.40 per annum payment of maintenance fees because they're 'assigned points.'  They are akin to casino chips, convertible into whatever you can find in the exchange company.

If you are paying $.40 per annum MF you have type 1 points.

If you are not paying $.40 per annum MF, you have type 2 points.

Type 1 or Trust ownership points work in their home resort (the trust) and the exchange company.  

Deeds work in the home resort and can convert to type 2 (no $.40 MF) points for use in the exchange company.  

The real question is who has first dibs on property deposited in the exchange company.


----------



## tombo

> Trust members own points, Exchange Members own Weeks that can be converted to points, and the Exchange Company is the facilitator when each is requesting inventory that's not available within their respective ownership pools.





gblotter said:


> Well said.  I've been following all these tugbbs discussions since June 20, but I have never been able to glue together all the pieces in my mind.  I think I've had an epiphany today about how this all really works.  Wish I could have figured it out weeks ago.  Doubtless something will surface tomorrow that will turn my "clear understanding" on its head - lol.  Marriott is certainly not making it easy on anyone (owners or their own reps) to comprehend the details.



Well said except that the trust points purchasers respective pool is BOTH POOLS (the trust inventory, and the weeks inventory deposited for points). Weeks owners who deposit their weeks for points only have access to one pool (the weeks deposited for points inventory). 

So trust points owners have access to all pools, weeks owners who convert to points only get to go in the kiddie pool.


----------



## pfrank4127

windje2000 said:


> There's two kinds of points
> 
> First, there's the kind that represent ownership of real property and require a $.40 per annum payment of maintenance fees to the Trust.  That payment gets you first dibs on the trust inventory, which represents the equivalent of your home resort.  Just like your deed gets you first dibs on home resort reservations.
> 
> The second kind of points has no $.40 per annum payment of maintenance fees because they're 'assigned points.'  They are akin to casino chips, convertible into whatever you can find in the exchange company.
> 
> If you are paying $.40 per annum MF you have type 1 points.
> 
> If you are not paying $.40 per annum MF, you have type 2 points.
> 
> Type 1 or Trust ownership points work in their home resort (the trust) and the exchange company.
> 
> Deeds work in the home resort and can convert to type 2 (no $.40 MF) points for use in the exchange company.
> 
> The real question is who has first dibs on property deposited in the exchange company.



This is exactly how I see it!  Also I think everyone is losing sight the trust *only includes 11 resorts*.


----------



## puckmanfl

good morning...

Here's the rub.

Let's assume there are 40,000,000 points in the trust and today 4,000,000 points have been sold to trust owners.  Let's call these trust owners, the trust owners association.  The association owns 10% of the trust and MVCD the other 90%.  Why should the trust owners association have access to 100% of trust inventory when they only own 10%!!!!...

The association should have access to a % of inventory in the trust that they actually own.  I still don't understand why the association members have unfettered access to Exchange company inventory which is owned by MVCD but legacy owners in this case does not have unfettered access to UNSOLD trust inventory also owned by MVCD....


----------



## hipslo

DanCali said:


> I "have access" to 3000 resorts via II... I still need to make an exchange. That verbiage is misleading and I dare say it is misleading on purpose. The average owner will never realize that they don't have direct access to the trust.



Bingo!





DanCali said:


> I guarantee Marriott dropped at least enough points into the exchange company to satifsy all exchanges on Monday and the entire next few months. So what? That doesn't change the way the system is structured...
> 
> *When REAL points owners will get what is going on and will complain that they don't want to compete for trust reservations at their "home resort" with converted weeks owners, that charade will stop*...



Yup - all enrolled owners, whether we are enrolling direct purchase weeks or resale weeks, will be second in line behind points purchasers, as to the inventory in the trust.  Whether or not this makes any functional difference remains to be seen, but at least structurally, the possibility is there. 

This strikes me as potentially a more significant difference than the prior distinction between direct purchasers and resale purchasers (no MRPs for resale purchasers). 

So whoever said we are ALL resale owners now, I suppose I would have to agree.


----------



## tombo

pfrank4127 said:


> This is exactly how I see it!  Also I think everyone is losing sight the trust *only includes 11 resorts*.



Does it make it  the screwing Marriott put on weeks owners in the new points program a lot better since we are only "totally locked out" of 11 resorts? Before points ALL owners had access to ALL Marriott resorts. Now only new purchasers have access to ALL current and future Marriott resorts and weeks owned by the trust.


At 8 am 12 months in advance points purchasers have the same access to weeks inventory deposited for points that weeks owners who deposited it have. Weeks owners NEVER have access to the trust inventory (except when Marriott feels like throwing weeks owners a crumb) whether it is the current 11 resorts, or 21 or 51 in the future. In addition if Marriott ever buys/builds a new resort or ever starts ROFR'ing again, every single week will be in the trust and unavailable to weeks exchangers who convert to points.


----------



## hipslo

pfrank4127 said:


> Also I think everyone is losing sight the trust *only includes 11 resorts*.



..today.....


----------



## JimIg23

there is also the issue of weeks owners converting to MRPs.  Where does that inventory go?


----------



## windje2000

tombo said:


> Does it make it  the screwing Marriott put on weeks owners in the new points program a lot better since we are only "totally locked out" of 11 resorts? Before points ALL owners had access to ALL Marriott resorts. Now only new purchasers have access to ALL current and future Marriott resorts.
> 
> 
> At 8 am 12 months in advance points purchasers have the same access to weeks inventory deposited for points that weeks owners who deposited it have. Weeks owners NEVER have access to the trust inventory whether it is the current 11 resorts, or 21 in the future. In addition if Marriott ever buys/builds a new resort or ever starts ROFR'ing again, every single week will be in the trust and unavailable to weeks exchangers who convert to points.



The non trust owner neither owns nor is paying maintenance fees on the trust inventory.  Owners should come first, just like owners come first in your home resort. The trust owners do not have direct access to the inventory represented by deeds.  Why should a non trust owner have direct access to trust inventory?  It's the home resort of the trust owners.

The trust and the exchange company are separate entities, exactly like your home resort and II are separate entities. 

If you enroll, you have access to what trust owners and deeded enrolled owners are willing to deposit in the exchange company.  

Not different from II - you have access to inventory that deeded owners are willing to exchange and have deposited in the II exchange company.


----------



## puckmanfl

good morning

Jim

inventory that is converted to MRP's by weeks owners goes to MVCD.  They can rent it, deposit in II for getaways or exchanges and NOW they can also deposit in the new exchange company where trust and legacy point players hace equal dibs!!!


----------



## windje2000

hipslo said:


> Bingo!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yup - all enrolled owners, whether we are enrolling direct purchase weeks or resale weeks, will be second in line behind points purchasers, as to the inventory in the trust.  Whether or not this makes any functional difference remains to be seen, but at least structurally, the possibility is there.
> 
> This strikes me as potentially a more significant difference than the prior distinction between direct purchasers and resale purchasers (no MRPs for resale purchasers).
> 
> *So whoever said we are ALL resale owners now, I suppose I would have to agree.*



That would be me  link


----------



## pfrank4127

tombo said:


> *Does it make it  the screwing Marriott put on weeks owners in the new points program a lot better since we are only "totally locked out" of 11 resorts*? Before points ALL owners had access to ALL Marriott resorts. Now only new purchasers have access to ALL current and future Marriott resorts and weeks owned by the trust.
> 
> 
> At 8 am 12 months in advance points purchasers have the same access to weeks inventory deposited for points that weeks owners who deposited it have. Weeks owners NEVER have access to the trust inventory (except when Marriott feels like throwing weeks owners a crumb) whether it is the current 11 resorts, or 21 or 51 in the future. In addition if Marriott ever buys/builds a new resort or ever starts ROFR'ing again, every single week will be in the trust and unavailable to weeks exchangers who convert to points.



That's not true those 11 resorts are included in the exchange company.

"As of 6/20/2010, there are currently 53 resorts, including the aforementioned 11 resorts, with timeshare interests available for exchange through the Marriott Vacation Club Destinations Exchange Program, and those resorts are designated with the symbol ."


----------



## puckmanfl

good morning

windje...

in my example the trust association members are paying Mf's on the 10% of inventory that they own.  MVCD is paying on the other 90%.  Trust owners, in my example should have unfettered access to 10% of the trust point inventory!! 4,000,000 pts... worth.  They have unfettered access to 100% of trust inventory AND all exchange inventory!!!


----------



## tombo

windje2000 said:


> The non trust owner neither owns nor is paying maintenance fees on the trust inventory.  Owners should come first, just like owners come first in your home resort. The trust owners do not have direct access to the inventory represented by deeds.  Why should a non trust owner have direct access to trust inventory?  It's the home resort of the trust owners.
> 
> The trust and the exchange company are separate entities, exactly like your home resort and II are separate entities.
> 
> If you enroll, you have access to what trust owners and deeded enrolled owners are willing to deposit in the exchange company.
> 
> Not different from II - you have access to inventory that deeded owners are willing to exchange and have deposited in the II exchange company.



Trust owners don't pay your MF's on your week, but if you deposit it for points they have EXACTLY the SAME access to it that another weeks owner who deposited for points has. The weeks owner doesn't EVER have access to the trust inventory. Points owners only pay MF's on the trust but can access weeks inventory deposited for points. Marriott places inventory from the trust (inventory of their choosing that has the same points value) back into the weeks pool to replace what the points owners exchanged for. 

How is that the same? Are there II members who buy some new membership from II who have access to all exchange inventory while the older II members only have access to certain inventory?


----------



## Dean

pfrank4127 said:


> That's not true those 11 resorts are included in the exchange company.
> 
> "As of 6/20/2010, there are currently 53 resorts, including the aforementioned 11 resorts, with timeshare interests available for exchange through the Marriott Vacation Club Destinations Exchange Program, and those resorts are designated with the symbol ."


As I read it, those 11 resorts are actually 2 different resorts in terms of inventory and potential usage, not much different than say the two components of Maui Ocean Club.  In essence they have access to different villas in a % appropriate to the % of weeks, or the equivalent thereof, in both groups.


----------



## windje2000

puckmanfl said:


> good morning
> 
> windje...
> 
> in my example the trust association members are paying Mf's on the 10% of inventory that they own.  MVCD is paying on the other 90%.  Trust owners, in my example should have unfettered access to 10% of the trust point inventory!! 4,000,000 pts... worth.  They have unfettered access to 100% of trust inventory AND all exchange inventory!!!



Points purchasers bought an ownership interest not in a single resort, but rather bought into a portfolio of resorts.  

I think trust members currently representing 10% of the inventory can only reserve 10% of that inventory.  They *get* what they paid for.  They paid a pretty penny for that portfolio.

Early adopters get a large inventory to SELECT from - they GET no more occupancy rights than they paid for.  Right now the first in the store have a lot on the shelves to choose from.  But the check out person will only let them leave with what they paid for.  Like Best Buy on black friday.


----------



## windje2000

tombo said:


> Trust owners don't pay your MF's on your week, but if you deposit it for points they have EXACTLY the SAME access to it that another weeks owner who deposited for points has. The weeks owner doesn't EVER have access to the trust inventory. Points owners only pay MF's on the trust but can access weeks inventory deposited for points. Marriott places inventory from the trust (inventory of their choosing that has the same points value) back into the weeks pool to replace what the points owners exchanged for.
> 
> How is that the same? Are there II members who buy some new membership from II who have access to all exchange inventory while the older II members only have access to certain inventory?



Owners have first dibs on what they own.  Deeds or Trust = no difference.

If you decide to exchange, all exchange company participants have equal access to what is deposited for exchange.


----------



## puckmanfl

good  morning!!!

here is my konundrum!!! (hope that is a word)

I was very happy with the old Coke!!!! Along comes MVCD that says our owners prefer the flexibility of points, thus we will sell points. We will give legacy owners the option to be points players as well.  When I say yippee, I discover that the paradigm of my points includes stuff like exchanging, waiting for deposits etc.  Stuff that is inherent to weeks trading NOT a points system.  However, the new points players have a true points system with access to all of the inventory.  

Help!!!!


----------



## puckmanfl

good morning

windje...

yes, the association can only occupy 10% BUT they get unfettered access to the other 90% that MVCD owns before we do!!!!


----------



## windje2000

puckmanfl said:


> good morning
> 
> windje...
> 
> yes, the association can only occupy 10% BUT they get unfettered access to the other 90% that MVCD owns before we do!!!!



The first people through the doors of Best Buy on black friday get first crack at full shelves.  Same here.  They only get to take home what they paid for.


----------



## tombo

windje2000 said:


> Owners have first dibs on what they own.  Deeds or Trust = no difference.
> 
> If you decide to exchange, all exchange company participants have equal access to what is deposited for exchange.



If you decide to exchange for points you won't have equal access to the trust inventory available for exchange, in fact you won't have any access to trust inventory.The majority of the trust is not owned by points owners, the majority is owned by Marriott, yet they have access to 100% of that inventory, and they also have access to 100% of the weeks deposited for points (which they own 0% of). 

Weeks owners who convert to points have no access to the points trust pool. Points buyers have 100% access to the weeks deposited for points pool and 100% access to the trust pool.

I don't understand how that seems good to anyone other than points buyers.


----------



## tombo

windje2000 said:


> The first people through the doors of Best Buy on black friday get first crack at full shelves.  Same here.  They only get to take home what they paid for.



Best buy doesn't have some buyers who can shop throughout the whole store while making other buyers only have access to merchandise in the back corner of the store.


----------



## puckmanfl

good morning


windje


On Black friday,I have the same opportunity as everyone else to get to the mall at 3 am.  Here I don't...  I can't change my legacy deeds into trust points!!!!


----------



## NJDave

I agree with the conclusion that Trust Points > Enrolled Points.   While this conclusion has an impact on my decsion to enroll, since I don't plan on trading using points, it isn't going to control my decision.  

The key to my decision is what access will I have as an enrolled owner versus a non-enrolled member.  It is important to know if inventory deposited by enrolled members go into the Marriott Vacation Club Destinations exchange system in which enrolled members have direct versus indirect access to.  On the flip side, would an enrolled member thus have indirect access to Interval inventory and a non-enrolled member have direct access to Interval's inventory?

Does the key question become which pool is going to have the best inventory and which owner has priority (direct vs indirect access) to that pool?


----------



## Dean

puckmanfl said:


> good morning
> 
> 
> windje
> 
> 
> On Black friday,I have the same opportunity as everyone else to get to the mall at 3 am.  Here I don't...  I can't change my legacy deeds into trust points!!!!


No, but you could sell your deeds and buy points accomplishing the same thing, albeit at a significant price differential.  Trust owners have their own issues also including competing with other trust owners and no access to weeks not converted in some way, even if enrolled.


----------



## windje2000

tombo said:


> Best buy doesn't have some buyers who can shop throughout the whole store while making other buyers only have access to merchandise in the back corner of the store.



The trust is the home resort of the trust owners and represents Best buy in my example.  

Best Buy in my example only opens its doors to those who buy in.  You don't get into the trust if you don't buy in. 

So what you purchase in best buy is either taken home or put in an exchange company.  If you as a deeded owner or trust owner don't want to stay at your home resort(s) you make your interest available for exchange.  


The trust owners and deeded owners have equal rights in the exchange company


----------



## windje2000

NJDave said:


> Does the key question become which pool is going to have the best inventory and which owner has priority (direct vs indirect access) to that pool?



Yes In My Humble Opinion


----------



## tombo

windje2000 said:


> The trust is the home resort of the trust owners and represents Best buy in my example.
> 
> Best Buy in my example only opens its doors to those who buy in.  You don't get into the trust if you don't buy in.
> 
> So what you purchase in best buy is either taken home or put in an exchange company.  If you as a deeded owner or trust owner don't want to stay at your home resort(s) you make your interest available for exchange.
> 
> 
> The trust owners and deeded owners have equal rights in the exchange company



In your example the points home resort is Best Buy and I can't shop there because I didn't buy in. My home resort is Target. Why can the Best Buy owners shop in my Target store at the same time and in the exact same way that I can?? They didn't buy into my store!


----------



## puckmanfl

good morning

great!!!

now I have 3 options

#1 stay in "weeks" in a world where MVCD is now a COMPETITOR for exchanges

#2  play in points that < trust points and rely on MVCD to do the correct thing and co-mingle inventory..

#3 sell my deeds at a 80% loss AND pay an additional 130K to get my equivalent number of post skim points.  Total cost for this 180K  yikes

Think I will stay with door #1 and door #2  and hope for the best on 7/26!!!!

Tombo, please help me!!!!


----------



## windje2000

tombo said:


> In your example the points home resort is Best Buy and I can't shop there because I didn't buy in. My home resort is Target. Why can the Best Buy owners shop in my Target store at the same time and in the exact same way that I can?? They didn't buy into my store!



Best Buy owners can only get Target inventory if someone who has bought into Target  puts what they bought at Target into the exchagne company.  edited to add Best Buy owners are not allowed into Target.


----------



## tombo

puckmanfl said:


> good morning
> 
> great!!!
> 
> now I have 3 options
> 
> #1 stay in "weeks" in a world where MVCD is now a COMPETITOR for exchanges
> 
> #2  play in points that < trust points and rely on MVCD to do the correct thing and co-mingle inventory..
> 
> #3 sell my deeds at a 80% loss AND pay an additional 130K to get my equivalent number of post skim points.  Total cost for this 180K  yikes
> 
> Think I will stay with door #1 and door #2  and hope for the best on 7/26!!!!
> 
> Tombo, please help me!!!!



I don't like any of the options, I am going fishing. Hopefully I won't be limited to only catching bream since I have been fishing for years and haven't bought  any new rods and reels lately. Perhaps like Marriott, Zebco has created new rules for new buyers. I hope I will still be allowed to catch bass and catfish too even though all I was ever guaranteed when I purchased from Zebco in the past was the opportunity to catch fish, I was never guaranteed to always be able to catch all the fish I used to catch in the past.


----------



## tombo

windje2000 said:


> Best Buy owners can only get Target inventory if someone who has bought into Target  puts what they bought at Target into the exchagne company.



Once I put it into Target I should be able to shop at Best Buy since those who buy at Best Buy can shop at Target too. Otherwise why in the world would I buy at target in the first place?


----------



## windje2000

tombo said:


> Once I put it into Target I should be able to shop at Best Buy since those who buy at Best Buy can shop at Target too. Otherwise why in the world would I buy at target in the first place?



No they can't

Everyone can shop at either their home resort or the exchange company or garage sale/swap meet.

Best Buy owners don't get through the front doors of Target and vice versa.  Everyone is allowed into the garage sale/swap meet


----------



## tombo

windje2000 said:


> No they can't
> 
> Everyone can shop at either their home resort or the exchange company or garage sale.
> 
> Best Buy owners don't get through the front doors of Target and vice versa.  Everyone is allowed into the garage sale



At 8 am 12 months in advance points owners can reserve weeks deposited for points (the same as weeks owners can). That is not a garage sale, that is a invitation to all best buy shoppers to get to Target early for the best deals..

Have a good one. Gone fishing.....


----------



## windje2000

tombo said:


> At 8 am 12 months in advance points owners can reserve weeks deposited for points (the same as weeks owners can). That is not a garage sale, that is a invitation to come to all owner's only sales even though you don't wn there.
> 
> Have a good one. Gone fishing.....



So trust owners have equal rights to deeds owners if there is something on the tables at the garage sale or swap meet, which is a better analogy.  If there's nothing on the tables at the swap meet, . . . 

Good luck - Hope they're biting.


----------



## puckmanfl

good morning...

Im going fishin' too... bright and early on 7/26.  I have my atomic clock set for 9:00:000001 am EST and my points VOA on speed dial...  Using points as bait.  Keeping the weeks as weeks, until I see the fish, then convert...

will report in as soon as trading is done!!!


----------



## Dean

puckmanfl said:


> good morning
> 
> great!!!
> 
> now I have 3 options
> 
> #1 stay in "weeks" in a world where MVCD is now a COMPETITOR for exchanges
> 
> #2  play in points that < trust points and rely on MVCD to do the correct thing and co-mingle inventory..
> 
> #3 sell my deeds at a 80% loss AND pay an additional 130K to get my equivalent number of post skim points.  Total cost for this 180K  yikes
> 
> Think I will stay with door #1 and door #2  and hope for the best on 7/26!!!!
> 
> Tombo, please help me!!!!


IMO, being a well positioned member of option #2 is going to be the best overall situation to be in.  By well positioned, I mean good resorts/seasons owned and enough points to be Premier or Premier Plus.  I can't even imagine starting over with Marriott as a new Trust owner given the price realities you reference, basically higher than DVC prices for both up front and yearly fees.  If they get a break in some areas, I'd say they truly paid for it. 

To me it's not really any different than if Marriott shut down their sales completely, you simply freeze where we are for the inventory already alloted and function from there.  The main difference is if you owned at a resort with significant unsold inventory, you might lose your resort completely or see your dues go up dramatically.  Take Crystal Shores for example with a current subsidy of over $300 a week and limited amenities.  Without such a move, it would likely never be completed, it still might not be, but there was a real chance of it going under without something to sustain it given it's level of sales and other constraints.


----------



## kedler

windje2000 said:


> The non trust owner neither owns nor is paying maintenance fees on the trust inventory.  Owners should come first, just like owners come first in your home resort. The trust owners do not have direct access to the inventory represented by deeds.  Why should a non trust owner have direct access to trust inventory?  It's the home resort of the trust owners.
> 
> The trust and the exchange company are separate entities, exactly like your home resort and II are separate entities.
> 
> If you enroll, you have access to what trust owners and deeded enrolled owners are willing to deposit in the exchange company.
> 
> Not different from II - you have access to inventory that deeded owners are willing to exchange and have deposited in the II exchange company.


Well said!!! 

I recall lots of angst that points owners were going to be able to "get" our weeks.

Now everyone is complaining that we can't "get" the trust inventory. 

Marriott Exchange Company is an internal exchange company for Marriott weeks and beneficial interest/points owners to exchange what we own - no more, no less. 

Who gets what week/reservation is up to Marriott but does that really differ from who gets what in II? If I call II and get a 3 bdrm Aruba Surf Club with a 2 bdrm MGV outside of flexchange (which I did) I'm I getting preferential treatment or was that luck? Whether we are exchanging through MEC or II I don't think we'll ever really know.

We own deeded weeks at our home resort - we have first dibs on the weeks in the season we own or to the fixed week at our HOME resort. 

Weeks owners can give up "first dibs" for MEC inventory (if enrolled), II inventory (regardless of enrollment), MRP (regardless of enrollment, unless resale week owner), extras in the MVCD Program (if enrolled) or extras in II (regardless of enrollment).

New points owners own deeded beneficial interests they have first dibs on the inventory in the trust - remember they too have a deeded right - in their case its a deeded right to use x(the number purchased) beneficial interests in the trust - the Trust is their HOME "resort".

New Points owners can give up "first dibs" for MEC inventory, II inventory, MRP or extras in MEC and maybe II.

There are weeks owners who own weeks at the 11 resorts in the trust who will enroll in the program or who will continue to deposit in II - our "access" to the 11 resorts may be limited by the trust but it is not gone. 

The new points owners will want access to more that those 11 resorts so they will deposit their points in MEC to exchange for enrolled points or they will deposit their points in II to exchange for II inventory. Again our access to the trust inventory is not gone it may be limited.

My gut instinct is that MEC will try very hard to fill enrolled weeks owners requests with what ever inventory they have on Monday (in the same haphazard way this program was rolled out) to provide more inventory to the new points owners, most of whom no doubt think they have easy access to all Marriott resorts in the program.


----------



## GregT

Dean said:


> IMO, being a well positioned member of option #2 is going to be the best overall situation to be in.  By well positioned, I mean good resorts/seasons owned and enough points to be Premier or Premier Plus.  I can't even imagine starting over with Marriott as a new Trust owner given the price realities you reference, basically higher than DVC prices for both up front and yearly fees.  If they get a break in some areas, I'd say they truly paid for it.
> 
> To me it's not really any different than if Marriott shut down their sales completely, you simply freeze where we are for the inventory already alloted and function from there.  The main difference is if you owned at a resort with significant unsold inventory, you might lose your resort completely or see your dues go up dramatically.  Take Crystal Shores for example with a current subsidy of over $300 a week and limited amenities.  Without such a move, it would likely never be completed, it still might not be, but there was a real chance of it going under without something to sustain it given it's level of sales and other constraints.



I agree with this and how we need to think about the new system.

As much as I dislike skimming and uncertainty around inventory access, it also does keep Marriott in the timeshare game.  I want them to someday build out the 4th tower at Ko Olina, the additional building at St. Kitts, and the final building at Frenchman's Cove (I think there is one more).  And perhaps they will have less ambitious expansion into new areas as well.

If Marriott had elected to get out of the business completely (either sell the management role or go solely to property management) that would have been less desirable, in my view, so I have to accept the skimming (but will never like it).  I hope for modest expansion of the properties in the future and this may be the best chance of that.  

So it is up to us TUGgers to figure out the new system and where is the best place to play in it.  I agree with Dean that a Premier/Premier Plus that has the ability to play in points (even if we never do) leaves the most options and most ability to utilize whatever system is best.

All the best,

Greg


----------



## dioxide45

What seems to be at issue here and why trust owners get first crack is that trust owners will always be doing a Request First type of search. Their points won't be deposited in to the exchange company until they get out what they want.

This is different for weeks enrollees. Enrollees can do request first or deposit first. By depositing a week for points, they have done a deposit first. This gives those trust owners request first access to that week. The problem happens if the weeks owners all hold out for inventory and don't convert until they see it, then there will be gridlock.

I have to agree with others that Marriott will be seeding the exchange company with plenty of trust points that have been bulk banked. This will facilitate the flow of plenty of enrolled weeks in to the exchange company.

It doesn't really matter how Marriott facilitates this, as long as people get the exchanges they want, those people will be happy.


----------



## Dean

GregT said:


> I agree with this and how we need to think about the new system.
> 
> As much as I dislike skimming and uncertainty around inventory access, it also does keep Marriott in the timeshare game.  I want them to someday build out the 4th tower at Ko Olina, the additional building at St. Kitts, and the final building at Frenchman's Cove (I think there is one more).  And perhaps they will have less ambitious expansion into new areas as well.
> 
> If Marriott had elected to get out of the business completely (either sell the management role or go solely to property management) that would have been less desirable, in my view, so I have to accept the skimming (but will never like it).  I hope for modest expansion of the properties in the future and this may be the best bet.
> 
> So it is up to us TUGgers to figure out the new system and where is the best place to play in it.  I agree with Dean that a Premier/Premier Plus that has the ability to play in points (even if we never do) leaves the most options and most ability to utilize whatever system is best.
> 
> All the best,
> 
> Greg


While I don't like the skim nor the 3 bucket of points with Trust owners having better options (at a higher cost) than enrolled owners, I do understand it.  From a legal standpoint I'm not sure they have any other choice related to access since technically this IS a new timeshare system with the old one being essentially frozen.  It's very analogous in many ways to RCI weeks vs RCI points.


----------



## m61376

NJDave said:


> I agree with the conclusion that Trust Points > Enrolled Points.   While this conclusion has an impact on my decsion to enroll, since I don't plan on trading using points, it isn't going to control my decision.
> 
> The key to my decision is what access will I have as an enrolled owner versus a non-enrolled member.  It is important to know if inventory deposited by enrolled members go into the Marriott Vacation Club Destinations exchange system in which enrolled members have direct versus indirect access to.  On the flip side, would an enrolled member thus have indirect access to Interval inventory and a non-enrolled member have direct access to Interval's inventory?
> 
> Does the key question become which pool is going to have the best inventory and which owner has priority (direct vs indirect access) to that pool?



Or- is an enrolled week owner treated as a regular week owners unless he/she converts to points in a given year? From what I was told, enrolled week owners using weeks continue with business as usual and are not privy to MVCD deposits, except insofar as MVCD makes comparable exchanges in II for week deposits which point owners have requested.


----------



## windje2000

dioxide45 said:


> What seems to be at issue here and why trust owners get first crack is that trust owners will always be doing a Request First type of search. Their points won't be deposited in to the exchange company until they get out what they want.
> 
> This is different for weeks enrollees. Enrollees can do request first or deposit first. By depositing a week for points, they have done a deposit first. This gives those trust owners request first access to that week. The problem happens if the weeks owners all hold out for inventory and don't convert until they see it, then there will be gridlock.
> 
> I have to agree with others that Marriott will be seeding the exchange company with plenty of trust points that have been bulk banked. This will facilitate the flow of plenty of enrolled weeks in to the exchange company.
> 
> It doesn't really matter how Marriott facilitates this, as long as people get the exchanges they want, those people will be happy.



Equal access/rights to the exchange company inventory is imperative if Marriott expects this to work.  It won't work if any class of exchange participants perceives the deck is stacked against them.


Not communicating with the 400,000 people who are your best customers?  


*Absolutely . . . positively . . . insane.*


----------



## hotcoffee

windje2000 said:


> Equal access/rights to the exchange company inventory is imperative if Marriott expects this to work.  It won't work if any class of exchange participants perceives the deck is stacked against them.
> . . . .



Both points owners and enrolled weeks owners have access to the same inventory.  The WEB site now makes that pretty clear.  Unsold weeks, weeks deposited by enrolled owners, weeks traded for MRP, and weeks from delinquent MF owners are all part of the Points inventory.  Moreover, unsold weeks in the Trust will also be available just like unsold weeks at the other 42 participating resorts.  The only part of the Trust that they will probably have to hold back will be enough weeks to account for all of the purchased points.  Those who purchased points have to be given the right to use them.  So, they will probably have to withhold enough of a cross section of weeks to account for any possible way that current points owners might want to reserve them.


----------



## BocaBoy

I agree that the Marriott response was poorly worded.  However, it is clear to me that weeks owners who exchange for points in a given year have access to ALL trust inventory IF THEY USE POINTS TO RESERVE.  They can not reserve a week the old way from the points inventory.  (And that is no surprise.  I do not think any of us ever thought we could reserve the old way from trust inventory.)


----------



## DanCali

BocaBoy said:


> I agree that the Marriott response was poorly worded.  However, it is clear to me that weeks owners who exchange for points in a given year have access to ALL trust inventory IF THEY USE POINTS TO RESERVE.  They can not reserve a week the old way from the points inventory.  (And that is no surprise.  I do not think any of us ever thought we could reserve the old way from trust inventory.)



Yes - 100% correct. They have access, not direct access. And to gain access it is an exchange, not a reservation.

And I think most of us though that "points  are points", meaning we could reserve trust inventory. Just look at the posts between June 20 and July 10.

Clearly Trust Points > Legacy Points not only in this aspect but others as well. See my next couple of posts responding to others.



hotcoffee said:


> Both points owners and enrolled weeks owners have access to the same inventory.



Again, Access < Direct Access...


----------



## windje2000

hotcoffee said:


> Both points owners and enrolled weeks owners have access to the same inventory.  The WEB site now makes that pretty clear.  Unsold weeks, weeks deposited by enrolled owners, weeks traded for MRP, and weeks from delinquent MF owners are all part of the Points inventory.  Moreover, unsold weeks in the Trust will also be available just like unsold weeks at the other 42 participating resorts.  The only part of the Trust that they will probably have to hold back will be enough weeks to account for all of the purchased points.  Those who purchased points have to be given the right to use them.  So, they will probably have to withhold enough of a cross section of weeks to account for any possible way that current points owners might want to reserve them.



I think dioxide was pointing out that points owners always are the equivalent of 'request first' exchangers while legacy owners who elect points are the equivalent of 'deposit first'.  

The inventory is the same; the access procedure is not.  That's the difference he was pointing out.


----------



## hotcoffee

BocaBoy said:


> I agree that the Marriott response was poorly worded.  However, it is clear to me that weeks owners who exchange for points in a given year have access to ALL trust inventory IF THEY USE POINTS TO RESERVE.  They can not reserve a week the old way from the points inventory.  (And that is no surprise.  I do not think any of us ever thought we could reserve the old way from trust inventory.)



It appears that Marriott does not want to get involved with any of the debates going on here.  They have already posted on the my-vacation club WEB site what inventory is available to enrolled owners.  I don't think they are going to say anything more.  Anyone who truly wants to know can just go there and read it for themselves:

1. Go to my-vacationclub.com
2. Pull down the "Plan and Book My Vacation" menu
3. Choose "Things to know before you start"
4. Under "Making or Changing a Reservation", click on "Enrolled owner"
5. Under "Reservations with Your Vacation Club Points", click on "Marriott Vacation Club Collection"
6. After reading the first bullet under "When can I make a reservation?", notice that it says "Enrolled Owners may request and reserve any resort in the Marriott Vacation Club Destination Exchange Program". Then click on the little number 5 after the title.
7. Read what the Marriott Vacation Club Collection consists of. Notice that the 11 resorts in the Trust are included in the "Marriott Vacation Club Destinations Exchange Program".  It previous said that an enrolled owner can reserve *any* of them.


----------



## DanCali

dioxide45 said:


> What seems to be at issue here and why trust owners get first crack is that trust owners will always be doing a Request First type of search. Their points won't be deposited in to the exchange company until they get out what they want.
> 
> This is different for weeks enrollees. Enrollees can do request first or deposit first. By depositing a week for points, they have done a deposit first. This gives those trust owners request first access to that week. The problem happens if the weeks owners all hold out for inventory and don't convert until they see it, then there will be gridlock.



I think this is on the right track but needs to be emphasized more.

Trust Owners always do a "Request First" when they exchange with points. If they have what they need in the trust then no exchange. If what they want is not in the Marriott Exchange Company, then no exchange. Also, if it's not in the Exchange Company, they can waitlist with a VOA (Request First) for an exchange with the Marriott exchange company. In fact, they can probably keep a "home resort" reservation in the process. Only when the exchange is fulfilled, do those points make it into the Marriott Exchange Company and converted enrolled weeks can reserve trust inventory. Hence, the points never get deposited until an exchange is guaranteed -> always "Request First"

Enrolled weeks can reserve at their home resort or browse point inventory ("request first", or browse for "instant exchange" if you will) in the Marriott Exchange Company. If they don't see what they want they can wait list for the exchange, but we were told that to waitlist then you have to convert to points. This effectively turns it into a *"Deposit First"*. What is also important hre is that once you convert, you cannot change your mind and go back to using your home resort as a week. You may be able to exchange with points to an off season week at your home resort, but due to skim many weeks are out of play.

This is an important distinction - if the exchange you want is not there there is no "Request First" for enrolled weeks. You cannot "waitlist" while keeping your home resort reservation. Or can you?


----------



## hotcoffee

windje2000 said:


> I think dioxide was pointing out that points owners always are the equivalent of 'request first' exchangers while legacy owners who elect points are the equivalent of 'deposit first'.
> 
> The inventory is the same; the access procedure is not.  That's the difference he was pointing out.



Agreed.  But remember, there is a lot more inventory in the Trust than there are points owners.  Much of that will end up being available to points exchangers.  What is more important is many (if not most) of the points owners will not have enough points to directly reserve a lot of the inventory in the Trust.  That inventory will end up being available for exchanges (both internal and II).


----------



## windje2000

hotcoffee said:


> Agreed.  But remember, there is a lot more inventory in the Trust than there are points owners.  Much of that will end up being available to points exchangers.  What is more important is many (if not most) of the points owners will not have enough points to directly reserve a lot of the inventory in the Trust.  That inventory will end up being available for exchanges (both internal and II).



You are absolutely right about that.  Moreover, it will be a long time before there are as many points interests as weeks interests, and they will then represent half the universe of traders.

My personal view is that it will be a long time before I see a material effect on trading in II.


----------



## hotcoffee

DanCali said:


> . . .
> Again, Access < Direct Access...



Okay.  I don't have the time to stay around here and read every post in this and every other thread about this program.  If the train of thought now has evolved to "access" versus "direct access", then I don't have any issue with that.  I've said from the beginning that Trust owners have to have inventory to use their points for.  Therefore, Marriott cannot simply take everything out of the Trust for exchanges any more than they can at the resorts where weeks owners have to be able to reserve their weeks.


----------



## DanCali

windje2000 said:


> The non trust owner neither owns nor is paying maintenance fees on the trust inventory.  Owners should come first, just like owners come first in your home resort. The trust owners do not have direct access to the inventory represented by deeds.  Why should a non trust owner have direct access to trust inventory?  It's the home resort of the trust owners.
> 
> The trust and the exchange company are separate entities, exactly like your home resort and II are separate entities.
> 
> If you enroll, you have access to what trust owners and deeded enrolled owners are willing to deposit in the exchange company.
> 
> Not different from II - you have access to inventory that deeded owners are willing to exchange and have deposited in the II exchange company.





So when you go to a presentation, is Marriott selling the points as a different product than your "exchange points" or are they saying "points are points"? Are they telling you that if you buy 1000 points you cannot combine them with your inferior "exchange points" to get direct access to trust inventory? Or do they let you believe you'll have the ability to do a direct reservation at Marco Island by buying 1000 points?

When you spend $10K on 1000 points they are only good to enhance your "trading power" with points exchanges. The "exchange points" you get for converting your week will never have direct access to trust inventory whether combined with "real points" or not. 

By the way, would you pay II $10K for a boost in your trading power? Oh wait - II never skimmed on your trading power when you enrolled, so maybe you don't have to...


----------



## Clemson Fan

Sorry, but I think this thread is total hogwash.  The black helicopter folks are really having a heyday trying to analyze and pick apart every single word in the documents and they're creating their own interpretation based on their own underlying beliefs.  The wording is ambiguous for a reason as all "fine print" seems to be from any company.  Legal ambiguity is a good thing for companies because it helps prevent any lawsuits.  It's like any answer you get from a politician who rarely answers any questions directly.

There may or may not be 2-3 different buckets of points.  Marriott may have legally had to set it up that way since they're attempting to commingle their old weeks system of sales and their new points system.  So what is what I say!  I do believe that the way the system will work is that effectively a point is a point.  Marriott may not legally be able to say that, but I really think that's how it's effectively going to work.

Ironically, all the black helicopter folks are providing the Marriott TS salesmen with some of their future sales tactics.  I can see it now, "you better buy some new points so you can make all of your legacy points equal in value."  We'll see it twisted so many times by the timeshare salesmen to show how their shinny new points are so much better then your legacy points that it will be comical.

Hogwash is what I say!!!  Points will effectively be points even if "legally" speaking there may be several buckets.

Best wishes to all!  I'm still going to thoroughly enjoy my vacations in Marriott units whether they be my own units or ones I get exchanging.


----------



## DanCali

hotcoffee said:


> Okay.  I don't have the time to stay around here and read every post in this and every other thread about this program.  If the train of thought now has evolved to "access" versus "direct access", then I don't have any issue with that.  I've said from the beginning that Trust owners have to have inventory to use their points for.  Therefore, Marriott cannot simply take everything out of the Trust for exchanges any more than they can at the resorts where weeks owners have to be able to reserve their weeks.



Sayng you have "access" to trust inventory is like II saying you have access to 3000 resorts... it is meaningless... it's a sales pitch rather than a statement of fact. 

If this is what you have been pointing to in the past two weeks - that we can make exchanges into trust resorts rather than direct reservations - that was not the point we were trying to clarify... I think we all knew that part. The issue is making a trust resort reservation rather than exchange (i.e., access versus direct access - and that's Marriott's words, not mine).

Just like you could never trade into Ocho Cascadas if there were no deposits, you will never have access to trust inventory if there are no "green marble" (trust points) deposits. Marriott will obfuscate this reality by doing bulk deposits. It doesn't change the reality.


----------



## hipslo

hotcoffee said:


> Agreed.  But remember, there is a lot more inventory in the Trust than there are points owners.  Much of that will end up being available to points exchangers.  What is more important is many (if not most) of the points owners will not have enough points to directly reserve a lot of the inventory in the Trust.  That inventory will end up being available for exchanges (both internal and II).




Points owners get first crack at trust inventory, and can reserve trust inventory directly.  Enrolled owners who trade for points can reserve trust inventory as well, but only if it has been made available to the exchange program. This would occur if (i) a trust owner seeks to reserve non - trust inventory, and marriott does not pull the requested inventory out if II (if the requested inventory is pulled out of II, marrott would presumably replace the II inventory with trust inventory).  However, if marriott pulls the requested inventory out of what enrolled weeks owners have deposited for points, then they'd need to replace that inventory with trust invenntory that would then become available to enrolled weeks owners using points in the year at issue.  

As to the balance of trust inventory, while marriott could presumably choose to make it available to enrolled owners who elect points in exchange for their deposited weeks, I dont see why anyone would think that marriott is OBLIGATED to do so.  Perhaps they will, as a practical matter, but that is different than an obligation to do so.  Also, as the number of pioints sold increases, marriott would have less and less flexibility to make trust inventory available to enrolled weeks owners who elect points, since the inventory would need to be ehld back for points owners, unless and until they use their points to make a reservation outside of the trust inventory.


----------



## hipslo

Clemson Fan said:


> Sorry, but I think this thread is total hogwash.  The black helicopter folks are really having a heyday trying to analyze and pick apart every single word in the documents and they're creating their own interpretation based on their own underlying beliefs.  The wording is ambiguous for a reason as all "fine print" seems to be from any company.  Legal ambiguity is a good thing for companies because it helps prevent any lawsuits.  It's like any answer you get from a politician who rarely answers any questions directly.
> 
> There may or may not be 2-3 different buckets of points.  Marriott may have legally had to set it up that way since they're attempting to commingle their old weeks system of sales and their new points system.  So what is what I say!  I do believe that the way the system will work is that effectively a point is a point.  Marriott may not legally be able to say that, but I really think that's how it's effectively going to work.
> 
> Ironically, all the black helicopter folks are providing the Marriott TS salesmen with some of their future sales tactics.  I can see it now, "you better buy some new points so you can make all of your legacy points equal in value."  We'll see it twisted so many times by the timeshare salesmen to show how their shinny new points are so much better then your legacy points that it will be comical.
> 
> Hogwash is what I say!!!  Points will effectively be points even if "legally" speaking there may be several buckets.
> 
> Best wishes to all!  I'm still going to thoroughly enjoy my vacations in Marriott units whether they be my own units or ones I get exchanging.



Actually, the language is quite clear.  Legally, points owners have a slightly different set of rights than enrolled owners who exchange for points.  Characterizing the (very real) legal distinction as "black helicopter" thinking doesnt change that.  

Whether or not these legal distinctions will make a practical difference, on the other hand, is just speculation.  If I had to guess, I would say it is unlikely to make a practical difference, at least inititally, and perhaps never.  But that is not because a "point is a point".  And it is not a certainy, either.


----------



## SueDonJ

I'm not sure that this thread has been meaningless because it has definitely solidified our understanding that Trust Members and Exchange Members will both have to utilize the Exchange Company in the stipulated manners to gain access to inventory that each doesn't own, and that Marriott has some ways (MRP-exchanges, foreclosures, etc.) to manipulate that inventory.  Knowledge is power, so they say.

Once we've gained that knowledge, though, what it all boils down to is still the same thing - are we better off enrolling to gain whatever additional benefits are available to us as an Exchange Member, or are we better off not enrolling and using our Week(s) in whatever ways are possible with the advent of the Destination Club?

That answer is going to be different for every one of us based on what we own, how we were able to use it before and how this knowledge leads us to believe we'll be able to use it in the future, and what we think about Marriott going forward.  None of us can make that decision for anybody else because what's important to one isn't important to another.  If you think you'll be more successful and/or less stressed using Marriott's exchanges instead of II's, and the fees make it worthwhile, then enroll.  If you don't, don't.  If you think Marriott has now topped the list of Worst Timeshare Scumbucket Companies Ever, then don't enroll.  If you don't think so, enroll.  It's not as difficult a decision as we seem to be making it, especially as Marriott doesn't NEED a majority of the existing weeks to make the DC work.


----------



## windje2000

DanCali said:


> So when you go to a presentation, is Marriott selling the points as a different product than your "exchange points" or are they saying "points are points"? Are they telling you that if you buy 1000 points you cannot combine them with your inferior "exchange points" to get direct access to trust inventory? Or do they let you believe you'll have the ability to do a direct reservation at Marco Island by buying 1000 points?
> 
> When you spend $10K on 1000 points they are only good to enhance your "trading power" with points exchanges. The "exchange points" you get for converting your week will never have direct access to trust inventory whether combined with "real points" or not.
> 
> By the way, would you pay II $10K for a boost in your trading power? Oh wait - II never skimmed on your trading power when you enrolled, so maybe you don't have to...



Haven't been to a points presentation!  Been to a total of one sales presentation --- where I didn't buy.  Actually don't plan on attending another one.  

Do salespeople lie, omit, obfuscate, imply, let you believe what isn't true, etc?  That was my one experience.  They seem to have problems with those who show up with an HP-12C and a pad.  

Write down everything they say that's important to you and tell them as a condition of purchase they will sign a side contract giving you the right to 'put' the interest to them at the original price should the representations therein documented prove false.  No falsehoods no downside. Separates the wheat from the chaff real quick.  Especially if you know the answers better than the salesperson.

Figure can lie and liars can figure.  If you are from the NY metropolitan area, you'll remember Sy Syms always used to say 'an informed consumer is our best customer'  Guess Sy isn't advising Marriott.


----------



## BocaBoy

Once a weeks owner exchanges for points in a given year, he can then use those points to make a RESERVATION for that year on exactly the same terms (and from exactly the same inventory) as a points owner can.  The election of points is the exchange, not the making of the reservation. Legacy points are not less valuable than purchased points.  That is what I meant when I said access.  Honestly, it is not that hard.

I do concur, however, that the official Marriott response was horribly written.


----------



## Clemson Fan

hipslo said:


> Actually, the language is quite clear.  Legally, points owners have a slightly different set of rights than enrolled owners who exchange for points.  Characterizing the (very real) legal distinction as "black helicopter" thinking doesnt change that.
> 
> Whether or not these legal distinctions will make a practical difference, on the other hand, is just speculation.  If I had to guess, I would say it is unlikely to make a practical difference, at least inititally, and perhaps never.  But that is not because a "point is a point".  And it is not a certainy, either.



I agree with that.  In practicality a point will be a point and the only time it will be different is when a timeshare salesman is trying to close a sale.


----------



## Clemson Fan

BocaBoy said:


> I do concur, however, that the official Marriott response was horribly written.



Actually, it was exactly what I expected.  Giving a straight answer to people emotionally charged on a particular subject from a big corporation is like a politician giving a straight answer.  IOW, it ain't gonna happen!


----------



## hipslo

BocaBoy said:


> Once a weeks owner exchanges for points in a given year, he can then use those points to make a RESERVATION for that year on exactly the same terms (and from exactly the same inventory) as a points owner can.  The election of points is the exchange, not the making of the reservation. Legacy points are not less valuable than purchased points.  That is what I meant when I said access.  Honestly, it is not that hard.




While you sound quite certain about all this, with all due respect, I think you are wrong.  The focus needs to be on the trust inventory being given to the exchange company.  The exchange comes into play on the trust side of the equation, not the weeks side.  (I would say "honestly, its not that hard", but I don't think that would add to the discussion).


----------



## SueDonJ

hipslo said:


> While you sound quite certain about all this, with all due respect, I think you are wrong.  The focus needs to be on the trust inventory being given to the exchange company.  The exchange comes into play on the trust side of the equation, not the weeks side.  (I would say "honestly, its not that hard", but I don't think that would add to the discussion).



I agree with you that the exchange happens after an Exchange Member elects to convert a week to points AND is matched to whatever inventory is available in the Exchange Company (whether it's been put there by a Trust or Exchange Member electing to exchange outside of their owned interest.)

You made a really good point, too, with your post about Marriott not being obligated to co-mingle the inventory in such a way that Exchange Members can expect to receive any and all exchanges to Trust inventory.  But what benefit does it serve Marriott to not co-mingle?  That's what I don't understand.  Of course it's reasonable to try to figure out the limitations here, but isn't it also useful to try to figure out why they'd apply them to the detriment of Exchange Members?  If EM's realize as the system rolls on that Marriott is not co-mingling, and they're not getting access to Trust inventory that they thought they'd have, then wouldn't they stop converting their Weeks and go back to using their ownerships on a week-to-week basis?  Wouldn't that result in Trust Members having much more limited access to the existing sold-out resorts, which would be bad for the overall success of the DC?

And I apologize if you took my last post to mean that I think enrollment is an easy decision or one that needs to be made immediately.  That wasn't what I meant but I can see how it could be taken that way.  What I meant is that it appears there is enough information now for each of us to figure out if enrollment might be an enhancement or not for the week(s) we own.  Plus there is still the choice to sit back and watch to see how others are able (or not!) to make it all work.


----------



## hipslo

SueDonJ said:


> I agree with you that the exchange happens after an Exchange Member elects to convert a week to points AND is matched to whatever inventory is available in the Exchange Company (whether it's been put there by a Trust or Exchange Member electing to exchange outside of their owned interest.)
> 
> You made a really good point, too, with your post about Marriott not being obligated to co-mingle the inventory in such a way that Exchange Members can expect to receive any and all exchanges to Trust inventory.  But what benefit does it serve Marriott to not co-mingle?  That's what I don't understand.  Of course it's reasonable to try to figure out the limitations here, but isn't it also useful to try to figure out why they'd apply them to the detriment of Exchange Members?  If EM's realize as the system rolls on that Marriott is not co-mingling, and they're not getting access to Trust inventory that they thought they'd have, then wouldn't they stop converting their Weeks and go back to using their ownerships on a week-to-week basis?  Wouldn't that result in Trust Members having much more limited access to the existing sold-out resorts, which would be bad for the overall success of the DC?
> 
> *And I apologize if you took my last post to mean that I think enrollment is an easy decision or one that needs to be made immediately.  That wasn't what I meant but I can see how it could be taken that way. * What I meant is that it appears there is enough information now for each of us to figure out if enrollment might be an enhancement or not for the week(s) we own.  Plus there is still the choice to sit back and watch to see how others are able (or not!) to make it all work.



That wasnt directed at you - it was directed at another poster who used those same words ("honestly it isnt that hard")  to suggest that anyone who didnt agree that enrolled owners electing points would have the right to make direct reservations of trust inventory was somehow dense and missing the point.  

For me, this whole topic has no bearing on the decision to enroll. I have already enrolled.  As the owner of 5 high cost resale weeks, I already have a great deal of money invested in this system.  The opportunity to forever have my resale weeks stand on an equal footing with developer weeks for $400 per week is a no brainer.  That said, I have no intention to ever turn my weeks in for points (or MR points either, for that matter), but compared to what I have already spent, the additional cost is relatively minor, and it keeps my options open for the future. 

I have no idea whether the two inventory pools will be intemingled to such an extent that they are effectively one pool, and I dont have any real stake in that, as I dont intend to use points.  So, you may be right, or others may be right.  Only time will tell.  The only thing that is clear to me is that, as a legal and structural matter, there is a distinction between trust points and enrolled owner points.  Whether or not that will make a difference, I will leave that speculation to others.


----------



## hotcoffee

DanCali said:


> Sayng you have "access" to trust inventory is like II saying you have access to 3000 resorts... it is meaningless... it's a sales pitch rather than a statement of fact.
> 
> If this is what you have been pointing to in the past two weeks - that we can make exchanges into trust resorts rather than direct reservations - that was not the point we were trying to clarify... I think we all knew that part. The issue is making a trust resort reservation rather than exchange (i.e., access versus direct access - and that's Marriott's words, not mine).
> 
> Just like you could never trade into Ocho Cascadas if there were no deposits, you will never have access to trust inventory if there are no "green marble" (trust points) deposits. Marriott will obfuscate this reality by doing bulk deposits. It doesn't change the reality.




There is one huge difference than just having weeks deposited into the points exchange program to what I have saying.  That is the availability of unsold weeks to points exchangers.  Unsold weeks are not available to weeks exchangers unless they are bulk deposited into II.  However, they will form an important part of the points inventory.  Since the Trust contains all of the unsold weeks at the 11 resorts that currently a part of the Trust, most of those will be available to points exchangers because most new points purchasers will not have enough points to get many of them (particularly the Hawaiian weeks).  In addition, there are unsold weeks elsewhere (such as Frenchmen's Cove) that have not been added to the Trust.  These are also available to points exchangers.

I think we still disagree on perhaps two issues:

1. the availability of unsold weeks, weeks obtained from MRP trades, and weeks that are either in default or where the owners are delinquent on MF to the points inventory, and 
2. the fact that Trust points exchange one-for-one with Exchange points (section III., A., 1., sentence 5, of the document "EXCHANGE PROCEDURES FOR MARRIOTT VACATION CLUB DESTINATIONS EXCHANGE PROGRAM"); and, therefore, can be combined with the points of enrolled members who elect points.


----------



## m61376

SueDonJ said:


> You made a really good point, too, with your post about Marriott not being obligated to co-mingle the inventory in such a way that Exchange Members can expect to receive any and all exchanges to Trust inventory.  But what benefit does it serve Marriott to not co-mingle?  That's what I don't understand.  Of course it's reasonable to try to figure out the limitations here, but isn't it also useful to try to figure out why they'd apply them to the detriment of Exchange Members?


The only issue I can see is that, over time, as more people buy points, they are really buying a piece of the trust. The question is does that legally entitle them to first dibs on the trust units, so that Marriott would have to keep at least enough inventory in the trust pool to satisfy all the owners should they elect to reserve weeks in the trust? Over time Marriott may have to keep the bulk of the trust inventory in the trust pool, and may only be able to release it if a trust owner elects to use points for exchange inventory outside the trust (in which case Marriott will effectively exchange that trust week either into the club pool or into II, depending upon where the inventory being used to fulfill the point owner's request came from.

That's why I think it will likely take several years before we see the real impact of the uneven access of legacy and trust points. Right now there is plenty of inventory to go around, but as the trust gets sold and there is more competition for all weeks, those wonderful trade posts that I fully expect to see come Monday may be meaningless. I personally don't think we will see a difference between legacy and trust points until the trust is at least half sold. That's when the real competition, especially for premium weeks, will be felt.

And, in response to hotcoffee's post above- that may be when we will really see the difference between merely having access and having direct access. I think that issue will first be seen when looking to book high demand weeks, esp. at properties where there is a big difference in demand for maybe a dozen or less weeks out of the year.


----------



## DanCali

hotcoffee said:


> I think we still disagree on perhaps two issues:
> 
> 1. the availability of unsold weeks, weeks obtained from MRP trades, and weeks that are either in default or where the owners are delinquent on MF to the points inventory, and
> 2. the fact that Trust points exchange one-for-one with Exchange points (section III., A., 1., sentence 5, of the document "EXCHANGE PROCEDURES FOR MARRIOTT VACATION CLUB DESTINATIONS EXCHANGE PROGRAM"); and, therefore, can be combined with the points of enrolled members who elect points.



It is now as clear as daylight - you will have aceess to these only through indirect access via the exchange company. *You will not have direct access*. 

If a real points owner deposites points in the points exchange or if Marriott bulks deposits points into the points exchange, you will see this inventory. Otherwise, you won't.


----------



## hotcoffee

m61376 said:


> The only issue I can see is that, over time, as more people buy points, they are really buying a piece of the trust. The question is does that legally entitle them to first dibs on the trust units, so that Marriott would have to keep at least enough inventory in the trust pool to satisfy all the owners should they elect to reserve weeks in the trust? . . .



While this is probably going to be true, it is also highly probably that many (if not most) points owners will exchange rather than use inventory in the Trust.  The reason is that they have no home resort, and the 11 current resorts in the Trust will seem somewhat confining - especially to the ones who don't have enough points to reserve a decent week in many of the resorts).  People with fewer points than required for some of the nicer resorts will, in some cases, bank points to take a better vacation in alternate years.  Then, there is also the Explorer program that gives them more options than simply going to one of the 11 resorts in the Trust.  For those enrolled owners with enough points for great exchanges, I think the points program will work very well - even long term.


----------



## m61376

hotcoffee said:


> While this is probably going to be true, it is also highly probably that many (if not most) points owners will exchange rather than use inventory in the Trust.  The reason is that they have no home resort, and the 11 current resorts in the Trust will seem somewhat confining - especially to the ones who don't have enough points to reserve a decent week in many of the resorts).  People with fewer points than required for some of the nicer resorts will, in some cases, bank points to take a better vacation in alternate years.  Then, there is also the Explorer program that gives them more options than simply going to one of the 11 resorts in the Trust.  For those enrolled owners with enough points for great exchanges, I think the points program will work very well - even long term.



Yes- but legacy point users will have to wait for trust point users to decide not to use inventory before it becomes available to the legacy point pool.

And, while I agree that all this flexibility and the Explorer program, cruises, etc., all sound wonderful, that all carry a big price tag. I think that's a big hurdle going forward. Timeshares have historically appealed to a certain class- people with discretionary income, but with limitations. The really wealthy joined destination clubs, own vacation condos, or simply book whatever and whenever they want to go. I see the cost of the points starting to out price their value. When non-owners can book many of the weeks for less than the MF's, that becomes a real problem. When owners can simply google one of the Explorer trips and discover that they could book the trip directly for less than their MF's on the points required, as someone in another thread posted, that's a problem. Same with cruises. I am not so sure in this Internet savvy time that people are going to spend thousands for points and then be so quick to use them on the optional uses Marriott is offering. It's too easy today to see the fair market value. Ten years ago I would agree that people would jump at the alternatives even at the inflated price points, but today I am not so sure. I may be wrong; time will tell.


----------



## hotcoffee

DanCali said:


> It is now as clear as daylight - you will have aceess to these only through indirect access via the exchange company. *You will not have direct access*.



Agreed.



DanCali said:


> If a real points owner deposites points in the points exchange or if Marriott bulks deposits points into the points exchange, you will see this inventory. Otherwise, you won't.



This is more of a paperwork exercise for Marriott because they are the 2000 pound gorilla and ultimately control both programs. If they want something in the Trust, and there is plenty of surplus, do you doubt that they effectively will just take it?  I feel pretty confident (based upon what I have been told by my points specialist) that if you request a week at a certain resort with a certain view, and there is an available week in the Trust that is surplus (i.e., not accountable to existing sold points), they will confirm you into it.


----------



## SueDonJ

m61376 said:


> The only issue I can see is that, over time, as more people buy points, they are really buying a piece of the trust. The question is does that legally entitle them to first dibs on the trust units, so that Marriott would have to keep at least enough inventory in the trust pool to satisfy all the owners should they elect to reserve weeks in the trust? Over time Marriott may have to keep the bulk of the trust inventory in the trust pool, and may only be able to release it if a trust owner elects to use points for exchange inventory outside the trust (in which case Marriott will effectively exchange that trust week either into the club pool or into II, depending upon where the inventory being used to fulfill the point owner's request came from.
> 
> That's why I think it will likely take several years before we see the real impact of the uneven access of legacy and trust points. Right now there is plenty of inventory to go around, but as the trust gets sold and there is more competition for all weeks, those wonderful trade posts that I fully expect to see come Monday may be meaningless. I personally don't think we will see a difference between legacy and trust points until the trust is at least half sold. That's when the real competition, especially for premium weeks, will be felt.
> 
> And, in response to hotcoffee's post above- that may be when we will really see the difference between merely having access and having direct access. I think that issue will first be seen when looking to book high demand weeks, esp. at properties where there is a big difference in demand for maybe a dozen or less weeks out of the year.



I think it will take quite a while, years, before we need to worry about whether or not the Trust inventory is sufficient to keep Trust and Exchange Members happy.  It seems to me that Exchange Members have the upper hand here because without their deposits the Trust Members are going to have very limited exchange opportunities.  If Marriott doesn't act so that Exchange Members can get successful exchanges through the DC, they'll just not pay their DC dues and revert back to Weeks usage which will limit exchange inventory even further.  If enough EM aren't participating then Marriott is going to have to invest capital into conveying more Weeks to the Trust to open up inventory for Trust Members.  Why would they do that when it's so much more economical for them to simply co-mingle the inventory as it exists?


----------



## DanCali

*Incentives and Potential Conflicts of Interest*

Marriott DOES have an incentive to deposit trust points in the Points Exchange. It's not really just to make the exchange successful, but rather to trasfer value from owners to Marriott.

Tomorrow, there will be lots of green marbles waiting to be picked up. Those points already deposited by Marriott represent weeks owned by Marriott. By definition each points exchange someone makes is a downtrade due to skim. So Marriott gives you a week worth 3500 points and takes your week worth 4000 points. Then they take that week worth 4000 points and give it to someone who surrenders a week worth 4500 points (but got only 4000 points due to skim). Then they take that week worth 4500 points and give it to someone who surrenders a week worth 5000 points (but got only 4500 points due to skim). Then they take that week worth 5000 points and give it to someone who surrenders a fixed Hawaii week worth 6000 points (but got only 5000 points due to skim).  

Now they can take that fixed Hawaii week and rent it out since all this cascade of exchanges started with points owned by Marriott. So Marriott can start with a 2BR in Orlando and 7 exchanges later end up with GregTs 2BR fixed week at the Maui Villas which they can rent out... With those incentives, you will see all the green marbles you want.  

So why did I put the "Conflicts of Interest" in the title of this post? Once Marriott ends up with the 2BR Hawaii week, they may decide to rent it out, rather than fill someone's exchange request because they'd rather not take a 2BR Gold Summit Watch 2 years in a row for the 2BR in Hawaii (I'm referring to someone with a less desirable week willing to borrow points to get a prime week at a prime resort). They may also prefer to rent that week rather than give that exchange to a trust points owner who is waiting for it. Lots of potential for conflicts of interest...


----------



## hipslo

SueDonJ said:


> I think it will take quite a while, years, before we need to worry about whether or not the Trust inventory is sufficient to keep Trust and Exchange Members happy.  It seems to me that Exchange Members have the upper hand here because without their deposits the Trust Members are going to have very limited exchange opportunities.  If Marriott doesn't act so that Exchange Members can get successful exchanges through the DC, they'll just not pay their DC dues and revert back to Weeks usage which will limit exchange inventory even further.  If enough EM aren't participating then Marriott is going to have to invest capital into conveying more Weeks to the Trust to open up inventory for Trust Members.  Why would they do that when it's so much more economical for them to simply co-mingle the inventory as it exists?




But if marriott has access to inventory to satisfy points trusts requests via weeks deposited into II, which I believe is the case, is there really a compelling need for them to also ensure that they get inventory from enrolled owners who convert to points?


----------



## SueDonJ

hipslo said:


> But if marriott has access to inventory to satisfy points trusts requests via weeks deposited into II, which I believe is the case, is there really a compelling need for them to also ensure that they get inventory from enrolled owners who convert to points?



Hmmm.  So you're thinking that whether Exchange Members make their deposits as Weeks in II or as Points or Weeks in the Exchange Company, the Trust Members' exchange requests will be filled by either II or Marriott?  I guess so, but if Exchange Members are only using II, won't Marriott have to make deposits into II whenever they pull inventory from there?  Both II and Marriott have said that "comparable" weeks will be deposited; where will that inventory come from?  (Of course this doesn't get into whether "comparable" means the same thing to Marriott, II and the exchangers.)


----------



## hotcoffee

*Computerization probably renders many of these issues insignifcant*

We talk here about depositing weeks and Trust points almost as if things were like they were 30 years ago.  It is almost as if Marriott has to pick up a piece of paper and move it somewhere in order to deposit a week into the exchange inventory.  I was a programmer for many years in a past life.  I was also an Oracle database administrator for a number of years.  All of these Marriott programs - the Trust, the Exchange company, the resorts - are all either owned or managed by Marriott.  That makes it pretty easy to create a central inventory database containing all of the weeks managed by Marriott.  You would not need three databases - one for the weeks inventory, one for the points inventory, and one for the Trust inventory.  You can do it easiest with just one database.  One way would be to have a category field for each week (or whatever division they choose) that designates what category the week belongs to (e.g., W for weeks, T for Trust, E for Exchange, and other codes for other categories).  Then you can move a week around by just changing the letter designator.  That can happen instantaneously.  You could also have a availability flag.  Set the flag to a 1 if the week is available to be searched by the points exchange search engine, and set it to 0 if it is not searchable.  Then to drop weeks into the Exchange inventory (i.e., deposit them), you just set the availability flag to a 1 for each week to be made searchable.  Presto!  You can instantly deposit scores of weeks into the exchange inventory without physically moving anything or doing any paperwork.  I don't know if they actually did it this way, but I could have created a database for them; and there was a time I could have written a lot of the software.

Since Marriott controls or manages all of these facilities, it becomes somewhat of a mute point as to whether they can move inventory around or have inventory searchable or not seachable.  They control everything.  So, they can pretty do whatever they want whenever they want.  Fortunately, they have every incentive to make the Points program a major success, and I suspect they will do whatever it takes to make that happen.  They are not going to allow unused weeks to just lay around if someone actually wants them.  That would make no sense.


----------



## DanCali

hotcoffee said:


> They are not going to allow unused weeks to just lay around if someone actually wants them.  That would make no sense.



Of course not - they are Marriott's weeks. Marriott can rent them at will, unless you give them a better week for a worse week, in which case they will trade for your week and rent that one out.


----------



## hotcoffee

DanCali said:


> Of course not - they are Marriott's weeks. Marriott can rent them at will, unless you give them a better week for a worse week, in which case they will trade for your week and rent that one out.



Perhaps over the long haul.  Right now, I would bet they are going to try to make as much inventory available as possible for points.  In fact, I bet they will be going out of their way to try to make this thing work.

Monday has all the makings of organized chaos.  I'm not expecting it to go smoothly.  Eventually it will get better, though.


----------



## Dean

hotcoffee said:


> We talk here about depositing weeks and Trust points almost as if things were like they were 30 years ago.  It is almost as if Marriott has to pick up a piece of paper and move it somewhere in order to deposit a week into the exchange inventory.  I was a programmer for many years in a past life.  I was also an Oracle database administrator for a number of years.  All of these Marriott programs - the Trust, the Exchange company, the resorts - are all either owned or managed by Marriott.  That makes it pretty easy to create a central inventory database containing all of the weeks managed by Marriott.  You would not need three databases - one for the weeks inventory, one for the points inventory, and one for the Trust inventory.  You can do it easiest with just one database.  One way would be to have a category field for each week (or whatever division they choose) that designates what category the week belongs to (e.g., W for weeks, T for Trust, E for Exchange, and other codes for other categories).  Then you can move a week around by just changing the letter designator.  That can happen instantaneously.  You could also have a availability flag.  Set the flag to a 1 if the week is available to be searched by the points exchange search engine, and set it to 0 if it is not searchable.  Then to drop weeks into the Exchange inventory (i.e., deposit them), you just set the availability flag to a 1 for each week to be made searchable.  Presto!  You can instantly deposit scores of weeks into the exchange inventory without physically moving anything or doing any paperwork.  I don't know if they actually did it this way, but I could have created a database for them; and there was a time I could have written a lot of the software.
> 
> Since Marriott controls or manages all of these facilities, it becomes somewhat of a mute point as to whether they can move inventory around or have inventory searchable or not seachable.  They control everything.  So, they can pretty do whatever they want whenever they want.  Fortunately, they have every incentive to make the Points program a major success, and I suspect they will do whatever it takes to make that happen.  They are not going to allow unused weeks to just lay around if someone actually wants them.  That would make no sense.


To a degree, still they are working on an imperfect system with many variables including start day, view type, area demand, etc.  The truth is that many weeks do go unused for a number of reasons.  Marriott let weeks sit open at Surfwatch the week before 4th of July offering them for rent but not for MR points and it looks like they ultimately went unused from what I could tell.


----------



## hipslo

SueDonJ said:


> Hmmm.  So you're thinking that whether Exchange Members make their deposits as Weeks in II or as Points or Weeks in the Exchange Company, the Trust Members' exchange requests will be filled by either II or Marriott?  I guess so, but if Exchange Members are only using II, won't Marriott have to make deposits into II whenever they pull inventory from there?  Both II and Marriott have said that "comparable" weeks will be deposited; where will that inventory come from?  (Of course this doesn't get into whether "comparable" means the same thing to Marriott, II and the exchangers.)



My understanding is that marriott can take weeks out of II to satisfy points requests, whether the II inventory comes from enrolled owners depositing their weeks, or regular, non enrolled owners depositing their weeks. Yes, they would need to replace that inventory with comparable inventory, which presumably would be trust inventory.  So, to the extent that trust inventory is going into II, it isnt going to enrolled owners who elect points.  Though I suppose once the trust inventory gets into II, they could then pull it back out to satisfy the request of an enrolled owner who elects points, so long as it is still replaced by something comparable.

Come to think of it, viewed that way, it sure does sound like a lot of intermingling will be taking place.  The only real distinction is that enrolled owners arent getting first crack at the trust inventory, which may first need to go into and out of II a coulple of times before it goes to the enrolled owners.  However, I suppose it is possible that as a practical matter, this will be a distinction without a difference.


----------



## Dean

hipslo said:


> My understanding is that marriott can take weeks out of II to satisfy points requests, whether the II inventory comes from enrolled owners depositing their weeks, or regular, non enrolled owners depositing their weeks. Yes, they would need to replace that inventory with comparable inventory, which presumably would be trust inventory.  So, to the extent that trust inventory is going into II, it isnt going to enrolled owners who elect points.  Though I suppose once the trust inventory gets into II, they could then pull it back out to satisfy the request of an enrolled owner who elects points, so long as it is still replaced by something comparable.
> 
> Come to think of it, viewed that way, it sure does sound like a lot of intermingling will be taking place.  The only real distinction is that enrolled owners arent getting first crack at the trust inventory, which may first need to go into and out of II a coulple of times before it goes to the enrolled owners.  However, I suppose it is possible that as a practical matter, this will be a distinction without a difference.


My understanding is that they can "exchange" for weeks within II for this purpose subject to the normal II exchange rules and that Marriott as a corporate member falls under the same basic parameters as all of us do, including trade power.  Maybe that's what you meant by saying they "can take weeks out of II to satisfy points requests", but I took it as saying they have direct access ahead of other II members which I understand is not the case for weeks deposited.


----------



## hipslo

Dean said:


> My understanding is that they can "exchange" for weeks within II for this purpose subject to the normal II exchange rules and that Marriott as a corporate member falls under the same basic parameters as all of us do, including trade power.  Maybe that's what you meant by saying they "can take weeks out of II to satisfy points requests", but I took it as saying they have direct access ahead of other II members which I understand is not the case for weeks deposited.




I meant exactly what you said, thank you for the clarification.  My point relates primarily to the sources of inventory potentially available to marriott to satisfy requests of enrolled owners using points. Given all of their unsold trust inventory, it seems likely that marriott will not have any real difficulty making "comparable" desposits to II, with sufficient trading power, to get the inventory needed to satisfy enrolled owner points requests. Even playing by the same rules, they simply have so much inventory to work with that they ought to be able to get what they want, when they want it.  Individual users of II then get access to the comparable deposits.


----------



## JimIg23

I am not very happy with these buckets....

However, just as long as I can 1)secure my week 2) then check if points are available for a specific time I want *before *converting to points, so I can still use/II trade without getting stuck, I am coming around to I may not like it, but for now it is fine.  I still think with the amount of deeded weeks owners out there, Marriott will have to adjust the program to fit us if there is not alot of points deposits.  I still think they will need the weeks once there becomes alot of "Trsut members"


----------



## Fredm

hotcoffee said:


> Since Marriott controls or manages all of these facilities, it becomes somewhat of a mute point as to whether they can move inventory around or have inventory searchable or not seachable.  They control everything.  So, they can pretty do whatever they want whenever they want.  Fortunately, they have every incentive to make the Points program a major success, and I suspect they will do whatever it takes to make that happen.  They are not going to allow unused weeks to just lay around if someone actually wants them.  That would make no sense.



Absolutely. We mentally compartmentalize inventory into all these buckets, cookie and marble jars. But, Marriott manages all of it. Including the reservation inventory of legacy owners who do not join the D-club.

Marriott must make the system work well for all owners. If it does not, long term success will be compromised by their own hand. That's why Marriott is prepared to deposit inventory it obtains from MRP conversions. It's all one bucket from their prospective (although it must be managed within some legal parameters).

No one questioned what inventory Marriott cherry picked when an owner converted for MRP's. 
Why? Marriott paid for the inventory. Now, Marriott views it as an inventory resource to make their system function. 

Marriott will capture inventory for their purposes. No surprise here. THAT is an object of the exercise. How they do it makes for interesting arm chair quarterbacking. But, at the end of the day the proof will be in the eating. So far, no meals have been served.


----------



## Dean

hipslo said:


> I meant exactly what you said, thank you for the clarification.  My point relates primarily to the sources of inventory potentially available to marriott to satisfy requests of enrolled owners using points. Given all of their unsold trust inventory, it seems likely that marriott will not have any real difficulty making "comparable" desposits to II, with sufficient trading power, to get the inventory needed to satisfy enrolled owner points requests. Even playing by the same rules, they simply have so much inventory to work with that they ought to be able to get what they want, when they want it.  Individual users of II then get access to the comparable deposits.


OK, thanks.  It does raise an interesting aspect, that for the first time (as far as I know) II will allow essentially a retrade or "rental" of an exchange on a formal basis.  I realize they've always done the behind the scenes "you scratch my back, I'll scratch yours" thing including sweetheart deals to many of the employees in the industry including Marriott sales staff. 

It is my belief that Marriott will do the same thing we all do in exchanging, get as much as they can for as little as possible.  As I posted on one of these thread's a few weeks ago, they will take out the 4th of July HH week and put in the late August week, as an example.  We'd all do the same thing if in their shoes.



JimIg23 said:


> I am not very happy with these buckets....
> 
> However, just as long as I can 1)secure my week 2) then check if points are available for a specific time I want *before *converting to points, so I can still use/II trade without getting stuck, I am coming around to I may not like it, but for now it is fine.  I still think with the amount of deeded weeks owners out there, Marriott will have to adjust the program to fit us if there is not alot of points deposits.  I still think they will need the weeks once there becomes alot of "Trsut members"


I think many of us are in that boat, some just got there more quickly than others. "It is what it is" applies.  I doubt some will get past some of the up front issues and even 10 years from now you'll still see posts from those on a crusade still angry about this.  I can't imagine anyone on the ownership side that's thrilled with every aspect of the new program.  However, as you point  out, in the end we'll figure out ways to make it work for us or we'll move on.  I do still believe that a subset of owners that convert will be far better off than they were before this new program but realize that it could have been far better but also far worse.


----------



## SueDonJ

hipslo said:


> My understanding is that marriott can take weeks out of II to satisfy points requests, whether the II inventory comes from enrolled owners depositing their weeks, or regular, non enrolled owners depositing their weeks. Yes, they would need to replace that inventory with comparable inventory, which presumably would be trust inventory.  So, to the extent that trust inventory is going into II, it isnt going to enrolled owners who elect points.  Though I suppose once the trust inventory gets into II, they could then pull it back out to satisfy the request of an enrolled owner who elects points, so long as it is still replaced by something comparable.
> 
> Come to think of it, viewed that way, it sure does sound like a lot of intermingling will be taking place.  The only real distinction is that enrolled owners arent getting first crack at the trust inventory, which may first need to go into and out of II a coulple of times before it goes to the enrolled owners.  However, I suppose it is possible that as a practical matter, this will be a distinction without a difference.



That's exactly how I'm thinking it will all work.  It's going to be interesting tomorrow trying to figure out if Marriott has set this all up so that, as hotcoffee says, they'll be able to just click a few buttons and do more instant matches than are possible in the old II system.  We know already that the first step of an II exchange has been removed - we won't have to wait for Marriott to verify our ownership - now we'll have to see if the inventory can be moved from bucket to bucket instantly.  I think this will be possible at roll-out but am not sure it can continue to happen with the same frequency as time goes on.


----------



## gblotter

Fredm said:


> Marriott must make the system work well for all owners. If it does not, long term success will be compromised by their own hand.


I don't understand why you feel that way, but time will tell.  Marriott is interested in maximizing their profit - not in seeing that you get the reservation you want.  Just ask the owners at NCV.  Marriott has not hesitated in scooping up the prime summer NCV weeks for rentals - no matter how disenfranchised the owners feel about it.



Fredm said:


> No one questioned what inventory Marriott cherry picked when an owner converted for MRP's.


Plenty of NCV owners questioned the cherry picking by Marriott - Marriott doesn't care.



Fredm said:


> Now, Marriott views it as an inventory resource to make their system function.


Based on Marriott's past behavior, I disagree. Marriott views it as a source of profit first and foremost.



Fredm said:


> Marriott will capture inventory for their purposes. No surprise here.


Yep.



Fredm said:


> But, at the end of the day the proof will be in the eating. So far, no meals have been served.


True, but the real proof may not be seen for years.  Marriott will only be serving food after they themselves have gorged at the trough.  Just like airline seats, there are sophisticated computer models a-plenty to guide Marriott in their inventory management.  There is currently much excess inventory, and only so many rooms can be rented out at the prices they are asking.  Leftovers will be made available to the exchange, and leftovers will be plentiful at least for a while.  As more points owners join the system and excess capacity disappears, then it will get interesting. Business Rule #1: When Marriott has control over a week, expect that Marriott will use that week for its own profit to the maximum extent possible.  It is naive to think that Marriott will sacrifice the profit from a prime week rental just to make a timeshare owner happy with a reservation.  As I said before - just ask the NCV owners about that.


----------



## Fredm

NCV Platinum Season owners suffer a bad deal on summer reservations because most of the Platinum 25 weeks want the same 7-8 weeks. 

Marriott was indeed greedy by selling NCV Platinum Season the way they did. But, that is a different argument than the one you are providing. Yours do not speak to my comments.


----------



## gblotter

Fredm said:


> NCV Platinum Season owners suffer a bad deal on summer reservations because most of the Platinum 25 weeks want the same 7-8 weeks.
> 
> Marriott was indeed greedy by selling NCV Platinum Season the way they did. But, that is a different argument than the one you are providing. Yours do not speak to my comments.


When the entire NCV summer season is unavailable for timeshare reservations, yet you can book those same NCV summer weeks at marriott.com, that is not because of the competition between owners.  It is because Marriott scooped up those weeks before owners ever even had a chance.


----------



## BocaBum99

Clemson Fan said:


> Sorry, but I think this thread is total hogwash.  The black helicopter folks are really having a heyday trying to analyze and pick apart every single word in the documents and they're creating their own interpretation based on their own underlying beliefs.  The wording is ambiguous for a reason as all "fine print" seems to be from any company.  Legal ambiguity is a good thing for companies because it helps prevent any lawsuits.  It's like any answer you get from a politician who rarely answers any questions directly.
> 
> There may or may not be 2-3 different buckets of points.  Marriott may have legally had to set it up that way since they're attempting to commingle their old weeks system of sales and their new points system.  So what is what I say!  I do believe that the way the system will work is that effectively a point is a point.  Marriott may not legally be able to say that, but I really think that's how it's effectively going to work.
> 
> Ironically, all the black helicopter folks are providing the Marriott TS salesmen with some of their future sales tactics.  I can see it now, "you better buy some new points so you can make all of your legacy points equal in value."  We'll see it twisted so many times by the timeshare salesmen to show how their shinny new points are so much better then your legacy points that it will be comical.
> 
> Hogwash is what I say!!!  Points will effectively be points even if "legally" speaking there may be several buckets.
> 
> Best wishes to all!  I'm still going to thoroughly enjoy my vacations in Marriott units whether they be my own units or ones I get exchanging.



I think this is essentially correct.


----------



## Fredm

gblotter said:


> When the entire NCV summer season is unavailable for timeshare reservations, yet you can book those same NCV summer weeks at marriott.com, that is not because of the competition between owners.  It is because Marriott scooped up those weeks before owners ever even had a chance.



Weeks are available on Marriott.com because Marriott is an owner also. They control weeks that remained unsold, acquired by deed-backs, defaults, and weeks converted to MRP.
I am sure they took their share (by week) and rented them. 
There is no evidence that Marriott took more than their share. If they did, that's another story. I would be the first to holler foul. But, you have not cited a reason for me to think otherwise. My observations have been that Marriott is careful about such matters.

While NCV is a particularly sensitive example because of the oversold season (as I have already acknowledged), most owners system-wide have been generally satisfied with Marriott's management.

Marriott has demonstrated its greed in the past by extending its prime season for sales purposes. Similar (but not as severe) reservation issues exist with the Hawaii resorts. A 50 week season competing for the summer calendar. The month of May at the desert resorts, etc.
But, I am not aware of Marriott taking more than their share (by week)for its purposes. 

Now, back to my point. 
Greed is a motive I trust. We look at the same issues differently. You see greed as a motive to kill the goose that lays the golden eggs. I see it as nurturing the goose to lay as many eggs as possible, long term. Marriott's motives are, no doubt, self-serving. In order to maximize the potential of its enterprise Marriott is willing to use its own inventory (heretofore rented) to make the exchange system work well.
At the end of the day, the result is more inventory for its ends. 

We will NEVER know how Marriott manages that process. 
I do know that it is not the simplistic analysis thus far offered by some here. 
The "skim" is an example of that. A 10% skim does not offset the 15% Marriott is contributing by surrendering MRP inventory to the exchange inventory. They have a different, more profitable, way of capturing inventory for their benefit. 
I don't know exactly how they will do it, but neither does anyone else.

Each of us has a different bottom line when determining whether the D-club is beneficial to us. We will soon begin to observe how well the reconstituted system works. THAT will speak volumes. The rest goes in the trash bin.


----------



## TrapperDog

*Reserving with combo points*

I'm a new poster, so I apologize for not understanding despite hours reading posts on this...

I own two weeks at shadow ridge. If I buy 1000 points and deposit one of my weeks for DC points (total 4075 DC points) would I be able to reserve a time period -- using DC points -- that was longer than the 1000 points?


----------



## hotcoffee

TrapperDog said:


> I'm a new poster, so I apologize for not understanding despite hours reading posts on this...
> 
> I own two weeks at shadow ridge. If I buy 1000 points and deposit one of my weeks for DC points (total 4075 DC points) would I be able to reserve a time period -- using DC points -- that was longer than the 1000 points?



You will have 5075 points to use for an exchange under the scenerio you described.


----------



## DanCali

TrapperDog said:


> I'm a new poster, so I apologize for not understanding despite hours reading posts on this...
> 
> I own two weeks at shadow ridge. If I buy 1000 points and deposit one of my weeks for DC points (total 4075 DC points) would I be able to reserve a time period -- using DC points -- that was longer than the 1000 points?



The points you get for your week can only be combined with points you purchase to do points exchanges. This is different than booking trust inventory directly. You are relying on points owners (including Marriott) to deposit points in the Marriott Exchange Company and only then can Marriott fulfill your points exchange request.

Only your 1000 points will have direct access to trust inventory.


----------



## windje2000

Fredm said:


> *Greed is a motive I trust. We look at the same issues differently. You see greed as a motive to kill the goose that lays the golden eggs. I see it as nurturing the goose to lay as many eggs as possible, long term. Marriott's motives are, no doubt, self-serving.*



The question becomes - what do we have that Marriott wants that will help it achieve its goals?  That's when we're the geese laying egg$.  (If not, we're foie gras.)

What are Marriott's goals? - Sell that inventory somehow - if it sells as points, sell it as points.

What do we legacy owners have?  1.  deeded weeks and 2. dollars.

We own weeks - Marriott needs/wants weeks for exchange in the DClub - they're selling the dream.

We have $ - Marriott wants us to buy points and it seems the sales staff will say just about anything to achieve that.

We have $ - Marriott wants an enrollment fee.  The enrollment fee has 'sweeteners' including bundled fee benefits, 800 bonus points, and time pressure on resale owners.

If they can entice one to exchange for points, they get skim and potentially unused points expirations.  Borrowing points from future years can lock you in.  

They get you to agree to never vote against them.

If you go points, you never reserve your week, they do.  They get to reserve your week up front if you waitlist.  If need to borrow and you don't get your waitlist, too bad for you - the borrowed points stay borrowed.

Fred, I think you and I will agree on what Marriott wants -- CASH FLOW!

If you buy points - they receive big (and profitable for book purposes) cash flow.

If you enroll and don't buy points, they receive the enrollment fee, the possibility of skim and the possibility of selling you points.  Small cash flow.  Plus enhanced access to your weeks via points exchange or II reservation and your cooperation with DClub.

If you don't enroll, as a customer you generate no future incremental cash flow and therefore have no incremental value.  

The geese that generate incremental future cash flow are the egg laying geese. If you're not the goose that lays the egg$, you're foie gras.  You get foie gras by slaughtering geese.  If its true that they only expect 20% enrollment, 4 of 5 owners are not egg layers but rather foie gras.  

Lastly, in the long run, Marriott like any developer has a build vs buy decision to make.  They just got burned badly ($700MM) by building resorts they couldn't sell.  Looking at the way this is structured to add provisions which negatively affect resale marketability/liquidity and resale value, they may have decided to try buying.

Like you I too believe in greed.  But I can't escape the indications that they have effectively written off 80% of their customer base by implementing a plan that makes other points programs look decidedly more attractive than theirs.


----------



## Fredm

windje2000 said:


> The question becomes - what do we have that Marriott wants that will help it achieve its goals?  That's when we're the geese laying egg$.  (If not, we're foie gras.)
> 
> What are Marriott's goals? - Sell that inventory somehow - if it sells as points, sell it as points.
> 
> What do we legacy owners have?  1.  deeded weeks and 2. dollars.
> 
> We own weeks - Marriott needs/wants weeks for exchange in the DClub - they're selling the dream.
> 
> We have $ - Marriott wants us to buy points and it seems the sales staff will say just about anything to achieve that.
> 
> We have $ - Marriott wants an enrollment fee.  The enrollment fee has 'sweeteners' including bundled fee benefits, 800 bonus points, and time pressure on resale owners.
> 
> If they can entice one to exchange for points, they get skim and potentially unused points expirations.  Borrowing points from future years can lock you in.
> 
> They get you to agree to never vote against them.
> 
> If you go points, you never reserve your week, they do.  They get to reserve your week up front if you waitlist.  If need to borrow and you don't get your waitlist, too bad for you - the borrowed points stay borrowed.
> 
> Fred, I think you and I will agree on what Marriott wants -- CASH FLOW!
> 
> If you buy points - they receive big (and profitable for book purposes) cash flow.
> 
> If you enroll and don't buy points, they receive the enrollment fee, the possibility of skim and the possibility of selling you points.  Small cash flow.  Plus enhanced access to your weeks via points exchange or II reservation and your cooperation with DClub.
> 
> If you don't enroll, as a customer you generate no future incremental cash flow and therefore have no incremental value.
> 
> The geese that generate incremental future cash flow are the egg laying geese. If you're not the goose that lays the egg$, you're foie gras.  You get foie gras by slaughtering geese.  If its true that they only expect 20% enrollment, 4 of 5 owners are not egg layers but rather foie gras.
> 
> Lastly, in the long run, Marriott like any developer has a build vs buy decision to make.  They just got burned badly ($700MM) by building resorts they couldn't sell.  Looking at the way this is structured to add provisions which negatively affect resale marketability/liquidity and resale value, they may have decided to try buying.
> 
> Like you I too believe in greed.  But I can't escape the indications that they have effectively written off 80% of their customer base by implementing a plan that makes other points programs look decidedly more attractive than theirs.



Just my view of the matter.

What legacy owners have is *inventory*. Without it, the program will not work well. Marriott's timeshare business does not thrive without it. 
The only way to get that inventory is to make the system function well enough for legacy owners to want the options it provides. It is a long term view of the business. 

Sure, Marriott can trade inventory with I.I., but it can only trade what is given to them in the first place.

Selling the dream to new points buyers will work once. If Marriott cannot deliver on the dream because it is not awash in inventory will cut the re-buys off at the pass. And, forget about the referrals. Not Marriott's MO. Longer term, selling points and converting legacy owners are opposite sides of the same coin.

One can believe that Marriott is willing to discard 80% of its owner base, or, believe that Marriott's self interest lies in cultivating its owner base. Absent some compelling reason to think otherwise, I simply default to the latter.

I do not believe for one second that Marriott's goal is to only convert 20% of its owner base. I do believe that they cannot convert more than 20% in the short term. The logistics make it impossible. Heck, most have not even been notified yet. But, ANY enterprise that does not shoot for the lions share is a bush league player. Give it a few years. The first 12-18 months are a boot-strap. They have been selling points and legacy conversions for 5 weeks.

Having said this, I prefer the legacy system. It has worked very well in the past, and do not see it changing very much. 
I.I. has been a great exchange vehicle and I expect it to remain so. The concerns expressed by some are overblown, IMO.


----------



## windje2000

Fredm said:


> Just my view of the matter.
> 
> What legacy owners have is *inventory*. Without it, the program will not work well. Marriott's timeshare business does not thrive without it.
> The only way to get that inventory is to make the system function well enough for legacy owners to want the options it provides. It is a long term view of the business.
> 
> Sure, Marriott can trade inventory with I.I., but it can only trade what is given to them in the first place.
> 
> Selling the dream to new points buyers will work once. If Marriott cannot deliver on the dream because it is not awash in inventory will cut the re-buys off at the pass. And, forget about the referrals. Not Marriott's MO. Longer term, selling points and converting legacy owners are opposite sides of the same coin.
> 
> One can believe that Marriott is willing to discard 80% of its owner base, or, believe that Marriott's self interest lies in cultivating its owner base. Absent some compelling reason to think otherwise, I simply default to the latter.
> 
> I do not believe for one second that Marriott's goal is to only convert 20% of its owner base. I do believe that they cannot convert more than 20% in the short term. The logistics make it impossible. Heck, most have not even been notified yet. But, ANY enterprise that does not shoot for the lions share is a bush league player. Give it a few years. The first 12-18 months are a boot-strap. They have been selling points and legacy conversions for 5 weeks.
> 
> Having said this, I prefer the legacy system. It has worked very well in the past, and do not see it changing very much.
> I.I. has been a great exchange vehicle and I expect it to remain so. The concerns expressed by some are overblown, IMO.



Marriott's actions speak for themselves.  I don't see a lot of actions that would fall into the category of 'cultivating the owner base', starting with how they rolled this out and continuing with the specifics of how the plan works and the way it's being communicated.

There once was a lot of goodwill in the owner group.   I've never heard a pejorative nickname attached to Marriott timeshares until now.  That goodwill has been impaired if not lost forever.  I wonder what percentage of current legacy owners would encourage someone they know (and don't dislike) to buy the DClub.  If you haven't been over there, read Bill Marriott's blog.  What do you think the poolside/owner wine and cheese party chatter will be?  It will start with skim and go downhill from there.

The DClub plan is not legacy owner friendly.  For legacies DClub accomplishes two things -  occupancy by day and greater trading ability for high value units that may have been undervalued in II trading.  On the other hand, DClub trading ability for many average and particularly lower value units is diminished.  I'd guess the losers outnumber the winners.  

Moreover, the plan suggests that actions are being influenced more by short term profitability goals rather than embracing  a long term view of 'cultivate the customer base.'   

You can fool all of the people some of the time etc.  Like many organizations, I wonder if Marriott realizes how quickly the internet can make an increasingly large percentage of any user group too smart to be fooled.

You are absolutely right - without the inventory provided by enrolled owners, DClub fails because they won't be able to sell the dream.  I don't think they'll get as much as they would like with this plan.


----------



## BocaBum99

Fredm said:


> Just my view of the matter.
> 
> What legacy owners have is *inventory*. Without it, the program will not work well. Marriott's timeshare business does not thrive without it.
> The only way to get that inventory is to make the system function well enough for legacy owners to want the options it provides. It is a long term view of the business.
> 
> Sure, Marriott can trade inventory with I.I., but it can only trade what is given to them in the first place.
> 
> Selling the dream to new points buyers will work once. If Marriott cannot deliver on the dream because it is not awash in inventory will cut the re-buys off at the pass. And, forget about the referrals. Not Marriott's MO. Longer term, selling points and converting legacy owners are opposite sides of the same coin.
> 
> One can believe that Marriott is willing to discard 80% of its owner base, or, believe that Marriott's self interest lies in cultivating its owner base. Absent some compelling reason to think otherwise, I simply default to the latter.
> 
> I do not believe for one second that Marriott's goal is to only convert 20% of its owner base. I do believe that they cannot convert more than 20% in the short term. The logistics make it impossible. Heck, most have not even been notified yet. But, ANY enterprise that does not shoot for the lions share is a bush league player. Give it a few years. The first 12-18 months are a boot-strap. They have been selling points and legacy conversions for 5 weeks.
> 
> Having said this, I prefer the legacy system. It has worked very well in the past, and do not see it changing very much.
> I.I. has been a great exchange vehicle and I expect it to remain so. The concerns expressed by some are overblown, IMO.



I think that Marriott put too much emphasis on the "exchange" element of this new program.  It's almost as if they said it so much internally that they were going to make an internal exchange system that they lost sight of what they were actually trying to do, which is to  create a better (more effective) and more profitable system.

As a result, they just created a partial week version of the II system.  Completely wrong paradigm for a points system.  What they should have done was take a look at a few of the systems that had success in converting owners from a fixed/floating week system and copied their model and learned from their mistakes.  

That's okay, the world is littered with companies who tried to reinvent the wheel and ended up with a square thing that wouldn't turn.


----------



## SueDonJ

BocaBum99 said:


> I think that Marriott put too much emphasis on the "exchange" element of this new program.  It's almost as if they said it so much internally that they were going to make an internal exchange system that they lost sight of what they were actually trying to do, which is to  create a better (more effective) and more profitable system.
> 
> As a result, they just created a partial week version of the II system.  Completely wrong paradigm for a points system.  What they should have done was take a look at a few of the systems that had success in converting owners from a fixed/floating week system and copied their model and learned from their mistakes.
> 
> That's okay, the world is littered with companies who tried to reinvent the wheel and ended up with a square thing that wouldn't turn.



I'm confused.  If you search this board as far back as 2006 the speculation about a new Marriott system was that they would be developing an internal exchange system.  Here's a thread that was begun 5/4/06 and this is Dave's Post #10:


> As I reported here a few months ago, Marriott is in the early stages of developing an internal trading mechanism that would be handled without II. The implementation is still several years away.
> 
> However, Marriott will not "break away" from II. Marriott will need II for owners who choose to exchange into non-Marriotts.
> 
> This isn't a question of "if" it will happen, but "when" it will happen.



There are plenty of posts/threads since 2006 (and probably before then if we could access the old boards) that mention an internal exchange system being developed by Marriott.  (And of course, what's been rolled out doesn't match all of the speculation.)  But I don't know why anybody would have expected a new program focused on something other than internal exchanges.


----------



## BocaBum99

SueDonJ said:


> I'm confused.  If you search this board as far back as 2006 the speculation about a new Marriott system was that they would be developing an internal exchange system.  Here's a thread that was begun 5/4/06 and this is Dave's Post #10:
> 
> 
> There are plenty of posts/threads since 2006 (and probably before then if we could access the old boards) that mention an internal exchange system being developed by Marriott.  (And of course, what's been rolled out doesn't match all of the speculation.)  But I don't know why anybody would have expected a new program focused on something other than internal exchanges.



You shouldn't be confused.  Marriott did create an internal exchange system just like they said they were going to do.  They modeled it after II and they missed a great opportunity to make a great points system.

A point system also allows internal exchanges and the best ones do it great.  Marriott isn't even as good as RCI Points which is one of the worst point systems in the industry.  It's not even close to the best in the industry.  I can't think of any point system that is worse than Marriott's.

I still plan on joining because I'll get some great trades unlike Perry who paid maintenance fees on a 2br unit and got a partial week in a studio.  He would have been better off locking off this Summit watch and exchanging for a full week at MOC with either the studio or 1br half.  He would have gotten a full week instead of a partial week and  he would have had another week to trade.  Perry does weird things sometimes.


----------



## pfrank4127

SueDonJ said:


> I'm confused.  If you search this board as far back as 2006 the speculation about a new Marriott system was that they would be developing an internal exchange system.  Here's a thread that was begun 5/4/06 and this is Dave's Post #10:
> 
> 
> There are plenty of posts/threads since 2006 (and probably before then if we could access the old boards) that mention an internal exchange system being developed by Marriott.  (And of course, what's been rolled out doesn't match all of the speculation.)  But I don't know why anybody would have expected a new program focused on something other than internal exchanges.



That was very interesting reading that old thread! Thanks!!


----------



## SueDonJ

BocaBum99 said:


> You shouldn't be confused.  Marriott did create an internal exchange system just like they said they were going to do.  They modeled it after II and they missed a great opportunity to make a great points system.
> 
> A point system also allows internal exchanges and the best ones do it great.  Marriott isn't even as good as RCI Points which is one of the worst point systems in the industry.  It's not even close to the best in the industry.  I can't think of any point system that is worse than Marriott's.



  But it was you who confused me, Boca, when you said, "It's almost as if they said it so much internally that they were going to make an internal exchange system that they lost sight of what they were actually trying to do ..."  I think what they were actually trying to do was to develop an internal exchange system!

I agree that whatever they've developed hasn't rolled out as The Best anything, that's for sure.  We'll have to see what we think of it a year or so in before we completely pan it, though.



BocaBum99 said:


> I still plan on joining because I'll get some great trades unlike Perry who paid maintenance fees on a 2br unit and got a partial week in a studio.  He would have been better off locking off this Summit watch and exchanging for a full week at MOC with either the studio or 1br half.  He would have gotten a full week instead of a partial week and  he would have had another week to trade.  Perry does weird things sometimes.



Don't we all?


----------



## Dean

SueDonJ said:


> But it was you who confused me, Boca, when you said, "It's almost as if they said it so much internally that they were going to make an internal exchange system that they lost sight of what they were actually trying to do ..."  I think what they were actually trying to do was to develop an internal exchange system!
> 
> I agree that whatever they've developed hasn't rolled out as The Best anything, that's for sure.  We'll have to see what we think of it a year or so in before we completely pan it, though.
> 
> 
> 
> Don't we all?


II developed their partial week option in large part due to DVC's input from what I can gather.  In the past II has been rumored to be working on their own points program.  

Every system I know of that works with points AND has cash type exchange options (cruises, hotels, etc) puts a lot of emphasis on those other options in the sales process.  However, I'm not aware of a single one that consistently gives good value for those other options.  

My interpretation of what Marriott was/is trying to do is multi-factored but ultimately it comes down to long term profit enhancement and protection.  Hopefully it'll be win-win for them and their customers, we'll have to see.  However, unlike many here, I think there is more involved in Marriott's plan than pure short term profit.


----------



## dioxide45

BocaBum99 said:


> Perry does weird things sometimes.



Apparently view was very important to Perry, given the price he paid for a OF studio. The only explanation I have for Perry is that all those years he was touting great trades, he was actually trading down in view but up in location or unit. Seems view was 90% and the other only 10%.


----------



## SueDonJ

pfrank4127 said:


> That was very interesting reading that old thread! Thanks!!



You're welcome!  If you're interested in reading more, click on "Advanced Search" in the drop-down menu up there at "Search" on the blue line, and then input "internal exchange" for the search terms, "Dave M" as the User Name (because he had contacts for related info,) and choose the Marriott board under "Search in Forums."  All kinds of goodies for you there.


----------



## dioxide45

I think while many people referenced an "internal exchange system", more people thought it would be more of an internal reservation system across multiple resorts rather than an exchange company. I don't think there are any other companies out there with a point system that is actually an exchange company (other than RCI). The rest seem to allow reservation flexibility at a certain date prior to check in. HGVC and DVC are examples of this. If the time is not reserved, it can be booked. 

I think Marriott took this route because it gives them ultimate control over inventory where the other systems may not provide that to the management companies.


----------



## Dean

dioxide45 said:


> I think while many people referenced an "internal exchange system", more people thought it would be more of an internal reservation system across multiple resorts rather than an exchange company. I don't think there are any other companies out there with a point system that is actually an exchange company (other than RCI). The rest seem to allow reservation flexibility at a certain date prior to check in. HGVC and DVC are examples of this. If the time is not reserved, it can be booked.
> 
> I think Marriott took this route because it gives them ultimate control over inventory where the other systems may not provide that to the management companies.


DVC has a registered exchange company which they use only for exchanges external to their system but directly with other companies.  Bluegreen, Club Cordial & Club Intrawest do the same thing, BG with shell and the other 2 reciprocal to DVC.  I don't know if they have formally registered an exchange company, if they have, I'm not aware of it though Jim would be in a much better position than I would to know regarding BG.

My suspicion is that the only legal and reasonable way they could provide "direct" access between the current weeks system and the points system was something along the lines of what they've done.  Else you either wouldn't have a connection at all and would simply run them independently freezing the current system where it is OR you'd convert the current members who did elect to participate directly to the trust itself with the benefits but negatives included.  With that approach likely the only conversion option allowed would be an additional purchase and it's very possible they would have done so by exchanging what you currently owned for other inventory to get the right number of points.  That'd be quite an increase in dues with the current structure.


----------



## BocaBum99

dioxide45 said:


> I think while many people referenced an "internal exchange system", more people thought it would be more of an internal reservation system across multiple resorts rather than an exchange company. I don't think there are any other companies out there with a point system that is actually an exchange company (other than RCI). The rest seem to allow reservation flexibility at a certain date prior to check in. HGVC and DVC are examples of this. If the time is not reserved, it can be booked.
> 
> I think Marriott took this route because it gives them ultimate control over inventory where the other systems may not provide that to the management companies.



Exactly....


----------



## Fredm

BocaBum99 said:


> .... *they just created a partial week version of the II system*.  Completely wrong paradigm for a points system.  What they should have done was take a look at a few of the systems that had success in converting owners from a fixed/floating week system and copied their model and learned from their mistakes.



Boca, that is exactly what Marriott has done.
Created a partial week exchange mechanism for legacy owners. 
It is an additional option. Enrolled members should exercise the legacy system for weekly trades. 

How well it will work remains to be seen. But, it will be directly related to legacy conversions. 

Tuggers have put this under a microscope, diced and sliced it, and uncovered the shortcomings. Most of which are distinctions without a difference as a practical matter when using the legacy system.

So, the sales proposition for the 95%+ of legacy owners who do not read TUG is a simple one: keep what you already enjoy, but have the added ability to make partial week reservations/exchanges,  potentially save on fees, make travel arrangements, and convert to MRP's (if a resale owner). I think that will sell quite well. It will take couple of year or more for Marriott to get around to all owners. But, over time Marriott will achieve its goal of controlling the whole shebang (or most of it).

I mean, you said you are converting, warts and all. If it has some backhanded appeal to you, how do you think less insightful owners will view the offer?

Pluses and minuses aside, I do think it will be successful for Marriott. And Marriott's success will mean that there will be enough inventory for the system to work well. That will be the bottom line for most.

Marriott is 5 weeks into a multi-year migration. Meanwhile, legacy owners have not surrendered anything, or lost what they had pre-June 20. As I have stated before, that is the biggest take away from this whole thing.

It is not that Marriott has focused too much on creating a partial week exchange/reservation system. It is our obsession with it. Nothing is compelling us to deal with it, except liking to hear ourselves talk:hysterical:


----------



## jerseygirl

Fredm said:


> Enrolled members should exercise the legacy system for weekly trades.



Fred -- You know I agree with you 99% of the time, but I think Marriott has created a system where enrolled members with lots of points truly can benefit by using the points system .... all the rest, not so much.  Without interference, this would lead to a stalemate of sorts because those who do not benefit would not "seed" the inventory.  However,  there is interference -- huge interference -- in that Marriott can grab deposits from II, thereby fulfilling the requests of those high point owners.  Over time, what's left for the others????   I know Marriott has to substitute other weeks when they pull a deposit, but we all know how that turned out for RCI weeks owners!  

JMHO, but I think it's a too simplistic to state that enrolled members should exercise the legacy system for weekly trades (or that non-enrolled members will not be affected).   Now, back to agreeing with you on all things timeshare related!


----------



## windje2000

Fredm said:


> Boca, that is exactly what Marriott has done.
> Created a partial week exchange mechanism for legacy owners.
> It is an additional option. Enrolled members should exercise the legacy system for weekly trades.
> 
> How well it will work remains to be seen. But, it will be directly related to legacy conversions.
> 
> Tuggers have put this under a microscope, diced and sliced it, and uncovered the shortcomings. Most of which are distinctions without a difference as a practical matter when using the legacy system.
> 
> So, the sales proposition for the 95%+ of legacy owners who do not read TUG is a simple one: keep what you already enjoy, but have the added ability to make partial week reservations/exchanges,  potentially save on fees, make travel arrangements, and convert to MRP's (if a resale owner). I think that will sell quite well. It will take couple of year or more for Marriott to get around to all owners. But, *over time Marriott will achieve its goal of controlling the whole shebang (or most of it).*
> 
> I mean, you said you are converting, warts and all. If it has some backhanded appeal to you, how do you think less insightful owners will view the offer?
> 
> Pluses and minuses aside, I do think it will be successful for Marriott. And Marriott's success will mean that there will be enough inventory for the system to work well. That will be the bottom line for most.
> 
> Marriott is 5 weeks into a multi-year migration. Meanwhile, legacy owners have not surrendered anything, or lost what they had pre-June 20. As I have stated before, that is the biggest take away from this whole thing.
> 
> It is not that Marriott has focused too much on creating a partial week exchange/reservation system. It is our obsession with it. Nothing is compelling us to deal with it, except liking to hear ourselves talk:hysterical:



Just curious - how do you think this ends, as regards the quote highlighted?


----------



## Fredm

windje2000 said:


> Just curious - how do you think this ends, as regards the quote highlighted?



I think it ends with a Marriott controlled exchange and reservation system. Or, mostly so.

It is a long term business strategy. This is not a short term scheme to sell dog weeks. It took years to plan and begin implementing.
I believe Marriott has concluded that revenue growth from new product sales has plateaued. Mining the owner base is a long term opportunity to generate recurring revenues with high profit margin. I assume they will also capture more inventory for their rental business than previously. 

If successful (and I think they will be) at converting legacy owners, then Marriott has a yet longer term objective. Sell vacant hotel rooms as part of its product offering, in a more robust package. No land acquisition /development/ sales cost
(think of the Asia Pacific program for a clue).
That is why, I believe, MRP's are included for all resale legacy owners. I don't know what form this will take, but have heard snippets that suggest it will be a boon for Marriott because it will also be able to guarantee higher occupancy rates when negotiating its operations management contact with hotel owners. This is not just about the Vacation Club. It's about Marriott's entire enterprise.

Marriott has much latitude in creating flexible value for the invested owner. They are just beginning to shape a delivery system to provide it. Whether owners perceive value is another matter.  

By retaining the legacy system intact, owners should not feel threatened by the migration. It became a closed system of opportunity as of 6/20/10.  Smart move, IMO. No sense in stirring that pot. Marriott has plenty of time to sell them on a new mouse-trap.


----------



## DanCali

Fredm said:


> I think it ends with a Marriott controlled exchange and reservation system. Or, mostly so.
> 
> It is a long term business strategy. This is not a short term scheme to sell dog weeks. It took years to plan and begin implementing.
> I believe Marriott has concluded that revenue growth from new product sales has plateaued. Mining the owner base is a long term opportunity to generate recurring revenues with high profit margin. I assume they will also capture more inventory for their rental business than previously.
> 
> If successful (and I think they will be) at converting legacy owners, then Marriott has a yet longer term objective. Sell vacant hotel rooms as part of its product offering, in a more robust package. No land acquisition /development/ sales cost
> (think of the Asia Pacific program for a clue).
> That is why, I believe, MRP's are included for all resale legacy owners. I don't know what form this will take, but have heard snippets that suggest it will be a boon for Marriott because it will also be able to guarantee higher occupancy rates when negotiating its operations management contact with hotel owners. This is not just about the Vacation Club. It's about Marriott's entire enterprise.
> 
> Marriott has much latitude in creating flexible value for the invested owner. They are just beginning to shape a delivery system to provide it. Whether owners perceive value is another matter.
> 
> By retaining the legacy system intact, owners should not feel threatened by the migration. It became a closed system of opportunity as of 6/20/10.  Smart move, IMO. No sense in stirring that pot. Marriott has plenty of time to sell them on a new mouse-trap.




It is one thing to get owners to enroll, but another to get them to convert to points year after year. I've still been trying to figure out how Marriott benefits under current rules if owners just enroll, but keep using II. I haven't found a compelling way in which they benefit from that so I have concluded in my mind that they will ultimately change the II deposit rules and go the Starwood way, at least for enrolled owners. Do you see it that way or do you believe most enrolled owners will use points, despite the various disadvantages of points vs. II uncovered so far, so Marriott won't care if a minority just uses II and saves on fees?


----------



## NboroGirl

I emailed the Marriott response Dave posted in note #447 to my Marriott contact, who claims enrolled weeks owners have access to the Trust, and he wrote:



> Actually  the response proves me right
> 
> Owners of Marriott Vacation Club weeks who enroll in the points product and elect to exchange for Vacation Club points have access to Marriott Vacation Club Destinations inventory and Interval International exchange inventory.
> 
> Destinations Inventory = Trust Inventory
> 
> Furthermore as a legacy week owner you will have access to both “legacy week owner’s inventory and trust inventory,” new purchasers only have access to Trust inventory and weeks that traditional legacy week owners convert into Destination Club Points



I want to believe it, and I'm pretty sure he believes it, but why wouldn't Marriott just say so then?


----------



## TrapperDog

By retaining the legacy system intact, owners should not feel threatened by the migration. It became a closed system of opportunity as of 6/20/10.  Smart move, IMO. No sense in stirring that pot. Marriott has plenty of time to sell them on a new mouse-trap.[/QUOTE]

Unfortunately, this isn't correct - it's not a closed system. Trust points owners have access to both inventories, and legacy owners only have access to legacy inventory. My salesman stated that (in an effort to get me to buy points) they expect higher end resort week owners to convert to points in increasing numbers. This means other legacy owners will have a decreasing pool to trade a week for, in the traditional way. 

As I mentioned in a different post, my salesman started off the presentation by saying nothing is being taken from you. After he mentioned the above and I pointed out that this is a net loss for me as a legacy owner, even he conceded the point.


----------



## DanCali

NboroGirl said:


> I emailed the Marriott response Dave posted in note #447 to my Marriott contact, who claims enrolled weeks owners have access to the Trust, and he wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> I want to believe it, and I'm pretty sure he believes it, but why wouldn't Marriott just say so then?



Your rep is right... enrolled weeks owners have "access" to trust inventory, but it's through the exchange company.

The distinction to focus on is "direct access" vs. "access"



> The reservation rules and priorities that owners of Marriott Vacation Club weeks enjoyed prior to introduction of the new points program have been maintained. *The inventory that owners of the new points product have direct access to at any resort consists of weeks that are actually owned by the Trust.* Any other occupancy by owners of the new points product at a resort, is of inventory that owners of weeks have elected to place into the new points exchange program.
> 
> Owners of Marriott Vacation Club weeks continue to have access to inventory at their home resort and Interval International exchange inventory, as they have in the past. *Owners of Marriott Vacation Club weeks who enroll in the points product and elect to exchange for Vacation Club points have access to Marriott Vacation Club Destinations inventory* and Interval International exchange inventory.



So you are right because "points are not points." Trust owners get direct reservation access. Legacy points get access through an exchange company. And he is right because he uses the word "access" which is technically true, but obviously not what you meant. By his interpretation, you also technically have "access" to 3000+ resorts via Interval too...


----------



## Fredm

DanCali said:


> It is one thing to get owners to enroll, but another to get them to convert to points year after year. I've still been trying to figure out how Marriott benefits under current rules if owners just enroll, but keep using II. I haven't found a compelling way in which they benefit from that so I have concluded in my mind that they will ultimately change the II deposit rules and go the Starwood way, at least for enrolled owners. Do you see it that way or do you believe most enrolled owners will use points, despite the various disadvantages of points vs. II uncovered so far, so Marriott won't care if a minority just uses II and saves on fees?



I think it's like turning a battleship in a bathtub. The progression will be slow.
I do know that the first step is owner conversions. If owners do not convert they will not use points at all. So, conversions are the key. 
Once converted, owners will do what suits them best. 
If they never use points (unlikely), then Marriott still gets the annual fee.  However, as a long term view, owner needs may change over time. Split week, mid-week, and other alternatives may have an appeal that is not now contemplated. Others will experiment with it. Some will use it actively. Collectively, more inventory enters the system. And it will increase over time.
Also, resale legacy owners may dabble with MRP's. Marriott wins here also.

You say "despite the various disadvantages of points vs. II uncovered so far".  It is clear to me that I.I. is preferable for weekly trades. Most of those that convert will see it the same way. Marriott is marketing this to legacy owners as an flexible alternative to weekly trades. Not a substitute. As they should. We are the ones that have chosen to make much of the weekly comparison. 

So, sure, Marriott will be pleased as punch if owners just convert. Once they have, the next step is possible. Without it, nothing happens.

I want to be clear. I am not advocating the D-club. Just saying that in my opinion it will be successful. And, much of the analysis is dissecting tree branches, twigs, and leaves. Not looking at the tree. Never mind the forest.


----------



## Fredm

jerseygirl said:


> Fred -- You know I agree with you 99% of the time, but I think Marriott has created a system where enrolled members with lots of points truly can benefit by using the points system .... all the rest, not so much.  Without interference, this would lead to a stalemate of sorts because those who do not benefit would not "seed" the inventory.  However,  there is interference -- huge interference -- in that Marriott can grab deposits from II, thereby fulfilling the requests of those high point owners.  Over time, what's left for the others????   I know Marriott has to substitute other weeks when they pull a deposit, but we all know how that turned out for RCI weeks owners!
> 
> JMHO, but I think it's a too simplistic to state that enrolled members should exercise the legacy system for weekly trades (or that non-enrolled members will not be affected).   Now, back to agreeing with you on all things timeshare related!



jerseygirl -- I don't mean to suggest that things will not change over time. They always do.  In fact, at some point the impact on I.I.'s internal trade inventory  may be such that it will "encourage" some legacy owner holdouts to convert. But, that's a long way off.  Most owners will not notice a difference for quite a while, if ever.  Again, I am referring to the 95%+ who do not know what you do.

Fact is, change is here.


----------



## BocaBum99

I see it the way FredM sees it.  The rest is just implementation detail which will impact how effective the new exchange system will become.  

I am going to join only because I want access to the Hawaii inventory.  It has to go somewhere.  As long as I have access to all options where it is available, I'll get it.


----------



## hotcoffee

jerseygirl said:


> Fred -- You know I agree with you 99% of the time, but I think Marriott has created a system where enrolled members with lots of points truly can benefit by using the points system .... all the rest, not so much.  Without interference, this would lead to a stalemate of sorts because those who do not benefit would not "seed" the inventory.  However,  there is interference -- huge interference -- in that Marriott can grab deposits from II, thereby fulfilling the requests of those high point owners.  Over time, what's left for the others????   I know Marriott has to substitute other weeks when they pull a deposit, but we all know how that turned out for RCI weeks owners!
> 
> JMHO, but I think it's a too simplistic to state that enrolled members should exercise the legacy system for weekly trades (or that non-enrolled members will not be affected).   Now, back to agreeing with you on all things timeshare related!



I personally believe that premier and premier plus points owners (or even those near or above 5000 points) will not need to use II to exchange except when they want to exchange into a non-Marriott resort.  Given the reality that the Marriott exchange manager can satisfy waitlist requests for their points clients via II, there should be no advantage to high points exchangers to go directly through II.

However, this fact should not adversely affect weeks owners who continue to exchange through II because Marriott will have to satisfy II searches when II satisfies their searches.  So, it should be a wash: one Marriott week out of II and one Marriott week into II.  Given that all points searches in II are Request-first, I would suspect that it will turn out to be a lot of Request-first <==> Request-first type trades between II and Marriott.  Still, this benefits weeks owners as much as points owners.

The only thing that will hurt weeks owners exchanging through II would be when and if the number of enrollments becomes enough that II deposits begin diminishing.


----------



## Fredm

TrapperDog said:


> *Unfortunately, this isn't correct - it's not a closed system. Trust points owners have access to both inventories, and legacy owners only have access to legacy inventory.* My salesman stated that (in an effort to get me to buy points) they expect higher end resort week owners to convert to points in increasing numbers. This means other legacy owners will have a decreasing pool to trade a week for, in the traditional way.
> 
> As I mentioned in a different post, my salesman started off the presentation by saying nothing is being taken from you. After he mentioned the above and I pointed out that this is a net loss for me as a legacy owner, even he conceded the point.



I referred to a legacy owner who *does not convert *is playing in a closed system. You took it to the points comparison of exchange members to points owners.


----------



## pipet

DanCali said:


> It is one thing to get owners to enroll, but another to get them to convert to points year after year. I've still been trying to figure out how Marriott benefits under current rules if owners just enroll, but keep using II. I haven't found a compelling way in which they benefit from that so I have concluded in my mind that they will ultimately change the II deposit rules and go the Starwood way, at least for enrolled owners. Do you see it that way or do you believe most enrolled owners will use points, despite the various disadvantages of points vs. II uncovered so far, so Marriott won't care if a minority just uses II and saves on fees?



This is what I wonder, too.  How long did it take before Starwood did that?


----------



## windje2000

Fredm said:


> I think it ends with a Marriott controlled exchange and reservation system. Or, mostly so.
> 
> It is a long term business strategy. This is not a short term scheme to sell dog weeks.  [Selling inventory is a big first step in whatever they are planning] It took years to plan and begin implementing.
> I believe Marriott has concluded that revenue growth from new product sales has plateaued. [Agree] Mining the owner base is a long term opportunity to generate recurring revenues with high profit margin. [Agree]  I assume they will also capture more inventory for their rental business than previously.
> 
> If successful (and I think they will be) [What's your definition of success?] at converting legacy owners, then Marriott has a yet longer term objective. Sell vacant hotel rooms as part of its product offering, in a more robust package. No land acquisition /development/ sales cost
> (think of the Asia Pacific program for a clue).
> That is why, I believe, MRP's are included for all resale legacy owners. [Interesting observation - hadn't thought of that]I don't know what form this will take, but have heard snippets that suggest it will be a boon for Marriott because it will also be able to guarantee higher occupancy rates when negotiating its operations management contact with hotel owners. This is not just about the Vacation Club. It's about Marriott's entire enterprise.
> 
> Marriott has much latitude in creating flexible value for the invested owner. They are just beginning to shape a delivery system to provide it. Whether owners perceive value is another matter. Agree
> 
> By retaining the legacy system intact, owners should not feel threatened by the migration. [Why not - The question is how will it change long term?]   It became a closed system of opportunity as of 6/20/10.  Smart move, IMO. No sense in stirring that pot. Marriott has plenty of time to sell them on a new mouse-trap.



This plan is like a league where baseball teams keep the ground rules a secret from the players, never publish a box score and the umpires are team employees.

I'm guess I'm just not so keen on Marriott (or anyone for that matter) wearing so many hats, all of which have revenue potential.  

Development Company
Sales Company
Management Company
Reservation agent
Exchange Company
Trust Manager
Rental agent
Resale Company

There are lots of inherent conflicts when one wears all those hats.  Particularly when there's no transparency.  Mining the customer base translates to drilling into my bank account.

I historically accorded Marriott as much of a presumption of integrity and fair dealing as one can reasonably award a business.  Now I'm somewhere beyond 'trust but verify' and heading towards 'If they say the sky is blue look out the window.'  

Marriott might well take heed of your sage advice.


----------



## Fredm

windje2000 said:


> This plan is like a league where baseball teams keep the ground rules a secret from the players, never publish a box score and the umpires are team employees.
> 
> I'm guess I'm just not so keen on Marriott (or anyone for that matter) wearing so many hats, all of which have revenue potential.
> 
> Development Company
> Sales Company
> Management Company
> Reservation agent
> Exchange Company
> Trust Manager
> Rental agent
> Resale Company
> 
> There are lots of inherent conflicts when one wears all those hats.  Particularly when there's no transparency.  Mining the customer base translates to drilling into my bank account.
> 
> I historically accorded Marriott as much of a presumption of integrity and fair dealing as one can reasonably award a business.  *Now I'm somewhere beyond 'trust but verify' and heading towards 'If they say the sky is blue look out the window.'  *
> 
> Marriott might well take heed of your sage advice.



By George! We agree.


----------



## hotcoffee

NboroGirl said:


> I emailed the Marriott response Dave posted in note #447 to my Marriott contact, who claims enrolled weeks owners have access to the Trust, . . . .
> 
> I want to believe it, and I'm pretty sure he believes it, but why wouldn't Marriott just say so then?



What the points salespeople are saying is that Marriott will satisfy reservation requests from any available inventory.  At this point it would appear that what they are not saying is exactly _*when*_ that will happen.  When I called the VOA on the 26th, I talked at length to her about the various inventories.  I knew exactly what was in the Trust based partly upon what the Multisite Public Offering document says is there plus what some of the TUGGERs who have analyzed the room designators have posted here.  I spent over an hour making my reservation due partly to some "oops" type snafus and partly because I was pumping her about what she was able to see regarding the Trust.  I came away convinced that she was not able to move anything out of the Trust into the Exchange inventory right there over the phone.

I then contacted my points specialist to inquire why she was not able to do that.  His explanation was that Marriott has a department that will handle moving inventory around to satisfy exchange requests.  In order for that to have happened, I would have had to allow my reservation request to be put on the waitlist.  So, the VOA cannot (at least as of now) move inventory around.  All she can do is match your request against what is currently in the exchange inventory and help you with ideas as to how to get what you what.  That explanation sounds plausible.  That makes the Marriott's exchange company similar to II in that you will need to do the equivalent of a search (i.e., be waitlisted) in order for Marriott to find something that will meet your request.

Some (if not most) of the points specialists at Marriott read TUG and are aware of what is being debated here, and they still insist that internal exchange requests can be fulfilled from the Trust inventory when necessary.


----------



## hotcoffee

windje2000 said:


> . . .
> I'm guess I'm just not so keen on Marriott (or anyone for that matter) wearing so many hats, all of which have revenue potential.
> 
> Development Company
> Sales Company
> Management Company
> Reservation agent
> Exchange Company
> Trust Manager
> Rental agent
> Resale Company
> 
> There are lots of inherent conflicts when one wears all those hats.  Particularly when there's no transparency. . . .



Did you notice how many times this phrase (or something functionally equivalent) appears in the various legal documents:

"Exchange Company [or Program Manager; or Developer; etc.] reserves the right . . . ."

They have that type of phrase in all of the documents for just about everything.  In other words, they can do anything they want, any time they want, and in anyway they want, and don't have to ask anyone's permission.  As far as I can see, there is nothing in the documents that is legally binding that says they cannot change any of their reservation rules should they decide to change them.


----------



## pipet

hotcoffee said:


> They have that type of phrase in all of the documents for just about everything.  In other words, they can do anything they want, any time they want, and in anyway they want, and don't have to ask anyone's permission.  As far as I can see, there is nothing in the documents that is legally binding that says they cannot change any of their reservation rules should they decide to change them.



People have pointed out that Marriott had some leeway to change things with the weeks system, but the difference was that a lot more of us trusted Marriott to do the right thing.  While there are some who are still counting on this, there are a lot more who no longer see Marriott in the same light.


----------



## puckmanfl

good afternoon...
I think we can all agree that access to trust inventory is an exchange company for legacy point players but a reservation system for trust players!!!  The problem is to access trust inventory it is a "deposit" first but a request first for trust players.

I am not sure I trust them enough to actually convert (give up) my week, take the "skim" and hope they do the right thing.  MVCD could equalize the playing field, by permitting wait listing with the collateral of a legacy week which would be converted to points upon finding a match.  After all it is an exchange company, it doesn't matter if the unit of barter is points or a week that immediately is converted to points!!!

With this system, the only access to new resorts if thru "deposit" first. (converting a week to points) and losing it...and hoping for trust inventory.  I do this in II but their motive is to make exchanges for $$$, not to promote sales (trust points) and exchanges.  There is a clear conflict of interest with the mother company.  They may not use it but the perception is real!!!


----------



## hotcoffee

One question that does come to mind is what happens if they are unable to meet a waitlisted requested prior to the desired travel day?  II deposits can last for two years.  I cannot recall if anything has been published about what happens if they cannot satisfy a waitlist request.  Ideally, they should give you some type of compensation.  Since the points will expire at the end of the Use Year, it does not sound like they can give you a second year to find something.

I do know that, according to someone at Marriott that I spoke to early on (forgotten who), they supposedly will be more liberal in allowing banking when a waitlist search fails.  In other words, even if past the banking deadline, they supposedly will allow banking of points that would have otherwise been lost due to a failure in satisfying the request.  We'll have to wait to see if that happens.


----------



## jerseygirl

Fredm said:


> jerseygirl -- I don't mean to suggest that things will not change over time. They always do.  In fact, at some point the impact on I.I.'s internal trade inventory  may be such that it will "encourage" some legacy owner holdouts to convert. But, that's a long way off.  Most owners will not notice a difference for quite a while, if ever.  Again, I am referring to the 95%+ who do not know what you do.
> 
> Fact is, change is here.



I agree Fred, change is here.  But, legacy owners can do something about it -- they can move their exchange inventory elsewhere so Marriott can't get their hands on it.  I think I'll send a resume to SFX -- they're fools not to jump all over this -- yesterday!


----------



## jerseygirl

hotcoffee said:


> I personally believe that premier and premier plus points owners (or even those near or above 5000 points) will not need to use II to exchange except when they want to exchange into a non-Marriott resort.  Given the reality that the Marriott exchange manager can satisfy waitlist requests for their points clients via II, there should be no advantage to high points exchangers to go directly through II.



I think we're saying the same thing.  I too agree that there's no need for those with a large number of points to use II _directly_, but IMO they're going to need Marriott to use II for them.  That's where I would revolt if I were a legacy owner without a large number of points -- I would find another exchange company to do business with.  Unless I felt I was getting a fair shake, I wouldn't provide the inventory necessary for this to work the way it's intended.



hotcoffee said:


> However, this fact should not adversely affect weeks owners who continue to exchange through II because Marriott will have to satisfy II searches when II satisfies their searches.  So, it should be a wash: one Marriott week out of II and one Marriott week into II.  Given that all points searches in II are Request-first, I would suspect that it will turn out to be a lot of Request-first <==> Request-first type trades between II and Marriott.  Still, this benefits weeks owners as much as points owners.



I don't disagree here either, I would just be worried about what Marriott chooses for the substitutions.  As I mentioned earlier, we all know how "substitutions" turned out at RCI!



hotcoffee said:


> The only thing that will hurt weeks owners exchanging through II would be when and if the number of enrollments becomes enough that II deposits begin diminishing.



Can't agree here ... but I do hope you're correct as I hate it when big companies do stuff like this to loyal customers ....


----------



## Fredm

jerseygirl said:


> I agree Fred, change is here.  But, legacy owners can do something about it -- they can move their exchange inventory elsewhere so Marriott can't get their hands on it.  I think I'll send a resume to SFX -- they're fools not to jump all over this -- yesterday!



Go girl!! Just be careful. Some around here will want your head for screwing with their exchange prospects.

"Analysis" can take a decidedly self-serving bent once the steam has vented.


----------



## ilene13

*SFX*



jerseygirl said:


> I agree Fred, change is here.  But, legacy owners can do something about it -- they can move their exchange inventory elsewhere so Marriott can't get their hands on it.  I think I'll send a resume to SFX -- they're fools not to jump all over this -- yesterday!



I do not know anything about SFX but I just went on their website and their directory lists most of the Marriott timeshares.  I'm assuming they get into the directory because someone who owns their has joined their program.  I may be wrong.  Has anyone used it?


----------



## jerseygirl

I've used SFX several times.  The plus side is a generous bonus week program.  The huge negative is the lack of online search capability (not a big deal for some, but I don't always have a destination in mind -- there's a great big world out there I still haven't seen!).   

SFX is not nearly as robust as II ... but that could change, imo, if they created online search capability and rolled out preferential trading programs (e.g., Marriott to Marriott, Starwood to Starwood, Hilton to Hilton, etc.).  It would take time, of course, but they're nuts if they don't do something QUICKLY to attempt to capitalize on the current Marriott situation (as well as the Starwood situation).  It's time someone created a fully transparent exchange program that makes its money the old fashioned way -- performing fair exchanges!


----------



## sparty

*Got a call from Corporate*

Tuesday night (July 26th), after waiting 3.5 hours for a VOA at 9 am EST and getting shot down in my points request. I crafted a nice letter to Marriott corporate with my concerns and issues.

Today I got a response.. I am willing to share the executives name at corporate but not sure if posting peoples names is a violation here, I think it is.

Anyways here's what he said:

1) Marriott will consider refunding my enrolment fees

2) There are two pools - enrolled owners and points/trust owners - they don't play together except for 11 resorts - Lakeshore Reserve, Crystal Shores, etc. (I think most may already know this.

3) As of this afternoon around 3 PM central - there were 4000 enrolled owners and nobody should worry about trading as a lot (most?) of the 400,000 "legacy" owners will convert and then when they deposit there will be easy trading opportunities

4) Nobody is calling in (Customer Advocacy) and complaining about the system - I am the only one who thinks the MVCD has some serious issues/limitations.

5) The Marriott agents are all well trained and knowledgeable - He doesn't know of any issues related to mis-information and would like names of any Marriott employees who may have given incorrect information.

Ok.. What kool-aide is he drinking.. Once they  return my enrollment fees I will have some with him..


----------



## brigechols

Sparty,

Ask the executive to read Mr. Marriott's blog for a reality check :hysterical: :hysterical:


----------



## TrapperDog

Fredm said:


> I referred to a legacy owner who *does not convert *is playing in a closed system. You took it to the points comparison of exchange members to points owners.



This is STILL not a closed system. Before the new program, another owner who chose to deposit, that week went into the II pool. It would have been available to me for an exchange. Now, an enrolled owner can convert this week to points. If I'm not enrolled, it's not available to me but IS available to points owners. Inventory goes out but does not come in. Less inventory available to non-enrolling members. Gradual devaluing of my week for trading as more enroll.


----------



## Fredm

TrapperDog said:


> This is STILL not a closed system. Before the new program, another owner who chose to deposit, that week went into the II pool. It would have been available to me for an exchange. Now, an enrolled owner can convert this week to points. If I'm not enrolled, it's not available to me but IS available to points owners. Inventory goes out but does not come in. Less inventory available to non-enrolling members. Gradual devaluing of my week for trading as more enroll.



Trapper, I understand what you are saying. 
But, that is also one less exchanger competing for an exchange. 
Also, if Marriott gets the inventory from I.I. they replace it with a comparable share.

Yes, the I.I. inventory pool will decrease over time as more owners convert. So will the competition.  This is no different than some number of owners who decide to take their exchanges to SFX (as suggested by jerseygirl in this thread).

Your point is well taken. At some distant future time, legacy system owners may conclude that they will have a better shot by joining the D-club. In fact, Marriott is probably counting on it. I said as much in my post #634.


----------



## windje2000

sparty said:


> Tuesday night (July 26th), after waiting 3.5 hours for a VOA at 9 am EST and getting shot down in my points request. I crafted a nice letter to Marriott corporate with my concerns and issues.
> 
> Today I got a response.. I am willing to share the executives name at corporate but not sure if posting peoples names is a violation here, I think it is.
> 
> Anyways here's what he said:
> 
> 1) *Marriott will consider refunding my enrolment fees*
> 
> 2) There are two pools - enrolled owners and points/trust owners - they don't play together except for 11 resorts - Lakeshore Reserve, Crystal Shores, etc. (I think most may already know this.
> 
> 3) As of this afternoon around 3 PM central - *there were 4000 enrolled owners* and nobody should worry about trading as a lot (most?) of the 400,000 "legacy" owners will convert and then when they deposit there will be easy trading opportunities
> 
> 4) Nobody is calling in (Customer Advocacy) and complaining about the system - I am the only one who thinks the MVCD has some serious issues/limitations.
> 
> 5) The Marriott agents are all well trained and knowledgeable - He doesn't know of any issues related to mis-information and would like names of any Marriott employees who may have given incorrect information.
> 
> Ok.. What kool-aide is he drinking.. Once they  return my enrollment fees I will have some with him..



Consider means maybe they will and maybe they won't

I thought the sales people were saying they enrolled 4,000 in week one - that would mean nothing since?

You're the only one complaining?  [yet this board has become the land of delusional paranoia]

No issues with bad info from Marriott staff.  


This guy lives in an alternate reality named 'don't rock the boat' in the county of 'make sure Bill doesn't read his blog' on Lake Wobegone, where all the timeshares are above average.  This man is delusional, which by the way is defined as having strongly held but false beliefs. 

Many of the suspicions of those 'delusional paranoiacs' on this board characterized variously as 'black helicopter' enthusiasts have been confirmed as truth as the onion is peeled back.

A better question is 

Why do we have to peel the onion?  

Why can't people get a straight answer to a simple question on a carefully considered plan four years in the making?


----------



## BocaBum99

windje2000 said:


> Consider means maybe they will and maybe they won't
> 
> I thought the sales people were saying they enrolled 4,000 in week one - that would mean nothing since?
> 
> You're the only one complaining?  [yet this board has become the land of delusional paranoia]
> 
> No issues with bad info from Marriott staff.
> 
> 
> This guy lives in an alternate reality named 'don't rock the boat' in the county of 'make sure Bill doesn't read his blog' on Lake Wobegone, where all the timeshares are above average.  This man is delusional, which by the way is defined as having strongly held but false beliefs.
> 
> Many of the suspicions of those 'delusional paranoiacs' on this board characterized variously as 'black helicopter' enthusiasts have been confirmed as truth as the onion is peeled back.
> 
> A better question is
> 
> Why do we have to peel the onion?
> 
> Why can't people get a straight answer to a simple question on a carefully considered plan four years in the making?



The reason why it's delusional paranoia is because more likely than not, Marriott is NOT trying to screw over owners.  Sure, they are trying to profit along the way, but that is what all companies do.  They will live and die by the customer satisfaction of this new program and therefore will have to take dramatic action to improve their program, their communication and their execution.  They will get there eventually.  That is when we should evaluate their program and its impact to owners.

Most of the problems that we see and hear about can most simply be explained by bad execution on Marriott's part.  Marriott isn't smart enough to screw up this badly or come up with a scheme as elaborate as has been discussed on this message board to cheat owners.  I really don't believe in conspiracy theories.   Such theories are usually impossible to plan and pull off.


----------



## windje2000

BocaBum99 said:


> The reason why it's delusional paranoia is because more likely than not, Marriott is NOT trying to screw over owners.  Sure, they are trying to profit along the way, but that is what all companies do.  They will live and die by the customer satisfaction of this new program and therefore will have to take dramatic action to improve their program, their communication and their execution.  They will get there eventually.  That is when we should evaluate their program and its impact to owners.
> 
> Most of the problems that we see and hear about can most simply be explained by bad execution on Marriott's part.  Marriott isn't smart enough to screw up this badly or come up with a scheme as elaborate as has been discussed on this message board to cheat owners.  I really don't believe in conspiracy theories.   Such theories are usually impossible to plan and pull off.



Time will tell


----------



## m61376

sparty said:


> 3) *As of this afternoon around 3 PM central - there were 4000 enrolled owners *and nobody should worry about trading as a lot (most?) of the 400,000 "legacy" owners will convert and then when they deposit there will be easy trading opportunities
> 
> 4) Nobody is calling in (Customer Advocacy) and complaining about the system - I am the only one who thinks the MVCD has some serious issues/limitations.
> 
> 5) The Marriott agents are all well trained and knowledgeable - He doesn't know of any issues related to mis-information and would like names of any Marriott employees who may have given incorrect information.
> 
> Ok.. What kool-aide is he drinking.. Once they  return my enrollment fees I will have some with him..


Aside from a lot of what you said being almost laughable, I find the enrollment figure interesting. That would mean that in over a months they have managed to enroll 1% of owners, during a time when there is heightened interest because it is new and exciting. At that rate, I'd be worried about them eventually enrolling the projected 20%, let alone "most."


----------



## Fredm

m61376 said:


> Aside from a lot of what you said being almost laughable, I find the enrollment figure interesting. That would mean that in over a months they have managed to enroll 1% of owners, during a time when there is heightened interest because it is new and exciting. At that rate, I'd be worried about them eventually enrolling the projected 20%, let alone "most."



Most owners do not yet know of the program. 
Many that do have been subject to what has been posted here.

Of those that have been notified, most remain uncommitted. They have until the end of the year to take advantage of the current offer.
Given that there is no rush, I am surprised that 4000 enrolled. 

Like all the numbers and stats thrown around, I have no reason to believe the accuracy of this one either.


----------



## dioxide45

Enrollments really is a meaningless number. They could enroll 100%, but that could have zero effect on weeks owners. Marriott needs people to convert their weeks to points. That is the challenge.


----------



## Dean

dioxide45 said:


> Enrollments really is a meaningless number. They could enroll 100%, but that could have zero effect on weeks owners. Marriott needs people to convert their weeks to points. That is the challenge.


True in a sense, however, an enrolled week is a potential points conversion and a non enrolled week isn't, at least directly.  Of course even non converted weeks have the potential to cross over through any rental program, breakage inventory, MR points conversions and in the back door from II.  One thing I don't think I've seen discussed (might have missed it) is that if enough owners convert at a given resort, there is the possibility of later having the owners vote to actually join the trust.  Maybe this will be the new change we're talking about 10 years from now.  I'm not saying this will happen, only that it is a possibility.


----------



## m61376

Dean said:


> True in a sense, however, an enrolled week is a potential points conversion and a non enrolled week isn't, at least directly.  Of course even non converted weeks have the potential to cross over through any rental program, breakage inventory, MR points conversions and in the back door from II.  One thing I don't think I've seen discussed (might have missed it) is that if enough owners convert at a given resort, there is the possibility of later having the owners vote to actually join the trust.  Maybe this will be the new change we're talking about 10 years from now.  I'm not saying this will happen, only that it is a possibility.


I'm not so sure that could potentially happen. Once a deeded week is owned it is owned unless the owner relinquishes it voluntarily. Even if the majority of owners were to vote to join the trust, as long as there are weeks owners who object, wouldn't that make the motion to join moot?


----------



## Dean

m61376 said:


> I'm not so sure that could potentially happen. Once a deeded week is owned it is owned unless the owner relinquishes it voluntarily. Even if the majority of owners were to vote to join the trust, as long as there are weeks owners who object, wouldn't that make the motion to join moot?


I'm not sure what the limits might be.  My guess would be a super majority, usually 60%, would be required but I do see how it could be problematic.  Of course they could simply do what they're doing now but make the conversions trust inventory instead, that I know they can do.


----------



## dioxide45

What about those resorts that have limited deeds. There is something in our MGV deed about it expiring in 2056 unless extended. I guess at that point though the buildings would just need to be torn down to start all over.


----------



## Dean

dioxide45 said:


> What about those resorts that have limited deeds. There is something in our MGV deed about it expiring in 2056 unless extended. I guess at that point though the buildings would just need to be torn down to start all over.


I didn't know GV was a RTU property.  Is that for all or just part.  From a conversion standpoint, I'd think RTU or leasehold would be easier to convert to a trust than truly deeded properties.  For RTU such as DVC, the ownership reverts to the developer and they can do anything they want including resell (timeshares or condo's), tear down, rentals, etc.


----------



## dioxide45

Dean said:


> I didn't know GV was a RTU property.  Is that for all or just part.  From a conversion standpoint, I'd think RTU or leasehold would be easier to convert to a trust than truly deeded properties.  For RTU such as DVC, the ownership reverts to the developer and they can do anything they want including resell (timeshares or condo's), tear down, rentals, etc.



It isn't RTU, it has deeded weeks just like all other domestic Marriott properties. I think this exists on most Marriott deeds, just the dates bay be differet.



> ...each estate being succeeded by the next in unending succession governed by the Declaration of Condominium until 10:00 a.m., on the first Saturday in 2056, at which date said estate shall termination unless extended in accordance with the provisions of the Declaration of Condominium.


----------



## puckmanfl

good morning...

Some good news to report today!!!!

Cashed in the two Waiohais 5/28 and converted to a 3bedroom OF at Kauai Lagoons 5/28 and kept the "change"!!!  Will use the extra points for some short stays somewhere down the road!!!!  Did not wait list, just called in 30 minutes ago!!!

This was most likely "Trust" Inventory!!!!  Looks like in this case, legacy points=trust points!!!!

This success story is so that I may be an equal opportunity poster.  Report the good as well!!!!


----------



## GregT

Puck, that is great news!

Congrats on getting KL and I'm glad to see that trust inventory available to legacy points.

All the best,

Greg


----------



## hotcoffee

Dean said:


> . . . One thing I don't think I've seen discussed (might have missed it) is that if enough owners convert at a given resort, there is the possibility of later having the owners vote to actually join the trust.  Maybe this will be the new change we're talking about 10 years from now.  I'm not saying this will happen, only that it is a possibility.



I don't think this is true.  The Trust inventory is based upon the Developer adding to it (according to the Multisite Public Offering document.  The number of Trust points = the number of points for sale.  They probably won't add to the Trust until they have sold most of the existing points.


----------



## Dean

hotcoffee said:


> I don't think this is true.  The Trust inventory is based upon the Developer adding to it (according to the Multisite Public Offering document.  The number of Trust points = the number of points for sale.  They probably won't add to the Trust until they have sold most of the existing points.


I know other systems are able to convert fixed weeks to trust inventory so in theory it's possible.  While the floating week system adds some complexity, I don't see how it would throw a total roadblock.


----------



## m61376

puckmanfl said:


> good morning...
> 
> Some good news to report today!!!!
> 
> Cashed in the two Waiohais 5/28 and converted to a 3bedroom OF at Kauai Lagoons 5/28 and kept the "change"!!!  Will use the extra points for some short stays somewhere down the road!!!!  Did not wait list, just called in 30 minutes ago!!!
> 
> This was most likely "Trust" Inventory!!!!  Looks like in this case, legacy points=trust points!!!!
> 
> This success story is so that I may be an equal opportunity poster.  Report the good as well!!!!


Congrats! I know it is what you wanted. Glad to see that they release some of the trust inventory into the exchange pool. However, especially since it was not available the other day and given others' experiences, I don't think we can conclude that legacy points=trust points.

It does indicate that they are at least making some of the trust inventory available to the exchange pool. Most likely as there are more trust owners there will be more intermingling of inventory.


----------



## puckmanfl

good evening

Thanks for the kind words...

I agree... that is why I put the "in this case..." primer.  It is a very encouraging development however...

My guru explained it to me...  The trust inventory became available as trust members used Exchange inventory.  It does not mean Legacy members have unfettered access to the Trust, but there will be a comingling as the system matures

Keep in mind that some of the non confirmations we have seen here were for single fixed weeks.  I asked for Frenchmans Cove spring break week (a legacy plat plus fixed week).  Brian asked for spring break at Marco (a trust fixed weex) but sold to legacy owners.

Just trying to be fair and post BOTH sides!!!

I think Perry said it best, "Just a new system with new rules to be exploited by smart TUGGERS"


----------



## hotcoffee

puckmanfl said:


> . . . My guru explained it to me...  The trust inventory became available as trust members used Exchange inventory.  It does not mean Legacy members have unfettered access to the Trust, but there will be a comingling as the system matures. . . .



There will no doubt be co-mingling over time, but I doubt there was much co-mingling on the 26th due to points owners exchanging.  I don't think there are enough points owners with enough points yet to have much such effect on the exchange inventory.  I suspect that Marriott itself moved some inventory around.  Since, most of the Trust inventory is still unaccounted for in sold points, it is just sitting there unused.  It would make sense for Marriott to use some of it to make the points program more successful.

I still believe that Marriott will allow access to unsold inventory both inside and outside of the Trust.  My points rep still insists it will be so.


----------



## jimf41

puckmanfl said:


> .  I asked for Frenchmans Cove spring break week (a legacy plat plus fixed week).



Spring break is an ordinary Plat week at MFC. The 3 Plat plus weeks are 7, 51 and 52.


----------



## puckmanfl

good evening

jim.. thanks for the correction...

yikes...

the first time my guru was incorrect...

sorry for the bad info...

can't slip up for a second around these parts...


----------



## Beverley

Jim,

FYI
Post # 666 refers to what I was mentioning on the Ocean Point board about needing to vote to continue as a timeshare at some point in the future.  This is on deeded resorts not RTU.

Beverley


----------



## pipet

Dean said:


> I didn't know GV was a RTU property.  Is that for all or just part.  From a conversion standpoint, I'd think RTU or leasehold would be easier to convert to a trust than truly deeded properties.  For RTU such as DVC, the ownership reverts to the developer and they can do anything they want including resell (timeshares or condo's), tear down, rentals, etc.



FYI - That's an escape clause some states require that allow you to get out of your TS if you want.  It's still a deeded resort, but the owners get to vote on what to do with it and whether the MFs are still worth it.   Not all states require it but FL is one that does.


----------



## Dean

pipet said:


> FYI - That's an escape clause some states require that allow you to get out of your TS if you want.  It's still a deeded resort, but the owners get to vote on what to do with it and whether the MFs are still worth it.   Not all states require it but FL is one that does.


I've read both statues 718 & 721 in the past and just skimmed 721 and don't recall or see anything in there requiring this issue.  It does state that it ALLOWS automatic deletions.  For purposes of FL statue 721, I assume that GV itself is filed as a multi site entity due to the phased nature of the resort.


> (c)  Automatic deletion.--The timeshare instrument may provide that a component site will be automatically deleted upon the expiration of its term in a timeshare plan other than a nonspecific multisite timeshare plan or as otherwise provided in the timeshare instrument. However, the timeshare instrument must also provide that in the event a component site is deleted from the plan in this manner, a sufficient number of purchasers of the plan will also be deleted so as to maintain no greater than a one-to-one use right to use night requirement ratio.



Reviewing 721 I find it interesting that had they charged more than $3K per person to participate the new system itself would have fallen under the rules for multisite timeshares for FL rather than an exchange program.  I also found this section interesting.



> In furtherance of the provisions of this subsection, the managing entity is authorized to reserve accommodations, in the best interests of the owners as a whole, for the purposes of depositing such reserved use with an affiliated exchange program or renting such reserved accommodations in order to facilitate the use or future use of the accommodations or other benefits made available through the timeshare plan.


----------



## Fredm

dioxide45 said:


> What about those resorts that have limited deeds. There is something in our MGV deed about it expiring in 2056 unless extended. I guess at that point though the buildings would just need to be torn down to start all over.



I think this date was included because of the "perpetuities" laws.

Desert Springs, for example, defines the expiration date as the death of the last surviving offspring of Presidents Bush (the first) or Clinton. No joke.


----------



## jimf41

puckmanfl said:


> good evening
> 
> jim.. thanks for the correction...
> 
> yikes...
> 
> the first time my guru was incorrect...
> 
> sorry for the bad info...
> 
> can't slip up for a second around these parts...



Well I'm glad to see that you said she was incorrect. Most folks would say she lied to you. Big difference between being incorrect and lying. For the record all my pencils have erasers.


----------



## DanCali

jimf41 said:


> Well I'm glad to see that you said she was incorrect. Most folks would say she lied to you. Big difference between being incorrect and lying. For the record all my pencils have erasers.



The main difference between being incorrect and lying is whether it is intentional. If you choose to believe that all salespeople (and to a lesser extent VOAs) always misrepresent the product unintentionally when (i) they deal with the the product 12+ hours a day (ii) they probably heard any question you have before (iii) they get a big commission if they close the sale and (iv) their misrepresentations always happen help their case  - then you you are of course free to do so. I happen to be much less forgiving on that front, especialy since there is no 365 day return policy if you buy on misleading information...


----------



## puckmanfl

good evening...

My guru and I were discussing my initial requests in the new system.  I mentioned FC Spring Break week.  She said it would be dicey as it is a fixed week (legacy) and many owners would not give it up!!!  She was not trying to sell me anything and I know it was an honest accidental goof..

My guru knows I am maxed out on timeshares (weeks/points) and that I have not purchased since 2005.  Despite knowing that with 3 off spring to put through college, my timeshare well has run dry (no more $$$), she continues to go out of her way to provide outstanding customer service.  Her integrity is beyond reproach and I consider her to be a valued friend and employee of MVCD...

There are 700,000 weeks in the system amongst 54 resorts with no rhyme or reason as to which are fixed,float,plat or plat plus.  I think it is ok, if she missed one!!!

I have no problem,posting the good, bad and ugly of both the new and old system but there is no debate as to the honesty and professionalism of my guru...


----------



## DanCali

puck - I understood jimf41 to be referring to recent comments made here on TUG about salespeople "lying" when trying to close a sale. I replied in those same general terms. If you have a personal relationship with someone knowldgeable who you consider a friend that is obviously a different situation. I am not in that situation as I have not urchased from Marriott, and it didn't seem to me that the people who were misrepresented the truth in various sales pitches had personal relationships with their respective salespeople.

I do believe your "guru" made an honest mistake.


----------



## puckmanfl

good evening...

Thanks for the kind words...

My guru continues to give me honest info, fully knowing it will end up in this forum...

She has never pushed or even asked me to enroll.  She has given me the info I needed to make an informed decision including the pros and cons of the new world order...

When I purchased in 2005, she steered me to a LOWER priced combination of weeks that would better suit my needs as an active "trader"!!!


----------



## d2r4s

*Marriott Vacation Club purchases*

While Marriott is out to convert people to the new points Vacation Club, my expierence in many of my past presentation they have never presurred or giving me bad information.  

We just purchased the new system and purchased the additional minumum points to have access to the pool.  We were given both options with and with out the extra purchase and it only made sense to have the advantage of the additional exchange opportunities.

We own in points and weeks and have found this to be true of other systems when changing to points as with Diamond resorts, however we are grandfathered to maintain are original holiday weeks and the extra week 53 from our New Years Week.

When we purcahsed into a point system then thats what we did with no extra costs such as our Wyndham points (originally farfield).  

I read these comments before purchasing which helped to ask questions and seek the right information, which our counsultant was up front about with no pressure.

One benefit I am looking forward to is taking a low points week and puting into II to see how it will trade, which was suggested by the counsultant, and I will check it out.

John Beyer:whoopie:


----------



## DanCali

d2r4s said:


> One benefit I am looking forward to is taking a low points week and puting into II to see how it will trade, which was suggested by the counsultant, and I will check it out.
> 
> John Beyer:whoopie:



Congratulations on your decision and I hope you make the most of your purchase.

I don't mean to put a damper on the "never given me bad information" part of your post but I am not sure it is possible to reserve a week with points and deposit in II... As far as I know, you can either deposit your week at your home resort or deposit points, but you can't just reserve a specific week like Orlando and deposit that week. I could very well be wrong on this, as I have not focused on that aspect of the program.


----------



## puckmanfl

good morning

John

Have to agree with Dan.  Reservations/exchanges made with points (legacy or Trust) cannot be deposited in II.  Legacy owners can remain in weeks and make reservations at home resort and deposit in II (as always).  Trust owners (new purchasers) deposit points  to II and get exchanges with II based on the value of the number of points given to II...

With regards to access to the"pool".  Newly purchased trust points have direct access and Legacy points have Exchange access to the pool of trust inventory!  Purchasing 1000 (or any #) of Trust points /BI's does NOT convert your legacy points to Trust points.

My experience this weekend shows that Legacy points can access Trust inventory but it is an exchange process , not direct access.  It is a subtle, but absolute distinction... There is a good chance when the system matures and there is equilibrium between the inventories that this will appear seamless...but there are two types of points...


----------



## NboroGirl

*In case anyone is interested...*

Not to beat a dead horse, but this confirms what everyone has been saying about the inventories... in plain-speak English!  It comes from an internal Marriott training notice:

_*Today's Training Topic: Where Does My Inventory Come From - Part 1 of a Series*

August 2, 2010

Enrolled Owners do have access to Trust inventory via the Marriott Vacation Club DestinationsT exchange program. Points Owners do have access to inventory from Owners who enroll and elect, also via the Marriott Vacation Club DestinationsT exchange program. Contrary to rumors, Enrolled Owners will also have access to any future inventory that the trust acquires, once again via the exchange program. While it is true that whatever inventory at those resorts is transferred to the trust is made available to Points Owners first (you can think of it as analogous to a home resort priority), it is anticipated that all resorts and all seasons will be available to both Enrolled Owners and Points Owners. Trust inventory becomes available to Enrolled Owners when any Points Owner does one of the following (usage history indicates that about 3 in 4 will choose one of these options):

l        Chooses to vacation in the Marriott Vacation Club® Collection using non-Trust inventory via the exchange program

l        Chooses a vacation from the Marriott® Collection

l        Chooses a vacation from the World Traveler Collection

l        Chooses a vacation from the Explorer Collection

When that happens, the Trust exchanges his/her share of the deeded units held by the Trust for the vacation that the Points Owner has selected, which makes those nights available to the exchange service.

Similarly, non-Trust inventory may become available to Points Owners when any Enrolled Owner elects Vacation Club Points or chooses an internal exchange. In addition, unsold inventory is the property of Marriott Vacation Club®, as is the current year usage rights for any inventory that was traded to us for Marriott Rewards® points. If we should choose to do so, it is our option to place that inventory into the internal exchange program, which would also make it available to both Points Owners and Enrolled Owners_


----------



## puckmanfl

good morning

Nboro

we are saying exactly the same thing!!!

Legacy access to the trust inventory is thru the Exchange company.  Trust points access to trust inventory is direct .  I am sure that legacy points will get Trust inventory (did it this weekend). However, the key word in legalese is ANTICIPATED...


----------



## BocaBum99

NboroGirl said:


> Not to beat a dead horse, but this confirms what everyone has been saying about the inventories... in plain-speak English!  It comes from an internal Marriott training notice:
> 
> _*Today's Training Topic: Where Does My Inventory Come From - Part 1 of a Series*
> 
> August 2, 2010
> 
> Enrolled Owners do have access to Trust inventory via the Marriott Vacation Club DestinationsT exchange program. Points Owners do have access to inventory from Owners who enroll and elect, also via the Marriott Vacation Club DestinationsT exchange program. Contrary to rumors, Enrolled Owners will also have access to any future inventory that the trust acquires, once again via the exchange program. While it is true that whatever inventory at those resorts is transferred to the trust is made available to Points Owners first (you can think of it as analogous to a home resort priority), it is anticipated that all resorts and all seasons will be available to both Enrolled Owners and Points Owners. Trust inventory becomes available to Enrolled Owners when any Points Owner does one of the following (usage history indicates that about 3 in 4 will choose one of these options):
> 
> l        Chooses to vacation in the Marriott Vacation Club® Collection using non-Trust inventory via the exchange program
> 
> l        Chooses a vacation from the Marriott® Collection
> 
> l        Chooses a vacation from the World Traveler Collection
> 
> l        Chooses a vacation from the Explorer Collection
> 
> When that happens, the Trust exchanges his/her share of the deeded units held by the Trust for the vacation that the Points Owner has selected, which makes those nights available to the exchange service.
> 
> Similarly, non-Trust inventory may become available to Points Owners when any Enrolled Owner elects Vacation Club Points or chooses an internal exchange. In addition, unsold inventory is the property of Marriott Vacation Club®, as is the current year usage rights for any inventory that was traded to us for Marriott Rewards® points. If we should choose to do so, it is our option to place that inventory into the internal exchange program, which would also make it available to both Points Owners and Enrolled Owners_



This is the clearest message from Marriott to date on this topic.  It confirms the various inventory pools.  And, it illustrates how inventory can cross buckets.

What remains unknown is the algorithm for inventory to cross over.  Hopefully, it is NOT manual.  That would introduce significant delay in satisfying exchange requests.

I am hoping that Marriott comes up with a reservation system model for BOTH Trust owners AND (a separate one) for enrolled owners.  But, I am not holding my breath.


----------



## mlwlpt

*Please explain*

I own a deeded week at Royal Palms.  I have read many of the posts but not all.  I am not understanding the term "trust properties vs ??".  Could someone explain for me so all the other conversation will make more sense?
Thank you


----------



## DanCali

mlwlpt said:


> I own a deeded week at Royal Palms.  I have read many of the posts but not all.  I am not understanding the term "trust properties vs ??".  Could someone explain for me so all the other conversation will make more sense?
> Thank you



Try reading post 228:

http://tugbbs.com/forums/showthread.php?p=950358


----------



## SueDonJ

NboroGirl said:


> ... _*Today's Training Topic: Where Does My Inventory Come From - Part 1 of a Series* ..._



Hmmmmm.  THIS sounds very interesting!  NboroGirl, how did you get your hands on an internal training memo that puts this in plainspeak?!  Nevermind, don't answer if it's going to dry up your source.    More importantly, can you get the later ones in the series as they're released?  These would make a FANTASTIC addition to Dave's sticky!


----------



## 5infam

Wow - Wouldn't this training series have been great BEFORE the product was rolled out???!!! 

I like the last line where it says "If we should choose to do so, it is our option to place that inventory into the internal exchange program, which would also make it available to both Points Owners and Enrolled Owners."

I wonder what and how their decisions are based. Assuming they want to make some money on these deals and rent them out for cash, and since Trust owners don't pick their week for deposit - my guess is that it will be very tough for an Exchange member to get a high value week.


----------



## jimf41

BocaBum99 said:


> This is the clearest message from Marriott to date on this topic.  It confirms the various inventory pools.  And, it illustrates how inventory can cross buckets.
> 
> What remains unknown is the algorithm for inventory to cross over.  Hopefully, it is NOT manual.  That would introduce significant delay in satisfying exchange requests.
> 
> I am hoping that Marriott comes up with a reservation system model for BOTH Trust owners AND (a separate one) for enrolled owners.  But, I am not holding my breath.



I also received this message from my contact at MVCI this morning. Until I received it I thought I had a handle on the various pools of inventory. I thought that the trust would contain all the unsold weeks at the 11 trust resorts and any other unsold inventory. This message seems to correct that with this line,

In addition, unsold inventory is the property of Marriott Vacation Club®, as is the current year usage rights for any inventory that was traded to us for Marriott Rewards® points. If we should choose to do so, it is our option to place that inventory into the internal exchange program, which would also make it available to both Points Owners and Enrolled Owners.

If the unsold inventory goes into Marriott's hands to deposit where they want what exactly do the trust owners get in their pool? I was assuming that unsold inventory was automatically in the trust and would have to be transferred or swapped out. It seems to say that initially there won't be many trust owners so the unsold inventory will go to where the most demand is. Initially that has to be the legacy owners requesting reservations using points. I just don't see trust owners coming anywhere near the number of enrolled legacy owners for two or three years and possibly 5-10 years if the economy doesn't make a significant upswing soon.

I do agree that a manual transfer system would not be beneficial to trust or legacy owners.


----------



## jimf41

DanCali said:


> The main difference between being incorrect and lying is whether it is intentional. If you choose to believe that all salespeople (and to a lesser extent VOAs) always misrepresent the product unintentionally when (i) they deal with the the product 12+ hours a day (ii) they probably heard any question you have before (iii) they get a big commission if they close the sale and (iv) their misrepresentations always happen help their case  - then you you are of course free to do so. I happen to be much less forgiving on that front, especialy since there is no 365 day return policy if you buy on misleading information...



Dan,

If they all told the same story (lie) I would agree with you. I've made about a dozen calls and 4 or 5 emails to MVCI so far. None of these folks says what another one says. To me that's misinformation caused by an incredibly complex system coupled with poor training.

I won't be seeing a rep in person till I go to MPB this Fall. In my former profession I received a significant amount of training in detecting when a person is lying based on their body language. It's pretty interesting and you can GOOGLE it for some basic techniques. I find them very useful when dealing with sales persons. I've caught Marriott folks a couple of times. Specifically when they tell you if you buy resale you don't get a personal VOA. Generally they make this statement in a truthful way but when you question them on it they all start showing indications of making up a whopper to answer the question.


----------



## PHILIPC56

*I called II Marriott desk and was told that II will administer points program.*

:whoopie: Marriott II rep. told me that II will continue to provide week for week exchanges but will also administer points program for Marriott!  She could not tell me whether II was going to discontinue the week for week exchanges.  I don't know what to expect.  Does anybody know anything about this?

:whoopie: 





tombo said:


> How could an owner later be pleased that owners had to call marriott employees repeatedly asking questions about inventory and they kept getting different answers? It should be an embarassment for Marriott and it is another slap in the face for owners.
> 
> Right now the best we can do is go on the majority rule. The majority of Marriott employees have told the owners who called and inquired that Legacy owners who deposit weeks will not be able to access trust inventory. If that is later proven to be wrong, or if it is in fact correct, the ineptitude of marriott's roll out and the lack of training of it's employees is something that significantly reduces most owner's confidence in Marriott as a well run organization. In addition after not getting a straight answer for weeks at a time, when they finally give a supposedly definitive answer, how can you trust them to not change it later and say oops you were told wrong again?


----------



## PHILIPC56

*Why not exchange home resort week with SFX?*

 SFX may be the alternative if II goes away.  Marriott should not have its Vacation Club Member's back to the wall.  Why not exchange home resort week through any of the functional exchange companies and not be held hostage to the points system.  
I called the manager at Fairway Villas ( my home resort ) and was told if I wanted to exchange my "points" as a "Gold Week" owner for a "Gold Week" at Aruba Surf Club, I wouldn't have enough.  Last year, I did that exchange through II with no grief, no aggravation and no headaches or misunderstandings. Now it seems to me that I would not have too many points for my home resort; I would have to buy more points and if I wanted to convert to the points program it would cost me $1,495 as a resale owner.   
Does Marriott think, that we are all stupid and don't see through this charade. Thankfully there still may be exchange alternatives.





Fredm said:


> I think it ends with a Marriott controlled exchange and reservation system. Or, mostly so.
> 
> It is a long term business strategy. This is not a short term scheme to sell dog weeks. It took years to plan and begin implementing.
> I believe Marriott has concluded that revenue growth from new product sales has plateaued. Mining the owner base is a long term opportunity to generate recurring revenues with high profit margin. I assume they will also capture more inventory for their rental business than previously.
> 
> If successful (and I think they will be) at converting legacy owners, then Marriott has a yet longer term objective. Sell vacant hotel rooms as part of its product offering, in a more robust package. No land acquisition /development/ sales cost
> (think of the Asia Pacific program for a clue).
> That is why, I believe, MRP's are included for all resale legacy owners. I don't know what form this will take, but have heard snippets that suggest it will be a boon for Marriott because it will also be able to guarantee higher occupancy rates when negotiating its operations management contact with hotel owners. This is not just about the Vacation Club. It's about Marriott's entire enterprise.
> 
> Marriott has much latitude in creating flexible value for the invested owner. They are just beginning to shape a delivery system to provide it. Whether owners perceive value is another matter.
> 
> By retaining the legacy system intact, owners should not feel threatened by the migration. It became a closed system of opportunity as of 6/20/10.  Smart move, IMO. No sense in stirring that pot. Marriott has plenty of time to sell them on a new mouse-trap.


----------



## DanCali

PHILIPC56 said:


> SFX may be the alternative if II goes away.  Marriott should not have its Vacation Club Member's back to the wall.  Why not exchange home resort week through any of the functional exchange companies and not be held hostage to the points system.
> I called the manager at Fairway Villas ( my home resort ) and was told if I wanted to exchange my "points" as a "Gold Week" owner for a "Gold Week" at Aruba Surf Club, I wouldn't have enough.



Why do you think II will go away? It's not like Marriott is a credible source on this given their incentives...

As for SFX, there is zero transparency on what goes on there. When SFX lets me request first without paying an annual fee, I will give them a try... I am not giving them my week without an exchange, and I'm not paying them fees just to do request first. They'll get the exchange fee if I get my exchange. Until then, I'll take my chances with II, which is not going anywhere anytime soon.


----------



## Fredm

PHILIPC56 said:


> SFX may be the alternative if II goes away.  Marriott should not have its Vacation Club Member's back to the wall.  Why not exchange home resort week through any of the functional exchange companies and not be held hostage to the points system.
> I called the manager at Fairway Villas ( my home resort ) and was told if I wanted to exchange my "points" as a "Gold Week" owner for a "Gold Week" at Aruba Surf Club, I wouldn't have enough.  Last year, I did that exchange through II with no grief, no aggravation and no headaches or misunderstandings. Now it seems to me that I would not have too many points for my home resort; I would have to buy more points and if I wanted to convert to the points program it would cost me $1,495 as a resale owner.
> Does Marriott think, that we are all stupid and don't see through this charade. Thankfully there still may be exchange alternatives.



I.I. is not going away.

You can still trade weeks with I.I.  Marriott/Marriott or externally.

Using SFX is also an option.


----------



## hotcoffee

NboroGirl said:


> . . . While it is true that whatever inventory at those resorts is transferred to the trust is made available to Points Owners first (you can think of it as analogous to a home resort priority), it is anticipated that all resorts and all seasons will be available to both Enrolled Owners and Points Owners. . . .



One thing the internal memo is not addressing is the amount of unsold weeks in the Trust that are beyond reach of most if not all of the early points purchasers.  Some of the Hawaiian inventory, for example, will probably never be reserved by any of the early Trust owners (at least, for the first couple of years) because few will have enough points to reserve it.

The internal memo clearly hints that available Trust weeks could end up in the exchange inventory.  When a Trust owner owning 4000 points does an exchange, he frees up 4000 points of Trust inventory that can be moved into the exchange inventory if needed.  That fact establishes the reality that freed-up points can end up in the exchange inventory.



NboroGirl said:


> . . . In addition, unsold inventory is the property of Marriott Vacation Club®, . . .



It has been noted more than once that the Trust does not contain all of the unsold weeks currently in the possession of Marriott.


----------



## dioxide45

There is one thing that seems apparent here now that I didn't anticipate in my cookies, jars, marbles and mom post. My post anticipated that once a trust owner deposited points in to the exchange jar, those points would be available for exchange and those points would provide direct ability to reserve trust resorts. That doesn't seem to be the case. Marriott seems to be only depositing trust inventory, actual weeks, banks of time from the trust in to the exchange pool. This is far less flexible for legacy owners over what I anticipated.


----------



## puckmanfl

good evening

Dioxide...

I don't believe this to be true.  When i did the test drive, cashed my 2 waiohais for points and took the 3 bedroom Kauai Lagoons and kept the "change" my VOA asked me if I wanted to stay extend my stay by a few days.  If it was just "weeks" deposited into the Exchange, my legacy points could not have snagged a 2-3 day extension on a 7 day stay!!!

I think your analogy of cookies , marbles and milk was "bang on"


----------



## dioxide45

puckmanfl said:


> good evening
> 
> Dioxide...
> 
> I don't believe this to be true.  When i did the test drive, cashed my 2 waiohais for points and took the 3 bedroom Kauai Lagoons and kept the "change" my VOA asked me if I wanted to stay extend my stay by a few days.  If it was just "weeks" deposited into the Exchange, my legacy points could not have snagged a 2-3 day extension on a 7 day stay!!!
> 
> I think your analogy of cookies , marbles and milk was "bang on"



If those extra days were actually in the exchange pool as time, your legacy weeks could have snagged the extra days. It could also be that Marriott is depositing a Platinum week. In HI this is any week, but at other resorts, the trust could perhaps deposit a gold week (equal to the points deposited). This would limit what the legacy points users can reserve to only a gold week and perhaps not platinum at that resort. I am not convinced that legacy owners have unfettered access to trust inventory when trust points are deposited.


----------



## GaryDouglas

dioxide45 said:


> The trust has 42MM points, they have maybe sold 2MM max. There is lots of inventory there. I am willing to bet that the trust has bulk deposited plenty of points in to the exchange company for enrolled members. No one will have any issues Monday trying to book trust inventory.


 
A MOC sales person stated this last week that 20% of the 42MM points have been sold. That would be 8.4MM points or ~$77.28MM. Both my daughter and son-in-law agree that is what they both heard. I haven't been following all related threads so don't know if this is news or if it has been verified.


----------



## Fredm

GaryDouglas said:


> A MOC sales person stated this last week that 20% of the 42MM points have been sold. That would be 8.4MM points or ~$7.728MM. Both my daughter and son-in-law agree that is what they both heard. I haven't been following all related threads so don't know if this is news or if it has been verified.



The next quarterly report (Oct. 6) would give us a good indication.

But, 8.4mm x 9.20 = 77.28mm. Your a decimal place off. 
Or, an annual run rate of ~390mm. That's possible.

If true, Marriott will have sold all its trust inventory by the end of 2011.
Is the 42mm points the real number?  If it is, we can expect Marriott to be exercising ROFR like crazy in about a year.


----------



## windje2000

Fredm said:


> The next quarterly report (Oct. 6) would give us a good indication.
> 
> But, 8.4mm x 9.20 = 77.28mm. Your a decimal place off.
> Or, an annual run rate of ~390mm. That's possible.
> 
> If true, Marriott will have sold all its trust inventory by the end of 2011.
> Is the 42mm points the real number?  If it is, we can expect Marriott to be exercising ROFR like crazy in about a year.




_From page 35 of the 2009 Marriott Annual Report_



> Timeshare segment *contract sales* decreased by $411 million (38 percent), compared to 2008, to *$665 million* from $1,076 million.


  The corresponding figure for 2007 was $1,400 MM.

That run rate estimate of $390MM (assuming the accuracy of all inputs to that estimate) would appear to be well below the 2009 actual of $665MM.  

Note that 95% of revenue of the Marriott timeshare segment is MVCI.

I believe 42MM has been sourced from the land trust documents.  I don't believe it represents all of the unsold Marriott inventory.


----------



## GregT

windje2000 said:


> _I believe 42MM has been sourced from the land trust documents.  I don't believe it represents all of the unsold Marriott inventory._


_

The 42M points was the points values of the properties put into the trust in March 2010 -- when the trust was established.    Marriott continued to sell properties (that were outside of the Trust) between March and June 2010, so we have no idea how many properties were unsold Marriott properties (and available to be added to the Trust).

But the 42M is definitely what the trust STARTED with.

All the best,

Greg_


----------

