# Is this the first DC points resale listing on ebay?



## windje2000 (Jul 20, 2011)

I don't believe certain of the representations made in the description are accurate.

Take a look - LINK


EDITED TO ADD  NEW REVISED LISTING  LINK


----------



## dioxide45 (Jul 20, 2011)

windje2000 said:


> I don't believe certain of the representations made in the description are accurate.
> 
> Take a look - LINK



I think it may be. It will be a good test to see what they sell for. No reserve bidding starting at $1. Though there are several errors in the ad. MF would be $600 on 1500 points, not $799. Also they indicate that 1400 bonus points are available, though I am not sure that those will be able to be transferred with ownership since they are PlusPoints. You do get 1500 2011 points included and they are not asking for reimbursement of MFs.

We still don't know if Marriott has created any type of process to allow these to be transferred even if one is the winning bidder. You may get a deed, but that may be all. They did disclose ROFR, but didn't disclose a ROFR fee.


----------



## windje2000 (Jul 20, 2011)

dioxide45 said:


> I think it may be. It will be a good test to see what they sell for. No reserve bidding starting at $1. Though there are several errors in the ad. MF would be $600 on 1500 points, not $799. Also they indicate that 1400 bonus points are available, though I am not sure that those will be able to be transferred with ownership since they are PlusPoints. You do get 1500 2011 points included and they are not asking for reimbursement of MFs.
> 
> We still don't know if Marriott has created any type of process to allow these to be transferred even if one is the winning bidder. You may get a deed, but that may be all. They did disclose ROFR, but didn't disclose a ROFR fee.



From camachinist's post at this LINK, which refers to the document in your earlier post



> Owners of our points-based products who do not purchase from us *do not have access to the internal exchange component of the product* and therefore would only be able to use the inventory that underlies the vacation ownership interests they purchased.



This quote is from the SEC filing for SPINCO


----------



## m61376 (Jul 20, 2011)

Interesting...I e-mailed the owner asking about that. It will be interesting to see his/her response.


----------



## RBERR1 (Jul 20, 2011)

I saw it too and sent an email to the owner and asked about transfer fees, how they came up with maintnenace fees and the bonus points.


----------



## Stefa (Jul 20, 2011)

What is meant by "the inventory that underlies the vacation ownership interests they purchased"?    I didn't realize the points were associated with any specific inventory.  Would the buyer actually be able to reserve anything?


----------



## windje2000 (Jul 20, 2011)

Stefa said:


> What is meant by "the inventory that underlies the vacation ownership interests they purchased"?    I didn't realize the points were associated with any specific inventory.  Would the buyer actually be able to reserve anything?



A points owner has an equity interest in the land trust.  The land trust in turn owns a bunch of weeks.  So if you own points, you have an indirect ownership interest in the weeks owned by the trust.

The buyer of these points would be able to reserve available inventory (whatever remains at 60 days out if my understanding of the documents is correct) in the land trust.

The buyer would not be permitted to join the DC.


----------



## mkahanek (Jul 20, 2011)

Are you kidding me??  Something smells here.  Who would pay at a min $13800 and turn around and auction a year later?   Just doesn't make sense.


----------



## taffy19 (Jul 20, 2011)

Before you sign the dotted line, would Marriott tell you where you really own?  This would be very important in case you have to sell early and the next buyer can only make reservations at that resort.

Isn't this what Wyndham was doing as you toured a resort on the coast of Oregon but the underlying deed was somewhere in the middle of the country and the oceanfront resorts are hard to visit because they are so popular.

Marriott made it harder to visit on the coast because of the high requirement of points so the buyer was aware of it before he bought but are they aware of the problems with selling points unless you are told where the points are coming from so you know what your chances are for selling your points?

We bought a floating week once but we made them change the underlying week to a week that was acceptable to us or we wouldn't buy.

If we were buying points, we would make sure that the points are coming from a resort that would be in high demand or where we wouldn't mind owning at in reality.

This quote is from the SEC filing for SPINCO that Pat posted earlier.

Quote:
Owners of our points-based products who do not purchase from us do not have access to the internal exchange component of the product and therefore would only be able to use the inventory that underlies the vacation ownership interests they purchased.


----------



## RBERR1 (Jul 20, 2011)

RBERR1 said:


> I saw it too and sent an email to the owner and asked about transfer fees, how they came up with maintnenace fees and the bonus points.



Here is the response I got to my question:
Hi,

We just found out that the bonus points will not transfer, but the regular points will. The maintenance fee is $.40 per point, totalling $600, the other $165 (not $199 as we initially stated) is for the annual club dues. The transfer fee is $150 and is paid by the winning bidder after the auction. We have ended the auction and have re-listed it with the correct information. The auction will start tonight; the eBay item number will be #260821374578.

Thank you,
Justin


----------



## m61376 (Jul 20, 2011)

I go the same response, and e-mailed him back a copy of the usage restrictions quoted above. Very interesting....


----------



## SueDonJ (Jul 20, 2011)

iconnections said:


> *Before you sign the dotted line, would Marriott tell you where you really own?*  This would be very important in case you have to sell early and the next buyer can only make reservations at that resort.
> 
> Isn't this what Wyndham was doing as you toured a resort on the coast of Oregon but the underlying deed was somewhere in the middle of the country and the oceanfront resorts are hard to visit because they are so popular.
> 
> ...



All good points, Emmy, except for the first question that I bolded.  This is an external resale - the buyer needs to know what s/he's bidding on but Marriott isn't responsible for making sure all the usage rules are understood before the purchase.  If you're bidding on a Week on eBay you can call Marriott to confirm the deed info (for example, 2BR, Gold season, oceanside view, every-other-year usage, etc...) but Marriott reps don't explain all the usage technicalities of prospective external Weeks purchases.  With a DC Points external purchase I'd expect them to confirm how many and associated fees, but not all the rules about using them.  Buyer beware comes into play, doesn't it?  Hopefully the seller is at least giving prospective buyers a chance to read the governing docs, but if TUG history is any indication, that has never been something routinely done by sellers of Weeks.  So why should it be expected with DC Points?


----------



## windje2000 (Jul 20, 2011)

SueDonJ said:


> *All good points, Emmy, except for the first question that I bolded.  This is an external resale - the buyer needs to know what s/he's bidding on but Marriott isn't responsible for making sure all the usage rules are understood before the purchase.*  If you're bidding on a Week on eBay you can call Marriott to confirm the deed info (for example, 2BR, Gold season, oceanside view, every-other-year usage, etc...) but Marriott reps don't explain all the usage technicalities of prospective external Weeks purchases.  With a DC Points external purchase I'd expect them to confirm how many and associated fees, but not all the rules about using them.  Buyer beware comes into play, doesn't it?  Hopefully the seller is at least giving prospective buyers a chance to read the governing docs, but if TUG history is any indication, that has never been something routinely done by sellers of Weeks.  So why should it be expected with DC Points?




The problem is that Marriott simply won't respond with clear answers to standard questions anyone would have  regarding external transfers, among other things.  

Is Marriott not responsible for answering direct questions from customers and prospective customers?  

I think it is, and its utter failure to do so is a clear failing on the part of Marriott.


----------



## SueDonJ (Jul 20, 2011)

windje2000 said:


> The problem is that Marriott simply won't respond with clear answers to standard questions anyone would have  regarding external transfers, among other things.
> 
> Is Marriott not responsible for answering direct questions from customers and prospective customers?
> 
> I think it is, and its utter failure to do so is a clear failing on the part of Marriott.



I agree, if Marriott is selling something then Marriott should have responsibility for clearly explaining all facets of the product.  But the fact is, as we've all learned through the years of Marriott being in the Weeks timeshare business, that Buyer Beware comes into play because the only legal requirement Marriott is held to, is to allow buyers a rescission period once they've had an opportunity to review the governing docs.  There were umpteen posts on TUG long before the DC was introduced that said some variation of, "if a salesman's lips are moving HE'S LYING!!"  As much as we'd like things to be different now that a new product is on the scene, are we really all that surprised that some reps are still not telling the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth?  I do agree, it's a failing when Marriott doesn't educate new purchasers, but it's nothing new.

In this case, though, of an external resale of DC Points on eBay, I don't see how or why Marriott is expected to be a party to this transaction before an agreement is reached between the Seller and Buyer.  Marriott isn't the Seller here and there is no rescission protection to which Marriott has to comply.  Marriott has never routinely issued copies of the governing docs in order to educate prospective buyers of Weeks on the external market prior to the sale - what leads to the expectation that they should with DC Points?  I just don't get it.  After a Week is sold on the external resale market then the new owner can ask Owner Services for a copy of the docs; they may have to pay for it but they'll be issued a copy of those 5-1/2x8" paperback POS books.  I'd expect that after a DC Points external sale the same request can be made by the new owner.  But before an external sale of DC Points?  IMO Marriott doesn't have any more legal obligations to educate buyers than they do for external Weeks sales.


----------



## thinze3 (Jul 20, 2011)

So, are we assuming that the entire 1500 points has a small underlying interest at one resort only, locking the resale points usage into that one resort, and not an even smaller underlying interest of all the DC resorts, thereby granting availability to all resorts?

If so, why are we assuming this?


----------



## windje2000 (Jul 20, 2011)

SueDonJ said:


> I agree, if Marriott is selling something then Marriott should have responsibility for clearly explaining all facets of the product.  But the fact is, as we've all learned through the years of Marriott being in the Weeks timeshare business, that Buyer Beware comes into play because the only legal requirement Marriott is held to, is to allow buyers a rescission period once they've had an opportunity to review the governing docs.  There were umpteen posts on TUG long before the DC was introduced that said some variation of, "if a salesman's lips are moving HE'S LYING!!"  As much as we'd like things to be different now that a new product is on the scene, are we really all that surprised that some reps are still not telling the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth?  I do agree, it's a failing when Marriott doesn't educate new purchasers, but it's nothing new.
> 
> In this case, though, of an external resale of DC Points on eBay, I don't see how or why Marriott is expected to be a party to this transaction before an agreement is reached between the Seller and Buyer.  Marriott isn't the Seller here and there is no rescission protection to which Marriott has to comply.  Marriott has never routinely issued copies of the governing docs in order to educate prospective buyers of Weeks on the external market prior to the sale - what leads to the expectation that they should with DC Points?  I just don't get it.  After a Week is sold on the external resale market then the new owner can ask Owner Services for a copy of the docs; they may have to pay for it but they'll be issued a copy of those 5-1/2x8" paperback POS books.  I'd expect that after a DC Points external sale the same request can be made by the new owner.  But before an external sale of DC Points?  IMO Marriott doesn't have any more legal obligations to educate buyers than they do for external Weeks sales.



If you don't think Marriott should answer a question (from anyone) about its product -- then you and I will simply disagree.  

We're all owners here.  

We're all stumbling around in the dark about this infernal program and they won't answer our questions either.

Buyer beware?  That's a great slogan for the new Marriott. Absolutely perfect.


----------



## SueDonJ (Jul 20, 2011)

windje2000 said:


> If you don't think Marriott should answer a question (from anyone) about its product -- then you and I will simply disagree.
> 
> We're all owners here.
> 
> ...



Of course it's not a good slogan at all for any company, but it's the norm for most.  That's why consumer protection agencies exist.  And if TUG posts over the years any indication, then it's been Marriott's way for a good number of years now.


----------



## windje2000 (Jul 20, 2011)

SueDonJ said:


> Of course it's not a good slogan at all for any company, but it's the norm for most.  *That's why consumer protection agencies exist.*  And if TUG posts over the years any indication, then it's been Marriott's way for a good number of years now.



Jails exist because criminal exist - but the existence of jails doesn't excuse being a criminal.

John Chase's signature used to say it best of all. 

_When you want the worst we're the best._  The new Marriott DC


----------



## SueDonJ (Jul 20, 2011)

windje2000 said:


> If you don't think Marriott should answer a question (from anyone) about its product -- then you and I will simply disagree.
> 
> We're all owners here.
> 
> ...



You know what really surprises me about this particular eBay listing and the way it's being talked about on TUG?  It appears to be from a postcard company rather than an individual owner, right?  If this was a Weeks sale then TUGgers would BLAST the company to kingdom come for having incorrect info in the ad but they wouldn't be making demands that Marriott explain the rules - they'd say the postcard company should know better or should at least check with the owner so the ad could be corrected.  At the same time TUGgers would do everything they could to buy the Week at the absolute lowest price possible, then they'd come to TUG and gloat about their steal of a deal, after which all kinds of folks would pat them on their back for taking advantage of one of those evil postcard companies.

But here it's Marriott being blasted for the incorrect/incomplete ad info.   

Emmy's question - *"... would Marriott tell you where you really own?"* - is easily answered.  You would own an interest in the Trust which is comprised of this inventory, and your ability to make a reservation at any of those properties is dependent upon the usage rules stipulated in the related governing docs.

Beyond that, all the questions about when you can reserve, how much it costs for ROFR, how much it costs to transfer, whether you can use the DC Exchange Company or II, etc ...??  Those are answers the SELLER should try to obtain just in case the buyer asks them.  None of us knows if the seller, or the company who is transacting the sale for him/her, asked Marriott anything before the ad went up.  It wouldn't exactly surprise me to find that a postcard company deliberately withheld info in order to make the product look better than it is - what's surprising is that TUGgers now are so quick to blame Marriott for the misleading ad instead of putting the responsibility where it has always rested in the cases of external resales, on the Seller.


----------



## windje2000 (Jul 20, 2011)

RBERR1 said:


> Here is the response I got to my question:
> Hi,
> 
> We just found out that the bonus points will not transfer, but the regular points will. The maintenance fee is $.40 per point, totalling $600, *the other $165 (not $199 as we initially stated) is for the annual club dues.* The transfer fee is $150 and is paid by the winning bidder after the auction. We have ended the auction and have re-listed it with the correct information. The auction will start tonight; the eBay item number will be #260821374578.
> ...



Club dues?  What assurance do you have that they will let you join the DClub?  SPINCO's SEC filing strongly suggests they will not.

Will they allow you to rescind the purchase if you cannot join DC and enjoy all the benefits the original purchaser enjoyed?


----------



## windje2000 (Jul 20, 2011)

SueDonJ said:


> *But here it's Marriott being blasted for the incorrect/incomplete ad info.*



Wrong again - nobody in this thread has blasted Marriott about this ad.


----------



## SueDonJ (Jul 20, 2011)

windje2000 said:


> Jails exist because criminal exist - but the existence of jails doesn't excuse being a criminal. ...



That wasn't my point.     All the years that folks complained on TUG that they were misled by Marriott reps, I've never said that Marriott should be excused for misleading them.  I agree with everyone who says that Marriott could do a lot more by way of education to generate good will among its customer base.  But in a consumer-driven business "buyer beware" IS the norm, and the reason consumer protection agencies exist is to help folks who probably were not wary enough when making a purchase.


----------



## windje2000 (Jul 20, 2011)

SueDonJ said:


> That wasn't my point.     All the years that folks complained on TUG that they were misled by Marriott reps, I've never said that Marriott should be excused for misleading them.  I agree with everyone who says that Marriott could do a lot more by way of education to generate good will among its customer base.  *But in a consumer-driven business "buyer beware" IS the norm*, and the reason consumer protection agencies exist is to help folks who probably were not wary enough when making a purchase.



In a consumer driven business -- *"buyer beware" IS the norm*?????????

In consumer driven businesses, companies that *LOVE THEIR CUSTOMERS* win.  

Every time.


----------



## SueDonJ (Jul 20, 2011)

windje2000 said:


> The problem is that Marriott simply won't respond with clear answers to standard questions anyone would have  regarding external transfers, among other things.
> 
> Is Marriott not responsible for answering direct questions from customers and prospective customers?
> 
> I think it is, and its utter failure to do so is a clear failing on the part of Marriott.





windje2000 said:


> If you don't think Marriott should answer a question (from anyone) about its product -- then you and I will simply disagree.
> 
> We're all owners here.
> 
> ...





windje2000 said:


> Jails exist because criminal exist - but the existence of jails doesn't excuse being a criminal.
> 
> John Chase's signature used to say it best of all.
> 
> _When you want the worst we're the best._  The new Marriott DC





windje2000 said:


> Wrong again - nobody in this thread has blasted Marriott about this ad.



Well if you're not blasting Marriott in this thread then I don't know what you would consider blasting at all!  I suppose technically you're not blasting Marriott _about this ad_, but if you hadn't found the ad on eBay and posted it here then you wouldn't have been able to take this opportunity to blast Marriott for all the questions generated by the ad.  Questions the SELLER should have known how to answer, before the ad was placed.


----------



## windje2000 (Jul 20, 2011)

SueDonJ said:


> Well if you're not blasting Marriott in this thread then I don't know what you would consider blasting at all!  I suppose technically you're not blasting Marriott _about this ad_, but if you hadn't found the ad on eBay and posted it here then you wouldn't have been able to take this opportunity to blast Marriott for all the questions generated by the ad.  Questions the SELLER should have known how to answer, before the ad was placed.



Nobody but Marriott can answer these questions.

They choose not to.  Their choice.  Actions have consequences.  

What will you accuse me of next - buying 1500 DC points and listing them on ebay just so I could have the opportunity to blast Marriott on this thread?


----------



## SueDonJ (Jul 20, 2011)

windje2000 said:


> In a consumer driven business -- *"buyer beware" IS the norm*?????????
> 
> In consumer driven businesses, companies that *LOVE THEIR CUSTOMERS* win.
> 
> Every time.



So tell me one thing you can buy that doesn't come with clearly stated or implied guarantees or warranties that are subject to legal interpretation, and don't require a consumer to file for redress if the product fails or doesn't perform as advertised.  (Product recalls such as child car seats that pose a hazard don't count, because the reason the companies do such recalls is due to prior legislation that requires such.)


----------



## taffy19 (Jul 20, 2011)

thinze3 said:


> So, are we assuming that the entire 1500 points has a small underlying interest at one resort only, locking the resale points usage into that one resort, and not an even smaller underlying interest of all the DC resorts, thereby granting availability to all resorts?
> 
> If so, why are we assuming this?


I hope that you are right but I would like to have this answer before signing the dotted line if we were buying points.  

It is important because of the clause that Pat posted earlier in this thread.  It is there for a reason.


----------



## SueDonJ (Jul 20, 2011)

windje2000 said:


> Nobody but Marriott can answer these questions.
> 
> They choose not to.  Their choice.  Actions have consequences.
> 
> What will you accuse me of next - buying 1500 DC points and listing them on ebay just so I could have the opportunity to blast Marriott on this thread?



BWAHAHahahahaha!!  Don't know if you intended to make me laugh but that's what happened, because you're much too smart to purchase DC Points until and unless all these questions are answered, and probably not even then.

I really don't disagree all that much with what you're saying, you know.  I wish these answers were a matter of public record by this time, too.  But I just can't jump on the Marriott-bashing bandwagon until I have personal knowledge of them deliberately evading the questions.  Since I haven't asked anybody at Marriott who could be relied upon for the answers, I can't say if the answers are available or not.  The only TUGger I know of who has asked ALL the questions of the right people is BocaBoy, and if I had the same experience as he did then I'd be pretty disillusioned with Marriott right now, too.

This thread, though - I only jumped in to ask why Emmy would expect Marriott to make a statement about usage of an external DC Points purchase.  It's not an expectation that I've ever seen applied to external Weeks resales, that's all.


----------



## RBERR1 (Jul 20, 2011)

windje2000 said:


> Club dues?  What assurance do you have that they will let you join the DClub?  SPINCO's SEC filing strongly suggests they will not.
> 
> Will they allow you to rescind the purchase if you cannot join DC and enjoy all the benefits the original purchaser enjoyed?



My gut here is that you still are a member of the Dclub but you are limited to properties in the trust based on what was said in the SPINCO SEC filing.  (Remember DClub is both the trust part and the enrolled weeks part.)

Same way resale in the old system were still able to book weeks but cannot get MR points.


----------



## taffy19 (Jul 20, 2011)

Susan, I am not bashing Marriott or the ad on eBay but because the clause is there, I would want to know what resort or resorts are tied in to the points we would be buying from the Marriott direct.  We didn't buy points so it doesn't affect us in any way.  It was just a general queston to ask the Marriott in the first place and again from a resale seller too.

The smallest package is 250 points so would you own at one or six resorts or somewhere in between?  Where can you stay if you own six resorts of 250 points each?  

Also, will Marriott use the right of refusal on the best point package of 250 points when you put it up for sale or will they buy them all that you bought originally from the Marriott?  Just another general question.

If you can stay at all the resorts in the Trust, then this important clause would not have been included in the documents.  JMHO.


----------



## taffy19 (Jul 20, 2011)

RBERR1 said:


> My gut here is that you still are a member of the Dclub but you are limited to properties in the trust based on what was said in the SPINCO SEC filing.  (Remember DClub is both the trust part and the enrolled weeks part.)
> 
> Same way resale in the old system were still able to book weeks but cannot get MR points.


This sounds like a good answer to me but you need to verify.


----------



## windje2000 (Jul 20, 2011)

iconnections said:


> Susan, I am not bashing Marriott or the ad on eBay but because the clause is there, I would want to know what resort or resorts are tied in to the points we would be buying from the Marriott direct.  We didn't buy points so it doesn't affect us in any way.  It was just a general queston to ask the Marriott in the first place and again from a resale seller too.
> 
> The smallest package is 250 points so would you own at one or six resorts or somewhere in between?  Where can you stay if you own six resorts of 250 points each?
> 
> ...




The way to view the trust is like a mutual fund.  Instead of stocks, the fund has weeks.

Your ownership interest is an undivided fractional interest in the weeks.  It is not tied to any resort, just as your mutual fund interest is not tied to any particular stock in the fund.


----------



## windje2000 (Jul 20, 2011)

SueDonJ said:


> BWAHAHahahahaha!!  Don't know if you intended to make me laugh but that's what happened, because you're much too smart to purchase DC Points until and unless all these questions are answered, and probably not even then.
> 
> I really don't disagree all that much with what you're saying, you know.  I wish these answers were a matter of public record by this time, too.  But I just can't jump on the Marriott-bashing bandwagon until I have personal knowledge of them deliberately evading the questions.  Since I haven't asked anybody at Marriott who could be relied upon for the answers, I can't say if the answers are available or not.  The only TUGger I know of who has asked ALL the questions of the right people is BocaBoy, and if I had the same experience as he did then I'd be pretty disillusioned with Marriott right now, too.
> 
> This thread, though - I only jumped in to ask why Emmy would expect Marriott to make a statement about usage of an external DC Points purchase.  It's not an expectation that I've ever seen applied to external Weeks resales, that's all.



I've been to a half dozen sessions regarding DClub.  I've asked the questions.  The difference is that I knew the answers to most all the questions I posed.  (Cross Examination 101 - Never ever ask a question you don't know the answer to.) 

In each case, I knew more about the program than the presenter.  

One shouldn't have to literally cross examine a Marriott rep to get answers to basic how does the program work questions.


----------



## taffy19 (Jul 20, 2011)

Windje, so the clause means that additional Marriott inventory will be excluded unless you buy additional points from the Marriott direct?  Do you agree with that?


----------



## windje2000 (Jul 20, 2011)

iconnections said:


> Windje, so the clause means that additional Marriott inventory will be excluded unless you buy additional points from the Marriott direct?  Do you agree with that?



My interpretation of what the clause means.

I read the clause to mean a resale points owner can only reserve what he/she has an ownership interest in.  That is the properties in the trust.  The number of properties in the Trust is a moving target as properties are added over time.

I believe the documents limit the resale points buyer to reserving occupancy less than 60 days out.  

I read the clause to mean a resale points owner cannot participate in the Exchange Company.

To analogize to a weeks owner, it would be very similar to a weeks owner who could 

1.  only reserve his or her week from what was left at 60 days out and 

2.  was prohibited from participating in II or RCI.

The difference is that the weeks owner owns at one resort but the points owner has an interest in a 'mutual fund' of weeks at a number of resorts.

Hope that helps.


----------



## taffy19 (Jul 20, 2011)

windje2000 said:


> My interpretation of what the clause means.
> 
> I read the clause to mean a resale points owner can only reserve what he/she has an ownership interest in.  That is the properties in the trust.  The number of properties in the Trust is a moving target as properties are added over time.
> 
> ...


Yes, it does.     We are a fixed week/unit owner at one single Marriott resort so the old fashioned way and we still like it that way.  

Thanks a lot.


----------



## dioxide45 (Jul 21, 2011)

The problem here is that the seller likely can't answer any of these questions, because they probably can't get an answer from Marriott.

As far as we know, Marriott hasn't made any real policy known about how to transfer a resale point sale on the resale market. There was a broker (transfer agent) on here earlier this year that had an owner that needed out of their trust points. They contact Owner Services and Owner Modifications to try to get answers as to the transfer fees, ROFR, and ROFR fees. Marriott couldn't or wouldn't provide the answers. Either they didn't want to or hadn't thought about the need for those policies yet.

It is Marriott's responsibility to make those policies/procedures available to people when they need to sell. We don't know what the seller listing this EBay sale did, did they call Marriott? We don't know. It doesn't seem so. But we also haven't seen anyone post anything about how Marriott will facilitate trust point sale transfers for owners that need/want to sell.

Marriott knows that people will want/need to sell their trust points. They wrote a ROFR provision in to the trust. They must make a process available t those who ask how to transfer trust points. While it is the responsibility of the seller to provide this information to potential buyers, it is also the responsibility of Marriott to make that information available to the seller. Which up to this point, doesn't appear to have happened. At least not that we have seen.

Marriott has dropped the ball. They should have has a process in place since 6/30/2010 on how to transfer trust ownership. They knew the day would come that someone wanted/needed to sell.


----------



## dioxide45 (Jul 21, 2011)

Here is the new listing.

http://cgi.ebay.com/260821374578


----------



## dioxide45 (Jul 21, 2011)

With a $150 transfer fee, does this include the ROFR waiver fee? Or is the combined transfer fee $$0.10 per point?


----------



## tlwmkw (Jul 21, 2011)

Funny, I predicted it would be about a year for these points to start appearing on the re-sale market and was pooh-poohed.  Now here they are.

Yes, Marriott should have had clear mechanisms in place for re-sale and transfer of these points as soon as they started to sell them.  It is just an example of poor planning on their part.  I would be afraid to bid on them because no one knows if/how you will be able to use them.  What a mess.  Most people interested in re-sale have probably seen TUG and for that reason I think there will be limited (if any) interest in this auction other than folks here looking at it and not bidding.

I feel sorry for the seller.  If they even sell it will be pennies on the dollar.  Does Marriott think that will make them look good?  News will get out about this and then they will look even more foolish as they try to sell for top dollar.

tlwmkw


----------



## RBERR1 (Jul 21, 2011)

windje2000 said:


> My interpretation of what the clause means.
> 
> I read the clause to mean a resale points owner can only reserve what he/she has an ownership interest in.  That is the properties in the trust.  The number of properties in the Trust is a moving target as properties are added over time.
> 
> ...



I asked a follow-up question on the new listing to see what limits on reservation or limits are on these points are resale.  Answer should be interesting.


----------



## windje2000 (Jul 21, 2011)

RBERR1 said:


> I asked a follow-up question on the new listing to see what limits on reservation or limits are on these points are resale.  Answer should be interesting.



Look forward to seeing the response.  I assume you asked the seller and not Marriott.

Looks like there's two bids so far.  Might be an interesting gamble for a points owner (or a weeks owner for that matter) to purchase these .  .  .   cheap . . . .  before Marriott gets its act together . . . . .and see what ownership rights they can obtain/negotiate.  

Might even be interesting to try to rent them out.  I wonder how 'smart' their systems are, since they were allowing post 6/20 resale weeks to enroll.


----------



## GregT (Jul 21, 2011)

windje2000 said:


> Look forward to seeing the response.  I assume you asked the seller and not Marriott.
> 
> Looks like there's two bids so far.  *Might be an interesting gamble for a points owner (or a weeks owner for that matter) to purchase these .  .  .   cheap . . . .  before Marriott gets its act together . . . . .and see what ownership rights they can obtain/negotiate.*
> 
> Might even be interesting to try to rent them out.  I wonder how 'smart' their systems are, since they were allowing post 6/20 resale weeks to enroll.



I like the way you think..........................................


----------



## RBERR1 (Jul 21, 2011)

windje2000 said:


> Look forward to seeing the response.  I assume you asked the seller and not Marriott.
> 
> Looks like there's two bids so far.  Might be an interesting gamble for a points owner (or a weeks owner for that matter) to purchase these .  .  .   cheap . . . .  before Marriott gets its act together . . . . .and see what ownership rights they can obtain/negotiate.
> 
> Might even be interesting to try to rent them out.  I wonder how 'smart' their systems are, since they were allowing post 6/20 resale weeks to enroll.



I asked the seller.  I may call Marriott if I get a chance.


----------



## RBERR1 (Jul 21, 2011)

RBERR1 said:


> I asked a follow-up question on the new listing to see what limits on reservation or limits are on these points are resale.  Answer should be interesting.



This is the response I got..

Hi,

As far as Marriott would tell us, there should be no restrictions on the points.

Thank you,
Justin

Very very interesting.


----------



## windje2000 (Jul 21, 2011)

RBERR1 said:


> This is the response I got..
> 
> Hi,
> 
> ...



How far was that?

Is the seller willing to guarantee that bundle of rights and allow you to rescind  if that turns out not to be the case?  

With all due respect, this is a non response response.  Moreover, it appears to conflict with what is written in the governing documents.


----------



## m61376 (Jul 21, 2011)

windje2000 said:


> Look forward to seeing the response.  I assume you asked the seller and not Marriott.
> 
> Looks like there's two bids so far.  Might be an interesting gamble for a points owner (or a weeks owner for that matter) to purchase these .  .  .   cheap . . . .  before Marriott gets its act together . . . . .and see what ownership rights they can obtain/negotiate.
> 
> Might even be interesting to try to rent them out.  I wonder how 'smart' their systems are, since they were allowing post 6/20 resale weeks to enroll.



The cost may be a steal, but if their usage is restricted to 60 days out, then those MF's won't seem like such a bargain. Tough call...


----------



## chunkygal (Jul 21, 2011)

This will be interesting. We own DVC as well as Marriott and these "points" have always been sellable. We have owned at Hilton Head for 15 years and enjoyed 15 years of great vacations and we could still turn around and sell the rest of the 40 year contract for $14000 or more.


----------



## bogey21 (Jul 21, 2011)

My first Marriott was a pre-construction Week at Sabal Palms.  When I decided to sell I used the Marriott Resale Department who (in essence) guaranteed me that they would sell my Week for me at a profit.  All I had to do was wait until my Week came to the top of the list of similar Weeks listed for sale.  

While I waited I reserved a Week and rented it using the Marriott Rental Program.  I think I did this twice.  Marriott eventually sold my Week for me at a profit and in the interim I more than covered my Maintaince Fees (even after commissions) by renting my Week using the Marriott Rental Program.  

The whole process took me somewhere around two or three years, but it eventually worked.

My how times have changed!!

George


----------



## GregT (Jul 21, 2011)

All,

It looks like I'm going to be outbid -- someone else has come in that pushed my bid up to $510.   I'm still high bidder, but I don't expect that to last for long.

Some thoughts on buying resale points:

1) I don't think its a functional problem that these things can't access the Exchange Inventory.   I have (rented) legacy points for that, and it's really no different from what Trust Point users are reporting.  I would just have to book Day 1 and Day 2 with my resale Trust Points, and then Day 3-7 with legacy points
2) At my high bid price ($1,000) I think it is inconceivable that Marriott would not ROFR the points.   I think it would be disastrous for them to let it go at that price.
3) If I did get them for $1,000, I believe that I would be able to pay an additional $2,000 to get Initiated, so my basis for 1,500 Trust Points is $3,000.   
4) At that point, I would have points with Base Plus access, but not Special Benefits
5) At this point in time, I don't really value Special Benefits.   The only thing that would bum me out is if Ritz Carlton ultimately came into DClub, but came in as a Special Benefit.  And if it does, I'm totally blocked anyway because I have no intention of buying 10,000 Trust Points.
6) The obvious risk of course is that they won't let me Initiate my cheapo Trust Points.  In which case I'm limited to 60-day ressies.  If that occurs, I am probably limited to the Properties that are deep in the Trust (Ko Olina, MOC, Timber Lodge, NCV).   I could tolerate that, but it would be inconvenient and require creativity to get my desired reservations -- but I think this is a modest risk of occuring and do not expect it would happen.

So.....it's an interesting experiment.   I never thought I'd be winning bidder at $203.50, and I don't expect to get it for $1,000.   But we will see!   

I'll keep TUGgers apprised of the process if I actually end up with the things.  

Best,

Greg


----------



## windje2000 (Jul 21, 2011)

GregT said:


> All,
> 
> It looks like I'm going to be outbid -- someone else has come in that pushed my bid up to $510.   I'm still high bidder, but I don't expect that to last for long.
> 
> ...



You may want to take another look at this old post  LINK


----------



## GregT (Jul 21, 2011)

windje2000 said:


> You may want to take another look at this old post  LINK



Yes, I agree - there is risk here, hence my low bid. 

Somebody has to figure it out though, and I think my chances of maximizing it are as good as anybody's?  I would welcome the opportunity - wish me luck!

Best,

Greg


----------



## windje2000 (Jul 21, 2011)

GregT said:


> Yes, I agree - there is risk here, hence my low bid.
> 
> Somebody has to figure it out though, and I think my chances of maximizing it are as good as anybody's?  I would welcome the opportunity - wish me luck!
> 
> ...



Rootin for you


----------



## SueDonJ (Jul 21, 2011)

GregT said:


> Yes, I agree - there is risk here, hence my low bid.
> 
> Somebody has to figure it out though, and I think my chances of maximizing it are as good as anybody's?  I would welcome the opportunity - wish me luck!
> 
> ...



Wow, I'm really surprised you (or anyone) would take a risk on resale DC Points.  What will you do if you're the high bidder, Marriott doesn't exercise ROFR, you have to pay the ROFR waiver and transfer fees, and your usage is as extremely limited as the governing docs make it appear it will be?  True, your initial outlay might be worth the experiment, but with the $600 annual MF (1,500 x .40c) you're putting a lot more on the line.  And to get out from under, won't you have to convince someone else that there's value in what you'll be selling?  I honestly thought when I first saw this thread that Perry might be the only TUG-connected person who might use this resale as an experiment.


----------



## mkahanek (Jul 21, 2011)

I am still curious.  Why would someone already be selling these points after at most a year of ownership?  Didn't they just lose their shirt?


----------



## SueDonJ (Jul 21, 2011)

mkahanek said:


> I am still curious.  Why would someone already be selling these points after at most a year of ownership?  Didn't they just lose their shirt?



Probably.  But sometimes life happens and your finances change so much that routine travel and annual MF become luxuries that you can't afford.  Maybe a year ago the owner had a solid marriage and a good job with a nice paycheck, but now one or all of those things is gone?


----------



## mkahanek (Jul 21, 2011)

SueDonJ said:


> Probably.  But sometimes life happens and your finances change so much that routine travel and annual MF become luxuries that you can't afford.  Maybe a year ago the owner had a solid marriage and a good job with a nice paycheck, but now one or all of those things is gone?



Wow.  I guess.  I just figured in that time frame there had to be some hint of instability that would have scared said person away from the purchase.  But who knows.


----------



## dioxide45 (Jul 21, 2011)

I wonder if Marriott will treat resale buyers of trust points differently if they are already enrolled in the DC program or are brand new buyers?

The problem is that they have to have encumbrances on the points. They can't be enrolled in the DC program. Marriott mentioned this restriction in an SEC filing. My guess is that they can't just change that policy without making that that change known.


----------



## dioxide45 (Jul 21, 2011)

I do hope that a Tugger is the winning bidder, though it won't be me. The only way we will be able to truly tell how Marriott will handle these is from first hand experience by someone who shares those details.


----------



## dioxide45 (Jul 21, 2011)

SueDonJ said:


> I honestly thought when I first saw this thread that Perry might be the only TUG-connected person who might use this resale as an experiment.



Maybe he is experimenting also, but if he is, he can't post about it.

Looks like Greg was outbid.

My initial estimate a while ago were that these points wouldn't sell for any more than $1 a point. Looks like they could beat that estimate.


----------



## GregT (Jul 22, 2011)

dioxide45 said:


> Maybe he is experimenting also, but if he is, he can't post about it.
> 
> Looks like Greg was outbid.
> 
> My initial estimate a while ago were that these points wouldn't sell for any more than $1 a point. Looks like they could beat that estimate.



Dioxide,

Indeed it will be interesting to see where this goes.   I suppose its good for Marriott that this thing isn't going to sell for $1 (like Wyndham points) but Marriott still has to prove that there is a reasonable path forward to having these points be transferred and useable.   

As with RBERR, I've made contact with the broker and at least I can track the process from the sidelines, if not as the active purchaser.    Perhaps we'll learn enough from the broker on how easily the transfer occurred, and if full rights transferred too.  

Best to all,

Greg


----------



## dioxide45 (Jul 22, 2011)

tlwmkw said:


> Funny, I predicted it would be about a year for these points to start appearing on the re-sale market and was pooh-poohed.  Now here they are.



I fully expected points to become available for resale; however I didn't expect them to be listed on EBay first. I would have expected sellers to first try listing on places like TUG, Redweek or My Resort Network. People usually don't realize that what they purchased is now worth so little, so they list them on these sites for unrealistic prices.

I wouldn't have figured someone was desperate enough only one year in to go the EBay route. Uninformed sellers usually sell for bargain basement prices once they have realized what they own is not worth anywhere close to what they paid the developer. This sometimes takes years of listing it for unrealistic prices.


----------



## dioxide45 (Jul 22, 2011)

iconnections said:


> The smallest package is 250 points so would you own at one or six resorts or somewhere in between?  Where can you stay if you own six resorts of 250 points each?
> .



While a BI (Beneficial Interest) is equal to 250 points. The smallest package of points that Marriott sold was for four BIs, 1000 trust points. I doubt they allow individual BIs to be deeded out.

They could have easily made a BI 1000 or 2500 points. Not sure how they landed on 250 points, or why they even need BIs in the first place.


----------



## m61376 (Jul 22, 2011)

Greg- My impression is the seller doesn't know any more than we do. I got the same blanket response to my initial inquiry, and when I copied and pasted the excerpt from Marriott's regulations and asked for further information I didn't receive a response as to how usage rights would transfer. I'm guessing he is as confused as the rest of us.

I applaud you for considering taking the plunge. Ultimately, it might be a great deal for the buyer, as everyone tries to navigate through the system. I am not even sure Marriott knows what to do with resale points. But, for the same reasons Sue pointed out, I'm too conservative to be the one to take that chance, because ultimately it might mean being saddled with a $600 yearly outlay or choosing to pass along an albatross to someone else.

And, who knows, btw, if Perry isn't the high bidder there? It would be a perk for him to be the one to figure it all out....


----------



## windje2000 (Jul 22, 2011)

m61376 said:


> Greg- *My impression is the seller doesn't know any more than we do.* I got the same blanket response to my initial inquiry, and when I copied and pasted the excerpt from Marriott's regulations and asked for further information I didn't receive a response as to how usage rights would transfer. I'm guessing he is as confused as the rest of us.
> 
> I applaud you for considering taking the plunge. Ultimately, it might be a great deal for the buyer, as everyone tries to navigate through the system. I am not even sure Marriott knows what to do with resale points. But, for the same reasons Sue pointed out, I'm too conservative to be the one to take that chance, because ultimately it might mean being saddled with a $600 yearly outlay or choosing to pass along an albatross to someone else.
> 
> And, who knows, btw, if Perry isn't the high bidder there? It would be a perk for him to be the one to figure it all out....



Here's hoping the ultimate buyer understands what is being offered for sale.  An uninformed buyer reading that ebay ad copy certainly would not be aware of the limitations on use many believe are associated with resale points.  

If an uninformed buyer wins, the selling price will not reflect the true attributes of the product.

One would think the broker would have modified the ad copy to state points usage can only occur consistent with the Marriott rules and regs, especially  after being put on notice by TUGGERS that there are many open questions as to what that usage might be.  

Should be an interesting auction.


----------



## kds4 (Jul 22, 2011)

I have to question how this will even be possible for the seller to complete as a transaction. We specifically questioned our representative at the Orlando Sales Center back in April during our DC points presentation when we decided to enroll our week about what resale options any owner who purchased points would have.

We were specifically told that points cannot be resold (ie. Marriott would not recognize a resale of points). We were told they could be transferred via an estate (death of the owner), but that was the only way Marriott would change the ownership. "While you can rent points from another owner, the only place you can buy them is from Marriott directly."

If that is still true, Marriott won't even have to ROFR (and pay the owner/seller anything). They will just refuse the transaction altogether. The only way the owner/seller can get out of the maintenance fees will be to quit paying and let Marriott 'repossess' them.

This will be an interesting test case of that approach. We knew it would come eventually.


----------



## GregT (Jul 22, 2011)

All,

I've had some contact with Judi Kozlowski, who is a well-respected broker on the HGVC board.  I bought my HGVC through her, and I'm now on her email list of new listings.

In her last email blast, she indicated that she is now approved to be a resale broker for Marriott.   I followed up with her and posed some questions.

She indicated that Marriott is actively working on their resale program and she believed it was close to introduction.  She indicated there was a July 25 conference call scheduled for the authorized brokers where a number of the open questions should be addressed.  She cautioned that it is possible that there could be further delays in the formal introduction, and she encouraged me to contact her after July 25 to see if she could answer some of my questions.   She also confirmed that Marriott is exercising ROFR selectively, which is consistent with what we've heard before, but just haven't seen much of on TUG.   She also confirmed that Hilton is ROFRing extremely aggressively.

So, we should know more after the 25th, and I'll post what I learn!

BTW, despite my inquiries to Judi and my low-ball bid on eBay, these are more driven by curiousity than a desire to own Trust Points.  I'm very happy with the points rental activity that has developed in a short time (thank you TUGgers!) and I continue to believe that legacy points will function well for the near to medium term, and who knows what will happen in the long term.   

Best,

Greg


----------



## jimf41 (Jul 26, 2011)

Just ended at $3750. I dropped out at $1150.


----------



## dioxide45 (Jul 26, 2011)

:whoopie: Yahoooo.






Okay, I didn't win (or bid for that matter). I was surprised that it sold for the price that it did. Hopefully we will find out the status of ROFR.


----------



## windje2000 (Jul 26, 2011)

GregT said:


> 2) At my high bid price ($1,000) *I think it is inconceivable that Marriott would not ROFR the points.   I think it would be disastrous for them to let it go at that price.*
> 
> So.....it's an interesting experiment.   I never thought I'd be winning bidder at $203.50, and I don't expect to get it for $1,000.   But we will see!



Greg - I think you are right about MAR ROFR.  Here's why I think Marriott must ROFR these points.

Short answer - to prevent arguments about inventory impairment.

What is the right answer on point value to measure potential impairment of inventory?  $10/pt or the newly established ebay price  

Suppose you were auditing MAR timeshare.  One audit question is carrying value of points inventory.  Marriott sells points inventory @ approx $10/pt.  Here we have a points resale transaction on ebay which reached a price decidedly less (approx 75%) than $10.  

MAR will argue that this is one isolated transaction and they are selling tons of points @ $10.  

The ebay price is an 'under the hammer' no reserve auction value, which can only generate an indication of value at or (more likely) below fair market value.  (Note that the technical definition of fair market value assumes no compulsion to act on either the buyer or seller.  A no reserve auction by definition doesn't meet that criterion - the property is sold for whatever the highest bid is when the auction ends.)

The auditor might say sure, but that $10 includes access to the exchange company, an intangible asset.    The ebay price is measuring the just property rights in the trust -- exclusive of the value of that intangible asset.  That's a much more direct indication of the property value in the trust than the tons of points sales (which include the access to the exchange company intangible) and have a huge overlay of selling expense.  

MAR will come back to the auditor and say - look, we're selling access to the exchange company to our legacy owners for as little as $500.  In addition here's what it costs anyone to join II or RCI.  (Note that the Dclub initiation fee excludes present value of the skim, which for a legacy is a ongoing and perpetual cost of access.)  

No way access to the exchange company is worth the price difference between a $10 sale in due course of our ordinary business and an auction value of around $2 on ebay.  (Note that a primary motivator for many to join is the bundled fee and savings which currently can be obtained.)  

So what's the correct answer?  --  There isn't one.  At least one and probably both of these price points are wrong.

But here's the real motivator for MAR.  If MAR doesn't exercise ROFR,  how will they explain the fact that they didn't to the auditors.  Not exercising would be an action consistent with the view that the underlying property value of points is far less than $10.  Not a good position to defend to the auditors.

MAR is absolutely compelled to exercise ROFR.  Exercising ROFR would be entirely consistent with the notion that the points are worth what they are selling for ($10) which is much more than the ebay high bid.  

We all should remember that Marriott took a $0.75 B write off on inventory.  No way they want to go down or even near that road again.  That was probably the issue that put the spin-off transaction on the front burner.  

The best course of action for Marriott is to simply stay away from arguing about the import of points sales prices in venues other than developer sales and exercise ROFR.


----------



## RBERR1 (Jul 26, 2011)

windje2000 said:


> Greg - I think you are right about MAR ROFR.  Here's why I think Marriott must ROFR these points.
> 
> Short answer - to prevent arguments about inventory impairment.
> 
> ...



As a former auditor, I agree completely.  My first question would have been why did you not ROFR this transaction if they are not imparied?  

I am sure part of the reason a lot of the weeks transactions did not get ROFR because MAR has already written whatever weeks they owned down far enough that the e-bay transactions would not be materially different than the carrying value therefore would not create an additional impairment problem.

If points are sold for even $8/pt resale and they did not ROFR them then all of the arguments about the stuff that resale does not get might past muster but at $2-3/pt.  Not a chance.  They might be able to use the one transaction argument but the real risk for MAR now is that this is the only the first transaction (at least that we know about) and a whole bunch start occuring. It may depend on the number of transactions that occur before year-end.  If this starts a trend and establishes a "market price"  of $2-3/pt based on a series of transactions, then MAR may have an impairment problem. 

Easiest way for avoid this whole thing is to ROFR them and go out and sell the same pts for $10/pt.


----------



## vail (Jul 26, 2011)

What happens if I enroll my week for points---I think I read where I could trade my unit for points? and I now try to sell the points assuming Marriott willexercise ROFR.
I can take a unit that I basically will not get muc for but turn it in to points and have Marriott pick it up?
I am sure they are in the business of selling points---not purchasing points?

Also when they do trade points for weeeks--what do they do with all those weeks no one wants?


----------



## Asia2000 (Jul 26, 2011)

vail said:


> What happens if I enroll my week for points---I think I read where I could trade my unit for points? and I now try to sell the points assuming Marriott willexercise ROFR.
> I can take a unit that I basically will not get muc for but turn it in to points and have Marriott pick it up?
> I am sure they are in the business of selling points---not purchasing points?
> 
> Also when they do trade points for weeeks--what do they do with all those weeks no one wants?



1.  Marriott will give fewer points for your week than the number of points required to stay for the same week (majority of the time).  Many people call this "skim".  Perhaps the single most upsetting variable of the whole program.  

2.  When ROFR happens, the seller will receive the price of the contract.  No bonus money given by Marriott.  1500 points just sold for $3750.  Bad deal.  If Marriott exercises ROFR, then the seller will receive $3750.
Also, if you enroll your week, you would be selling your week as a week, not points.  Point programs can only be sold if you bought "pure" points from Marriott (not a week that was converted to points).  

3.  Point values for the dud weeks are low.  Two sets or buckets of weeks.  Point users and Week owners.  There are always unused weeks in the off season.  Marriott or II will discount them to attempt usage.


----------



## windje2000 (Jul 26, 2011)

vail said:


> What happens if I enroll my week for points---I think I read where I could trade my unit for points? and I now try to sell the points assuming Marriott willexercise ROFR.
> I can take a unit that I basically will not get muc for but turn it in to points and have Marriott pick it up?
> I am sure they are in the business of selling points---not purchasing points?
> 
> Also when they do trade points for weeeks--what do they do with all those weeks no one wants?



You can 'trade' your enrolled unit for points to use annually.  You could also rent out those points

You cannot 'trade' your enrolled unit for points representing ownership in the trust which would be subject to ROFR if you tried to sell them.


----------



## kds4 (Jul 26, 2011)

windje2000 said:


> Greg - I think you are right about MAR ROFR.  Here's why I think Marriott must ROFR these points.
> 
> I have to disagree that Marriott has to ROFR (as we traditionally think of ROFR). I took the following from Page 3, Section VI of the Marriott Ownership Resorts Inc. (MORI) disclosures guide at https://www.my-vacationclub.com/common/vc/en-us/pdfs/enrollment_legal_docs/disclosure_guide.pdf
> 
> ...


----------



## RBERR1 (Jul 26, 2011)

kds4 said:


> windje2000 said:
> 
> 
> > Greg - I think you are right about MAR ROFR.  Here's why I think Marriott must ROFR these points.
> ...


----------



## windje2000 (Jul 26, 2011)

RBERR1 said:


> It does limit the buyer according to the docs but they are still able to book a reservation at whatever resorts are in the trust.
> 
> at 60 days out???
> 
> They just may not be able to access what has been deposited by enrolled weeks owners into the exchange company.



I agree that the language would suggest that there would be no access to the exchange co.  

BTW, do you know if the seller/lister  is an Approved Broker??


----------



## chunkygal (Jul 27, 2011)

Who is this Perry guy Ihear spoken of so much?

I wish there was aw ay to find out who won and what their experience is. 
I would buy some at that price if I knew I could use them.


----------



## puckmanfl (Jul 28, 2011)

good morning...

Perry is quite an interesting character on these here parts!  For some of his best work, pull up the"speculation" thread that ran here from about March 2010 to the roll out of the new DC program 6/20/2010...

He now has a new home , although it is quite sparsely populated....

www.mvci-timesharewizard.com


----------



## windje2000 (Jul 28, 2011)

puckmanfl said:


> good morning...
> 
> Perry is quite an interesting character on these here parts!  For some of his best work, pull up the"speculation" thread that ran here from about March 2010 to the roll out of the new DC program 6/20/2010...
> 
> ...



Puck, for reasons I can't figure out your link doesn't work, at least for me.  Here's one that does --LINK


----------



## FlyerBobcat (Jul 28, 2011)

puckmanfl said:


> good morning...
> 
> Perry is quite an interesting character on these here parts!  For some of his best work, pull up the"speculation" thread that ran here from about March 2010 to the roll out of the new DC program 6/20/2010...
> 
> ...



www.mvci.timesharewizard.com


----------



## JeffBrown (Jul 28, 2011)

*Marriott Kauai*

Anyone have any idea what a fair ebay price would be for a Marriott Kauai, 2 bedroom Annual deeded as week 25.  Maint. Fee $1540.

Any help is appreciated, thanks.


----------



## mkahanek (Jul 28, 2011)

sumdayvacations said:


> Anyone have any idea what a fair ebay price would be for a Marriott Kauai, 2 bedroom Annual deeded as week 25.  Maint. Fee $1540.
> 
> Any help is appreciated, thanks.



Depends on the resort.  Is is Lagoons, Waiohai or Kauai Beach Club?


----------



## JeffBrown (Jul 28, 2011)

mkahanek said:


> Depends on the resort.  Is is Lagoons, Waiohai or Kauai Beach Club?



Kauai Beach Club


----------



## TheTimeTraveler (Jul 28, 2011)

sumdayvacations said:


> Kauai Beach Club





Why not $1 ?





.


----------



## dioxide45 (Sep 30, 2011)

Anyone ever hear if this cleared ROFR?


----------



## dioxide45 (Oct 1, 2011)

clintonR71weir said:


> What will you accuse me of next - buying 1500 DC points and listing them on ebay just so I could have the opportunity to blast Marriott on this thread?



Your not making any sense.


----------

