# Proposed internal exchange program and restrictions on resale weeks



## Dave M (Dec 14, 2007)

*Internal Exchanges*
As detailed in several lengthy threads here, Marriott is developing an internal exchange system. Marriott believes it can handle internal (Marriott-to-Marriott) exchanges better and more profitably for Marriott than through the existing II Marriott internal exchange program. We would still use II for Marriott-to-nonMarriott exchanges.

How that will affect all of us is anyone's guess. My guess is that there won't be a significant adverse impact overall. Perhaps a small fee increase for exchanges. And with any system change will come some changes to procedures that some of us will love and others will hate. I have no knowledge or guess as to what those changes might be. However, it’s likely that overall the changes will be neutral.

Theoretically, it's also possible that Marriott will eventually decide that it can't profitably implement the new system and will junk it before implementation. However, junking it is extremely unlikely because it appears that Marriott's new internal exchange system will utilize II's existing software. 

*My latest information indicates that the new system will be implemented by January 1, 2009*.

*   *   *   *   *

*Restrictions on Resale Weeks*

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

I have now had it confirmed that Marriott does plans to implement something that would make resale purchases less attractive. The only current significant restriction is that a Marriott week purchased from a third party cannot be traded for Marriott Rewards points.

What will that new restriction be? I'm sure there will be much speculation on that until it's implemented. If I had to guess, based solely on the information I have obtained, I would say that those buying from Marriott will be able to reserve their weeks earlier that those who buy resale. (Please note that the last statement is an opinion, not fact.) 

For now, anything we hear from salespeople about what the restrictions might be (e.g., restrictions on locking off or restrictions on exchanging) is pure conjecture. Marriott hasn't finalized what the rules will be.

*When?* The implementation date is uncertain, but probably within 18 months or so.

*Grandfathering?* Yes, Marriott plans to grandfather all owners, presumably as of the date the change is announced or implemented. Thus, if you buy a Marriott timeshare on the resale market now, you will - as currently planned - be exempt from the proposed restrictions on resale weeks, whatever they might be. That makes sense because it would be a public relations nightmare if Marriott implemented such a drastic change that impacted existing owners – whether resale or not.


----------



## littlestar (Dec 14, 2007)

Thanks for the update, Dave.


----------



## gores95 (Dec 14, 2007)

Yes thanks Dave.  I agree about the grandfathering for existing resale owners.  Only downside is if we decide to sell our resale after the implementations that would probably adversely affect selling prices.  Perhaps there will be a "run" on resales just prior to the conversion when new owners will look to get their hands on grandfathered resales.

I wonder how this would affect Marriott ROFR after the planned changes...


----------



## Lawlar (Dec 14, 2007)

*Is Marriott That Greedy?*

There is nothing in my deed or contract that says that a person buying my TS will be penalized for buying it resale.  Marriott obviously isn’t thinking about the best interests of its customers or their legal rights.

Marriott should focus its efforts on finding ways to enhance the value of the TSs it sells.  By reducing the reservation rights of a TS after it is sold on the resale market two things will happen: (1) Fewer people will want to buy a Marriott TS on the resale market and (2) Marriott owners will have to reduce their asking prices dramatically if they want to sell their TSs.  A Marriott TS will have little value after it is purchased from Marriott.

TS ownership has some appeal.  But the biggest downside is that the value of a TS declines dramatically after it is purchased (and it is very difficult to find a willing buyer).  If Marriott wants to promote TS ownership it should focus its efforts on making TS ownership appealing economically.  

If Marriott implements this restriction on resales then Marriott is going to damage the value of its TSs over the long term in order to make a few more bucks in the short term.

I’m really surprised that TS groups aren’t more active in advocating for the protection of their rights.


----------



## timeos2 (Dec 14, 2007)

*A developer killing resale? How can that be?*



Dave M said:


> *Internal Exchanges*
> As detailed in several lengthy threads here, Marriott is developing an internal exchange system. Marriott believes it can handle internal (Marriott-to-Marriott) exchanges better and more profitably for Marriott than through the existing II Marriott internal exchange program. We would still use II for Marriott-to-nonMarriott exchanges.
> 
> How that will affect all of us is anyone's guess. My guess is that there won't be a significant adverse impact overall. Perhaps a small fee increase for exchanges. And with any system change will come some changes to procedures that some of us will love and others will hate. I have no knowledge or guess as to what those changes might be. However, it’s likely that overall the changes will be neutral.
> ...



No surprise there. It has been painfully obvious for a long time that using II is an unnecessary step that cost the owners $$ and pays Marriott nothing. It will hurt II more than Marriott owners but II is due to be decimated by the top end brands leaving the fold soon as they all want points and internal trades not some third party making all the cash. The recent DVC changes announced and  the buyout and downplaying of II at Sunterra (now Diamond) are just the beginning. II will be left with the Wastegates and others that are too sales focused to care about trades but even they will wake up at some point. The "quality" that II loves to use as a slogan, even though most of it is unavailable and the majority of actual deposits are not top shelf, will soon be history.  Leaving the same smaller, older resorts that RCI and II have really been awash in since day one.  Can you say point system to regain any hope pf of II's long term survival? 



Dave M said:


> *Restrictions on Resale Weeks*
> I have now had it confirmed that Marriott does plans to implement something that would make resale purchases less attractive. The only current significant restriction is that a Marriott week purchased from a third party cannot be traded for Marriott Rewards points.
> 
> What will that new restriction be? I'm sure there will be much speculation on that until it's implemented. If I had to guess, based solely on the information I have obtained, I would say that those buying from Marriott will be able to reserve their weeks earlier that those who buy resale. (Please note that the last statement is an opinion, not fact.)
> ...



Holy Wyndham!  So Marriott is looking to devalue resales - who would have thought? If they try pulling things like extended reservation periods depending on how you bought the owners had better get their documents out and start reading where it is allowed. 99% sure it isn't as that is part of the basic ownership rights spelled out in the offering  - no mere rules can alter those rights.  All in all makes me happy I never did buy into Marriott despite the great resorts. Too easy to get them without owning and now it sounds like the resale values, something they have had second only to DVC so far,  are going to tank as well if the ROFR hasn't done the job already. 

A great example of why buying any timeshare at a premium for the name or current operational model is a big mistake. Everything changes over time but n inexpensive purchase price is forever and can almost always be resold for at least the same amount. Makes Wyndham points look great while the Marriotts, DVC's, etc that carry a premium are all likely losers in the long term.


----------



## BocaBum99 (Dec 14, 2007)

Thanks for the info Dave.  It will be interesting to see what Marriott implements for internal exchange rules.  I wonder if they will simply use a season to season, size to size trading power formula.  My guess is they will use something like that since it is the easiest thing to explain to new customers.  That will obviously result in severe stock out situations for high demand weeks.  But, the real purpose of Marriott having an exchange system is probably to have a sales tool.  It certainly isn't meant to help owners.  Of course, a point based system would be better, but that would take a lot of guts by Marriott to create.  Not sure they would do it without some experience running an exchange company.

I would be surprised if Marriott offered a reservation window advantage to owners who purchase directly from Marriott over those who don't.  The reason I say that is that for resorts like the Maui Marriott, such an advantage would pretty much shut them out from every booking a summer week.  That would result in a class action law suit, in my opinion.

Most developers who want to create a differentiated product, create add on benefits that only transfer if purchased from the developer.  Hotel points is an example.  So are VIP benefits.  My guess is that Marriott will create a VIP program that you only get if you purchase from Marriott.  And, there may be some advantages in the internal exchange system if you purchase from Marriott.  For instance, a 3-day early access to inventory available for exchange for each unit deposited that was purchased from Marriott.  

If Marriott offered such a feature, it would not interfere with the basic rights of owners to reserve their weeks.  The internal exchange program is optional, so owners can't claim to be losing rights.  They can pretty much do anything they want with it.

This sounds very good to owners who purchase directly from Marriott and Marriott itself.

This is very bad for resale owners.  I think I will sell all of my Marriott's now.


----------



## Docklander (Dec 14, 2007)

Dave M said:


> *Restrictions on Resale Weeks*
> I have now had it confirmed that Marriott does plans to implement something that would make resale purchases less attractive. The only current significant restriction is that a Marriott week purchased from a third party cannot be traded for Marriott Rewards points.
> 
> What will that new restriction be? I'm sure there will be much speculation on that until it's implemented. If I had to guess, based solely on the information I have obtained, I would say that those buying from Marriott will be able to reserve their weeks earlier that those who buy resale. (Please note that the last statement is an opinion, not fact.)
> ...



IMHO Marriott really isn't thinking clearly if/when they go ahead with this. As everyone seems to agree the resale value of units will collapse (with or without ROFR) if the penalties for buying resale get worse, so, how does Marriott plan on explaining to owners buying TSs at $100k+ (Marco Island) that their considerable outlay will be hugely devalued infront of their very eyes as soon as they sign on the dotted line. Sure, at first owners may or may not think beyond enjoying their vacations and selling won't enter their minds, but after a while the TS community at large will work it out and people (no matter how dumb) will not part with their hard earned $$$ just to see it disappear within seconds (not even a car devalues like that!). Marriott's prices will have to come down to far lower levels if they are to continue enticing owners into their system and that just doesn't make financial sense. A story involving a goose and a golden egg springs to mind!


----------



## CMF (Dec 14, 2007)

*I knew a bounty on new info would amount to something!*

A good chunk of information here.  Dave your major award is on it's way 

Thanks!
Charles


----------



## sdtugger (Dec 14, 2007)

*Very Interesting*

Thanks Dave!

It will be very interesting to see what is implemented, if anything.  Of the things thrown out so far, the only thing that would significantly devalue resale weeks is any restriction on making reservations.  Given the current mad rush to make reservations for the most popular weeks exactly at 9 a.m. the day they open, any restriction on that right (even a matter of hours) would effectively eliminate the most popular weeks as a reservation option.  Obviously, that would make a resale week much less valuable.

Let's use Maui as an example.  When I called to make a reservation for Thanksgiving 2008, all saturday checkins were gone 14 seconds after 9 a.m. and all checkins were gone within a few hours of 9 a.m.  If you said that resales couldn't make reservations until even noon the day the reservations window opened, then you'd eliminate any chance these folks would have of ever reserving a popular week.  If you made it 6 months, resale owners would be left with just a few very low demand weeks to reserve.

With the amount of money spent even on resales, I suspect that this sort of move by Marriott would be challenged in court.

As a resale owner who would apparently be grandfathered, the only impact to me appears to be that when I decide to sell that my week would be worth dramatically less.  Far from making me want to quickly gobble up additional wouldbe grandfathered weeks, this potential move makes me question whether I want to own the weeks I have for fear of not being able to sell them should the need arise.  It certainly doesn't make me want to run out and buy additional weeks from Marriott that would be worth even less than the current almost 50% immediate devaluation as soon as you sign the papers.  Still, I doubt many direct from Marriott purchasers are sophisticated enough to even consider worth of resale at the time of purchase.

Wouldn't Marriott be buying back all of these weeks for a song using ROFR?  If they can pull this off, this would be very profitable for Marriott.  But, I have to believe that a court fight will take place and I suspect that Marriott would have a tough time in court (even if the contracts allow them to do this).


----------



## BocaBum99 (Dec 14, 2007)

Marriott wouldn't dare interfere with basic ownership rights.  As soon as they do that, they will be in severe doo-doo with the Real Estate Commissions of the states in which they do business.  Those commissions are there to protect the consumers.  If you own a floating week, there has to be a reservation system in place to allocate weeks.  Impairing that right would certainly be scrutinized significantly by real estate commissioners.
I agree with the notion of a class action law suit should that happen.   I don't think Marriott is that dumb.

But, monkeying around with the exchange features and making them optional could work.

As for dropping resale prices, consumers will be oblivious to a significant drop in resale price.  Look at Wyndham and Westgate.  Huge drops in resale value and people keep buying from the developer.  The same will be true for Marriott with the biggest difference being that they will be able to buy back inventory for a lower price than they do today thereby increasing their profit for having a rule that allows them to devalue a product to the point that owners must give them away for next to nothing so that they can sell it again for full value.

I have always wondered why ROFR has never been challenged in court.  I think it's because most people even on this board believe that ROFR is a good thing.   It isn't, but that is a subject for another thread.


----------



## sdtugger (Dec 14, 2007)

*Not Much Impact if not Reservations*

I don't see much impact on resale prices if the changes aren't limits to resale reservations.  And, I think Marriott can get away with changes to the exchange system much easier than the reservation system.  I suppose I can picture some kind of draconian exchange limitation (or as they would phrase it--benefit to Marriott direct purchasers).  But, for a place like Maui, the value would still be there if you can still reserve and use or rent the place.  And, you always have other trading services that you can try.

Now, the big question for me???  Can I get a refund on the 5 year II membership I purchased when the change happens????


----------



## gores95 (Dec 14, 2007)

Does anyone know if Marriott agents actually view this site or am I just being naive????


----------



## littlestar (Dec 14, 2007)

I wonder if it's a good idea to get rid of all Marriott weeks now? I don't want to own something that has no resale value in the future. Ugh. If I had paid big bucks for a Marrriott week, I would be very, very worried about this.

At least so far, DVC has made no difference for resale purchases. My DVC keeps looking better and better to me, and my little EOY VRI managed resort in the mountains. Maybe I should have just stuck to my plan of buying Interval cash Getaways at Horizons Orlando and Cypress Harbour (since we travel off season) and not even bought another Marriott week. Why bother with owning and having risk - just rent a Marriott from an owner that's taking all the risk!


----------



## m61376 (Dec 14, 2007)

gores95 said:


> Does anyone know if Marriott agents actually view this site or am I just being naive????



I strongly suspect that at least some representatives do. Last year, when there were some heated discussions regarding the Surf Club and palapa policies, which provoked some rather nasty SC bashing, for lack of a better description, I did have one of the powers-that-be thank me for my positive comments which I had posted about the resort. I son't remember if it was a Board member ir Marriott employee, but I remember being surprised that the comments were read.

Dave- thanks for being on top of this, as usual. What you've posted confirms my suspicions and makes sense for Marriott, to some degree. I think grandfathering existing owners will be an essential component of any program instituted. 

It will be a delicate balancing act for Marriott to institute policies that will tip the scales in favor of developer purchases without too severely undermining the resale market. I think they face a huge challenge trying to sell to retirees especially if the resale values plummet because of reservation or trading restrictions, since buying to use for the next 10-20 years will be less attractive if people don't feel they have much equity. If new resale buyers aren't allowed to make reservations at the same time as developer buyers, then I would expect the resale prices to plummet. If they change the exchange system, penalizing future resale buyers, I think it would have less of an impact on the resale value, but would undermine Marriott's internal trading system, because more units would be deposited into II and, with fewer Marriotts in II, would likely be fabulous traders.

For those of us sitting on the fence about making another purchase (like me), I think the handwriting is on the wall.

Thanks again for your expert input!


----------



## Stefa (Dec 14, 2007)

littlestar said:


> I wonder if it's a good idea to get rid of all Marriott weeks now? I don't want to own something that has no resale value in the future. Ugh. If I had paid big bucks for a Marrriott week, I would be very, very worried about this.
> 
> At least so far, DVC has made no difference for resale purchases. My DVC keeps looking better and better to me.



We are struggling with the decision whether or not to buy.  We own with Starwood and they have an unequal system where some resale owners have access to their internal trading system while others don't.   

Although it would be illegal for Marriott to restrict owners' use of their home resort, they could do what Starwood does and deny and/or restrict some owners' access to the new system.


----------



## LAX Mom (Dec 14, 2007)

Thanks for the info Dave!

Do you have any thoughts about a "Flexchange" type of system with the new Marriott exchange program? It seems to me that they would have to relax trading requirements at some point. You can't expect to fill a popular week at a place like Maui at the last minute with a "like to like" exchange. Lots of great Marriott weeks would remain empty if it took a comparable exchange to book Maui, even at the last minute. Perhaps Marriott won't include "Flexchange" in their program, but in my opinion that would be a huge mistake.


----------



## CMF (Dec 14, 2007)

Perhaps the resale restrictions would apply to weeks sold by Marriott after the new rules are in place, i.e., only new Marriott developer sales will be subject to the resale restrictions.

I can't see Marriott changing the rules midstream, but I don't have a problem with attaching restrictions to new developer sales. If this is the case, resales of weeks that were originally sold by Marriott before the rule change date will be more valuable than resales of weeks sold by Marriott after the rule change.

Charles


----------



## m61376 (Dec 14, 2007)

Charles- that makes a lot of sense, because then not only would current resale owners be grandfathered, but current developer owners would be protected from a likely drop in resale value. Moreover, the purchase provisions and understandings that went along with the initial sale would remain intact; no one could accuse Marriott of changing the rules that they purchased under.


----------



## suenmike32 (Dec 14, 2007)

Between yesterday's news on the steroid scandal and today's news of the possibility that Marriott would implement a policy that could prove devastating for re-sale owners, (when they choose to sell), it brings to mind the tearful plea  a young fan made to Shoeless Joe Jackson 88 years ago….    
              "Say it ain't so Joe"

I for one sure hope it ain't


----------



## Dave M (Dec 14, 2007)

To respond to a number of issues/questions raised here:

*Flexchange*
No, I have no information on how Flexchange or any other aspect of Marriott's internal exchange system would work. My understanding is Marriott is still working on the development of the program.

*Who from Marriott looks at this forum?*
Yes, we know that a variety of Marriott people look at what's posted here - from corporate people to sales people to individual resort general managers. A few (such as, about two months ago, a corporate person in connection with an alleged problem at a particular resort) even post on this forum (rarely) when a particular need arises.

*Will the resale market collapse?*
I doubt that the resale market will "collapse" when Marriott introduces the new resale restrictions. I don’t think that any changes that are made will “prove devastating for re-sale owners”. Currently, there is a restriction (exchange for points) that some people view as significant, yet Marriott is one of the very few chains where you can buy from the developer and - for most resorts- expect to get your money back on a resale after 5-7 years or so. Marriott isn't a dummy. Whatever they introduce will be calculated to maintain a reasonable resale market while, at the same time, encouraging people to buy from Marriott. It's a delicate balancing act and you can be sure Marriott is acutely aware of the need for that balance.

I see no reason to sell a Marriott week now if like your resort, the exchanges you get with a Marriott week and the overall Marriott program. As I stated, I don't think the resale market will collapse. There might be a slight downward burp in resale prices, but who knows. 

*Legal Issues*
As for legal issues with whatever Marriott introduces, I agree that "Marriott wouldn't dare interfere with basic ownership rights", especially those that are protected by the legal documents (the CC&Rs) for our individual resorts. I think there is a lot of premature speculation here. You can bet that Marriott has its best internal and external lawyers reviewing every detail of what it might implement and that it is also carefully considering the public relations aspects of what it might implement. That wouldn't necessarily stop a lawsuit from those who might be unhappy at the changes, but why get riled now when we don't know exactly what the changes will be?

*II - refunds and effect of these changes*
As for II refunds, my understanding is that II will give refunds for a prorated period of unused membership, if you terminate your membership. However, I don't have any idea whether Marriott's internal exchange system (which will utilize II's current system) will be tied in some way to II membership. Let's wait and see.

As for whether Marriott's new internal exchange system will hurt II, I'm not sure of that, at least not significantly. Marriott will still be paying fees to II for the use of their software. Also, non-Marriott owners who want to exchange into Marriotts will still be able to do so through II, just as they do now. That's because Marriott owners will still exchange through II for exchanges to non-Marriott resorts, thus providing II with those deposits. Also, it's not certain what Marriott will do with weeks we deposit for internal exchanges that are never confirmed, but it's possible that some of those weeks might wind up in II's inventory.

*   *   *   *   *

I will try to talk to some of my other contacts and find out more info, but these are topics where there just isn’t much firm info yet.


----------



## CMF (Dec 14, 2007)

*Please explain when you have a chance.*



Dave M said:


> That's because Marriott owners will still exchange through II for exchanges to Marriott.




Dave, can you explain this.  Isn't this what the internal system is supposed to replace?

Charles "The Dense"


----------



## Dave M (Dec 14, 2007)

Oops! 

Thanks for the catch, Charles. Although I normally don't like to go back and materially change my posts after someone has responded, I will in this case - for accurate reporting. 

I should have said, "That's because Marriott owners will still exchange through II for exchanges to non-Marriott resorts, thus providing II with those deposits."


----------



## BocaBum99 (Dec 14, 2007)

Actually, how would Marriott prevent other Marriott owners from exchanging through II?

Let's say that a Marriott owner exchanges out for a Four Seasons week.  A deposit needs to be made into II.

Then later, another Marriott owner who made a deposit with II sees a Marriott exchange and makes it.

Isn't that a Marriott to Marriott exchange?  There is no way for Marriott to stop this from happening.


----------



## timeos2 (Dec 14, 2007)

*It might help those that still use II*



BocaBum99 said:


> Actually, how would Marriott prevent other Marriott owners from exchanging through II?
> 
> Let's say that a Marriott owner exchanges out for a Four Seasons week.  A deposit needs to be made into II.
> 
> ...



Unless they keep a heavy hand in it trades with II might actually improve if Marriott had an internal system for the majority of trades.  Since the inventory would be reduced value should rise (it happened noticeably with Wastegate in RCI when the majority of units shifted to II) and it may give the owners the right to reserve a week and then deposit that exact week - not the one Marriott chooses - to II.  Again a potential for better trade power.


----------



## Dave M (Dec 14, 2007)

> Actually, how would Marriott prevent other Marriott owners from exchanging through II?


The easiest for Marriott to stop it would be for Marriott to terminate its relationship with II, something it doesn't plan to do. 

However, it’s possible that Marriott could put a block in its agreement with II that would prevent a Marriott owner from exchanging his/her Marriott into another Marriott through II. That would merely be an extension of a variety of blocking agreements that II currently has with numerous resort chains. I have no idea whether Marriott contemplates doing that.


----------



## Dave M (Dec 14, 2007)

timeos2 said:


> ... it may give the owners the right to reserve a week and then deposit that exact week - not the one Marriott chooses - to II.


I'm confused. Unlike some other resort chains, Marriott owners have that right today. That's what I always do and - as part of planning for the best exchange possible - is standard advice on this forum: Reserve the best week you can and then deposit that with II.


----------



## jancurious (Dec 14, 2007)

Dave,
Once again...thank you for providing our forum with this information.  I think the news is encouraging  (resales being grandfathered) and it's nice to know approximately when to expect this since some of us put in exchange requests over 12 months out.

I think we will all be anxiously awaiting more details to find out how we can best tweak the new system to get the most value from our weeks.

Jan


----------



## Hoc (Dec 14, 2007)

Lawlar said:


> Marriott obviously isn’t thinking about the best interests of its customers or their legal rights.



That is a kind of shocking statement, coming from a retired attorney.  For at least the past five years, it has been painfully obvious that Marriott never thinks about the best interests of its customers or their legal rights, except for how to get around them if necessary to maximize Marriott's profit.

I keep warning people out there: Do not think of Marriott as a beneficent uncle, waiting to make your life better.  Marriott is a business, and an extremely avaricious one, at that.  You own a Marriott timeshare because it gets you where you want to go, or because you like the timeshare you own for traveling.  But if you are relying on Marriott's generosity, you will always be sorely disappointed.


----------



## timeos2 (Dec 14, 2007)

Dave M said:


> I'm confused. Unlike some other resort chains, Marriott owners have that right today. That's what I always do and - as part of planning for the best exchange possible - is standard advice on this forum: Reserve the best week you can and then deposit that with II.



Dave - If that is the way it works now, a rarity in most larger systems, then the process already gets that advantage. The only worry would be that Marriott might adopt the more restrictive approach of DVC/Wastegate and others that make the owners accept whatever week the management decides to place with II - not the week the owner requests, which could hurt trade power.  

One thing for sure. Any change gets people worked up as there are always new winners and new losers compared to the way things are now.  Most judge the value of a change by which side their ownership falls on.


----------



## Hoc (Dec 14, 2007)

If I had to guess how Marriott will devalue resales in the future, and given what I have seen from Marriott in the past, this is the most likely scenario:  Everyone who owns now will be allowed to participate in the new internal trading system (eventually paying an exchange fee that gradually rises).  However, buyers who purchase resale after the implementation of the internal trading system date will have to pay a higher fee to trade internally.

Only a guess, but it's based on what I've seen from Marriott over the past few years.


----------



## ciscogizmo1 (Dec 14, 2007)

BocaBum99 said:


> Let's say that a Marriott owner exchanges out for a Four Seasons week.  A deposit needs to be made into II.
> 
> Then later, another Marriott owner who made a deposit with II sees a Marriott exchange and makes it.




This is exactly why I'm not for an internal trade system.  I do this all the time.   I say let's try a new resort and then, I see a Marriott that looks better.  I've traded outside of Marriott 3 times out of my 7 exchanges.  I think an internal system would limit our choices of resorts.


----------



## Hoc (Dec 14, 2007)

littlestar said:


> I wonder if it's a good idea to get rid of all Marriott weeks now?



Depends on whether or not existing resale owners will be grandfathered in or not.  If not, then you might consider getting rid of your resales.  If you will be grandfathered in, it would be foolish to get rid of your resales, because you could only get them back with the same benefits if you repurchased from Marriott at triple the price.

When I decided that I did not like the situation at Streamside, I sold my Aspen unit a few months before their resale value went into the toilet.  (The person who bought it has since become a fairly active tugger, and he is actually quite happy with the purchase because of the condition of the unit. I, on the other hand, am happy I sold.) At the time I sold it, I did not know about all of the huge annual fees and special assessments that were coming down the pike, but I sure am glad that I got out of it before they did.

The resale value of the unit is now almost nothing, so I am glad I got out.  But it will probably go back up again in a couple of years, and as long as the new owner gets good use out of it in the interim, he really should not care about resale value.

So, should you sell now?  It depends on your circumstances, your need for the unit, and what Marriott does with existing resale owners.  All are in flux, and anything could happen.


----------



## Lawlar (Dec 14, 2007)

*Possible Restrictions Resale Purchasers*



Hoc said:


> That is a kind of shocking statement, coming from a retired attorney.  For at least the past five years, it has been painfully obvious that Marriott never thinks about the best interests of its customers or their legal rights, except for how to get around them if necessary to maximize Marriott's profit.




Even lawyers, retired or not, can engage in occasional folly.  For now, I am hoping for the best from Marriott.  I’ve enjoyed their hotels for many years and I enjoyed my recent stay at Timber Lodge.  

The high pressure sales tactics of their salespeople leaves a lot to be desired.  But I’m optimistic (though watchful) that in the long term my relationship with Marriott will be positive.

I just reread Marriott’s Disclosure Statement for MOC and my deed.  The Disclosure Statement contains language only a lawyer could enjoy reading.  Nevertheless, the document makes clear that “owners” (which include those who purchase at resale) have the right to reserve their dates 12 months in advance (multiple owners can do it 13 months in advance).  There is no language to indicate that Marriott can unilaterally change that right.  

The Disclosure Statement does provide, in bold print, that Marriott can restrict participation in its rewards programs to the original owners who purchased through Marriott (and their heirs).  There is no similar warning with respect to changing the rights of resale owners to select occupancy dates.  

I don’t want to see Marriott do anything that would harm the long-term value of TSs. Restricting the rights of those who purchase at resale will lower the value of TSs. That is in no one’s best interest.

[I am glad that I purchased a fixed unit.]


----------



## Carmel85 (Dec 14, 2007)

dave,

Thank you for the info about Marriott. Any new info about II and other Hotel timeshares exchanges like Hyatt,Starwood,Hilton or DVC?


----------



## Pit (Dec 14, 2007)

Grandfathering current resale owners will not protect them from devaluation. If resale weeks are devalued, then all resales are devalued. The resale week you now own will drop in value if reservation and/or exchange restrictions are put in place.

So, it could very well make sense to sell out before the devaluation, but there is too little known about these pending changes to make an informed decision now.

Marriott could implement an internal exchange system similar to SVN, in which case float owners exchanging through II would lose the ability to chose the deposited week. Still, there is no shortage of Starwood properties in II inventory. There are plenty of owners exchanging out of the Starwood system, despite an internal exchange system. I would expect that to hold true for Marriott as well.


----------



## ciscogizmo1 (Dec 14, 2007)

Pit said:


> Marriott could implement an internal exchange system similar to SVN, in which case float owners exchanging through II would lose the ability to chose the deposited week. Still, there is no shortage of Starwood properties in II inventory. There are plenty of owners exchanging out of the Starwood system, despite an internal exchange system. I would expect that to hold true for Marriott as well.



One thing I like about the Marriott system over SVN is that you can trade at 12 months.  With SVN the earliest you can trade internally is 8 months.  I know that is fine for a lot of people but not for those with airfare miles.  It would be hard for me to use my frequent flyer miles at 8 months.  So, I'd really be disappointed if Marriott went this route.  I own a Westin and I don't like their internal trading.   I've gotten better trades with Marriott with less stress..


----------



## timeos2 (Dec 14, 2007)

Pit said:


> Grandfathering current resale owners will not protect them from devaluation. If resale weeks are devalued, then all resales are devalued. The resale week you now own will drop in value if reservation and/or exchange restrictions are put in place.



And whats Grandfathered in can later be unceremoniously booted out. Ask the Wyndham resale buyers who were VIP & grandfathered in only to get a letter this year stating that going forward they are just more dirt - er, standard owners since they dared to buy sensibly at resale.  The only thing you buy are the base rights. Those cannot be changed (or at least can be challenged as illegal moves by a corrupt management/developer). All the perks, non-disclosure items can and most likely will be changed or lost over time so never pay a premium to get those.


----------



## Steve (Dec 14, 2007)

I think the most likely restriction on new resale buyers, if there is one, would be that future resale buyers might not be allowed to participate in the internal exchange system.  If a Marriott owner who bought resale wants to trade into another Marriott, then they will have to use II.  They can still make the trade, but not through Marriott.  So they will have fewer Marriott weeks to choose from and won't have priority. 

This is what Four Seasons does.  Resale owners can still exchange their Four Seasons week into another Four Seasons week...but they have to go through II.  They can't trade directly through Four Seasons.  Owners who buy through Four Seasons (or an approved reseller) have a choice.  They can exchange directly through Four Seasons or they can exchange from one Four Seasons to another (or to any other II resort) through II. 

This makes sense to me.  It creates a definite incentive to buy through the developer.  But it still allows buyers who buy resale a chance to exchange to another Marriott...they just have to do so externally.  So there should not be a collapse of the value of resale weeks. I think this type of policy would create a good balance.  

On the other hand, I can't imagine Marriott completely prohibiting Marriott owners from exchanging into other Marriotts through a block in II.  I also can't imagine them giving reservation preferences at an owner's home resort to those who buy from the developer as this would certainly lead to lawsuits.  Time will tell, and it will be fun to watch.

Steve


----------



## CMF (Dec 14, 2007)

*Steve is on to something.*

There is nothing to prevent Marriott from giving a new benefit to direct sales buyers and denying the benefit to resale buyers.  Resale buyers can't complain that they did not get something they never bargained for.  This can still be detrimental to resale buyers if, for instance, the majority of direct buyers move into a system [taking their weeks with then] that the resale buyers can not participate in.

Charles


----------



## CMF (Dec 14, 2007)

*More*

.. . . . Direct buyers would have access to all the weeks deposited with Marriott and resale buyers would only have the scraps deposited with II. The problem can be compounded if the other majors follow suit. And, even worse if the majors contract with II to block exchanges between their weeks.

This is a nightmare scenario for resale buyers.

Charles


----------



## tombo (Dec 14, 2007)

I want to go to a Marriott sales presentation soon and have a salesman tell me that resales will have limited benefits in the future. I want him to tell me how smart I am to buy from marriott because anyone who buys resale will not get the same benefits (ie anyone I sell my high dollar purchase to).  I will look him in the eye and ask him if I look so stupid that I want to buy something that I am being told in advance will be devalued by the resort costing me a lot of money and making it harder to sell if I ever want to or need to. I can't imagine buying any high ticket item after being told by the salesman that the seller is going to activelly try to make my purchase less valuable in the future!! 

What a win for Marriott. They devalue weeks purchased from them by limiting how far in advance a reservation can be made if purchased resale and limiting internal trades. Then they ROFR the really low resale offers they created by devaluing resales. Now Marriott gets to sell the weeks they stole using ROFR for 10's of thousands of dollars with all the developer's rights included that weren't included when the poor previous owner took a bath trying to resell his week that Marriott sold him. Genius. Corporate greed at it's finest.

Obviously new Marriott customers are also looking to buy Automobiles that can be serviced Mon-Sat if purchased from the dealership, but can only get serviced on Tuesdays and Thursdays every other week if sold to someone else by you after you purchase it from the dealership. They must also looking to buy land with lake priviledges, that loses the lake priviledges if it is resold. I am sure that anyone the land is sold to won't care that they don't get the same benefits as their neighbors. We want computers that only get the internet if purchased from Dell, but if resold no internet, but they will still play video games.

Heck Marriott is tapping a whole new market of customers wanting to pay top dollar for something that will be almost useless if resold. I am sure other companies will not follow suit as people will not be treated that way and become repeat customers. My only Marriott is now for sale before the prices drop and I will not buy another Marriott ever again. Trick me once shame on Marriott, trick me twice shame on me!!


----------



## JimIg23 (Dec 14, 2007)

When we talk to grandfathering in resales, would that allow the current resale owners to have the right to use the internal trading system?  

Also, What are people thoughts about the lenght of time Marriott will allow a deposit to exchange?  In my case, I was looking for another EOY even so I can get the 13 month reservation, but I plan on depositing my cheaper week into II and trade for the following odd year.  Do people think that the new system may make you trade in the same year?  If so, I would rather buy an odd EOY now instead.


----------



## CMF (Dec 14, 2007)

*Educated consumers.*



tombo said:


> I want to go to a Marriott sales presentation soon and have a salesman tell me that resales will have limited benefits in the future. I want him to tell me how smart I am to buy from marriott because anyone who buys resale will not get the same benefits (ie anyone I sell my high dollar purchase to).  I will look him in the eye and ask him if I look so stupid that I want to buy something that I am being told in advance will be devalued by the resort costing me a lot of money and making it harder to sell if I ever want to or need to. I can't imagine buying any high ticket item after being told by the salesman that the seller is going to activelly try to make my purchase less valuable in the future!!
> 
> What a win for Marriott. They devalue weeks purchased from them by limiting how far in advance a reservation can be made if purchased resale and limiting internal trades. Then they ROFR the really low resale offers they created by devaluing resales. Now Marriott gets to sell the weeks they stole using ROFR for 10's of thousands of dollars with all the developer's rights included that weren't included when the poor previous owner took a bath trying to resell his week that Marriott sold him. Genius. Corporate greed at it's finest.
> 
> ...



But most folks will still buy from Marriott because they won't know to ask these questions.  They'll be wowed with pictures of beautiful resorts and promises and sign on the doted line. 

I'd like to know how many Marriott owners are resale buyers?  Is it 7%?

Charles


----------



## cp73 (Dec 14, 2007)

Dave M said:


> *Internal Exchanges*
> *Grandfathering?* Yes, Marriott plans to grandfather all owners, presumably as of the date the change is announced or implemented.



This is interesting and I am glad to see it. All previous buyers/owners will be treated the same. No special treatment to Marriott buyers in the past. Your deal is over. Both groups will pay fees. Only future new buyers will be incentivized in this deal to purchase directly from Marriott. Maybe their annual fees will be free, or how about free trading. It will be factored into the future purchase prices, not the purchases that you or I made. I guess they decided the points weren't enough. But we all knew that.

I think this can only be good for us. Now we will have a choice of systems to trade through (Marriott & II). I dont expect II to stand still and let Marriott take all their business. There are approximately 650,000 Marriott timeshare owners out there now today. We will not be forgotten.

Also I haven't read on this board many complaints about II.


----------



## dioxide45 (Dec 14, 2007)

CMF said:


> .. .And, even worse if the majors contract with II to block exchanges between their weeks.
> 
> This is a nightmare scenario for resale buyers.
> 
> Charles



I don't see any benefit for II do contract with the majors to do this. Remember, II is a business that needs to offer a service. If they don't offer a service of value, then they don't make any money. Ultimatly II could start their own trading preference among brands, much like they have today for Marriott. They could say that those with Marriott can have a preference of 3 days over the other non Marriott's, similar to today. The same for the other majors. This would entice people to trade their weeks back in to II rather than with their resort chains.


----------



## Pit (Dec 14, 2007)

dioxide45 said:


> They could say that those with Marriott can have a preference of 3 days over the other non Marriott's, similar to today. The same for the other majors. This would entice people to trade their weeks back in to II rather than with their resort chains.



Well, except for those that own non-majors. 

It seems likely that II will get the leftovers from the internal system, similar to their relationship with SVN. But, there will be plenty of nice leftovers. It does Marriott no good to let units sit empty -- that represents lost revenue and a lost opportunity to sell. I don't see any benefit for Marriott to block II trades.


----------



## Pit (Dec 14, 2007)

JimIg23 said:


> When we talk to grandfathering in resales, would that allow the current resale owners to have the right to use the internal trading system?



Yes, according to the information Dave posted. Should you decide to sell, the right to use the internal system does not transfer, thereby devaluing your ownership interest. This is similar to the way SVN operates at their so called "voluntary" resorts.


----------



## bobcat (Dec 14, 2007)

Dave M said:


> The easiest for Marriott to stop it would be for Marriott to terminate its relationship with II, something it doesn't plan to do.
> 
> However, it’s possible that Marriott could put a block in its agreement with II that would prevent a Marriott owner from exchanging his/her Marriott into another Marriott through II. That would merely be an extension of a variety of blocking agreements that II currently has with numerous resort chains. I have no idea whether Marriott contemplates doing that.



We were at HH in Sept. Went on a tour of Surfwatch.  Salesman said changes will be made to their system. He said ,right now if you called Marriott they could tell you if you purchased resales. A letter is placed next to your name. I never heard of this. We own a Marriott on HH resale. He went into reasons why we should have purchased from Marriott.  We would not buy his reasons to pay alot more .


----------



## dlpearson (Dec 15, 2007)

bobcat said:


> He said ,right now if you called Marriott they could tell you if you purchased resales. A letter is placed next to your name. I never heard of this.



That's true.  In the Marriott system there is an "R" next to your week/name if you bought resale.  I'm not sure if II gets that info (and if they do, they currently don't care).

I had a couple of Marriott sales people tell me this over the years, and I saw it firsthand when we took a tour in Boston a few months ago.  The sales rep looked up our existing info (we have 1 developer, 1 resale week) and he could tell me which we bought from Marriott and which we bought resale.

David


----------



## Dave M (Dec 15, 2007)

bobcat said:


> He said ,right now if you called Marriott they could tell you if you purchased resales. A letter is placed next to your name. I never heard of this.


That is correct and has been discussed here previously. That's how Marriott can determine that, if you are a resale owner, you aren't eligible to trade the use of your week for Marriott Rewards points.


----------



## bobcat (Dec 15, 2007)

dlpearson said:


> That's true.  In the Marriott system there is an "R" next to your week/name if you bought resale.  I'm not sure if II gets that info (and if they do, they currently don't care).
> 
> I had a couple of Marriott sales people tell me this over the years, and I saw it firsthand when we took a tour in Boston a few months ago.  The sales rep looked up our existing info (we have 1 developer, 1 resale week) and he could tell me which we bought from Marriott and which we bought resale.
> 
> David



Thank You.  BOBCAT


----------



## taffy19 (Dec 15, 2007)

Forget the trading.  Rent your week out and with that money rent from another Marriott owner or at another resort.  This is what we are planning to do.  You don't have to sweat it for months on end if you will get an exchange or not.

We got rid of our first Marriott because it became almost impossible to make reservations at our home resort for the dates we wanted to go because they introduced the advantage of owning multiple weeks which made reserving holidays weeks or early March impossible for us on the first or even the second try.  I don't know how they could do this legally to the current owners then but they did.  It restricted our right of making reservations a lot.  JMHO.  

We had better luck with exchanging but we bought for use mainly at our home resort.  It will be so easy from now on with our fixed week and fixed unit otherwise we wouldn't have bought another Marriott timeshare again.  

We learned the hard way that they can make changes any time they feel like it even if it hurts the present owners.  It made a big difference for us and our resort was sold out already when we bought so they can't blame it on that.

It's going to be interesting what the Marriott will do as they can't make so many present owners upset today or make the resale values drop too much but I doubt if the grandfathered ones will.  The new ones after that may be another story?


----------



## bobcat (Dec 15, 2007)

iconnections said:


> Forget the trading.  Rent your week out and with that money rent from another Marriott owner or at another resort.  This is what we are planning to do.  You don't have to sweat it for months on end if you will get an exchange or not.
> 
> We got rid of our first Marriott because it became almost impossible to make reservations at our home resort for the dates we wanted to go because they introduced the advantage of owning multiple weeks which made reserving holidays weeks or early March impossible for us on the first or even the second try.  I don't know how they could do this legally to the current owners then but they did.  It restricted our right of making reservations a lot.  JMHO.
> 
> ...



I wonder if it would help to purchase Marriott stock and go to there yearly stockholders meeting. ?When they ask for questions, bring up what we are talking about. I have done this in the past with other co's.


----------



## Hoc (Dec 15, 2007)

cp73 said:


> This is interesting and I am glad to see it. All previous buyers/owners will be treated the same. No special treatment to Marriott buyers in the past. Your deal is over.



Not quite right.  Those who bought from Marriott will still be able to trade their units for points, while those who bought resale will not.  I don't see this as much of a benefit, since I think that what you pay for Marriott points in annual fees is more than they are worth, but that's an argument we've been having around here for years.  It's why I bought resale and others bought from Marriott.


----------



## BocaBum99 (Dec 15, 2007)

Dave M said:


> The easiest for Marriott to stop it would be for Marriott to terminate its relationship with II, something it doesn't plan to do.
> 
> However, it’s possible that Marriott could put a block in its agreement with II that would prevent a Marriott owner from exchanging his/her Marriott into another Marriott through II. That would merely be an extension of a variety of blocking agreements that II currently has with numerous resort chains. I have no idea whether Marriott contemplates doing that.



Wouldn't this require an owner to know a priori whether or not they were going to exchange for a Marrriott or a non-Marriott?

What if they didn't know yet and wanted to test the market.  If they deposit with II and later want to deposit use it for another Marriott, what do they do?  I don't see it as practical.  And, it would really tick off a lot of Marriott owners.

If Marriott is going to do this, I suggest they create a full point system and allow all owners a one time opportunity to join for free.  Then, after that date, charge $2995.  Then, Marriott owners can have trading power defined by a number of points and they can change the affiliation agreement with II to havre a WorldMark like interface where they have access to II and they just pay a certain number of points for an exchange.  Then, Marriott controls what gets depoisted into II and the owner gets a choice of either Marriott or II resorts.

This will achieve the differentiator between developer sales and resale.  They could offer the internal exchange as an add on that they only get if buy direct from Marriott or pay the participation fee.

In the program, it would require a window for booking their week.  And, if by 6 months, they don't, it automatically gets deposited into the internal exchange programn.  They need to auto deposit feature, otherwise, they won't have enough inventory for this internla exchange to be meaningful.

That's what I would do.


----------



## buzzy (Dec 15, 2007)

If this all happens and the resale market does tank for those that want to sell their resales, wouldn't it be in the best interest of the seller to just price it where Marriott exercises ROFR? I wonder if the ROFR amount be lower compared to what it is today?


----------



## dougp26364 (Dec 15, 2007)

Boy is there a LOT of wild speculation going on in this thread. Keep in mind guys, NOTHING has happened yet. The only thing DaveM is certain of is that an internal exchange program is being CONTIMPLATED with a projected implimentation date of Jan. 2009.

But, since  everyone is tossing out their 2 cents worth:

*Resale values*: So long as Marriott exercises ROFR I don't see a significant drop in what it costs to buy and get a unit resale. Deal have been reported lost at Manor Club at the $7,900 level. If someone really wants a Manor Club week, at this point they'd still have to pay more than $7,900. So long as they exercise ROFR after any change I don't see that price point dropping. 


*Internal trades*: Keep in mind that nothing has happened yet but, I see things changing to a system like what BocaBum has stated a couple of posts above me. It's a system the seems to work for their Worldmark week and a system currently in use with DRI. You own your deed and can exchange it through I.I. whether you purchased resale or from the developer. If you purchased through the developer you have a points value to your week and can use those points internally or through I.I. for exchanges. If you bought resale then you'd need to buy into the internal points based trading system. 

*Grandfathering*: Everyone seems to forget that term. DaveM has speculated that resale weeks bought previous to any change will keep their rights and not lose anything. Now, if Marriott did go to some sort of points option for internal exchanges, I don't think grandfathering will get you into that system. I think there will still be internal exchanges possible through I.I. just like there is now but, I think owners who bought through Marriott or have paid a joiner fee will have enhanced privlidges which could, in effect, reduce the number of I.I. internal exchange opportunities for resale buyers......or, it might not have any effect at all. 

*choosing you week vs developer choosing deposits*: IMO a double edged sword. I've read SO MANY reports about the difficulty of getting desirable weeks because you have to be on the phone/computer right at the opening bell. Some areas are almost impossible to exchange into and some resorts have issues with owner dissatisfaction because they can't get a week in their season that works for them. Newport Coast comes to mind for families wanting a summer week.

With a points based internal reservation system like DRI and apparently SVN have, owners have first crack at the most desiralble weeks to use. It's a pitty when you own in a system and would love to stay somewhere on a desirable week only to learn that week has been taken and used mostly as exchange bait with I.I. I think it would be great if OWNERS recieved those desirable weeks ahead of exchangers. IOW, owners first. 

Contrary to popular belief and averaged value of all weeks isn't a bad thing. You know what the value of your ownership for exchange is at all time. Not what it's worth if you can manage to reserve one particular week. Reserving the most popular weeks for exchange denies owners in that system the ability to enjoy that part of their ownership, leads to frustration and complicates the exchange process by making you have to be on the phone like a radio call in give away (Caller number 5 get's tickets to the big concert).

I belong to two systems that utilize this sort of system and I much prefer them to Marriott's get up, hit the phone, keep dialing and praying system. I can get what I want, when I want it and be comfortable doing it. HGVC's and DRI's systems are GREAT if you want to get into Hawaii on just about any date I've looked at. I know EXACTLY what it takes and I don't have to make a deposit and request over a year in advance and HOPE that I have enough trade power. 

Heck, the way Marriott is set up now I don't stand a chance of getting Memorial day week at my home resort in FL unless I'm on the phone and get lucky.......REALLY LUCKY. With HGVC or DRI it's not such a big deal. In fact it's really pretty easy since no one is trying to reserve that week just to trade it. They only reserve that week if they want to use it. So, IMO bring on the point system and even, balance trade values through I.I. It will make my life easier and less complicated. 

I'll close by saying everyone needs to keep in mind that most of this thread is PURE SPECULATION. About the only information I trust is when DaveM says Marriott is working on developing an internal exchange program and it's target date for implimination is Jan. 2009. Everything beyond that is just a wild guess.


----------



## saturn28 (Dec 15, 2007)

How about Marriott using a points based system similar to Hyatt, where you can convert your fixed week to points. With the points you would be able to do an internal Marriott Vacation Club trade and be able to book stays from  1 to 7 nights. 

However, if you are a resale buyer you would only be able to do internal Marriott Vacation Club trades for a full week and would not be able to convert your fixed week to Marriott Vacation Club points. 

Each owner whether weeks or points, or multiple week owners would have the same reservation window to book an internal exchange, or book their home week. The internal exchange would cost $39.

Marriott could use the week and unit that it shows on your deed as your fixed week that you would only have to call in, or use the website to confirm within a certain time period or that unit would be released for booking to other Marriott owners. If you wanted to book another week within your season at your resort, there would be another date that that would have to be done by. Either excepting your fixed week or booking another week within your season at your resort would be done at no cost.

If you are a weeks owner, you would still be able to book out of your season through Interval Interantional for an $89 exchange fee, but not through an internal exchange. When weeks owners did an internal exhchange they would only be able to book within their season or to a lower season.

Points owners would be able to book wherever their points would take them.

In addition, if Marriott exercised the ROFR on these units they would not be able to re-sell them as weeks that could be converted to Marriott Vacation Club points. They would have to re-sell them as regular weeks.

This would essentially leave the present system as it is, with the addition of a new internal trading system for weeks,  and allow Marriott to ad a the new perk of a points based system without punishing resale buyers and sellers. This new Marriott Vacation Club points system would be a perk that would be an addition to the present perk of converting your week to Marriott Hotel points that are used for hotel stays, car rentals, and air fare.


----------



## Dave M (Dec 15, 2007)

As Doug states, there is a lot of speculation in this thread. Some of it is quite thoughtful and matches some rumors I have heard. I won't comment on specifics because I don't like to report rumors, preferring to report only those tidbits that I believe I have been able to confirm.

I currently have no more info than I have posted here, but I hope to get more. I don't expect any more immediately, since the person I want to check with is not currently available. Stay tuned over the next several weeks.

If I get more significant info, I'll likely start a new thread so that readers don't have to wade through a myriad of posts to find it.


----------



## Lawlar (Dec 15, 2007)

*Changing the Rules Midstream*



iconnections said:


> We got rid of our first Marriott because it became almost impossible to make reservations at our home resort for the dates we wanted to go because they introduced the advantage of owning multiple weeks which made reserving holidays weeks or early March impossible for us on the first or even the second try.  I don't know how they could do this legally to the current owners then but they did.  It restricted our right of making reservations a lot.  JMHO.
> 
> We had better luck with exchanging but we bought for use mainly at our home resort.  It will be so easy from now on with our fixed week and fixed unit otherwise we wouldn't have bought another Marriott timeshare again.
> 
> We learned the hard way that they can make changes any time they feel like it even if it hurts the present owners.  It made a big difference for us and our resort was sold out already when we bought so they can't blame it on that.



Does anyone know how Marriott was able to change the rules midstream to give multiple owners a one-month priority over nonowners? [That is before my time here.]

Did any of the owners oppose the Marriott change?  [Owners really need an association that fights for their rights.]

I think Marriott would have to change the CC&Rs that govern each location.  That wouldn’t be easy, unless Marriott has sufficient voting power to override the interests of the owners.  

The MOC Disclosure Statement that was given to me clearly describes the CC&Rs as creating a right for owners (even those who bought a resale unit) as having a 12-13 month reservation system.  I don’t see that changing unless they can amend the CC&Rs.  [Even my old gray cells can think of lots of legal recourse that owners would have if Marriott tried to force through this type of change in the rules.)


----------



## timeos2 (Dec 15, 2007)

*Do it unless we're caught. Developer motto #1*



Lawlar said:


> Does anyone know how Marriott was able to change the rules midstream to give multiple owners a one-month priority over nonowners? [That is before my time here.]
> 
> Did any of the owners oppose the Marriott change?  [Owners really need an association that fights for their rights.]
> 
> ...



I have never seen anyone post how they did it - it seems on the surface to simply have been implemented legal or not.  Like the giant boil on timesharing called Wastegate many of these developer controlled resorts simply do as they please regardless of rules, law or owner wishes.  They depend on the fact that owners lack control of the Associations, pay little attention and won't put up the money needed to fight in most cases.  Usually they are right. If that occurred in the the case of Marriott or if they actually had a legal way to accomplish an undermining of buyers rights is an unknown. In either case it doesn't give a warm feeling or make anyone want to spend big bucks for a Marriott if thats the way they behave.


----------



## dioxide45 (Dec 15, 2007)

buzzy said:


> If this all happens and the resale market does tank for those that want to sell their resales, wouldn't it be in the best interest of the seller to just price it where Marriott exercises ROFR? I wonder if the ROFR amount be lower compared to what it is today?



If the resale market tanks, it is likely that the developer market won't be far behind. Marriott will only buy back what it thinks it can resell. They aren't in the business of holding inventory, that costs them money.


----------



## dougp26364 (Dec 15, 2007)

saturn28 said:


> How about Marriott using a points based system similar to Hyatt, where you can convert your fixed week to points. With the points you would be able to do an internal Marriott Vacation Club trade and be able to book stays from  1 to 7 nights.
> 
> However, if you are a resale buyer you would only be able to do internal Marriott Vacation Club trades for a full week and would not be able to convert your fixed week to Marriott Vacation Club points.
> 
> ...



Your theory is blown in your first paragraph. Marriott has very few fixed weeks and those are pretty much holiday weeks that cost a premium price. Other than those few weeks, Marriott weeks are sold as floating weeks in an assigned season. It would be impossible to force owners into the fixed week on their contracts. Especially since it's written into the contract that it is for deeding purposes.


----------



## saturn28 (Dec 15, 2007)

dougp26364 said:


> Your theory is blown in your first paragraph. Marriott has very few fixed weeks and those are pretty much holiday weeks that cost a premium price. Other than those few weeks, Marriott weeks are sold as floating weeks in an assigned season. It would be impossible to force owners into the fixed week on their contracts. Especially since it's written into the contract that it is for deeding purposes.



You didn't read the whole post. The week and unit on your deed can be used as a starting point. Some people may be happy with that week or unit. However, you would still have the option, as you do now, to book any week within your season at no cost. So, you won't be forced to take anything. Everything remains the same. Only you have the added option of keeping the week and unit on your deed it you choose.

The way Hyatt works is you have a fixed week. Then one year before your check-in date there is a 6 month window that you have to decide whether you will occupy your unit or do an internal trade to another resort. Marriott could do a similar thing and within that time period you could decide whether you want to occupy the unit on your deed or reserve another unit and week within your same season at your home resort. The only reason I put this in is because people are complaining about having to phone in exactly one year ahead of time to reserve their unit. If you are going to use your unit to trade, I have found most dates in a season trade pretty much the same.


----------



## LAX Mom (Dec 15, 2007)

Marriott could/should  keep it very simple. Why wouldn't something like this work:

Starting Jan. 1, 2009 Marriott will have their own internal exchange system, which will be available to owners who purchase from Marriott (and prior resale owners grandfathered in). If you purchase resale after Jan. 1, your options are to either use your week, rent it or exchange with II or another 3rd party exchange company. 

This could be a big selling point for Marriott- Buy from us and you can tap into the vast market of Marriott timeshares!! Most Marriott owners, especially high-end Marriotts would likely stay with the Marriott system. The sales reps would say "Why deposit with II and trade down? Stay with Marriott and you'll be assured of getting Marriott quality."

Marriott has to keep it simple and fairly easy to understand. If it is too complicated their sales force will never be able to explain it to the vacationers listing to the pitch. 

After reading all these posts my head was spinning with all the possiblities!! It just occured to me that Marriott has to keep it fairly simple! Most owners/prospective owners would be scared away by a complicated system!!


----------



## timeos2 (Dec 15, 2007)

*They do better when resales tank - why worry?*



dioxide45 said:


> If the resale market tanks, it is likely that the developer market won't be far behind. Marriott will only buy back what it thinks it can resell. They aren't in the business of holding inventory, that costs them money.



If that were true then Wyndham's Fairshare Plus Points retail sales should have faltered years ago while they were still called Fairfield.  They have been on a campaign to devalue resale points for almost a decade.  And it worked despite the fact that 99.9 percent of the true value/rights of a FSP point stays intact regardless of how you buy - resale or retail -  they continue to sell retail at 150% or more over resale and people think they are getting value!  It's an effective blend of FUD (fear uncertainty doubt), puffery ("You'll be a Golden Idol VIP with only 8 million FSP points  - you even get a free newspaper!")  and the simple fact that most buyers roped into a sales pitch simply don't have the knowledge needed to counteract the well rehearsed sales pressure.  

It doesn't explain how anyone from TUG or other informational sites can still get roped into these "deals" (and they do) except that the weasels are THAT good at what they do.  How scary is that?  

In any case at least so far the typical tactics of developers works better than the simple fact that for most resorts/systems resale represents not only exactly the same product but by far the better purchase value.  Until that changes - and there is zero signs it will - they aren't going to worry about what resales sell for.  It doesn't impact them.


----------



## saturn28 (Dec 15, 2007)

LAX Mom said:


> Marriott could/should  keep it very simple. Why wouldn't something like this work:
> 
> Starting Jan. 1, 2009 Marriott will have their own internal exchange system, which will be available to owners who purchase from Marriott (and prior resale owners grandfathered in). If you purchase resale after Jan. 1, your options are to either use your week, rent it or exchange with II or another 3rd party exchange company.
> 
> ...


 
The reason I don't like this is because if you buy resale you don't get a shot at all of the Marriott inventory. You have no priority at all being a Marriott owner. You might as well purchase some $500 timeshare on Ebay because you will get the same opportunity to reserve whatever Marriott weeks Interval gets. In addition, who would want to buy the Marriott week that you purchased from Marriott when you would just be getting all the scraps that Marriott first class owners don't want.


----------



## JimIg23 (Dec 15, 2007)

I am assuming Horizons at Branson and Orlando owners will be included in the new system with the same rights?


----------



## saturn28 (Dec 15, 2007)

It seems to me rather than taking things away from owners a better approach is to let everyone keep what they have, but include new perks that only people that purchase through Marriott get.


----------



## dioxide45 (Dec 15, 2007)

JimIg23 said:


> I am assuming Horizons at Branson and Orlando owners will be included in the new system with the same rights?



One never knows. Thought today a Horizons owner is treated no different than a MCVI resort owner. I don't see why that would be different in the future.


----------



## Dean (Dec 15, 2007)

Lawlar said:


> There is nothing in my deed or contract that says that a person buying my TS will be penalized for buying it resale.  Marriott obviously isn’t thinking about the best interests of its customers or their legal rights.
> 
> Marriott should focus its efforts on finding ways to enhance the value of the TSs it sells.  By reducing the reservation rights of a TS after it is sold on the resale market two things will happen: (1) Fewer people will want to buy a Marriott TS on the resale market and (2) Marriott owners will have to reduce their asking prices dramatically if they want to sell their TSs.  A Marriott TS will have little value after it is purchased from Marriott.
> 
> ...


Marriott reserves the right to make reservation changes without any input from the members.  With that ability they can take a lot of latitude though I would agree that it's very unlikely they'd try to alter access to reservations in favor of one group vs another.  But what they could do is limit or prevent access to other benefits.  While I too suspect they'd grandfather current owners, I don't think they'd be required to.  They certainly dropped certain resort like a hot potato even though some on this board (and thread) said they'd never do so for reasons including PR.  And while certain changes could affect the resale value for those not bought through Marriott, I suspect Marriott sees that as a plus and not a negative.  Many other resorts have sold timeshares that have a value pennies on the dollar and have fared just fine else there wouldn't be many timeshares in the world.

While I'm not convinced this is going to go forward, it is interesting to think of an internal and external exchange system with Marriott not much different than many of the current points systems where you can exchange internally or through II or RCI (sometimes either for a given resort).  While Marriott could possibly block exchanges back in through II, I doubt they will but rather than II will not give any preference to Marriott to Marriott exchanges.  The truth is that it might actually enhance the trading within II for certain resorts/weeks.  I think to block exchanges back in they'd have to go to a corporate account much like DVC or Starwood and I think that would hurt Marriott more than anything else being discussed here.



Lawlar said:


> Does anyone know how Marriott was able to change the rules midstream to give multiple owners a one-month priority over nonowners? [That is before my time here.]
> 
> Did any of the owners oppose the Marriott change?  [Owners really need an association that fights for their rights.]
> 
> ...


As I said above, Marriott has total control and it's stated in the POS very clearly.  But I do think they'd have a world of trouble if they tried to give preference to one group vs another based on this issue in terms of reserving what they own.  If that happened I think the lawsuit would come and Marriott would lose that battle.  But for all the rest, Marriott would have essentially any option they wanted.  They would not even have a legal obligation to grandfather current owners that bought resale or even those that bought from Marriott in reality.


----------



## LAX Mom (Dec 15, 2007)

saturn28 said:


> The reason I don't like this is because if you buy resale you don't get a shot at all of the Marriott inventory. You have no priority at all being a Marriott owner. You might as well purchase some $500 timeshare on Ebay because you will get the same opportunity to reserve whatever Marriott weeks Interval gets. In addition, who would want to buy the Marriott week that you purchased from Marriott when you would just be getting all the scraps that Marriott first class owners don't want.



That's exactly why it works for Marriott. They can tell potential purchasers- "Buy directly from Marriott, you'll have access to the most inventory!!"

This could be a huge selling point for Marriott in the future!!


----------



## alanraycole (Dec 15, 2007)

*I would love a Marriott internal exchange!*

I own both Hilton and Marriott timeshares. I overwhelmingly prefer the Hilton system because of the internal exchange system. I will never own another Marriott because they don't have one. I am presently looking for a good deal on more Hilton time.

The only thing that disturbs me about the Marriott exchange system as described here is the limitation of resale buyers participating. Hilton resale buyers have the same rights in the internal exchange system. Marriott would do well to copy HGVC internal exchange system exactly.

If for no other reason... less than a month away and I can log on to hgvc.com and reserve a week in Hawaii or anywhere else! The same is true for every month of the calendar! Marriott owners wouldn't have anymore desparate races to reserve the ideal week, unless they plan on using it themselves. In HGVC, you don't reserve a week for exchange. In fact, you can't! The best weeks are saved for the owners who actually will use the time! RCI gets the leftovers and Hilton still has the highest trading power in RCI.

P.S. Hiltons and Marriotts sell for similar resale prices last time I checked, so the internal exchange system itself wouldn't hurt that.


----------



## timeos2 (Dec 15, 2007)

Lawlar said:


> The MOC Disclosure Statement that was given to me clearly describes the CC&Rs as creating a right for owners (even those who bought a resale unit) as having a 12-13 month reservation system. I don’t see that changing unless they can amend the CC&Rs. [Even my old gray cells can think of lots of legal recourse that owners would have if Marriott tried to force through this type of change in the rules.)





Dean said:


> As I said above, Marriott has total control and it's stated in the POS very clearly.  But I do think they'd have a world of trouble if they tried to give preference to one group vs another based on this issue in terms of reserving what they own.  If that happened I think the lawsuit would come and Marriott would lose that battle.  But for all the rest, Marriott would have essentially any option they wanted.  They would not even have a legal obligation to grandfather current owners that bought resale or even those that bought from Marriott in reality.



If the rules are spelled out in the disclosure filed with the state as outlined above by Lawlar then Marriott does not have the right to change it at their whim.  The one rock any timeshare / condo purchase is based on is the disclosure and the words there are nearly impossible to change after the sale without a super majority vote of the ownership. A different version can be sold to new buyers but it wouldn't apply to prior sales or resales of those contracts as the original rules stay with the contract.   Of course a developer or management can choose to ignore it and figure no one will challenge - they could be right about that - but it would not be legal if it were challenged.  

Far too many developers try to push the limits for this type of critical owner right and it appears Marriott isn't above that dirty trick either.


----------



## hipslo (Dec 15, 2007)

saturn28 said:


> It seems to me rather than taking things away from owners a better approach is to let everyone keep what they have, but include new perks that only people that purchase through Marriott get.



Like make reservations 14 months in advance?


----------



## saturn28 (Dec 15, 2007)

LAX Mom said:


> That's exactly why it works for Marriott. They can tell potential purchasers- "Buy directly from Marriott, you'll have access to the most inventory!!"
> 
> This could be a huge selling point for Marriott in the future!!



Yea it may work great for Marriott in the beginning. But after those same buyers, as well as thousands more, walk out the door and find the unit they just purchased is worth 10 percent of what they just paid because of the restrictions on resales. We will see how it affects Marriott sales. They won't be getting many repeat buyers that is for sure.


----------



## Dave M (Dec 15, 2007)

As saturn28  suggests, I think a number of people here who seem to think Marriott can't change its reservations program for resale owners are missing a key point. The various POS documents are written in a permissive manner, not a restrictive manner. In other words, they state that an owner _may_ make reservations 12 months in advance. They don't state that an owner _cannot_ make a reservation more than 12 months in advance. 

Those MOC documents also say, as I recall, that an owner of two _MOC_ weeks _may_ make multiple-week reservations 13 months in advance. Some years ago, Marriott quietly extended the 13-month reservations benefit to those who any two or more weeks, whether at the same resort or not. However, I don't believe there is any language in the older POS documents that specifically allows that. There is one active TUGger who fought Marriott on that point, posting here about it for several years, and ultimately got nowhere.

Accordingly, if one gets creative, one could imagine many ways that Marriott could _add_ or _extend_ some benefits so as to treat all current owners and those who purchase direct from Marriott in the future differently from those who purchase resale weeks in the future. Based on the POS wording, it might be easy for Marriott to do that. 

Even if that's not what Marriott is planning - and I have no knowledge either way - Marriott has obviously had its best legal minds review every detail of its plans. 

Marriott has made many changes (e.g., instituting new fees for a variety of services (e.g., for ROFR waiver) and, so far, no court has ever overturned any of those changes. I'm betting that whatever changes Marriott makes here will also withstand any legal scrutiny.

As for whether resale values will plummet, I think Marriott is a lot smater than we are and won't make changes so significant as to allow that to happen.


----------



## AwayWeGo (Dec 15, 2007)

*Luxury Timeshare Digs For Motel 6 & Super 8 Rates.*




timeos2 said:


> In either case it doesn't give a warm feeling or make anyone want to spend big bucks for a Marriott if thats the way they behave.


Shux, I already don't want to spend big bux on a Marriott or any timeshare. 

Half the fun -- closer to 3/4 of the fun*,* even more like 9/10 of the fun -- is getting an outstanding resale timeshare for nickels on the full-freight dollar. 

-- Alan Cole, McLean (Fairfax), Virginia, USA.​


----------



## JimH (Dec 15, 2007)

All the major hotel chains have the same wish - find a way to offer an incentive to buy from the developer rather than resale. How about the top 5 or 6 brands getting together to create an exchange company (exclusively for those who bought from the developer) to trade entirely among those  5 or 6 top brands. They could call it Very Nice Hotels International. This would be a significant benefit to those with developer weeks - a significant detriment to those that are resale and I don't think they would even have to grandfather it!


----------



## rmfine (Dec 15, 2007)

Alot of interesting thoughts here. From my perspective - I would doubt this program ever gets implemented:

1. *Anti-trust/ Anti-competetive issues.* The implementation of this type of program clearly creates a competetive disadvantage to anyone who wants to sell their timeshare on their own or using another outside broker. As an owner - am I to be penalized because I desire to avoid paying Marriott's 40% resale commission - or I wish to make a private sale to a friend or relative. 

Additionally, this type of change would also be a direct assault on the resale brokerage community - which I don't think will roll over and play dead should an attempt to implement such a policy be tried.

2. *Interval International.* You can be assured II is not going to let this business walk out the door. I would image II would take a much more aggressive stance with respect to exchange fees in order to keep this business in house.

3. *Fragmentation of exchange weeks.* If weeks are split between II and a Marriott internal systems ..... owners actually have fewer choices. Difficult trades become more difficult for all owners whether you bought from Marriott or outside of Marriott. 

4. *Homeowner Association Issues.* The overwhelming number of MVC resorts are Homeowner owned and controlled. Besides addressing the fragmentation issue as noted above - certainly the HOA boards have an obligation to assure all owners receive equal and fair treatment by the management company. 

Marriott HOA boards do hold some leverage with  MVCI when it comes to these issues. It is important to remember Marriott "works for / is paid by" the homeowner association - and certainly HOA boards have the ability to require fair and equal access of all owners to exchanges by their management company (ie, Marriott) regardless of how the timeshare is purchased. 

For several years the idea of a Marriott internal exchange has been discussed. My personal feelings are that Marriott continues to allow this rumour to propagate through its sales operations so as to cast a shadow over the resale market. While Marriott may implement an internal program somewhere down the road - I believe even Marriott realizes it must walk a tight rope so as to not be anticompetetive and penalize owners that desire to sell or buy their Marriott timeshare through other venues other than Marriott.


----------



## JimIg23 (Dec 15, 2007)

I guess one of my questions is how profitable are the timeshares that have created a internal trading system which resales now command pennies on the dollar as oppose to Marriott and Disney?   Is it so much higher that it would be worth Marriott distroying their resale market and create the negative opinions that follows?  Does Disney make profits in line with Marriott?  They allow resale the same benefits as others.


----------



## dougp26364 (Dec 15, 2007)

saturn28 said:


> You didn't read the whole post. The week and unit on your deed can be used as a starting point. Some people may be happy with that week or unit. However, you would still have the option, as you do now, to book any week within your season at no cost. So, you won't be forced to take anything. Everything remains the same. Only you have the added option of keeping the week and unit on your deed it you choose.
> 
> The way Hyatt works is you have a fixed week. Then one year before your check-in date there is a 6 month window that you have to decide whether you will occupy your unit or do an internal trade to another resort. Marriott could do a similar thing and within that time period you could decide whether you want to occupy the unit on your deed or reserve another unit and week within your same season at your home resort. The only reason I put this in is because people are complaining about having to phone in exactly one year ahead of time to reserve their unit. If you are going to use your unit to trade, I have found most dates in a season trade pretty much the same.



No, I read the entire post. It's just that in Marriott's sales contract it states you don't have any right to that specific unit and that specific week. It's only for deeding purposes. 

Marriott might be able to change it's program but it can't go back and change the written sales contracts it's been using. 

It's not a bad thought. It's just that because of the way units have been sold and the contracts that were written I don't believe it will be practical.


----------



## dougp26364 (Dec 15, 2007)

timeos2 said:


> If the rules are spelled out in the disclosure filed with the state as outlined above by Lawlar then Marriott does not have the right to change it at their whim.  The one rock any timeshare / condo purchase is based on is the disclosure and the words there are nearly impossible to change after the sale without a super majority vote of the ownership. A different version can be sold to new buyers but it wouldn't apply to prior sales or resales of those contracts as the original rules stay with the contract.   Of course a developer or management can choose to ignore it and figure no one will challenge - they could be right about that - but it would not be legal if it were challenged.
> 
> Far too many developers try to push the limits for this type of critical owner right and it appears Marriott isn't above that dirty trick either.



Keep in mind rules (not contracts but rules) can be changed by a vote. In many cases the developer has managed to own enough that they can vote in any change they want to vote in (or out).


----------



## Dean (Dec 15, 2007)

timeos2 said:


> If the rules are spelled out in the disclosure filed with the state as outlined above by Lawlar then Marriott does not have the right to change it at their whim.  The one rock any timeshare / condo purchase is based on is the disclosure and the words there are nearly impossible to change after the sale without a super majority vote of the ownership. A different version can be sold to new buyers but it wouldn't apply to prior sales or resales of those contracts as the original rules stay with the contract.   Of course a developer or management can choose to ignore it and figure no one will challenge - they could be right about that - but it would not be legal if it were challenged.
> 
> Far too many developers try to push the limits for this type of critical owner right and it appears Marriott isn't above that dirty trick either.


Per the Surfwatch POS exhibit F to the Master deed and c/w all I've seen


> ...the Management company or the Association, may without the consent of the owners and in it's reasonable business judgement , revise the reservation system from time to time ...


It goes on to discuss some of the things they could do including


> Such other conditions, restrictions and limitations as the management company or the association shall deem necessary under the circumstances to assure a manageable and fair system.


Under that type of legal restraints they were able to change to the current 12/13 month system.  While I think there are potential safeguards for home resort reservations that should prevent many potential abuses, this system allowed the 12/13 month reservation option.  Still, this would only help with a home resort and not any exchange or non home resort option where Marriott would have total control.  Regardless, every single change that benefits a given owner will likely negatively impact someone else.


----------



## littlestar (Dec 15, 2007)

JimIg23 said:


> I guess one of my questions is how profitable are the timeshares that have created a internal trading system which resales now command pennies on the dollar as oppose to Marriott and Disney?   Is it so much higher that it would be worth Marriott distroying their resale market and create the negative opinions that follows?  Does Disney make profits in line with Marriott?  They allow resale the same benefits as others.



We did okay when we sold some DVC points - we sold them for $11.00 more a point than what we paid direct from Disney. These points were bought in '02 and sold in '06. Of course, we didn't have to worry about Disney treating the new buyer as "second class."   I know with DVC being RTU that it will eventually go down in value, but with DVC (Disney), if you buy and use, say for 10 to 15 years, I believe you can more than get your money back out of a DVC purchase if your life circumstances change.

Some of this talk makes me think Marriott is starting to look more like Westgate or maybe Starwood. Starwood seems nutty to me with their mandatory and voluntary resorts. 

Hilton, Hyatt, and DVC bought as a resale (or maybe developer) look much more attractive to me right now than what Marriott does. Which is a real shame, because Marriott does have some nice resorts.


----------



## Lawlar (Dec 15, 2007)

*Marriott Apologist or Supporter of Timeshare Owners?*



Dave M said:


> As saturn28  suggests, I think a number of people here who seem to think Marriott can't change its reservations program for resale owners are missing a key point. The various POS documents are written in a permissive manner, not a restrictive manner. In other words, they state that an owner _may_ make reservations 12 months in advance. They don't state that an owner _cannot_ make a reservation more than 12 months in advance.
> 
> Those MOC documents also say, as I recall, that an owner of two _MOC_ weeks _may_ make multiple-week reservations 13 months in advance. Some years ago, Marriott quietly extended the 13-month reservations benefit to those who any two or more weeks, whether at the same resort or not. However, I don't believe there is any language in the older POS documents that specifically allows that. There is one active TUGger who fought Marriott on that point, posting here about it for several years, and ultimately got nowhere.
> 
> ...



Dave, I’m beginning to think your last name is Marriott.

 Does it concern you that Marriott, in your opinion, would write the rules in such a manner that it could change them for its own benefit whenever it wants? Are you comfortable with the idea that Marriott's lawyers are good at doing that sort of thing? Is that really what you mean, and is that really how you feel?

Do you care about the owners Dave?  [This is the Timeshare Owners Group - Isn't it?]


----------



## Dave M (Dec 15, 2007)

I'm not judging or lobbying. I'm reporting what I know, based on information from sources that have never been wrong over varying periods extending back at least six years. 

As to my opinions (e.g., comments regarding Marriott lawyers), such opinions, depending on the topic, are based partly on information given to me, partly based on my knowledge of the POS and program rules for three separate Marriotts and more than ten years of ownership, partly based on having immersed myself in an effort to know everything I can about Marriott because of my responsibility as moderator of this forum and partly based on the legal, finance and other roles that I have played and am still playing in large corporate and other business situations over the past 44 years. I work for a large manufacturing corporation that has no connection with Marriott.

Occasionally, there is a blending of what I state as fact and what I state as opinion. That can happen rarely, not necessarily in this thread, when I am given factual information that I am not authorized to disseminate immediately.

Whether a particular forthcoming change concerns me isn't pertinent to my reporting of it. I would do a disservice to participants here if I withheld information merely because I didn't like it.

I think my record for accuracy in reporting and in making predictions on this Marriott forum is unblemished. I hope to keep it that way and, thus, try to avoid making predictions that I can't support in some way. I think those that have observed my posts here for several years or more will back me up on that.

I wish I could report on what my sources of information are, but if I did, that would end the flow of information.

Edited to add: Regarding your unnecessarily harsh question about whether I care about Marriott owners, I am one and have owned multiple Marriott weeks for more than 10 years, purchasing my most recent one - from Marriott - about three years ago. Also, if I didn't care about Marriott owners, I wouldn't have more than 3,000 posts on this Marriott forum over the past 2 1/2 years!


----------



## Steel5Rings (Dec 15, 2007)

Lawlar said:


> Dave, I’m beginning to think your last name is Marriott.
> 
> Does it concern you that Marriott, in your opinion, would write the rules in such a manner that it could change them for its own benefit whenever it wants? Are you comfortable with the idea that Marriott's lawyers are good at doing that sort of thing? Is that really what you mean, and is that really how you feel?
> 
> Do you care about the owners Dave?  [This is the Timeshare Owners Group - Isn't it?]




Easy Cowboy!!! Easy There!!!

Dave has been a great resource for Marriott owners on this sight including myself.  He has great contacts inside MVCI and reports what he hears....he is hardly a shill for them.

That said, it is time that everyone wake up and understand that Marriott IS A BUSINESS!!!  BUSINESS EXIST TO MAKE MONEY!!!  I love the Marriott properties and am very happy to be an owner, but, as a former Streamside owner I can tell you in no uncertain terms that Marriott will do whatever it deems in it's best interest and for it's bottom line and damned the owners and HOA's.  The Marriott romantics on this board need to wake up.....jacked up manitance fees, increased management cost, dropping resorts after letting them decline, less value for MAR Points, the 13 month rule....and now the internal trade system.


----------



## alanraycole (Dec 15, 2007)

*What gives?*

I can understand the apprehension of us Marriott owners with any added limitations that resale owners may face. But, as long as resale owners have equal use of any future internal exchange, what misgivings could anyone have?  

I admit to only skimming this thread. But, I have been skimming it for comments on the internal exchange program itself. I haven't seen much... just hand-wringing over the limitations that resale buyers may face and the resulting diminishing resale value. 

Just for a minute, let's pretend that part of the plan was never proposed... what are the misgivings about an internal exchange system... how about a discussion of what our dream internal exchange system would be. Then, maybe, Marriott will read it and maybe even implement it... What are our dreams, not our fears?


----------



## LAX Mom (Dec 16, 2007)

alanraycole said:


> ... how about a discussion of what our dream internal exchange system would be. Then, maybe, Marriott will read it and maybe even implement it... What are our dreams, not our fears?



alanraycole-
I like your idea and I started a new thread. I think we should all list what we would like to see with a new Marriott internal exchange program.


----------



## taffy19 (Dec 16, 2007)

alanraycole said:


> Just for a minute, let's pretend that part of the plan was never proposed... what are the misgivings about an internal exchange system... how about a discussion of what our dream internal exchange system would be. Then, maybe, Marriott will read it and maybe even implement it... What are our dreams, not our fears?


It seems to me that the Hilton and Hyatt internal exchange systems have the most satisfied timeshare owners. I still don't see how the Marriott can make exchanges for less than three days like the Hilton can.

The Marriott has a week based system but some resorts let you split the week. I still believe that a lot of people prefer staying a whole week at a resort if they have to drive far or fly to them or the stay is hardly worth it. They wouldn't be happy if they can no longer reserve a full week as that is what they bought originally.

The Hyatt system seems to be the system they can follow so owners can reserve the full week for a certain time and when it goes to the internal system, it can be exchanged for by the day as the owners gave the week up so both features will be available that way.

This is how I see it. I cannot see how the Marriott could become a point-based system like the Hilton is. Their system seems to work great and people love the flexibility and it is very fair as everyone has a chance to get a good week if they save up their points and you don't have to keep buying more weeks just to keep competing with each other for the best weeks. That was a great deal for the Marriott bottom line but expensive in maintenance fees alone for the timeshare owners.


----------



## Dean (Dec 16, 2007)

Lawlar said:


> Dave, I’m beginning to think your last name is Marriott.
> 
> Does it concern you that Marriott, in your opinion, would write the rules in such a manner that it could change them for its own benefit whenever it wants? Are you comfortable with the idea that Marriott's lawyers are good at doing that sort of thing? Is that really what you mean, and is that really how you feel?
> 
> Do you care about the owners Dave?  [This is the Timeshare Owners Group - Isn't it?]


I can tell you that every one of the systems I have any familiarity with has this power, it's likely all the rest do too.  Sometimes I think people have higher expectations of some systems than others and thus hold them to a higher standard.  I am comfortable that Marriott will be reasonable but I am certain there will be losers with any change.  That's one of the reasons I've frequently told the DVC members that timeshares are a risky venture.  DVC has a lot more power than does Marriott as they retain the right to vote for you.


----------



## Pit (Dec 16, 2007)

Lawlar said:


> Do you care about the owners Dave?  [This is the Timeshare Owners Group - Isn't it?]



No reason to flame Dave. He's been a very reliable source of information on Marriott. Don't shoot the messenger.


----------



## PerryM (Dec 16, 2007)

*Ba humbug!*

This WM owner votes against this – it’s going to devalue WM credits as a result and I’m going to have to actually stay at WM resorts instead of at Marriotts.  This is not what I signed up for and I’m writing Santa today and complain!

This would mean that in addition to our 1 Gold Summit Watch I might have to buy back my week 51 and 52 at MountainSide SummitWatch, and plain Jane Platinum weeks at Maui.  This would hurt a lot in 2008.

So I vote no – stick with a proven winner of a system Marriott.  Just my one vote here.

If Marriott does dump II for an internal exchange system here are my recommendations:

1)	Do NOT screw around with making one Marriott owner better than another – just ask FF/Wyndham what that does for resale values.  No special advantage for making and using the new reservations system.

2)	Add the new exchange system “on top” of the existing system and let each owner decide if they want to continue the status quo or take advantage of the new system but make it voluntary

3)	Charge $99 to convert; if the owner does it 6 months before a deadline.  After that charge 10% - 20% of the current sales price to convert a week later – that way any unit that did not convert in the beginning can convert at anytime.

4)	Charge $99 to deposit the unit into the system each year.

5)	Make the system a *Point Based System *based upon the rate Marriott charges rental rates (Call them Coins and not Points for less confusion).  E.g. if a 2BR week 52 at MountainSide rents from Marriott for $4,900 then the owner get’s 4,900 Coins and others shopping around pay 4,900 Coins to get that reservation - it never changes until it expires/exchanges 

6)	Allow banking of unused Coins into the next year and borrowing Coins from the next year – no cost to do this

7)	Allow one owner to move Coins from their account to another account via the Internet page.  This allows for renting of Coins between owners.  No fee for this

8)	Don’t screw around with removing anything that the owner paid for, like membership, when the unit is sold – even to a 3rd party, that membership goes with the unit

There Marriott, follow those rules and you will so dominate the timeshare market as to cause others to follow your lead.

But, as I stated I’m for the existing status quo – so Ba Humbug to Marriott.

If II had their head screwed on right they would adopt this Point system and offer it to Marriott as a Christmas gift in 2008 – they make the money exchanging (what they do best) and the Marriott salesreps do what they do best – spin Christmas stories.


----------



## PerryM (Dec 16, 2007)

*Grandfather knows best...*



Lawlar said:


> Dave, I’m beginning to think your last name is Marriott.
> 
> Does it concern you that Marriott, in your opinion, would write the rules in such a manner that it could change them for its own benefit whenever it wants? Are you comfortable with the idea that Marriott's lawyers are good at doing that sort of thing? Is that really what you mean, and is that really how you feel?
> 
> Do you care about the owners Dave?  [This is the Timeshare Owners Group - Isn't it?]




Lawlar, Dave has contacts within Marriott and I, for one, take advantage of information that I believe is better than 50/50; I suggest you might take advantage of Dave’s feelings as to what Marriott might do in this very very important area.

Based upon this release and past releases of similar feelings from Dave I will look to buy Marriott weeks in 2008 that I believe will benefit our way of using Marriott – resale of course.  I believe Marriott will offer an internal exchange system at some point (probably not mine) and know that Grandfathering will be a key part to leverage my money with Marriotts.

However, what happens on this little chat room is just a whimsical footnote  to the developers.  I truly believe that they start some of their management meetings with “Did you hear what TUG is saying today?”


----------



## Lawlar (Dec 16, 2007)

*Passive or Assertive Owners' Group?*



PerryM said:


> Lawlar, Dave has contacts within Marriott and I, for one, take advantage of information that I believe is better than 50/50; I suggest you might take advantage of Dave’s feelings as to what Marriott might do in this very very important area.
> 
> Based upon this release and past releases of similar feelings from Dave I will look to buy Marriott weeks in 2008 that I believe will benefit our way of using Marriott – resale of course.  I believe Marriott will offer an internal exchange system at some point (probably not mine) and know that Grandfathering will be a key part to leverage my money with Marriotts.
> 
> However, what happens on this little chat room is just a whimsical footnote  to the developers.  I truly believe that they start some of their management meetings with “Did you hear what TUG is saying today?”



     I didn’t mean to pick on Dave.  Maybe I had too much caffeine yesterday.  If my comments are seen as a personal attack on Dave, then I sincerely apologize.  Yes, I have seen Dave post some very positive and helpful information.  He is probably a great guy.

     But Perry, you express my concerns very clearly when you say: “However, what happens on this little chat room is just a whimsical footnote to the developers. I truly believe that they start some of their management meetings with “Did you hear what TUG is saying today?”

     Is that what TUG wants to be – just a place for whimsical chat?  When Marriott changed the rules to give priority to those who bought multiple weeks (see complaint from ICONNECTIONS and others) did TUG complain to Marriott that it was acting unethically?  If Marriott tries to implement a new policy that harms its customers, will TUG try to contact Marriott to mediate or oppose the new policy?  If not, then TUG is just a forum to explain Marriott’s policies and allow us owners to vent to no purpose.

     Dave said: “I'm not judging or lobbying. I'm reporting.”  OK.  That is helpful to put us on alert that something wicked this way comes.  But how about using his connections with Marriott to tell Marriott that TUG members believe that they are going to be harmed by this change.  It would be nice to think that Marriott is fully informed before it makes its decision.  If Marriott acts improperly then owners can find ways to oppose Marriott’s actions.

     I’m a 60s rebel.  I don’t like to see big business trample on the rights of its customers.  Many of Marriott’s TS owners are hard working people who believed the little white lies told to them by the salespeople. There are still a few businesses in this country that put the welfare of its customers first.  Unfortunately, that philosophy seems to be dying.  No wonder the rest of the world is losing respect for this country.


----------



## PerryM (Dec 16, 2007)

*A chuckle can change the world...*



Lawlar said:


> I didn’t mean to pick on Dave.  Maybe I had too much caffeine yesterday.  If my comments are seen as a personal attack on Dave, then I sincerely apologize.  Yes, I have seen Dave post some very positive and helpful information.  He is probably a great guy.
> 
> But Perry, you express my concerns very clearly when you say: “However, what happens on this little chat room is just a whimsical footnote to the developers. I truly believe that they start some of their management meetings with “Did you hear what TUG is saying today?”
> 
> ...




I am a very aggressive consumer – I fight for everything I buy/use.  However, there is a line between being a consumer and consumer activism – you get into politics.  TUG seems to stay away from political fights of one group of owners hell bent on destroying another group of owners – and for good reason.

Marriott has but one mission – the maximize the net worth of their stock investors.  We as their customers have some concern to Marriott – negative press at worst, and further areas to exploit at best.

To assume that we, their customers, or lawyers, or courts, know more than Marriott’s goal to maximize stockholders wealth is folly.

I owned 5 Marriott weeks, some were the most expensive weeks Marriott sold at that time, and sold all 5 of them and found ways to go right back to those same Marriotts at the same time for 1/10 the cost – I did my part to maximize my usage of funds invested in timeshares.

Did I dump Marriotts because of the 13 month rule – no.  Did I dump Marriotts because I couldn’t get the vacation reservation I wanted – no.  I dumped the Marriotts for the same reason their stockholders bought/sold Marriott stock – I found better uses of my money.

All that came about because I am a member of TUG and listen intensely to those that I believe know more than I do – Dave is one of them.  I contribute to TUG to repay the kind efforts of Dave and others who have helped me over the years.  (Some might not want my input but I offer it freely anyway).

I’m perfectly happy if TUG offers a whimsical opening to a timeshare developer’s management meeting.  Even if they consider us whimsical they still are listening and perhaps one day we might make an impact to them.  However, lawyers, courts, and lynch mobs are fought tooth and nail.

Good humor is based upon truth and planting a chuckle in the minds of the developer is, to me, priceless.


----------



## MikeM132 (Dec 16, 2007)

Lawlar said:


> There is nothing in my deed or contract that says that a person buying my TS will be penalized for buying it resale.  ..............................
> I’m really surprised that TS groups aren’t more active in advocating for the protection of their rights.



I am not familiar with anything in any deed I have with Marriott, nor in any documents from each timeshare that gives me any "rights" whatsover to exchange. I bought a timeshare and the right to use it. Exchanging is part of the Marriott program so long as they see fit to allow it. At least that's my worst-case expectation.


----------



## MikeM132 (Dec 16, 2007)

Perry: in any well-run corporation, the principal goal is profit, not stock appreciation. I would guess this is true within Marriott. You would think these two goals would follow each other closely, but then you would disregard buyouts, option-based compensation and other manipulations that you hear about too often where companies do exactly as you say--worry about stock price before profit. Long term this is not a good plan. Just a minor observation.


----------



## timeos2 (Dec 16, 2007)

*What level of input do you want?*



Lawlar said:


> But Perry, you express my concerns very clearly when you say: “However, what happens on this little chat room is just a whimsical footnote to the developers. I truly believe that they start some of their management meetings with “Did you hear what TUG is saying today?”
> 
> Is that what TUG wants to be – just a place for whimsical chat?  When Marriott changed the rules to give priority to those who bought multiple weeks (see complaint from ICONNECTIONS and others) did TUG complain to Marriott that it was acting unethically?  If Marriott tries to implement a new policy that harms its customers, will TUG try to contact Marriott to mediate or oppose the new policy?  If not, then TUG is just a forum to explain Marriott’s policies and allow us owners to vent to no purpose.
> 
> ...



There is a basic assumption one almost has to make when dealing with the bigger systems vs owning at an individual resort. If you buy into an independent, owner controlled resort that has voluntary affiliations with exchange groups such as RCI, II, or even some mini-systems like Diamond's Club (which has a plan that allows voluntary vs mandatory membership) then you have a direct voice on the ultimate control of that resort - the Board of Directors. But if you buy into a mini-system with ongoing developer control (Wyndham, the Diamond "Trust" Club, DVC, etc) you are basically accepting that you are along for the ride and have no say in how that operation is run. You better believe the first priority is to making money for the controlling group not the best interests of the individual buyers. Marriott blurs those lines more than most as they are both a central, controlling agent yet buyers get sold into a single resort they may or may not have a independent voice to look out for their interests.  

If you want to sit back and use what you are offered then a multi-resort system like DVC, Wyndham, Diamond with near total developer control is a way to go.  We own two "shares" (weeks) in one of those - Wyndham - and overall we're satisfied that what we pay gets us good value. But we are at the mercy of Wyndham as the two votes we hold pale under the massive voting power of the Developer and they will always win. 

On the other hand we own 4 other resorts that, in theory, are owner controlled and decisions are made at the "local" level by the owner elected Board.  All but one of those are very responsive to the desires of the owners and we feel our voices are heard in any operational decisions and they are focused on doing the best they can for the owners rather than the sales/developer. The exception is the nightmare operation of Wastegate which is the worst of a non-system but a continued (and most likely illegal) dominance by the developer that pays ZERO attention to any owner except to ensure payments. So even a so called owner controlled resort can be horribly mismanaged but that is the exception not the rule.  We like both types of ownership but have no delusions  that Wyndham would take steps to enhance owner value if it cost them even $.10 in corporate profits. It's just the way it is and if we don't like it we should sell. 

Marriott also seems to be moving toward the bastardized Wastegate model rather than the independent resort or mini-system routes. That just may be the worst of both worlds and one we would avoid owning.  

Finally there is a bigger issue that the formation of these mni-systems and large internal trade programs fosters.  It is a continuing fragmentation of the available timeshare inventory into small, exclusive groups rather than a master clearinghouse that RCI once represented.  It is getting harder and harder to obtain a large cross section  of inventory using trades while the availability of specific resorts and dates as rentals are becoming the real method of "exchange". It just utilizes cash rather than a week for week or points based barter.  Ultimately that may be the most efficient way for owners to "exchange" outside of any inexpensive internal method offered.  It certainly opens the greatest number of opportunities for exact resorts/times/units that the old exchange services of RCI. II, etc could never offer. Maybe it really is the market's way of saying this is what we want.


----------



## PerryM (Dec 16, 2007)

*It always comes down to money....something easy to measure*



MikeM132 said:


> Perry: in any well-run corporation, the principal goal is profit, not stock appreciation. I would guess this is true within Marriott. You would think these two goals would follow each other closely, but then you would disregard buyouts, option-based compensation and other manipulations that you hear about too often where companies do exactly as you say--worry about stock price before profit. Long term this is not a good plan. Just a minor observation.




Once a company issues stock for the first time (IPO), the price of that stock will then change due to the efforts of 1) the company, 2) the market, and 3) outside influences like class action lawsuits or government edicts. However the company wants happy stockholders which mean doing a great job of whatever they do as a business.  Efficiency, expectations and evolution are items that greatly influence the market’s impression of how the company is doing.

I don’t know a thing about Marriott, the stock, but the timeshare division has a contribution that must meet top management’s expectations or heads will roll.  Management must decide if developing, implementing, and maintaining timeshare exchanges internally is worth the risk to Marriott and their jobs.  

Marriott is a timeshare developer and currently unloads exchanges to a 3rd party, II.  Does it make sense to the stockholders to take that business internally?  It sure does if it means money in their pockets with bigger dividends and/or other folks thinking that they must now own Marriott to get in on internal timeshare exchanges.  Failure to meet these expectations will be disastrous to Marriott.

I personally think that the risk is worth it if they do exchanges COMPLETELY different than now done and it becomes a sales tool.  I could go on and on how a Point System does this but no one here would care and Marriott already knows.

P.S.
Being a former software consultant I know that this is a HUGE undertaking - HUGE risk to all those Marriott employees involved - good luck guys.  II should really be the one to develop this and just pay them a royalty for each exchange.


----------



## littlestar (Dec 16, 2007)

Talked to my husband about this whole thread and he said we're keeping our little Marriott EOY week. He said as long as he can trade into Horizons Orlando with our Horizons Branson week, he's happy. That's what we bought it for.


----------



## Dean (Dec 16, 2007)

Lawlar said:


> I didn’t mean to pick on Dave.  Maybe I had too much caffeine yesterday.  If my comments are seen as a personal attack on Dave, then I sincerely apologize.  Yes, I have seen Dave post some very positive and helpful information.  He is probably a great guy.
> 
> But Perry, you express my concerns very clearly when you say: “However, what happens on this little chat room is just a whimsical footnote to the developers. I truly believe that they start some of their management meetings with “Did you hear what TUG is saying today?”
> 
> ...


I see TUG as a community to share information and not as an activist group though the individual members are free to complain if they want.  Timesharing today will often contact a resort or system regarding complaints and print both the complaint and response when appropriate.  The 12/13 month option likely predates many of the Marriott owners here, but certainly not all, as it's been in place a number of years.  It's also clearly within their right to do so in my reading of the legals documents I've seen from several of the resorts including the 3 newest on HH.  It's also positive to many owners while being negative to others, as is the case with essentially any system change.  Rather than getting mad, many of us went and bought other weeks to use the change to our advantage.

While I'd agree Marriott is in this to make money, they certainly know more about what's best for the resorts they manage than do the majority of the owners.  Most owners don't even vote when they have the opportunity and few can name members of their BOD.  Does that mean that every decision they make will work out for the best, certainly not, they do have a business to run and an industry reputation to maintain.  Thus having inferior resorts in their system hurts the other owners, stockholders and company in general.



littlestar said:


> Talked to my husband about this whole thread and he said we're keeping our little Marriott EOY week. He said as long as he can trade into Horizons Orlando with our Horizons Branson week, he's happy. That's what we bought it for.


Moving out would likely be a bad decision anyway, the question is about buying resale going forward.  While Marriott has not obligation to grandfather ANY owner, my expectation would be that they will.


----------



## Docklander (Dec 16, 2007)

Lawlar said:


> But how about using his connections with Marriott to tell Marriott that TUG members believe that they are going to be harmed by this change.  It would be nice to think that Marriott is fully informed before it makes its decision.  If Marriott acts improperly then owners can find ways to oppose Marriott’s actions.



With all due respect that is a particularly selfish and self-serving point of view. Firstly, Dave has no duty to anyone here to use his connections to _'tell Marriott that TUG members believe that they are going to be harmed by this change_' Secondly, if you seriously think that Marriott don't sit down and work out exactly what effect their decisions are going to have then you have very little understanding of how a corporation works. They know exactly what they're doing, they are fully informed of what people think & will think, they just play a balancing act of seeing how much they can get away with whilst maximising their profits at the expense of owners whilst keeping just short of starting a storm of protests that gives them unneeded bad press. Lastly, and going on from my first point, if you still believe that Marriott will be ill informed why don't you get in touch with them and put forward your case rather than expecting someone else to do it for you? Dave and I don't necessarily agree on a few things but he has been an invaluable source of info on Marriott both to me and the entire TUG population so please don't make wild comments as you have in your lasts two posts (eg. _'I’m beginning to think your last name is Marriott'_) as you might just make him wonder if it's really worth the hassle of posting info if he's just going to take flack - I know if it was me I'd seriously wonder.


----------



## timeos2 (Dec 16, 2007)

*Funny, it's always whats good for Marriott that the resort needs*



Dean said:


> While I'd agree Marriott is in this to make money, they certainly know more about what's best for the resorts they manage than do the majority of the owners.  Most owners don't even vote when they have the opportunity and few can name members of their BOD.  Does that mean that every decision they make will work out for the best, certainly not, they do have a business to run and an industry reputation to maintain.  Thus having inferior resorts in their system hurts the other owners



Well, reputation they now have in spades. They will unilaterally change procedures to favor new sales over existing owners. They will drop resorts through any means they can dream up when they age. They will put the Corporate income ahead of owners - everytime. And they know best for the resorts? Please.  

All excellent reasons to avoid ownership with such a group and just enjoy the decent resorts they offer through non-ownership rental or trade. Far cheaper and you aren't at risk for "whats best for Marriott".


----------



## Dean (Dec 16, 2007)

timeos2 said:


> Well, reputation they now have in spades. They will unilaterally change procedures to favor new sales over existing owners. They will drop resorts through any means they can dream up when they age. They will put the Corporate income ahead of owners - everytime. And they know best for the resorts? Please.
> 
> All excellent reasons to avoid ownership with such a group and just enjoy the decent resorts they offer through non-ownership rental or trade. Far cheaper and you aren't at risk for "whats best for Marriott".


Maybe, do you own with Marriott at present?  I'll point out that this is all conjecture at this point.  Given there are other systems that give direct purchasers extra benefits, I doubt it'll matter that much to Marriott or to their sales.  Such a change would devalue sales to a degree, the amount depends on specifics, but might actually help Marriott as a company pushing sales directly to them.  Marriott has dropped a number of resorts, all I can think of didn't measure up to Marriott's current standards and were not developed nor owned by Marriott.  I think one can expect one or possibly two additional resorts to be dropped in the next few years.  Eventually we will see resorts dropped that were developed by Marriott, in part due to the fact that some BOD simply don't want to spend the money to keep up as with Vail.


----------



## Hoc (Dec 16, 2007)

timeos2 said:


> All excellent reasons to avoid ownership with such a group and just enjoy the decent resorts they offer through non-ownership rental or trade.



While, as you know, I'm not a huge Marriott fan, I really still think there are many reasons to own a Marriott -- more reasons that those to dump the timeshares.  That is why I still own one.  My Marriott resort is well kept and easily gets me good trades (with an extra "AC" week) into two other Marriotts a year that are also well-kept.

That said, and knowing Marriott's propensities, I would never pay a premium to own a Marriott, and I am certainly willing to dump my property when Marriott's greed makes the cost of ownership greater than the benefit at any particular resort I own.  And I certainly am under no delusion that, just because I have a popular resort that was built by and is currently managed by Marriott, it will be a Marriott in five years.

The bottom line is that Marriott resorts are as worth owning as other resorts, as long as you get them at a fair price, do not pay a premium for the Marriott name, and do not absolutely expect them to remain a Marriott.


----------



## AwayWeGo (Dec 16, 2007)

*Life After Marriott.*




timeos2 said:


> They will drop resorts through any means they can dream up when they age.


So, what happens to older timeshares after Marriott drops'm ? 

Do the ex-Marriotts just keep on going as independent timeshares? 

Does some other timeshare company (e.g., WestGate, SunTerra) grab'm up & add'm to their existing timeshare chains? 

Just wondering -- I have no dog in this fight.   

-- Alan Cole, McLean (Fairfax County), Virginia, USA.​


----------



## timeos2 (Dec 16, 2007)

*Remember the fox in your management - er, hen house*



AwayWeGo said:


> So, what happens to older timeshares after Marriott drops'm ?
> 
> Do the ex-Marriotts just keep on going as independent timeshares?
> 
> ...



In at least one case a professional management - VRI - was brought in and things are being turned around for those owners.  Like most developer owned management companies Marriott's answers to two masters and the owners - who actually pay the bills - don't seem to be the one that gets the benefit as sales and Corporate gets their ear.


----------



## Kazakie (Dec 16, 2007)

Hoc said:


> The bottom line is that Marriott resorts are as worth owning as other resorts, as long as you get them at a fair price, do not pay a premium for the Marriott name, and do not absolutely expect them to remain a Marriott.



However you want do describe the premium - whether by brand name, the preference in trading, the resort portfolio, consistent maintenance, etc - it's almost impossible to not pay a premium for a marriott vs any non-hotel timeshare next door - regardless if it is from developer or resale.


----------



## Hoc (Dec 17, 2007)

Kazakie said:


> However you want do describe the premium - whether by brand name, the preference in trading, the resort portfolio, consistent maintenance, etc - it's almost impossible to not pay a premium for a marriott vs any non-hotel timeshare next door - regardless if it is from developer or resale.



I disagree.  I did not pay a premium for my Marriott Custom House over what I would have paid for any timeshare located in the heart of the historic part of downtown Boston.  I paid the same for my Streamside unit that they were getting for other, non-Marriott timeshares in Vail during ski season.

Yes, Marriott owners who sell list at a premium price, but some get real and sell at a price that does not include a premium for the Marriott name.


----------



## Dean (Dec 17, 2007)

Hoc said:


> I disagree.  I did not pay a premium for my Marriott Custom House over what I would have paid for any timeshare located in the heart of the historic part of downtown Boston.  I paid the same for my Streamside unit that they were getting for other, non-Marriott timeshares in Vail during ski season.
> 
> Yes, Marriott owners who sell list at a premium price, but some get real and sell at a price that does not include a premium for the Marriott name.


Two extreme examples I think.  There is little to compare in Boston and Vail was at the bottom of the food chain with high maint fees overall.  ROFR will also impact this issue for many resorts.  For high demand times one will generally pay a premium for Marriott over non Marriott.  The question is whether it's because of the name, a nicer resort, etc or any combination.  The truth is that any nice resort that's left to run down will decrease in value.  And even with somewhat of a premium there are good deals to be had for many situations.  There is little overlap between a good Marriott to own to use and one to own to trade internally and this is one of the problems.  It's often better to buy two weeks, one to trade and one to use with the idea of booking both weeks together at the 13 month window.


----------



## hipslo (Dec 18, 2007)

Dave M said:


> *Internal Exchanges* If I had to guess, based solely on the information I have obtained, I would say that those buying from Marriott will be able to reserve their weeks earlier that those who buy resale. (Please note that the last statement is an opinion, not fact.)




If we were so inclined as to speculate on this point (and I realize its nothing more than that), would people think that Marriott would potentially drop and revamp the entire existing reservations system (ie - 12 or 13 months in advance depending on whether single or multiple weeks are being reserved, etc) from scratch as part of this process, or keep it more or less as is but give direct purchasers a bit of a jump ahead of resale purchasers?  

I own multiple weeks at Mountainside, all purchased resale.  I have had no problem reserving the weeks that I want at 13 months, using one or two of those weeks and renting out the balance (over time the plan is to use more, eventually all, and rent less).  Just trying to get a feel for the effects that a new system might have on my ability to continue with the same usage pattern, and whether it might be time to think about dumping Mountainside and buying Westgate Park City.  Any thoughts, up to and including wild speculation, would be much appreciated.


----------



## Dave M (Dec 18, 2007)

As has been pointed out earlier in this thread, the legal documents for most resorts include the 12/13-months system. Although the language in some of those docs allows Marriott to change those terms without a vote of owners or BODs, that's not true for all resorts. 

Thus, it's a good bet that the 12/13-months system will stay in place and, perhaps, be "enhanced" in some way - just as Marriott enhanced it when they quietly dropped the requirement that an owner had to own multiple weeks at a single resort to reserve 13 months in advance.

Based on what I have been told, my guess is that for new resale weeks acquired after the so-far unannounced cutoff date, the current procedures would apply and Marriott would "enhance" the procedures for other owners.


----------



## PerryM (Dec 18, 2007)

Dave M said:


> As has been pointed out earlier in this thread, the legal documents for most resorts include the 12/13-months system. Although the language in some of those docs allows Marriott to change those terms without a vote of owners or BODs, that's not true for all resorts.
> 
> Thus, it's a good bet that the 12/13-months system will stay in place and, perhaps, be "enhanced" in some way - just as Marriott enhanced it when they quietly dropped the requirement that an owner had to own multiple weeks at a single resort to reserve 13 months in advance.
> 
> Based on what I have been told, my guess is that for new resale weeks acquired after the so-far unannounced cutoff date, the current procedures would apply and Marriott would "enhance" the procedures for other owners.



I’m betting that the day Marriott makes the announcement of an internal exchange system there will have been so many leaks that folks should be able to start a resale purchase and get to the point where their name is switched on Marriott’s records.  Assume a 2 month lead time.


I don’t know when Marriot’s fiscal year starts but that’s a great time to guess as to when it would be announced.

Just a WAG on my part but something I will be looking at in 2008.


----------



## hipslo (Dec 18, 2007)

Dave M said:


> Based on what I have been told, my guess is that for new resale weeks acquired after the so-far unannounced cutoff date, the current procedures would apply and Marriott would "enhance" the procedures for other owners.




I wonder whether any new, "enhanced" procedures would continue to give an advantage to multiple week owners over single week owners.  If so, things could get pretty complicated pretty quickly.  Different rules for (i) multiple week direct purchasers and multiple week grandfathered resale purchasers (as an aside, though I'd like to believe that we will all be grandfathered, it strikes me as at least a bit naive to think that things will really turn out that way, though I will keep my fingers crossed), (ii) single week direct purchasers and single week grandfathered resale purchasers, (ii) multiple week non-grandfathered resale purchasers, and (iv) single week non-grandfathered resale purchasers.  Would single week direct purchasers have priority with multiple week resale purchasers?  Would the two groups be on the same footing?  

Its also interesting to speculate as to what it might take to get into the prized "direct purchaser" category.  For example, I own multiple resale weeks.  Lets assume for the moment that existing resale owners are not grandfathered.  Could I take advantage of the new reservation "enhancements" if I purchase a single week directly from Marriott?  If so would I then be considered a single week direct purchaser and a multiple week resale purchaser, or perhaps the single direct purchase could elevate the status of the resale weeks and make some or all of them eligible for the new "enhanced" reservation system?  


The possibilities seem almost endless to contemplate.  Guess we'll just have to wait and see what happens.


----------



## Dave M (Dec 18, 2007)

PerryM said:


> I don’t know when Marriot’s fiscal year starts but that’s a great time to guess as to when it would be announced.


Marriott is on a 52-53 week calendar year, with this year ending on December 28. Since this change would be a very tiny blip on Marriott's overall corporate radar screen, I don't expect much - if any - in the way of a public announcement, just as there was no announcement for the change in the rental program. I certainly don't expect any announcement within the next few months. There is still too much work to do on this change internally.


----------



## Dean (Dec 18, 2007)

Dave M said:


> Although the language in some of those docs allows Marriott to change those terms without a vote of owners or BODs, that's not true for all resorts.


Dave, I'm not aware of any resort in the Marriott system that doesn't give Marriott the right to determine the reservation system on their own.  I know it was argued that Maui didn't but from the info I saw posted I think they do have that right there though I haven't seen the entire legal package there.  It was simply not as clear as some of the other resorts assuming that the entire applicable info was posted.  Do you have further specifics?


----------



## Dave M (Dec 18, 2007)

Thanks, Dean. I stand corrected. I thought Grande Ocean was one. 

The original reservation procedures for GO are part of the Master Deed (as an exhibit), which can be amended only by unanimous consent of the owners. However, the individual exhibits to the Master Deed can be amended as outlined in each exhibit. And the one for reservations can be amended by the Declarant (i.e., Marriott).

Incidentally, in my early 1990s GO POS, there is no 13-month reservation system. All owners, at the time, could request reservations starting on June 1 for any dates within the owner's season for the _following_ year. Priority was to be given to those owners of multiple GO weeks who wanted to reserve consecutively or concurrently, but they couldn't request reservations any earlier than single-week owners. No reservation requests would be accepted after October 15 for the _following_ year's usage!


----------



## Seth Nock (Dec 19, 2007)

Dave,
     I have spoken to many of the other brokers, as well as my contacts in Marriott, and the other brokers have spoken to their contacts at Marriott.  No one has been able to confirm what is being posted.  They have brought up a number of questions though:
1. If this is to be begin with usage early 2009, as people can book 1 year to 13 months in advance, wouldn't they have to start depositing their weeks immediately for early 2009 units?
2. If Marriott is going to give any difference in ability to trade, how are they going to deal with Hawaii, Arizona and a few other state laws that prohibit that (as Weston just made those states mandatory)?
3. Interval International offers bonus certificates for many Marriott deposits.  How will Marriott compete with that?
4. Interval International will often offer upgrades (have a studio trade for a 1 bedroom or 1 bedroom trade for 2 bedroom).  Interval does this because they have a number of people who deposit but don't book.  Marriott cannot count on that with a brand new exchange process.  How would they compete?
5. Many Marriott owners don't trade for other Marriotts.  How would Marriott compete with that?  or would they just recommend trading through Interval?
6. Many people like the request first option.  Would Marriott have that option?
7. Many people want to be able to request various properties, both Marriott and non- Marriott.  How can this happen?
8. Marriott already tried an internal trade, the Florida Club.  For the most part, it is a failure.  Why would this be any better?
9. Why would Interval International permit Marriott to set up their own program if this would potentially cost them about Fifty Million dollars per year?  Wouldn't they set up a tremendous marketing campaign to try to keep their owners. Wouldn't they offer 2 for 1 memberships, bonus certificates and reduced exchange fees? 
Sorry for being so pessimistic, but we (me and about 25 other broker/agents) have been trying to have anyone at Marriott corroborate the information posted and cannot.  We have also been trying to get answers to the questions above, and cannot get answers.


----------



## Icarus (Dec 19, 2007)

Dave M said:


> *Will the resale market collapse?*
> I doubt that the resale market will "collapse" when Marriott introduces the new resale restrictions. I don’t think that any changes that are made will “prove devastating for re-sale owners”. Currently, there is a restriction (exchange for points) that some people view as significant, yet Marriott is one of the very few chains where you can buy from the developer and - for most resorts- expect to get your money back on a resale after 5-7 years or so. Marriott isn't a dummy. Whatever they introduce will be calculated to maintain a reasonable resale market while, at the same time, encouraging people to buy from Marriott. It's a delicate balancing act and you can be sure Marriott is acutely aware of the need for that balance.



How do you figure that you can get your money back after 5-7 years if you purchased from the developer? Is that also fact? With Marriott weeks, you will tend to keep more of the value than when purchasing from many other developers, but I haven't seen that you can turn around and recoup your entire investment in 5 - 7 years. Am I missing something here? (You were the one that said that you like to post facts, Dave, that's why I'm asking. I'm wondering how you came to that conclusion?)

The restriction about points on a resale was well-known and part of the information when we purchased our Marriott weeks from the developer (or at resale).

If the rules are changed in a way that makes resales less attractive for units purchased prior to this change, I think that's going to be a problem for current owners and for Marriott. Yes, I understand that any resales already completed would be grandfathered, but that means that there would be new restrictions on resales that weren't in place when we purchased our units.

The ability to do an internal exchange or reserve your own week for occupancy is not a new feature. What's new is that Marriott would be taking it over and possibly adding new restrictions that might effect your resale value.

-David


----------



## Seth Nock (Dec 19, 2007)

Icarus said:


> How do you figure that you can get your money back after 5-7 years if you purchased from the developer? Is that also fact? With Marriott weeks, you will tend to keep more of the value than when purchasing from many other developers, but I haven't seen that you can turn around and recoup your entire investment in 5 - 7 years. Am I missing something here? (You were the one that said that you like to post facts, Dave, that's why I'm asking. I'm wondering how you came to that conclusion?)
> 
> The restriction about points on a resale was well-known and part of the information when we purchased our Marriott weeks from the developer (or at resale).
> 
> ...



Most Marriotts you will not be able to recoup your purchase price in 5-7 years (unless you bought resale).  You can @ Aruba, Ko 'Olina, Maui Barony Beach Platinum and Grand Ocean Platinum.  Most of the other properties, you will lose.


----------



## JimIg23 (Dec 19, 2007)

Keeping resale prices strong should be a major concern for Marriott.  I don’t know if salespeople hit that point, but it is good way to get confidence in buyers.  They will never hit the level that Disney has, but at least 50% is still excellent.  Having a system where you can by resale at pennies on the dollar lowers the overall perception of the organization.  Like Disney, I think (more hope) Marriott wants its name to be synonymous with a higher class product and have strong consumer confidence.  Having a joke of a timeshare business would ultimately tarnish their other ventures.  

Also, on another note concerning II.  I joined II mostly for the getaways, and I have only been looking for Marriotts.  Does anyone have any info/beliefs of what Marriott will do with their excess inventory?  Will they continue to give it to II for getaways or use it for owner benefits in their own internal system?


----------



## Dean (Dec 19, 2007)

Dave M said:


> Thanks, Dean. I stand corrected. I thought Grande Ocean was one.
> 
> The original reservation procedures for GO are part of the Master Deed (as an exhibit), which can be amended only by unanimous consent of the owners. However, the individual exhibits to the Master Deed can be amended as outlined in each exhibit. And the one for reservations can be amended by the Declarant (i.e., Marriott).
> 
> Incidentally, in my early 1990s GO POS, there is no 13-month reservation system. All owners, at the time, could request reservations starting on June 1 for any dates within the owner's season for the _following_ year. Priority was to be given to those owners of multiple GO weeks who wanted to reserve consecutively or concurrently, but they couldn't request reservations any earlier than single-week owners. No reservation requests would be accepted after October 15 for the _following_ year's usage!


Dave, the only version of the GO POS I have is the second one dated 1992.  Under rules and regulations which are an exhibit and not formally part of the legal portions of any POS from my understanding, it says.





> The Board of the Association reserves the right to make additional rules Rules and Regulations as may be required from time to time without the consent of the members.


Under exhibit H, the Master Deed, it outlines the then current process which required sending a letter and hopping for a reservations and goes on to say in 6.g 


> In the event the Agent determines that the current reservation system is unmanageable or is, for any reason, unfair to some or all of the owners, the Agent may, without the consent of the Owners and in it's reasonable business judgement, revise the reservation system from time to time...


It goes on to outline the situations and principles that should be followed similar to my Surfwatch POS does from 2005.  I remember when were were heavily discussing Maui in this regard and I made the point that in order to be certain I'd need to see the entire POS document in order to be certain how I interpreted it and that would be true in this case as well but at least for GO and SW I do have and have reviewed the entire documentation.  And given they represent early and late resorts and that Marriott lawyers are pretty smart, I'd be very surprised if they would get themselves stuck in an area they couldn't defend.



JimIg23 said:


> Keeping resale prices strong should be a major concern for Marriott.  I don’t know if salespeople hit that point, but it is good way to get confidence in buyers.  They will never hit the level that Disney has, but at least 50% is still excellent.  Having a system where you can by resale at pennies on the dollar lowers the overall perception of the organization.  Like Disney, I think (more hope) Marriott wants its name to be synonymous with a higher class product and have strong consumer confidence.  Having a joke of a timeshare business would ultimately tarnish their other ventures.
> 
> Also, on another note concerning II.  I joined II mostly for the getaways, and I have only been looking for Marriotts.  Does anyone have any info/beliefs of what Marriott will do with their excess inventory?  Will they continue to give it to II for getaways or use it for owner benefits in their own internal system?


Jim, I think all Marriott really cares about is keeping their resale prices strong and having enough differences between private resale to ensure a number of people will buy retail.  As noted in this thread, price is not the only way to do this.  I would assume one could still be a member of II and get those benefits you mention.  The things you'd likely give up include the special internal search first including the reduced fee and the trading priority within Marriott.  What you may gain is the ability to trade Marriott without belonging to II and possibly a points based system at some point.  We'll have to see what the specifics are if and when they happen.


----------



## PerryM (Dec 19, 2007)

*We did it!*



Icarus said:


> How do you figure that you can get your money back after 5-7 years if you purchased from the developer? Is that also fact? With Marriott weeks, you will tend to keep more of the value than when purchasing from many other developers, but I haven't seen that you can turn around and recoup your entire investment in 5 - 7 years. Am I missing something here? (You were the one that said that you like to post facts, Dave, that's why I'm asking. I'm wondering how you came to that conclusion?)
> 
> The restriction about points on a resale was well-known and part of the information when we purchased our Marriott weeks from the developer (or at resale).
> 
> ...




We broke even and actually made a profit on some of the 5 Marriotts we bought and held 3 to 5 years then sold resale.

The key here is to buy DAY ONE of sales in a new Marriott resort – even HOUR ONE.  That is the lowest price Marriott charges – pre-construction pricing.

Marriott resales go for a minimum of 40% discount and on hot holiday weeks that can be just 20%.  Marriott resale prices track the current sales price since Marriott has a ROFR on the vast majority of Marriotts.  Marriott increases their retail price by 5% per year at the minimum.  Therefore 40% discount is made up with 8 years of 5% and because of compounding it really is 7 years.

Hot holiday weeks command a scarcity and the week 52 at MountainSide we sold 4 years after we bought we made a nice profit.

Even buying post construction with the 40% discount from current retail pricing and 5% increase sale price per year is that maximum break even of 7 years.  However, you are looking at a lot more money to buy and the risk that Marriott will drop that 40% to 50% and now that’s 10 years.

P.S.
Of course if you can buy resale you take advantage of Marriott's 5% increase in retail price per year when you resell your resale


----------



## PerryM (Dec 19, 2007)

*Leftovers are just yesterdays discards heated up...*



Seth Nock said:


> ...
> 8. Marriott already tried an internal trade, the Florida Club.  For the most part, it is a failure.  Why would this be any better?
> ...




The Florida Club, a great idea that was a terrible idea!

Seth is right – the Florida Club was an experiment that seems to have gone bad.  When we owned our Grande Vista that was the big push – 6 months before check-in you become an owner of ALL the Marriotts in the Florida Club.

Well as you can guess 6 months from a check-in has little availability – the Florida Club was a sales gimmick and an experiment that soured.

*So Marriott has a history of picking sales gimmicks that fail *– will an internal owner-to-owner be a failure too?  If I had to guess it will be a miserable failure like the Florida Club.  Reheating leftovers is still just yesterdays unwanted food warmed up.


----------



## Dave M (Dec 19, 2007)

Seth Nock said:


> Dave,
> I have spoken to many of the other brokers, as well as my contacts in Marriott, and the other brokers have spoken to their contacts at Marriott.  No one has been able to confirm what is being posted.


That doesn't surprise me at all. However, I'll stand by my statements and the reliability of the information I have received. It’s to be expected that key Marriott people will refuse to confirm the existence of this project, as you have found. What is to be gained by causing the very near panic (e.g., re resales) that might result? Just read this thread!!

I believe my track record for reporting accurately various coming events such as this is unbroken. There's always a first time for being wrong.... You are more than welcome to assume this will be that time. 





> They have brought up a number of questions though:
> 1. If this is to be begin with usage early 2009, as people can book 1 year to 13 months in advance, wouldn't they have to start depositing their weeks immediately for early 2009 units?


Who said this is to begin with "usage early 2009"? I certainly didn't. My statement was (in bold print in the first post in this thread):





> My latest information indicates that the new system will be implemented by January 1, 2009.


In order for the new system to be available for January 2009 trades, it would have to be _implemented_ (i.e., put in place so it can be used) by the end of this month. That won't happen.



> 2. [etc.] If Marriott ...? [etc.]
> 
> .....
> 
> We have also been trying to get answers to the questions above, and cannot get answers.


Why am I not surprised? My understanding is that many of the issues you raised have not been resolved. Keep in mind that this new system is likely to be about a _*year*_ away from being implemented. 

Based on your questions about II, it would appear that you have missed some of my earlier posts in this thread. You might want to go back and read them for a better understanding of the situation. I won't repeat everything here other than to again state that Marriott is not dumping II. Marriott will work closely with II - under a new contract - and will utilize II's exchange system for its internal trades. 

Thus, it doesn't take much creativity to figure out that Marriott and II have resolved or will resolve most or all of the "how can this work?" issues involving ACs, request-first, requesting exchanges for both Marriotts and non-Marriotts, Flexchange and some of the other issues you have raised. 

Will everything be just as it is now? Of course not. Will all of us be happy with the changes? Of course not. But Marriott isn't stupid. They obviously wouldn't adopt a new system that no one wants to use. They will resolve those issues.


----------



## BocaBum99 (Dec 19, 2007)

Seth Nock said:


> Dave,
> I have spoken to many of the other brokers, as well as my contacts in Marriott, and the other brokers have spoken to their contacts at Marriott.  No one has been able to confirm what is being posted.  They have brought up a number of questions though:
> 1. If this is to be begin with usage early 2009, as people can book 1 year to 13 months in advance, wouldn't they have to start depositing their weeks immediately for early 2009 units?
> 2. If Marriott is going to give any difference in ability to trade, how are they going to deal with Hawaii, Arizona and a few other state laws that prohibit that (as Weston just made those states mandatory)?
> ...



Seth,

These are great questions.  The only way that Marriott can realistically pull this internal exchange program is by fiat or by creating an overlay program.

Fiat would be the most effective in ensuring long term success.  But, the short term problems that would result would be massive.  Just imagine 100,000 owners calling Marriott call centers asking the questions you just posed.  That is what Marriott would be signing up for with the fiat approach.

Overlay program would be less disruptive, but it would also make it difficult to get conversions.  They would have an issue similar to RCI Points.  

One thing that Dave M didn't say is that in order for Marriott to make a January 1, 2009 launch date, they need to have a lot in place now since development and test needs to be done.  If there isn't a spec now, there is no way they can launch it on Jan 1, 2009.  My guess is that they will announce it on Jan 1, 2009 and it will be delayed as everything else is when development is required.

I have thought of another way that Marriott can implement this project.  What Marriott can do is require 100% of deposits to be placed with Marriott first.  Then, Marriott decides what weeks get deposited into II.  They just keep the best stuff for Marriott owners.  All this would take is a slightly modified afflilation agreement with II and II can work pretty much the same.  

The biggest issue with this would be the anger a Maui MOC owner would have if Marriott deposited a Branson week for trade.

A full overlay point system that is similar to Hyatt would be the best option, in my opinion.  That would give Marriott a more competitive product and a reason for owners to upgrade into it.  But, this may be too big of a product to swallow all at once.  Marriott could first get control of the inventory by controlling all deposits to II.  Then, once they have control of the inventory, they can overlay the points program on top. 

I believe that Marriott's objective must be more than to simply take over internal exchanges.  There is not that much money to be made there.  They must be doing this project to make their product more competitive with their point system competitors.

The good news for timeshare brokers is there will be plenty of money to be made assisting customers in the upgrade process.  People make a living doing just that in other point systems that were once fixed/floating week oriented.


----------



## PerryM (Dec 19, 2007)

*Good luck Marriott - you'll need it*

If Marriott really wants to make a fortune in the exchange business they need to just form another corporation that competes with II and RCI.  Make it totally voluntary and allow access to II AND RCI.  

Starting over they could implement an exchange system that Marriott owners would flock to and not tinker with the current II setup.  Of course I’d suggest a Point system that integrates ALL Marriott units, be they timeshares, hotel rooms, fractional units, or whole ownership units.

But I get the feeling that what Marriott wants is just a sales gimmick – good luck with that Marriott.


----------



## Dean (Dec 19, 2007)

PerryM said:


> The Florida Club, a great idea that was a terrible idea!
> 
> Seth is right – the Florida Club was an experiment that seems to have gone bad.  When we owned our Grande Vista that was the big push – 6 months before check-in you become an owner of ALL the Marriotts in the Florida Club.
> 
> ...


While I think the FL club and similar split week options are a failure from a usage standpoint, are they from Marriott's standpoint.  It's a program that pays for itself by mandatory dues from all that own FL club units and has enticed more than one person to buy that might not have.  Obviously common sense tells you that any high demand week is not likely to be available at 6 months out.  Last I heard Marriott was still considering expanding the FL club and similar options including the possibility of including HH in the FL club.


----------



## PerryM (Dec 20, 2007)

Dean said:


> While I think the FL club and similar split week options are a failure from a usage standpoint, are they from Marriott's standpoint.  It's a program that pays for itself by mandatory dues from all that own FL club units and has enticed more than one person to buy that might not have.  *Obviously common sense tells you that any high demand week is not likely to be available at 6 months out*.  Last I heard Marriott was still considering expanding the FL club and similar options including the possibility of including HH in the FL club.




When Ma and Pa signed up for the freebies and the sales tour I doubt they have any insight as to availability of weeks, 52 weeks out (or 13 months) or 6 months out.  It's up to the salesreps to paint a picture of "you own ALL Marriotts in the Florida Club at 6 months".  At least that's what I remember the sales pitch 5 years ago.

Later we realized that the Florida Club was a sales gimmick and it served its purpose; we bought based partly on the Florida Club idea.

For Gold, Silver, and Bronze weeks the concept of owning more Marriotts at 6 months or heck 11 months makes a lot of sense.  Too bad Marriott picked 6 months instead of 11 months.


----------



## Dean (Dec 20, 2007)

PerryM said:


> When Ma and Pa signed up for the freebies and the sales tour I doubt they have any insight as to availability of weeks, 52 weeks out (or 13 months) or 6 months out.  It's up to the salesreps to paint a picture of "you own ALL Marriotts in the Florida Club at 6 months".  At least that's what I remember the sales pitch 5 years ago.
> 
> Later we realized that the Florida Club was a sales gimmick and it served its purpose; we bought based partly on the Florida Club idea.
> 
> For Gold, Silver, and Bronze weeks the concept of owning more Marriotts at 6 months or heck 11 months makes a lot of sense.  Too bad Marriott picked 6 months instead of 11 months.


Then I guess it didn't fail in this case.  It's not a program without value but it is a program without a lot of value IMO.  I do know of people who have successfully used it including the split week option.  One of the uses is getting a reservation at non Orlando properties to deposit into II.  This can allow you the chance of getting a higher trader including the chance to trading back in to DVC which blocks other Orlando trades.  Though I bet most members of the FL club don't know they can deposit other club resorts in to II.


----------



## Pit (Dec 25, 2007)

PerryM said:


> If Marriott really wants to make a fortune in the exchange business they need to just form another corporation that competes with II and RCI.



Why compete with II when they could just buy it? Since II is about to be spun off by its parent company, perhaps we will once again see Marriott take an ownership interest in II. Just speculating here, I have no inside information.


----------



## Palguy (Dec 25, 2007)

I don't think Marriott wants to be in the trade business per se. They make their money selling and reselling units, buy low and sell high. The profit margin is so much greater there, than the trading business, plus the tremendous amount of overhead and management involved. They want to stack the deck in their favor when it comes to selling more units. In other words make it in your best interest to sell to them low and in the buyers best interest to buy from them high. Nothing with II would have to change, just your ability to pick and choose choice weeks before depositing them for trade. They can sell only platinum in Hawaii for instance, but create 4 levels of it by giving 1st reservation priority to dual and then single unit owners who purchased from the developer and then to dual and single unit owners who purchased resale. Say for instance 15 and 14 months out for Marriott sold units and the current 13 and 12 for resales. That on top of the additional incentives such as points for deposits, and purchase bonuses that are already in place.  If you want to insure you get first dibs on vacation choices, and all the other benefits, you buy from the developer. When it is time to sell, your unit may or may not have decreased in value from the changes made to the system, but either way Marriott wins because they can pick what they want at the lowest price (whatever that price may be) by ROFR. Nothing major or at much cost to Marriott, but something more to tip the advantage towards them in selling more units. And if the resale price drops a little because of it, pick them up at a lesser price while they are at it; win win.

Just my 2¢.


----------



## PerryM (Dec 25, 2007)

Pit said:


> Why compete with II when they could just buy it? Since II is about to be spun off by its parent company, perhaps we will once again see Marriott take an ownership interest in II. Just speculating here, I have no inside information.



I believe Marriott sold most or all their interest in II so I don't know how they could justify to their stockholders that the sale was a mistake and now it's a great idea - never happen in my opinion.

Sounds like Marriott is going to tinker around with the current II setup and declare an "Internal owner exchange system" and will do fine - the Marriott sales reps will have plenty of new stories to spin and all will be just fine.

I don't think they are ready to shake up the timeshare world with truly something revolutionary - no need to take the risk; yet.


----------



## McFail (Dec 25, 2007)

PerryM said:


> I believe Marriott sold most or all their interest in II so I don't know how they could justify to their stockholders that the sale was a mistake and now it's a great idea - never happen in my opinion.



Well, in recent business history AT&T sold their huge share in Cingular to Bellsouth. Then they waited a few months and bought Bellsouth.


----------



## AwayWeGo (Dec 25, 2007)

*What's In A Name ?*




Northern Willy said:


> Then they waited a few months and bought Bellsouth.


The way I heard it, it was BellSouth that gobbled up AT&T -- which by then was basically just a cell phone company anyway, a mere shadow of its former self so many years after the forced breakup of Ma Bell.  Then, adding insult to injury, BellSouth renamed itself AT&T. 

Why not?  It bought everything that was left of the whole company, including the famous name & trademark.  So now the expanded Baby Bell spin-off unit gets to do business under the famous old parent-company name.  Who'd a-thunk? 

That's roughly what Nation's Bank did after gobbling up Bank Of America.  They scrapped the Nation's Bank name & applied the famous & historic Bank Of America title to the whole combined banking conglomerate after takeover. 

Nothing stays the same.  Everything changes.  Something is lost while something is gained.  So it goes. 

-- Alan Cole, McLean (Fairfax County), Virginia, USA.​


----------



## thinze3 (Dec 25, 2007)

Sorry, but it was the baby bell, Soutwestern Bell (SBC), out of San Antonio that bought ATT and decided to change its name to ATT because of the national recognition of ATT's name. Then the new ATT bought BellSouth.


----------



## AwayWeGo (Dec 25, 2007)

*Bell South, Southwestern Bell -- Hard To Keep'm Straight From Back Here.*




thinze3 said:


> Sorry, but it was the baby bell, Soutwestern Bell (SBC), out of San Antonio that bought ATT and decided to change its name to ATT because of the national recognition of ATT's name. Then the new ATT bought BellSouth.


Back here in Chesapeake & Potomac Telephone Company territory, renamed Bell Atlantic, re-renamed Verizon, we don't know 1  Baby Bell from another out West.  (Some of us don't anyway.)  That is to say, to (some of) us benighted easterners, SBC & Bell South might as well be 1 & the same.  And now, thanks to the buyouts & consolidation you described, they are -- doing business under Ma Bell's old name.  The stockholders must be very proud.  

We eastern know-it-alls -- some of us -- can't help embarrassing ourselves with our ignorance of the West.  An FFV society lady from Richmond was at a country club event attended by several young college women.  She asked 1 girl where she was from. 

"Idaho," said the college girl. 

The FFV society lady appeared amused. 

"Did I say something funny?" the girl asked. 

"Oh, no, my dear," the FFV lady said.  "It just that here in Virginia we pronounce it _Ohio_." 

-- Alan Cole, McLean (Fairfax County), Virginia, USA.​


----------



## skisnow&water (Jan 5, 2008)

*When is a resale a resale?*

I'm reading the posts on the speculated Marriott policy changes and would ask this as well. How will Marriott flag a deed in the computer as being resold? If the database has record of a resale trigged by title transfer, this impacts my kids ability to use the timeshare when they *inherit* the deed (as title passes to them) in the same way as if I had actually sold it to a 3'rd party. Clearly this would conflict with what we are all told when we purchase (directly) from Marriott.
I'm sure resales are frustrating to any company trying to get top dollar for their new units but hopefully Marriott will come to their senses and let the issue drop. Alternatively we can all start gearing up for a very expensive class action suit that would hit them hard enough that they would drop this nonsense.


----------



## Dave M (Jan 6, 2008)

Resales are already flagged in the Marriott system. There is a big "R" that shows up on the screen. That's how a Marriott rep at Owner Services is supposed to know that the use of a resale week cannot be exchanged for Marriott Rewards points.

Transfers at no cost within a family are treated the same as with the current owner. Examples: divorce and death. Thus, such a transfer doesn't change an original week to a resale week.


----------



## pwrshift (Jan 6, 2008)

Unfortunately Marriott Rewards doesn't feel any compassion over death (if you're not married or partnered) or divorce with the reward points you've accumulated.  From the rules & regs:

_Accrued points and miles do not constitute property of the member. Points accrued by a Marriott Rewards member are for the member's benefit only and may not be transferred to anyone. Points are transferable to a legal spouse or partner only in the case of documented death of the member. Points are not transferable to another person for any other reason, including divorce or inheritance._

I would like to think that points you purchased or got in exchange for trading your week's MF for points would remain a family asset, but perhaps not.  Greedy greedy.  The airlines have a small fee for inheritance transfers.

Brian


----------



## sandytoes (Jan 6, 2008)

*Tour Questions and Answers at Ocean Watch today*

We just spend a week at Monarch on Hilton Head Island and are now at Ocean Watch in Myrtle Beach. 

One observation to add to the mystery . . . the elevator signs that usually promote the sales tours and offer a choice of either Marriott Vouchers for local attractions/restaurant or points now only mention the vouchers and not the points. I noticed this at Monarch where the tours are for Surf Watch. Last year points were offered and mentioned in all advertisements.

Also on the lists of daily activities at  Monarch was  a program about learning about Ritz Carlton and using points for the Ritz Carlton . . . we did not attend (got busy and forgot), but this seemed strange to specifically be targeting Ritz Carlton.

Today we took the tour at Ocean Watch on Myrtle Beach. I remembered some of what was being discussed here and asked a couple of questions.

I asked about a new internal exchange program. I was told that since I asked she (the sales rep) was allow to say that the program would becoming out in March. She further said all the sales personnel had been informed but were not supposed to be talking about it unless they were asked. She did not discuss the details but she said a few things I either was not aware of or had not heard before.

I asked if resale  purchases and timeshares purchased directly from Marriott would be treated differently in regards to exchanging. She said there is no difference.

According to her, the 24 day Marriott advantage for Marriott deposits  and owners does not show up with II on the computer system. When Interval gets a Marriott deposit they are required to hold it for the use of Marriott for 24 days. The only way a Marriott owner finds out about a unit that is in the 24 day window is by talking to your Marriott Adviser. She stressed several times that I should call my adviser and establish a report with my adviser. She indicated this was important. She also said the Marriott desk at II may know about some of the units but not all the units available within the 24 day "hold for Marriott Owners" period. Anyone using the computer will not see those units. Upon reflection, I am wondering if the owner's home resort may have access to the inventory prior to the general Marriott owners who do not own at a Marriott resort they are hoping to exchange into. This may be part of the new program.  My next paragraph will shed a little light into why I am thinking this might be a possibility. This is only speculation on my part.

The sales rep also claimed that within the exchange hierarchy it is possible (though not always probable) for a bronze week owner to get a Platinum week at anytime . . .not just within the 59 day period. She stated that all owners at their home resort have priority over all other exchanger who do not own at a certain resort, including Marriott owners exchanging from another Marriott resort in their same season, irregardless of the season they own. So, when you go through the pecking order of Marriott owners in their home resort exchanging into the season they own, giving priority to multiple week owners staying at their home resort, before a week is offered to II, any owner in any season at their home resort has a priority over any other Marriott owner or outside exchanger. Thus, if a bronze owner calls and asks for a platinum week, if one is available it goes to the bronze week owner in their home resort if there are no other high priority request unfulfilled. She said she would not buy a bronze week with the hope of exchanging into a platinum but it does occasionally happen. Hopefully you all will be able to understand what it is I am trying to explain 

Let me know your thoughts.. . as if I had to ask


----------



## Dean (Jan 6, 2008)

Sandy, regarding your last paragraph.  I'd agree with what you were told for the most part other than the idea that home resort gives you much of a priority, it is only a tiebreaker.  You could apply the same info to trading up in unit size as for the demand of the week.  I'd also add that resort quality and overall trade power are still applicable, just a little fuzzy in application in the internal trading system.  It will be interesting to see what happens with any changes.  To be honest, I think many of the sales reps aren't that well informed about the trading issue.


----------



## JimIg23 (Jan 6, 2008)

sandytoes said:


> According to her, the 24 day Marriott advantage for Marriott deposits  and owners does not show up with II on the computer system. When Interval gets a Marriott deposit they are required to hold it for the use of Marriott for 24 days. The only way a Marriott owner finds out about a unit that is in the 24 day window is by talking to your Marriott Adviser. She stressed several times that I should call my adviser and establish a report with my adviser. She indicated this was important.



Is this true now?  Do we get better trades by asking an advisor instead of putting in a request to II?


----------



## Eric (Jan 6, 2008)

This is 1000% wrong. Same resort exchange is a tie breaker BUT way down the list. This is how sales people get you to buy offseason at thier resort when you can not afford a Platinum week. 



sandytoes said:


> Thus, if a bronze owner calls and asks for a platinum week, if one is available it goes to the bronze week owner in their home resort if there are no other high priority request unfulfilled. She said she would not buy a bronze week with the hope of exchanging into a platinum but it does occasionally happen. Hopefully you all will be able to understand what it is I am trying to explain
> 
> Let me know your thoughts.. . as if I had to ask


----------



## Dave M (Jan 6, 2008)

Confirming, from the "Marriott Exchange Priority" section of the MVCI site (bold emphasis added):





> In addition, *when all comparable factors are equal*, Interval International gives priority to Marriott Vacation Club Owners who request an exchange back to their home resort.


----------



## sandytoes (Jan 6, 2008)

The example being given was for Ocean Watch where all the units are two bedroom units. The rep stated that a two bedroom Ocean Watch Owner had priority in an exchange even if the trade was for a higher season over all non Ocean Watch owners. Those who were owners trading in their season had priority over those owners trading out of their season.

Thus . . . Ocean Watch priority as I understood what the sales rep was saying . . . . . . 

multi week owners of Ocean Watch trading in season
single week owners of Ocean Watch trading in season
multi week owners of Ocean Watch trading out of season
single week owners of Ocean Watch trading out of season
All other are below

Just had a thought . . . could she actually be meaning when I call into Marriott to reserve my week at the resort I own?





Dave M said:


> Confirming, from the "Marriott Exchange Priority" section of the MVCI site (bold emphasis added):


----------



## sandytoes (Jan 6, 2008)

What about the 24 day Marriott advantage? Any truth to the fact that you need to call your Marriott Adviser to have access to all those Marriott held weeks? If true . . . this was the biggest news of all that was stated during our tour.


----------



## thinze3 (Jan 6, 2008)

sandytoes said:


> ....According to her, the 24 day Marriott advantage for Marriott deposits  and owners does not show up with II on the computer system. When Interval gets a Marriott deposit they are required to hold it for the use of Marriott for 24 days. The only way a Marriott owner finds out about a unit that is in the 24 day window is by talking to your Marriott Adviser. She stressed several times that I should call my adviser and establish a report with my adviser. She indicated this was important. She also said the Marriott desk at II may know about some of the units but not all the units available within the 24 day "hold for Marriott Owners" period. Anyone using the computer will not see those units....
> Let me know your thoughts.. . as if I had to ask



IN reference to the 24 day Marriott advantage not showing up on the computer, I am not sure I agree unless you talking about a future Marriott trading system.?.?

Current trading system with II:
I own two Marriotts and a single non-Marriott unit and can tell you first hand that Marriott weeks show up all the time on II's website that I cannot see with my non-Marriott until the 24 day Marriott priority has passed. I watched many Florida Marriott weeks in the last few months waiting for one to get through the priority period in hopes of using my non-Marriott to make a trade. A June week finally made it through and my trade happened. It was almost frustrating at times, because not many good Marriott weeks make it past the 24 day window.

I have noticed the same thing for weeks inside Flexchange, the only difference is that the Marriott hold period is shorter and varies greatly. I have watched good weeks not be available for my non-Marriott for up to two weeks. Others I have seen become available in only a few days.

I tried to use my non-Marriott AC to get a 2BR at MGC for February during Flexchange, but nothing ever seemed to get through the Marriott hold so I ended up booking a room elsewhere.

This priority/hold period is a huge advantage for Marriott owners within II's trading system. IMO

.


----------



## Dave M (Jan 6, 2008)

> The rep stated that a two bedroom Ocean Watch Owner had priority in an exchange even if the trade was for a higher season over all non Ocean Watch owners.


The rep's statement is incorrect. Guaranteed.

As three of us have stated and as confirmed by the wording at the MVCI site, the home resort priority applies *only* if all other exchange factors are equal. 

Thus, if an OW owner seeks to exchange back into OW, that owner will get the week of choice, *if the normal II "comparable exchange" factors give that owner the edge over all other Marriott owners requesting that same week.  

If all of those exchange factors result in an equal "comparable exchange" in competition with another owner, the home priority would get the exchange for the OW owner.

However, if the "comparable exchange" formula favors the non-OW owner, the home resort priority won't be a factor and the other owner will get it.

From a practical standpoint, two exchange requests are almost never exactly equal, so it would be a very rare situation where the home resort priority would be a deciding factor.*


----------



## Dave M (Jan 6, 2008)

sandytoes said:


> What about the 24 day Marriott advantage? Any truth to the fact that you need to call your Marriott Adviser to have access to all those Marriott held weeks?


No truth. An ongoing search will snag such a week. Also, you can see such weeks while doing an online search if they haven't been taken by other Marriott owners with ongoing searches.


----------



## PerryM (Jan 6, 2008)

*What galaxy are you from again?*



sandytoes said:


> We just spend a week at Monarch on Hilton Head Island and are now at Ocean Watch in Myrtle Beach.
> 
> One observation to add to the mystery . . . the elevator signs that usually promote the sales tours and offer a choice of either Marriott Vouchers for local attractions/restaurant or points now only mention the vouchers and not the points. I noticed this at Monarch where the tours are for Surf Watch. Last year points were offered and mentioned in all advertisements.
> 
> ...



I’m glad that the Marriott salesreps are so far off base as to be in another galaxy when it comes to II exchanges.

The key question to *ask any salesrep is this “Are you and owner at this timeshare?”.*

If the answer is YES then you can listen so some of the rumors that the reps pass along like gas.  If the answer is NO, then you might as well start thinking of what you are going to have for dinner that night since it will be so full of false information as to be worthless.

I’m guessing that this salesrep doesn’t own a Marriott timeshare and might not even own any.  They are NOT a fountain of wisdom to make any decisions on.


Forget what the salesrep said and pay attention to what TUG members have reversed engineered from Marriott and II.


----------



## sandytoes (Jan 6, 2008)

Dave M said:


> No truth. An ongoing search will snag such a week. Also, you can see such weeks while doing an on line search if they haven't been taken by other Marriott owners with ongoing searches.


 
Would an adviser, being aware you are asking for a certain week but have not deposited in II, be able to see the weeks prior to them being loaded into II? I was told that at the time the 24 days Marriott weeks were released into the II system they were the "left over" 24 day weeks.

I am in sales myself and and personally do not like a lot of sales people because many are not straight forward and honest. I am pretty good at picking out a high presser "BS"er. This woman was very professional, low keyed, low pressured and did not seem incompetent. There was not pressure to have us buy a week . .  . she merely asked if we were interested at the end and asked that we let her know one way or the other. I asked her several times if she was certain if she was correct or to clarify what I was hearing. I think I will call her again tomorrow to see if she still says the same thing . . . especially now that I have had a chance to think over our conversation and digest what has been said on TUG.

I do believe you are correct, as your view is what I always thought was accurate prior to our tour today.


----------



## sandytoes (Jan 6, 2008)

Perry . . .  being married to a Meteorologist . . .  I loved your article link and so would my hubby as he would agree (even being a prof.)


----------



## Dave M (Jan 6, 2008)

sandytoes said:


> Would an adviser, being aware you are asking for a certain week but have not deposited in II, be able to see the weeks prior to them being loaded into II? I was told that at the time the 24 days Marriott weeks were released into the II system they were the "left over" 24 day weeks.


Once the 24-day Marriott priority starts, that week will be immediately confirmed to any "comparable exchange" ongoing search. The so-called "leftovers" are the weeks that you can see with an online search. They are left over because there were no existing online searches for those weeks that were comparable. 

I don't know if an II rep can see such a week before it is loaded into II's system, but I would doubt it. Even if they could see such a week and tell you about it, knowing that such a week is coming online doesn't give you any advantage. That's what ongoing searches are for - to gain that advantage over those that don't have such a search.


----------



## Jim McLaren (Jan 6, 2008)

Dave M said:


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


I guess us mortals will have to wait a year to see what you said since you posted it in 2009.


----------



## Dean (Jan 7, 2008)

sandytoes said:


> The example being given was for Ocean Watch where all the units are two bedroom units. The rep stated that a two bedroom Ocean Watch Owner had priority in an exchange even if the trade was for a higher season over all non Ocean Watch owners. Those who were owners trading in their season had priority over those owners trading out of their season.
> 
> Thus . . . Ocean Watch priority as I understood what the sales rep was saying . . . . . .
> 
> ...


That is similar to the priority list for unit assignments, the only benefits a multiple week owner gets in exchanging is if they can get a better week or get it deposited earlier.  As noted, home resort is a tiebreaker and that includes ALL Marriott resorts in exchanging.


----------



## PerryM (Jan 7, 2008)

sandytoes said:


> Perry . . .  being married to a Meteorologist . . .  I loved your article link and so would my hubby as he would agree (even being a prof.)



Glad you liked it!


----------



## CMF (Jan 9, 2008)

*Key sales person confirms 6 month reservation restriction planned.*

[She] could not discuss the legal aspects of the plan as was a bit taken aback that I was aware of it.  The information was in response to questions from me.  

Charles


----------



## LAX Mom (Jan 9, 2008)

CMF said:


> [She] could not discuss the legal aspects of the plan as was a bit taken aback that I was aware of it.  The information was in response to questions from me.
> 
> Charles



6 weeks? Did you mean 6 months?


----------



## Luckybee (Jan 9, 2008)

Although, I certainly dont know as much about trading as many of you I thought I might chime in here with regard to our most recent experience. We have owned 2 gold 1 bdrm weeks at the Aruba Ocean Club since they first opened. We have only traded once prior to this past year choosing to go back to Aruba each time instead. This past Nov we had to deposit on very short notice ie within 3 weeks of our booked period because of surgery issues. We also had a fairly major trip to Dubai and the Maldives that we had to cancel since I can't be that far away from home because of the ongoing possible complications. Fast forward....we decide to go to Florida and the Caymans for Feb. Ok, so we decide, Orlando wk 1, South FL, wk 2, and the 3rd week non time share we book the Ritz in Grand Cayman. Of course we only have the 60 day window to look at option, so when that window opens, I search with both the short deposit weeks, and using my 2008 weeks with a phantom res. number. Although I was showing some options for Orlando, I could not see either Doral or Beachplace, which is what we wanted for our 2nd week. I called II and the rep was able to book us in right then and there for Doral. While I was on the phone I was still searching...nothing was showing. No doubt in my mind that there is an advantage to phoning in, there certainly was for us


----------



## thinze3 (Jan 9, 2008)

Many times when I do the online search, minimum or no units pop  up at resorts where I know that there should be inventory. I usually then do a resort specific week (such as MVD) and get totally different results. Other times I get the same resorts.

I truly believe it is nothing more than a technical glitch on II's website. I also believe that II's computers see the same things your computer does, if it goes glitch free. One things for certain, it can't hurt to call. IMO


----------



## Luckybee (Jan 9, 2008)

All i can say is that I did continuously search both ie general location, and resort specific...found what i wanted only by phoning. Hopefully we dont have to trade again for a while....but guess which way we'll search if we have to


----------



## arlene22 (Jan 9, 2008)

Sometimes if I press F5 over and over, eventually, new resorts show up. II definitely has glitches in its software. That is reason enough to call in!


----------



## CMF (Jan 9, 2008)

*oops.*



LAX Mom said:


> 6 weeks? Did you mean 6 months?



Yes, I meant 6 months.

Charles


----------



## CMF (Jan 9, 2008)

*Marriott is trying to stop misinformation.*



CMF said:


> [She] could not discuss the legal aspects of the plan as was a bit taken aback that I was aware of it.  The information was in response to questions from me.
> 
> Charles



I relayed my experience to Marriott executive offices and I received this reply.

_Dear Mr. Fernandez:

We are currently trying to reach all the sales staff with correct information.  I will forward this to my manager and it will be addressed immediately.  You have assurance that we are not changing your reservation process.

Please accept my deepest apologies for this misinformation._


Charles


----------



## thinze3 (Jan 9, 2008)

Charles,

I contacted them today as well to let them know about this.
The lady who told you this was contacted by the executive offices (Marriott knew who it was) and asked about it. The person told Marriott execs that you had misunderstood her statements. Her take was that she told you that she had only heard the rumors just as you had. They (Marriott) were not happy to say the least. 

Marriott also stated again that it was ALL RUMORS AND TOTALLY FALSE. 

I guess old habits are hard to break.


----------



## arlene22 (Jan 9, 2008)

I wish Dave M wasn't so darn reliable. Then I could let myself believe this isn't going to happen.


----------



## CMF (Jan 10, 2008)

*I expected as much.*



thinze3 said:


> Charles,
> 
> I contacted them today as well to let them know about this.
> The lady who told you this was contacted by the executive offices (Marriott knew who it was) and asked about it. The person told Marriott execs that you had misunderstood her statements. Her take was that she told you that she had only heard the rumors just as you had. They (Marriott) were not happy to say the least.
> ...



I did not expect anything but a denial.

Charles


----------



## PerryM (Jan 10, 2008)

*Nuke em’ Dano*

It amazes me that in this day and age corporations, like Marriott, don’t have a “Rumor Control” center and folks can ask about a rumor there and the corporation can respond.  Even an official "No comment" is still official.

I understand that the corporation opens itself to all kinds of scrutiny and possible litigation but rumors make the stock market go up and down all the time.  This is a perfect case for Marriott to address these rumors that their own employees spread and to nuke em’.


----------



## VacationPro (Jul 9, 2008)

It has been quite some time since the last post--has anybody heard any new information regarding Marriott's plans for an internal exchange/points system?


----------



## Dave M (Jul 9, 2008)

They have been very quiet. Even my normally very reliable sources won't say anything. There are any number of possible conclusions one could draw from the silence. 

I think we will just have to wait.


----------



## PerryM (Jul 9, 2008)

We were at Timber Lodge last week and I met the most knowledgable sales rep in 10 years.  He ownes 3 weeks there and he says 18 months.  He has no idea of how the internal system will work.

He did use it as a reason to buy Marriott now.

Just another rumor....


----------



## thinze3 (Jul 9, 2008)

PerryM said:


> We were at Timber Lodge last week and I met the most knowledgable sales rep in 10 years.  He ownes 3 weeks there and he says 18 months.  He has no idea of how the internal system will work.
> 
> He did use it as a reason to buy Marriott now.
> 
> Just another rumor....




*Perry,
You are alive. Great to hear from you!!
Where in the world have you been?
What have have you been up to?


Terry *


----------



## PerryM (Jul 10, 2008)

thinze3 said:


> *Perry,
> You are alive. Great to hear from you!!
> Where in the world have you been?
> What have have you been up to?
> ...



Illness in the family has consumed much of my time, but things have turned for the better and after a week in Tahoe I feel rested up.  Sadly the blue skies and blue water of Tahoe were shrouded in smoke from California burning to the ground - hey, at least the porcupine owl (or whatever) had a nesting site for a few years....before the forest floor caught fire and burned everything to the ground.

I noticed that the Nevada side had thousands of piles of forest floor material piled up for removal wherever we hiked - glad someone has some sense out there in Nevada.


----------



## thinze3 (Jul 10, 2008)

I am sorry about the illness but am happy things have turned for the better. I hope to be reading some, long-winded, interesting posts from you again real soon.

Terry


----------



## leskiw (Aug 1, 2008)

Dave M said:


> *Internal Exchanges*
> *My latest information indicates that the new system will be implemented by January 1, 2009*.
> 
> *   *   *   *   *
> ...



Any new news on restrictions on resale weeks? Does anyone know of any other likely/probable restrictions?

If the information is true (and based on what I have read in this forum and from 2nd hand information from Marriott sales reps) it does look probable, we are only 5 months for the implementation of this new system.

Dave


----------



## Dave M (Aug 1, 2008)

I have no new authoritative info. Based on comments by salespeople (as reported in this forum recently), it appears Marriott is still going ahead with development of this plan. I have no idea (and sales people apparently don't either) as to the effective date.


----------



## Darlene (Aug 1, 2008)

We bought our resale week from Marriott, and can either use, rent, or get every year points.  What will Marriott do with owners like us?


----------



## m61376 (Aug 2, 2008)

Darlene said:


> We bought our resale week from Marriott, and can either use, rent, or get every year points.  What will Marriott do with owners like us?



In any case, you are considered to have purchased from the developer, so would not be considered a resale purchaser.


----------



## winger (Aug 3, 2008)

m61376 said:


> In any case, you are considered to have purchased from the developer, so would not be considered a resale purchaser.



yes, dont worry darlene. you wont lose the change to get your mrps !


----------



## kevinz4444 (Aug 5, 2008)

*A few thoughts on this matter...*

OOPS! Please read other post! Sorry, a little too quick on the clicker!


----------



## kevinz4444 (Aug 5, 2008)

*A few thoughts on this matter...*

About a year ago, a Marriott sales agent (Stan Lewis) who some of you may know, and a great guy, told my wife and I about Marriott soon taking over internal exchanges. 

When I asked other Marriott people about this -- though they were not executive level decision-makers -- their response was that Marriott has something like 200,000+ owners and such a system would be very complicated to implement. 

I think a few key points among the thread of responses is (1) how Marriott could have a biased system that favors those who buy directly from Marriott, (2) how could Marriott develop a software system to manage the transfers (or as Dave indicates, they may contract to use II's software), (3) given all the possible scenarios of deposits/reserves/exchange within/exchange outside/changes/etc. there will be many scenarios that would make this type of system very difficult to manage, and (4) owners may be inclined to file suit if the program in any way affects the equal-maintenance-fee paying owner's abilities to reserve and use their week. 

While this sounded like a great idea when Stan mentioned it to us, with the promise of lower fees to trade internally, I have a feeling this may be just a convenient rumor and possible selling tool -- If Marriott encourages people to either buy resale now to be grandfathered in, OR buy from Marriott to take advantage of the greater priority they will have when the "new system" takes hold -- either way, Marriott increases buying of their timeshares!  JUST MY OPINION!


----------



## PerryM (Aug 5, 2008)

*Bzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz*



kevinz4444 said:


> About a year ago, a Marriott sales agent (Stan Lewis) who some of you may know, and a great guy, told my wife and I about Marriott soon taking over internal exchanges.
> 
> When I asked other Marriott people about this -- though they were not executive level decision-makers -- their response was that Marriott has something like 200,000+ owners and such a system would be very complicated to implement.
> 
> ...




Resales – the mosquito bite of developer sales…

I see no reason why Marriott would pay big bucks to scratch a mosquito bite – resales.

Check this video out to see what “those in the know” do for a mosquito bite – make a mountain out of a molehill.  

An internal Marriott exchange system isn’t needed – where are the outraged Marriott owners paying for full page ads in the Wall Street Journal?  No one really cares.

Only Marriott salesreps with way too much time on their hands spread these rumors – an excuse why they didn’t make their quota this month – those damn resales.

Resales amount to just 7% of the total number of timeshares sold in a year – why not just ignore the problem and it will just fade away.

All Marriott has to do is to instruct II to change the "Marriott Only Window" from 24 days to 365 days and they have a totally internal exchange system - total cost is 25 cents to make the phone call and it would be immediate.

In the event that Marriott does decide that this is a great way to control those evil resellers they WILL grandfather every owner into the new scheme on the day it is released – I’ll bet $25 to my favorite charity (in TUG's name) if they do not, on that fateful day, incorporate EVERY Marriott owner on record that day.


----------



## GregT (Aug 5, 2008)

Perry raises an interesting point about how Marriott could do this quickly and easily.

However, isn't in Marriott's interests to permit some non-Marriott owners into their properties?  They benefit from high occupancy -- more people to spend money at their property versus an empty room, and they benefit presumably from some portion of the exchange fee.

I would think 24 days is frankly a very well thought out timeline to give ample opportunity to ANY Marriott owner to stay in the system, while still making sure they have a visitor at their prized properties.   And some of those non-Marriott visitors may actually buy on their exchange???

Am I looking at this correctly?


----------



## jhm40cu (Aug 6, 2008)

I agree with those of you who think Hilton or Hyatt is better than Marriott for resales.

I think it's about time I should look for HGVC on eBay. I think Hilton T/S is the simply the best system out there and treats resale owners fairly. Correct me if I am wrong.


----------



## BocaBum99 (Aug 6, 2008)

jhm40cu said:


> I agree with those of you who think Hilton or Hyatt is better than Marriott for resales.
> 
> I think it's about time I should look for HGVC on eBay. I think Hilton T/S is the simply the best system out there and treats resale owners fairly. Correct me if I am wrong.



HGVC is a good system.  But, HGVC is NOT the best since it is so limited in the number of locations you can travel within the system.  It doesn't trade with II.  And, you have to pay $49 for an internal exchange.


----------



## skidoc (Aug 6, 2008)

I asked my salesperson at the Oceana Palms presentation yesterday about the 6-month window change for resale buyers; she basically said that she would not lower herself to the level of some other salespersons to comment on what was an obvious rumor with no official foundation.

I respected that!


----------



## Dean (Aug 6, 2008)

jhm40cu said:


> I agree with those of you who think Hilton or Hyatt is better than Marriott for resales.
> 
> I think it's about time I should look for HGVC on eBay. I think Hilton T/S is the simply the best system out there and treats resale owners fairly. Correct me if I am wrong.


IMO it depends on how you'll use it.  HGVC is a good system if you'll use the Hilton resort.  Hyatt is somewhat of a hybrid in that it's a fixed system with points on the back end more than more other points system.  And like Westin, there are more time limitations on using the points than are present for Wyndham, Bluegreen and some of the other points systems.  Westin does trade with II and does have an internal trading preference for it's members.  While Marriott is a fixed week system, it has fabulous resorts overall in great places.  The internal trading preference is huge, IMO, and the only current difference for a resale owner is the points issue, one that is close to a non issue for most people IMO.  The only other issue, as is true for many other systems, is that Marriott has ROFR which tends to limit the fire sale deals, isn't HGVC pretty active in ROFR as well?  We can argue the merits of ROFR another day.

What's best for you may not be the same as what's best for me.  I love a good points system owning Bluegreen, DVC and an individual resort that works on points.  I also love my Marriott time owning resorts I'll use and resorts to trade and take advantage of the internal trading.  If things change, it may be for better or worse for me and what's better for me may be worse for the next person.


----------



## James1975NY (Aug 12, 2008)

*Marriott on the resale market*

Doesn't make sense to me that Marriott would change the reservation rules for someone that purchased through the resale market. Although it would appear that this change would be illegal and against the condo docs, you would be surprised to see how vague these documents are and how they can simply state "reservation rules can be changed or modified at anytime". I don't know that this verbiage is in there but I have seen it with other developers. Usually, this rule is in place because the developer wants to be able to make the program easier to use for its owners when a program is new such as the Starwood Vacation Network where there have been a number of changes over the past 8 years.

Ultimately, the owners that bought from Marriott would have somewhat of an easier time making their own reservations; however, I understand that Marriott is more focused on managing their own internal exchange system. Currently managed by II, Marriott is not getting a dime for this service. 

In an effort to maximize revenue, I think that it is smart for Marriott to handle the process internally and keep the exchange fee that is currently going to Interval International. Why not? Marriott charges its owners for everything else they use.

The bottom line is that regardless of what you are reading, the big developers are taking hits and are laying people off left and right due to lack of sales internally. A friend of mine has purchase 4 weeks on resale within the Marriott family and all of them passed throught he ROFR....this tells me that Marriott is not confident that they are able to sell. Granted, these weeks were purchased at a resort that is not sold out but the price was so ridiculous I could not believe they passed.


----------



## PerryM (Aug 12, 2008)

*Marriott listen up...*

Upper management at MVCI must ask itself “What business are we in?”, once in a while.

I’m guessing the answer is “Sell timeshares”; anything else is a distraction.

If upper management starts to think “Internal exchange systems” then they are focusing on the wrong target and need to be replaced by folks who want to just sell, sell, sell timeshares.

But, I once worked for Anheuser-Busch in St. Louis and the wife of Augie Busch went on a cruise ship vacation with the sales force once and convinced Augie to buy the cruise line – it was a total disaster.  AB also pressured their beer distributors into getting into the wine cooler business too – another total disaster.

It’s really up to the upper management at MVCI what business they want to get into next – why not landscaping – all the Marriott’s need it and I’d bet they could capture the landscaping  business overnight if they set their mind to it.

So, MVCI just exactly what business butters your bread?


----------



## BocaBum99 (Aug 12, 2008)

I agree with Perry.  MVCI is in the business of selling timeshares.  Anything they do with the product is to enhance resort sales.

My guess is that all this talk of internal exchange and points systems overseas is nothing but a product enhancement strategy to make the Marriott Vacation Club more competitive with the other hotel chains that have point systems that Marriott currently does not have.  The goal is not to destroy resales.  It is to enhance resort sales.  Any suggestion otherwise is just phanton conspiracy theories that probably have no bearing in reality.


----------



## Dean (Aug 12, 2008)

James1975NY said:


> Doesn't make sense to me that Marriott would change the reservation rules for someone that purchased through the resale market. Although it would appear that this change would be illegal and against the condo docs, you would be surprised to see how vague these documents are and how they can simply state "reservation rules can be changed or modified at anytime". I don't know that this verbiage is in there but I have seen it with other developers. Usually, this rule is in place because the developer wants to be able to make the program easier to use for its owners when a program is new such as the Starwood Vacation Network where there have been a number of changes over the past 8 years.
> 
> Ultimately, the owners that bought from Marriott would have somewhat of an easier time making their own reservations; however, I understand that Marriott is more focused on managing their own internal exchange system. Currently managed by II, Marriott is not getting a dime for this service.
> 
> ...


As to whether MVCI can change the rules mid stream, they can and have.  The legal paperwork says they can change it unilaterally without any input.  But what they can't legally do in the states I'm aware of the legalities is make the regular reservation system different for the resale owner as the retail owner but they could do the reverse, enhance certain owners such as with points.  And they can set up tiered reservations hence the 13 month reservations discussed her on TUG.

And I'd agree with Perry and Jim in that they won't make such a change without a reason based on dollars.  That reason could be to secure more sales or to improve their profit margin in other areas like resort management.  If they converted to a points system they could certainly have the option of tying it to additional sales.


----------



## Starbucks (Oct 20, 2008)

So i just came back from the owner meeting at Son Antem in Spain. Sales Rep told me that the whole sales team will have an important meeting tomorrow (Tue, 21.October 2008) in regards to a worldwide roll-out of a new point based exchange system. He mentioned that i should make an appointment on wednesday so that he can give me the updates of the meeting. No clue if we finally see some official facts or if this is just another sales tactic...


----------



## JonP (Oct 20, 2008)

Starbucks said:


> So i just came back from the owner meeting at Son Antem in Spain. Sales Rep told me that the whole sales team will have an important meeting tomorrow (Tue, 21.October 2008) in regards to a worldwide roll-out of a new point based exchange system. He mentioned that i should make an appointment on wednesday so that he can give me the updates of the meeting. No clue if we finally see some official facts or if this is just another sales tactic...




I don't think it's a sales tactic.

http://www.tugbbs.com/forums/showthread.php?t=78307


----------



## davidvel (Oct 22, 2008)

Starbucks said:


> So i just came back from the owner meeting at Son Antem in Spain. Sales Rep told me that the whole sales team will have an important meeting tomorrow (Tue, 21.October 2008) in regards to a worldwide roll-out of a new point based exchange system. He mentioned that i should make an appointment on wednesday so that he can give me the updates of the meeting. No clue if we finally see some official facts or if this is just another sales tactic...



The salesman was probably referring to the new points system (read devaluation) of MRP. Woo-hoo!

Did you call him on Wednesday (today) and see what the great new points-based exchange system is?


----------



## tommyjoe (Oct 23, 2008)

*resale*

I own Wyndham also, so I am well aware of the battle between owners that paid developer cost vs. those that bought resale.  However, I think that reducing the benefits to an owner that bought resale hurts everyone.  The owner that now wants to sell his ts will get less for it.  The best thing about Marriott is the resale, but now with the reduced rofr's and now with the possibility of diminished trade options, selling your ts will be more difficult.  Is this really what we wanted.  Remember every resale was once a developer purchase that someone like us decided to get rid of.  I hope that my Marriott TS continues to hold value.
Thomas,  nc


----------



## abdibile (Nov 8, 2008)

So was something important (besides the reward points devaluation) revealed that day?


----------



## Kokonut (Nov 9, 2008)

Dave M said:


> *My latest information indicates that the new system will be implemented by January 1, 2009*.
> .
> .
> .
> *Grandfathering?* Yes, Marriott plans to grandfather all owners, presumably as of the date the change is announced or implemented. Thus, if you buy a Marriott timeshare on the resale market now, you will - as currently planned - be exempt from the proposed restrictions on resale weeks, whatever they might be. That makes sense because it would be a public relations nightmare if Marriott implemented such a drastic change that impacted existing owners – whether resale or not.



Let's say that the new system becomes effective as of January 1, 2009. Will those waiting for Marriott to process their ownership transfers be grandfathered? Technically they are not "existing owners" because their transfers have not taken place.

Would Marriott be nice enough to include all that have submitted ownership transfers as of the effective date of the new system? Maybe there is a reason why Marriott is currently taking so long to process transfers. I'm concerned because I am hoping to make a purchase soon.


----------



## darcy (Nov 9, 2008)

I tried to scan through the whole thread, but I apologize if this issue was addressed and I missed it.  When I deposit a Marriott week in II, I put in a list of requested trades, some of which may be Marriott and some may not be.  I am not sure how that would work with Marriotts out of II...I don't see a way to do simultaneous requests, but if I wait for a response from Marriott and don't get the trade, then maybe it becomes too late for getting one of the II trades.     Maybe it forces Request-first instead of Deposit-first trades? 

Thanks,
Darcy


----------



## Dave M (Nov 9, 2008)

Darcy & kokonut -

Please note this wording from post #179 in this thread:





> I have no new authoritative info. Based on comments by salespeople (as reported in this forum recently), it appears Marriott is still going ahead with development of this plan. I have no idea (and sales people apparently don't either) as to the effective date.


It would appear extremely unlikely that any implementation would be as early as January 2009.


----------



## dougp26364 (Nov 9, 2008)

I'd go so far as to say there's no way it's going to happen in January of 2009. If it was going to happen, you'd have thought they'd get the information out before many of the resorts had their annual meetings.

Personally, I'm not hopefull that an internal exchange program will come to pass. The system, as it is, really isn't broken. Unless Marriott feels they need some sort of internal exchange program to increase/enhance new sales, I just don't see much incentive for them to move forward with any urgency. 

The only other reason for Marriott to go to an internal exchange program would be if enhanced revenue collections to the bottom line of Marriott. I'm not convinced that an internal exchange program will do this unless they want to start collecting additonal club dues to pay for and profit from such a system.


----------



## VacationPro (Nov 9, 2008)

Kokonut said:


> Let's say that the new system becomes effective as of January 1, 2009. Will those waiting for Marriott to process their ownership transfers be grandfathered? Technically they are not "existing owners" because their transfers have not taken place.
> 
> Would Marriott be nice enough to include all that have submitted ownership transfers as of the effective date of the new system? Maybe there is a reason why Marriott is currently taking so long to process transfers. I'm concerned because I am hoping to make a purchase soon.



My bet is that they will use the date of the deed being recorded, regardless of whether they have recognized the new owners in their system as of that day.


----------



## Dean (Nov 9, 2008)

darcy said:


> I tried to scan through the whole thread, but I apologize if this issue was addressed and I missed it.  When I deposit a Marriott week in II, I put in a list of requested trades, some of which may be Marriott and some may not be.  I am not sure how that would work with Marriotts out of II...I don't see a way to do simultaneous requests, but if I wait for a response from Marriott and don't get the trade, then maybe it becomes too late for getting one of the II trades.     Maybe it forces Request-first instead of Deposit-first trades?
> 
> Thanks,
> Darcy


No way to know how or if things will change.  If Marriott adopts any type of true internal trading system, it would likely be separate from Marriott and if so, you'd have the choice of trading with Marriott or through II. If done this way, It's likely we'd lose our internal trading preference with II.  Other than a points system, I can't imagine how Marriott could do much to truly restrict new owners and see no way they could restrict resale buyers differently than others for their home resort.


----------



## jimf41 (Nov 10, 2008)

Dean said:


> Other than a points system, I can't imagine how Marriott could do much to truly restrict new owners and see no way they could restrict resale buyers differently than others for their home resort.



Everyone seems to think that in order to enhance new owners to buy developer instead of resale they have to put some restrictions on resale owners. The six month reservation period for resale owners has been mentioned early on in this thread. From my conversations with the corporate sales office this idea has been largely discarded  mainly due to huge opposition from owners.

Put yourself in Marriott's position and address the problem. It's hard for them to convince current owners to buy another week at 38k when Ebay has them being sold for 9.6k. This recently happened at OP and I can't wait to see what the Marriott sales rep says about that at the tour I'm taking tomorrow. True, they can exercise ROFR but with the current market conditions it would be hard for them to buy up every week that's being sold for less than 40% of current developer price. So if you were Marriott what would you do to increase sales?

Well, one way would be to extend the reservation period to developer bought weeks beyond what resales owners can currently use. This costs Marriott nothing. In their sales pitch they can counter the resale argument by saying that resale owners will pick their weeks after the developer bought weeks have picked their's. A single week owner would then have a good chance of getting a premium week. This is not the case at most Marriott resorts right now from the various discussions I've seen on TUG and other forums.

Marriott has somewhat addressed this problem already by creating Platinum Plus weeks that sell at a high premium. That seems to be working in their new resorts but the older ones like OP it can't be implemented after the fact. At least I don't think it can. OP is sold out but it is still very popular and Marriott would be able to make a fair amount of money selling resales here if they had something to offset the resale price advantage. A friend and non timeshare owner went to the sales tour a few days ago. They pitched hard on Oceana Palms. When he told the rep. that he liked OP better the rep. said he would check his inventory but he didn't think there was anything available at OP right now. I know for a fact that several owners here have listed their OP weeks with Marriott in the resale buy-back program. I would think this indicates that sales on the newer resorts are slowing. That would lead me to conclude that something is in the works to enhance folks to buy developer.

Marriott is in the business of making money. To do that they have to offer a better product at a price people are willing to pay. Right now resales offer essentially the same product at 40-60% less than Marriott. They could increase the points incentives but that costs them money. I don't think any large corporation is looking at increasing their costs right now.


----------



## Dean (Nov 10, 2008)

jimf41 said:


> Everyone seems to think that in order to enhance new owners to buy developer instead of resale they have to put some restrictions on resale owners. The six month reservation period for resale owners has been mentioned early on in this thread. From my conversations with the corporate sales office this idea has been largely discarded  mainly due to huge opposition from owners.
> 
> Put yourself in Marriott's position and address the problem. It's hard for them to convince current owners to buy another week at 38k when Ebay has them being sold for 9.6k. This recently happened at OP and I can't wait to see what the Marriott sales rep says about that at the tour I'm taking tomorrow. True, they can exercise ROFR but with the current market conditions it would be hard for them to buy up every week that's being sold for less than 40% of current developer price. So if you were Marriott what would you do to increase sales?
> 
> ...


I'd agree in general.  I still don't think Marriott can legally make rules that negatively and directly affect one owner at a given resort compared to another from a reservation and usage standpoint of THAT resort without giving them the ability to attain those same options.  Take the 13 month reservation rule, while it does give some the options over others, they still have the potential to buy additional weeks and participate.  But they certainly could offer added value options to qualified owners such as the ability to exchange internally to other MVCI resorts and other value added options such as paying for II, trading for points or other exchange options, even trading back to pay dues.


----------



## CMF (Nov 10, 2008)

Why don't they just give direct buyers more points for their weeks as MFs go up?  Nah, too simple.

Charles


----------



## sdtugger (Nov 10, 2008)

jimf41 said:


> Everyone seems to think that in order to enhance new owners to buy developer instead of resale they have to put some restrictions on resale owners. The six month reservation period for resale owners has been mentioned early on in this thread. From my conversations with the corporate sales office this idea has been largely discarded  mainly due to huge opposition from owners.
> 
> Put yourself in Marriott's position and address the problem. It's hard for them to convince current owners to buy another week at 38k when Ebay has them being sold for 9.6k. This recently happened at OP and I can't wait to see what the Marriott sales rep says about that at the tour I'm taking tomorrow. True, they can exercise ROFR but with the current market conditions it would be hard for them to buy up every week that's being sold for less than 40% of current developer price. So if you were Marriott what would you do to increase sales?
> 
> ...



I think Marriott correctly saw the big problem with messing around with reservations for resale owners.  It is fine to add bells and whistles to usage or trading, but it is completely different to make it more difficult for resales to reserve the same week as direct purchases.  And, the dirty secret is that all weeks would be devalued under this system because they become "resales" as soon as the owner decides they need/want to sell.  Try purchasing a platinum in Hawaii direct and then needing to sell it for the equivalent of a silver or bronze week price because the resale owner can't reserve any decent platinum weeks.  From everything I've read/heard, Marriott realized this would create a huge revolt with owners and backed off of the plan.

Thank goodness.


----------



## silkey21 (Nov 10, 2008)

*Marriott and II*

If Marriott goes away from II then II will not have Marriott getaway weeks, if that is the case say good night to II -- I guess People are saying to Marriott sales people I can get getaway weeks for $400 why buy another week ?.
If this happens, Marriott will be selling timeshares like crazy since people will not have access to extra weeks.


----------



## silkey21 (Nov 10, 2008)

*six month window*



skidoc said:


> I asked my salesperson at the Oceana Palms presentation yesterday about the 6-month window change for resale buyers; she basically said that she would not lower herself to the level of some other salespersons to comment on what was an obvious rumor with no official foundation.
> 
> I respected that!



There is no way if someone bought a timeshare and sells the timeshare then that new owner can only can only book six months in advanced instead of twelve. In would have to state that in the original contract if it does't then they can not. They can added it to new sales, not old sales.

By the way this is a great thing for Marriott, but I would not trust Marriott they could take in the better weeks and then try to rent it out.


----------



## littlestar (Nov 11, 2008)

silkey21 said:


> If Marriott goes away from II then II will not have Marriott getaway weeks, if that is the case say good night to II -- I guess People are saying to Marriott sales people I can get getaway weeks for $400 why buy another week ?.
> If this happens, Marriott will be selling timeshares like crazy since people will not have access to extra weeks.



Getaway weeks are usually only offered for off season in locations with plenty of supply.


----------



## GrayFal (Nov 11, 2008)

CMF said:


> Why don't they just give direct buyers more points for their weeks as MFs go up?  Nah, too simple.
> 
> Charles


If they gave me enough points to stay at a Cat 7 (and now an 8!) for a week - I might consider this a benefit....but getting 90K points for my 2BR L/O Aruba week just doesn't seem like a benefit to me


----------



## CMF (Nov 11, 2008)

GrayFal said:


> If they gave me enough points to stay at a Cat 7 (and now an 8!) for a week - I might consider this a benefit....but getting 90K points for my 2BR L/O Aruba week just doesn't seem like a benefit to me



Yes, points for direct buyers vs no points for resale buyers has always been the distinction.  I say give direct buyers more points!  

Charles


----------



## Pens_Fan (Nov 11, 2008)

There is a local car dealership that lets it be known that their service department has an order that it will work on cars brought in for service.


Cars bought from their dealership
Cars from out of town/state
Cars bought at another local dealership

It's not like they will not work on your car if you buy it from another dealer, but they certainly won't prioritize you.

I don't see how people on this board can't see, or don't want to see, this happening with timeshares.

The developer, much like the car dealership, wants that big upfront piece of money from you.  If you don't choose to buy from them, they'll still accept your maintenance fees, but they aren't going to make it easy for you.

Let's say Marriott gets tricky and decides to come up with a way that doesn't invalidate anyones current contract.  Instead of the threatened reduction from 12 to 6 months booking your vacation if you have a resale, instead Marriott *adds* an incentive to all developer purchased units that they can book 15 months out.  

You can continue to use your resale purchased timeshare, but probably get worse weeks or try to resell it to someone else.  If Marriott think they can resell it, they'll pick it back up at a much reduced ROFR, and resell it at a higher price because now there is a huge difference in value between purchased and resale weeks.


----------



## timeos2 (Nov 11, 2008)

*Could be done but must be fair to all*



Pens_Fan said:


> Let's say Marriott gets tricky and decides to come up with a way that doesn't invalidate anyones current contract.  Instead of the threatened reduction from 12 to 6 months booking your vacation if you have a resale, instead Marriott *adds* an incentive to all developer purchased units that they can book 15 months out.
> 
> You can continue to use your resale purchased timeshare, but probably get worse weeks or try to resell it to someone else.  If Marriott think they can resell it, they'll pick it back up at a much reduced ROFR, and resell it at a higher price because now there is a huge difference in value between purchased and resale weeks.



They could do that BUT to be legal they could only give the priority to the weeks that were purchased under that agreement. IE - if there were 20% of the weeks at the resort purchased under the 15 month rule then only 20% of the units could be reserved that way. The other 80% remain in the 12 month use pool and owners there still have a fair shot at them. No one would have a legitimate complaint. And if you were retail or resale wouldn't matter (as it shouldn't). 

We actually own a resort where a similar distinction between owner types / use rules exist due to the various ways it was marketed over the selling years. They use the percentage allotment on each use week and everyone gets a fair chance at what they desire within the rules their week was sold under. Works well and how they bought their week - retail or resale - never plays into the mix.  The resort looks out for the owners  - not how it was sold - as it should be.


----------



## Pens_Fan (Nov 11, 2008)

I don't know, call it a *loyalty* program, and why couldn't they just choose to give it to anyone that had purchased it directly from them.

I just filled out a survey from Marriott and they are talking tiered levels, loyalty programs, and preferencial reservations.


----------



## CMF (Nov 11, 2008)

*No diff.*

Extending the time window for reservations made by direct buyers has the same effect as reducing the time window to resale buyers.

I.E. Brown eyed people are better than blue eyed people = blue eyed people are not equal to or better than brown eyed people.

Charles


----------



## Latravel (Nov 11, 2008)

_I.E. Brown eyed people are better than blue eyed people = blue eyed people are not equal to or better than brown eyed people._

It's not a question of better or worse.  It's just different.  How can you pay thousands less on the resale market, and still expect Marriott to give you the same privileges in the program?  The business model _*can't*_ work that way or people would always buy from the resale market, which would in turn hurt Marriott's sales numbers.  Of course I am talking about the Marriott program, not an owners use of their unit, which is their legal right.

There has to be a difference (and one that is meaningful to potential buyers) to justify buying from them and I would BET that Marriott is currently developing creative ways to offer more incentives to customers who purchased direct as part of a loyalty program (just like those in existence with air carriers, hotel chains, grocery stores, department stores, the list goes on...).  Why would it be different in the timeshare business world?  I just don't think the Marriott corporation is that simple minded and naive.


----------



## vacationlover2 (Nov 11, 2008)

*New survey*

I just got a survey asking my opinion on a points based system, which I told them I would not like AT all.


----------



## sdtugger (Nov 11, 2008)

Latravel said:


> _I.E. Brown eyed people are better than blue eyed people = blue eyed people are not equal to or better than brown eyed people._
> 
> It's not a question of better or worse.  It's just different.  How can you pay thousands less on the resale market, and still expect Marriott to give you the same privileges in the program?  The business model _*can't*_ work that way or people would always buy from the resale market, which would in turn hurt Marriott's sales numbers.  Of course I am talking about the Marriott program, not an owners use of their unit, which is their legal right.
> 
> There has to be a difference (and one that is meaningful to potential buyers) to justify buying from them and I would BET that Marriott is currently developing creative ways to offer more incentives to customers who purchased direct as part of a loyalty program (just like those in existence with air carriers, hotel chains, grocery stores, department stores, the list goes on...).  Why would it be different in the timeshare business world?  I just don't think the Marriott corporation is that simple minded and naive.



No doubt Marriott can come up some incentives to purchase retail (such as the points swap, internal trading, etc.).  But, the one thing they can't do (and I believe they've realized this as it was floated internally and discussed on the net) is change the reservation system to make it different for resale purchasers.  A resale "platinum" week that can only be used to reserve poor weeks (akin to gold, silver, or even bronze weeks) would be worth MUCH less and would no doubt be challenged (in my view successfully) in court.  Fortunately, it appears that Marriott has seen the light on this one.


----------



## timeos2 (Nov 11, 2008)

*Can't do it legally (doesn't mean they won't try)*



Latravel said:


> _I.E. Brown eyed people are better than blue eyed people = blue eyed people are not equal to or better than brown eyed people._
> 
> It's not a question of better or worse.  It's just different.  How can you pay thousands less on the resale market, and still expect Marriott to give you the same privileges in the program?  The business model _*can't*_ work that way or people would always buy from the resale market, which would in turn hurt Marriott's sales numbers.  Of course I am talking about the Marriott program, not an owners use of their unit, which is their legal right.
> 
> There has to be a difference (and one that is meaningful to potential buyers) to justify buying from them and I would BET that Marriott is currently developing creative ways to offer more incentives to customers who purchased direct as part of a loyalty program (just like those in existence with air carriers, hotel chains, grocery stores, department stores, the list goes on...).  Why would it be different in the timeshare business world?  I just don't think the Marriott corporation is that simple minded and naive.



No, there isn't a difference. SOMEONE (the seller) paid the full freight price at original purchase. Thats the one & ONLY time the developer (in this case Marriott) gets to sell or make rules. After that the property/use rights belong to the buyer, under the term they purchased and agreed to and in there is the right to sell. Not sell an encumbered or altered  product but sell what they bought to whoever makes the offer and at whatever price they can get. The paying thousands less is simply being a smart buyer not a reason or justification to try to artificially limit that resale buyers use rights. That theory won't fly and wouldn't stand up to any court challenge. 

Trying to make two classes out of already sold product doesn't work and ends up hurting everyone. Not even the lowlife at Wyndham sales was able to successfully pull off that trick. Believe me you don't want Marriott following the Wyndham path of degrading resales (and they had virtually nothing to accomplish that with except a bogus "VIP" moniker that did the trick).  Unless you want your ownership to be worth pennies on your retail purchase price dollars.


----------



## Dave M (Nov 11, 2008)

Please take a look at this new thread on this forum for a peek at some of Marriott's current thinking about a possible points-based internal exchange program and numerous other possible changes that could impact current and future MVCI owners.


----------



## Latravel (Nov 11, 2008)

It already is different.  Resale purchasers cannot exchange for points and no one can challenge that concept so your theory has been tested and proven false.  Marriott can change the terms of the program as they wish and they do.  The question now is if they want the difference between direct and resale to be even greater than it is now.


----------



## davidvel (Nov 11, 2008)

Latravel said:


> It already is different.  Resale purchasers cannot exchange for points and no one can challenge that concept so your theory has been tested and proven false.  Marriott can change the terms of the program as they wish and they do.  The question now is if they want the difference between direct and resale to be even greater than it is now.


Timeos2 is absolutely correct. Nothing is different, nothing is changed, and nothing he says has been proven false. The trade for points "benefit" is not part of the deeded rights, but simply an "incentive" promised to original buyers, which Marriott (not the HOA for your resort), has an obligation to fulfill through its points system, which it CAN change at will. 

His original post was responding to the following theory:



Pens_Fan said:


> Instead of the threatened reduction from 12 to 6 months booking your vacation if you have a resale, instead Marriott *adds* an incentive to all developer purchased units that they can book 15 months out.



The reservation rules (12/13 month) are specfically set forth in the deeded documents. It is not a matter of "adding a benefit" to reserve 15 months out. The rules are concise and specific. There is no distinction between an original purchaser and resale purchaser in those docs.  Marriott cannot change any terms of the deed, CC&Rs and Timeshare declaration. In fact, Marriott is simply a manager for the respective HOAs which actually owes the obligations to owners. 

This is akin to a developer giving you a cheap mortage, upgrades or other incentives when buying a house directly from developer. The developer doesn't owe these same incentives to any subsequent purchaser. Simply put Mariott cannot change the rules for reserving, or using your week, which are deeded entitlements.   



Latravel said:


> How can you pay thousands less on the resale market, and still expect Marriott to give you the same privileges in the program?



No resale buyer has a right to be a part of any new exchange program, etc., or any particular priority.  However, I expect that Marriott will include resale buyers as there are so many valuable weeks that have been resold that they would need for their program to be sucessful. In a way, this is how Marriott can "recapture" the resale weeks under their control and make new vague promises during the sales pitch about the value of the program (as they do now with the points trade system.)

Of course, resale buyers are entitled to the same deeded rights of an original purchaser no matter what price was paid, no different than neighbors in a condo complex that paid drastically different prices for their unit twenty years apart.


----------



## Latravel (Nov 12, 2008)

_"Timeos2 is absolutely correct. Nothing is different, nothing is changed, and nothing he says has been proven false. The trade for points "benefit" is not part of the deeded rights, but simply an "incentive" promised to original buyers, which Marriott (not the HOA for your resort), has an obligation to fulfill through its points system, which it CAN change at will."_


If you read my post carefully, I was talking about the Marriott program (as you say, incentives), not the owners legal right to use their unit as stated in their purchasing documents.  As you stated as well, Marriott can change the program rules as they wish, as they are doing now with the potential points system.  This creates a _*difference *_in the privileges or benefits as you call them between resale and direct purchase.  That is the difference I am discussing.  I'm not sure of where is the disagreement?


----------



## PerryM (Nov 15, 2008)

Oops wrong thread


----------

