# What are Trust Points Worth?



## vbfour (Feb 26, 2013)

Mid-week through a stay at Ocean Pointe.  Weeks owner here (Silver Season) and Trust Points owner.  Decided to use Trust Points for an Ocean Front 1 Bedroom.  Got Ocean Front first floor view of tree trunks.  Numerous attempts to move, to no avail.  After coming here 10 years and never getting below fourth floor, I figured maybe we were due. Priority in room assignments is multi-week owner, owner, others.

Curious, I asked management where I stood as a Trust owner.  Their answer was the same as an Interval International Trade.  Really?  I paid (Pay) big money to MVC for those points.  When sold to me I was told that I was an "Owner" anywhere.  Ha!

Similar occurrence at Customs House last year . . . BEWARE of trust points, they are not all that they are portrayed to be - and less!


----------



## SueDonJ (Feb 26, 2013)

This is the second post in a week about a similar situation; see  this link related to a TUGger's experience at Kauai Beach Club.  I don't know if poor placements for Destination Club Members are happening more frequently or if we're more attuned to the topic (because the system should be functioning easily now that it's passed its infancy,) but for whatever reason we've also lately had quite a few different discussions about the overall topic of Marriott's lack of an official position concerning unit placement at the resorts when using DC Points.

In my opinion, if the onsite Marriott employees at the resorts are under the impression that DC Members are not considered to be on par with other Marriott Owners, then the Marriott execs should clarify that position directly to the DC Members.  As long as we're getting reports of onsite reps saying outright that DC Points usage puts a Member on equal footing with only II exchangers and not other Marriott Owners, then Marriott execs have a problem.  DC Membership IS a form of Marriott ownership and the execs need to relay that fact to the resort personnel.  Until they do, what's happening at that level only serves to discourage usage of the Marriott DC Points product, which in turn will discourage sales of the product.

Vbfour, my suggestion is that you do the same thing TUGger cbdmvci did after posting that linked thread.  You should contact Customer Advocacy and make them aware of your experience.  It simply doesn't make any sense to me that Marriott execs would want the onsite reps to be actively disparaging the newest Marriott Points product, but the only way they'll know it's happening is if they're told about it.

_Marriott Vacation Club Corporate Office
Customer Advocacy
tel: 800-936-6824
email: customer.advocacy~AT~vacationclub.com (change ~AT~ to @, of course)
Hours: 8:30 AM - 5:30 PM EST (Monday - Friday)_

Good luck.


----------



## FractionalTraveler (Feb 26, 2013)

vbfour said:


> Mid-week through a stay at Ocean Pointe.  Weeks owner here (Silver Season) and Trust Points owner.  Decided to use Trust Points for an Ocean Front 1 Bedroom.  Got Ocean Front first floor view of tree trunks.  Numerous attempts to move, to no avail.  After coming here 10 years and never getting below fourth floor, I figured maybe we were due. Priority in room assignments is multi-week owner, owner, others.
> 
> Curious, I asked management where I stood as a Trust owner.  Their answer was the same as an Interval International Trade.  Really?  I paid (Pay) big money to MVC for those points.  When sold to me I was told that I was an "Owner" anywhere.  Ha!
> 
> Similar occurrence at Customs House last year . . . BEWARE of trust points, they are not all that they are portrayed to be - and less!



Sorry to hear you have a couple of experiences where your expectations were not met for view/unit location using Trust Points.

I am also a Trust point owner but have no such experiences to date with about 15 trust point reservations across 7 different properties completed so far.

I wouldn't be too quick to draw conclusions based upon just 2 data points so far.  There are many more factors that make up room assignments than just reservation type for example (check-in day, season, occupancy rate, time of day, unit configuration, accessibility, room requests, MVCI Status, etc.)

As far as I know the only guaranteed view is the one on a deed and now also one that can be confirmed through the use of DC points which is a real big benefit to the program IMHO.

Try booking an oceanfront unit at other properties and you won’t be disappointed.  I think you just had some bad luck on those two previous reservations.

Best,
FT


----------



## SueDonJ (Feb 26, 2013)

FractionalTraveler said:


> Sorry to hear you have a couple of experiences where your expectations were not met for view/unit location using Trust Points.
> 
> I am also a Trust point owner but have no such experiences to date with about 15 trust point reservations across 7 different properties completed so far.
> 
> ...



Except, FT, that the OP said s/he asked onsite management to explain and was told outright that DC Points users are on par with II exchangers in that resort's placement hierarchy.  I think that's unacceptable whether we're talking about Trust or Exchange/Enrolled Members, but certainly more so for Trust Members.  That's why I suggested that the OP should involve Customer Advocacy.

Normally I have the same attitude you do, that the only thing guaranteed is placement in the unit type/view that's purchased (whether as a Week or as booked with Points) and that the fairest way for the resort employees to implement placement is on a rotational basis so that certain owners aren't always placed in the "best" units.  But what's been related twice in one week now isn't a matter of TUGgers taking their fair turns in units that might be considered the "worst."  What's being related is that the onsite personnel are stating unequivocally that they are not considering DC Members to be Marriott Owners, which they most certainly are.  IMO.


----------



## Saintsfanfl (Feb 26, 2013)

Was this stay just recently? This is an extremely busy month for Ocean Pointe. Many of the units are owner occupied during their own reservations. You cannot be placed ahead of those reservations. If you put in a specific building request that killed your floor chances even further. Next time you want to specify as high a floor as possible in any building. You still could end up on bottom during February. Once you are assigned requesting a move has almost no chance because the resort is so full during Feb.


----------



## Saintsfanfl (Feb 26, 2013)

Also, keep in mind there are only 7 ocean front 1BR units per building in the first four buildings (excluding Kingfish). It doesn't take many owners for you to automatically go to the bottom.

Because February oceanfront rents for so much more than maintenance fees, owners are occupying or renting out on redweek.


----------



## Saintsfanfl (Feb 26, 2013)

I don't think anyone is debating that DC members are not Marriott owners. It's more of an issue of a DC member is not a Ocean Pointe owner, which they most certainly are not. In the OP's case they happen to be an Ocean Pointe owner but they booked the worst month in probably the worst unit type to expect a good placement. 



SueDonJ said:


> Except, FT, that the OP said s/he asked onsite management to explain and was told outright that DC Points users are on par with II exchangers in that resort's placement hierarchy.  I think that's unacceptable whether we're talking about Trust or Exchange/Enrolled Members, but certainly more so for Trust Members.  That's why I suggested that the OP should involve Customer Advocacy.
> 
> Normally I have the same attitude you do, that the only thing guaranteed is placement in the unit type/view that's purchased (whether as a Week or as booked with Points) and that the fairest way for the resort employees to implement placement is on a rotational basis so that certain owners aren't always placed in the "best" units.  But what's been related twice in one week now isn't a matter of TUGgers taking their fair turns in units that might be considered the "worst."  What's being related is that the onsite personnel are stating unequivocally that they are not considering DC Members to be Marriott Owners, which they most certainly are.  IMO.


----------



## SueDonJ (Feb 26, 2013)

Saintsfanfl said:


> Was this stay just recently? This is an extremely busy month for Ocean Pointe. Many of the units are owner occupied during their own reservations. You cannot be placed ahead of those reservations. If you put in a specific building request that killed your floor chances even further. Next time you want to specify as high a floor as possible in any building. You still could end up on bottom during February. Once you are assigned requesting a move has almost no chance because the resort is so full during Feb.



The OP says the stay is happening now, "... mid-week through a stay ..."

I don't understand why DC Members aren't on par with other owners, IMO.  There's only one resort which hasn't had any intervals conveyed to the DC Trust (Streamside, I think?) and with all the other resorts, there are Trust-conveyed intervals as well as others being mingled among the DC Exchange Company.  DC Members ARE Marriott Owners and should be considered on par with Weeks Owners.  Not above them, but on par with them meaning that DC Trust Members should be on par with Owners using their Home Resorts (at all but that one) and DC Exchange/Enrolled Members should be considered on par with Owners exchanging back into their Home Resorts.

I know that's not a popular opinion here on TUG but it's what I believe.  But even if you don't, I don't understand at all how you can be in agreement with the resort personnel who are saying that DC Members are only on par with II Exchangers.  That's preposterous, IMO, because they own Marriott products!  If what these couple of reps have said is true, though, that it's the official stance, then I think Marriott execs should come right out and say it because it's a major determining factor of whether the Points product is worth buying or using.


----------



## Superchief (Feb 26, 2013)

vbfour said:


> Mid-week through a stay at Ocean Pointe.  Weeks owner here (Silver Season) and Trust Points owner.  Decided to use Trust Points for an Ocean Front 1 Bedroom.  Got Ocean Front first floor view of tree trunks.  Numerous attempts to move, to no avail.  After coming here 10 years and never getting below fourth floor, I figured maybe we were due. Priority in room assignments is multi-week owner, owner, others.
> 
> Curious, I asked management where I stood as a Trust owner.  Their answer was the same as an Interval International Trade.  Really?  I paid (Pay) big money to MVC for those points.  When sold to me I was told that I was an "Owner" anywhere.  Ha!
> 
> Similar occurrence at Customs House last year . . . BEWARE of trust points, they are not all that they are portrayed to be - and less!



vbfour.
I am sorry to hear about your disappointing experience at Ocean Pointe. I suggest you try Oceana Palms in the future if you plan a trip to Singer Island in the future (althought there are only 2BR units). I was told that DC points redeemers receive equal treatment to weeks owners. I am a weeks owner and of course I believe we should get view priority when using my owned week, but trust points owners should get priority when I use DC points for a week . There resally aren't any bad views at this resort. I was in the Sunset tower during a recent visit, and those villas also appear to have great views of the intercoastal along with some view of the ocean. I have used DC points for several stays and believe my priority was slightly lower than owners using their owned week. Are you a premiere or premiere plus owner?


----------



## dioxide45 (Feb 26, 2013)

DC point users really should only be on par with weeks owners when using trust points and booking direct trust inventory. Any inventory booked through the DC Exchange Company using points is the equivalent of an exchange in II. Just a different company facilitating the exchange. Since the OP is at Ocean Pointe which is light on trust inventory, I would expect that their stay was booked with legacy points through the DC Exchange Company.


----------



## FractionalTraveler (Feb 26, 2013)

dioxide45 said:


> DC point users really should only be on par with weeks owners when using trust points and booking direct trust inventory. Any inventory booked through the DC Exchange Company using points is the equivalent of an exchange in II. Just a different company facilitating the exchange. Since the OP is at Ocean Pointe which is light on trust inventory, I would expect that their stay was booked with legacy points through the DC Exchange Company.



I agree with this.  This seems like a very plausible explanation of how it should work.  I'm just not sure the system is either designed this way or if compliance at the property level is enforced with this type of policy.

As a trust owner, I will ask Marriott for a direct response on the matter and report back my findings.  Now that we have a few different types of reservations, we should get this in writing from the top.

No guarantee we will get a response but I'm up to formally asking.


----------



## BocaBoy (Feb 27, 2013)

vbfour said:


> Mid-week through a stay at Ocean Pointe.  Weeks owner here (Silver Season) and Trust Points owner.  Decided to use Trust Points for an Ocean Front 1 Bedroom.  Got Ocean Front first floor view of tree trunks.


This type of villa classification is a big problem with Ocean Pointe and a major reason I do not much like the resort.  The views you get are often not what they should be for a given category.  A first floor villa with no view of the ocean should be garden view regardless of whether it faces in the direction of the ocean.  (I recognize that Ocean Pointe is not the only resort with this problem.)  In contrast, at Maui Ocean Club the first floor villas facing the ocean but with no view solely because it is blocked by landscaping are classified as Garden view or Island view.  This is as it should be.


----------



## Saintsfanfl (Feb 27, 2013)

BocaBoy said:


> This type of villa classification is a big problem with Ocean Pointe and a major reason I do not much like the resort.  The views you get are often not what they should be for a given category.  A first floor villa with no view of the ocean should be garden view regardless of whether it faces in the direction of the ocean.  (I recognize that Ocean Pointe is not the only resort with this problem.)  In contrast, at Maui Ocean Club the first floor villas facing the ocean but with no view solely because it is blocked by landscaping are classified as Garden view or Island view.  This is as it should be.



I agree. In reality it is the second floor since the garage is on the ground but it still isn't near high enough to clear the green and fence to a comfortable level. Oceana Palms right down the street has the garage through 6 so the views start at floor 7 rather than 2. The bottom unit floor at Oceana is equivalent to the next to highest unit floor at Ocean Pointe.


----------



## cbdmvci (Feb 27, 2013)

SueDonJ said:


> Vbfour, my suggestion is that you do the same thing TUGger cbdmvci did after posting that linked thread.  You should contact Customer Advocacy and make them aware of your experience.  It simply doesn't make any sense to me that Marriott execs would want the onsite reps to be actively disparaging the newest Marriott Points product, but the only way they'll know it's happening is if they're told about it.



*Here's a copy of the letter I wrote to Customer Advocacy at Sue's suggestion.  It's been about a week.  So far, no response.*
_
Xxxxxxx Xxxxxxx 
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxxx, NJ xxxxx
Customer Number: xxxxxxxxx 
Marriott Rewards Number: xxxxxxx 
Interval International Number: xxxx
(h)xxx-xxx-xxxx
(w)xxx-xxx-xxxx

Customer Advocate
Marriott Vacation Club

Dear Friends:

"SueDonJ," moderator of the Marriott Resort System Forum on the TUG BBS, suggested that I share a link to a current discussion thread on the Forum … and solicit … and report your response.

http://tugbbs.com/forums/showthread.php?t=187723


As I am sure you have learned, Sue is a fair moderator.  She defends MVC vigorously when she believes a disgruntled MVC customer is being unfair to the Club and its personnel.  But, she "calls out" the Club when she believes a concern is legitimate.

The three issues raised in this thread that she finds of particular interest are as follows:

1.       Are there clearly defined guidelines for the ranking a reservation requests besides the obvious one: home resort requesters get first priority for best rooms/views?

What about DC Points reservations versus intra-Marriott week-to-week trades versus Interval Internationsl trades?  Fewer-day DC reservations versus longer DC reservations.  DC points reservations versus MRP reservations.  Etc.


2.       Do frontline personnel know and understand these rankings?


3.       Are frontline personnel that handle check-ins "on the same page as corporate" in the branding of DC Points?

The string will take you just a minute or two to read through.

I'd love to have your reaction.  I am, obviously, "cbdmvci" among the posters on this thread.

Sincerely yours,

Xxxxxx X. Xxxxxxxxx_


----------



## Saintsfanfl (Feb 27, 2013)

I would be very surpised if you get anything but a boilerplate response, if any at all.


----------



## cbdmvci (Feb 27, 2013)

*Sue has put her finger on the problem best.*

*It's one of two things:*

It's a given that home resort owners come first for room/view priority, 

*But it seems that either...*

MVC hasn't specified a clear ranking beyond that given first right.  And specifically where DC Points reservations falls in that ranking;

*or*

MVC hasn't assured that frontline personnel understand that ranking ... and have allowed them to denigrate DC Points reservations during the check-in process (as happened to me in Kauai).

*But, in either case, MVC is clearly hurting its DC Points branding at a critical time.*

For example, I'm sure not buying any Trust Points now.  And I'm shifting back to more II trades than DC Points selections until I know where those points reservations stand in that queue.


----------



## tschwa2 (Feb 27, 2013)

Was this last week?  Then it also would have been midweek (non-traditional check in day) on a busy Holiday week (President's Day).  The weekend partial stays would have been other DC members, renters and rewards through Marriott.com. Marriott.com users wouldn't be ahead of owners.  So there may have been limited availability of rooms in your view category.  Also by checking in late it also gives the full week occupants time to complain and possibly be re-accommodated into a better view before you checked in. 

The DC club really touts the savings of midweek stays using points but during busy times when a majority of weeks are used as traditional weeks there may not be the inventory for anything above the minimum view in the selected view category.


----------



## puckmanfl (Feb 27, 2013)

good morning....

This gets very dicey and confusing... The sales "shpiel" is as follows  Purchase "Trust Points, you don't have a home resort because every resort is your home resort".  This is not exactly true. The OP made a reservation at Ocean Pointe using Trust points but there is a better than average chance that this inventory was not owned by the Trust (Legacy Inventory) but came thru the Exchange company.  In this way,The Trust Point ressie for OP is essentially an exchange as well.  When a Trust ressie is made at Oceana Palms or some other joint well stocked in the trust, then the ressie has a higher chance of being a direct Trust ressie in which the ressie should be treated the same as an owner!!!

The $64K is "Does the front-line staff at the resorts, know or care about the difference between a Trust owner making a direct Trust ressie (owner) or a Trust point ressie made from Legacy inventory thru Excahnge Company (exchange)


----------



## puckmanfl (Feb 27, 2013)

good morning....

It gets even dicier.... Not sure why everyone feels that marriott.com renters should go to bottom of priority.  In effect, Marriott.com users are renting from owners (Marriott/MVCD).  MVCD is a multi-week owner, when they rent these units to customers on line the resort priority that is attached to these units should remain.  If I rent OF from a multi week owner at OP I would expect the priority of these units to still be valid.


----------



## Saintsfanfl (Feb 27, 2013)

puckmanfl said:


> good morning....
> 
> It gets even dicier.... Not sure why everyone feels that marriott.com renters should go to bottom of priority.  In effect, Marriott.com users are renting from owners (Marriott/MVCD).  MVCD is a multi-week owner, when they rent these units to customers on line the resort priority that is attached to these units should remain.  If I rent OF from a multi week owner at OP I would expect the priority of these units to still be valid.



If you rent from an owner I believe it is still valid. I rented an ocean front studio one time during platinum season. I called Ocean Pointe not knowing what the request procedure was and the front desk told me I was near the bottom since I was renting. I was in closing on a unit but not yet listed as an owner. Needless to say the front desk was wrong. The reservation was still classified under premier owner's status and it read "guaranteed high floor". I ended up on the 6th floor of the building I requested. Definitely high on the priority list.

As far as marriott.com renters go, that is another matter. There has to be some type of priority so you can't just say everyone is an owner and be done with it. The priority list is very specific for a reason, otherwise you end up with hundreds of reservations all tied with the same priority.


----------



## puckmanfl (Feb 27, 2013)

good morning...

It again gets very tricky.... MVCD gets inventory from many avenues...

#1 MVCD owned units
#2 MR and DC point conversions
#3 foreclosures and delinquencies...

If the Marriott.com inventory comes from #1/#3  the Marriott.com customer is renting from a multi week owner and should have the same priority as any other owner..

On the Marriott.com website..the room choice says (OF, OV ) etc...It doesn't say the worst of (OF,OV etc.)


----------



## tschwa2 (Feb 27, 2013)

puckmanfl said:


> On the Marriott.com website..the room choice says (OF, OV ) etc...It doesn't say the worst of (OF,OV etc.)



It doesn't; but it also doesn't state best of...  Nor does it for single week owners, multi week owners, multi week owners using consecutive weeks, etc.  All are guaranteed a unit in the view category.  Nothing more, nothing less.  If the HOA's are making priority lists (as we know they do) they have to deal with the happy and/or unhappy folks as they check in.  Maybe date stamps or random programs would work better who knows.  

Marriott doesn't have to have procedures to deal with priority, but if they do they should follow it.  As stated in this tread there are many permutations that probably aren't dealt with in the current priority procedures but that probably should be addressed.


----------



## vbfour (Feb 27, 2013)

Wow, guess I tossed a grenade in the room with this one!

The point of my post is simple.  MVCI is selling Trust points as a "you are an owner everywhere" system.  They charge me the same for the Villa at Ocean Pointe as they would if a weeks owner were to trade their week for points and then use those points to get back into Ocean Pointe.  They charge me more for my maintenance fees and allow less for property taxes because my "ownership" is spread across the system.  The bottom line is that I paid as much or more for my week at Ocean Pointe as a "weeks" member.

BUT, management has indicated that "Weeks" trumps "Trust" in all cases.  If I were to ever endeavor to come back to Ocean Pointe during Platinum Season, even though I paid the premium to be here, I will NEVER be placed with a view.  For those of you that have been here, there is an enormous difference between first floor and seventh floor accommodations - though all are at the same "price".

If MVCI wants this program to work, then Trust owners must be on par with Weeks owners.  Put us in the same pool with regards to Villa assignment (you were on the seventh floor last year, so this year you're on the second  . . . etc).  Multi-week locks on the best units might have to change as well.

I am tracking this to ground here at Ocean Pointe first, with follow-ups up the chain coming after my return home.


----------



## puckmanfl (Feb 27, 2013)

good morning....

All True...but timeshare owners have some idea about how all of this works (at least they should) but the poor guy just trolling on Marriott.com has no idea about stuff like multi week owners etc... Perhaps when these MVCD units pop up on Marriott.com there should be some disclaimer that states "unit view dependent on resort priority system...

Perhaps even better..the mother company can be more honest about views...that 1st floor Kingfish OF at Ocean Pointe may be technically OF but not what the average customer has in mind...  Same for the OV at Waiohai tha has a fractional slice of OV whne you turn your head and lean out the balcony...


----------



## Saintsfanfl (Feb 27, 2013)

This is one of my ownership documents available on my MVCI account.



> Marriott's Ocean Pointe
> Palm Beach Shores, Florida
> REQUESTS AND VILLA ASSIGNMENTS
> Ocean Pointe enjoys one of the highest Owner occupancy rates of all Marriott Vacation Club resorts. As is true at every property, we place our Owners at the very top of the priority list in terms of requests for villa locations and preferences. Because of the very high number of Owners that we welcome each week, we are often challenged with villa location requests that we are essentially unable to grant. We respectfully ask for your understanding and acceptance of our meticulous adherence to the established priorities of villa assignments as listed below. As Ocean Pointe approaches complete sell-out, there is virtually no availability for upgrades from ocean side to ocean front villas. Since you are almost certain to be vacationing during the same week as many Ocean Pointe Owners, it is likely that the resort's physical capacity will not support the number of requests for particular views or locations. Requests are handled (and granted when available) in the following order:
> ...


----------



## puckmanfl (Feb 27, 2013)

good morning...

vbfour...

Here is the problem....With your trust points..you are not an owner "everywhere".  You are an owner in the trust!!! OP is mostly Legacy and Platinum is almost all sold...  At OP Platinum you are an "exchanger"..The inventory came from Legacy stuff placed in Exchange company.  The problem is the sales folks aren't making this clear!!!  They aren't teling newbies that HHI summer is almost all sold and they have to"exchange" to get in...


----------



## vbfour (Feb 27, 2013)

BocaBoy said:


> This type of villa classification is a big problem with Ocean Pointe and a major reason I do not much like the resort.  The views you get are often not what they should be for a given category.  A first floor villa with no view of the ocean should be garden view regardless of whether it faces in the direction of the ocean.  (I recognize that Ocean Pointe is not the only resort with this problem.)  In contrast, at Maui Ocean Club the first floor villas facing the ocean but with no view solely because it is blocked by landscaping are classified as Garden view or Island view.  This is as it should be.



Amen.  Management here punts to Florida Statutes that only allow "Ocean View" or "Ocean Front".  In fact I suggested that they have a listing for "Garden View" but they said they couldn't.  

There is an expectation of value when you make a reservation through Trust points.  That value has been intentionally denied by local management at the very least.  My goal is to ascertain whether that denial comes from the top.


----------



## vbfour (Feb 27, 2013)

puckmanfl said:


> good morning...
> 
> vbfour...
> 
> Here is the problem....With your trust points..you are not an owner "everywhere".  You are an owner in the trust!!! OP is mostly Legacy and Platinum is almost all sold...  At OP Platinum you are an "exchanger"..The inventory came from Legacy stuff placed in Exchange company.  The problem is the sales folks aren't making this clear!!!  They aren't teling newbies that HHI summer is almost all sold and they have to"exchange" to get in...



I get this.  The problem is there is no way of knowing this when you make a reservation (though TUG will certainly help with this in the future).  There is no warning in the system that tells you that you are buying a location with little hope of good placement.

Maybe the reservation system cold be be modified to indicate available inventory.  I don't know.  I just know I feel as though I've been "bait and switched".


----------



## puckmanfl (Feb 27, 2013)

good morning...

you have been "bait and switched" twice..Once by MVCD for not explaining Trust v. Legacy and again when they qualify a first floor tree view as OF...and charged you the points accordingly...

The expectation of value making reservations with Trust points is at resorts that are mostly "Trust" and your reservation is Trust inventory.   OP Platinumis a mature mostly sold out Legacy joint.  Thus at this facility you are an 'exchanger" (inventory thru Exchange Company).  No different than an II exchange.  The problem is that MVCD charges you at OF premium in DC points, then sticks you in a room that is legally OF but morally is garden or island view.  In these circumstances  MVCD should list units as "obstructed OF" and charge less points...  Had you known you would have had a  lousy OF, you would have just taken OV...


----------



## vbfour (Feb 27, 2013)

puckmanfl said:


> good morning...
> 
> you have been "bait and switched" twice..Once by MVCD for not explaining Trust v. Legacy and again when they qualify a first floor tree view as OF...and charged you the points accordingly...
> 
> The expectation of value making reservations with Trust points is at resorts that are mostly "Trust" and your reservation is Trust inventory.   OP Platinumis a mature mostly sold out Legacy joint.  Thus at this facility you are an 'exchanger" (inventory thru Exchange Company).  No different than an II exchange.  The problem is that MVCD charges you at OF premium in DC points, then sticks you in a room that is legally OF but morally is garden or island view.  In these circumstances  MVCD should list units as "obstructed OF" and charge less points...  Had you known you would have had a  lousy OF, you would have just taken OV...



You've got that right!  Had I known - there isn't a way through the reservation site.


----------



## SpikeMauler (Mar 2, 2013)

Here's another example.

See link below:
http://www.tripadvisor.com/ShowUser...omas_U_S_Virgin_Islands.html#CHECK_RATES_CONT


----------



## puckmanfl (Mar 2, 2013)

good morning....

Spike  I read this review... and nothing changes....The problem remains the same... The sales people are selling the Trust points with the "you are an owner everywhere" shpiel.  This is not true!  You are an owner only in the Trust.  Many of the old Legacy resorts, especially platinum season are accesses only thru Legacy Inventory and the Exchange Company!!!  Thus, if a points player (either Trust or Legacy) accesses this inventory you are an "exchanger" and thus fall behind owners using their own weeks! No differnet than an II exchange!!!

I am a legacy owner that uses DC points all the time... I expect to be behind owners using their home resort!!!!  I expect to be in the "exchanger" priority group.  I can "buy" my way up the "food chain" by using extra points.  IOW IF I use the points the purchase OF, I expect to be higher than OV owners using their own week, but lower than owners using their own OF week...


The problem is 2 fold...

#1   Trust owners (especially newbies) are nort being taught by the sales folks how the system works...

#2   Legacy owners don't understand that when they access Legacy or Trust inventory using DC points, they are still "exchangers" just using Marriott's internal exchange company, instead of II...

In summary...

all Legacy DC points transactions are "exchangers"
all Trust access of Legacy units are also "exchangers"
only Trust reservations of Trust inventory is "ownership"

hope this helps...

spent my 7 days at RC Vail making sure I can learn the system:rofl::hysterical:


----------



## SueDonJ (Mar 2, 2013)

puckmanfl said:


> good morning....
> 
> Spike  I read this review... and nothing changes....The problem remains the same... The sales people are selling the Trust points with the "you are an owner everywhere" shpiel.  This is not true!  You are an owner only in the Trust.  Many of the old Legacy resorts, especially platinum season are accesses only thru Legacy Inventory and the Exchange Company!!!  Thus, if a points player (either Trust or Legacy) accesses this inventory you are an "exchanger" and thus fall behind owners using their own weeks! No differnet than an II exchange!!!
> 
> ...



At this point it appears that the majority of resorts aren't making any ownership allowances at all for DC membership in their Priority Placement Systems and IMO, that's just not acceptable.  As much as I don't agree that DC Points users, especially Trust Members, should be considered "exchangers," the least I will concede is that if that's the case, then the resorts should be distinguishing between DC and II exchangers and not just lumping them all in together.  If they are looking at them all as exchanges, then a DC exchange should count for more than an II exchange, IMO, similar to the priority given to an owner exchanging back in to a home resort.

Puck, I'm confused about this - _"IOW IF I use the points the purchase OF, I expect to be higher than OV owners using their own week, but lower than owners using their own OF week..."_  I don't understand why you'd give any consideration at all to OV owners here because booking DC stays guarantees the view/building type.  I get why you'd consider OF owners in the equation when you book a DC stay in an OF unit, but I'm lost as to why you're mentioning OV owners here.  There's no question that the room assigners do not have the same leeway with DC bookings as they do with II bookings, where they don't have to place guests in the particular unit/view type on an II confirmation.  If they're taking that leeway with DC bookings then that's a whole different set of unacceptable problems.


----------



## puckmanfl (Mar 2, 2013)

good afternoon

Sue...

what i meant was that if I purchase OF with DC points...I should get an OF, before an OV owner at home resort gets upgraded!!!

are u watching bolts v bruins???/


----------



## SueDonJ (Mar 2, 2013)

puckmanfl said:


> good afternoon
> 
> Sue...
> 
> ...



Sssssshhhhhh.  Don't tell anybody but I have an odd bad feeling about the B's this year, can't explain it but can't mention it around here either because folks seem to have gone crazy thinking that the B's can do no wrong.  I don't ever have these odd feelings or superstitions but it's almost like I know they're going to implode and don't want to see how.  So, I'm not watching unless Don has them on.  He's at work, the house is nice and quiet. 

I'll tell you, Puck, if owners are being upgraded from what they purchased when they're staying at their home resorts on their owned Weeks ... well, that's about as bad a placement practice as I'd want to see happen.  Owners should get what they own, DC members should get what they reserve.  Period.  Upgrades like you say would make me rant and rave all over creation, after I blew a gasket hearing about it!  It shouldn't happen, EVER.  Well, maybe it would be okay .000000001% of the time, if strange circumstances make units unavailable because their ceilings have caved in or something.  Now you've got me stomping and hmmmph-ing all over my quiet house!  :rofl:


----------



## dioxide45 (Mar 2, 2013)

SueDonJ said:


> At this point it appears that the majority of resorts aren't making any ownership allowances at all for DC membership in their Priority Placement Systems and IMO, that's just not acceptable.  As much as I don't agree that DC Points users, especially Trust Members, should be considered "exchangers," the least I will concede is that if that's the case, then the resorts should be distinguishing between DC and II exchangers and not just lumping them all in together.  If they are looking at them all as exchanges, then a DC exchange should count for more than an II exchange, IMO, similar to the priority given to an owner exchanging back in to a home resort.



I don't understand why you would think that a DC exchange should possibly be given a priority over an II exchanger? IMO, they are both an exchange. You are just using a different exchange company to complete the exchange. Now a DC exchange should be considered a "Marriott Owner" when exchanging in to a Marriott property. They should be placed on the same level as other Marriott owners exchanging in through II. Now a DC exchanger should be place above a non Marriott owner exchanging through II. 

I don't think there is any need to distinguish between DC and II exchanges in the priority placement systems. They already in most (all?) cases distinguish between Marriott owners and non Marriott owner exchanging in.


----------



## SueDonJ (Mar 2, 2013)

dioxide45 said:


> I don't understand why you would think that a DC exchange should possibly be given a priority over an II exchanger? IMO, they are both an exchange. You are just using a different exchange company to complete the exchange. Now a DC exchange should be considered a "Marriott Owner" when exchanging in to a Marriott property. They should be placed on the same level as other Marriott owners exchanging in through II. Now a DC exchanger should be place above a non Marriott owner exchanging through II.
> 
> I don't think there is any need to distinguish between DC and II exchanges in the priority placement systems. They already in most (all?) cases distinguish between Marriott owners and non Marriott owner exchanging in.



I don't know what it is or how to explain it other than with one you're using an internal Marriott product and with the other an external product.  But especially with Trust Members I think it's more than that, regardless of whether their intervals technically are DC Exchange Company intervals.  IMO they are true Marriott Owners on par with Weeks Owners.  If that means the resorts have to all start using a rotational system so that at least DC Trust Members can be integrated in the Priority Placement System fairly, then so be it.  IMO that's what Marriott execs should be relaying to their resort personnel. 

What you're saying about placement with II exchanges would make sense if that's how it's implemented across all resorts, that Marriott owners are given a preference over other II exchangers.  But I don't think it is.  This OP didn't say that the resort manager differentiated between all II exchangers that way.  That manager only said s/he, "_... was the same as an Interval International Trade._"  If the OP was a DC Exchange Member I'd still want the breakout to go further to give a Marriott preference, but with the OP being a DC Trust Member I think that breakout was completely wrong and the explanation was totally inadequate!

Like I said, I know this isn't a popular TUG opinion.  But until Marriott puts out an official position I'm going to continue suggesting that folks contact Customer Advocacy with complaints about DC placement.  At the least maybe it will push them to form an official position, even if it's not the one I think is best.    I just want uniformity so we can know what to expect.


----------



## puckmanfl (Mar 2, 2013)

good afternoon...

Sue.... despite the shpiuel from the sales people..Trust owners are still mostly exchangers... Let me explain...There are about 750,000 week units in the system.  Prior to 6/20/10 almost 500,000 of these were sold to Legacy owners...(about 67%) even higher % at the prime platinum weeks.  This left about 33% to go into trust at MVCD discretion. Thus when Trust owners snag ressies it will be thru Legacy inventory 2/3 of the time, closer to 90% for the platinum good stuff.  Thus they are exchangers....

I think Marriott owners thru II and thru DC are equal and the determining factor will be the matrix of  availability and less than 7 day DC reservations 

Sue I agree with you as I don't believe that Trust owners obtaining Trust inventory are treated as ownwers, still believe they fall below legacy owners at home resort.  I believe that a single week Oceana Palms owner will trump a Trust owner OF ressie at Oceana Palms even though it is mostly likely Trust inventory...


----------



## SueDonJ (Mar 2, 2013)

Okay, Puck, I put the game on to see the last three minutes of that awesome penalty-killing display by the B's at the end of the 2nd.  Wow!  They are FAST, it's amazing how much faster than what we usually expect of Bruins.  Nice.

But they give me heart failure.  All that speed is chaotic.  Chaos on the ice, chaos at the Marriott resorts.  I just want my chaos to be orderly, is that too much to ask?!


----------



## puckmanfl (Mar 2, 2013)

good afternoon...

Sue....

more like a pathetic pp by the Bolts..If I see one more soft blind backhand "hope pass"  just going to scream... with 20 million $$$$ of talent on the ice... would like to see a few hard "tape to tape" passes...

Go Bolts..


----------



## taffy19 (Mar 2, 2013)

SueDonJ said:


> I don't know what it is or how to explain it other than with one you're using an internal Marriott product and with the other an external product. But especially with Trust Members I think it's more than that, regardless of whether their intervals technically are DC Exchange Company intervals. IMO they are true Marriott Owners on par with Weeks Owners. If that means the resorts have to all start using a rotational system so that at least DC Trust Members can be integrated in the Priority Placement System fairly, then so be it. IMO that's what Marriott execs should be relaying to their resort personnel.
> 
> What you're saying about placement with II exchanges would make sense if that's how it's implemented across all resorts, that Marriott owners are given a preference over other II exchangers. But I don't think it is. This OP didn't say that the resort manager differentiated between all II exchangers that way. That manager only said s/he, "_... was the same as an Interval International Trade._" If the OP was a DC Exchange Member I'd still want the breakout to go further to give a Marriott preference, but with the OP being a DC Trust Member I think that breakout was completely wrong and the explanation was totally inadequate!
> 
> Like I said, I know this isn't a popular TUG opinion. But until Marriott puts out an official position I'm going to continue suggesting that folks contact Customer Advocacy with complaints about DC placement. At the least maybe it will push them to form an official position, even if it's not the one I think is best.  I just want uniformity so we can know what to expect.


I agree with Susan. A true Trust Owner doesn't own one particular resort so when he makes reservations to any of the trust resorts, he should be treated as an owner and not as an exchanger.

If a Legacy Week owner uses the DC Club, he has the capability to request any view, season or length of stay depending on how many points he will use but it is still an exchange. Trust owners, who reserve their own points, should be treated the same like Legacy Week owners but some of the resorts do not seem to do this.

I see more complications coming once there are many true Trust owners and we will have a lottery system in place to keep it fair. It is in the documents already. Legacy Week owners will have to be on the ball to get what they want as there is no lottery in our documents as far as I know or is there?


----------



## SueDonJ (Mar 2, 2013)

iconnections said:


> I agree with Susan. A true Trust Owner doesn't own one particular resort so when he makes reservations to any of the trust resorts, he should be treated as an owner and not as an exchanger.
> 
> If a Legacy Week owner uses the DC Club, he has the capability to request any view, season or length of stay depending on how many points he will use but it is still an exchange. Trust owners, who reserve their own points, should be treated the same like Legacy Week owners but some of the resorts do not seem to do this.
> 
> I see more complications coming once there are many true Trust owners and we will have a lottery system in place to keep it fair. It is in the documents already. *Legacy Week owners will have to be on the ball to get what they want as there is no lottery in our documents as far as I know or is there?*



There's nothing that applies to all the resorts equally but each of the resorts could have lottery-related language in the individual docs.  Not sure about any others but the docs for both Barony Beach and SurfWatch do.


----------



## ilene13 (Mar 2, 2013)

iconnections said:


> I agree with Susan. A true Trust Owner doesn't own one particular resort so when he makes reservations to any of the trust resorts, he should be treated as an owner and not as an exchanger.



I do not agree, unless it is a "true trust resort".  We own at Surfwatch and Aruba Ocean Club.  Both resorts were virtually sold out prior to the inception of the DC rollout.  We own platinum weeks at both resorts.  There is very little trust inventory at these resorts.  IMHO as an owner, I feel that I should have priority in villa assignments over a trust owner making a reservation at these properties.  Undoubtedly the inventory is coming from a legacy owner turning their weeks into points.  Therefore, it is an exchange. When we were at the OC in December there were only 4 unsold OC platinum weeks left.

Last summer when were at Surfwatch there was an owners meeting.  The manager asked how many weeks we each owned.  All participants answered and one couple said we own at all the resorts because we own only points.  Well everyone in the room looked at them as though they had two heads.  It was interesting as they wanted a say in how the resort is run, yet they may never get back in there again.  They had comments that were not in concert with the rest of the group.


----------



## SueDonJ (Mar 2, 2013)

ilene13 said:


> ... Last summer when were at Surfwatch there was an owners meeting.  The manager asked how many weeks we each owned.  All participants answered and one couple said we own at all the resorts because we own only points.  Well everyone in the room looked at them as though they had two heads.  It was interesting as they wanted a say in how the resort is run, yet they may never get back in there again.  They had comments that were not in concert with the rest of the group.



How did the manager respond to their comment about them owning at all the resorts?  It's what the sales staff say when they're trying to get us to buy and the only sales center on Hilton Head takes up a huge amount of space at SurfWatch, so I can't imagine the manager would have tried to tell them they were wrong?

I'm also a little bit interested in what the Trust Members said about the resort that all the Weeks Owners disagreed with - it's almost impossible to get a group of Weeks Owners to agree on anything!


----------



## ilene13 (Mar 2, 2013)

SueDonJ said:


> How did the manager respond to their comment about them owning at all the resorts?  It's what the sales staff say when they're trying to get us to buy and the only sales center on Hilton Head takes up a huge amount of space at SurfWatch, so I can't imagine the manager would have tried to tell them they were wrong?
> 
> I'm also a little bit interested in what the Trust Members said about the resort that all the Weeks Owners disagreed with - it's almost impossible to get a group of Weeks Owners to agree on anything!



Sue, remember the GM was fairly new and Marcus, who had always run these meetings had left.  The manager just welcomed them, he did not say anything about their ownership-- the owners just stared.  They questioned the cost of the cabanas, the size of the new market and they wondered about the use of the theater that was being expanded.  It was annoying.


----------



## taffy19 (Mar 3, 2013)

puckmanfl said:


> good afternoon...
> 
> Sue.... despite the shpiuel from the sales people..Trust owners are still mostly exchangers... Let me explain...There are about 750,000 week units in the system. Prior to 6/20/10 almost 500,000 of these were sold to Legacy owners...(about 67%) even higher % at the prime platinum weeks. This left about 33% to go into trust at MVCD discretion. Thus when Trust owners snag ressies it will be thru Legacy inventory 2/3 of the time, closer to 90% for the platinum good stuff. Thus they are exchangers....
> 
> ...


Puck, I have read your post several times already and am still confused.

What I wonder is how is Marriott going to solve these problems with the floating week system once they sell more points?  Will reservations be stamped by the nano second?

I am glad that we only own one week and would be happier yet if we owned none at all. What a mess and certainly if Trust owners can reserve by the day in previous Legacy week resorts.


----------



## puckmanfl (Mar 3, 2013)

good morning


iconnections....

I have no problem with Trust owners exchanging into Legacy inventory, just as it is great that as Legacy I can exchange into Trust (RC Vail or Oceana Palms).  The issue brought up by the OP is that most reservations, even with Trust points are "exchange" reservations.  Trust owners were sold on the "owner everywhere" pitch and this just isn't true....

The second problem is that when Trust owners actually book Trust inventory, the empiric evidence states that these reservations are still being treated as "exchange' DC points reservations and behind Legacy owner weeks at home resort.... A trust owner in trust inventory is really no different than legacy owner using home week at home resort...


----------



## BocaBoy (Mar 3, 2013)

I own two OF weeks at the Maui Ocean Club.  I would like to turn them in for DC points and book 3 weeks (rough approximation) in a 1BR OF or OV unit.  If I do so I would certainly consider that a form of my owner's week and NOT like an II exchange.  People do not understand legal technicalities.  In my example, I would be using my MOC ownership weeks to stay at my home resort in my season, but in a slightly modified form.  Sometimes if it looks like ownership and quacks like ownership it really is ownership.

On the other hand, if I use DC points to stay at another MVCI resort, I think that should be somewhere under an owner's stay but clearly ahead of II exchangers.  Legal technicalities aside, I don't believe legacy points should be any less ownership stays than stays using pure trust points.


----------



## bogey21 (Mar 3, 2013)

SueDonJ said:


> Like I said, I know this isn't a popular TUG opinion.  But until Marriott puts out an official position I'm going to continue suggesting that folks contact Customer Advocacy with complaints about DC placement.  At the least maybe it will push them to form an official position, even if it's not the one I think is best. I just want uniformity so we can know what to expect.



What you want is reasonable but I don't think you will get it.  Why?  Because any official position or precise pecking order clarification will diminish the effectiveness of the "you own everywhere" sales pitch used to sell DC Points.  And selling Points is what makes Corporate profitable.

George


----------



## dioxide45 (Mar 3, 2013)

BocaBoy said:


> I own two OF weeks at the Maui Ocean Club.  I would like to turn them in for DC points and book 3 weeks (rough approximation) in a 1BR OF or OV unit.  If I do so I would certainly consider that a form of my owner's week and NOT like an II exchange.  People do not understand legal technicalities.  In my example, I would be using my MOC ownership weeks to stay at my home resort in my season, but in a slightly modified form.  Sometimes if it looks like ownership and quacks like ownership it really is ownership.
> 
> On the other hand, if I use DC points to stay at another MVCI resort, I think that should be somewhere under an owner's stay but clearly ahead of II exchangers.  Legal technicalities aside, I don't believe legacy points should be any less ownership stays than stays using pure trust points.



I still don't think that if you are using DC points taken from converting your week using them to stay at your home resort that you should be on par with weeks owners staying on their home resort reservation.

There is a distinct difference between using your home resort reservation and using an exchange. Whether it be a DC exchange or II exchange. Now I do agree that using your DC points to exchange back in to your home resort should put you above non-Marriott II exchanges. It should also put you ahead of Marriott owners at other resorts exchanging in through II. But if there are two owners, one exchanging in through DC and the other through II, they should be on par.

Realize that the "Exchange Company" is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Marriott Ownership Resorts Inc. It is a separate company. So there is a distinct difference between using your home resort week and DC points to exchange back in to your home resort. Just the same as II.


----------



## FractionalTraveler (Mar 4, 2013)

bogey21 said:


> What you want is reasonable but I don't think you will get it.  Why?  Because any official position or precise pecking order clarification will diminish the effectiveness of the "you own everywhere" sales pitch used to sell DC Points.  And selling Points is what makes Corporate profitable.
> 
> George



In all fairness, my trust documents do say I own everywhere.  I don’t think that is technically an incorrect statement from the sales/marketing teams.

What I think is really in question is the existence, clarification, communication, and/or uniform implementation of a corporate policy relating to villa assignments that is managed at the property level.

Quite frankly this appears to me to be no different than independently owned Marriott Hotel properties complying with Marriott International management programs that include Marriott Rewards benefits to its elite customers.

IMHO we will never see a public policy produced related to this topic.  There are too many factors that contribute to villa assignments which can't be adequately managed from a corporate policy.  The best they could probably achieve is a best practices guideline to assist the property with the process.

Folks will always argue that they got an unfair room assignment.  This will never go away when you don't own the actual unit/view location at a property and are renting on a space available basis.  Its the nature of the business.

Now we have taken this to the next level by analyzing the landscaping on a specific property to determine if an oceanfront DC point reservation is really worth it on a second floor that potentially has an obstructed view because of an overgrown tree branch that limits the view. Wow!

The quest for the best unit location and view at each property for every reservation request is admirable but un-realistic and un-sustainable when it comes to expectations.

But its fun trying......


----------



## SueDonJ (Mar 4, 2013)

FractionalTraveler said:


> In all fairness, my trust documents do say I own everywhere.  I don’t think that is technically an incorrect statement from the sales/marketing teams.
> 
> What I think is really in question is the existence, clarification, communication, and/or uniform implementation of a corporate policy relating to villa assignments that is managed at the property level.
> 
> ...



You're probably right, it's not sensible to expect detailed Orders On High that the resort personnel will all have to follow to a T.  But it's not unreasonable to expect the exec offices to clarify to each of the resort GM's whether or not DC Points users are to be treated on par with Owners or as other guests.

I don't see all this as simply an effort to try to resolve the unit placement complaints.  I remember a TUG discussion about a resort which issued different color wristbands depending on whether a guest was an owner or not, because some of the resort activities were limited to owners-only.  I think that practice is ridiculous as well and said so in that thread, but now I'm wondering if DC Points users at that resorts get owner wristbands or not.  And look upthread here at how DC Points users weren't welcome at an Owners' Social - obviously management there didn't issue a statement saying they couldn't attend but the other owners appear to feel justified in thinking that maybe they don't belong.

You say yourself - your ownership docs clearly state that you own everywhere.  It sounds like some of the resort personnel need to be educated, and their newsletters should probably include at least a blurb or two so that Owners and DC Members have an idea of what makes for reasonable expectations.



FractionalTraveler said:


> Folks will always argue that they got an unfair room assignment.  This will never go away when you don't own the actual unit/view location at a property and are renting on a space available basis.  Its the nature of the business.
> 
> Now we have taken this to the next level by analyzing the landscaping on a specific property to determine if an oceanfront DC point reservation is really worth it on a second floor that potentially has an obstructed view because of an overgrown tree branch that limits the view. Wow!
> 
> ...



I get the idea you're trying to make but I think you're not 100% correct.  Many of us have said that we understand that we'll have to at times take our fair placement in some of the least desirable units.  Well, that works both ways - a fair rotational system would allow for DC Points Users to be placed among the "best" as well as the "worst."  Also, even if this was only about unit placement (which I don't believe it is,) the difference between the "best" and "worst" among available views is not always as minimal as a single tree branch.

Think of islandview at Waiohai, for example - you could be placed in a unit that's oriented to the gorgeous interior of the resort with stunning landscaping, or one that's oriented out the back of the property over a clay-topped parking lot that's baking in the sun with a smelly dumpster in the corner.  I know where I'd prefer to be but as an II exchanger going in I know that either is a possibility.  As a DC Enrolled Points user I don't think it would be unreasonable for me to expect more than an II exchanger.  As a DC Trust Points user if I got the hot and smelly dumpster view I'd be back at the front desk asking the manager for an explanation, and taking it further up the chain if the manager's response isn't satisfactory.

****
Re-reading this I sound like a whiny spoiled entitled brat.  Ack!  For the record I've only twice in my life had a conversation about unit placement.  Once when we were placed into a handicap-accessible unit at Disney's Beach Club on a cash stay I called the front desk before we unpacked to ask if they had anything else available.  Not nasty, not demanding, just a question nicely asked - they moved us to a non-HA unit with a similar view as the first and we were perfectly happy.  The second time was when the Barony Beach GM included a blurb about unit placement in his newsletter and I sent an email asking for a more detailed explanation.  He responded, I was happy.

So, I hope you're not all seeing me as an entitled whiny snowflake.  Honestly, we take our fair turns in the units with tree-limb views.


----------



## FractionalTraveler (Mar 4, 2013)

SueDonJ said:


> You're probably right, it's not sensible to expect detailed Orders On High that the resort personnel will all have to follow to a T.  But it's not unreasonable to expect the exec offices to clarify to each of the resort GM's whether or not DC Points users are to be treated on par with Owners or as other guests.
> 
> I don't see all this as simply an effort to try to resolve the unit placement complaints.  I remember a TUG discussion about a resort which issued different color wristbands depending on whether a guest was an owner or not, because some of the resort activities were limited to owners-only.  I think that practice is ridiculous as well and said so in that thread, but now I'm wondering if DC Points users at that resorts get owner wristbands or not.  And look upthread here at how DC Points users weren't welcome at an Owners' Social - obviously management there didn't issue a statement saying they couldn't attend but the other owners appear to feel justified in thinking that maybe they don't belong.
> 
> ...



FWIW: I attended the RC Leadership training that is available publicly.  Over the 3 days the one thing they emphasized time after time was to treat every guest as a VIP consistently.

There was to be no mention of pecking order when it comes to handling customer requests whether it be for room location/views or for a priority parking spot for a $250K Ferrari.

All guests are to be treated equally.  That is what I believe Marriott trains their employees to.  That having been said, I don't believe they would intentionally release a formal pecking order since this would be contrary to their values and beliefs.


----------



## SueDonJ (Mar 4, 2013)

FractionalTraveler said:


> FWIW: I attended the RC Leadership training that is available publicly.  Over the 3 days the one thing they emphasized time after time was to treat every guest as a VIP consistently.
> 
> There was to be no mention of pecking order when it comes to handling customer requests whether it be for room location/views or for a priority parking spot for a $250K Ferrari.
> 
> All guests are to be treated equally.  That is what I believe Marriott trains their employees to.  That having been said, I don't believe they would intentionally release a formal pecking order since this would be contrary to their values and beliefs.



But we all know that most of the Marriott timeshares already DO have a pecking order for unit placements and most of them already DO publish their version of it, at least in the newsletters sent out by GM's to owners!  It'd be more than a little bit disingenuous for them to now say, in response to questions about where DC Members fit in to those established pecking orders, that every guest is to be considered equally.  Not to mention, it wouldn't be true.


----------



## FractionalTraveler (Mar 4, 2013)

SueDonJ said:


> But we all know that most of the Marriott timeshares already DO have a pecking order for unit placements and most of them already DO publish their version of it, at least in the newsletters sent out by GM's to owners!  It'd be more than a little bit disingenuous for them to now say, in response to questions about where DC Members fit in to those established pecking orders, that every guest is to be considered equally.  Not to mention, it wouldn't be true.



Then you bring me right to my point.  If most properties already DO publish their version of the pecking order, then what folks must complain about is where they land on the pecking order.

Release the pecking order and people will complain the policy is unfair to some member demographics.  

Don't release the pecking order and other people will complain they got shafted in the process and have the right to know the pecking order.

Like I said before.  Its unrealistic and un-sustainable.  Case in point, I have been a MR PLT Premier for at least 10 years now and all I hear over on the Marriott Insiders board or FlyerTalk is how Marriott properties don't treat its elite members fairly when it comes to benefits. Blah, Blah, Blah.  Someone starts those threads daily to vomit the same discussions.

Oh I didn't get my upgrade, Oh, my room was next to the elevator, Oh I didn't get my desired floor.  Oh, they didn't recoginze me as Mr. Premier at the check-in desk, they treated me badly.  Its insane how people treat a REWARDS program as an ENTITLEMENT program.

I hope it doesn't come to that at MVCI.


----------



## klpca (Mar 4, 2013)

FractionalTraveler said:


> Then you bring me right to my point.  If most properties already DO publish their version of the pecking order, then what folks must complain about is where they land on the pecking order.
> 
> Release the pecking order and people will complain the policy is unfair to some member demographics.
> 
> ...



These programs are created to make us feel special, but it turns out that we're not really all that special.  It's quite a surprise to some. (And I am referring to the flyertalkers who start those threads)


----------



## SueDonJ (Mar 4, 2013)

FractionalTraveler said:


> Then you bring me right to my point.  If most properties already DO publish their version of the pecking order, then what folks must complain about is where they land on the pecking order.
> 
> Release the pecking order and people will complain the policy is unfair to some member demographics.
> 
> ...



You won't catch me disagreeing with you that rewards v. entitlement is taken to a ridiculous level with some MR-related complaints.

I also would agree if anyone said that this discussion is rambling on at this point.    But simply, this isn't a matter of us asking for Marriott to implement and publish a priority system for the timeshare usage because one hasn't been determined yet.  It's a matter of Marriott needing to clarify where owners of their new product fit into the priority systems that've been long-established and well-published.  They made the problem, they can at least try to fix it.


----------



## FractionalTraveler (Mar 4, 2013)

SueDonJ said:


> You won't catch me disagreeing with you that rewards v. entitlement is taken to a ridiculous level with some MR-related complaints.
> 
> I also would agree if anyone said that this discussion is rambling on at this point.    But simply, this isn't a matter of us asking for Marriott to implement and publish a priority system for the timeshare usage because one hasn't been determined yet.  It's a matter of Marriott needing to clarify where owners of their new product fit into the priority systems that've been long-established and well-published.  They made the problem, they can at least try to fix it.



Agreed.  I asked them this exact question last week.  We will see if they ever reply....


----------



## taffy19 (Jun 23, 2013)

FractionalTraveler said:


> Agreed.  I asked them this exact question last week.  We will see if they ever reply....


Did they ever reply?


----------



## FractionalTraveler (Jun 23, 2013)

iconnections said:


> Did they ever reply?



Yes, they did.  Below find my original question and their response.

We have received the following inquiry from you, "HELLO, I am a Legacy weeks, DC member, and Trust point owner. I would like to know what is the official policy for granting (priority) reservation requests for unit location/views at MVCI properties. We now have legacy week owners, trust owners, DC point exchangers, II exchangers, and retail rentals. We also have MVCI Standard owners, Premier owners, and Premier Plus owners. This is all very confusing to me. I would love to purchase more Trust points but would like to understand first what is the policy for reservation requests at the different MVCI properties. I have heard from other Trust owners that some properties are not considering them as real owners but as exchangers with lower priority. Please help me understand and make sense of all this. Thanks."

Please know that you are an Enrolled Hybrid Premier Plus owner. Enrolled means that you have added your deeded weeks into the Destinations Points Program, which allows you a 5th usage option for your weeks (to elect for Vacation Club Points). Hybrid means that you also own Beneficial Interests in the Marriott Trust, along with your enrolled deeded weeks. Legacy owners did not chose to enroll their deeded weeks into this program so they only have the original 3 to 4 usage options (depending on if they purchased internally or externally). Trust owners are those who do not own any deeded weeks, but they own Beneficial Interests in the Marriott Trust. All of the above options have priority with Marriott Vacation Club as they are Marriott Vacation Club owners.

Any non-Marriott owner that exchanges into Marriott Vacation Club property does not have the same priority.

Only Marriott Vacation Club owners can have Standard, Premier, and Premier Plus status within the Destinations Points Program, with Premier Plus providing the most benefits and opportunities.

FT


----------



## CashEddie (Jun 23, 2013)

FractionalTraveler said:


> Yes, they did.  Below find my original question and their response.
> 
> We have received the following inquiry from you, "HELLO, I am a Legacy weeks, DC member, and Trust point owner. I would like to know what is the official policy for granting (priority) reservation requests for unit location/views at MVCI properties. We now have legacy week owners, trust owners, DC point exchangers, II exchangers, and retail rentals. We also have MVCI Standard owners, Premier owners, and Premier Plus owners. This is all very confusing to me. I would love to purchase more Trust points but would like to understand first what is the policy for reservation requests at the different MVCI properties. I have heard from other Trust owners that some properties are not considering them as real owners but as exchangers with lower priority. Please help me understand and make sense of all this. Thanks."
> 
> ...


This response doesn't answer the question how Trust owners compare with respect to priority with legacy owners, unless I'm missing something.  From what I'm reading here, the response is stating that all owners are "equal" and above non owners that are exchanging in via II.  I think thats what we all understood beforehand so nothing new.


----------



## MALC9990 (Jun 23, 2013)

CashEddie said:


> This response doesn't answer the question how Trust owners compare with respect to priority with legacy owners, unless I'm missing something.  From what I'm reading here, the response is stating that all owners are "equal" and above non owners that are exchanging in via II.  I think thats what we all understood beforehand so nothing new.



I agree not a good answer. More typical of a politician, who, when asked an easy question that requires a simple straight forward answer, gives an evasive answer containing vaguely related waffle. None of the answer is untrue but fails to answer the question asked.


----------



## SueDonJ (Jun 23, 2013)

CashEddie said:


> This response doesn't answer the question how Trust owners compare with respect to priority with legacy owners, unless I'm missing something.  From what I'm reading here, the response is stating that all owners are "equal" and above non owners that are exchanging in via II.  I think thats what we all understood beforehand so nothing new.



Yep, that's pretty much a non-answer reply to FT's concerns.  BUT it does say, "... All of the above options have priority with Marriott Vacation Club as they are Marriott Vacation Club owners ..." which not all of the resorts appear to be considering when placing owners into units.  

A more recent discussion about unit placements is taking placing in this thread:
Homeless in Paradise... [DC Member Unit Placement]
Please continue the discussion there.  (FT, your e-mail exchange can be copied there.)  Thanks!


----------

