# www.TUGmar.com (combined thread)



## Marriott Owner (Apr 1, 2006)

*www.TUGmar.com*

Another message board to help is 
www.TUGmar.com 
... it's just for Marriott Vacation club owners.


----------



## dougef (Apr 1, 2006)

I guess I don't get it - what's wrong with this board right here on TUG?  Why would we need/want another?  I like having one place to look for information and post questions.


----------



## Marriott Owner (Apr 1, 2006)

*choice*

That's ok you feel that way.

I suppose choice.  www.TUGmar.com is new, and it's operated by Marriott owners.

What we like about it is that each resort has its own place to post. Plus it's free.
Seems like others places on the web liek www.Redweek.com, they want $ to post ads and review other people's opinions. Not everyone appreciates paying to view their own opinions about resorts they and their fellow owner's own!  

So to me, it's a good thing and I am glad to be a moderator on the Sabal Palms board. It's by the owner's, and for their owners. What's wrong with that? They own their timeshares, why can't they have their own board???


----------



## BocaBum99 (Apr 1, 2006)

dougef said:
			
		

> I guess I don't get it - what's wrong with this board right here on TUG?  Why would we need/want another?  I like having one place to look for information and post questions.



That is one of the downsides of capitalism.  Competition leads to too much choice at times.


----------



## Marriott Owner (Apr 1, 2006)

*that's right!*

You got that right, BocaBum.
Talking about choices, I'm trying to decide whether to exchange and go to Marriott Royal Palms or Ocean Pointe this Summer with the kids.

What I like about Royal Palms is the best darn swimming pool in the Marriott system at the main hotel. I wish Ocean Pointe had just one real nice pool, instead of all the branch pools.

Guess I want it all!

Am I the only spoiled one, who wishes the pools at Ocean Pointe were just a little bit nicer?


----------



## ondeadlin (Apr 1, 2006)

Just an FYI, that board incorrectly states that Streamside is leaving the Marriott system. The Aspen building is gone, and Cedar may leave, but the three best buildings have come to a new contract agreement with Marriott.


----------



## John&Laurie (Apr 1, 2006)

*Another Marriott Website*

As long as we are sharing new websites, I found this one today.

http://www.rpalms.com


----------



## JMSH (Apr 1, 2006)

Thank you Marriott Owner I think the new site is a great idea.


----------



## KenK (Apr 1, 2006)

Ah Ha!  I knew it...I knew the Marriott Owners would throw out Beach Place sooner or later....maybe it never arrived!!  (And how can I rant when its not there?)  (Or did I miss it?)

It has to be that $12.00 daily parking fee.  Thats OK....they'll refurb big time and bridge over to the Saint Regis.  (I wonder if there will be any kind of Starwood points in the transfer)?

Un-named poster, is there a reason the name of the new site is TUGmar?  Would FORUMSmar have worked just as well?  Do we at TUG Original know you?

In any case, it looks good...and hope it adds to the knowledge and helps Marriott learn direction from its owners...ie T/S owners on the equity kind...


----------



## Potential Buyer Scott (Apr 2, 2006)

*I love www.tugmar.com!!!!!*

I love being able to ask a more targetted audience more specific questions about a specific place if I want to. 

In general, I think I will continue to use the general Marriott boards, however, if I have a specific question (such as the weather and flooding situation at the Kauai beach club or where is the nearest place to get Thai) it would be nice to not have to clutter up the general board with it.

Thank you so much.

I think it is very thoughtful and requires a lot of effort on someone's part.

Scott


----------



## KathyPet (Apr 2, 2006)

I do like the fact that there is a separate area for each MVCI location however it seems like they should also have a area for more general topics and questions that are more universal in nature.


----------



## Marriott Owner (Apr 2, 2006)

*general discussion*

I am one of the handful of Marriott owners who helped get it started.

www.TUGmar.com is NOT about replacing TUG2.net as a place to go for Marriott owners to get together. TUG2.net is the absolute leader and pioneer for everything about timesharing. Hands down!   thank you very much TUG2.net and it provides lots of value to its users.

But TUG2.net can't be everything to everybody.

Marriott owners really need a special place just for themselves, for all the details for each resort property. These discussion threads about ROFR is just an example! Can you believe what Marriott is doing apparently low balling their ROFR, instead of stepping up and at least giving the owners what they paid! Wow that should be a wake up call to Marriott owners to get more active! 

Hopefully, TUGmar.com will become a place for example where owners can be more proactive during their ANNUAL PROPERTY OWNERS MEETING. it's about community and really taking ownership ! 

You'll notice that each property has a new board started just for that property. That's a great start. Let's see how the owner's want to make their own board work for them. I will soon be moderating the Sabal Palms board on www.TUGmar.com and I am an owner at Sabal Palms in Orlando. I am in the process of contacting my Board of Directors at Sabal.

thanks everyone and also to tug2.net !


----------



## Eric (Apr 2, 2006)

Man, you just don't get it do you !! Hey, here's an idea !! Don't sell the unit unless you get your price !! If you agree on a price, why do you care who the buyer is ? How is MArriott low balling if YOU THE SELLER set the price ?

Amazing logic

______________________________

 Can you believe what Marriott is doing apparently low balling their ROFR, instead of stepping up and at least giving the owners what they paid! Wow that should be a wake up call to Marriott owners to get more active!


----------



## Marriott Owner (Apr 2, 2006)

*ROFR not fair*

That's a good point, and your comment just might be the way that Marriott shareholder attorney's might argue it.

Why not insist at time of purchase that the ROFR is to be at the price that you paid Marriott!

Here is the current scenario:

You go to Marriott before you try to resale, and they tell you we are not interested, or give you a very very very low price ( much lower than the contract price that Marriott will later exercise their ROFR), don't you think that would make you mad as an owner when they play rope a dope and exercise after you worked your tail off trying to get more than Marriott's original offer?

Remember that these are real people who sometimes need quick money and HAVE TO SELL QUICKLY!

Marriott knows this.

Easy prey for the big wolf.

Maybe if it happened to you, and you felt the pain, you'd more easily understand. Hope this helps.

Anyway, easy solution is before you sign to buy the original, have the ROFR restated to original purchase price or better. Why would Marriott sales people complain? It's supposed to become more valuable into the future, right?


----------



## Eric (Apr 2, 2006)

Insist all you want. I never saw an option on the contract to pick a) b) or c)
The contract is what it is. You do have an option NOT to buy !!
The reason why Marriott and even Disney do this is to protect the other owners so the weeks don't hit the resale market at 1/2 price, therefore, lowering your value

Your house it worth 300K. Two people on your block have the same house and sell for 200K. What does that do to the value of your house ?

The logic Marriott uses is protect the majority !! I think it has been fairly successful so far 

I know an Ocean Point owner who owns 2 OF Platinum units. He bought them 3 years ago. He just sold them on the resale market for what he paid. High enough for Marriott to pass on the ROFR and enough to get his money back. It comes down to a life lesson. Buyer beware. Don't buy if you can't afford it and buy the right product at the right price. It's not Marriott's fault if you don't. 
_______________________________



			
				Marriott Owner said:
			
		

> That's a good point, and your comment just might be the way that Marriott shareholder attorney's might argue it.
> 
> Why not insist at time of purchase that the ROFR is to be at the price that you paid Marriott!
> 
> ...


----------



## KenK (Apr 2, 2006)

Marriott Owner

   Are there any Marriott employees or staff involved with the site?  If so, will posts still be an honest representation of what the posters feel...will honest negatives be removed.

  When Yahoo E Groups had the MVCI Group, and it was run by Greg, it went strong.  When he could no longer run it, Marrioot staff took it over (I believe sales).  The site died.

  Thanks for fixing the link to the Beach Place forum.  The pix, however, is quite misleading.  Feel free to use any of the pix from the lists at the end of my TUG signature.  They are only one year old.  I also have March 06 pix, but haven't posted them to MAC site yet.  You will not see much blue sky, but its a more honest rep of the resort.

  Will we be able to post know price resales of units, like $3000 for a gold week at >>>>>?


----------



## Marriott Owner (Apr 2, 2006)

*Ok*

 Thanks for trying to understand.

Here's another rub.

Does Marriott reimburse you for your realtor's fees, who has been working 
trying to sell the timeshare for the past 12 months? Answer - NO !

So what happens next time that same realtor gets a request from a Marriott owner to list a property for sale? 

Here's another rub: Does Marriott reimburse you for the closing costs, up to the point that Marriott exercises their ROFR?  NOT!

And on and on.

And in reply, of course not, Marriott sales does not offer option 1 2 or 23 about the ROFR.

That's the buyers responsibilty to NEGOTIATE at time of purchase. While it's true they can just walk away and not buy from Marriott, it is also true that they can negotiate that the ROFR IS AT THE ORIGINAL PURCHASE PRICE OR BETTER.

Anything wrong with that?


----------



## Eric (Apr 2, 2006)

Wrong, no !! feasible NO !! The contract cannot be changed. The rules are the same for everybody. Everybody knows that when they buy. If you don't like them, you have an option to say no but whinning after the fact is just pointless. 


____________________________
 it is also true that they can negotiate that the ROFR IS AT THE ORIGINAL PURCHASE PRICE OR BETTER.

Anything wrong with that?  [/QUOTE]


----------



## Marriott Owner (Apr 2, 2006)

*Reply to Ken*

Ken

No Marriott employees or any Marirott affiliation behind www.TUGmar.com

We have great servers volunteered, database backup operator system, and a strong small base of Marriott owners who care. We need more moderators, but each moderator has an important job re: Annual meetings etc. and so the moderator has to care a lot about their property to run that section of the board. Probably like you are doing now for this board. Thanks by the way, its is a great board and your work is appreicated!  

About your comments about the old Yahoo board. If one day it is close to passing like Yahoo., maybe TUG2 might want to operate it.  However, it was Yahoo's board. Whereas, TUGmar.com is autonomous and independent and has its own database not owned by something like Yahoo.


----------



## BocaBum99 (Apr 2, 2006)

*Don't waste your time with that site.*

There is no content.  

Scott is obviously a SHILL for the site.

I think you should change your site name.  I'll bet using TUG in your name is a violation of the TUG trademark.

It would be like someone starting a new retail store and calling it Walmartville and then disclaiming any relationship to Walmart.  What a joke.


----------



## Marriott Owner (Apr 2, 2006)

*Message for Bum*

You are right. There is very little content now. The site is one day old!

About trademark.

KMart was first. Then there was WalMart. How about that? 

What is it with us Americans? Air is free. Why must we always try to pay for it, and try to possess free things like air? And if TUG is a registered trademark, then show it now. Because it is not!  Like air, TUG is for all timeshare owners, it is a service - thank you very much TUG1.net for being the pioneer and the leader. And for being there for people like us. 

Who remembers the beginnings of the web back in the 90's? It was all about connecting people and it was revolutionary and liberating. Like Rock and Roll and the music for the people, then the $ people have to license and control.

Maybe growing up as I did in the 1960's I am still an old hippie. But it just amazes me sometimes about some of our culture here in the USA.

www.TUGmar.com is free to use. It is new. It is by owners for owners. It is not meant to replace or compete with TUG2.net . It is a complement service to help Marirott owners. TUG1.net is awesome, and it is for the entire timeshare community. www.TUGmar.com is just for Marriott owners. Is there something wrong with that?

You know, I am one of the TUGmar.com volunteers, and it is amazing sometimes to see what happens when you try to do things for people and they react the way they do. Like the way some old fashioned people reacted so negatively back in the 60's when kids wanted to grow their hair a little longer. We used to say as young adults, hey, Benjamin Franklin and George Washington had long hair and it's even on our money. But the authorities hated it. And they tried to put it down and punish and be mean with words.

I'll just keep on loving and move forward and help like my fellow Marirott owners at www.TUGmar.com Kind of like the song from the 60's went "Come on people now Smile on your brother Everybody get together Try to love one another Right now ".    Hope no one minds quoting that verse, and if it makes you angry, sorry you feel that way.

thanks for listening! 

ps. about your 'shilling' comment, we at TUGmar.com have no idea who Scott is except that he is another person who uses TUG2.net ( a fellow tug2.net user) Why not send him an email or message via tug2.net. I'd love to see his response!


----------



## MOXJO7282 (Apr 2, 2006)

I also love the new site!! I think the format is excellent, and of course free advertising is great.

As much as I love TUG, I think there are some shortcomings, so I welcome the new site.  I have no problem with paying a registration fee, because there has to be some costs to run the site, but I don't agree with charging advertising costs, so its great to have options.

Let's hope it works out.

Regards.
Joe


----------



## Makai Guy (Apr 2, 2006)

I have merged another thread about this website into this one.  

I have also closed a third thread which appeared to be an attempt to post an additional thread here in order to get more gratuitous exposure.


----------



## chalucky (Apr 2, 2006)

BocaBum99 said:
			
		

> There is no content.
> 
> Scott is obviously a SHILL for the site.
> 
> ...




Just plain off base.........lighten up !!!


----------



## hipslo (Apr 2, 2006)

Having practiced business law for many years, I can say that I have never seen a seller that is in the position to extract a rofr from a buyer agree to a rofr at the original purchase price, rather than the price on the proposed new sale.  Sure, buyers ask for it all the time, but it is decidedly NOT something that a seller will realistically agree to, at least in my experience (which, admittedly, is not in the TS arena, but involves some very sophisticated players in the real estate industry).  Never hurts to ask, though, but wanted to share that such a provision has little or no support in the broader real estate or joint venture marketplace. 

 So long as the seller gets the price that the seller is otherwise willing to sell for, it shouldn't matter to seller who the buyer is.  If Marriott stands to benefit from that, rather than some third party, seems to me there is no reason for seller to object, other than emotional reason, which has little place in a business transaction.  Marriott also has an interest in protecting the brand and the resort, and would thus not want the price of entry to drop too low. 

 I just purchased several platinum weeks at Mountainside, resale, for far less than developer's price, developer is sold out, and rofr was not exercised.  If it were, seller gets same deal, I wind up paying someone else more for the weeks, resale, and value of resale weeks stays higher.  Who loses?


----------



## Eric (Apr 2, 2006)

Great Post--

This is my favorite quote


""If Marriott stands to benefit from that, rather than some third party, seems to me there is no reason for seller to object, other than emotional reason, which has little place in a business transaction""




_____________________________________





			
				hipslo said:
			
		

> Having practiced business law for many years, I can say that I have never seen a seller that is in the position to extract a rofr from a buyer agree to a rofr at the original purchase price, rather than the price on the proposed new sale.  Sure, buyers ask for it all the time, but it is decidedly NOT something that a seller will realistically agree to, at least in my experience (which, admittedly, is not in the TS arena, but involves some very sophisticated players in the real estate industry).  Never hurts to ask, though, but wanted to share that such a provision has little or no support in the broader real estate or joint venture marketplace.
> 
> So long as the seller gets the price that the seller is otherwise willing to sell for, it shouldn't matter to seller who the buyer is.  If Marriott stands to benefit from that, rather than some third party, seems to me there is no reason for seller to object, other than emotional reason, which has little place in a business transaction.  Marriott also has an interest in protecting the brand and the resort, and would thus not want the price of entry to drop too low.
> 
> I just purchased several platinum weeks at Mountainside, resale, for far less than developer's price, developer is sold out, and rofr was not exercised.  If it were, seller gets same deal, I wind up paying someone else more for the weeks, resale, and value of resale weeks stays higher.  Who loses?


----------



## Werner Weiss (Apr 2, 2006)

Marriott Owner said:
			
		

> About trademark.
> 
> KMart was first. Then there was WalMart. How about that?


If someone started an auto parts store, and called it Kmart Auto Parts (and used Kmart's colors and a similar font to the Kmart font), Kmart would undoubtedly object.  And many customers would undoubtedly be confused.

It looks to me that TUGmar is trying to look like TUG.  I don't understand why a new site would want to cause confusion.  In fact, I would think that a new site would want to establish a distinct, unique identity.

There's a tiny notice that "TUGmar.com is not affiliated with Marriot (sic) Vacation Club, or with TUG2.net."  But there's not even a notice that the "TUGmar Timeshare User's Group" is not affiliated "TUG - the Timeshare User's Group."

"TUGmar Timeshare User's Group" even has the same punctuation error as "The Timeshare User's Group."  Each site really should be a "users' group" (a group of multiple users), not a "user's group" (a group representing only one user).

I'm not objecting to the idea behind TUGmar.  In fact, I would welcome a site at which I can zero in on information about other, specific MVCI locations and share information about MVCI resorts at which I'm an owner or at which I've stayed.  Only time will tell if TUGmar takes off as a popular, useful site, or if TUGmar becomes yet another essentially inactive bulletin board on the Worldwide Web.

If the folks behind TUGmar want some friendly advice, my advice would be to erase any confusion between TUG and TUGmar.  At least, change the graphics on the site.  Ideally, change the name and URL too.


----------



## Marriott Owner (Apr 2, 2006)

*Message to Werner*

Ouch - it sounds like you don't like the similarites between tug2.net and TUGmar.com and you are letting your opinion known in your post.

I understand that the term Timeshare Users' Group is a generic term that is about timeshare owners coming together as a community. 

In fact, Timeshare Users Group is not trademarked or registered at the US Patent Office.  Nor is TUG. Nor is TUG1. Nor is TUG2. It is public domain. It is a generic term. That's OK, isn't it? Or does everything in America have to be tied down, fenced in and individual property? Air is free. Let's keep it that way, like we say on the website.

It really confuses us, we are trying to help Marroitt owners have an exclusive place to come together and talk. Do you propose that this be a monopoly by TUG2.net? On our website, we have links and praise for TUG2.net for being the leader and pioneer for building a community. But tug2.net or any website cannot do it all. Isn't it OK for us Marriott users to come together?

Now about TUG. And it is called TUG1.net or TUG2.net, and TUG1.org

Regarding the analogy with Kmart Auto parts, KMart is a registered trademark and they were before WalMarts time. There was also a store called FedMart, for those of us who remember it in the 1960's. However, that didn't stop WalMart from years later calling themselves WalMart. Walmart was also a big store, with the same type of goods, in strip malls, etc, however, there were significant distinctions between the two - KMart and WalMart. There were also similarties.

Yes, there are similarities betweek www.TUGmar.com and www.TUG1.net
The endusers are timeshare users. They both have message boards. They both allow advertisements. They both use the words timeshare users group, that's what it is. 

Does Marriott get all roused up because tug2.net has a message board for the Marriott system and uses the name Marriott freely on their titles? Not - kudos to Marriott! thank you Marriott! America, please let there be freedom.

Lots of Marriott owners have paid TUG1.net and TUG2.net over the years to provide a service to post advertisements and review for all timeshares. Myself personally, in the past I have not had a need to advertise. When I do, I can use EBAY or other sites and pay. On TUGmar.com I don't pay anything, because that is the way it is set up. Understand that it is entirely OK for other sites to charge and make a profit or pay expenses.  That's OK! Is it OK to offer this service without fee? I hope so!

TUGmar is not about ALL timeshares. Only Marriott timeshares. That is a big distinction.

So here are some significant differences:

1. It is dedicated just for fellow Marriott owners.
2. It is free. No cost to post Marriott owners properties for sale or for rent advertisements. Free air.
3. It is operated by Marriott owners.
4. All Moderators are required to be owners of their respective timeshare property!
5. It is not TUG1 or TUG2. 

Thank you to TUG2.net for the patience with these posts, and thank you readers for listening. We listen and try to understood too.

America is great , and here's to keeping it that way!


----------



## taffy19 (Apr 2, 2006)

I like that each Marriott resort is listed separately.  Great idea and thank you.


----------



## Werner Weiss (Apr 2, 2006)

Marriott Owner said:
			
		

> Ouch - it sounds like you don't like the similarites between tug2.net and TUGmar.com and you are letting your opinion known in your post.


Yes.  It's my opinion that making any new Web site that looks like belongs to an established Web site is at best confusing and at worst an attempt to mislead.  Actually, I won't think TUGmar is trying to mislead anybody.  I assume that the attempt to mimic TUG is actually a tribute to TUG.

But that doesn't alter the fact that it's currently confusing.



			
				Marriott Owner said:
			
		

> I understand that the term Timeshare Users' Group is a generic term that is about timeshare owners coming together as a community.


"Timeshare Users' Group" (or "Timeshare User's Group"), is capitalized and is the name of a specific Web site.  The name and its acronym TUG have name recognition and around ten years of goodwill attached to them.

A generic term would be something like a timeshare Web site or a timeshare bulletin board or a timeshare forum.


			
				Marriott Owner said:
			
		

> In fact, Timeshare Users Group is not trademarked or registered at the US Patent Office.  Nor is TUG. Nor is TUG1. Nor is TUG2. It is public domain. It is a generic term.


Yes, it appears that Bill Rogers did not hire a lawyer to make sure that his Web site's name and acronym would have full legal protection.  He probably didn't think he had to.  I'm not an intellectual property lawyer (or any other kind of lawyer), so I don't know how much protection Bill Rogers has given up.  

By the way, TUG2.net is a domain name, not a trademark, business name, or site name. 

I'm not involved with TUG in any capacity except as a someone who has learned a lot from TUG, who occasionally posts, and who pays his annual fee.  I'm simply offering an opinion and friendly advice.  Maybe Bill Rogers will object to the attempt to leverage the TUG goodwill; maybe he will be flattered by the tribute.  I don't know.

TUGmar loses credibility because the site comes across as an attempt to deceive.  That's unnecessary and it's a shame.

The Kmart and Wal-Mart analogy doesn't hold water.  Retailers have used the words mart, market, store, and shop on their signs for centuries, usually preceded by a space, sometimes preceded by a dash, and sometimes preceded by neither.

As far as the comments about the Marriott trademark are concerned, there's a big difference between discussing Marriott properties and using the Marriott brand in a deceptive manner.  Neither TUG nor TUGmar are using the Marriott brand in a way that makes it appear the sites are operated by Marriott.

Again, my friendly advice would be establish a distinct, unique identity.


----------



## gmarine (Apr 2, 2006)

If TUGMAR is not affiliated with TUG, why use TUG in the name and make it appear to visitors that it is affilitated? That is certainly what is intended.

I wont visit a site that falsely appears to represent another site and I agree that TUGmar loses credibility by trying to deceive visitors.


----------



## Marriott Owner (Apr 2, 2006)

*Sad message*

What is sad is the negativism and feelings of hate that we receive from your message, Mr Werner. That's my perception at least.

There is no intent to deceive, and there is not deception on the website.

There is even an disclaimer that you referred to as small print. ( by the way, it is the same font size as all the other print in the column) . That's deceptive on your part for saying it is small, now isn't it.

http://tugmar.com/Marriott_TUG/index.php?topic=307.0

There is a link with further comments about all the hate we've just received from some posters here.

We've also received lots of love from fellow Marriott owners, and we appreciate it.

kind regards.
Marriott Owner


----------



## ondeadlin (Apr 2, 2006)

Werner Weiss said:
			
		

> TUGmar loses credibility because the site comes across as an attempt to deceive.  That's unnecessary and it's a shame.



Can't agree more with this point.


----------



## Werner Weiss (Apr 2, 2006)

Marriott Owner said:
			
		

> What is sad is the negativism and feelings of hate that we receive from your message, Mr Werner. That's my perception at least.


I assure you that I do not have "feelings of hate" toward TUGmar.  

In fact, if had feeling of hate or if I wanted to see TUGmar fail, I would not have spent any time posting to this thread.

Please think about the perception of visitors to TUGmar:

Some visitors will think the site is part of TUG, in which case, they're being deceived, even if this is not the intent.
Some visitors will figure out that there's no connection to TUG, and will perceive the site negatively as an attempt to deceive or mislead.
Some visitors will figure out that there's no connection to TUG, and will view the use of the TUG name and similar masthead in a way that isn't negative.  (They might simply be puzzled, or might might see it as a tribute).
Some visitors will not perceive any connection to TUG, perhaps because they're unfamiliar with TUG.

Please reread my posts as friendly advice, not as "negativism and feelings of hate."


----------



## daventrina (Apr 2, 2006)

*Mug*

So, if it is a Marriott Users Group and not attempted to capatalize on *TUG*, why not call it *MUG* (_Marriott Users Group_). (which is fitting cause that's how we felt after we bought Marriott; like we'd been mugged  )
Should have at least made it TUGmarriott...


----------



## Pat H (Apr 2, 2006)

Marriott Owner, I think you are being way too sensitive. A lot of the remarks you call "hate" don't come across like that at all. They are not necessarily negative either. Some people are just trying to give you their perception/opinion. You don't need to be so defensive.


----------



## MOXJO7282 (Apr 2, 2006)

I disagree that there is some attempt of deception. When I viewed the site,  I saw the statements very clearly about its non-affiliation with TUG. The vast majority of people would easily make that same distinction. 

And besides, it doesn't look like any of the commonalities were patented items, so there isn't even a legal issue.  

I see the backlash as loyal tug followers, I'm speculating, non-Marriott owners who out of loyality are being "Debbie Downers" 

I say that because I'm not sure how anyone could see this new site as a negative. The more insight, the more opportunity to rent and sell TSs for free, the better.   

I look forward to the development of the new website.

Regards.
Joe


----------



## Werner Weiss (Apr 2, 2006)

MOXJO7282 said:
			
		

> And besides, it doesn't look like any of the commonalities were patented items, so there isn't even a legal issue.


Patents apply to inventions, so patents don't apply here.  Trademarks and service marks apply to names and logos.

I found an interesting site, PROTECTING TRADEMARKS & DOMAIN NAMES.

So, on one hand TUG has rights because... "Rights to a mark are created by using the mark. Even without registration, this creates 'common law' rights to the mark."

On the other hand... "The more fanciful a name is, the easier it is to register and protect; the more descriptive a name is, the harder it is to register and protect."  (That explains why so many new companies have nonsense names.)  Timeshare User's Group and TUG are not fanciful.

I'm posting this link because I think it's interesting to understand (at least at a high level) how marks are protected.  I'm not suggesting that anybody should be going to court over the similarity between TUG and TUGmar.



			
				MOXJO7282 said:
			
		

> I see the backlash as loyal tug followers, I'm speculating, non-Marriott owners who out of loyality are being "Debbie Downers"
> 
> I say that because I'm not sure how anyone could see this new site as a negative. The more insight, the more opportunity to rent and sell TSs for free, the better.


If those comments are directed at least partially toward me, please be aware that I own three Marriott weeks and I would welcome more information and more discussion about the Marriott system and specific Marriott resorts.  I don't see a new site as a negative at all.  

That's why I offered the friendly advice to establish a distinct, unique identity.


----------



## BocaBum99 (Apr 2, 2006)

There is nothing wrong with creating a Marriott only site and promoting it here on TUG.  It's very generous that the owners of TUG allow it.  It proves to me that they really do care about timesharing in that it allows free flow of information.  I only have a problem with the site name which is obviously a play on TUG and that decision immediately casts a cloud over the integrity of the site.  So, when a person posts like they did asking for help with the site on a different site, it comes across as a shill, even if it isn't.

The site will live and die on its ability to attract users to come back to it.   There will be an initial set of people who go to the site just to see what it's all about.  But, it if doesn't have a core group adding content continually for the next year, it will end up like this site:  tstips .  A Ghost town.

If it does a good job of adding content, it will be like this site:  Timeshare Forums 

The launch of both of those sites had a ton of early interest.   And that was with a ton of energy put behind both with lots of volunteers.  Given they have over 1000 members now, it appears that Timeshare Forums will now succeed.

Here is another attempt at creating a timesharing site:  Happy Owners 

As far as technology goes, it blows away all of the sites previously mentioned.  But, go to the forums and you will see almost no posts.  I consider it a failure.


----------



## BocaBum99 (Apr 2, 2006)

MOXJO7282 said:
			
		

> I see the backlash as loyal tug followers, I'm speculating, non-Marriott owners who out of loyality are being "Debbie Downers"
> 
> I say that because I'm not sure how anyone could see this new site as a negative. The more insight, the more opportunity to rent and sell TSs for free, the better.
> 
> ...



If I owned the copyright and trademark to TUG, I would sue TUGmar to change their name.  And, I would win.  I am a marketing executive so I know that trademarks and service marks are important are fairly easy to defend.

The most eggregious ripping off of a brand I have witnessed was in Los Angeles when I was getting my undergrad degree.  I went to a gas station called "Mobic" with a friend in his car.  It had blue letters and a red "o".  It was clearly an attempt to make customers believe it was "mobil."

They had prices in liters.  I remember clearly telling my friend that I hate when a gas station prices in liters.  I got out my calculator and calculated the cost per gallon.  It was DOUBLE the market rate.  My friend was so enraged, he took out the gas pump out of his car and started screaming at the owner.  He was a New Yorker from Long Island, so he wasn't about to be taken like that.  He gave the attendent a pen and said "write down my license plate number, I am NOT paying you frauds."

Whether or not the owners of TUGMar had the intent to steal key trademarks of TUG, I have no idea.  In any event, it's not right and should be changed.


----------



## EducatedConsumer (Apr 2, 2006)

I'll not get into the issue of trade infringement, but I will address a few other topics:

(1) I would caution anyone about supplying personal or confidential information, including your name, to any website. Sites like that referred to, although often purported as altruistic by their principals, are often facades of sales and marketing organizations (and thieves) that use seemingly harmless websites to capture information that can later be used for all sorts of purposes, including illegal ones. E.g. depending what information is required for registration, it may be possible to put certain demographic data together, including data that is a matter of public record to obtain ones identity. Many timeshares are deeded, with the deed recorded by an entity that is obligated to make its activities matters of public record. I am a victim of Identity Theft, and my identity was pieced together by the theft using public records, and search engines. One search engine that is worthy of your attention is zabasearch.com

(2) I can't help but wonder who the person or people are behind the referenced website. Right now they are living their lives behind a curtain.

(3) I hesitate to think about the psyche of the person who is tuned to this or any other like station all day. Thank God there is more to my life than forums such as this one.


----------



## gmarine (Apr 2, 2006)

Marriott Owner said:
			
		

> What is sad is the negativism and feelings of hate that we receive from your message, Mr Werner. That's my perception at least.
> 
> There is no intent to deceive, and there is not deception on the website.
> 
> ...



The disclaimer is an awfull lot smaller than the wording "Timeshare users group". 
Your getting some negative responses because it is very obvious your trying to make visitors think the site is affiliated with this one when it isnt.

You trying to say that the site isnt meant to deceive anyone into believing it is affiliated with TUG is absolutely laughable.


----------



## Clemson Fan (Apr 2, 2006)

EducatedConsumer said:
			
		

> I'll not get into the issue of trade infringement, but I will address a few other topics:
> 
> (1) I would caution anyone about supplying personal or confidential information, including your name, to any website. Sites like that referred to, although often purported as altruistic by their principals, are often facades of sales and marketing organizations (and thieves) that use seemingly harmless websites to capture information that can later be used for all sorts of purposes, including illegal ones. E.g. depending what information is required for registration, it may be possible to put certain demographic data together, including data that is a matter of public record to obtain ones identity. Many timeshares are deeded, with the deed recorded by an entity that is obligated to make its activities matters of public record. I am a victim of Identity Theft, and my identity was pieced together by the theft using public records, and search engines. One search engine that is worthy of your attention is zabasearch.com
> 
> ...


 
My thoughts exactly!

I'm personally very skeptical and suspicious about this new website and I don't plan on registering with it. For all I know it could be a shill website created by Marriott salespeople who hate TUG and the people who post on it who've probably end up costing them multiple sales. They'd probably love to get those posters information to figure out who they are and screw with their accounts.

TUG has 10+ years of goodwill and I actually trust the moderators here like KenK and DaveM to protect my personal information. Creating a new website like this is fine and I applaud the efforts if they're honest, but using the TUG name was a mistake IMO and one that leads to a lot of suspicion. It reminds me of those daily e-mails I get saying that my paypal account has been violated. It then tells me to click on a "paypal" link in the e-mail to log into my account to fix things. When you click on that link it very deceptively sends you to some non paypal weblink that really looks exactly like the paypal logon page.

Whether it's trademarked or not, TUG is TUG and not tug2.net like the OP constantly tries to call it.

Sorry Marriott Owner, I just don't trust you or your new website. Trying to incorporate another websites name into yours that has so much goodwill built up is a major league red flag to me.


----------



## taffy19 (Apr 2, 2006)

EducatedConsumer said:
			
		

> I'll not get into the issue of trade infringement, but I will address a few other topics:
> 
> (1) I would caution anyone about supplying personal or confidential information, including your name, to any website. Sites like that referred to, although often purported as altruistic by their principals, are often facades of sales and marketing organizations (and thieves) that use seemingly harmless websites to capture information that can later be used for all sorts of purposes, including illegal ones. E.g. depending what information is required for registration, it may be possible to put certain demographic data together, including data that is a matter of public record to obtain ones identity. Many timeshares are deeded, with the deed recorded by an entity that is obligated to make its activities matters of public record. I am a victim of Identity Theft, and my identity was pieced together by the theft using public records, and search engines. One search engine that is worthy of your attention is zabasearch.com
> 
> ...


Excellent post of caution as I just looked up who the owner is of this web site but it is hidden. I would never do business with a web site where the owner is hidden behind a curtain. Now why would they hide if it is a legit business or web site?

I had already signed up but only gave my email address which is a junk email address anyway.


----------



## Pit (Apr 2, 2006)

BocaBum99 said:
			
		

> If I owned the copyright and trademark to TUG, I would sue TUGmar to change their name.  And, I would win.



Ditto. I've registered several trademarks. It is not necessary to register a mark to be protected. Read...
http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/tac/doc/basic/register.htm 



			
				BocaBum99 said:
			
		

> Whether or not the owners of TUGMar had the intent to steal key trademarks of TUG, I have no idea.  In any event, it's not right and should be changed.



Seems to me a rather obvious attempt at remaking the TUG logo. Air is free, trademarks and service marks are not. Your attempt to piggyback on the success of TUG is wrong.


----------



## Clark (Apr 2, 2006)

Hmmm, now that I think about it TUGownertrades.com has a nice ring to it --


----------



## taffy19 (Apr 2, 2006)

Clark said:
			
		

> Hmmm, now that I think about it TUGownertrades.com has a nice ring to it --


You mean *Marriottownertrades.com* or something like it? I would register that name if I were you. This is addressed to the owner of TUGmar.com/.  

www.marriottownerstrading.com/
www.marriottownerexchanges.com/

etc. etc. Many possibilities without mentioning the word TUG in your domain name.


----------



## daventrina (Apr 2, 2006)

*Here is the info on TUGmar.com*



			
				iconnections said:
			
		

> Excellent post of caution as I just looked up who the owner is of this web site but it is hidden. ...


Not hidden, but obscure.
I wouldn't trust them!

You would have to guess that it is these guys behind it:
https://www.gkg.net/info/bios.html
Paul D. Marvin - President/Chief Executive Officer
W. Taylor Marvin - Vice Chairman/Chief Technology Officer
Jose Quintana - Director of Technology Consulting
Alexandra "Boo" Davis - Public Relations/Marketing
Alec Pointer - Director of Operations

Will the real Marriott Owner please stand up  

TUGmar.com
http://www.whois.net/
http://www.whois.net/whois.cgi2?d=TUGmar.com
WHOIS information for TUGmar.com:

[whois.gkg.net]
The Data in GKG.NET's WHOIS database is provided by GKG.NET for information
purposes, and to assist persons in obtaining information about or related
to a domain name registration record.  GKG.NET does not guarantee its
accuracy.  By submitting a WHOIS query, you agree that you will use this
Data only for lawful purposes and that, under no circumstances will you use
this Data to: (1) allow, enable, or otherwise support the transmission of
mass unsolicited, commercial advertising or solicitations via e-mail
(spam); or  (2) enable high volume, automated, electronic processes that
apply to GKG.NET (or its systems).  GKG.NET reserves the right to modify
these terms at any time.  By submitting this query, you agree to abide by
this policy.

Registrant:
    GKG.NET Domain Proxy Service
    GKG.NET Domain Proxy Service Administrator
    2700 S Earl Rudder Frwy.
    Suite 1300
    College Station, TX 77845
    US
    +1.9796935447 (FAX) +1.9796947060
tugmar.com@privatedomain.gkg.net

Administrative Contact:
    GKG.NET Domain Proxy Service
    GKG.NET Domain Proxy Service Administrator
    2700 S Earl Rudder Frwy.
    Suite 1300
    College Station, TX 77845
    US
    +1.9796935447 (FAX) +1.9796947060
tugmar.com-admin@privatedomain.gkg.net

Technical Contact:
    GKG.NET Domain Proxy Service
    GKG.NET Domain Proxy Service Administrator
    2700 S Earl Rudder Frwy.
    Suite 1300
    College Station, TX 77845
    US
    +1.9796935447 (FAX) +1.9796947060
tugmar.com-tech@privatedomain.gkg.net

Billing Contact
    GKG.NET Domain Proxy Service
    GKG.NET Domain Proxy Service Administrator
    2700 S Earl Rudder Frwy.
    Suite 1300
    College Station, TX 77845
    US
    +1.9796935447 (FAX) +1.9796947060
tugmar.com-billing@privatedomain.gkg.net

    Registrar..: gkg.net (http://register.gkg.net/)
    Domain Name: TUGMAR.COM
	Created on..............: 28-MAR-2006
	Expires on..............: 28-MAR-2016
	Record last updated on..: 28-MAR-2006
	Status..................: ACTIVE

    Domain servers in listed order:

    NS50.ANYSERVERS.COM
    NS51.ANYSERVERS.COM 

And from InterNIC
http://reports.internic.net/cgi/whois?whois_nic=TUGmar.com&type=domain

Whois Server Version 1.3

Domain names in the .com and .net domains can now be registered
with many different competing registrars. Go to http://www.internic.net
for detailed information.

   Domain Name: TUGMAR.COM
   Registrar: GKG.NET, INC.
   Whois Server: whois.gkg.net
   Referral URL: http://www.gkg.net
   Name Server: NS50.ANYSERVERS.COM
   Name Server: NS51.ANYSERVERS.COM
   Status: REGISTRAR-LOCK
   Updated Date: 27-mar-2006
   Creation Date: 27-mar-2006
   Expiration Date: 27-mar-2016


>>> Last update of whois database: Sun, 2 Apr 2006 06:12:19 EDT <<<


If you do it for a real company, like microsoft, here is what you get:
OpenSRS Whois Utility


Whois info for, microsoft.com:


Registrant:
 Microsoft Corporation
 One Microsoft Way
 Redmond, WA 98052
 US

 Domain name: MICROSOFT.COM

 Administrative Contact:
    Administrator, Domain  domains@microsoft.com
    One Microsoft Way
    Redmond, WA 98052
    US
    +1.4258828080
 Technical Contact:
    Hostmaster, MSN  msnhst@microsoft.com
    One Microsoft Way
    Redmond, WA 98052
    US
    +1.4258828080


 Registration Service Provider:
    DBMS VeriSign, dbms-support@verisign.com
    800-579-2848 x4
    Please contact DBMS VeriSign for domain updates, DNS/Nameserver
    changes, and general domain support questions.


 Registrar of Record: TUCOWS, INC.
 Record last updated on 27-Jan-2005.
 Record expires on 03-May-2014.
 Record created on 02-May-1991.

 Domain servers in listed order:
    NS5.MSFT.NET   65.55.238.126
    NS3.MSFT.NET   213.199.144.151
    NS2.MSFT.NET   65.54.240.126
    NS4.MSFT.NET   207.46.66.75
    NS1.MSFT.NET   207.68.160.190


 Domain status: REGISTRAR-LOCK

The Data in the Tucows Registrar WHOIS database is provided to you by Tucows
for information purposes only, and may be used to assist you in obtaining
information about or related to a domain name's registration record.


----------



## Werner Weiss (Apr 2, 2006)

daventrina said:
			
		

> Not hidden, but obscure.
> I wouldn't trust them!
> 
> You would have to guess that it is these guys behind it:
> ...


GKG is an Internet services company.  Among other services, GKG provides domain registration and Web hosting.  GKG probably has thousands of customers.  TUGmar is one of those customers.

There is no reason to believe that one of the corporate officers or senior managers of GKG is behind TUGmar.

Using a Web hosting provider is not a bad thing.  Companies ranging from the smallest mom & pop businesses to many of the Fortune 500 corporations use Web hosting providers.

TUGmar would have more credibility if the people who are responsible for TUGmar would reveal their identities, just as the officials of their hosting provider do at http://www.gkg.net/info/bios.html


----------



## Dave M (Apr 3, 2006)

Based on some info that another TUGger found, it appears that....

tugmar.com, rpalms.com, and athleticscience.com

were all registered by

Athletic Science, Inc.
L Ramus
P.O. Box 1314
Royal Oak, Michigan 48068
US
+1.2485820330 (FAX) +1.2485820330
63351@whois.gkg.net

rpalms.com was apparently a family website which was recently changed to delete the name of the family. I have that name, but it serves no purpose to disclose it.

Whether the above info is true or not, the owners of the website referred to in this thread have gone to great lengths to avoid disclosure of who the owners are. Very strange.


----------



## dougp26364 (Apr 3, 2006)

All I can say is WOW, paranoia runs deep on the internet.   

If you don't want to register for the site, don't do it. There will always be competing sites and if anyone thinks people are making money on most of these discussion forums, well, start one and good luck. Most lose money, are hosted on "free" servers or are simply vanity sites (I have it because I want to be the big cheese). 

Personally, I was a little put off by the use of TUG in the name but, unless the TUG owners/administrators object, then I feel I have no objection myself.


----------



## Clemson Fan (Apr 3, 2006)

dougp26364 said:
			
		

> All I can say is WOW, paranoia runs deep on the internet.


 
Yup, you're right.

Since my original post, I've gotten 3 of those fraudulent paypal e-mails and they've gotten even more sophisticated than they already were.  This time, when I click on the "paypal" link it sends me to a numbered web address that looks like paypal that says this site has been moved.  Then, when you click on that link it brings you to what is an internal page on their site that actually has the name paypal in the address bar.  It's a very sophisticated scam.

I think people realize that this new website is probably not set up to be a moneymaker for someone.  I think the concern is that it may be a dishonest front to try and gather information for one reason or another.  It's already dishonest by using TUG and it's 10+ years of goodwill to try and attract people to their site.

Like I said before, TUG is TUG and not tug2.net like the OP keeps trying to rename it as.


----------



## EducatedConsumer (Apr 3, 2006)

Clemson Fan said:
			
		

> "I think people realize that this new website is probably not set up to be a moneymaker for someone."
> 
> I wouldn't be so sure about that.
> 
> ...


----------



## dougp26364 (Apr 3, 2006)

Oh good lord. Surely you're not linking the new web site to the phishing E-mails for Paypal? I've been getting a couple of those a week since signing up for Tug, Cruise Critic and Las Vegas Talk (who's owner I've met a couple of times). I also get phishing scams for credit card companies, E-bay, lotteries and some poor guy in Ethiopia who's desperate to get their money out of some bank and into America. Heck, I started getting them just about as soon as I signed up for my very first E-mail address and they were coming from what looked like my ISP. Maybe Compuserve, AOL, Yahoo, Netzero et.... are all in on this phishing scam too? Maybe THAT'S how the ISP's really make money?

Consumer beware is good advice but all out paranoia is a lot like being scared of you're own shadow. If you're worried about someone collecting data concerning you're E-mail address, then don't get on the internet. It's a lot like staying out of the water because you some people have been known to drown, be stung by jelly fish, get a rash or be bitten by sharks.

Would it have made a difference it they hadn't made the mistake of making the name TUGmar? Perhaps if they'd just choosen the name Marriott users group (MUG) everyone would have felt safe?

I really think a much ado has been made about nothing here. It's just another website with a discussion forum. Nothing more and nothing less.


----------



## KenK (Apr 3, 2006)

Clemson Fan said:
			
		

> Like I said before, TUG is TUG and not tug2.net like the OP keeps trying to rename it as.




The addresses the OP stated are tug server addresses:

http://www.tug2.net/

TUG has always been helpful (and willing to help) a new site that might deal with T/S help & issues.  That's when things are open on both sides.  The TUG BBS does not allow ads here.  It also does not allow any post by any poster that would have a financial gain or profit motive.  So...as soon as it is determined that the new MR site has any form of profit motivation, and is posted here by those gaining to profit, those posts will be removed.

An example: A Law Firm posted an address here to RCI owners about a law suit.  Because the Law Firm posted this, it was removed.  If Clemson Fan had posted this info, it would have stayed, because Clemson has no financial gain in the Law office. (He might in the suit)

We allowed TSTips (when it started) to post here. When RE ads were detected on that site, any post by the owner in referance to the site was removed. 

Note that the owner of Forums does not post info leading to that site here.  But others can.   

I don't know why the new sites owners are so very secretive.  Do they think Marriott may mark their accounts?  (Maybe there a point there).

Even if it does become a profit making site, leads to that site can be posted here by disinterested TUG info volunteers.

Informational posts here are allowed by T/S professional. You see Seth, Bootleg, Joanne, Theresa, Cindy, (Resale Sally)  posting T/S info at times.  They do not, however point to their realty or other companies as a come on.  Actually, most posters here would not even know they worked for RCI, Shawnee, ERA, Cendant. 

We don't even allow affiliated links.  If A can do one to Entertainment Pubs, why can't B and C do it as well?

Once in a while, a Marriott exc will even make an appearance....very rare lately...(They like their jobs better than TUG)

The new site developers seem to think TUG is being hostile, and grouchy, toward their endeavor.  I don't see it that way.  

OK...any moderators or administrators, I may have made a few info errors...feel free to fix.


----------



## RichM (Apr 3, 2006)

I think it's great that owners are interested enough to start and support, through posting and replying, on any system-specific website not operated by the developer or resort management.  This was the exact reason behind wmowners.com for WorldMark owners.  It started when one owner added a single sub-category to an existing forum for an unrelated business and eventually, the WM content was separated, moved and the site now has over 2,000 members and is closing in on 60,000 posts.  Since the hard cost to run a website and discussion forum is so low, it's easy to get a core group of volunteers and come up with the money for such an endeavor.  If the interest is there, more and more volunteers come in and it becomes self-supporting.

TUG has been very generous in allowing links to the wmowners.com website, presumably because it is truly independent and non-commercial.  Many WM Owners regulars also participate on TUG since there are so many more people here and there's a great wealth of information on other systems and timesharing in general.

Just a thought on timesharing sites in general: As generation X gets older and more of them look into timesharing, the developers are going to have to look at their business model and realize that they can't control the flow of information on the internet.  It seems that the sales tactics some use rely on the fact that their "mark" comes in with little or no knowledge of their system, or timesharing at all.  With the new crop of buyers having more knowledge of the internet, googling, message boards, etc., many more will go into their presentation armed with information that the developers don't want you to know about.  


___________________
WorldMark Owners' Community -      
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




      - www.wmowners.com


----------



## BocaBum99 (Apr 3, 2006)

KenK said:
			
		

> The addresses the OP stated are tug server addresses:
> 
> http://www.tug2.net/
> 
> ...



Ken,

Thanks for posting the TUG position on this topic.  TUG should be commended for acting consistently within these policies.


----------



## BocaBum99 (Apr 3, 2006)

RichM said:
			
		

> I think it's great that owners are interested enough to start and support, through posting and replying, on any system-specific website not operated by the developer or resort management.  This was the exact reason behind wmowners.com for WorldMark owners.  It started when one owner added a single sub-category to an existing forum for an unrelated business and eventually, the WM content was separated, moved and the site now has over 2,000 members and is closing in on 60,000 posts.  Since the hard cost to run a website and discussion forum is so low, it's easy to get a core group of volunteers and come up with the money for such an endeavor.  If the interest is there, more and more volunteers come in and it becomes self-supporting.
> 
> TUG has been very generous in allowing links to the wmowners.com website, presumably because it is truly independent and non-commercial.  Many WM Owners regulars also participate on TUG since there are so many more people here and there's a great wealth of information on other systems and timesharing in general.
> 
> ...



Rich,

I totally agree with you.  wmowners is a fantastic site for a phenomenal point system.

I think resort developers will move more toward a WorldMark type of timesharing system especially since transaction costs for resales are fairly low since no deed recording is required.  This will help those developers sell points via the internet in the future at a much more reasonable price.


----------



## ironweed (Apr 3, 2006)

*Oh good!!*

Oh boy,  now I've got two more boards to keep an eye on to see whats up at my two Marriott properties ....    

lets see . . . . . that makes *FIVE !!*  

Anybody else want to get something going ????


----------



## KenK (Apr 3, 2006)

Will the TUGgers who have made calls to the staff at the new Marriott BBS please stop. 

No wonder they want to keep their IDs hidden


----------



## Clemson Fan (Apr 3, 2006)

KenK said:
			
		

> Will the TUGgers who have made calls to the staff at the new Marriott BBS please stop.


 
Don't you mean the tug2.netters?

It wasn't me.  I've barely even looked at the site.


----------



## Clemson Fan (Apr 3, 2006)

dougp26364 said:
			
		

> Would it have made a difference it they hadn't made the mistake of making the name TUGmar?


 
Yes.  I think it would've made a huge difference.

Combine that with the fact that these posters Marriott Owner and Potential Buyer Scott all of a sudden came out of the blue and this whole thing just reeks of a fraud.  If it had been some posters that I've actually seen before who decided to take the initiative to create a website like this like forums or wmowners were created, then it would've been much more believable to me.  I could care less what their real identities are.  

I can't venture to guess what their underlying motives are, but I really doubt they are what's stated on their website.


----------



## dougp26364 (Apr 3, 2006)

We'll, I registered and have posted to the site. I suppose if all of the sudden my bank accounts go dry, and earthquake swallows my house just before the tornado, tsunami and volcano get to it, then I'll believe you.

As it stands now I think they just had the unfortunate lack of forsight in putting a name to their site. While I'll agree that TUGmar was probably the WORST name they could pick, I don't see how that equates into attempting to defraud Marriott owners. 

If they had really wanted to defraud Marriott owners, all they would have had to do was steal sensitive information directly from the Marriott computers. Opps, I guess someone else already thought of that.

I'm sorry but I think to many of you have really just jumped off the deep end on this one.


----------



## KauaiMark (Apr 3, 2006)

*I was wondering the same thing...*



			
				BocaBum99 said:
			
		

> T  I'll bet using TUG in your name is a violation of the TUG trademark....



I was wondering the same thing...


----------



## dougp26365 (Apr 3, 2006)

I've had a change of heart.  I totally agree with those who think it was wrong for TUGmar to take on the name they did.  I decided not to post there after all.

See how easy it is to appear to be someone else at the click of a mouse?

What if I kept this id and I started telling people how I didn't like Marriott timeshares because they are overpriced.  

I would be telling the truth.  I do believe that.  But, who is the real me?  Would people be confused?  Would people attribute my posts to you?

I am not Doug P.  See.  I have a disclaimer.  So, it's okay now?

That's the problem with TUGmar.  Does it make more sense to you now?


----------



## daventrina (Apr 4, 2006)

*Well..... What would you expect*



			
				KenK said:
			
		

> Will the TUGgers who have made calls to the staff at the new Marriott BBS please stop.
> 
> No wonder they want to keep their IDs hidden


If you don't want to take the calls, maybe you shouldn't show up on someone else's board blowing your own horn  ... OH and stealing their copywriten content    like 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 or this: 
"Marriott TUG Message Board - www.TUGmar.com - Timeshare Users' Group".  And not be upfront about who you are.


----------



## gatoredy (Apr 4, 2006)

I'm all for another board and think competition is just fine but I don't see much value there yet. I'll keep an eye on it but will stick primarily here since it's where all the action is. It'll probably be a long time before they attract the viewership that TUG has.  

Marriott Owner....you should advertise somewhere else.  It's obvious that you looking to pull the TUG2 audience...it just doesn't make you or your website look good when you brazenly troll for viewers here.    

gatoredy


----------



## arlene22 (Apr 4, 2006)

dougp26365 said:
			
		

> I've had a change of heart.  I totally agree with those who think it was wrong for TUGmar to take on the name they did.  I decided not to post there after all.
> 
> See how easy it is to appear to be someone else at the click of a mouse?
> 
> ...



I had to read this post about five times before I understood what was going on...


----------



## ondeadlin (Apr 4, 2006)

The place is a ghost town and will probably continue to be.

If so, their unfortunate name and inept launch will be a major reasons why.


----------



## Avery (Apr 4, 2006)

iconnections said:
			
		

> You mean *Marriottownertrades.com* or something like it? I would register that name if I were you. This is addressed to the owner of TUGmar.com/.
> 
> www.marriottownerstrading.com/
> www.marriottownerexchanges.com/
> ...



How about MUG?


----------



## sandytoes (Apr 4, 2006)

There's the old story about a lawyer who moves to a small town and has no business until another lawyer moves to town and they have more business then they can handle . . . . maybe having two boards will be good for both TUGs. Certainly the small yearly price one has to pay to belong to this board is not going to be a deterient to my being able to access all the valuable information I have gained here.

Maybe using the TUG name was latching onto a good thing to get exposure, maybe it was poor judgement, maybe it violated some law or rule, BUT . .  .it could work to bring more people to both sites when they search for TUG or Marriott on the Internet.

Also, I believe I've discovered how they can afford to run their board. I believe they are selling advertising banners with some of their links. If you click on the calander, there are modest priced for purchasing a link to the calander or for purchasing a banner. It is the best calander I have seen on a timeshare site . . .very user friendly.

In my business, everyone wants to buy the prime piece of land with the view but then they want to tell the next person that comes along that they can not build in the empty field next door.

It is my hope that both boards thrive. It would even be nicer to see a  linking of the boards. Thanks to the TUG administrators for allowing us the hear about this new board.

It's a big world . . . there's room for everyone.

PS. I would still like to see a spell checker on this board . . .just a suggestion.
PSS . . . Some of my best friends are attornys  
PSSS . . .  no I have nothing to do with the new board . . . I still trying to figure out all that is here on this board.


----------



## BocaBum99 (Apr 4, 2006)

There are more posts on this thread than there are on the whole TUGmar message board.  After 3 days only 64 posts?  BigFrank did that in his first hour on timeshareforums.


----------



## Amy (Apr 4, 2006)

I would be interested in an alternative board for more focused information, just as I visit timeshareforums.com on a regular basis and wmowners.com on an irregular basis. But I am not interested in TUGmar.com since it is clear that it is appropriating the "TUG" term to take advantage of the goodwill TUG has generated for over a decade. There is no question in my mind that Bill Rogers owns a trademark in the name TUG as used in connection with a timeshare owners group internet forum. As evidenced by timeshareforums.com and wmowners.com, there is absolutely no need to have "TUG" in the internet address, to have them capitalized while "mar" is not, and to use both "TUG" and "Timeshare User's Group" in the exact way used by TUG in their caption -- all those points indicate board owners wanted to capitalize [unfairly] on the recognition of an existing trademark. I cannot support that.


----------



## dougp26364 (Apr 4, 2006)

dougp26365 said:
			
		

> I've had a change of heart.  I totally agree with those who think it was wrong for TUGmar to take on the name they did.  I decided not to post there after all.
> 
> See how easy it is to appear to be someone else at the click of a mouse?
> 
> ...




Yes and no. 

I don't care for the choice of name because of the confusion it can cause. I think it was a very poor choice of name AND I've stated that. 

However the paranoia that the people behind this site are up to no good is ridiculous. Just like my thinking that your intentions were to steal my identity and ruin my good name rather than to attempt to make a point.

The name's IS a poor choice but I don't think they're collecting data, stealing information or intentionally trying to harm anyone.


----------



## BocaBum99 (Apr 4, 2006)

dougp26364 said:
			
		

> Yes and no.
> 
> I don't care for the choice of name because of the confusion it can cause. I think it was a very poor choice of name AND I've stated that.
> 
> ...



I think you have a good point about the paranoia.  I do think they were trying to use the TUG name to build up their site, though.

But, if TUG doesn't have a problem with it, it's none of my business.

I'll use the site if it has unique content worth going back to see.


----------



## BocaBum99 (Apr 4, 2006)

chalucky said:
			
		

> Just plain off base.........lighten up !!!



Given the balance of the posts that follow mine, I'd say my post was "spot on"


----------



## Bill4728 (Apr 4, 2006)

BB said:
			
		

> The site will live and die on its ability to attract users to come back to it. There will be an initial set of people who go to the site just to see what it's all about. But, it if doesn't have a core group adding content continually for the next year, it will end up like this site: tstips . A Ghost town.
> 
> If it does a good job of adding content, it will be like this site: Timeshare Forums
> 
> ...



I saw your comments about Happy Owners  and you're right what a beautiful site and what a great BBS. But as you said there isn't anyone there, the last post I saw was Jan 2006.  Someone did alot of work and no one is there. Too Bad!


----------



## pwrshift (Apr 4, 2006)

Personally I think the new site name is off base and a bold attempt to rob a successful site that has meant so much to so many.   Just using the 'tug' name is illegal in my view as it is not generic.  I suspect they used 'mar' because they fear use of 'marriott' might land them in court faster than TUG might do.  If it's a good site, be honest enough to give it a 'new' name and let it build readers on its own merits.  Shame on you.

Brian


----------



## Ireland'sCall (Apr 4, 2006)

Why do we need a new website ?   Am one who rushed in ...but in all honesty do we need a new site.....if we were more active we would not need it
Garry


----------



## pedro47 (Apr 4, 2006)

The more information you learn about Marriott, their resorts and how their system  works is a win, win for all owners.
Good Luck


----------



## Werner Weiss (Apr 4, 2006)

dougp26364 said:
			
		

> I don't care for the choice of name because of the confusion it can cause. I think it was a very poor choice of name AND I've stated that.
> 
> However the paranoia that the people behind this site are up to no good is ridiculous. Just like my thinking that your intentions were to steal my identity and ruin my good name rather than to attempt to make a point.
> 
> The name's IS a poor choice but I don't think they're collecting data, stealing information or intentionally trying to harm anyone.


I'm not one of the people here who thinks that the TUGmar site is out to steal identities or to harvest private information.  But I can understand why people are distrustful of the new site.  I would call it healthy skepticism, not paranoia.

The site is clearly using TUG's name, masthead colors and "look."  Although they claim no deception, it's hard for a reasonable person to see anything other than an attempt to capitalize on the goodwill and reputation of TUG, the Timeshare User's Group.  (And they claim that if a trademark isn't registered, it's in the public domain and anyone can use it.  I'm not a lawyer, but I know that that's wrong.)

TUGmar has earned distrust by the choices they've made and by how they've tried to justify those choices.


----------



## Smooth Air (Apr 4, 2006)

And now, if we say something on TUG2.net that Dave does not like he locks us down! What the heck is going on here???


----------



## Elden12 (Apr 4, 2006)

If you are referring to the fact that Dave closed the thread on the note you posted I would disagree that Dave is "locking you down."

His reply clearly states  that there is already a thread on TUGmar and that any comments should be posted on that thread, which I see that you have.

I for one have the utmost respect for the knowledge that Dave has shared on this forum. (As well as the time and effort he puts into it!)  Thank you Dave!!!

Elden


----------



## Smooth Air (Apr 5, 2006)

Elden: The thread is already 4 pages long! I had a very specific question. It was kind of surprising that I was locked down b/f anybody had a chance to answer!  Just wanted to know if I was the only one taken in by the TUGmar ad...that's all...what is so bad about that?? So, now there is only one thread for anything related to TUGmar?? Seems a bit restrictive to me.


----------



## Elden12 (Apr 5, 2006)

I am not saying that your question/comment was unfounded.   I did not intend to sound critical of your question.  I was just supporting Dave's decision.   Dave made the decision to keep all comments on TUGMAR on this thread.  My point is that I respect Dave.   Being a moderator involves making decisions that not everyone will always agree with. I respect your opinion that you think that it is restrictive.  

In regards to the new forum I did look because I thought it was affiliated with TUG.  Once I checked out the site I quickly realized that it was NOT affiliated with TUG.  There has been so little action there that I quit checking.  

On a positive note, it has certainly created a lively conversation on TUG.   Everyone learns when people share their experiences with their time shares!


----------



## Clemson Fan (Apr 5, 2006)

smoothair said:
			
		

> Elden: The thread is already 4 pages long! I had a very specific question. It was kind of surprising that I was locked down b/f anybody had a chance to answer! Just wanted to know if I was the only one taken in by the TUGmar ad...that's all...what is so bad about that?? So, now there is only one thread for anything related to TUGmar?? Seems a bit restrictive to me.


 
DaveM just made a judgement call, that's all.  I really doubt he did it due to any bad intentions.  I too respect DaveM's judgement and the tireless pro bono work he puts into this BBS.  

A 10 second copy and paste gets your post on this thread.  No big deal.


----------



## Dave M (Apr 5, 2006)

No nefarious intentions in closing the thread. I was simply trying to keep the conversation related to this new website in one place, thus making it easier for all to follow.

I hope *smoothair* accepts my explanation in the cooperative spirit in which it was intended.


----------



## Smooth Air (Apr 5, 2006)

For somebody with a name like "Smoothair", I seem to be causing  a lot of turbulence here. The air is not really smooth! The original  post on TUGmar was mainly about the "expropriation" of the TUG name. My post was similar but different in that I was simply trying to see if other Tuggers were duped into going to TUGmar b/c they thought it was affiliated w/ TUG2.net. My intention was to poll opinion on a very specific question. That's all! I reasoned that if I posted my "poll" on the original post it wld get lost. I posted a separate post for expediency. But, hey, Dave, you have the key so do as you wish. I am only  a visitor!


----------



## dougp26364 (Apr 5, 2006)

Ireland'sCall said:
			
		

> Why do we need a new website ?   Am one who rushed in ...but in all honesty do we need a new site.....if we were more active we would not need it
> Garry



The other website is more resort specific rather than Marriott in general. If you're only interested in Manor Club, there's a forum about Manor Club. If your interest is only with the resorts in Orlando, there are forums dedicated to each of those resorts.

So, it's just more specific and it's something that TUG probably wouldn't have the space to provide. Even if they did I'm sure there would be an outcry from other resort system owners wanting their own location specific forums. As it was, there used to be a Hilton forum and a Marriott forum on TUG. A few Hilton owners were a little put off when TUG combined Hilton into a catagory with other hotel brands but kept a Marriott specific forum.

If people would utilize the new site it could be a great benefit to Marriott owners wanting more specific information on idividual resorts rather than Marriott in general.


----------



## Clemson Fan (Apr 5, 2006)

sandytoes said:
			
		

> Certainly the small yearly price one has to pay to belong to this board is not going to be a deterient to my being able to access all the valuable information I have gained here.


 
This BBS is free.  You don't need to be a TUG member to post here.


----------



## jazzeaw (Apr 5, 2006)

I can't get into this new thread - how comes?    it says "can not find server"


----------



## mapper (Apr 6, 2006)

As I stayed in the Tugmar forum, I am grateful for all of the forums on timeshares.  Each has a value to someone and isn' t that the point in the end?.....to educate and discuss a certain subject....in this case timeshares, more specifically in their forum......Marriott timeshares.

Each forum has the capability of sharing information, because of human mods, and the searches done by people to find the various forums, each forum has potential for different info or content and opinions which in and of itself is extremely value.  I prefer a variety of "takes" on any subject.

I have not been confused at all by the name of Tugmar and I guess I don't  take it as them trying to copy the Tugbbs, just trying to provide another valuable source of information for Marriott timeshare owners like me.

IMHO, the tugmar does not take away from this forum in any way shape or manner.

Diana


----------



## jerseyfinn (Apr 6, 2006)

*Time to take a step back*

I've been sitting here on the sidelines trying to resist the urge to post as I don't want to get entangled in a bru hah hah. But given the drift of many of the posts here, I'll offer my two cents worth.

First, I think that in today's world, it is indeed wise to step back & take a good look at things. In the case of TUGmar, my only reservation is whether or not the site actualy represents what it says it is  -- a place for MVCI owners to interact in an open forum with a different forum format which supplements TUG.  Certainly folks are wise to stop and ask what TUGmar really is.

At this specific time, I personally see no reason for the *hysteria* and the *wild speculation* one way or the other. It seems to me that TUG administrators are making an earnest effort to discern if something is amiss here and the answer at present is "no".

As to the so-called "secretiveness" of TUGmar's administrator, there are several possibile legitimate reasons why one would cloak or sequester their identity. And let me point out that *many folks here on TUG hide their own identities here on this very BB*. It seems a little disingenuous to immediately jump to the conclusion that clandestine motives are behind TUGmar  because the administrator of TUGmar is (necessarily) ducking some of the tirades here.

The Internet is the Internet -- annonymous, fast, and seamless. And it's always been "buyer beware" long before the Internet. So there's really nothing new here at all.

Likewise, it's for each of us to rationally decide the merits of TUGmar. If it is what it says it is, then many of us will turn to TUGmar as yet another TS resource. The resort-specific format is at the very least attractive and perhaps even compelling. Like any public venture, time will tell, and not wild speculation or suggestions that one is suddenly getting more spam.

Let's simply see how TUGmar works out and whether or not it has something new or unique to offer to we MVCI owners.

Barry

(signing my name as I always do )


----------



## BocaBum99 (Apr 6, 2006)

But Barry, hysteria is what makes internet bulletin boards interesting.


----------



## Ireland'sCall (Apr 10, 2006)

Have just looked "over there "..........not much activity.
Garry


----------



## MOXJO7282 (Apr 10, 2006)

Ireland'sCall said:
			
		

> Have just looked "over there "..........not much activity.
> Garry



It's going to take a long time to get going. I wonder how long it will remain free. They're spending money to maintain, and they have no traffic, so how are they covering expenses? There isn't any advertising either.

Marriott has alot of owners, so I do think if the word gets out, it could be a powerful resource for the Marriott owner.  We'll see.

Regards.
Joe


----------



## ironweed (Apr 11, 2006)

I just stopped by there myself.

If you listen carefully, you can hear the paint drying . . . .


----------



## jazzeaw (Apr 12, 2006)

why is it that everytime I try to go to this site is says the page can not be displayed?  do you have to join and have your userid imbedded in some file or what


----------



## Dave M (Apr 12, 2006)

tugmar.com seems to work fine. I just tested it. And as you can see from posts here, others don't seem to be having the same difficulty.

Try deleting all of your cookies and then try again.


----------



## arlene22 (Apr 12, 2006)

jazzeaw said:
			
		

> why is it that everytime I try to go to this site is says the page can not be displayed?  do you have to join and have your userid imbedded in some file or what



I have intermittently had that same issue. Just try back another time.


----------



## Ireland'sCall (Apr 12, 2006)

Anyway....after much "excitement" ...it seems to me it has fizzled out. But as I mentioned before...We need Marriott postings...its all too quiet.
Garry


----------



## BocaBum99 (Apr 12, 2006)

Come on now.  It did have 5 posts today.  At that rate, it will take more than a year before there are 2000 posts.


----------



## taffy19 (Apr 14, 2006)

I hope that this web site will succeed because I like the idea of each individual Marriott resort being listed separately.  It is so hard to keep the names apart for us, who have never been to the East Coast.  It would help to have each resort listed by name, abbreviation and by State too.  JMHO.

I only wished they would let us know who they are.  I have a feeling that the few principals are from the UK but why hide this information?  If they had some bad calls, can't they trace them down?  My telephone service does.


----------

