# What do MVC owners think of Abound?



## TravelTime (Sep 4, 2022)

There are active threads in the Vistana forum and concerns about how Marriott is hurting the Vistana program. I have not heard much, if anything, about what Marriott owners think about Abound.

A few questions:

1) For points owners and enrolled weeks owners, are you excited to be able to book the new Vistana properties? Which Westin/Sheraton resorts in particular are you most interested in?

2) What do you think of the points values for new Westin/Sheraton properties? The new points charts are loaded for 2023 under Helpful Tools on the MVC website.

3) Any concerns that it will be harder to book the already hard-to-get Marriott resorts inventory with more competition from the Vistana folks for the top locations?

4) For MVC weeks owners, any fears that you will not be able to book your home resorts due to more competition from Vistana folks? If not, what reassurance can you give the Vistana folks?

5) Any resentment that Vistana owners will get immediate access to Marriott inventory but it might not be reciprocal for Marriott people to access Vistana inventory since Vistana inventory will be limited (at least in the beginning)?

6) What do post-2010 resale weeks owners think about Vistana mandatory resale owners (pre-8/9/2022) getting free enrollment into Abound?


----------



## CPNY (Sep 4, 2022)

TravelTime said:


> There are active threads in the Vistana forum and concerns about how Marriott is hurting the Vistana program. I have not heard much, if anything, about what Marriott owners think about Abound.
> 
> A few questions:
> 
> ...


technically aren’t we all Marriott owners now? Or will we still be divided into vistana and Marriott people?

Number 5, of course Marriott owners will have resentment….remember Marriott bought ILG, so naturally everything should come to the Marriott owner gratis.

number 6. I’m not so sure we can compare these two. Remember vistana had a points based program with contractual obligations. Marriott only had deeded weeks ownership prior to rolling out their points program. Owners do not know the legalities or reasons why they are doing what they are doing now.


----------



## dioxide45 (Sep 4, 2022)

CPNY said:


> technically aren’t we all Marriott owners now? Or will we still be divided into vistana and Marriott people?


I think legally they are still separate companies, just that both are subsidiaries of the larger MVW. They both still have distinctive underlying products in that Marriott has deeded weeks and Vistana has VSN. I wonder if something needs changed in the forums nest year given that there is a combined Abound program and separate Marriott and Vistana weeks based products. I know this question wasn't asked, but I don't think we want to dump them all into a single forum, but we are starting to see a lot of stuff posted to the wrong forum already.


----------



## dougp26364 (Sep 4, 2022)

I think I’m tired of hearing about the labor pains and want to see the baby.

I’m so worn out over the speculation and what the latest released tid-bit means for owners, or what some sales person told someone on an owner update, that my heads about ready to explode.

In the end nothing really matters. It’s going to be what it’s going to be and we can’t really begin to digest the program or dissect the nuances until we actually see it and can take it out for a test drive


----------



## TravelTime (Sep 4, 2022)

CPNY said:


> technically aren’t we all Marriott owners now? Or will we still be divided into vistana and Marriott people?
> 
> Number 5, of course Marriott owners will have resentment….remember Marriott bought ILG, so naturally everything should come to the Marriott owner gratis.
> 
> number 6. I’m not so sure we can compare these two. Remember vistana had a points based program with contractual obligations. Marriott only had deeded weeks ownership prior to rolling out their points program. Owners do not know the legalities or reasons why they are doing what they are doing now.



I am interested in what pre-Abound Marriott weeks and points owners think of the Abound program that is launching later this year. 

You are a Vistana person from what I can see that is being brought into the Abound program. Unless I am wrong, you do not own any Marriott weeks or trust points? If so, then your comments are from the POV of a Vistana owner and what the folks over on the Vistana threads are debating. Not to exclude you here but really want to hear the voice of non-Vistana people.

I do not think anyone can say we are all “Marriott” people after Abound launches. There will still be various buckets of people in Abound with all different privileges after Abound launches. There will still be: Pre-2010 enrolled Marriott weeks owners, Post-2010 unenrolled Marriott weeks owners, Trust Point owners, Vistana developer purchased weeks and flex points, Vistana retroed weeks, Vistana enrolled mandatory weeks owners, Vistana unenrolled voluntary weeks owners, Vistana post-8/9 mandatory weeks owners, and probably some other buckets I have missed.

This is why I am asking the Marriott side what they think since I have not heard their voices. This thread might be more insightful if the Marriott owners with no Vistana ownerships share what they know and what they like and do not like.


----------



## Fallenone (Sep 4, 2022)

I'm fairly new but 3) does worry me a bit. The footprint of Marriot is much larger and there are quite a few overlap between the programs. Hopefully the Mexico properties can draw existing Marriott owners to balance things out as Marriott had no footprint there before.


----------



## JIMinNC (Sep 4, 2022)

TravelTime said:


> 1) For points owners and enrolled weeks owners, are you excited to be able to book the new Vistana properties? Which Westin/Sheraton resorts in particular are you most interested in?


Excited is probably too strong a word. I am interested in a few. About the only one that really fills a gap for us is the Westin Los Cabos. I could see trying to book that if any availability makes its way into Abound. Sheraton PGA might be a fun place for golf for a few days added onto MVC Ocean Pointe. I could also see booking one of the nice studios at WKORV as a second week added onto a first week at Maui Ocean Club, but I prefer the better location of MOC on the south section of Kaanapali to the WKORV location on North Kaanapali.



> 2) What do you think of the points values for new Westin/Sheraton properties? The new points charts are loaded for 2023 under Helpful Tools on the MVC website.


I haven't looked at comparisons in detail, but from a cursory inspection they seem to fit nicely in the same basic structure we've become accustomed to over the years in the Destination Club. I did note that the WKORV seems to cost more points compared to MOC Lahaina/Napili, but maybe that's justified since Westin tends to be positioned slightly above Marriott in the hotel brand structure and due to the better studio portion of the 2BR units at Westin compared to MVC.



> 3) Any concerns that it will be harder to book the already hard-to-get Marriott resorts inventory with more competition from the Vistana folks for the top locations?


Yes somewhat, but it depends on so many variables, it's hard to say how much it will really impact availability. For every Vistana owner coming to book at MVC, that opens up availability in Abound to book Westin/Sheraton, but if all those VSN Abound deposits come in from Orlando and they want to book Aruba, that could make somewhere like Aruba harder to book. If Mexico or St John owners elect for Abound points, that might draw more MVC toward Westins in Mexico and free up competition for MVC in Hawaii or the Caribbean. Our main use of MVC is for Hawaii though, and since VSN is potentially bringing in so much new Hawaii inventory, I'm not all that concerned about the impact on the place we go the most, Maui.



> 4) For MVC weeks owners, any fears that you will not be able to book your home resorts due to more competition from Vistana folks? If not, what reassurance can you give the Vistana folks?


None whatsoever. Marriott keeps weeks inventory totally separate from DC/Abound, so as long as I'm online when the inventory is released at 13/12 months, I feel confident we will continue to be able to book our ownership at Maui Ocean Club and Waiohai sometime in January, February, or March.



> 5) Any resentment that Vistana owners will get immediate access to Marriott inventory but it might not be reciprocal for Marriott people to access Vistana inventory since Vistana inventory will be limited (at least in the beginning)?


Nope. That's the way it has to work. For every Vistana owner coming to book at MVC, that opens up availability in Abound to book at Westin/Sheraton. I welcome the new VSN owners to the family and hope they enjoy sampling MVC resorts.



> 6) What do post-2010 resale weeks owners think about Vistana mandatory resale owners (pre-8/9/2022) getting free enrollment into Abound?


It's comparing apples and oranges. Post-6/2010 MVC resale weeks owners are comparable to post-8/2022 Vistana mandatory resale owners, not pre-8/2022. Neither post-6/2020 MVC resale or post-8/2022 VSN resale get Abound access. I suspect both groups will continue to be offered ways to enroll by spending north of $30K.


----------



## TravelTime (Sep 4, 2022)

JIMinNC said:


> It's comparing apples and oranges. Post-6/2010 MVC resale weeks owners are comparable to post-8/2022 Vistana mandatory resale owners, not pre-8/2022. Neither post-6/2020 MVC resale or post-8/2022 VSN resale get Abound access. I suspect both groups will continue to be offered ways to enroll by spending north of $30K.



I understand what you are saying. However, I sort of think it was unfair to give any resales owners free enrollment in Abound. The precedent right now is that no resale owners get free enrollment and all resale owners (except us lucky ones who are getting in for free) must spend a lot of $$$ to enroll a week. 

BTW, I was ready to buy a week in Spain to enroll my WKOVRN week. Luckily Marriott would not provide an addendum so I rescinded. Now I know why they would not provide the addendum. 

Thank you Marriott for the free gift!


----------



## JIMinNC (Sep 4, 2022)

TravelTime said:


> I understand what you are saying. However, I sort of think it was unfair to give any resales owners free enrollment in Abound. The precedent right now is that no resale owners get free enrollment and all resale owners (except us lucky ones who are getting in for free) must spend a lot of $$$ to enroll a week.
> 
> BTW, I was ready to buy a week in Spain to enroll my WKOVRN week. Luckily Marriott would not provide an addendum so I rescinded. Now I know why they would not provide the addendum.
> 
> Thank you Marriott for the free gift!



But pre-2010 resale owners in MVC now get free enrollment as well. All you have to do I believe is watch a video and sign an enrollment agreement. Back in 2010, they did charge an enrollment fee for both developer-purchased and pre-2010 resales (with resale paying a bit higher fee), but those fees were modest, and they have since decided to change strategy and make enrollment free for everyone. If anything, it's the pre-8/2022 Vistana voluntary resales that are being treated differently, in that they are being kept out of Abound entirely, even though they are pre-8/2022. Obviously, the voluntary/mandatory distinction was not something MVC had to deal with in 2010, but do today, and that's how they decided to handle it. SInce resale voluntary didn't have VSN access, I guess it's a defensible decision on their part, but that is actually the biggest difference from 2010 - i.e. - not all pre-8/2022 resales are being grandfathered into Abound.


----------



## CPNY (Sep 4, 2022)

TravelTime said:


> I am interested in what pre-Abound Marriott weeks and points owners think of the Abound program that is launching later this year.
> 
> You are a Vistana person from what I can see that is being brought into the Abound program. Unless I am wrong, you do not own any Marriott weeks or trust points? If so, then your comments are from the POV of a Vistana owner and what the folks over on the Vistana threads are debating. Not to exclude you here but really want to hear the voice of non-Vistana people.
> 
> ...


Marriott people should really stop being segregationists. It’s a systemic problem


----------



## CPNY (Sep 4, 2022)

TravelTime said:


> I understand what you are saying. However, I sort of think it was unfair to give any resales owners free enrollment in Abound. The precedent right now is that no resale owners get free enrollment and all resale owners (except us lucky ones who are getting in for free) must spend a lot of $$$ to enroll a week.
> 
> BTW, I was ready to buy a week in Spain to enroll my WKOVRN week. Luckily Marriott would not provide an addendum so I rescinded. Now I know why they would not provide the addendum.
> 
> Thank you Marriott for the free gift!


I get it I get it I’m a vistana owner not allowed to post in the Marriott forum….. however, I’ve never seen a vistana owner telling a Marriott owner not to post in the vistana forum…. Just sayin…..although, technically I’m now a Marriott owner. My ownership confirmations come from Marriott vacation club…. So here We are! 

onto my comments. Your post here is contradictory. First you say no resale owner should be granted free enrollment but then you’re thanking Marriott for the free gift.

you should in good faith buy than week in Spain lol. Marriott needs your money haha


----------



## TravelTime (Sep 4, 2022)

CPNY said:


> I get it I get it I’m a vistana owner not allowed to post in the Marriott forum….. however, I’ve never seen a vistana owner telling a Marriott owner not to post in the vistana forum…. Just sayin…..although, technically I’m now a Marriott owner. My ownership confirmations come from Marriott vacation club…. So here We are!
> 
> onto my comments. Your post here is contradictory. First you say no resale owner should be granted free enrollment but then you’re thanking Marriott for the free gift.
> 
> you should in good faith buy than week in Spain lol. Marriott needs your money haha



Yes my opinion is contradictory in that I do not understand why Marriott gave free enrollment to mandatory resale owners at all. OTOH, I am grateful they gave it to those of us who met the arbitrary criteria. Like I said once, I am not going to look a gift horse in the mouth. If someone gives you something for free, even if it makes no sense, I just say thank you.

I am not trying to exclude Vistana owners on any other Marriott threads. I am just saying I would like to hear the voices of non-Vistana owners here. Otherwise it will get cluttered with the opinions of Vistana-only owners who have been quite vocal in many other threads. Many Vistana owners have repeated themselves hundreds of times by now LOL.

In terms of being segregationalist, it is a fact that people all have different ownerships with different benefits, rules and ways to participate in Abound.


----------



## CPNY (Sep 4, 2022)

TravelTime said:


> Yes my opinion is contradictory in that I do not understand why Marriott gave free enrollment to mandatory resale owners at all. OTOH, I am grateful they gave it to those of us who met the arbitrary criteria. Like I said once, I am not going to look a gift horse in the mouth. If someone gives you something for free, even if it makes no sense, I just say thank you.
> 
> I am not trying to exclude Vistana owners on any other Marriott threads. I am just saying I would like to hear the voices of non-Vistana owners here. Otherwise it will get cluttered with the opinions of Vistana-only owners who have been quite vocal in many other threads. Many Vistana owners have repeated themselves hundreds of times by now LOL.
> 
> In terms of being segregationalist, it is a fact that people all have different ownerships with different benefits, rules and ways to participate in Abound.


Nothing really changes for the legacy Marriott owner. Maybe the ability to book Westin/Sheraton properties and soon to be Harborside at Atlantis. A resort that many Marriott owners who frequent the Caribbean have always wanted to get into. I see this is as a good thing for Marriott owners.

if what Jim said is correct and pre 2010 owners can enroll without a fee, I’m not sure why there is such hate for the mandatory owner. Seems like it’s a good thing for all


----------



## TravelTime (Sep 4, 2022)

CPNY said:


> Nothing really changes for the legacy Marriott owner. Maybe the ability to book Westin/Sheraton properties and soon to be Harborside at Atlantis. A resort that many Marriott owners who frequent the Caribbean have always wanted to get into. I see this is as a good thing for Marriott owners.
> 
> if what Jim said is correct and pre 2010 owners can enroll without a fee, I’m not sure why there is such hate for the mandatory owner. Seems like it’s a good thing for all



Who says there is hate for the mandatory owner? That is exactly why I started this thread…to hear from non-Vistana owners.


----------



## DRH90277 (Sep 4, 2022)

My concerns are along the lines of whether the addition improves the inventory for access by "all" MVC participants; and, whether our access to the better properties will be even more restricted. 

I'm not happy with the sold out signs in making reservations for the better Marriott properties - keep in mind we are 12 years into the point-based program.  It's like the old commercial about "show me the beef" with respect to the incoming inventory.  Is the incoming inventory an upgrade or a downgrade in the quality of the eventual total available inventory?

Are we talking too much about the "mechanics" and missing "the potential and changing outcomes for our timeshare interests?"  Remember the devaluation of our Bonvoy points?


----------



## JIMinNC (Sep 4, 2022)

CPNY said:


> Nothing really changes for the legacy Marriott owner. Maybe the ability to book Westin/Sheraton properties and soon to be Harborside at Atlantis. A resort that many Marriott owners who frequent the Caribbean have always wanted to get into. I see this is as a good thing for Marriott owners.



I think this is absolutely why there has been so much less discussion and noise on this Marriott Board than what is going on over on the Vistana Board. Nothing is really changing for us except for the addition of the Westin/Sheraton properties, plus the potential competition for reservations that might come from VSN owners who elect into Abound. Right now that competition is only theoretical and will depend on how things actually play out, so I think a lot of us are in wait and see mode.


----------



## wuv pooh (Sep 5, 2022)

TravelTime said:


> Who says there is hate for the mandatory owner? That is exactly why I started this thread…to hear from non-Vistana owners.


You won't hear anything because it is not worth the energy.  We did all our bitching 12-14 years ago when there were endless threads on the change, the skim, the enrollment fee, the inventory pools, etc. etc. etc.  Quite exhausting and it did not change anything.  Either join or sell or just use your week.  You could ignore it or embrace it however you wanted.  Seems Vistana owners don't have weeks, so they can't just ignore it.  You will see some complaints if people can't get prime weeks, but not sure how you would prove that it was because all the "slum" Vistana owners stealing what is ours. From my knowledge they have just as many nice resorts compared to their ownership numbers as Marriott.  Marriott has people like me who bought in Williamsburg and Orlando and we are treated the same as people who bought in Maui.


----------



## Big Matt (Sep 5, 2022)

They reservation system will have more problems with more people on it.

Places like Hilton Head will see a lot more competition for points reservations

I'm looking forward to the Westin studios.  I've never stayed in a Marriott studio as a trade or with points since I can book for cash if I need to.  Having a kitchen is a big deal to me.


----------



## CPNY (Sep 5, 2022)

Big Matt said:


> They reservation system will have more problems with more people on it.
> 
> Places like Hilton Head will see a lot more competition for points reservations
> 
> I'm looking forward to the Westin studios.  I've never stayed in a Marriott studio as a trade or with points since I can book for cash if I need to.  Having a kitchen is a big deal to me.


I was thinking about this the other day, I think Marriott owners will be pleased with the lockoffs in the Vistana units. Y’all are pretty savvy with your point usage and many of the small one bedrooms are nicely equipped with kitchenettes and washer/dryers.

I am with you, having a kitchen is huge for me as is a washer/dryer. For that reason I would never book a Marriott studio.


----------



## kozykritter (Sep 5, 2022)

CPNY said:


> I was thinking about this the other day, I think Marriott owners will be pleased with the lockoffs in the Vistana units. Y’all are pretty savvy with your point usage and many of the small one bedrooms are nicely equipped with kitchenettes and washer/dryers.
> 
> I am with you, having a kitchen is huge for me as is a washer/dryer. For that reason I would never book a Marriott studio.


Never is a long time, Chris! Give it a try once maybe  

Yes, Marriott studios are more like a hotel guestroom compared to Vistana's condo-like equivalent....but like a really nice swanky guestroom! I stay in them comfortably all the time, often for multiple weeks. 

Since the 1-bed/2-bed units have laundry, the laundry room is rarely busy and it's easy to run a load or two through whenever I'd like. As far as cooking, I mostly make do with the microwave but when I get the urge to do more, I've learned that the property (MountainSide in my particular experience) will bring you an electric griddle, hot plate, pan, utensils if you ask for them. I do miss the bigger size fridge but I make it work since it is just a temporary holiday stay. The compromise for me is worth it for the location, the points saved with a smaller unit and the access to the resort itself. And I do book the 1-bed sometimes instead for the extra space and full kitchen...nice to have options.


----------



## TravelTime (Sep 5, 2022)

One thing to keep in mind is that Marriott is charging extra for the Westin studios vs the Marriott studios. So the stove top and washer dryer cost extra. This makes sense since you are getting more with a Westin studio.


----------



## TravelTime (Sep 5, 2022)

Marriott is charging the same for IV and OV category at WKOVR/N. Why on earth would they do that? Anyone have a guess? Seems like this would be a point of arbitrage. LOL   I see some other possible points of arbitrage too but that would require getting into the nitty gritty details of unit positioning.

Using shoulder season (same dates) as a comparison:

WKOVRN Studio
IV 2925
OV 2925
OF 3900

WKOVR Studio
IV 2525
OV 2525
OF 3550

MOC Napili/Lahaina studio
IV 2175
MG 2525
OV 2975
OF 3375

OTOH, they made the 2BR point values the same for both phases of WKOVR south and north overall but they also did the same thing as with the studios in valuing IV and OV the same.

WKOVR (south and north) 2BR
IV 6075
OV 6075
OF 8200

MOC Napili/Lahaina 2BR
IV 4700
MG 5700
OV 6650
OF 7450


----------



## JIMinNC (Sep 5, 2022)

TravelTime said:


> Marriott is charging the same for IV and OV category at WKOVR/N. Why on earth would they do that? Anyone have a guess? Seems like this would be a point of arbitrage. LOL   I see some other possible points of arbitrage too but that would require getting into the nitty gritty details of unit positioning.
> 
> Using shoulder season (same dates) as a comparison:
> 
> ...



Are the Ocean Views at WKORV N&S so-so views? More partial OV maybe? Maybe that might explain it.


----------



## TravelTime (Sep 5, 2022)

JIMinNC said:


> Are the Ocean Views at WKORV N&S so-so views? More partial OV maybe? Maybe that might explain it.



The north phase has no parking lot views and south phase has some parking lot views when staying in IV. So that is one point of confusion for me. I would choose OV over island view if points are the same.

The other point of confusion is that OF is significantly better in the south phase than in the north phase. I would choose OF south over OF north if points are the same.

I would choose the 2BR in MOC Napili/Lahaina over Westin since points are lower and I prefer MOC location. But if I wanted a studio with kitchen and W/D, I might choose the WKOVR (south) since points are lower than other OV categories in WKOVRN (north) and MOC. Unless I am missing something, this is what I would do.

Overall, I like MOC’s location better than Westin. But I think the views are better on average at the Westins and it feels more spread out. I am going again in April and staying at each one for a week, both will be OF 2BR. Then I can do a better head-to-head comparison since last time I stayed at Westin for a week and at MOC for 3 nights (both OF 1BRs then). At that time, I felt the location of MOC trumped the views at WKOVR (south) for me (and I stayed in the OF center with direct oceanfront view, which is the crown jewel of Westin). I got a bit bored at WKOVR. I liked walking to the mall near MOC for meals.


----------



## GregT (Sep 5, 2022)

TravelTime said:


> There are active threads in the Vistana forum and concerns about how Marriott is hurting the Vistana program. I have not heard much, if anything, about what Marriott owners think about Abound.
> 
> A few questions:
> 
> 1) For points owners and enrolled weeks owners, are you excited to be able to book the new Vistana properties? Which Westin/Sheraton resorts in particular are you most interested in?



I am very happy about the ability to book Vistana properties with my Marriott DC points.   I love WPORV and I have always wanted to visit WSJ and the presence of 1BR units in the USVI is appealing to me -- we only have 2BR units now in MFC and Ritz STT and the points chart at WSJ is an attractive use of DC Points.  

I also like increasing the access to Maui -- we have great properties at MOC and the new towers (which are now 13 and 15 years old) but anything to increase the probability of being able to visit is a good thing.



TravelTime said:


> 2) What do you think of the points values for new Westin/Sheraton properties? The new points charts are loaded for 2023 under Helpful Tools on the MVC website.



I remain surprised at how the Caribbean properties are under represented in points.   I have always thought that Frenchman's Cove deserved more points than it's owner receive and I feel the same way now about WSJ.    Marriott has found a way to get MFC inventory available so that there is availability at release, and now they need to demonstrate the same with WSJ.

I also find it interesting that there are three tiers of Scottsdale properties -- Kierland is the top tier and commands the most points, Canyon Villas is second (from a points perspective) and SDO is just below Canyon Villas.   I viewed MCV and SDO as comparable and was surprised to see SDO come in lower.   This is an opportunity for those of us who go for Spring Training -- and again, three shots on goal to get a reservation.



TravelTime said:


> 3) Any concerns that it will be harder to book the already hard-to-get Marriott resorts inventory with more competition from the Vistana folks for the top locations?



I think TUGgers have an innate advantage because we've developed booking tricks like the atomic clock.  I think it will be harder for many Marriott owners to get the reservation because their will be a minor increase in competition, but I don't know how noticeable it will be.   I think hard reservations will still be hard, and easy reservations will remain so.



TravelTime said:


> 4) For MVC weeks owners, any fears that you will not be able to book your home resorts due to more competition from Vistana folks? If not, what reassurance can you give the Vistana folks?



No, I've not experienced any problems booking my floating weeks, but I am also very disciplined about it.   If Vistana owners do the same, they will be fine.



TravelTime said:


> 5) Any resentment that Vistana owners will get immediate access to Marriott inventory but it might not be reciprocal for Marriott people to access Vistana inventory since Vistana inventory will be limited (at least in the beginning)?



No, I want them to have a positive experience because I want them to be happy to participate in the system.   I think the inventory requirements will level out over time and I think Marriott will reacquire Vistana inventory (and seek out weeks on the resale market) to purchase for the system.  I believe there will be sufficient Vistana inventory in time.   



TravelTime said:


> 6) What do post-2010 resale weeks owners think about Vistana mandatory resale owners (pre-8/9/2022) getting free enrollment into Abound?


As per #5, I'm happy for them (which includes me) to have access and I want them to have a positive experience.

Great questions and great conversation.

Best,

Greg


----------



## TravelTime (Sep 5, 2022)

@GregT do you own a fractional at Ritz STT? If so, how do you like it vs just using Marriott points to book there? Do you book your own unit or can you book any unit as an owner there? Do you always get high floors as an owner?


----------



## GregT (Sep 5, 2022)

TravelTime said:


> @GregT do you own a fractional at Ritz STT? If so, how do you like it vs just using Marriott points to book there? Do you book your own unit or can you book any unit as an owner there? Do you always get high floors as an owner?


I don't own a fractional at Ritz STT, but I have been able to book it with some frequency with DC Points.   Most of the inventory that is in the Trust is in the Suites buildings (there are six buildings total, two are Suites and four are Villas), and most of the Suites inventory is low floor (first three floors).   So I never expect a high floor when I reserve there, but even the third floor has had very nice views.

Best,

Greg


----------



## bobpark56 (Sep 5, 2022)

dioxide45 said:


> I think legally they are still separate companies, just that both are subsidiaries of the larger MVW. They both still have distinctive underlying products in that Marriott has deeded weeks and Vistana has VSN. I wonder if something needs changed in the forums nest year given that there is a combined Abound program and separate Marriott and Vistana weeks based products. I know this question wasn't asked, but I don't think we want to dump them all into a single forum, but we are starting to see a lot of stuff posted to the wrong forum already.


Vistana also has some deeded weeks. We have one at St John.


----------



## Bodie (Sep 5, 2022)

TravelTime said:


> There are active threads in the Vistana forum and concerns about how Marriott is hurting the Vistana program. I have not heard much, if anything, about what Marriott owners think about Abound.
> 
> A few questions:
> 
> ...



Honestly, as a  MVC owner, there isn’t much about this Vistana deal that excites me.   The  properties in Cancun and the Bahamas are the only ones  I find of interest.  Everything else seems more of the same.  Marriott is doing a lousy job of
explaining what‘s in it for us besides more people/owners to compete against.


----------



## DRH90277 (Sep 5, 2022)

Bodie said:


> Honestly, as a  MVC owner, there isn’t much about this Vistana deal that excites me.   The  properties in Cancun and the Bahamas are the only ones  I find of interest.  Everything else seems more of the same.  Marriott is doing a lousy job of
> explaining what‘s in it for us besides more people/owners to compete against.



I agree.  

If I look back at what we had 10 years ago versus now, I don't see much real value added as a consumer of this vacation program.  I suspect MVC would bring up the flexibility of the points program as being the highlight.  It is ok but not a major value add, it's only a currency change.  A real highlight would be if they had added many more great properties, which they have not done.


----------



## TravelTime (Sep 5, 2022)

This is my Marriott perspective. Over on the Vistana threads, I have a different opinion using my Vistana hat and the benefits I am getting with my Vistana week enrolled for free, high value in points conversion and upgrade to Chairman’s level.

If I were a Marriott-only owner, I would be concerned about the way Vistana owners are being brought into the Abound program at no enrollment cost. I paid a lot to enroll my MKO week. I do not see any similarities with pre-2010 Marriott weeks and pre-8/9/2022 Vistana weeks. I see the precedent in the past 12 years has been you pay to enroll your resale weeks.

I would also be really concerned about the increased competition to book the already hard-to-book Marriott resorts. In fact, I must admit even as a dual owner, I am worried about increased competition for some of my favorite Marriott resorts and locations. I am always online as soon as the reservations windows open so I hope I can still get what I want.

I would only care about a few new locations like Mexico, St John and Bahamas. The rest overlap with what Marriott owns and most of the Vistana locations, I would not want to stay in since they are not places I visit. However, I might only visit those locations 1x or not at all since I never visited them with SOs.


----------



## VacationForever (Sep 5, 2022)

I am not even reading through this thread.  As an owner of both Marriott and Vistana, I am indifferent to Abound other than it will get us to Chairman's Club level.  I will continue to use SOs to go to Vistana properties and II to go to most Marriott properties.  We hardly use MVC points and while there is quite a bit of skim to book Collette tours, we are looking at using the points to go to France, likely in 2024.  Internal booking in DC has no appeal to us.  Yah yah yah, we bought from MVC directly, and we hardly use their system.


----------



## ljmiii (Sep 5, 2022)

TravelTime said:


> 1) For points owners and enrolled weeks owners, are you excited to be able to book the new Vistana properties? Which Westin/Sheraton resorts in particular are you most interested in?


Unsurprisingly, the ones located in places without MVC resorts. Mexico, Kauai's North Shore, Bahamas, and St John.





TravelTime said:


> 2) What do you think of the points values for new Westin/Sheraton properties? The new points charts are loaded for 2023 under Helpful Tools on the MVC website.


Don't particularly care. Like MVC locations, they cost what they cost...if I want to go I'll pay and if I don't I won't.





TravelTime said:


> 3) Any concerns that it will be harder to book the already hard-to-get Marriott resorts inventory with more competition from the Vistana folks for the top locations?


Nope. A little annoyed that the Vistana resorts won't be available at 13 months...but such is life. I'll book MVC at 13 months and if availability at a Vistana location I'd rather go to shows up at 12 months I'll book and cancel.





TravelTime said:


> 4) For MVC weeks owners, any fears that you will not be able to book your home resorts due to more competition from Vistana folks? If not, what reassurance can you give the Vistana folks?


Nope. Weeks inventory has nothing to do with points inventory.





TravelTime said:


> 5) Any resentment that Vistana owners will get immediate access to Marriott inventory but it might not be reciprocal for Marriott people to access Vistana inventory since Vistana inventory will be limited (at least in the beginning)?


Nope. One day soon (October? November?) I'll get to see what Vistana resorts have availability 12 months out. If I get access to more Vistana inventory because Vistana owners elected their enrolled weeks and booked at MVC resorts over the next couple of months all the better.





TravelTime said:


> 6) What do post-2010 resale weeks owners think about Vistana mandatory resale owners (pre-8/9/2022) getting free enrollment into Abound?


Couldn't care less. I enrolled both my pre and post 2010 weeks using what seemed to be the best mechanism at the time. I considered buying Mandatory Vistana weeks when the merger was announced...but the risk didn't seem worth it. Particularly considering that I didn't really want to stay in any of those locations if the process of converting to MVC DPs didn't pan out.

But more to the point...why would I care about something that doesn't affect me in any way?!?


----------



## dioxide45 (Sep 5, 2022)

Since we enrolled our two Marriott weeks early on in the DC days, we have only elected Club Points twice. Other than that one year, we have always exchanged through II. It will be interesting to see how II inventory may be impacted for Marriott weeks, but I doubt much will change as anyone still exchanging in II is probably still going to do so. We rent points or points based reservations now and then. It will be a little easier since we *might* be Executive based on our Vistana ownership meaning we can rent points for one night reservations >10 months out. That said, our use case for points is very limited. Since we always use StarOptions on the Vistana side, we may now do the math to see if it makes more sense to elect Club Points for a reservation instead of using StarOptions. However, I suspect VSN will still carry most of the Vistana inventory and even if it is cheaper to use Club Points, the availability may not be there anyway. So we will continue to probably use our Vistana weeks in VSN anyway.


----------



## Bodie (Sep 6, 2022)

DRH90277 said:


> I agree.
> 
> If I look back at what we had 10 years ago versus now, I don't see much real value added as a consumer of this vacation program.  I suspect MVC would bring up the flexibility of the points program as being the highlight.  It is ok but not a major value add, it's only a currency change.  A real highlight would be if they had added many more great properties, which they have not done.



Ain't that the truth.   They're top heavy in Florida and South Carolina.   Personally, I'd like to see more Pulse properties in different cities.  It seems they're missing an opportunity to market to those interested in more urban experiences (Chicago, New Orleans, Paris, London, Rome et al) .  Guess their market analysts are telling them otherwise.


----------



## Bodie (Sep 6, 2022)

VacationForever said:


> I am not even reading through this thread.  As an owner of both Marriott and Vistana, I am indifferent to Abound other than it will get us to Chairman's Club level.  I will continue to use SOs to go to Vistana properties and II to go to most Marriott properties.  We hardly use MVC points and while there is quite a bit of skim to book Collette tours, we are looking at using the points to go to France, likely in 2024.  Internal booking in DC has no appeal to us.  Yah yah yah, we bought from MVC directly, and we hardly use their system.




"Bit of skim."  LOL


----------



## Bodie (Sep 6, 2022)

Know how I can tell this Abound deal is a dog?  My favorite salesperson hasn't called me to talk it up.


----------



## dansimms (Sep 6, 2022)

I am glad that I will have more uses for DP currency. It will help for some of my longer trips, which more easily can blend a stay at Frenchmens Reef and followed by the Westin St John, for example. On the negative side, it has been hard getting stays at the Ritz properties and now we will have even more competition for them, as they are in high demand and now only down to the 5 locations.  Unfortunately, the addition of St Regis will not help when it comes to using Destination Points. The luxury resorts can be fun to plan for, when you want to splurge. I have a blended trip in February in Scottsdale, AZ with the Canyon Villas followed by the Kierland.  I used 200,000 Bonvoy Points for a 5 night stay at Kierland in their small 1 BR.  Can't wait ! We start with the studio for a few days at Canyon Villas.  Hoping to get to see the big golf tourny with the 15000 fans on the 16th hole and then back at the resort for Super Bowl Sunday!


----------



## DRH90277 (Sep 6, 2022)

Bodie said:


> Ain't that the truth.   They're top heavy in Florida and South Carolina.   Personally, I'd like to see more Pulse properties in different cities.  It seems they're missing an opportunity to market to those interested in more urban experiences (Chicago, New Orleans, Paris, London, Rome et al) .  Guess their market analysts are telling them otherwise.



I don't know how they would avoid the bad seasons for some of these locations.  Who would go on vacation to Chicago in the winter, I near froze to death there?  I think they need places with a good chance of year-round survival.


----------



## Bodie (Sep 6, 2022)

DRH90277 said:


> I don't know how they would avoid the bad seasons for some of these locations.  Who would go on vacation to Chicago in the winter, I near froze to death there?  I think they need places with a good chance of year-round survival.


That may be a calculation but the one in NYC does very well.  So much to do there.   I really like it.


----------



## Big Matt (Sep 6, 2022)

dioxide45 said:


> Since we enrolled our two Marriott weeks early on in the DC days, we have only elected Club Points twice. Other than that one year, we have always exchanged through II. It will be interesting to see how II inventory may be impacted for Marriott weeks, but I doubt much will change as anyone still exchanging in II is probably still going to do so. We rent points or points based reservations now and then. It will be a little easier since we *might* be Executive based on our Vistana ownership meaning we can rent points for one night reservations >10 months out. That said, our use case for points is very limited. Since we always use StarOptions on the Vistana side, we may now do the math to see if it makes more sense to elect Club Points for a reservation instead of using StarOptions. However, I suspect VSN will still carry most of the Vistana inventory and even if it is cheaper to use Club Points, the availability may not be there anyway. So we will continue to probably use our Vistana weeks in VSN anyway.


 Do you know whether the new entrants will have the same Marriott priority in II?  If they do, that will be quite a big deal.


----------



## dioxide45 (Sep 6, 2022)

Big Matt said:


> Do you know whether the new entrants will have the same Marriott priority in II?  If they do, that will be quite a big deal.


We don't know. I am thinking they may not put the II priority on parity just to protect original weeks owners "rights" on each side, but not really sure. Though, Vistana Abound members will now be able to exchange into Marriott through II with no exchange fee. So there may be a little more competition there from Vistana owners.


----------



## Red elephant (Sep 6, 2022)

Big Matt said:


> Do you know whether the new entrants will have the same Marriott priority in II?  If they do, that will be quite a big deal.


If they do that then they may make Vistana owners make a reservation first like Marriott before exchanging into Marriott in II. That’s creating another set of rules.  So I doubt it.


----------



## Cobra1950 (Sep 10, 2022)

Bodie said:


> Honestly, as a  MVC owner, there isn’t much about this Vistana deal that excites me.   The  properties in Cancun and the Bahamas are the only ones  I find of interest.  Everything else seems more of the same.  Marriott is doing a lousy job of
> explaining what‘s in it for us besides more people/owners to compete against.


I agree with your view on Marriott doing a Poor Job in explaining the new deal.  We recently went through a 3 Hour dog and pony in Palm Beach with 3 Marriott people (over 3 hours) trying to explain what the whole mess was about and the thousands it would cost us.  We have already disposed of 2 of the 3 Marriott timeshares we had but kept Summitt Watch Week 51.  Part of the presentation was that we would lose ownership of that week, meaning I guess they wanted to minimize the risk to them of us selling this $30K+ unit on the open market.  Not once during the presentation did they offer a piece of information on paper, just the old scribbled board technique with erasers at hand.  Was really quite disappointing to sit through, worst session we have had to sit through since 1999!


----------



## bobpark56 (Sep 10, 2022)

ljmiii said:


> Unsurprisingly, the ones located in places without MVC resorts. Mexico, Kauai's North Shore, Bahamas, and St John.Don't particularly care. Like MVC locations, they cost what they cost...if I want to go I'll pay and if I don't I won't.Nope. A little annoyed that the Vistana resorts won't be available at 13 months...but such is life. I'll book MVC at 13 months and if availability at a Vistana location I'd rather go to shows up at 12 months I'll book and cancel.Nope. Weeks inventory has nothing to do with points inventory.Nope. One day soon (October? November?) I'll get to see what Vistana resorts have availability 12 months out. If I get access to more Vistana inventory because Vistana owners elected their enrolled weeks and booked at MVC resorts over the next couple of months all the better.Couldn't care less. I enrolled both my pre and post 2010 weeks using what seemed to be the best mechanism at the time. I considered buying Mandatory Vistana weeks when the merger was announced...but the risk didn't seem worth it. Particularly considering that I didn't really want to stay in any of those locations if the process of converting to MVC DPs didn't pan out.
> 
> But more to the point...why would I care about something that doesn't affect me in any way?!?


Whatever makes you think that MVC folks should get 13-month access to Vistana resorts, when Vistana owners must wait until 12 months out, and Vistana owners at other resorts must wait until 8 months out? Kinda looks like you would like to jump the line by 5 months here. You're not a line-jumper, are you?


----------



## Bodie (Sep 10, 2022)

Three hours and three salespeople?  Sounds like they’re  using Law and Order get a confession squeeze.  Did you ask for a lawyer?  Hope you got a decent “gift” for all that torture.


----------



## Bodie (Sep 10, 2022)

bobpark56 said:


> Whatever makes you think that MVC folks should get 13-month access to Vistana resorts, when Vistana owners must wait until 12 months out, and Vistana owners at other resorts must wait until 8 months out? Kinda looks like you would like to jump the line by 5 months here. You're not a line-jumper, are you?


Isn’t that a Seinfeld episode?


----------



## sunski (Sep 10, 2022)

TravelTime said:


> Marriott is charging the same for IV and OV category at WKOVR/N. Why on earth would they do that? Anyone have a guess? Seems like this would be a point of arbitrage. LOL   I see some other possible points of arbitrage too but that would require getting into the nitty gritty details of unit positioning.
> 
> Using shoulder season (same dates) as a comparison:
> 
> ...


When you book currently at WKORV using staroptions there is no points distinction between IV and OV only a premium for OF, so it makes sense that they would keep the points values the same in Abound.  Seems to me those with IV would be more inclined to deposit into Abound because of the lesser value of other options like renting their unit, especially if they live closer to some of the "new" Marriott options available to them.

Interesting to see that MOC Lahaina M/G is same value as WKORV OV studio. I'd be tempted to go for my one bedroom in MOC and then try to move over to a OV studio for the second week.  That's probably worth the skim if you can get it.


----------



## sunski (Sep 10, 2022)

TravelTime said:


> This is my Marriott perspective. Over on the Vistana threads, I have a different opinion using my Vistana hat and the benefits I am getting with my Vistana week enrolled for free, high value in points conversion and upgrade to Chairman’s level.
> 
> If I were a Marriott-only owner, I would be concerned about the way Vistana owners are being brought into the Abound program at no enrollment cost. I paid a lot to enroll my MKO week. I do not see any similarities with pre-2010 Marriott weeks and pre-8/9/2022 Vistana weeks. I see the precedent in the past 12 years has been you pay to enroll your resale weeks.
> 
> ...


I'm of a similar opinion in many respects.  I do use the DC program to a certain extent and have gotten to get a decent feel for how it works for my interest and out of pure selfishness, I am not thrilled about the prospect of an influx of people who are being granted entrance and status to a program that I have paid quite a bit to be in especially when I have little to no interest in what they have to offer in return. 

I did buy two Vistana "spec" weeks without too much capital expended, since I missed the boat previously with the DC roll out, but because I don't care much for Vistana locations I didn't want too much burden from carrying them if things didn't pan out.  So although I will now have a "free" bump in status, I will still only be Executive and am leery that the Abound terms say if they change the qualifying levels you will only be given an extra year, not "grandfathered" status as they did previously. 

All in all, I am hopeful that this new option will not change things too much for anyone.  Pros and cons on both sides. Time will tell


----------



## JIMinNC (Sep 10, 2022)

sunski said:


> So although I will now have a "free" bump in status, I will still only be Executive and am leery that the Abound terms say if they change the qualifying levels you will only be given a extra year, not "grandfathered" status as they did previously.



Unless I’m mistaken, the DC terms have always allowed them to only extend status a year in the event of qualifying level changes. In practice, however, they have always grandfathered anyway, so hopefully that practice will continue.


----------



## sunski (Sep 10, 2022)

TBH, I never fully read the terms of DC since I got my one Developer week in "free" and had only lowly select status. I only knew about the grandfathering from sales and here.  Do the Abound terms read about the same as current DC?  Anything majorly different?


----------



## JIMinNC (Sep 10, 2022)

sunski said:


> TBH, I never fully read the terms of DC since I got my one Developer week in "free" and had only lowly select status. I only knew about the grandfathering from sales and here.  Do the Abound terms read about the same as current DC?  Anything majorly different?


I haven’t compared the two in detail. In my initial quick read of the Abound terms, however, it did seem like they read almost the same as the DC terms.


----------



## DRH90277 (Sep 10, 2022)

I think Abound is a mirage with a name.  Is this anything beyond just a rebranding?  Again, "Where's the Beef?"


----------



## ljmiii (Sep 10, 2022)

bobpark56 said:


> Whatever makes you think that MVC folks should get 13-month access to Vistana resorts…


Because we get access to the other properties in the DC trust at 13 months.


----------



## JIMinNC (Sep 10, 2022)

DRH90277 said:


> I think Abound is a mirage with a name.  Is this anything beyond just a rebranding?  Again, "Where's the Beef?"


It is mainly a rebranding for us on the MVC side. They are mainly just bringing Westin and Sheraton owners into the program we have had for 12 years. The “beef” for MVC owners is access to whatever Westin and Sheraton inventory finds it’s way into Abound. Initially that will be limited, but over time, as Marriott exercises ROFR on Westin and Sheraton weeks and more Westin/Sheraton owners elect their weeks for points, the inventory available to us will probably increase. I do think it will take a few years.


----------



## David10225 (Sep 12, 2022)

We are are Shereton Desert Oasis now in a 1 bedroom that we got through Interval by using 2022 mvc points. I don't think it's up to MVC standards. I couldn't even fit my suitcase in the closet!


----------



## rcv82 (Sep 12, 2022)

David10225 said:


> We are are Shereton Desert Oasis now in a 1 bedroom that we got through Interval by using 2022 mvc points. I don't think it's up to MVC standards. I couldn't even fit my suitcase in the closet!



Is it the small or large 1 bedroom? The small 1 bedroom units should be compared to a studio as they are the same points in Vistana. I recall the large units as being fairly spacious. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## jabberwocky (Sep 12, 2022)

rcv82 said:


> Is it the small or large 1 bedroom? The small 1 bedroom units should be compared to a studio as they are the same points in Vistana. I recall the large units as being fairly spacious.


I think it has to be the small 1BR, unless they have an enormous suitcase!  The large 1BR are actually quite spacious.


----------



## CPNY (Sep 12, 2022)

jabberwocky said:


> I think it has to be the small 1BR, unless they have an enormous suitcase!  The large 1BR are actually quite spacious.


Right, in which case, the one bedroom they’re in is superior to Marriott studio standards. Which is the standard it needs to be compared to.


----------



## David10225 (Sep 19, 2022)

CPNY said:


> Right, in which case, the one bedroom they’re in is superior to Marriott studio standards. Which is the standard it needs to be compared to.


i dont know what size 1 bedroom we stayed in. All Im saying is the closet was not deep enough to fit our suitcase. In years of teavel, that has never happened to me.


----------



## jme (Sep 20, 2022)

David10225 said:


> We are are Shereton Desert Oasis now in a 1 bedroom that we got through Interval by using 2022 mvc points. I don't think it's up to MVC standards. I couldn't even fit my suitcase in the closet!



Quite a claim.  Is it a studio (second BR)? or is it the 1BR master suite with kitchen?
Imho, not being able to fit a suitcase in a closet is not an indication of inferiority, unless you suffered multiple other shortfalls in the accommodations.
Frankly we seldom put a suitcase in a closet unless it's overhead next to the extra blankets, etc., and then, if need be, we find another spot....quite simple.
I'd be interested to learn the other negatives you have.

(As an aside, I believe the Sheraton resorts may not always reach the level of the Marriotts, but they're close. 
They're certainly better than most of the other brands, so I'm content to have them aboard.......lots more decent choices.)

If I have the right resort, is THIS the place at which you stayed?
Scroll thru the pics---it's gorgeous.





__





						Google Travel
					






					www.google.com


----------



## David10225 (Sep 22, 2022)

Well, it may be quite a claim, but really, that's how I feel.  To further explain, there was a closet in the bedroom.  The right had side (sliding doors) of the closet in the bedroom was entirely taken up by a safe attached to the back wall at about knee level so you could put nothing on the floor there.  On the left hand side, there was one of the one of those folding luggage racks.  The opening of the left hand side of the closet, was not wide enough for the suitcase to sit on the rack.  Between the bathroom and the kitchen, there was another closet, with a floor sweeper/vacuum, but it wasn't deep enough to fit my suitcase in it.  I was able to put our smaller suitcase in it.  Thinking back on it now, I suppose I could have tried taking the luggage rack out of the closet, and could have maneuvered the case in.  If that is what I should have done, then, then that's on me.

Just as an aside, there is considerable construction going on at the back part of the resort where our room was located.  If anyone plans to visit soon, see if you can get a room not so near the construction.  It is very noisy when the machines are going.  We arrived at 930 PM on a Friday night, so it wasn't till Monday morning that the workers returned.

I guess that wraps this up for this topic!


----------



## DRH90277 (Sep 24, 2022)

The topic question was "What do MVC owners think about Abound?"

Well, I don't see much to think or even dream about yet.  It seems someone came up with a name, but I didn't know what it really meant.  So, I ask Siri and it says "have in large numbers or amounts:   this land abounds with wildlife.

"Wow, so I guess we will be overwhelmed with new resorts, choices, and locations to which we have not ventured.  The first tranche must be this Westin/Sheraton deal for 25 resorts (on top of the existing MVC resorts.)  And then, I guess we will have lots of new owners coming in with inventory.  We will all share this combined inventory using points to acquire what comes available.  Points will be sold by Abound and vacations will be added to the Trust.  Week owners will deposit their vacations for points.  Then all will spend these points on the available inventory.  Abound probably means that rather than the difficulty we now have getting point vacations, there will be an abundant supply of what we want, when we want it.

Now, is this what we can now dream about?  I wonder how long I need to dream.

This name change will make all this happen even though we suffer a shortage of the reservations we want.


----------



## JIMinNC (Sep 26, 2022)

DRH90277 said:


> The topic question was "What do MVC owners think about Abound?"
> 
> Well, I don't see much to think or even dream about yet.  It seems someone came up with a name, but I didn't know what it really meant.  So, I ask Siri and it says "have in large numbers or amounts:   this land abounds with wildlife.
> 
> ...



A lot of your posts focus on a shortage of points reservations/availability in MVC. Based on your postings, I think I recall that the reservations you desire are prime-time summer Hilton Head, Myrtle Beach, and maybe Newport Coast. Just remember, those are the types of reservations that have *always* been hard to get via an exchange program if you do not own at those particular resorts in those seasons. Summer HHI, for example, was a difficult internal II trade prior to the launch of the Destination Club, it remained a tough get in the DC Points system, and will likely remain that way in Abound. After all, a points system is just another type of exchange system. That's why as long as I've been a participant in the TUG Marriott Forum the expert advice has always been "if you need to travel in high demand seasons at high demand resorts, own there." When we bought our initial Points/week bundle to become Marriott owners back in 2014, even the MVC sales rep said our purchase would work well for the spring/fall shoulder season times we were after, but if we had to have summer HHI, we should buy a summer resale week at our favorite property from MVC internal resales.


----------



## DRH90277 (Sep 26, 2022)

JIMinNC said:


> A lot of your posts focus on a shortage of points reservations/availability in MVC. Based on your postings, I think I recall that the reservations you desire are prime-time summer Hilton Head, Myrtle Beach, and maybe Newport Coast. Just remember, those are the types of reservations that have *always* been hard to get via an exchange program if you do not own at those particular resorts in those seasons. Summer HHI, for example, was a difficult internal II trade prior to the launch of the Destination Club, it remained a tough get in the DC Points system, and will likely remain that way in Abound. After all, a points system is just another type of exchange system. That's why as long as I've been a participant in the TUG Marriott Forum the expert advice has always been "if you need to travel in high demand seasons at high demand resorts, own there." When we bought our initial Points/week bundle to become Marriott owners back in 2014, even the MVC sale rep said our purchase would work well for the spring/fall shoulder season times we were after, but if we had to have summer HHI, we should buy a summer resale week at our favorite property from MVC internal resales.



JIMinNC - I enjoy your posts and note that you also live in NC.  So, we are probably both fans of OceanWatch and Hilton Head resorts.  It is hard to beat them, and they are close by car.  And yes, we did buy multiple OceanWatch "and" Newport Coast weeks as a defensive move to access what "we wanted" around the points system.  I think it is unfortunate that we had to do that.  

You are right about my posts and the repeated emphasis, but it is absolutely true the trust does suffer a lack of the better inventory.  Why hasn't MVC been exercising the ROFR and buying up the better "in demand" resale weeks for 10+ years.  Is MVC deliberately dumbing down the quality of available resorts for point owners?  Are they trying to redirect us toward the outsourced stuff? 

One excuse, they are relying on week owners to deposit the better weeks for points.  This could be pretty stupid, why would they expect me to deposit my 6 Ocean Watch weeks for points so I can spend them on lower end resorts such as Grand Chateau, Pulse Mayflower in DC, etc. (just my opinion).  So, what happens, those with better owned weeks are renting them out, depositing in Interval, etc.  Week owners do have the option of renting out weeks for cash and renting what they want - the "cash" alternative to the points program.  Is it good or bad that I might have better access to good reservations thru rentals on Redweek than by using points?       

MVC's latest venture with the Westin/Sheraton properties is going to be slow to access.  It might help a bit, but it won't solve the shortage in available reservations for the best resorts.  And the current MVC inventory will be subjected to a whole new population of users.


----------



## frytard (Sep 26, 2022)

I am not too familiar with what is happening with Abound. My mom who is transferring her Grand Chateau 2 BR to me pre2010 bought - Should i do this sooner than later or it doesnt matter on timing?

Thanks!


----------



## CPNY (Sep 26, 2022)

frytard said:


> I am not too familiar with what is happening with Abound. My mom who is transferring her Grand Chateau 2 BR to me pre2010 bought - Should i do this sooner than later or it doesnt matter on timing?
> 
> Thanks!


It shouldn’t matter on timing. Is it currently enrolled in the points program? All benefits should transfer to you so in reality it shouldn’t matter.


----------



## DanCali (Sep 26, 2022)

ljmiii said:


> Because we get access to the other properties in the DC trust at 13 months.




Vistana weeks cannot be booked more than 12 months in advance. It doesn't matter if the owner is Joe X, a real estate Trust like Westin Flex or Abound, or a Real estate trust that inherited booking privileges from Joe X who elected points for his week. Those are simply the booking rules.


----------



## rthib (Sep 26, 2022)

DRH90277 said:


> Why hasn't MVC been exercising the ROFR and buying up the better "in demand" resale weeks for 10+ years.  Is MVC deliberately dumbing down the quality of available resorts for point owners?


For the same reason they used to show people the II catalog and not mention that they were not going to get into those resorts. They don’t need those weeks to sell points. And why would they pay top dollar for in demand week, when they can pay pennies for a junk week. Both end up as points to sell and that is what they sell, points and a dream.


----------



## JIMinNC (Sep 26, 2022)

DRH90277 said:


> Why hasn't MVC been exercising the ROFR and buying up the better "in demand" resale weeks for 10+ years.  Is MVC deliberately dumbing down the quality of available resorts for point owners?  Are they trying to redirect us toward the outsourced stuff?



The main reason they repurchase weeks is to resell them as Points. I suspect they have a maximum price at which they are willing to exercise ROFR for any specific week. Their goal is to acquire inventory at the lowest reasonable cost to optimize their overall cost of inventory. It makes no sense for them to overpay for a week just because it is attractive to book. Paying too much doesn't help them achieve their profitability goals.


----------



## timsi (Sep 26, 2022)

DRH90277 said:


> JIMinNC - I enjoy your posts and note that you also live in NC.  So, we are probably both fans of OceanWatch and Hilton Head resorts.  It is hard to beat them, and they are close by car.  And yes, we did buy multiple OceanWatch "and" Newport Coast weeks as a defensive move to access what "we wanted" around the points system.  I think it is unfortunate that we had to do that.
> 
> You are right about my posts and the repeated emphasis, but it is absolutely true the trust does suffer a lack of the better inventory.  Why hasn't MVC been exercising the ROFR and buying up the better "in demand" resale weeks for 10+ years.  Is MVC deliberately dumbing down the quality of available resorts for point owners?  Are they trying to redirect us toward the outsourced stuff?
> 
> ...


Marriott may not have a business incentive to convey to the trust the best deeds it acquires through ROFR and foreclosures. The weeks conveyed to the trust may be composed primarily of deeds that are not very valuable to the developer's rental business. 

The question remains if the administrators of the trust act in the best interest of the trust owners if they continuously turn a blind eye and accept a low-quality inventory. It is possible that their responsibility is even higher if at the same time they work for the trust and for the developer since the trust owners would be left with no practical protection.


----------



## DRH90277 (Sep 26, 2022)

A new name, Abound, does not remedy the problem of booking the point reservations you want.


----------



## frytard (Sep 26, 2022)

CPNY said:


> It shouldn’t matter on timing. Is it currently enrolled in the points program? All benefits should transfer to you so in reality it shouldn’t matter.



Yes we enrolled last year. That way i wouldnt get a fee or something


----------



## JIMinNC (Sep 26, 2022)

DRH90277 said:


> A new name, Abound, does not remedy the problem of booking the point reservations you want.



My point is simply that any individual owner's perception of "problems of booking the points reservations you want" depends on what you are trying to book. If you are usually trying to book the highest demand weeks at some of the most popular locations, your experience is going to be very different than someone who is looking for shoulder seasons. If you are hoping to book prime time at the most demanded resorts, you are going to have just as hard of a time with points as weeks owners had before points trying to trade for these same high demand weeks in Interval. Yes, MVC sells the ability to use points to book "any" MVC resort, but that's no different than when they sold MVC Willow Ridge weeks by promoting the idea of using II to trade Willow Ridge for Hawaii or Hilton Head summer. Those were hard trades, too. With timeshare, if there is a reservation you *must* have, you should own there.


----------



## DRH90277 (Sep 27, 2022)

JIMinNC said:


> My point is simply that any individual owner's perception of "problems of booking the points reservations you want" depends on what you are trying to book. If you are usually trying to book the highest demand weeks at some of the most popular locations, your experience is going to be very different than someone who is looking for shoulder seasons. If you are hoping to book prime time at the most demanded resorts, you are going to have just as hard of a time with points as weeks owners had before points trying to trade for these same high demand weeks in Interval. Yes, MVC sells the ability to use points to book "any" MVC resort, but that's no different than when they sold MVC Willow Ridge weeks by promoting the idea of using II to trade Willow Ridge for Hawaii or Hilton Head summer. Those were hard trades, too. With timeshare, if there is a reservation you *must* have, you should own there.



With respect, I understand all that.  It is also unfair to harp on my requests for better resorts and season reservations - that's exactly why I spent my money for Marriott Vacations.  Don't make excuses for MVC - do you work for them?  MVC's inability to fill booking requests using points for better resorts coupled with little effort to add the better inventory is out in the open.  Did you really buy into Vacation Club so you could compromise your requests for point reservations?  And please don't blame this on the unwillingness of week owners to deposit their great weeks for points.     

Of interest, I received an email from Redweek this morning showing rental additions for yesterday - 19 for Newport Coast and 6 for OceanWatch.  MVC is probably sitting there wondering, where do all these weeks go and why?


----------



## JIMinNC (Sep 27, 2022)

DRH90277 said:


> With respect, I understand all that.  It is also unfair to harp on my requests for better resorts and season reservations - that's exactly why I spent my money for Marriott Vacations.  Don't make excuses for MVC - do you work for them?  MVC's inability to fill booking requests using points for better resorts coupled with little effort to add the better inventory is out in the open.  Did you really buy into Vacation Club so you could compromise your requests for point reservations?  And please don't blame this on the unwillingness of week owners to deposit their great weeks for points.
> 
> Of interest, I received an email from Redweek this morning showing rental additions for yesterday - 19 for Newport Coast and 6 for OceanWatch.  MVC is probably sitting there wondering, where do all these weeks go and why?



No, I don't work for MVW. I am a shareholder, but a very small one. I just think it's unrealistic for us to expect MVW to overpay to ROFR prime weeks, just to get those weeks into the Trust. They do have an obligation to shareholders like me to spend their capital wisely and not overpay for inventory. Of course, I am an owner, and want my needs met, but I acknowledge they have a business to run.

I bought Destination Points to visit a variety of MVC locations, and since 2014, we have never failed to get exactly what we want whenever booking with points - multiple trips to Hawaii in whale season to supplement the two EOY weeks we own there, multiple spring and fall trips to Hilton Head before we bought our own condo there, Marco Island, Ocean Pointe, Desert Springs, and for the first time in a few weeks, Newport Coast. So I don't feel I've had to compromise at all. No, we don't have a desire to book prime summer school vacation weeks, but if we did, I recognize any exchange system - whether weeks or points based - is going to present challenges during those times.

I actually have found booking our deeded Hawaii weeks to often be more stressful than booking with points, since those weeks are so popular with owners who own to rent their weeks for cash flow rather than their own use. That's where many of the Redweek listings come from. If I have one big gripe about MVC, it's that they don't enforce their own prohibitions against owners running what are essentially commercial rental businesses using their weeks ownership. I have no issue with owners renting their units when they can't use them for some reason, but there are many MVC owners who amass large numbers of resale weeks and use them as a source of income.


----------



## timsi (Oct 2, 2022)

JIMinNC said:


> No, I don't work for MVW. I am a shareholder, but a very small one. I just think it's unrealistic for us to expect MVW to overpay to ROFR prime weeks, just to get those weeks into the Trust. They do have an obligation to shareholders like me to spend their capital wisely and not overpay for inventory. Of course, I am an owner, and want my needs met, but I acknowledge they have a business to run.
> 
> I bought Destination Points to visit a variety of MVC locations, and since 2014, we have never failed to get exactly what we want whenever booking with points - multiple trips to Hawaii in whale season to supplement the two EOY weeks we own there, multiple spring and fall trips to Hilton Head before we bought our own condo there, Marco Island, Ocean Pointe, Desert Springs, and for the first time in a few weeks, Newport Coast. So I don't feel I've had to compromise at all. No, we don't have a desire to book prime summer school vacation weeks, but if we did, I recognize any exchange system - whether weeks or points based - is going to present challenges during those times.
> 
> I actually have found booking our deeded Hawaii weeks to often be more stressful than booking with points, since those weeks are so popular with owners who own to rent their weeks for cash flow rather than their own use. That's where many of the Redweek listings come from. If I have one big gripe about MVC, it's that they don't enforce their own prohibitions against owners running what are essentially commercial rental businesses using their weeks ownership. I have no issue with owners renting their units when they can't use them for some reason, but there are many MVC owners who amass large numbers of resale weeks and use them as a source of income.



By your standard, because I managed to book whale season in Maui, summer weeks in the Bahamas, or spring break in Cancun through Interval, does it mean that the inventory is good? No, it is very light, and you must judge a system by how fast the busiest weeks disappear, not just by finding some weeks sometime.  Every year I find in Interval more (great) weeks than I can use. This does not help the vast majority of the Interval members and the reality is that the Interval inventory is not that great compared to VSN.   I gather that many Tuggers have flexibility and compared to the average owner they may spend more time looking for deals (and they know when to look!) so they will inevitably find good trades. This is not necessarily an indication of abundance in one system or another. Plenty of people complain about the MVC inventory, and I have seen several reports that compared MVC to VSN and VSN seemed to be better, despite that the trading starts only 8 months before check in. (that will likely change with Abound unfortunately). How many times can you find Maui summer weeks in MVC 8 months before check in? Even if the MVC inventory was good, don’t you want Marriott to feel pressured and make it better?

The developer owns inventory that is worth few hundred million dollars (acquisition cost I assume so the resale value is a lot higher). It is not that they do not have more prime weeks to convey to the MVC trust, they may first apply a filter based on what they can do with those prime weeks, and they may think that they are better off renting them for a very nice profit. Because the trust is managed by the developer, I do not understand how they attempt to resolve the internal conflict and the kind of rules they have in place to make sure the interests of the trust owners are also taken care of. As far as I can tell they do not share with you guys how they do it. How they book their own inventory is another story altogether.


----------



## JIMinNC (Oct 2, 2022)

timsi said:


> By your standard, because I managed to book whale season in Maui, summer weeks in the Bahamas, or spring break in Cancun through Interval, does it mean that the inventory is good? No, it is very light, and you must judge a system by how fast the busiest weeks disappear, not just by finding some weeks sometime.  Every year I find in Interval more (great) weeks than I can use. This does not help the vast majority of the Interval members and the reality is that the Interval inventory is not that great compared to VSN.   I gather that many Tuggers have flexibility and compared to the average owner they may spend more time looking for deals (and they know when to look!) so they will inevitably find good trades. This is not necessarily an indication of abundance in one system or another. Plenty of people complain about the MVC inventory, and I have seen several reports that compared MVC to VSN and VSN seemed to be better, despite that the trading starts only 8 months before check in. (that will likely change with Abound unfortunately). How many times can you find Maui summer weeks in MVC 8 months before check in? Even if the MVC inventory was good, don’t you want Marriott to feel pressured and make it better?
> 
> The developer owns inventory that is worth few hundred million dollars (acquisition cost I assume so the resale value is a lot higher). It is not that they do not have more prime weeks to convey to the MVC trust, they may first apply a filter based on what they can do with those prime weeks, and they may think that they are better off renting them for a very nice profit. Because the trust is managed by the developer, I do not understand how they attempt to resolve the internal conflict and the kind of rules they have in place to make sure the interests of the trust owners are also taken care of. As far as I can tell they do not share with you guys how they do it. How they book their own inventory is another story altogether.



“Good” inventory is in the eye of the beholder. For my usage and needs, yes, it’s been good enough. YMMV. 

It’s not accurate to compare MVC availability in Maui at 8 months with VSN availability at 8 months. It’s like comparing apples to oranges. Availability at any high demand place is driven by when reservation windows open. MVC windows open at 13 and 12 months, so that inventory gets booked then. VSN doesn’t open until 8 months, so that’s why that availability is still there then in VSN but not MVC.


----------



## DRH90277 (Oct 2, 2022)

There are those who tout the abundance of inventory to get our desired point reservations.  So, try this sometime as I did this morning to test the abundance of available reservations.  I tested the reservation system 12 and 13 months out for some better resorts and some lesser resorts to see if I could get 5-day reservations for points.  Even I was surprised by the dismal inventory available. There is an inventory squeeze.

Incidentally, it is nearing the end of the time when week owners deposit weeks for points thereby enhancing available inventory for points.  Is this really working and is it getting better or worse?

We are Chairman level and if I can't see available reservations, you can imagine what happens to the person with fewer points.


----------



## GaryDouglas (Oct 2, 2022)

DRH90277 said:


> There are those who tout the abundance of inventory to get our desired point reservations.  So, try this sometime as I did this morning to test the abundance of available reservations.  I tested the reservation system 12 and 13 months out for some better resorts and some lesser resorts to see if I could get 5-day reservations for points.  Even I was surprised by the dismal inventory available. There is an inventory squeeze.
> 
> Incidentally, it is nearing the end of the time when week owners deposit weeks for points thereby enhancing available inventory for points.  Is this really working and is it getting better or worse?
> 
> We are Chairman level and if I can't see available reservations, you can imagine what happens to the person with fewer points.



If I compare and contrast this with what we were told during our last sales update at MOC, this is a far cry from what they allude to what is possible. Since we've been around the block a few times, we did not go forward with a purchase, but it took me more than a few hours to convince my wife that a purchase involved too much smoke a mirrors and wishful thinking.


----------



## JIMinNC (Oct 2, 2022)

DRH90277 said:


> There are those who tout the abundance of inventory to get our desired point reservations.  So, try this sometime as I did this morning to test the abundance of available reservations.  I tested the reservation system 12 and 13 months out for some better resorts and some lesser resorts to see if I could get 5-day reservations for points.  Even I was surprised by the dismal inventory available. There is an inventory squeeze.
> 
> Incidentally, it is nearing the end of the time when week owners deposit weeks for points thereby enhancing available inventory for points.  Is this really working and is it getting better or worse?
> 
> We are Chairman level and if I can't see available reservations, you can imagine what happens to the person with fewer points.



I did as you suggest and looked at inventory available tonight around the 12 month point at a selection of MVC properties. Basically looked for Saturday September 30, 2023 check-in and several of the days right before and right after that date. I also looked at availability deeper into October 2023, between the 13 month and 12 month release dates. I looked at Aruba, California, Florida beaches, Hawaii, and South Carolina beaches. I didn't look at any ski resorts, since Sept/Oct is basically approaching mud season, and so isn't a good barometer of availability.

As has generally been my experience when actually trying to book our reservations, inventory inside the 13 month point up to the 12 month date, is indeed spotty. That is why I have generally waited until the 12-month release to book our trips, since it seems a lot more inventory gets loaded then than at 13 months. So, when I looked at dates around that 12-month point - 9/30/2023 - I saw plenty of availability for 5 night stays with points at these properties for many, if not most check-in dates around that point:

Aruba Surf Club
Aruba Ocean Club
Newport Coast
Desert Springs I
Ocean Pointe
Oceana Palms
Crystal Shores (some views NA)
Waikoloa Ocean Club
Maui Ocean Club Original
Maui Ocean Club Sequel
Waiohai Beach Club
Ocean Watch
Surf Watch (mainly garden views)
Grande Ocean (ocean side only)
Barony Beach Club

That seems to be a pretty good cross-section of the MVC network, and except for Crystal Shores, Surf Watch, and Grande Ocean, it looked like almost every unit size and view was available at most of these places. To me, that availability looked very acceptable, and I could have booked a multitude of 5 night vacations if I had been so inclined. I'm not sure what specifically you were looking for that resulted in your dismal availability, but what I saw was far from dismal. Granted, late-September/October is a shoulder season, so availability *should* be good, but I was trying to replicate your test, so that's what I looked for.


----------



## timsi (Oct 2, 2022)

JIMinNC said:


> It’s not accurate to compare MVC availability in Maui at 8 months with VSN availability at 8 months. It’s like comparing apples to oranges. Availability at any high demand place is driven by when reservation windows open. MVC windows open at 13 and 12 months, so that inventory gets booked then. VSN doesn’t open until 8 months, so that’s why that availability is still there then in VSN but not MVC.


If the   MVC inventory is depleted as early as you say and if there isn't much left after 4 months, it means that at 8 months there will not be any good inventory left in VSN when Abound is up and running. This is in clear contrast with Marriott telling us that everything will remain the same and that Abound is “just an option” for the Vistana owners. I do not know how they can say that with a straight face.


----------



## TravelTime (Oct 2, 2022)

My gripes with Marriott are:
1) They do not enforce the rules for commercial use so a large majority of the weeks for rent are being used to make a profit. Tuggers promote renting out your week and use the profit for something more cost effective. I forget all the “get rich quick” schemes I hear on TUG.
2) They allow desirable, low cost weeks to pass ROFR instead of buying them back. Tuggers are always bragging about what a great deal they got with weeks that passed ROFR. So why is Marriott not buying these weeks back when they are in desirable locations?


----------



## JIMinNC (Oct 2, 2022)

timsi said:


> If the   MVC inventory is depleted as early as you say and if there isn't much left after 4 months, it means that at 8 months there will not be any good inventory left in VSN when Abound is up and running. This is in clear contrast with Marriott telling us that everything will remain the same and that Abound is “just an option” for the Vistana owners. I do not know how they can say that with a straight face.


The only inventory that will be depleted by Abound bookings is the inventory that gets elected for Abound. That shouldn't impact the Vistana inventory that doesn't elect for Abound and will remain available for VSN bookings at 8 months. I do suspect that Vistana Abound inventory will go quickly when it hits the Abound Exchange.


----------



## JIMinNC (Oct 2, 2022)

TravelTime said:


> My gripes with Marriott are:
> 1) They do not enforce the rules for commercial use so a large majority of the weeks for rent are being used to make a profit. Tuggers promote renting out your week and use the profit for something more cost effective. I forget all the “get rich quick” schemes I hear on TUG.


Agree 100%.



> 2) They allow desirable, low cost weeks to pass ROFR instead of buying them back. Tuggers are always bragging about what a great deal they got with weeks that passed ROFR. So why is Marriott not buying these weeks back when they are in desirable locations?


Because they have limits on what they are willing to pay to exercise ROFR. They are exercising ROFR to reacquire weeks to resell as points. So the acquisition cost per point is the most important criteria. Why pay more for a higher demanded week if they can fill their points pipeline with cheaper ROFR targets? Having said that,  I do suspect getting good inventory to improve booking availability is a secondary criteria, but their primary goal is to get points to resell at the lowest cost. If they can meet their needs for points inventory without paying to ROFR at higher costs per point, that is what they will do. If they can get attractive, demanded inventory at an attractive price, they will, but they shouldn't over pay for that inventory any more than you or I should when buying a resale week.


----------



## timsi (Oct 2, 2022)

JIMinNC said:


> The only inventory that will be depleted by Abound bookings is the inventory that gets elected for Abound. That shouldn't impact the Vistana inventory that doesn't elect for Abound and will remain available for VSN bookings at 8 months. I do suspect that Vistana Abound inventory will go quickly when it hits the Abound Exchange.




Currently on the Marriott side you have the Marriott home owners and  MVC  that deplete the inventory in the first 4 months. There is no reason to believe that it will be any different on our side when we will have the Vistana home owners and Abound booking for four months. What will be left for VSN?

To make it worse, Marriott will decide the Abound inventory based on "anticipated demand" and in its "sole discretion" as we both know. Maybe you can tell me what inventory is drawn from when a Sheraton flex owner deposits 20,000 Options into Abound.


----------



## TravelTime (Oct 2, 2022)

JIMinNC said:


> Because they have limits on what they are willing to pay to exercise ROFR. They are exercising ROFR to reacquire weeks to resell as points. So the acquisition cost per point is the most important criteria. Why pay more for a higher demanded week if they can fill their points pipeline with cheaper ROFR targets? Having said that,  I do suspect getting good inventory to improve booking availability is a secondary criteria, but their primary goal is to get points to resell at the lowest cost.



If they want to sell points, then they need to have the inventory people want or no one will buy more points. It seems like it goes against shareholder value to buy back junk and let the inexpensive desirable inventory slip by. If they do not care about inventory, then why are they trying to get Westin Maui owners to deposit their weeks? You can’t have a crappy product (and I do not mean that MVC is a crappy product) if you want to create shareholder value. Does Marriott not see the points system as a product? If they see it as a product, then they need to meet customer demand. You seem to be implying that they just want to sell, sell, sell without regard for the product.


----------



## timsi (Oct 2, 2022)

TravelTime said:


> My gripes with Marriott are:
> 1) They do not enforce the rules for commercial use so a large majority of the weeks for rent are being used to make a profit. Tuggers promote renting out your week and use the profit for something more cost effective. I forget all the “get rich quick” schemes I hear on TUG.
> 2) They allow desirable, low cost weeks to pass ROFR instead of buying them back. Tuggers are always bragging about what a great deal they got with weeks that passed ROFR. So why is Marriott not buying these weeks back when they are in desirable locations?


Marriott has accumulated a lot of rental inventory, up to 25% at some resorts. I am afraid that a selective enforcement of that rule would expose them to legal action.


----------



## timsi (Oct 2, 2022)

JIMinNC said:


> Agree 100%.
> 
> 
> Because they have limits on what they are willing to pay to exercise ROFR. They are exercising ROFR to reacquire weeks to resell as points. So the acquisition cost per point is the most important criteria. Why pay more for a higher demanded week if they can fill their points pipeline with cheaper ROFR targets? Having said that,  I do suspect getting good inventory to improve booking availability is a secondary criteria, but their primary goal is to get points to resell at the lowest cost.


We do not know what Marriott actually owns for its rental business, you concluded a while ago that it makes business sense to keep some of the best weeks and to delay conveying them to the trust. A clear indication is the Vistana inventory conveyed to the MVC trust  so far even if they own much better weeks (we know that because we have reports from owners that they have been offered for sale such weeks)


----------



## DRH90277 (Oct 3, 2022)

JIMinNC said:


> Agree 100%.
> 
> 
> Because they have limits on what they are willing to pay to exercise ROFR. They are exercising ROFR to reacquire weeks to resell as points. So the acquisition cost per point is the most important criteria. Why pay more for a higher demanded week if they can fill their points pipeline with cheaper ROFR targets? Having said that,  I do suspect getting good inventory to improve booking availability is a secondary criteria, but their primary goal is to get points to resell at the lowest cost.



Where are you getting this information?  I hope MVC would not deliberately dumb down the quality of the inventory while at the same time touting the quality of the vacation experience.  

Please run this by the upper management of VAC and see what they say.  The MVC Investor Relations person may also have a comment.


----------



## JIMinNC (Oct 3, 2022)

TravelTime said:


> If they want to sell points, then they need to have the inventory people want or no one will buy more points. It seems like it goes against shareholder value to buy back junk and let the inexpensive desirable inventory slip by. If they do not care about inventory, then why are they trying to get Westin Maui owners to deposit their weeks? You can’t have a crappy product (and I do not mean that MVC is a crappy product) if you want to create shareholder value. Does Marriott not see the points system as a product? If they see it as a product, then they need to meet customer demand. You seem to be implying that they just want to sell, sell, sell without regard for the product.





DRH90277 said:


> Where are you getting this information?  I hope MVC would not deliberately dumb down the quality of the inventory while at the same time touting the quality of the vacation experience.
> 
> Please run this by the upper management of VAC and see what they say.  The MVC Investor Relations person may also have a comment.



I'm not saying that they ROFR "junk" weeks, and am sorry if that's the impression I gave. To the contrary, many of those junk weeks pass ROFR at very low prices, probably because most of those junk weeks are worth very few points anyway, so it's not worth their while to ROFR a week that's only worth, let's say, 1500 points.

They would rather pay a reasonable price for a Maui Ocean Club Napili tower 2 BR OF week that adds 7475 points to the Trust. What I'm saying is that they seem to have a maximum price they are willing to pay for any given week, and just getting that inventory for booking purposes is not a motivator for them to overpay much above their target price. If someone sells MOC Napili OF for $30K, that's about $4 per point, and based on ROFR.net, that's likely to get bought back by MVC. At $35K or $40K ($4.68-$5.35/point), they'll probably let it go to the buyer. Also from ROFR.net from this year, a Grande Ocean Platinum OF worth 5075 points was ROFR'd by MVC for $17k, but they let another $20k sale go through. So, they bought back at $3.35/point but let a $3.94/point sale go through.

So, I'm not saying they ROFR junk - and I have no special insight into their specific ROFR strategies - but logic says they would want to buy good weeks at a good price because those are worth more points, and they are also bookable weeks for their owners. But I'm sure they do have a maximum price they are willing to pay for any given week. They make it very clear in their quarterly earnings calls that they view low cost reacquired inventory as a key component of their inventory pipeline, and they tout that using reacquired inventory in lieu of building new resorts frees up capital and lowers their average product cost. I'm not saying that getting attractive inventory in the Trust for us owners to book isn't important to them - it is - it's just secondary to getting inventory to resell at the price they are willing to pay.


----------



## JIMinNC (Oct 3, 2022)

timsi said:


> Currently on the Marriott side you have the Marriott home owners and  MVC  that deplete the inventory in the first 4 months. There is no reason to believe that it will be any different on our side when we will have the Vistana home owners and Abound booking for four months. What will be left for VSN?
> 
> To make it worse, Marriott will decide the Abound inventory based on "anticipated demand" and in its "sole discretion" as we both know. Maybe you can tell me what inventory is drawn from when a Sheraton flex owner deposits 20,000 Options into Abound.



Again, I refuse to speculate/worry about what "might" happen in the inventory management arena. We've never had transparency into that area in MVC and I don't expect that to change. We call inventory management a "black box" for a reason. The only way I can judge, is "can I get the reservations I want?" Since 2017, I've been able to book the following:

Maui Ocean Club; 1BR OF Lahaina/Napili Villas; 7 nights; Mar 2023
Desert Springs I; 1 BR; 7 nights; Oct 2022
Newport Coast; 2 BR; 3 nights; Oct 2022
Maui Ocean Club; 1BR OF Napili Villas; 7 nights; Feb 2022
Grande Vista; 2BR and a Studio; 1 night; May 2021
Pulse South Beach; Studio; 1 night; Mar 2021
Ocean Pointe; Studio; 7 nights; Mar 2021
Crystal Shores; 2 BR Gulf Side; 6 nights; Nov 2020
Maui Ocean Club; 1 BR OV Original; 7 nights; Feb 2020
Waiohai Beach Club; 2 BR IV; 7 nights; Feb 2019
Grande Ocean; 2BR OS; 7 nights; April 2018
Grand Chateau; 2BR; 3 nights; Oct 2017
Heritage Club; 2BR; 1 night; Apr 2017
Barony Beach Club; 2 BR OF; 7 nights; Apr 2017
As long as that experience continues, the inner-workings of the black box mean nothing to me. If that changes at some point, I will either adjust my strategy or adjust my ownership.


----------



## JIMinNC (Oct 3, 2022)

timsi said:


> Marriott has accumulated a lot of rental inventory, up to 25% at some resorts. I am afraid that a selective enforcement of that rule would expose them to legal action.





timsi said:


> We do not know what Marriott actually owns for its rental business, you concluded a while ago that it makes business sense to keep some of the best weeks and to delay conveying them to the trust. A clear indication is the Vistana inventory conveyed to the MVC trust  so far even if they own much better weeks (we know that because we have reports from owners that they have been offered for sale such weeks)



Except that the program terms and conditions expressly authorize the Program Manager (MVW) to rent inventory they control while prohibiting owners from running a commercial rental enterprise. Since it's outlined in the program t&c's, unless someone could prove that provision infringes some other external legal or constitutional right, I don't see on what basis legal action could succeed, but I'm not a lawyer. I take no issue with MVW renting what they control, but based on the very limited prime time timeshare inventory I usually see on Marriott.com, the owner rentals I see on Redweek cause me more concern. That IS inventory that MVC allocated for owner use and instead it's being used by some owners to run a prohibited business.


----------



## TravelTime (Oct 3, 2022)

JIMinNC said:


> I'm not saying that they ROFR "junk" weeks, and am sorry if that's the impression I gave. To the contrary, many of those junk weeks pass ROFR at very low prices, probably because most of those junk weeks are worth very few points anyway, so it's not worth their while to ROFR a week that's only worth, let's say, 1500 points.
> 
> They would rather pay a reasonable price for a Maui Ocean Club Napili tower 2 BR OF week that adds 7475 points to the Trust. What I'm saying is that they have a maximum price they are willing to pay for any given week, and just getting that inventory for booking purposes is not a motivator for them to overpay much above their target price. If someone sells MOC Napili OF for $30K, that's about $4 per point, and based on ROFR.net, that's likely to get bought back by MVC. At $35K or $40K ($4.68-$5.35/point), they'll probably let it go to the buyer. Also from ROFR.net from this year, a Grande Ocean Platinum OF worth 5075 points was bought by MVC for $17k, but they let another $20k sale go through. So, they bought back at $3.35/point but let a $3.94/point sale go through.
> 
> So, I'm not saying they ROFR junk - and I have no special insight into their specific ROFR strategies - but logic says they would want to buy good weeks at a good price because those are worth more points, and they are bookable weeks for their owners. But I'm sure they do have a maximum price they are willing to pay for any given week. They make it very clear in their quarterly earnings calls that they view low cost reacquired inventory as a key component of their inventory pipeline, and they tout that using reacquire inventory in lieu of building new resorts frees up capital and lowers average product cost. I'm not saying that getting attractive inventory in the Trust for us owners to book isn't important to them - it is - it's just secondary to getting inventory to resell.



I never said they should overpay but they should not let attractive low cost inventory to get by. I am speaking from a customer perspective. When I say attractive, I mean Hawaii, Marco Island (maybe not now), Caribbean, Hilton Head and other places people most want to visit. Orlando is a dime a dozen. They can let that and similarly unattractive destinations pass by.

I do not know the details of how easy it is to acquire the good stuff but it seems like they are letting a lot good stuff slip by. If I were a shareholder (and I probably am, I need to look), I would want Marriott to focus equally on selling points and creating the best possible product so people want to buy more points. The best product possible means attractive destinations that you can actually reserve. It also means having some options if you need to cancel and reschedule when life happens like this hurricane. I actually do not care as much about price when it comes to maintenance fees and number of points to reserve and all of that.

I have always gotten what I want at 12/13 months but when life happens and you need to change, it is really hard after that to find good places to go.

Right now, I have 11 nights booked in Crystal Shores 2BR Gulf front for next June. I am likely to go if the resort and local area are built back enough. However, I was exploring some options of what to do next June in case we decide to cancel Marco given the state of SW FL after the hurricane. Basically, there is very little I can book now at 8 months in advance for those dates. So my choices are to go or cancel but not rebook for any place else in the Marriott universe. When this happens, I end up with way too many extra points. So the few times I go to sales presentations, it is hard for them to sell me more points if I can‘t find ways to use my existing points.

Another example, I booked 2BR Maui OF for next April. It cost 8550 points for 1 week. I can afford to splurge because I still have a lot of 2023 points for some odd reason. I am going on fewer but more “expensive” vacations so I can find a way to use all my excess points right now. I am also going on longer vacations to use my points. I have been trying to make a few changes to my Maui trip but it is hard to get what I want. I did find a few days before and after my MOC week but it is not exactly what I want and entails staying in 3 different units in the two buildings over 11 nights. This is just an example of what happens when you want to adjust plans.

BTW, I am double booked at the moment for Maui with my Westin week first and the MOC week second. So it is not like I did some poor planning at the 12/13 month mark. But I checked airfare and it is more than double to fly Sat-Sat than Th-Mon so that is mainly why I am trying to change some things around. I am thinking I might deposit the Westin week in Abound and switch things around.

So my point is that if there is not good inventory that is actually bookable, people at Presidential and Chairman’s level are going to have challenges using their points. Then they can‘t sell them more points. Currently, I only have 11,600 points per year and I am challenged to use them. Thank goodness I get 18 months extra to bank. I am looking forward to Chairman’s level (due to the enrollment of my Vistana week) simply for the 2 year banking window. Hopefully I can use my points up with more time.


----------



## JIMinNC (Oct 3, 2022)

TravelTime said:


> I never said they should overpay but they should not let attractive low cost inventory to get by. I am speaking from a customer perspective. When I say attractive, I mean Hawaii, Marco Island (maybe not now), Caribbean, Hilton Head and other places people most want to visit. Orlando is a dime a dozen. They can let that and similarly unattractive destinations pass by.
> 
> I do not know the details of how easy it is to acquire the good stuff but it seems like they are letting a lot good stuff slip by. If I were a shareholder (and I probably am, I need to look), I would want Marriott to focus equally on selling points and creating the best possible product so people want to buy more points. The best product possible means attractive destinations that you can actually reserve. It also means having some options if you need to cancel and reschedule when life happens like this hurricane. I actually do not care as much about price when it comes to maintenance fees and number of points to reserve and all of that.
> 
> ...



I can't argue with any of what you wrote, and as I said, I do suspect that getting good inventory into the Trust for booking purposes is something that in some way factors into their decision on whether to ROFR or not. I just feel like, based on everything I've heard them say in their earnings calls, that getting it at the right price is very important to them. It seems their ROFR threshold floats in and around that $4/point price point, but we can only guess how much weight booking demand has on the price they are willing to pay.

Based on the resale transactions I've been involved in, I was told by a broker that they make ROFR decisions once per week. This is only an educated guess, but perhaps they have a ROFR budget/target for each weekly ROFR decision. So, they might look at the weeks they have available to them that week and prioritize based on cost/point, booking demand, or whatever other factors might factor in. We can only guess what those criteria are. Once their budget is used up, they let the others go. Maybe they have some ability to spend more or less based on how attractive/unattractive the opportunities are in any given week, but that's just a guess. That would, however, explain why some weeks get snapped up by MVC at the same price they had let go through at another time. It might depend on what the other opportunities were at any given time. They also try not to keep too much unsold inventory on their books, so that limits how much they can ROFR.


----------



## TravelTime (Oct 3, 2022)

I was just giving some more thought to my comments. Maybe the real problem for having more available inventory is not ROFR. It is not cracking down on commercial use of weeks. I do not mean the occasional rentals when an owner can’t use a week. 

I just looked on Redweek and there are 398 rentals at MOC, 552 rentals at Ko Olina, 407 at WKOVR, 492 at Crystal Shores, etc. To me, these are big numbers and lost inventory that they might be able to keep in the points or weeks system if they cracked down on rentals.

In the end, it is probably a combination of both factors: more buy back of attractive low priced inventory and cracking down on commercial use.


----------



## Dean (Oct 3, 2022)

DRH90277 said:


> You are right about my posts and the repeated emphasis, but it is absolutely true the trust does suffer a lack of the better inventory.  Why hasn't MVC been exercising the ROFR and buying up the better "in demand" resale weeks for 10+ years.  Is MVC deliberately dumbing down the quality of available resorts for point owners?  Are they trying to redirect us toward the outsourced stuff?
> 
> One excuse, they are relying on week owners to deposit the better weeks for points.  This could be pretty stupid, why would they expect me to deposit my 6 Ocean Watch weeks for points so I can spend them on lower end resorts such as Grand Chateau, Pulse Mayflower in DC, etc. (just my opinion).  So, what happens, those with better owned weeks are renting them out, depositing in Interval, etc.  Week owners do have the option of renting out weeks for cash and renting what they want - the "cash" alternative to the points program.  Is it good or bad that I might have better access to good reservations thru rentals on Redweek than by using points?
> 
> MVC's latest venture with the Westin/Sheraton properties is going to be slow to access.  It might help a bit, but it won't solve the shortage in available reservations for the best resorts.  And the current MVC inventory will be subjected to a whole new population of users.


IMO this comes down to understanding the system and how it works including from the developers side.  There is no incentive to for them to go out and get weeks at this point.  The only incentive is if they feel they can make money because they do so.  That may be by taking a week cheaply on ROFR and then reselling it as points or by creating issues and uncertainties on the ROFR side to limit resales somewhat.  They currently have no problems selling points related to any real or perceived inventory limitations since the information is not transparent.  


DRH90277 said:


> With respect, I understand all that.  It is also unfair to harp on my requests for better resorts and season reservations - that's exactly why I spent my money for Marriott Vacations.  Don't make excuses for MVC - do you work for them?  MVC's inability to fill booking requests using points for better resorts coupled with little effort to add the better inventory is out in the open.  Did you really buy into Vacation Club so you could compromise your requests for point reservations?  And please don't blame this on the unwillingness of week owners to deposit their great weeks for points.
> 
> Of interest, I received an email from Redweek this morning showing rental additions for yesterday - 19 for Newport Coast and 6 for OceanWatch.  MVC is probably sitting there wondering, where do all these weeks go and why?


The reality is that MVC made no promises of availability related to retail purchases and certainly not for resale buyers, with the exception of fixed week/unit options.  Actually quite the contrary, they made it clear there were limitations and there no guarantees of availability.  


TravelTime said:


> My gripes with Marriott are:
> 1) They do not enforce the rules for commercial use so a large majority of the weeks for rent are being used to make a profit. Tuggers promote renting out your week and use the profit for something more cost effective. I forget all the “get rich quick” schemes I hear on TUG.
> 2) They allow desirable, low cost weeks to pass ROFR instead of buying them back. Tuggers are always bragging about what a great deal they got with weeks that passed ROFR. So why is Marriott not buying these weeks back when they are in desirable locations?


It sounds like you have a misunderstanding of the commercial restriction.  Specifically it's not a restriction on renting including the amount of profit or the desirability of the week but rather on more of a business restriction.  Now there are those who make a business out of it but they are few and far between from what I've seen.  We will all vary on our definition of commercial which is part of the problem, there isn't a clear definition but what it is not, is profit based, but volume based.  

For points availability it does come down to Legacy owners electing points to generate availability.  Anyone deciding to participate in the points system either knew or should have known up front this would be the case.  And ultimately it comes down to competition between owners for both floating weeks and points so it's you against me so to speak.


----------



## DRH90277 (Oct 3, 2022)

Please just take a step back and view this points program from the perspective of a participant who buys expensive points with the expectation of getting the reservations they want.  Does the participant get the reservations they desire say 75% of the time?  If not, there is something wrong with the interworking's of the model, system, or available inventory.  We can speculate about what causes this forever, but it is up to MVC to deliver or disappoint their customers.  Disappointing customers is not good for business and word gets around.  Are customers buying the hype or the product?  Will I advise my children to buy this product?  Will I refer my friends?

*What are MVC's options:*
1.  *Increase ownership of desired weeks in the Trust - *Buy up more desired weeks under the ROFR.  MVC has had 12 years to build trust inventory.  The unsold inventory placed in the trust at the outset of the points program did not include very many weeks from the better resorts.  Beef up the inventory of the good stuff.
2.  *Motivate owners to deposit their owned weeks - enrolled or not -* Please don't blame owners for renting out their weeks.  This might be a defensive move to get the vacations they want by renting from others.  It might also be a move to gather cash to pay maintenance fees.     
3.  *Stop or limit pilfering inventory for rentals, etc. - *Having the right to divert inventory from Interval or the Trust may be detrimental to access by points program participants.
4.  *Improve the MVC experience now - *The Weston/Sheraton purchase is ok but what will it really do for us over the next three years?  It's tough to get too excited about what is being added.  Will this addition just add more demand for the already limited access to good inventory?

What can or will MVC do to improve your customer experience?


----------



## timsi (Oct 3, 2022)

JIMinNC said:


> Except that the program terms and conditions expressly authorize the Program Manager (MVW) to rent inventory they control while prohibiting owners from running a commercial rental enterprise. Since it's outlined in the program t&c's, unless someone could prove that provision infringes some other external legal or constitutional right, I don't see on what basis legal action could succeed, but I'm not a lawyer. I take no issue with MVW renting what they control, but based on the very limited prime time timeshare inventory I usually see on Marriott.com, the owner rentals I see on Redweek cause me more concern. That IS inventory that MVC allocated for owner use and instead it's being used by some owners to run a prohibited business.


It is possible that the exception for commercial use was intended to prevent an absurd situation where the developer could not rent any part of the resort it had just built, it is obvious they could not sell overnight 100% of the ownership interests. Was the intention to provide the developer with the opportunity to buy pre-owned deeds for next to nothing, rent them or sell them in a way that it is not allowed to the regular owners? I do not know.  A second intend was to make sure that the developer would be able to run restaurants, shops etc. but to prevent owners from setting up lemonade stands in their units or at the pool which would lead to chaos of course. When it comes to rentals, what constitutes a commercial activity and where do you draw the line? I do not think it is defined in the resort documents, instead they mention that owners can rent their units. If regular owners manage to make a profit every year, is that commercial or not? Are all the listings referred to by @TravelTime commercial? Which ones are, which ones aren't and by what standard?

Regardless, when it comes to the entities that can perform commercial activities you do not have to look just at the MVC trust documents, but at every resort to see if the “developer” is indeed allowed to rent those units.  At Lagunamar for example, according to the Bylaws: “Members and other Occupants […] may not use a Vacation Unit for any commercial purpose.” but “This Section does not apply to and shall not limit the Founding Member or the Property Association.” According to the same Bylaws, “Founding Member means the Westin Cancun SVO Mexico, Inc., a Florida corporation.” Could an entity that is not Westin Cancun SVO Mexico or the Property Association benefit from that exception? You will probably say no. If that is the case, do we know if MVW owns all its Lagunamar Interests through Westin Cancun SVO Mexico?  How about the Interests in the Westin Aventura if they are not owned through Westin Cancun SVO Mexico, Inc.? Can they rent those units at a commercial scale? How come the “CONSENT TO MVCD/VSN MASTER AFFILIATION AGREEMENT” signed on August 3rd,2022 is not signed by Westin Cancun SVO Mexico, Inc. but it is signed by VISTANA AVENTURAS, INC.? What is that telling us?

If you look at the notices to convey Westin Mission Hills, Westin Princeville and SVV St Augustine units to the MVC trust you will notice that they were conveyed by "MARRIOTT OWNERSHIP RESORTS, INC., a Delaware corporation" on behalf of the "developer". At those resorts, is Marriott Ownership Resorts Inc. allowed to perform commercial activities? Maybe yes, maybe not, I do not have access to those documents. 

It is also possible that the “developer” doesn’t want too many questions about its rental business and the process used to book the units it controls if it is not done in a manner that is consistent to what is available to the other owners.


----------



## SueDonJ (Oct 3, 2022)

timsi said:


> Marriott has accumulated a lot of rental inventory, up to 25% at some resorts. I am afraid that a selective enforcement of that rule would expose them to legal action.


What do you mean by "Marriott has accumulated ... up to 25%" rental inventory? It can't be that you think Marriott Vacations Worldwide flat-out owns all that inventory because they'd be on the hook for all those MF's. I think that they do gain control of inventory that they don't flat-out own, but, they don't gain that control until/unless the actual owners make it available to Marriott. That can happen if/when owners don't pay their MF's and other financial obligations, or, when owners don't comply with the rules for reserving, or, when owners specifically choose on an annual basis to deposit their inventory into Marriott's rental program. (Granted, none of those are economically-advantageous to the owner but they happen far more often than TUGgers want to believe.)


----------



## hcarman (Oct 3, 2022)

dougp26364 said:


> I think I’m tired of hearing about the labor pains and want to see the baby.
> 
> I’m so worn out over the speculation and what the latest released tid-bit means for owners, or what some sales person told someone on an owner update, that my heads about ready to explode.
> 
> In the end nothing really matters. It’s going to be what it’s going to be and we can’t really begin to digest the program or dissect the nuances until we actually see it and can take it out for a test drive


I have to agree.  I think for the last two years all I have been hearing about is being able to book Vistana properties with Destination Club points.  First it was rolling out in April of 2021, then we were told June of 2022, then it was end of July, then September - all of those have come and gone.  Guess we will believe it when we see it but I am sure website will crash for days when that day finally arrives.


----------



## CPNY (Oct 3, 2022)

JIMinNC said:


> The only inventory that will be depleted by Abound bookings is the inventory that gets elected for Abound. That shouldn't impact the Vistana inventory that doesn't elect for Abound and will remain available for VSN bookings at 8 months. I do suspect that Vistana Abound inventory will go quickly when it hits the Abound Exchange.


This is what we are all being told. In reality, it’s no different than an owner using their ownership at their home resort. As of now the only way the VSN will be depleted of inventory is if MVW makes the abound program attractive to the VSN owner so they convert their ownership out of Vistana and into Abound that year.


----------



## hcarman (Oct 3, 2022)

TravelTime said:


> I was just giving some more thought to my comments. Maybe the real problem for having more available inventory is not ROFR. It is not cracking down on commercial use of weeks. I do not mean the occasional rentals when an owner can’t use a week.
> 
> I just looked on Redweek and there are 398 rentals at MOC, 552 rentals at Ko Olina, 407 at WKOVR, 492 at Crystal Shores, etc. To me, these are big numbers and lost inventory that they might be able to keep in the points or weeks system if they cracked down on rentals.
> 
> In the end, it is probably a combination of both factors: more buy back of attractive low priced inventory and cracking down on commercial use.


A few months back I had a sales presentation where they encouraged me to buy more points and become Chairman’s Club - just so I could use these points for rentals to offset my fees.  But I don’t subscribe to that - I don’t want to be dependent on rentals (just look at Covid times).  But I am sure many do and they are able to then book at the 13 month window pretty much anything they want so they have prime weeks for rentals.  Our other vacation club was having so many issues with lack of inventory due to rentals that they capped how much you could rent without paying guest fees and if they think you are a commercial renter they cancel reservation  - but their contracts are set up differently.  I am not taking a position one way or the other - just stating it is common practice for sales to encourage this and that some clubs have tightened up the rental policies due to owners complaining about too many big time renters and no inventory for owners that want to use the time themselves.  I would guess there may be a lot of inventory that opens at the 60 day out mark due to rentals getting cancelled if not spoken for.


----------



## Dean (Oct 3, 2022)

DRH90277 said:


> Please just take a step back and view this points program from the perspective of a participant who buys expensive points with the expectation of getting the reservations they want.  Does the participant get the reservations they desire say 75% of the time?  If not, there is something wrong with the interworking's of the model, system, or available inventory.  We can speculate about what causes this forever, but it is up to MVC to deliver or disappoint their customers.  Disappointing customers is not good for business and word gets around.  Are customers buying the hype or the product?  Will I advise my children to buy this product?  Will I refer my friends?
> 
> *What are MVC's options:*
> 1.  *Increase ownership of desired weeks in the Trust - *Buy up more desired weeks under the ROFR.  MVC has had 12 years to build trust inventory.  The unsold inventory placed in the trust at the outset of the points program did not include very many weeks from the better resorts.  Beef up the inventory of the good stuff.
> ...


It sounds like you're looking at this more from a personal and emotional perspective while I'd look at it as more of a black and white reality perspective.  The reality and legalities are that there are no guarantees or even promises of availability, any assumptions otherwise simply reflect the lack of knowledge of how a floating system works.  I'd be surprised if 75% of the membership as a whole get their first choice and skeptical that 75% get anything in their top 3 choices for points Or floating weeks through it's likely better for weeks than points.  Part of it is understanding realities.  I'm sure TUG members do far better than the overall membership.  I think you're reading too much into this.  Their main goal is simply profit whether it be sales or management.  If the issues you bring up affect profit sufficiently, they will address it as best they can weighing cost vs potential benefit.  One of the benefits a developer has selling points is that every buyer has options and timing in mind, usually which the system can't handle and MVC knows that up front yet they will still sell to you even when they know your plans are not realistic.  Statistically for example, a buyer may be looking at HHI 4th of July but most won't get it or even the week before or after.  The ones that learn the system, play the game and are proactive will do better than most but at the expense of everyone else.    As long as systems like Westgate, Wyndham and Bluegreen can continue to sell at retail prices for something you can get almost free privately, I don't expect MVC, DVC, Hilton or the like to be overly limited due to the concerns you raise.  Remember most timeshare are bought not sold.  Would any of us advise a single person off the street to buy retail, the answer is no with extremely limited and specific examples to the contrary.  Once sold, MVC really cares even less as they're going to get their fees and they've already made their money on that item.  


CPNY said:


> This is what we are all being told. In reality, it’s no different than an owner using their ownership at their home resort. As of now the only way the VSN will be depleted of inventory is if MVW makes the abound program attractive to the VSN owner so they convert their ownership out of Vistana and into Abound that year.


In reality this is a series of systems linked together.  Basically it's a user who owns X and uses X specific to what they own (such as a floating week) and it's limitations and if not, they are an exchanger, wether it's the FL club, elected points or trust points, etc.  One of the problems with trust points is there is no home resort so they're in permanent exchange status and in many ways, one doesn't actually own anything.  I know people look at it like they own across the system and should be treated the same, or almost the same, as an owner at a given resort but that is not reality IMO.  Every member that moves from one category to another will affect demand along with availability so in theory the demand for each resort and option will roughly be the same before and after that person moves from one group to another (say weeks to points).  But there may be some minor differences in demand as one moves from an owner to an exchanger within MVC.  


hcarman said:


> A few months back I had a sales presentation where they encouraged me to buy more points and become Chairman’s Club - just so I could use these points for rentals to offset my fees.  But I don’t subscribe to that - I don’t want to be dependent on rentals (just look at Covid times).  But I am sure many do and they are able to then book at the 13 month window pretty much anything they want so they have prime weeks for rentals.  Our other vacation club was having so many issues with lack of inventory due to rentals that they capped how much you could rent without paying guest fees and if they think you are a commercial renter they cancel reservation  - but their contracts are set up differently.  I am not taking a position one way or the other - just stating it is common practice for sales to encourage this and that some clubs have tightened up the rental policies due to owners complaining about too many big time renters and no inventory for owners that want to use the time themselves.  I would guess there may be a lot of inventory that opens at the 60 day out mark due to rentals getting cancelled if not spoken for.


There has always been a disconnect between sales, usage and the actual legalities in place.  Specific to this situation, if sales encourages purchases to rent and management labels that person a commercial rental, I would not be surprised and would feel the member should have better understood what they were getting into by reading the actual legal paperwork.  I do not believe that anyone who gets to simply Chairman's club is going to be afoul of the commercial rental issue if they have any personal usage.  But for those like myself, who own quite a bit more, we could easily get to that level if we routinely rented a significant portion of what we owned.


----------



## timsi (Oct 3, 2022)

SueDonJ said:


> What do you mean by "Marriott has accumulated ... up to 25%" rental inventory? It can't be that you think Marriott Vacations Worldwide flat-out owns all that inventory because they'd be on the hook for all those MF's. I think that they do gain control of inventory that they don't flat-out own, but, they don't gain that control until/unless the actual owners make it available to Marriott. That can happen if/when owners don't pay their MF's and other financial obligations, or, when owners don't comply with the rules for reserving, or, when owners specifically choose on an annual basis to deposit their inventory into Marriott's rental program. (Granted, none of those are economically-advantageous to the owner but they happen far more often than TUGgers want to believe.)


You should look at the details of the resorts you own to see what I mean. At Westin Lagunamar, according to the auditor's report

"NOTE 9 - RELATED PARTY TRANSACTIONS
During the years ended December 31, 2021 and 2020, the amount of maintenance fees assessed to the Seller was
$5,396,116 and $4,804,051, respectively. "

I believe this is not very far from 25% of the resort budget. At other resorts, especially those that do not rent very well, the numbers may be different.


----------



## JIMinNC (Oct 3, 2022)

DRH90277 said:


> Please just take a step back and view this points program from the perspective of a participant who buys expensive points with the expectation of getting the reservations they want.  Does the participant get the reservations they desire say 75% of the time?  If not, there is something wrong with the interworking's of the model, system, or available inventory.  We can speculate about what causes this forever, but it is up to MVC to deliver or disappoint their customers.  Disappointing customers is not good for business and word gets around.  Are customers buying the hype or the product?  Will I advise my children to buy this product?  Will I refer my friends?
> 
> *What are MVC's options:*
> 1.  *Increase ownership of desired weeks in the Trust - *Buy up more desired weeks under the ROFR.  MVC has had 12 years to build trust inventory.  The unsold inventory placed in the trust at the outset of the points program did not include very many weeks from the better resorts.  Beef up the inventory of the good stuff.
> ...



I can't argue with any of this, and customer satisfaction is key to any business's success. In their investor presentations, MVW regularly quotes customer satisfaction scores north of 95%.

As I've said repeatedly, I think acquiring attractive Trust inventory is one factor MVC considers when determining whether to reacquire inventory through ROFR, they just seem to have a maximum price they are willing to pay based on guidance from their finance people on Cost of Inventory targets.

If you look at the Trust conveyances that @dioxide45 kept track of in this thread (Recorded Trust Documents) from 2010 through 2016, you can see how one resort that is famously underrepresented in the Trust, Marriott's Grande Ocean in Hilton Head, grew in the Trust. In November 2010, there was almost none:

*November 2010*
Timberlodge...............11,022,750
Ko Olina......................9,208,750
Newport Coast Villas.....8,643,000
Crystal Shores.............8,021,250
Oceana Palms..............5,706,000
MOC-Sequel................4,352,070
Kalanipu'u...................3,529,500 (Kauai Lagoons)
Canyon Villas..............3,105,500
Willow Ridge................2,848,500
MOC..........................2,410,750
Shadow Ridge..............1,475,750
Grande Chateau...........1,378,250
Ocean Watch................992,000
Grand Vista...................774,750
DSV II..........................333,750
Harbour Lake.................238,000
Lakeshore Reserve..........153,750
Fairway Villas.................110,000
Cypress Harbour...............90,750
Ocean Point....................71,000
Barony Beach Club............69,750
Mountain Side..................68,500
Summit Watch.................45,000
Sunset Point...................44,250
Sabal Palms.....................39,000
Royal Palms.....................35,000
Manor Club Sequel............32,000
Manor Club.....................30,000
Harbour Club...................17,250
DSV I............................16,000
Doral.............................13,000
*Grande Ocean.................. 9,000 (0.013%)*
Heritage Club.................. 7,500

*Grand Total....................64,892,320*

Over the next six years, MVC obviously bought up a lot of Grande Ocean inventory, as you can see from how Grande Ocean rose in the rankings in this list from December 2016:

*December 2016*
Grand Chateau..........................52,703,750
Ko'Olina...............................30,045,750
Newport Coast..........................29,394,500
Oceana Palms...........................23,391,250
Grande Vista...........................19,272,750
Kalanipu'u.............................18,293,500
Timber Lodge...........................17,677,250
Shadow Ridge II........................13,429,500
Maui Ocean Club........................11,981,250
Ritz Carlton Club - Vail...............11,813,500
The Mayflower..........................10,748,750
Crystal Shores..........................9,598,250
Cypress Harbour.........................9,156,000
Maui Ocean Club Sequel..................8,773,500
Ocean Pointe............................8,588,000
Harbour Lake............................8,506,500
Shadow Ridge............................8,053,750
Desert Springs II.......................7,686,750
Canyon Villas...........................5,820,500
Kauai Beach Club........................5,204,250
Ocean Watch.............................4,656,250
Willow Ridge Lodge......................4,552,000
Waiohai.................................4,446,000
Grand Residence Lake Tahoe..............4,322,250
Desert Springs I........................4,299,000
BeachPlace Towers.......................3,734,000
Barony Beach Club.......................3,339,750
*Grande Ocean............................3,159,250 (0.83%)*
Fairway Villas..........................2,827,750
Ritz Carlton Club - San Francisco.......2,678,000
Frenchman's Cove........................2,553,750
Surfwatch...............................2,532,500
Villas at Doral.........................2,423,750
Mountain Side...........................2,249,250
Royal Palms.............................2,134,750
Lakeshore Reserve.......................2,021,000
Summit Watch............................1,996,000
Ritz Carlton Club - St Thomas...........1,841,250
Legends Edge............................1,588,500
Manor Club..............................1,558,500
Sabal Palms.............................1,545,500
Ritz Carlton Club - Lake Tahoe..........1,462,750
Mountain Valley Lodge...................1,248,750
Manor Club Sequel.......................1,083,000
Streamside..............................1,007,500
Monarch at Sea Pines......................995,750
Imperial Palms............................714,500
Harbour Pointe............................665,000
Harbour Club..............................303,750
Heritage Club.............................267,500
Ritz Carlton Club - St Thomas Suites......243,250
Sunset Pointe.............................159,500

*Grand Total...........................378,749,500*

Grande Ocean is still probably under-represented in the Trust versus demand, but in the six years from late 2010 to late 2016, MVC reacquired MGO weeks worth over 3,150,000 points. I'm not sure what the average point value of those reacquired weeks were for GO, but let's say it was 3,500 to 4,000. That would mean over six years, MVC reacquired around 800 MGO weeks. Could they have reacquired even more if they had been more aggressive at matching higher offers? Sure. But, as I've said repeatedly, they have to meet their inventory cost targets and they don't have unlimited dollars for ROFR. Those dollars also have to be spread all around the network.

Since no one has kept track of the conveyances since 2016, we don't know what the picture looks like today, but I suspect MGO has continued to grow in the Trust.


----------



## JIMinNC (Oct 3, 2022)

timsi said:


> It is also possible that the “developer” doesn’t want too many questions about its rental business and the process used to book the units it controls if it is not done in a manner that is consistent to what is available to the other owners.



We keep going 'round-and-'round on these issues, but I think the big difference driving our perspectives is you seem to have a basic distrust of Marriott's motives whereas I don't. My experience with them over the last 8 years has been almost all positive, so I have no reason to think they are doing less honorable things with their inventory. If they are, it hasn't hurt me. I also consider pursuing a healthy profit margin to be an honorable motive, so it's logical that I would have fewer concerns than you do. We look at the current situation from different perspectives and through differing lenses.


----------



## timsi (Oct 3, 2022)

JIMinNC said:


> I can't argue with any of this, and customer satisfaction is key to any business's success. In their investor presentations, MVW regularly quotes customer satisfaction scores north of 95%.



Have you seen the actual questions? Who knows, maybe 95% of the owners may be satisfied with the resorts rather than with the ownership. 
95% satisfaction seems unusually high for anything, let alone timeshares. If the average delinquency rate is 2-4% (I can't imagine those who can't pay their bills are "happy with their ownerships), that would leave very few unhappy owners.


----------



## timsi (Oct 3, 2022)

JIMinNC said:


> We keep going 'round-and-'round on these issues, but I think the big difference driving our perspectives is you seem to have a basic distrust of Marriott's motives whereas I don't. My experience with them over the last 8 years has been almost all positive, so I have no reason to think they are doing less honorable things with their inventory. If they are, it hasn't hurt me. I also consider pursuing a healthy profit margin to be an honorable motive, so it's logical that I would have fewer concerns than you do. We look at the current situation from different perspectives and through differing lenses.


I tried to stay away from characterizing your comments, but can I now say that yours are so unusually positive that someone thought you worked for Marriott? I know it is not the case.


----------



## JIMinNC (Oct 3, 2022)

timsi said:


> I tried to stay away from characterizing your comments, but can I now say that yours are so unusually positive that someone thought you worked for Marriott? I know it is not the case.


I'm positive because my experience as an owner has been largely positive. I have no reason to be suspicious, at least for now. If my experience changes, so will my perspective.


----------



## JIMinNC (Oct 3, 2022)

timsi said:


> Have you seen the actual questions? Who knows, maybe 95% of the owners may be satisfied with the resorts rather than with the ownership.
> 95% satisfaction seems unusually high for anything, let alone timeshares. If the average delinquency rate is 2-4% (I can't imagine those who can't pay their bills are "happy with their ownerships), that would leave very few unhappy owners.



Valid point, although since 60% to 70% of their Sales are to existing owners, that would imply generally high overall owner satisfaction. I think they understand unhappy owners won't buy more.


----------



## timsi (Oct 3, 2022)

JIMinNC said:


> I can't argue with any of this, and customer satisfaction is key to any business's success. In their investor presentations, MVW regularly quotes customer satisfaction scores north of 95%.
> 
> As I've said repeatedly, I think acquiring attractive Trust inventory is one factor MVC considers when determining whether to reacquire inventory through ROFR, they just seem to have a maximum price they are willing to pay based on guidance from their finance people on Cost of Inventory targets.
> 
> ...


I do not think @DRH90277 was referring to a wonderful February week at the beach in South Carolina. Unless you know the breakdown per season, the numbers at Grande Ocean mean nothing and you can also find silver season in Interval.


----------



## timsi (Oct 3, 2022)

JIMinNC said:


> Valid point, although since 60% to 70% of their Sales are to existing owners, that would imply generally high overall owner satisfaction. I think they understand unhappy owners won't buy more.


Many existing owners are told to buy to get access to better inventory at 13 months, to get access to the trust points inventory and for other reasons.  It seems Marriott uses the inventory issues to their advantage. Do you like the resorts? Can you get what you need? If the answers are Yes and No you need to buy more! Actually you need to buy more regardless of the answers LOL. 

We also have to make a distinction between % of sales and % of ownership. I guess the total number of sales per year is less than 6-10% of the total number of owners and 6-10% would include those who become owners for the first time.


----------



## timsi (Oct 3, 2022)

JIMinNC said:


> I'm positive because my experience as an owner has been largely positive. I have no reason to be suspicious, at least for now. If my experience changes, so will my perspective.


I appreciate your comments and trust your judgement. We all have different views, thankfully.


----------



## Dean (Oct 3, 2022)

JIMinNC said:


> We keep going 'round-and-'round on these issues, but I think the big difference driving our perspectives is you seem to have a basic distrust of Marriott's motives whereas I don't. My experience with them over the last 8 years has been almost all positive, so I have no reason to think they are doing less honorable things with their inventory. If they are, it hasn't hurt me. I also consider pursuing a healthy profit margin to be an honorable motive, so it's logical that I would have fewer concerns than you do. We look at the current situation from different perspectives and through differing lenses.


IMO anyone who is overly negative or distrustful should consider exiting, or better yet, simply avoid the system if they are not already involved in it.  That's not to say one shouldn't strive for change or improvement but simply that we're not going to be able to "fix" the system and I'm not into beating my head against the wall.  In reality timeshare change, we should all know that going in.  When they change they will frequently change for the worse for a large % and basically always change for the worse for some segment of the membership.  Personally I think MVC did as much or more than they should have for those affected negatively by Covid though I know some disagree.  Regardless the events of the last 2.5 years should remind everyone of the type of things that can happen both with such systems and personally.  

And no, I don't work for MVC, I've just read and understand the realities of the limitations, commitments and risks involved.  For example, there are timeshare that were in the direct path of Ian, including Sanibel, and the reality is that those members may lose their timeshare completely with little to no compensation or they may simply have a year or 2 paying fees with no usage options including exchanges.  That is the way the system works when we commit to a condo ownership which ultimately is what a timeshare is.


----------



## JIMinNC (Oct 3, 2022)

timsi said:


> I do not think @DRH90277 was referring to a wonderful February week at the beach in South Carolina. Unless you know the breakdown per season, the numbers at Grande Ocean mean nothing and you can also find silver season in Interval.



Clearly, you are correct, but we have no way to know the composition of ROFR. We have a few isolated data points on ROFR.net, but that's all, and as crowd-sourced data, ROFR.net is far from a scientific sample. We also don't know how many MGO weeks go on the resale market at any point in time, at what prices, from what season, what % get taken by MVC, and at what price. We look at the few nuggets we do have and try to draw some reasonable conclusions. Those conclusions may offer insight; maybe not.

I freely admit I might feel differently about all of this if we had bought our MVC ownership to use in high-demand summer vacation time, spring break, Christmas, etc. I honestly can't recall our specific bookings the first two use years we owned MVC in 2015 and 2016, but I don't think we had ever booked our current Marriott or Hilton timeshares in June, July, or August until just recently when we booked a week at the HGVC timeshare in Tuscany, Italy for next June. We did use our previous ownership at what is now Kaanapali Beach Club (Diamond) several times in the summer and for spring/summer trades to Orlando (easy trade) when we had school aged children, but even then, we booked Hawaii right when our 12 month booking window opened and focused our trades on easy Orlando trips. We never had a problem. We sold KBC and bought MVC and Hilton just before our youngest went off to college, and I did a lot of research on TUG before we bought. We bought MVC and HGVC because I knew we didn't need to (or want to) compete for those prime summer weeks. Having reasonable expectations going in can result in higher satisfaction levels as an owner.


----------



## timsi (Oct 3, 2022)

JIMinNC said:


> Clearly, you are correct, but we have no way to know the composition of ROFR.


You are correct, without knowing the composition of ROFR and foreclosures as well as the conveyed weeks and the weeks the developer would keep for renting it is impossible to know for sure.


----------



## TravelTime (Oct 3, 2022)

I would rate my customer satisfaction at 90%+. I still have gripes. I think #1 is limiting rentals like someone mentioned in a post above that their club does. It bothers me that people buy weeks just to game the system especially when they are bragging about it. I think using your points or weeks effectively in the MVC system is the goal. Just my opinion since I bought to use.


----------



## TravelTime (Oct 3, 2022)

JIMinNC said:


> I can't argue with any of this, and customer satisfaction is key to any business's success. In their investor presentations, MVW regularly quotes customer satisfaction scores north of 95%.
> 
> As I've said repeatedly, I think acquiring attractive Trust inventory is one factor MVC considers when determining whether to reacquire inventory through ROFR, they just seem to have a maximum price they are willing to pay based on guidance from their finance people on Cost of Inventory targets.
> 
> ...



While the total may have grown tremendously, my favorite resorts have grown by a much smaller percentage. I guess this is because I enjoy the ones that would be more expensive for them to buy back.

Even though my satisfaction is high at 90%+, I still have my gripes. If I did this all over again, I would not buy timeshares because then I feel obligated to “use it or lose it.”

The plus of the money I supposedly “save” over the long run is offset by the negative of being limited to about 10 resorts I may want to visit and then I am stuck re-visiting them. I am already bored of one resort I have visited twice. I never liked the specific weeks I purchased so I enrolled them. Sort of a mistake bc now it is not cost effective to re-sell them.

I guess once I feel I have broken even, if I really feel bored of the Marriott resorts, I can re-sell MVC. At this point, to get to Chairman’s Club level including the enrollment of my Vistana week, I have spent over $80,000 and this is purchasing all resale at an average cost per point of $5. Was this a good decision? Hmm hard to say. I might be able to get half back if I am lucky. I am still way ahead of the average MVC owner who bough retail.

So I guess once I get to $40,000 or so in savings, I am at break even. If I compare to retail, then I have passed break even. But others have said I should be comparing to the rental rate. I should calculate to see if I am at break even. Maybe I am.

I am glad my satisfaction is high. I am glad that if I book at the 13/12 mark I have gotten everything I want. I am glad we can use points to get into the Ritz Carlton. I am glad we get Titanium level and a higher level on United. There are probably more things I like.

I am not thrilled that I have to book that early and if things happen where I need to change my reservations, then there is nothing left to book for the original dates. There are other things I like and some I do not like so much.

I really dislike renting what I can’t use myself but glad there is a mechanism for us regular owners who bought to use. I do not like II and doubt I will use it after my previous trials of it. I have not gotten good II exchanges. Even if I did, I would not get the views I want.

In spite of this, I much prefer the MVC/Abound system over Vistana and thrilled MVC has offered resale mandatory enrollment at not cost. That is really shocking and a free gift.

So even though My satisfaction is high at 90%+, I still would not recommend timeshares to my friends and family. I also will never buy more points again. So the negatives of me buying more points or encouraging anyone who does not already own timeshares to buy MVC is not really consistent with their main goal of selling more points.

The above is why I do not think they are not truly creating shareholder value. I define a stellar product as creating a product that people want to buy again and again, that people will recommend to others and that people will not stop using. I guess they can always find fresh meat  to buy retail points and meet their financial goals. But we all know a short term vision that drives stock in the short term could cause the stock price to crash in the long term. I hope I am wrong because then the product will certainly decline.

BTW, one more thing to add, unlike most Tuggers, I am happy if I get 2-3 excellent vacations per year out of my points. If I can get 1-2 weeks with 2BR OF views during peak seasons and another week off season in 2BR OF, I am happy. I need to calculate how much I pay in annual MFs but I bet my total cost is the same as what I am paying for a one week vacation in a one room OF hotel. So I guess it is worth it in the end. I still end up taking other weeks outside of the MVC universe which are very expensive. The low cost in MFs is why my satisfaction is 90% if I ignore the $80K+ in upfront fees.


----------



## daviator (Oct 3, 2022)

TravelTime said:


> I was just giving some more thought to my comments. Maybe the real problem for having more available inventory is not ROFR. It is not cracking down on commercial use of weeks. I do not mean the occasional rentals when an owner can’t use a week.
> 
> I just looked on Redweek and there are 398 rentals at MOC, 552 rentals at Ko Olina, 407 at WKOVR, 492 at Crystal Shores, etc. To me, these are big numbers and lost inventory that they might be able to keep in the points or weeks system if they cracked down on rentals.
> 
> In the end, it is probably a combination of both factors: more buy back of attractive low priced inventory and cracking down on commercial use.


To characterize every rental on RedWeek as “commercial use” is (maybe) not an accurate characterization.

For example, I sometimes have a WKORV rental listing there, when I decide to lock off one of my units and use one side and rent the others to recoup all or part of my maintenance fees.  Doing this was touted by sales people when I bought my units and indeed it can be a good strategy.  But I wouldn’t call this ”commercial use.”

On the other hand, there are people who own a whole bunch of VOIs which are largely used as rentals.  Some of them may have tens of listings on RedWeek and elsewhere.  They’ve made a business out of their ownerships, and I’d indeed characterize that as commercial use.

I have no idea what percentage of RedWeek listings are onesy-twosey listings from owners who mostly use what they own themselves and occasionally rent something, vs. owners who have made a business out of it.  And maybe the difference is unimportant – if Marriott bans all rentals, then all of these owners are in violation.  But if they only ban “commercial use” then I think you need to figure out how to define that.

Vistana allows rental of bookings at your home resort (or resorts, in the case of Flex owners) but prohibits rental of weeks booked with StarOptions at other resorts.  But once somebody elects Abound and makes a reservation that way, I actually don’t know what’s allowed.  It sounds like you’re saying that MVC prohibits all rentals (or all “commercial use”, which isn’t necessarily the same.)


----------



## DRH90277 (Oct 3, 2022)

JIMinNC said:


> I can't argue with any of this, and customer satisfaction is key to any business's success. In their investor presentations, MVW regularly quotes customer satisfaction scores north of 95%.
> 
> As I've said repeatedly, I think acquiring attractive Trust inventory is one factor MVC considers when determining whether to reacquire inventory through ROFR, they just seem to have a maximum price they are willing to pay based on guidance from their finance people on Cost of Inventory targets.
> 
> ...



I suspect these are aggregate point values owned for a year for each resort.  Is this true?

If this is the case, then let me see what this means for an easy one like Harbour Lake.  The number above is 8,506,500 points.  This would equate to Trust ownership of about 64 yearly villas out of 312 total villas (2 Bdrm) or say 18% are in the Trust.  The math (8,506,500 points/2,570 points per week = 3,310 weeks.  So, 3,310 weeks/52 = 64 yearly villas.  Now 64 yearly villas/ 312 total annual villas at the resort = 18% in the Trust).

Keep in mind week ownership includes all weeks in a year.  Peak season weeks would vary by resort and the 18% would be lower for the most used times of the year.

Please check my approach and advise.


----------



## Dean (Oct 3, 2022)

DRH90277 said:


> I suspect these are aggregate point values owned for a year for each resort.  Is this true?
> 
> If this is the case, then let me see what this means for an easy one like Harbour Lake.  The number above is 8,506,500 points.  This would equate to Trust ownership of about 64 yearly villas out of 312 total villas (2 Bdrm) or say 18% are in the Trust.  The math (8,506,500 points/2,570 points per week = 3,310 weeks.  So, 3,310 weeks/52 = 64 yearly villas.  Now 64 yearly villas/ 312 total annual villas at the resort = 18% in the Trust).
> 
> ...


I'm not seeing where it matters.  IMO the real number would be the breakdown of the number of each season that are in the trust combined with the number of owners who are enrolled and then elect points broken down by season.  Certainly the enrolled owners might elect points after the 12 or 13 month window which would affect who gets the unit but not the overall principles.  Of course it varies  by resort depending on it's seasonality points structure and ultimate demand as well as major  swings in trust vs weeks at a given resort.  

If I rent weeks it's not because I bought to rent them but rather I feel many of my weeks are more valuable in terms of $$$ than they are for points.  In a sense it's like we tend to recommend for trading through II. I always want to be trading up in II in at least 2 of 3 areas (unit size, demand, resort quality) and preferably in all 3.  But that means that for that situation one is taking more than they are giving.  That's one of the reasons it has to be volume based and over several years because intent is a major component of a timeshare commercial restriction, esp when the system itself is renting as most do.


----------



## l0410z (Oct 3, 2022)

TravelTime said:


> My gripes with Marriott are:
> 1) They do not enforce the rules for commercial use so a large majority of the weeks for rent are being used to make a profit. Tuggers promote renting out your week and use the profit for something more cost effective. I forget all the “get rich quick” schemes I hear on TUG.
> 2) They allow desirable, low cost weeks to pass ROFR instead of buying them back. Tuggers are always bragging about what a great deal they got with weeks that passed ROFR. So why is Marriott not buying these weeks back when they are in desirable locations?



1 - What rules are not being enforced that if they were, would prevent an owner from  renting out their owner week?  Marriott just manages the property and is paid by the HOA.  Why would Marriott have a say?
2 - Based on your profile, you purchase resales.  Did you purchase them because you think you got a bad deal or a good deal?  Would you rather Marriott have exercised ROFR on them?  What you pay for a timeshare is only a small part of what a great deal is.  How you use it makes it the great deal.  Example, I purchased  a 3 br Grand Chateau.  I use it to trade and love it.   If you told me I had to only use it in Las Vegas, getting it for free would be too much to pay.

What I am really trying to under is how an owners choice of renting, using or trading impacts anyone else to the extent that one thinks they shouldn't be allowed to rent?


----------



## JIMinNC (Oct 3, 2022)

DRH90277 said:


> I suspect these are aggregate point values owned for a year for each resort.  Is this true?
> 
> If this is the case, then let me see what this means for an easy one like Harbour Lake.  The number above is 8,506,500 points.  This would equate to Trust ownership of about 64 yearly villas out of 312 total villas (2 Bdrm) or say 18% are in the Trust.  The math (8,506,500 points/2,570 points per week = 3,310 weeks.  So, 3,310 weeks/52 = 64 yearly villas.  Now 64 yearly villas/ 312 total annual villas at the resort = 18% in the Trust).
> 
> ...


Yes, the point values are the annual points assigned to the weeks in the Trust as of that date. Your math is basically correct process-wise, with the only caveat being the 2570 points you used as a denominator. That number will depend on the actual mix of weeks in the Trust. It looks like Gold weeks are worth 1950 and Platinum weeks are 2550 based on Steven Ting's spreadsheet he has online. There are also apparently Platinum Plus weeks that would raise the average, but Steven's list doesn't have that data. Based on all that, I would expect the average is less than 2570.


----------



## JIMinNC (Oct 3, 2022)

l0410z said:


> 1 - What rules are not being enforced that if they were, would prevent an owner from  renting out their owner week?  Marriott just manages the property and is paid by the HOA.  Why would Marriott have a say?
> 
> What I am really trying to under is how an owners choice of renting, using or trading impacts anyone else to the extent that one thinks they shouldn't be allowed to rent?



I don't think anyone is disputing that owners have a right to rent an owned week. The question is when do those rental activities rise to the level of being a commercial enterprise or practice. Here is what the Exchange Procedures say about that:

_*B. Residential Use and Prohibition on Commercial Use. *Accommodations, Base Exchange Benefits, Base Plus Exchange Benefits, Special Benefits, and Use Periods may not be used for any commercial purpose. This prohibition on commercial use includes, but is not limited to, any illegal activity or a pattern of occupancy, rental, leasing, or use by a Program Member that Exchange Company, in its reasonable discretion, could conclude constitutes a commercial enterprise or practice. In the event a Program Member is determined to be reserving or using the Accommodations, Base Exchange Benefits, Base Plus Exchange Benefits, Special Benefits or Use Periods for any commercial purpose Exchange Company may immediately cancel any current reservation(s) made by such Program Member and may impose such additional penalties or restrictions as determined by Exchange Company, in its sole discretion, from time to time. The restrictions of this paragraph do not apply to Exchange Company or its affiliates or designees._

That is from the Points Exchange procedures, so is not directly applicable to a weeks owner renting a week. But the terms and conditions for weeks deeds contain substantially similar language. I just don't have a PDF handy of any of our weeks documents.

I think it's common knowledge on TUG that there are some owners who own many weeks, primarily for the purposes of rentals. Maui Ocean Club and the Aruba resorts are the ones I hear mentioned the most, with maybe Grande Ocean also sometimes mentioned. How many of the rentals that appear on Redweek are from these "mega-renters"? How much do these mega-renters actually reduce availability for regular owner use? No one knows the answer, but MVC doesn't seem to care to try to enforce that provision, as some other Developers apparently have.


----------



## TravelTime (Oct 3, 2022)

daviator said:


> To characterize every rental on RedWeek as “commercial use” is (maybe) not an accurate characterization.
> 
> For example, I sometimes have a WKORV rental listing there, when I decide to lock off one of my units and use one side and rent the others to recoup all or part of my maintenance fees.  Doing this was touted by sales people when I bought my units and indeed it can be a good strategy.  But I wouldn’t call this ”commercial use.”
> 
> ...



I agree with you 100%. I think the occasional rental of owner weeks or owner points is not a violation of the commercial use policy. 

MVC points owners are allowed to rent their points and it is not a violation. I was going to ask if points owners are allowed to rent banked points. Maybe someone knows the answer.

I am not sure but I doubt people rent points out often. All most people is get a reimbursement of MFs. Points just rent for the same more or less as MFs. Not a very profitable business for most people, I suspect. Some people happen to have points that average half the MFs but I suspect that is rare. It is a great deal to rent points from owners since they rent at the price as MFs, more or less.

People who rent their weeks year after year are a different situation. I wish Marriott would come up with some kind of fair policy about this like some other timeshare companies. Just because sales touts rental as a benefit does not make it something people should buy for. We always say “if their lips move” so why should we do anything they say?


----------



## TravelTime (Oct 3, 2022)

JIMinNC said:


> I don't think anyone is disputing that owners have a right to rent an owned week. The question is when do those rental activities rise to the level of being a commercial enterprise or practice. Here is what the Exchange Procedures say about that:
> 
> _*B. Residential Use and Prohibition on Commercial Use. *Accommodations, Base Exchange Benefits, Base Plus Exchange Benefits, Special Benefits, and Use Periods may not be used for any commercial purpose. This prohibition on commercial use includes, but is not limited to, any illegal activity or a pattern of occupancy, rental, leasing, or use by a Program Member that Exchange Company, in its reasonable discretion, could conclude constitutes a commercial enterprise or practice. In the event a Program Member is determined to be reserving or using the Accommodations, Base Exchange Benefits, Base Plus Exchange Benefits, Special Benefits or Use Periods for any commercial purpose Exchange Company may immediately cancel any current reservation(s) made by such Program Member and may impose such additional penalties or restrictions as determined by Exchange Company, in its sole discretion, from time to time. The restrictions of this paragraph do not apply to Exchange Company or its affiliates or designees._
> 
> ...



Exactly what I mean. Marriott needs to enforce commercial use. Apparently, Marriott does have control over owner weeks given this policy. Vistana also has control over owner weeks since it just blatantly says no rental of StarOptions.


----------



## dioxide45 (Oct 3, 2022)

Until and unless Marriott and Vistana take a hard line like Wyndham has done, nothing will change. Most Marriott resort CC&R documents have provisions against commercial activity. The DC Exchange Procedures do also. The ability is there to transfer points and add guest names to reservations. The first step to curbing rentals is usually to charge a fee for adding a guest. This also helps fatten the company bottom line. Then they may limit the number of guest certificates for an account. Then they could take the step of Wyndham and not allow guest names to be added during certain reservation time periods. Then they could go further and start sending out certified letters to known mega renters and even small time renters.


----------



## l0410z (Oct 3, 2022)

JIMinNC said:


> That is from the Points Exchange procedures, so is not directly applicable to a weeks owner renting a week. But the terms and conditions for weeks deeds contain substantially similar language. I just don't have a PDF handy of any of our weeks documents.
> 
> I think it's common knowledge on TUG that there are some owners who own many weeks, primarily for the purposes of rentals. Maui Ocean Club and the Aruba resorts are the ones I hear mentioned the most, with maybe Grande Ocean also sometimes mentioned. How many of the rentals that appear on Redweek are from these "mega-renters"? How much do these mega-renters actually reduce availability for regular owner use? No one knows the answer, but MVC doesn't seem to care to try to enforce that provision, as some other Developers apparently have.



 I am still not sure how it would apply to the weeks program given HOA's have the say at a resort and Marriott is the management company paid by the HOA.   No need to show me the PDF, I now understand what was meant. . 


It would be interesting to know  where the line in the sand gets drawn   for what is considered commercial use.


----------



## dioxide45 (Oct 3, 2022)

l0410z said:


> I am still not sure how it would apply to the weeks program given HOA's have the say at a resort and Marriott is the management company paid by the HOA.   No need to show me the PDF, I now understand what was meant. .
> 
> 
> It would be interesting to know  where the line in the sand gets drawn   for what is considered commercial use.


Commercial use could also be defined as something completely different than renting. It could be that you can't run a barber shop from your villa while you are staying at the resort.


----------



## JIMinNC (Oct 3, 2022)

l0410z said:


> I am still not sure how it would apply to the weeks program given HOA's have the say at a resort and Marriott is the management company paid by the HOA.   No need to show me the PDF, I now understand what was meant. .


As @dioxide45 notes above, the commercial prohibition is found in the resort CC&Rs, which were written by MVC. A resort HOA could de-affiliate with MVC of course, but that's a whole 'nother can of worms.


----------



## timsi (Oct 3, 2022)

JIMinNC said:


> I'm positive because my experience as an owner has been largely positive. I have no reason to be suspicious, at least for now. If my experience changes, so will my perspective.



Some owners are very skeptical when they see asymmetric rules for different types of owners. Apparently regular owners can't rent for a profit, they have to stay in line to book their own units, they can't buy units at the best available price, the units they sell are stripped of features etc. Daily we hear from owners who are being lied to in the sales meetings. When I read the Abound rules I could see clear conflicts with the resort rules, particularly with the Bylaws at Westin Lagunamar (see the link below in case you did not read the new thread).

If what I see with the naked eye does not meet a minimum standard, why should I not be suspicious about everything else? With an inventory of 700 million dollars or so the developer manages to have around 2 billion dollars in rental and sales revenue. Good for them, that is quite an achievement I would say but I digress, the topic of the moment is about the Redweek listings.  It seems that those who have to stay up at night to book few units are a threat to the other owners but the ones who rent for hundreds of millions of dollars a year, who can make the resale features magically reappear on the contracts and can buy and book their units wholesale are not. Based on Sue's comment earlier, many have little knowledge about how much the developer owns at their resort, and they assume that " It can't be that you (I) think Marriott Vacations Worldwide flat-out owns all that inventory because they'd be on the hook for all those MF's". Really?

How strong is the exclusive right of the Lagunamar owners to compete for the entire inventory during the Home Resort Reservation Period? | Timeshare Users Group Discussion Forums (tugbbs.com)


----------



## frank808 (Oct 4, 2022)

Dean said:


> It sounds like you're looking at this more from a personal and emotional perspective while I'd look at it as more of a black and white reality perspective. The reality and legalities are that there are no guarantees or even promises of availability, any assumptions otherwise simply reflect the lack of knowledge of how a floating system works. I'd be surprised if 75% of the membership as a whole get their first choice and skeptical that 75% get anything in their top 3 choices for points Or floating weeks through it's likely better for weeks than points. Part of it is understanding realities. I'm sure TUG members do far better than the overall membership. I think you're reading too much into this. Their main goal is simply profit whether it be sales or management. If the issues you bring up affect profit sufficiently, they will address it as best they can weighing cost vs potential benefit. One of the benefits a developer has selling points is that every buyer has options and timing in mind, usually which the system can't handle and MVC knows that up front yet they will still sell to you even when they know your plans are not realistic. Statistically for example, a buyer may be looking at HHI 4th of July but most won't get it or even the week before or after. The ones that learn the system, play the game and are proactive will do better than most but at the expense of everyone else. As long as systems like Westgate, Wyndham and Bluegreen can continue to sell at retail prices for something you can get almost free privately, I don't expect MVC, DVC, Hilton or the like to be overly limited due to the concerns you raise. Remember most timeshare are bought not sold. Would any of us advise a single person off the street to buy retail, the answer is no with extremely limited and specific examples to the contrary. Once sold, MVC really cares even less as they're going to get their fees and they've already made their money on that item.
> In reality this is a series of systems linked together. Basically it's a user who owns X and uses X specific to what they own (such as a floating week) and it's limitations and if not, they are an exchanger, wether it's the FL club, elected points or trust points, etc. One of the problems with trust points is there is no home resort so they're in permanent exchange status and in many ways, one doesn't actually own anything. I know people look at it like they own across the system and should be treated the same, or almost the same, as an owner at a given resort but that is not reality IMO. Every member that moves from one category to another will affect demand along with availability so in theory the demand for each resort and option will roughly be the same before and after that person moves from one group to another (say weeks to points). But there may be some minor differences in demand as one moves from an owner to an exchanger within MVC.
> There has always been a disconnect between sales, usage and the actual legalities in place. Specific to this situation, if sales encourages purchases to rent and management labels that person a commercial rental, I would not be surprised and would feel the member should have better understood what they were getting into by reading the actual legal paperwork. I do not believe that anyone who gets to simply Chairman's club is going to be afoul of the commercial rental issue if they have any personal usage. But for those like myself, who own quite a bit more, we could easily get to that level if we routinely rented a significant portion of what we owned.


Does MVC define commercial use? I thought the language in MVC T&C states commercial use and not commercial renting. Commercial use could be stating that you cannot run a business out of the unit. Does the T&C specifically prohibit commercial renting?

Just wondering if I will get in trouble in the future when I might not use all my weeks and points in MVC. If I decide to use my Hilton or Disney timeshares, Maybe we will take 8 month cruises so will definitely have some weeks to rent out. 

Then I will have 51.5 annual MVC weeks plus DC points to rent out. Right now it is fine as we are using everything annually. Have been enjoying my stays for over decade. Though it has only been the past 10 years we are averaging 40+ weeks a year at MKO. How does MVC define residential? MVC has not said anything to me about staying 30 continuous weeks at once. Then back again a week or two later for another 20+ week stay.



Sent from my SM-N975U using Tapatalk


----------



## DRH90277 (Oct 4, 2022)

JIMinNC said:


> Yes, the point values are the annual points assigned to the weeks in the Trust as of that date. Your math is basically correct process-wise, with the only caveat being the 2570 points you used as a denominator. That number will depend on the actual mix of weeks in the Trust. It looks like Gold weeks are worth 1950 and Platinum weeks are 2550 based on Steven Ting's spreadsheet he has online. There are also apparently Platinum Plus weeks that would raise the average, but Steven's list doesn't have that data. Based on all that, I would expect the average is less than 2570.



The number is close enough and far more accurate than your assertions about how great the MVC program is from the inside.  Confidence in the MVC program is eroding for many of us.  And, Abound is just a distraction.

What if we called the program "Mirage" while awaiting delivery of "Abound."


----------



## Dean (Oct 4, 2022)

frank808 said:


> Does MVC define commercial use? I thought the language in MVC T&C states commercial use and not commercial renting. Commercial use could be stating that you cannot run a business out of the unit. Does the T&C specifically prohibit commercial renting?
> 
> Just wondering if I will get in trouble in the future when I might not use all my weeks and points in MVC. If I decide to use my Hilton or Disney timeshares, Maybe we will take 8 month cruises so will definitely have some weeks to rent out.
> 
> ...


Jim listed the information from the exchange procedures in post #125 and it does include renting.  Normally timeshares make these things vague on purpose, DVC for example, included working that the definition could be generated later.  Generally it's things like volume, repetitive activity, websites and the like.  But they could easily decide an individual had stepped over the line renting multiple high demand weeks and shut them down.  One's only recourse at that point would be to exit totally or in part, use personally or undertake a legal battle.  The legal paperwork from all resorts I've seen also include a statement that the ownership is for personal use although that is more of an acknowledge by the buyer that they do not expect to profit by renting or selling rather than a ban and required by state law in many cases (inc FL), they can use it against the member when looking at this issue.  Most systems have taken some measures to limit rental activity including DVC, Bluegreen and Wyndham.  Personally I think they should have some limit that's out of bounds but it would likely only affect a handful of members.  Bluegreen and DVC have approached this simply by relatively strict volume limits, in BG's case, simply by limiting volume completely regardless of rental or personal use.  Realize they have multiple reasons to do so such as their own rental business and members complaining about availability.  For most members it'd look like they've done something if they put up road blocks around this issue but in reality it wouldn't make much if any difference.  

Specific to your and my situation, I think we could easily be afoul of this issue if we had several years where we were mostly renting.


----------



## frank808 (Oct 4, 2022)

Making them vague would be a problem for the entity that wrote the T&C. Courts would not look too kindly and rule in favor of MVC if it came before the courts. Now this is not legal advice, just my opinion. 

Have discussed the DVC T&C regarding commercial use with a few Florida licensed lawyers. They have concurred that if push came to shove and a lawsuit was brought by an owner locked out for commercial renting clause (which there is none) DVC would have a very tough time to win. Akin to telling the court "Sorry your honor but the T&C we wrote does not state specifically commercial renting is not allowed but that was our intent." DVC also states in the T&C that buyers will be at a distinct disadvantage if renting out their ownership interests. 

There are a couple cases, that I know of, where DVC sent cease and desist letters to mega renters. Even froze their accounts and started an investigation for commercial renting. End result was DVC unfroze the accounts and let it be when owners legal team got involved. DVC then went on a different attack and ended up freezing accounts by saying entities were over the 8000 point limit for one owner. DVC ended up linking all these entities controlled by one owner even though they were seperate legal entities. From what I know, one owner was so spooked that he is not renting and liquidated his points(resale prices where so high that it also made sense). 

Will have to look into the T&C for some of my ownership weeks to see what it says specifically about commercial renting.

Sent from my SM-N975U using Tapatalk


----------



## JIMinNC (Oct 4, 2022)

DRH90277 said:


> The number is close enough and far more accurate than your assertions about how great the MVC program is from the inside.  Confidence in the MVC program is eroding for many of us.  And, Abound is just a distraction.
> 
> What if we called the program "Mirage" while awaiting delivery of "Abound."



If you want to talk numbers, then let's use all of the numbers. Of course, we don't _*have*_ all of the numbers, but we can at least make some educated guesses and get a better view than just looking at part of the numbers.

First, given that Gold is 1950 and Platinum is 2550 at Harbor Lake, the number you should use for the denominator in your calculation should be some weighted average between those two numbers. At Harbor Lake, 20 weeks are Gold and 32 are Platinum. If we assume the weeks in the Trust match that distribution (which it may not, but we don't know what the real number is) then the weighted average point value per week would be 2322. So using your same methodology from post #121, 8,506,500 points/2,322 points per week = 3,663 weeks. So, 3,663 weeks/52 = 70 yearly villas. Now 70 yearly villas/ 312 total annual villas at the resort = 22% in the Trust.

So, our starting point is 22% of Harbor Lake might be in the Trust, but that was in December 2016, almost six years ago when the Trust contained 378 million points. How many Harbor Lake weeks have been added to the Trust since then? MVW said during their Investor Day in June that they average repurchasing 10,000 to 12,000 weeks every year. How many of those were from Harbor Lake? If you look at the MVC Trust annual budget and look at total assessments and calculate the number of beneficial interests (250 points each) that represents, you come up with an estimated number of points in the Trust now of around 600 million. So, could 30% or more of Harbor Lake weeks now be in the Trust? That doesn't seem to be too much of a stretch, but who knows?

But to address total availability for Points use, we also need to add those weeks Harbor Lake owners elect for points that then become available for booking with points through the Exchange. Obviously we don't know that number either, but when you start adding up the likely additions since 2016, plus owner elections, the total number of Harbor Lake weeks available for Points reservations, could easily approach the 40-50% range. When you consider that MVW says that about 40% of their owners still don't use points, getting a lot more than 40% to 50% of the weeks of *any* resort in the Trust/Exchange might be tough.

Finally, back to one non-numerical point - you mentioned my "assertions about how great the MVC program is". Those assertions are based 100% on my direct, personal experience. But as I've stated, my experience may have been totally positive only because we *don't *have any need or desire to book high demand summer reservations. If we did need to use points to book summer in HHI, for example, maybe we wouldn't be as happy. I don't  know. But the way I look at it, that's where deeded weeks come in. What I've learned most in my years on TUG is, if there is somewhere you must go during high demand season, buy a week there. Don't count on any exchange system - either weeks based or points based - to get you there. That's what we did with our two EOY Hawaii weeks. We didn't want to count on points or II trades to get February in Maui and Kauai every odd year, so we bought EOY resale weeks there. We bought the HHI condo I'm in right now because we want to come here anytime we want to. You also said that's what you did with your MVC weeks purchases in Myrtle Beach and Hilton Head - you bought legacy weeks in your favorite destinations. Points have their benefits for traveling to a variety of places, but it's hard to beat owning legacy weeks for those hard-to-get locations you just *have *to go to.


----------



## JIMinNC (Oct 4, 2022)

frank808 said:


> Just wondering if I will get in trouble in the future when I might not use all my weeks and points in MVC. If I decide to use my Hilton or Disney timeshares, Maybe we will take 8 month cruises so will definitely have some weeks to rent out.





Dean said:


> Specific to your and my situation, I think we could easily be afoul of this issue if we had several years where we were mostly renting.



I would think both of you guys should have a reasonable defense if Marriott were ever to challenge you on the commercial enterprise clause, because in many/most years my impression is that you both use many/most of your weeks. I would think the folks with the most to risk would be those who may own a bunch of weeks but who rarely use them themselves or only use a small number, always renting out the vast majority. I would also think that someone who always rents a couple of their weeks to offset their fees on the weeks they do use would not be viewed as a commercial enterprise either.


----------



## Dean (Oct 4, 2022)

frank808 said:


> Making them vague would be a problem for the entity that wrote the T&C. Courts would not look too kindly and rule in favor of MVC if it came before the courts. Now this is not legal advice, just my opinion.
> 
> Have discussed the DVC T&C regarding commercial use with a few Florida licensed lawyers. They have concurred that if push came to shove and a lawsuit was brought by an owner locked out for commercial renting clause (which there is none) DVC would have a very tough time to win. Akin to telling the court "Sorry your honor but the T&C we wrote does not state specifically commercial renting is not allowed but that was our intent." DVC also states in the T&C that buyers will be at a distinct disadvantage if renting out their ownership interests.
> 
> ...


In DVC's case they reserved the right to define later and have since added more definition.  Many of those initially caught by DVC bailed and did not challenge.  In the absence of a legal verdict, it difficult to say anything else.  I know what the DVC legal paperwork says and I think they could easily defend it for egregious situations, not so much for smaller fish.  But they, like MVC, are the 600# gorilla rightly or wrongly.


JIMinNC said:


> I would think both of you guys should have a reasonable defense if Marriott were ever to challenge you on the commercial enterprise clause, because in many/most years my impression is that you both use many/most of your weeks. I would think the folks with the most to risk would be those who may own a bunch of weeks but who rarely use them themselves or only use a small number, always renting out the vast majority. I would also think that someone who always rents a couple of their weeks to offset their fees on the weeks they do use would not be viewed as a commercial enterprise either.


Maybe but inherently I'd prefer to avoid the situation both because I do feel that one is is running a rental business, by any REASONABLE standard, is being inappropriate and should be curtailed.  But I also feel strongly that we should have options when the need arises.  Ultimately it comes down to intent for the most part.  I am always amused by those who feel any rental for a profit or a high demand week is commercial.


----------



## SueDonJ (Oct 4, 2022)

timsi said:


> ... Based on Sue's comment earlier, many have little knowledge about how much the developer owns at their resort, and they assume that " It can't be that you (I) think Marriott Vacations Worldwide flat-out owns all that inventory because they'd be on the hook for all those MF's". Really?



Yes, really.

If you're so convinced that Marriott "owns" up to a quarter of the Weeks inventory at every resort, then show your work. Understand, though, that the inventory that's been conveyed to the DC/Abound Trust is not flat-out owned by Marriott in the same way that Weeks can be owned (either never sold or reacquired) by Marriott. DC/Abound conveyances are "owned" by the Trust and correlate to the DC/Abound Trust Points that are sold as well as to the usage rights of Trust Members. If you're assuming that DC/Abound conveyances are ALL eligible to be pulled out and rented by Marriott for the company's sole revenue benefit (or used in any other manner for Marriott's sole benefit,) you're wrong. You're also wrong if you're assuming that Marriott is on the hook for the MF's for all those conveyed Weeks - DC/Abound Trust Members pay per-point MF's which are based on the same Annual Budgets that determine the Weeks inventory MF's, collectively, along with the administration fees of the Trust.

Somewhere in all of your posts you made a comment that Marriott is not transparent about which Weeks intervals have been conveyed to the DC/Abound Trust. In fact, that information is available to the public via a review of the filings at the Orange County FL public records. @dioxide45 used to maintain this TUG thread - Recorded Trust Documents - and you're as free as anyone to pick up that mantle and run with it. Just use "Marriott Ownership Resorts, Inc*" as your search term and go one-by-one to pull out the trust conveyances.

* I think another of your questions in all these posts questioned what "Marriott Ownership Resorts, Inc" designated? It's referenced in most governing docs as "MORI" and defined as "The Developer" in most/all of the Weeks Time Sharing Plans.

You've also asked quite a few other questions for which the answers can be found in the individual resorts' Public Offering Statements. Just want to let you know that I'm not ignoring the questions you've asked me but I'm waiting to answer until I have the time to do a thorough search. It's easy to understand the delay once you know that each resort's POS can be hundreds of pages long - for example, Barony Beach Club's consists of 325+ pages.


----------



## SueDonJ (Oct 4, 2022)

l0410z said:


> I am still not sure how it would apply to the weeks program given *HOA's have the say at a resort* and Marriott is the management company paid by the HOA.   No need to show me the PDF, I now understand what was meant.


This is far too basic a claim, considering that the Management Agreement governing docs grant Marriott extensive rights - and responsibilities - as to how inventory and even the resorts themselves are managed.



l0410z said:


> ... It would be interesting to know  where the line in the sand gets drawn   for what is considered commercial use.


I think if ever Marriott (MVW) decides to comprehensively limit owner rentals via the vague "commercial activity" language in the docs they'll do it the way Disney (DVC) does, by putting a number to how many owner reservations can have guests' names added to them. But until/unless they decide to implement wholesale limitations we won't hear anything related to rentals from them. I'm not totally convinced that they won't at some point selectively-but-rarely go after the largest owner rental businesses, but I don't believe that they'll make public their intent or determination to do so.

I'd be in favor of either mechanism to limit owner rentals - I don't believe my piddling rentals would be caught up by either but if it happens, c'est la vie. It's more important to me that owners have reservation (and unit placement) preference over renters.


----------



## timsi (Oct 4, 2022)

SueDonJ said:


> Yes, really.
> 
> If you're so convinced that Marriott "owns" up to a quarter of the Weeks inventory at every resort, then show your work. Understand, though, that the inventory that's been conveyed to the DC/Abound Trust is not flat-out owned by Marriott in the same way that Weeks can be owned (either never sold or reacquired) by Marriott. DC/Abound conveyances are "owned" by the Trust and correlate to the DC/Abound Trust Points that are sold as well as to the usage rights of Trust Members. If you're assuming that DC/Abound conveyances are ALL eligible to be pulled out and rented by Marriott for the company's sole revenue benefit (or used in any other manner for Marriott's sole benefit,) you're wrong. You're also wrong if you're assuming that Marriott is on the hook for the MF's for all those conveyed Weeks - DC/Abound Trust Members pay per-point MF's which are based on the same Annual Budgets that determine the Weeks inventory MF's, collectively, along with the administration fees of the Trust.
> 
> ...


I said “up to” because at the resort I can look at it is close to 25%. It seems many owners do not know the percentage owned by the developer. Sue, if you do not know (yet) the situation for Barony Beach (with the access you have), how could I know for all the +90 resorts? I think it is reasonable to assume it is not as low as some may believe, especially since Marriott disclosed an inventory of about 700 million dollars, and I assume it refers to the acquisition cost which is very low (ROFR, foreclosure etc) .

You are making several comments about the Trust inventory owned by the developer, I was referring more on a resort-by-resort basis. This is at Westin Lagunamar,  the 2021 budget was about 22.8 million dollars. Don't you interpret that they own close to 25% of the resort?
"NOTE 9 - RELATED PARTY TRANSACTIONS
During the years ended December 31, 2021 and 2020, *the amount of maintenance fees assessed to the Seller was $5,396,116* and $4,804,051, respectively. "

I actually do not think Marriott is interested in holding too many trust points at any given time, the MF are higher than the platinum weeks, it is much easier to make a rental profit by owning the platinum weeks directly. I think they will only want to hold the trust points that they can sell in the near to medium term.

I did not say that Marriott was not transparent about the deeds conveyed to the trust. I was replying to @JIMinNC who mentioned an aggregate number and I said it was not relevant in that context (the quality of the inventory) unless he knew the breakdown by season, which would be a lot more work, he would have to check every notice of conveyance for that resort.

What I did say instead was that we did not know a) the inventory acquired by the developer through ROFR, foreclosures and from the HOAs b) the inventory kept by the developer for its rental business; all we know is c) the inventory conveyed to the trust. If Marriott conveys to the trust 50 deeds low season and 25 deeds high season, you do not know if that is all they had or if they had acquired 50 high – 50 low, kept 25 high season deeds for their rental business and gave the rest to the trust (or whatever other combination you may prefer).

Going back to the commercial activities, I was only referring to Westin Lagunamar where the definition in the Bylaw is restrictive about who the Founder member is and who can perform commercial activities. I will not repeat the details, they are in one of my previous comments. I do not know about the Marriott resorts and I have no reason to doubt what you said about “MORI”.  Even if the developer and all affiliates are able to make a case, they are indeed permitted to run a rental business (unlike the other owners), I find it odd if the ones dividing the inventory may have a chance to book their own units first.


----------



## TravelTime (Oct 4, 2022)

dioxide45 said:


> Until and unless Marriott and Vistana take a hard line like Wyndham has done, nothing will change. Most Marriott resort CC&R documents have provisions against commercial activity. The DC Exchange Procedures do also. The ability is there to transfer points and add guest names to reservations. The first step to curbing rentals is usually to charge a fee for adding a guest. This also helps fatten the company bottom line. Then they may limit the number of guest certificates for an account. Then they could take the step of Wyndham and not allow guest names to be added during certain reservation time periods. Then they could go further and start sending out certified letters to known mega renters and even small time renters.



The hierarchy of how they manage rentals makes sense. I do not think they should eliminate occasional owner rentals. I think adding a fee for guest rentals is a great step. Maybe they can give a certain number of guest rental certificates per year. That would totally curb commercial rentals. I consider commercial rentals to be any time an owner repeatedly makes a profit on renting out their unit. Some people buy just to make a profit.


----------



## TravelTime (Oct 4, 2022)

dioxide45 said:


> Commercial use could also be defined as something completely different than renting. It could be that you can't run a barber shop from your villa while you are staying at the resort.



Not sure this matters. Who cares what someone does inside the unit unless it bothers other people or is illegal. It does not hurt anyone. Unless you own many weeks, you would not be running a business from a timeshare unit.


----------



## TravelTime (Oct 4, 2022)

frank808 said:


> Does MVC define commercial use? I thought the language in MVC T&C states commercial use and not commercial renting. Commercial use could be stating that you cannot run a business out of the unit. Does the T&C specifically prohibit commercial renting?
> 
> Just wondering if I will get in trouble in the future when I might not use all my weeks and points in MVC. If I decide to use my Hilton or Disney timeshares, Maybe we will take 8 month cruises so will definitely have some weeks to rent out.
> 
> ...



You are using your weeks as an owner so why would they say anything about that? I guess if you have 51 weeks at MVC that you do not use anymore it would be awfully hard to rent them out annually. That sounds like a full time job!


----------



## Pamplemousse (Oct 4, 2022)

TravelTime said:


> MVC points owners are allowed to rent their points and it is not a violation. I was going to ask if points owners are allowed to rent banked points. Maybe someone knows the answer.



You can only “move” points once- banking counts as a move so you can’t rent then and have them go into someone else’s account.
You could book a reservation for someone and rent that.


----------



## SueDonJ (Oct 4, 2022)

TravelTime said:


> Not sure this matters. Who cares what someone does inside the unit unless it bothers other people or is illegal. It does not hurt anyone. Unless you own many weeks, you would not be running a business from a timeshare unit.


I think it's far more risky for an owner to run a business *out of* timeshare units than a business of renting out their usage. Owners are granted the rights to rent out their usage in the governing docs but those same docs expressly state in a number of different places and using similar language that the units are for "residential purposes only." It's understandable because if Marriott allowed businesses to be run out of the units they'd effectively be a party to whatever the business might be *and* could potentially be held legally responsible if problems arise with such businesses.


----------



## dioxide45 (Oct 4, 2022)

TravelTime said:


> Not sure this matters. Who cares what someone does inside the unit unless it bothers other people or is illegal. It does not hurt anyone. Unless you own many weeks, you would not be running a business from a timeshare unit.


My comment was more of a joke about how undefined "commercial use" is, Theoretically though, say someone was running a barber shop out of their unit. That would mean more traffic to the resort and more traffic in and out of the unit. Thus you also don't have any real knowledge of the people that are coming or going. Perhaps someone is running an import/export business. That too is a problem. The resort and HOA should care what someone does inside their unit, at least to a degree.


----------



## timsi (Oct 4, 2022)

JIMinNC said:


> I can't argue with any of this, and customer satisfaction is key to any business's success. In their investor presentations, MVW regularly quotes customer satisfaction scores north of 95%.
> 
> As I've said repeatedly, I think acquiring attractive Trust inventory is one factor MVC considers when determining whether to reacquire inventory through ROFR, they just seem to have a maximum price they are willing to pay based on guidance from their finance people on Cost of Inventory targets.
> 
> ...


As a trust owner, do you get in your annual report a detailed view of the inventory?


----------



## timsi (Oct 4, 2022)

frank808 said:


> Making them vague would be a problem for the entity that wrote the T&C. Courts would not look too kindly and rule in favor of MVC if it came before the courts. Now this is not legal advice, just my opinion.


The prevailing view on Tugg seems to be that the developer can get away with almost anything when the rules are vague, can be easily changed and they often mention things like the interpretation is in their "sole discretion".


----------



## TravelTime (Oct 4, 2022)

Pamplemousse said:


> You can only “move” points once- banking counts as a move so you can’t rent then and have them go into someone else’s account.
> You could book a reservation for someone and rent that.



Great - thank you for this info!


----------



## TravelTime (Oct 4, 2022)

SueDonJ said:


> I think it's far more risky for an owner to run a business *out of* timeshare units than a business of renting out their usage. Owners are granted the rights to rent out their usage in the governing docs but those same docs expressly state in a number of different places and using similar language that the units are for "residential purposes only." It's understandable because if Marriott allowed businesses to be run out of the units they'd effectively be a party to whatever the business might be *and* could potentially be held legally responsible if problems arise with such businesses.



Good point. It is a vacation unit, not a business unit.


----------



## TravelTime (Oct 4, 2022)

dioxide45 said:


> My comment was more of a joke about how undefined "commercial use" is, Theoretically though, say someone was running a barber shop out of their unit. That would mean more traffic to the resort and more traffic in and out of the unit. Thus you also don't have any real knowledge of the people that are coming or going. Perhaps someone is running an import/export business. That too is a problem. The resort and HOA should care what someone does inside their unit, at least to a degree.



I did not think of this. I was thinking of a professional job but that is not running a business.


----------



## SueDonJ (Oct 4, 2022)

timsi said:


> The prevailing view on Tugg seems to be that the developer can get away with almost anything when the rules are vague, can be easily changed and they often mention things like the interpretation is in their "sole discretion".


You keep saying that the rules are vague and Marriott takes advantage of that, to the owners' detriment, in every which way possible. But you don't seem to have any MVW Public Offering Statements in which the rules are explained in detail, and you haven't proven any instances of Marriott mismanagement. Until you do, your escalating suspicion can't be taken seriously.

As for any prevailing view on TUG, you haven't been on TUG long enough to have discerned one! Yep, those of us who have read the POS that came with our timeshare purchases are fairly certain that there is far more protection in them for the developers/managers than for owners. But that doesn't mean we don't care about our ownerships or wouldn't bother questioning the developers/managers if blatant mismanagement were happening. Contrary to your insulting insinuation, it isn't that we're ignorant of our rights or how our timeshares should/do function - it's that we're cognizant of the facts that 1) the developers/managers *also* have rights and 2) them acting in ways that protect their rights/business does not automatically equate to the owners losing theirs.


----------



## vol_90 (Oct 4, 2022)

dioxide45 said:


> My comment was more of a joke about how undefined "commercial use" is, Theoretically though, say someone was running a barber shop out of their unit. That would mean more traffic to the resort and more traffic in and out of the unit. Thus you also don't have any real knowledge of the people that are coming or going. Perhaps someone is running an import/export business. That too is a problem. The resort and HOA should care what someone does inside their unit, at least to a degree.


May have to look at banning you for commercial use.  Spending too much time running Destination Timeshare from Timeshare Units 

One another note, I do believe many here are underestimating how difficult it is to "profit" from timeshares and there cannot be many mega-renters as the initial cost, maintenance fees, profit margins and payback is challenging with many better investment options out there.  As of today we would likely be considered a mega renter.  This is because we are accumulating a retirement timeshare portfolio while still working, have an income to support the purchases but limited by the number of vacation days per year.  We still use ~12 weeks per year but the rest are used looking for high point value, high demand weeks to cover maintenance fees and yes profit.  We expect to reduce our renting activities in 2025


----------



## timsi (Oct 4, 2022)

SueDonJ said:


> You keep saying that the rules are vague and Marriott takes advantage of that, to the owners' detriment, in every which way possible. But you don't seem to have any MVW Public Offering Statements in which the rules are explained in detail, and you haven't proven any instances of Marriott mismanagement. Until you do, your escalating suspicion can't be taken seriously.
> 
> As for any prevailing view on TUG, you haven't been on TUG long enough to have discerned one! Yep, those of us who have read the POS that came with our timeshare purchases are fairly certain that there is far more protection in them for the developers/managers than for owners. But that doesn't mean we don't care about our ownerships or wouldn't bother questioning the developers/managers if blatant mismanagement were happening. Contrary to your insulting insinuation, it isn't that we're ignorant of our rights or how our timeshares should/do function - it's that we're cognizant of the fact that the developers/managers *also* have rights.


I never insinuated that you or others do not how your ownerships work (I know the opposite to be true) but it does seem many have overlooked the rental business of the developer and how it may impact the inventory because in the end they are also the ones in charge with the reservation system. For Lagunamar I put the numbers of the inventory owned by the developer (my understanding). I do not think I have seen similar comments about any other resort, but I may be wrong.


Concerning how vague some rules are, I guess you have not looked at the Abound Exchange Procedures in detail, it is 33 pages long and *"sole discretion" appears 64 times*.

When it comes to the inventory, *"Exchange Company shall have the right to forecast anticipated reservations and use of the Accommodations and is authorized to demand balance, reserve, deposit, or rent the Accommodations for the purpose of facilitating the use or future use of the Accommodations or other benefits made available to Program Members through the Program in its sole discretion".*

Maybe you can explain how exactly this  is going to play out. Why do they need to anticipate, demand balance or rent when the deposits and the bookings are supposed to match perfectly and, we are told, not affect any week of inventory for the resort owners who will choose not to deposit in Abound. Why does it have to be in their sole discretion? If this is not written to avoid any accountability, I do not know what it is. I can find a lot more examples if you want.


----------



## timsi (Oct 4, 2022)

dioxide45 said:


> My comment was more of a joke about how undefined "commercial use" is, Theoretically though, say someone was running a barber shop out of their unit. That would mean more traffic to the resort and more traffic in and out of the unit. Thus you also don't have any real knowledge of the people that are coming or going. Perhaps someone is running an import/export business. That too is a problem. The resort and HOA should care what someone does inside their unit, at least to a degree.


A barber shop or worse, a massage parlor.


----------



## JIMinNC (Oct 4, 2022)

timsi said:


> As a trust owner, do you get in your annual report a detailed view of the inventory?



No. Just the annual budget income/expense statements that are used to approve the annual budget and annual assessment amounts.


----------



## winger (Oct 5, 2022)

timsi said:


> A barber shop or worse, a massage parlor.


Oh similar type of 'business' opened up at a brand new condo complex in an up and coming area where we lived before. Ladies coming and going, with lots of guy 'friends' visiting at all times of the day. And so this with four blocks of police HQ!


----------



## timsi (Oct 5, 2022)

SueDonJ said:


> You keep saying that the rules are vague and Marriott takes advantage of that, to the owners' detriment, in every which way possible. But you don't seem to have any MVW Public Offering Statements in which the rules are explained in detail, and you haven't proven any instances of Marriott mismanagement. Until you do, your escalating suspicion can't be taken seriously.



Are the rules vague or in conflict with other rules? Let's dive a bit deeper. 

To demonstrate how well defined are the Abound rules, can _you_ say with certainty that a deposit into Abound made by a WKV owner in October 2023 hasn’t _already_ altered the inventory available few months before (in March 2023) to the resort owners who want to reserve a March 2024 week? In March 2023, 12 months before check in, a Marriott owner who uses banked points from 2022 can have access to the March 2024 inventory based on rights “borrowed” from WKV owners who have not even deposited yet and have 8 more months to do so. Remember, Abound would request inventory from Vistana based on ”anticipated future demand” and it is in its “sole discretion”. Surgical precision, no less.

How is this not in conflict with the Vistana rule: “The Home Reservation Period must permit a VOI Owner to request a reservation, without competition from anyone who does not* own *a Vacation Ownership Interest for a Vacation Unit that is the same type and season as the VOI Owner’s unit type and season”. You notice you have to own the VOI, not just to have the right to reserve the period or other rights that Abound may claim would be transmitted with a deposit.


----------



## CPNY (Oct 5, 2022)

timsi said:


> Are the rules vague or in conflict with other rules? Let's dive a bit deeper.
> 
> To demonstrate how well defined are the Abound rules, can _you_ say with certainty that a deposit into Abound made by a WKV owner in October 2023 hasn’t _already_ altered the inventory available few months before (in March 2023) to the resort owners who want to reserve a March 2024 week? In March 2023, 12 months before check in, a Marriott owner who uses banked points from 2022 can have access to the March 2024 inventory based on rights “borrowed” from WKV owners who have not even deposited yet and have 8 more months to do so. Remember, Abound would request inventory from Vistana based on ”anticipated future demand” and it is in its “sole discretion”. Surgical precision, no less.
> 
> How is this not in conflict with the Vistana rule: “The Home Reservation Period must permit a VOI Owner to request a reservation, without competition from anyone who does not* own *a Vacation Ownership Interest for a Vacation Unit that is the same type and season as the VOI Owner’s unit type and season”. You notice you have to own the VOI, not just to have the right to reserve the period or other rights that Abound may claim would be transmitted with a deposit.


The anticipated future demand verbiage has been in the CCR’s well before Abound. I believe they can take inventory to put into Interval for anticipated demand. IIRC this takes place at 8 months, but I’m not certain. I’m assuming this anticipated demand is because Vistana owners have until 12/31 of that use year to bank in interval. 

If Vistana inventory is put into Abound Exchange directly by an owner converting their unit before their home resort period and Marriott waits until 8 months to fund the Abound exchange based on anticipated demand then no rules have been broken. However, it has been stated that a vistana owner must elect to convert in order for a vistana unit to show up in Abound, so are we sure that Marriott will even fund the abound exchange in anticipation? If they over estimate and more vistana units are in Abound than Vistana owners that actually converted, then I’d say rules have been broken. Or at the very least, Marriott just flat out lied. 

I understand your concern with regard to this verbiage. It is vague and allows Marriott to do what they want with inventory and use the “anticipated demand” as a reason to put a bit more into Abound than leaving in the VSN. But I wouldn’t worry too much yet, I’d wait to see what home resort period inventory brings before being concerned. I’d be more concerned with VSN inventory at 8 months. That may be decimated

We are seeing so much availability in the VSN at 8 months and less this past year. This is because Marriott is taking less inventory for their rental business and making it available to owners due to the COVID backup of star options. This will not continue and in the next year and beyond, inventory in the VSN will be much more competitive as it was pre COVID. Many will blame Abound, but in reality, it will be Marriott funding it’s rental business. This is why I don’t mind owners who are mega renters. Marriott themselves are the ultimate mega renter. Why is it ok for them to be a mega renter but not an owner who shelled out a ton of money to buy weeks/points?


----------



## timsi (Oct 5, 2022)

CPNY said:


> The anticipated future demand verbiage has been in the CCR’s well before Abound. I believe they can take inventory to put into Interval for anticipated demand. IIRC this takes place at 8 months, but I’m not certain. I’m assuming this anticipated demand is because Vistana owners have until 12/31 of that use year to bank in interval.
> 
> If Vistana inventory is put into Abound Exchange directly by an owner converting their unit before their home resort period and Marriott waits until 8 months to fund the Abound exchange based on anticipated demand then no rules have been broken. However, it has been stated that a vistana owner must elect to convert in order for a vistana unit to show up in Abound, so are we sure that Marriott will even fund the abound exchange in anticipation? If they over estimate and more vistana units are in Abound than Vistana owners that actually converted, then I’d say rules have been broken. Or at the very least, Marriott just flat out lied.
> 
> ...


Did you notice the clever verbiage? Abound doesn’t merely have to anticipate _deposits_, anticipating _demand_ is good enough to ask for more inventory during the home resort reservation period. In practice, if they allocate to Abound 100 units at 12 months and they are booked right away, that could be evidence they are in demand and good enough to ask Vistana for more units! This gives them such broad powers beyond anyone’s control, all done internally and without any public visibility, I do not see how they can claim this is not in violation of the Home Resort Reservation Period rule.


----------



## Dean (Oct 5, 2022)

timsi said:


> Are the rules vague or in conflict with other rules? Let's dive a bit deeper.
> 
> To demonstrate how well defined are the Abound rules, can _you_ say with certainty that a deposit into Abound made by a WKV owner in October 2023 hasn’t _already_ altered the inventory available few months before (in March 2023) to the resort owners who want to reserve a March 2024 week? In March 2023, 12 months before check in, a Marriott owner who uses banked points from 2022 can have access to the March 2024 inventory based on rights “borrowed” from WKV owners who have not even deposited yet and have 8 more months to do so. Remember, Abound would request inventory from Vistana based on ”anticipated future demand” and it is in its “sole discretion”. Surgical precision, no less.
> 
> How is this not in conflict with the Vistana rule: “The Home Reservation Period must permit a VOI Owner to request a reservation, without competition from anyone who does not* own *a Vacation Ownership Interest for a Vacation Unit that is the same type and season as the VOI Owner’s unit type and season”. You notice you have to own the VOI, not just to have the right to reserve the period or other rights that Abound may claim would be transmitted with a deposit.


Anticipated demand is normal for such situations including reservations, rentals and even II deposits.  It guards against last minute decisions affecting the systems as dramatically and allows for better overall planning.  We have to trust they don't do so beyond the limits of what will end up being needed in the end and they don't take all the best spots up front.  I can understand concern in this area but haven't seen evidence MVC is abusing this option historically.  Ultimately we don't have any way of checking up on it though.  

Am I understanding your point on reservation for MX that you feel the rights to those weeks cannot be transferred to MVC by election of points by those members and the potential reservations for any remaining weeks cannot be made during the priority period?  That would basically leave weeks sitting there unused during that time frame.  From what you posted on the thread you referenced above, I do not think one can definitely make that statement if this is what you're saying.  In addition, it's extremely likely there is wording in the documents that says the management company has complete control over the reservation process.


----------



## JIMinNC (Oct 5, 2022)

CPNY said:


> This is why I don’t mind owners who are mega renters. Marriott themselves are the ultimate mega renter. Why is it ok for them to be a mega renter but not an owner who shelled out a ton of money to buy weeks/points?


The obvious answer to your question is because the program terms and conditions are clear that the developer/program manager has the explicit right to rent inventory they either build or reacquire in some way, until it is resold. The developer/program manager can't use their inventory to take a vacation. Rental (or using the inventory for preview packages to boost sales) is how they can generate a return on that invested capital until they convert it into a sale.

On the other hand, while owners who purchase VOIs are allowed to rent or use, they are expressly prohibited by the CCRs from running anything that could reasonably be construed as a commercial enterprise. So a mega renter who rarely, if ever, uses most of the weeks they own would clearly be running afoul of the rules - if MVC chose to enforce those prohibitions. I don't rent my ownership, but I have no issue with owners who do so when they can't use their week or to offset their fees on other weeks they use. In those cases, the rental can reasonably be construed as being incidental to their primary purpose of owning for vacations.

Admittedly, all the information we know about the existence of mega renters is anecdotal, with the possible exception of a handful of TUGgers who are specifically known to own a lot of weeks primarily for rental purposes. So how big of a problem is this practice, *really?* We don't truly know. All I know is there is a perception among owners in Maui and Aruba that it does increase competition for prime weeks and views. The reason we Maui owners are often more concerned with mega renters than the weeks MVC rents, is there usually seems to be a lot more prime Maui weeks available for rent on Redweek than there is on Marriott.com.


----------



## timsi (Oct 5, 2022)

Dean said:


> Anticipated demand is normal for such situations including reservations, rentals and even II deposits.  It guards against last minute decisions affecting the systems as dramatically and allows for better overall planning.  We have to trust they don't do so beyond the limits of what will end up being needed in the end and they don't take all the best spots up front.  I can understand concern in this area but haven't seen evidence MVC is abusing this option historically.  Ultimately we don't have any way of checking up on it though.
> 
> Am I understanding your point on reservation for MX that you feel the rights to those weeks cannot be transferred to MVC by election of points by those members and the potential reservations for any remaining weeks cannot be made during the priority period?  That would basically leave weeks sitting there unused during that time frame.  From what you posted on the thread you referenced above, I do not think one can definitely make that statement if this is what you're saying.  In addition, it's extremely likely there is wording in the documents that says the management company has complete control over the reservation process.


We must look at the existing rules, not just at what is convenient for the developer and what suits their business model. A simple principle is that new rules cannot conflict with the existing ones. If they do not like the existing rules, they can go through the regular processes and change them. If they can’t even do that when they are building a new program, I do not see how they can ask anyone for trust, especially knowing what is happening in the sales meetings. Sales, inventory management, their own rentals, exchange services are all in the hands the same company.

The rules are in place to protect owners (the little protection we have left). No, it is not normal to base the inventory on “demand” if that conflicts with other rules, but they can “anticipate” all the demand they want when the home resort reservation period ends.


----------



## Fasttr (Oct 5, 2022)

timsi said:


> We must look at the existing rules, not just at what is convenient for the developer and what suits their business model. A simple principle is that new rules cannot conflict with the existing ones. If they do not like the existing rules, they can go through the regular processes and change them. If they can’t even do that when they are building a new program, I do not see how they can ask anyone for trust, especially knowing what is happening in the sales meetings. Sales, inventory management, their own rentals, exchange services are all in the hands the same company.
> 
> The rules are in place to protect owners (the little protection we have left). No, it is not normal to base the inventory on “demand” if that conflicts with other rules, but they can “anticipate” all the demand they want when the home resort reservation period ends.


What’s your end game?   Just whine about it here, or do you have plans beyond that?


----------



## timsi (Oct 5, 2022)

JIMinNC said:


> Admittedly, all the information we know about the existence of mega renters is anecdotal, with the possible exception of a handful of TUGgers who are specifically known to own a lot of weeks primarily for rental purposes. So how big of a problem is this practice, *really?* We don't truly know. All I know is there is a perception among owners in Maui and Aruba that it does increase competition for prime weeks and views. The reason we Maui owners are often more concerned with mega renters than the weeks MVC rents, is there usually seems to be a lot more prime Maui weeks available for rent on Redweek than there is on Marriott.com.




How big is the rental business of the developer? I showed the numbers I had for Lagunamar, everyone can ask for the auditor's reports for the resorts they own. That does not mean that we do not know a lot already, according to the public disclosures, the company has inventory of about 700 million dollars (2021). At Lagunamar, the "seller" (developer) pays about 5 million dollars in maintenance fees for a total resort budget of 23 millions. That is very significant. I do not know what it means for the other resorts but if you multiply 5 millions by 100 (resorts) you will get a number that is not far from the one they disclosed for the entire company. What other details do you need to realize that what we do not know does not change the magnitude of their rental business?


----------



## timsi (Oct 5, 2022)

Fasttr said:


> What’s your end game?   Just whine about it here, or do you have plans beyond that?


Shouldn’t matter more to you if the company we are giving thousands or tens of thousands of dollars a year could not (allegedly) follow its own rules?


----------



## TravelTime (Oct 5, 2022)

My numbers may be wrong but could it be that 19% to 21% of MOC weeks are being rented out?

396 rental weeks MOC
249 rental weeks MOC Lahaina/Napili
645 total rental weeks (data from Redweek, could be more but I only included 2 of the rental categories on Redweek bc I want sure if it the other listings were included in these totals)

Assumpiton 1
x7000 points per week (assumption for average?)
Approx 4.5 million rental points (approx?)

Assumption 2
X6000 points per week
3.9 Million

Total points according to Jim’s chart
Maui Ocean Club........................11.9 million
MOC-Sequel................8.7 million (I do not know what sequel means but including it in total, otherwise % rentals goes up)
21 million points (approx?)

19% to 21% rentals (approx ?)

If my numbers are correct, regardless of whether it is a mega renter, occasional owner rental, Marriott rental or repeat owner rental for weeks never used, 19% to 21% (or thereabouts) is a large percentage of Maui Ocean Club weeks/points taken off the rentals for Abound points.

1) Are my assumptions close to correct?
2) If so, what do folks think about the reduction in points/weeks available for MOC points in Abound?
- I know first response will be these are owner weeks and they are entitled to rent them. But any other thoughts?


----------



## ocdb8r (Oct 5, 2022)

timsi said:


> How is this not in conflict with the Vistana rule: “The Home Reservation Period must permit a VOI Owner to request a reservation, without competition from anyone who does not* own *a Vacation Ownership Interest for a Vacation Unit that is the same type and season as the VOI Owner’s unit type and season”. You notice you have to own the VOI, not just to have the right to reserve the period or other rights that Abound may claim would be transmitted with a deposit.


Please stop just making things up.  The fact you put this in quotation marks (as if it is a direct quotation from the "rules:") and *BOLDED *a word that does not exist in the Lagunamar bylaws just proves how totally out of control you are with these arguments.  I don't know how you expect anyone to take you seriously when you repeatedly make it clear you have no interest in a balanced and honest discussion of what the actual words written actually mean.

I know I'm wasting my breath here.  You will do as you have continued to do for months....find another thread to post the SAME tired arguments or start a new one when people get too bored to even bother reading or responding.


----------



## TravelTime (Oct 5, 2022)

Maybe we should ignore responding to Timsi and block him (like I have). I only glance at the replies and it seems like folks think what he says is bogus and repetitive comments.


----------



## ocdb8r (Oct 5, 2022)

TravelTime said:


> My numbers may be wrong but could it be that 19% to 21% of MOC weeks are being rented out?


Couldn't your numbers be rather skewed if a significant portion of the Redweek rentals are not weeks reserved using points, but weeks owners renting the actual weeks they own?  I think the total points according to Jim's chart is just that - total weeks in the trust valued for points (so using it as the denominator would be skewed by weeks not in the trust...).  I could be wrong, but that was my first reaction to the overall math.


----------



## ocdb8r (Oct 5, 2022)

TravelTime said:


> Maybe we should ignore responding to Timsi and block him (like I have). I only glance at the replies and it seems like folks think what he says is bogus and repetitive comments.


Agreed and I've tried....but now his posts litter threads all over the Vistana and MVC Boards.  Hard to weed through them to get to a reasonable conversation to be had.


----------



## TravelTime (Oct 5, 2022)

ocdb8r said:


> Couldn't your numbers be rather skewed if a significant portion of the Redweek rentals are not weeks reserved using points, but weeks owners renting the actual weeks they own?  I think the total points according to Jim's chart is just that - total weeks in the trust valued for points (so using it as the denominator would be skewed by weeks not in the trust...).  I could be wrong, but that was my first reaction to the overall math.



Good point. Maybe it is skewed. It was just an attempt to get at the total pointsrented. I do not know what the true denominator is. The correct denominater would be the total points attributed to weeks owned, not points in the trust. It could by more or less than 20%. Does anyone know how many total weeks exist outside of the trust?


----------



## JIMinNC (Oct 5, 2022)

timsi said:


> How big is the rental business of the developer? I showed the numbers I had for Lagunamar, everyone can ask for the auditor's reports for the resorts they own. That does not mean that we do not know a lot already, according to the public disclosures, the company has inventory of about 700 million dollars (2021). At Lagunamar, the "seller" (developer) pays about 5 million dollars in maintenance fees for a total resort budget of 23 millions. That is very significant. I do not know what it means for the other resorts but if you multiply 5 millions by 100 (resorts) you will get a number that is not far from the one they disclosed for the entire company. What other details do you need to realize that what we do not know does not change the magnitude of their rental business?



Yes they are a big company and own a lot of inventory, so they have a big rental business. What would you prefer they do with the inventory on their books? Just sit on it and have underutilized capital?

Here are two slides from their June 2002 Investor Day. The first shows Rentals contribute 15% of their total EBITDA. So it's a significant slice, but the two pieces of EBITDA related to Sales - Development and Financing make up almost half of EBITDA, and Management and Exchange contributes a little over a third. And as I'll get into a little later in the third slide below, not all of that 15% might come from rental of timeshare VOIs:





It's also important to note that they currently have much more inventory on their books than even THEY want. They acquired a lot through the acquisitions of ILG and Welk and are trying to reduce the inventory they carry over the next few years. They currently have over $1.1 billion of unsold inventory, which represents about 5 years of sell-through. Their goal is to reduce that to around $760-790 million by 2025, representing their target of 1.5-2 years of inventory on hand. They have existing commitments for $175 million in new-build inventory (Waikiki and maybe a few other projects where they still have not taken all the inventory their development partner has built), and they plan to reacquire $595-640 million annually to fund the Trusts.





You also have to consider that a possibly significant portion of their corporate rental revenue (the 15% in the first slide above) may not come from the timeshare inventory they own. They also generate rental income through Interval International (Getaways and other affiliate rental programs that Interval has with business partners and affinity groups) and through MVW's ownership of Aqua-Aston Hospitality that manages 27 resort hotel properties, many in Hawaii, including some Marriott and Hilton resort hotels. I do need to note that I'm not 100% sure whether that rental revenue is accounted for as a part of Management and Exchange EBITDA (the 36% in slide #1) or is consolidated into the Rental category along with rental of VOIs. That info may be broken out in their annual 10-K, but I haven't tried to dig through those numbers to find out. I'm already spending way too much time on this conversation!


----------



## ocdb8r (Oct 5, 2022)

JIMinNC said:


> You also have to consider that a possibly significant portion of their corporate rental revenue (the 15% in the first slide above) may not come from the timeshare inventory they own. They also generate rental income through Interval International (Getaways and other affiliate rental programs that Interval has with business partners and affinity groups) and through MVW's ownership of Aqua-Aston Hospitality that manages 27 resort hotel properties, many in Hawaii, including some Marriott and Hilton resort hotels. I do need to note that I'm not 100% sure whether that rental revenue is accounted for as a part of Management and Exchange EBITDA (the 36% in slide #1) or is consolidated into the Rental category along with rental of VOIs. That info may be broken out in their annual 10-K, but I haven't tried to dig through those numbers to find out. I'm already spending way too much time on this conversation!


I think most of the CCRs/bylaws also permit them to rent last minute inventory (for Lagunamar it's any inventory not used closer to 60 days within checking) at varying rates of reimbursement to the association (basically they get a big cut of whatever they are able to rent).  While 60 days out is "last minute" for timeshare people, it's probably a sweet spot timing wise for people looking to pay cash.  I make no judgment about how "fair" this arrangement is or is not....but it's been in the underlying docs for most resorts for years.


----------



## Dean (Oct 5, 2022)

timsi said:


> We must look at the existing rules, not just at what is convenient for the developer and what suits their business model. A simple principle is that new rules cannot conflict with the existing ones. If they do not like the existing rules, they can go through the regular processes and change them. If they can’t even do that when they are building a new program, I do not see how they can ask anyone for trust, especially knowing what is happening in the sales meetings. Sales, inventory management, their own rentals, exchange services are all in the hands the same company.
> 
> The rules are in place to protect owners (the little protection we have left). No, it is not normal to base the inventory on “demand” if that conflicts with other rules, but they can “anticipate” all the demand they want when the home resort reservation period ends.


To come to a reasonable opinion we'd have to look at the entire set of rules, not just was was pulled out.  As I noted, I would strongly suspect that those say that reservations are within their control without input.  What you've posted doesn't preclude the vicarious reservation by the system when one of those owners abdicates their ownership to Abound, as I read what you've posted.  I assume that my understanding of your position is accurate since you did not dispute it.  The truth is that from a practical standpoint, your position doesn't make sense there either to say those weeks in question just have to sit there.  

Looking at rentals by the system, this is a delicate balance.  Those who feel the system should not rent or should be very limited, are essentially saying they feel the system should not offer cash type options, like cruises or to pay for travel insurance.  That's because this is how they pay for those services.

Regardless of all of that, what do YOU intend to do as this moves forward.  Complaining here or similar places ongoing makes no sense.  You've stated your position though most of us don't agree with it.  Have you contacted the GM of the resort, BOD, MVC corporate?  Have you hired a lawyer?  If not, and you're not actually doing anything about your position, why are you giving them control over your emotions for something that's going to make no real difference in the end anyway.


----------



## timsi (Oct 5, 2022)

ocdb8r said:


> Please stop just making things up.  The fact you put this in quotation marks (as if it is a direct quotation from the "rules:") and *BOLDED *a word that does not exist in the Lagunamar bylaws just proves how totally out of control you are with these arguments.  I don't know how you expect anyone to take you seriously when you repeatedly make it clear you have no interest in a balanced and honest discussion of what the actual words written actually mean.
> 
> I know I'm wasting my breath here.  You will do as you have continued to do for months....find another thread to post the SAME tired arguments or start a new one when people get too bored to even bother reading or responding.


Have you checked the compete kit you have from Lagunamar? I bolded again the word "own" as it can be found on page 332.

"4.2.1 Required Reservation Periods.
There must be at least one “Home
Reservation Period”. The Home Reservation Period must permit a VOI Owner to
request a reservation, without competition from anyone who does not* own* a
Vacation Ownership Interest for a Vacation Unit that is the same type and
season as the VOI Owner’s unit type and season provided that nobody else has
reserved the Vacation Period and that no other persons have the exclusive right
to reserve the Vacation Period. 
Member Information Page 332"

You are correct if you say that page 332 is not part of the Bylaws that end at page 45 but it should confirm what you should already know about the resort owners and the HRRP. The Bylaws mention you have to have the VOIs assigned to you and the assignment process is pretty clear. You are really spitting against the wind if you are trying to say the members/owners do not own the Vacation *Ownership* Interests. The VOIs give you exclusive rights during the HRRP and the right to vote. You make a confusion between the Vacation Ownership Interests (that belong to owners/members) and the right to book a week which is a right that you can transmit when you exchange.

"ARTICLE THIRTEEN THE PLAN RESERVATION SYSTEM
13.1. Reservation Windows.
(a) Required Reservation Periods. There must be at least one “Home Resort
Reservation Period.” The Home Resort Reservation Period must permit a Member to request a
reservation, without competition from *anyone who is not assigned a Vacation Ownership
Interest* in a Vacation Unit that is the same Unit Type as the Member’s Unit Type and for any
Vacation Period in the same Season as the Member’s Vacation Week"

And it is not like the Bylaws do not mention who owns the VOIs and the bylaws use "*assigned to"* and "*owned by"* interchangeably.

"(a) “Class A Members” shall be all Members except the Class B Member.
Each Annual Vacation Ownership Interest *owned by* a Class A Member has two (2) votes in
matters subject to a vote of Members. Each Biennial Vacation Ownership Interest *assigned t*o a
Class A Member has one (1) vote."

@TravelTime


----------



## Dean (Oct 5, 2022)

ocdb8r said:


> I think most of the CCRs/bylaws also permit them to rent last minute inventory (for Lagunamar it's any inventory not used closer to 60 days within checking) at varying rates of reimbursement to the association (basically they get a big cut of whatever they are able to rent).  While 60 days out is "last minute" for timeshare people, it's probably a sweet spot timing wise for people looking to pay cash.  I make no judgment about how "fair" this arrangement is or is not....but it's been in the underlying docs for most resorts for years.


Most systems also allow for such inventory to be anticipated as well.


----------



## SueDonJ (Oct 5, 2022)

So much of @timsi's angst about developer/manager rentals and reservation rights is just regurgitated pablum that we Marriott owners already dissected to death in the speculation threads prior to the Destination Club rollout on 6/20/10 and in various threads since then. I get it, it's scary to be facing something new and some people naturally face that fear by presenting 'what-ifs' as if they're foregone conclusions. Nothing wrong with anticipating the worst along with the best - and everything in-between! - but I honestly don't understand why there's an expectation that the worst is exactly what Marriott will do when Vistana is finally fully-integrated with the DC/Abound program. We Marriott owners have a 12-year working experience with the DC/Abound that substantiates our claims that neither the worst nor the best of our expectations have come to fruition, and there certainly hasn't been any blatant mismanagement by Marriott. And quite frankly, it's insulting to be repeatedly told that we don't know enough about what we own and how it works in conjunction with the rights that Marriott holds.

*As a moderator* I am also seeing all these posts that are supposedly singular to the Vistana Lagunamar resort all over both the Marriott and Vistana TUG forums, and it's time to end all the duplicate posts/threads. From this point forward please keep the topic to this one thread on the Vistana forum:

How strong is the exclusive right of the Lagunamar owners to compete for the entire inventory during the Home Resort Reservation Period?

It would take days to winnow out all of the related posts and move them to that one thread, so please just stop posting in any others and use that thread to continue the discussion if you're so inclined. In the interim I'll be deleting posts and/or locking threads on the Marriott forum if the topic continues to be raised in them, and I'm tagging @DeniseM in this post so that she can decide whether or not to do the same in the Vistana forum.


----------



## CPNY (Oct 5, 2022)

SueDonJ said:


> So much of @timsi's angst about developer/manager rentals and reservation rights is just regurgitated pablum that we Marriott owners already dissected to death in the speculation threads prior to the Destination Club rollout on 6/20/10 and in various threads since then. I get it, it's scary to be facing something new and some people naturally face that fear by presenting 'what-ifs' as if they're foregone conclusions. Nothing wrong with anticipating the worst along with the best - and everything in-between! - but I honestly don't understand why there's an expectation that the worst is exactly what Marriott will do when Vistana is finally fully-integrated with the DC/Abound program. We Marriott owners have a 12-year working experience with the DC/Abound that substantiates our claims that neither the worst nor the best of our expectations have come to fruition, and there certainly hasn't been any blatant mismanagement by Marriott. And quite frankly, it's insulting to be repeatedly told that we don't know enough about what we own and how it works in conjunction with the rights that Marriott holds.
> 
> *As a moderator* I am also seeing all these posts that are supposedly singular to the Vistana Lagunamar resort all over both the Marriott and Vistana TUG forums, and it's time to end all the duplicate posts/threads. From this point forward please keep the topic to this one thread on the Vistana forum:
> 
> ...


So getting back to the original question….. What do MVC owners think about Abound? Lol


----------



## SueDonJ (Oct 5, 2022)

CPNY said:


> So getting back to the original question….. What do MVC owners think about Abound? Lol


I love it! Whatever Marriott is doing they should continue because the DC/Abound has given me far more exchange value for my owned Weeks than Interval Int'l ever did!


----------



## timsi (Oct 5, 2022)

SueDonJ said:


> So much of @timsi's angst about developer/manager rentals and reservation rights is just regurgitated pablum that we Marriott owners already dissected to death in the speculation threads prior to the Destination Club rollout on 6/20/10 and in various threads since then. I get it, it's scary to be facing something new and some people naturally face that fear by presenting 'what-ifs' as if they're foregone conclusions. Nothing wrong with anticipating the worst along with the best - and everything in-between! - but I honestly don't understand why there's an expectation that the worst is exactly what Marriott will do when Vistana is finally fully-integrated with the DC/Abound program. We Marriott owners have a 12-year working experience with the DC/Abound that substantiates our claims that neither the worst nor the best of our expectations have come to fruition, and there certainly hasn't been any blatant mismanagement by Marriott. And quite frankly, it's insulting to be repeatedly told that we don't know enough about what we own and how it works in conjunction with the rights that Marriott holds.
> 
> *As a moderator* I am also seeing all these posts that are supposedly singular to the Vistana Lagunamar resort all over both the Marriott and Vistana TUG forums, and it's time to end all the duplicate posts/threads. From this point forward please keep the topic to this one thread on the Vistana forum:
> 
> ...


One resort impacts all resorts in Abound, not to mention others may find similar language at the resorts they own.  I actually went back to the 2010 Marriott threads myself and I could *not* find any reference to existing resort rules that could protect the Marriott week owners. The Marriott owners have to come to the realization that Vistana is different and that they are trying to build Abound on rules that are very different than your rules.


----------



## timsi (Oct 5, 2022)

CPNY said:


> So getting back to the original question….. What do MVC owners think about Abound? Lol


What Abound? Are we there yet?


----------



## CPNY (Oct 5, 2022)

SueDonJ said:


> I love it! Whatever Marriott is doing they should continue because the DC/Abound has given me far more exchange value for my owned Weeks than Interval Int'l ever did!


I’m new to using interval since joining TUG. I’ve scored some really nice exchanges into Marriotts and Vistana units.

As a VSN owner I am looking forward to adding a few nights in STT at the Ritz to any WSJ week I can get in the VSN or just booked Ritz in STT for the week. I also hope some long last minute weekends are available via points for Beachplace towers and Lakeshore reserve.

Another benefit will be converting to Club Points, then putting those into Interval for certain non Marriott resorts that have a regional block.


----------



## SueDonJ (Oct 5, 2022)

timsi said:


> One resort impacts all resorts in Abound, not to mention others may find similar language at the resorts they own.  I actually went back to the 2010 Marriott threads myself and I could *not* find any reference to existing resort rules that could protect the Marriott week owners. The Marriott owners have to come to the realization that Vistana is different and that they are trying to build Abound on rules that are very different than your rules.


Each Marriott resort has its own Public Offering Statement consisting of the Timeshare Declaration, the Master Deed, the Timesharing Plan, the Management Agreement, associated amendments and various other resort-specific legal filings, most of which amount to more than 300 pages each. In addition, there are governing docs specific to the Destination Club/Abound Trust and Exchange Company. All of these POS were given to the original purchasers who may or may not have passed them on to resale buyers. You're not going to find every page from every resort's POS on TUG, and you're also not going to find clear answers to every question that has been raised, because like every other company doing business Marriott protects itself by publicly releasing only the information that they're legally required to release. It doesn't mean TUGgers are ignorant or Marriott is malicious - it just means that for many questions the answers will only be found through experience.

As a Marriott owner who's bright enough to realize that Vistana products are different from Marriott products, I certainly haven't come to the realization that Marriott is doing anything wrong - or correct for that matter - with Vistana products. How could I, when the integration isn't even a working thing yet?!


----------



## SueDonJ (Oct 5, 2022)

timsi said:


> What Abound? Are we there yet?


For Marriott owners, yes, we are there yet. We've been there since 6/20/10. For Marriott owners, Abound is simply the renaming of what we have come to know as the Destination Club. Sure, new resorts are coming online imminently, but they're the only things that aren't here yet - and we recognized very early on that the establishment of the DC Exchange Company would facilitate new (even non-Marriott branded) resorts being integrated.


----------



## timsi (Oct 5, 2022)

SueDonJ said:


> As a Marriott owner who's bright enough to realize that Vistana products are different from Marriott products, I certainly haven't come to the realization that Marriott is doing anything wrong - or correct for that matter - with Vistana products. How could I, *when the integration isn't even a working thing yet?!*



The Abound Exchange Procedures are public. I do not have to wait another year to come to the realization that if Abound gets inventory at 12 months, it is during the Home Resort Reservation Period.

Measuring with the same stick, you should not say that you love it since it's not a working thing yet.


----------



## frank808 (Oct 5, 2022)

ocdb8r said:


> I think most of the CCRs/bylaws also permit them to rent last minute inventory (for Lagunamar it's any inventory not used closer to 60 days within checking) at varying rates of reimbursement to the association (basically they get a big cut of whatever they are able to rent). While 60 days out is "last minute" for timeshare people, it's probably a sweet spot timing wise for people looking to pay cash. I make no judgment about how "fair" this arrangement is or is not....but it's been in the underlying docs for most resorts for years.


Seems like this is common in the TS world. DVC calls this breakage. DVC is allowed to rent any rooms not used within 60 days. They pay a minimum iscule amount back to the HOA of unit rented. I believe it was 5% or so. 

I believe HGVC has it also. But HGVC also has open season which was a great benefit for the members. Now it seems like it mainly benefits HGVC bottom line. 

Sent from my SM-N975U using Tapatalk


----------



## ocdb8r (Oct 5, 2022)

timsi said:


> The Marriott owners have to come to the realization that Vistana is different and that they are trying to build Abound on rules that are very different than your rules.


Totally delusional.  The MVC documents have provisions similar to the one you have cited; your interpretation is simply wrong.

*From Ko Olina*
"Owners will have the ability to request a reservation for a seven (7) night stay for an accommodation for a check-in day on a first-come, first-served basis, with other Owners, beginning twelve (12) months in advance of the requested check-in day. An Owner's request shall be timely if received no later than seventy-five (75) days prior to the first day of a Use Period."

Could equally be interpreted to mean that an exchange program could never make a reservation because it is not an Owner; however, the fact is when someone assigns the reservation and occupancy rights over to the Exchange Company it may then step in and exercise those right as an owner.  Nothing in this language (nor the Lagunamar language) prevents that.  Of course one could legally challenge this and have a court interpret it as you wish....but no amount of incessant squawking is going to make your interpretation "right" or "correct".  It is simply that, an interpretation (which numerous people have rebutted).  Again, it's totally pointless because the only thing that matters is how Marriott interprets the provisions until someone successfully challenges them in court.....so go for it!!


----------



## Bodie (Oct 5, 2022)

The MVC IT debacle has passed the joke stage and is now just inexcusable.  Using different search engines, I am unable to pull up my confirmed reservations or search on line availability.  What makes us think when they sync the new program it will be any better?  Past is prologue.


----------



## Bodie (Oct 5, 2022)

I scroll these comments and realize how much smarter people are than I.  I do get good insight and feedback but most of the time feel  like the Peanuts kids do when adults talk.  That aside, for most part I remain pleased with MVC but am dreading the new program.


----------



## CPNY (Oct 5, 2022)

Bodie said:


> I scroll these comments and realize how much smarter people are than I.  I do get good insight and feedback but most of the time feel  like the Peanuts kids do when adults talk.  That aside, for most part I remain pleased with MVC but am dreading the new program.


Aside from the IT debacle, what are some other reasons that are you dreading the new program?


----------



## timsi (Oct 5, 2022)

ocdb8r said:


> Totally delusional.  The MVC documents have provisions similar to the one you have cited; your interpretation is simply wrong.
> 
> *From Ko Olina*
> "Owners will have the ability to request a reservation for a seven (7) night stay for an accommodation for a check-in day on a first-come, first-served basis, with other Owners, beginning twelve (12) months in advance of the requested check-in day. An Owner's request shall be timely if received no later than seventy-five (75) days prior to the first day of a Use Period."
> ...


Similar to your quote from the Ko Olina documents, we can go to the pub tomorrow at 17:00, and other Tuggers can join us. This does not mean that those who are not Tuggers can’t come at the same time. We may even find guests at the pub who got there before 17:00.

Contrast this to the Vistana resorts where we talk about the *exclusive *right of the resort owners to book during the Home Resort Reservation Period and *without competition* from those who are not owners. 
If the right of the owners could be assigned to the non-owners, the Lagunamar and the Vistana Home resort reservation period would be meaningless because just about ANYBODY and their mother could book; if that was the case they would not talk about exclusive rights and about article 13 at WLR that could only be changed with the vote of 90% of the members. To me, this is exactly what the rules wanted to prevent, whether you like it or not. 

Thank you for confirming that the language used at the Marriott resorts was just not strong enough and that in 2010 MVC could take advantage of the lack of details; this is why they could start MVC bookings not only 12 but also 13 months before check in. This is what I suspected all along.


----------



## sponger76 (Oct 5, 2022)

timsi said:


> Similar to your quote from the Ko Olina documents, we can go to the pub tomorrow at 17:00, and other Tuggers can join us. This does not mean that those who are not Tuggers can’t come at the same time. We may even find guests at the pub who got there before 17:00.
> 
> Contrast this to the Vistana resorts where we talk about the *exclusive *right of the resort owners to book during the Home Resort Reservation Period and *without competition* from those who are not owners.
> 
> Thank you for confirming that the language used at the Marriott resorts was just not strong enough and that in 2010 MVC could take advantage of the lack of details; this is why they could start MVC bookings not only 12 but also 13 months before check in. This is what I suspected all along.


----------



## Bodie (Oct 5, 2022)

Possibly that the benefits I have as an Executive owner will be devalued or removed.  That my Platinum status with Bonvoy received as long as I stay in the Executive tier will lose it’s cache. That the addition of Vistana owners will make it more difficult to reserve at the resorts I frequent. All I see are additional choices in areas not of interest to me save for a few.  MVC could go a long way in assuaging my dread if they would explain - clearly and not in “ad speak”  - why Abound is such an improvement.


----------



## JIMinNC (Oct 5, 2022)

TravelTime said:


> Good point. Maybe it is skewed. It was just an attempt to get at the total pointsrented. I do not know what the true denominator is. The correct denominater would be the total points attributed to weeks owned, not points in the trust. It could by more or less than 20%. Does anyone know how many total weeks exist outside of the trust?



The other consideration is the numbers I included in the earlier post were from December 2016 when there were less than 400 million points in the Trust. Today, there may be as many as 600 million points in the Trust. So, if Maui weeks in the Trust have grown proportionally with the overall Trust, the roughly 21 million points in the two phases of Maui Ocean Club in 2016 may have grown to around 30 million today.

Marriott no longer reports the number of units in each resort in their annual 10-K report, but I went back to the 2017 when they did and the total MOC unit count was 458. So, some number of those 458 units are those making up the theoretical 30 million points I mention above. You would have to calculate the average election value of the unit mix at MOC to come up with the number of units that notional 30 million represents. That election value ranges from 2250 for Island View 1BR in the original towers to 10,225 for 3BR OF is the newer towers. So if the average were 5000, that would mean the 30 million Trust points represented 115 units. If the average is higher, then the resulting units will be lower. But if we use 115 units for arguments sake, that leaves roughly 340 units owned by weeks owners. Some of these are used by the owner, some are elected for Points and go into the Abound Exchange, some may go to II, and others are rented by owner. It's even possible some may be owned by MVW after ROFR and they haven't been conveyed to the Trust yet.

Those may be better numbers to use in the calculations you did in your earlier post.

*Note: Edited to fix some careless math! Thanks @timsi for the heads up.*


----------



## Bodie (Oct 5, 2022)

CPNY said:


> Aside from the IT debacle, what are some other reasons that are you dreading the new prognram?


That the benefits I currently receive as an Executive owner will be devalued. That, then, the Platinum status with Bonvoy I have by being an Executive owner will be devalued. That the competition for resorts I frequent will be even harder with the addition of Vistana members.  There is very little of interest to me in the added inventory.  Also, MVC will have to recoup its investment. Who’s paying for that?  By and large I’m happy with my MVC relationship.  But, it’s clear we are far less important than their shareholders.  That’s the view from someone who just wants to be go where I want when I want.


----------



## CPNY (Oct 5, 2022)

Bodie said:


> That the benefits I currently receive as an Executive owner will be devalued. That, then, the Platinum status with Bonvoy I have by being an Executive owner will be devalued. That the competition for resorts I frequent will be even harder with the addition of Vistana members.  There is very little of interest to me in the added inventory.  Also, MVC will have to recoup its investment. Who’s paying for that?  By and large I’m happy with my MVC relationship.  But, it’s clear we are far less important than their shareholders.  That’s the view from someone who just wants to be go where I want when I want.


Thank you for that…. I agree

plat bonvoy is useless now


----------



## Superchief (Oct 5, 2022)

The bigger 'Abound' gets, the poorer each owner is treated by the big corporation. Leadership cares more about shareholders than investors. Individual resorts lose their flexibility. Valued owners at a resort get lost in the masses. Services suffer. Decisions are made at the corporate level with little input from the resorts. MF's increase more than they should because too many unnecessary costs are added to inflate their resort ratings that are given by guests who have no concern about their costs. The places I want to go will be harder to get, and very few of the added ones are appealing to me.

A good example of how things will continue to get worse is the way MVC is handling communication of the situation at Marco Island. Communication is pathetic and it appears decisions are driven by corporate greed and CYA, with no consideration of the impact their decisions have on people's lives and investment.

I spent a career in corporate America and went through several mergers and acquisitions. The only people who benefit were the executives, lawyers, and investment bankers. Employees, shareholders, and customers were left holding the short end of the stick. I would never buy anything from this new company.


----------



## timsi (Oct 5, 2022)

JIMinNC said:


> The other consideration is the numbers I included in the earlier post were from December 2016 when there were less than 400 million points in the Trust. Today, there may be as many as 600 million points in the Trust. So, if Maui weeks in the Trust have grown proportionally with the overall Trust, the roughly 21 million points in the two phases of Maui Ocean Club in 2016 may have grown to around 30 million today.
> 
> Marriott no longer reports the number of units in each resort in their annual 10-K report, but I went back to the 2017 when they did and the total MOC unit count was 458. So, some number of those 458 units are those making up the theoretical 30 million points I mention above. You would have to calculate the average election value of the unit mix at MOC to come up with the number of units that notional 30 million represents. That election value ranges from 2250 for Island View 1BR in the original towers to 10,225 for 3BR OF is the newer towers. So if the average were 5000, that would mean the 30 million Trust points represented 150 units. If the average is higher, then the resulting units will be lower. But if we use 150 units for arguments sake, that leaves roughly 400 units owned by weeks owners. Some of these are used by the owner, some are elected for Points and go into the Abound Exchange, some may go to II, and others are rented by owner. It's even possible some may be owned by MVW after ROFR and they haven't been conveyed to the Trust yet.
> 
> Those may be better numbers to use in the calculations you did in your earlier post.


Are the 1BR units standalone  or part of lockoffs? Marriott did not report the smaller units separately. At Lagunamar  they report 290 units even if they can be divided into 290 studios and 290 1BR (they are all identical). If that's the case, you may want to use a number significantly higher than 5000, especially if you include week 52.

Even if I use your denominator and use 52 weeks per year, I arrive at 115 units owned by the trust. I suspect it is more like 60 or 80 if you use a higher number. However, you do not have the complete image unless you know the units owned directly by the developer (look for "maintenance fees assessed to the seller" in the auditor's report)


----------



## DanCali (Oct 5, 2022)

Bodie said:


> I scroll these comments and realize how much smarter people are than I.  I do get good insight and feedback but most of the time feel  like the Peanuts kids do when adults talk.  That aside, for most part I remain pleased with MVC but am dreading the new program.



There really is no "new program". "Abound by Marriott" is just a rebranding of "Marriott Vacation Club Destinations" with a few additional affiliated resorts that were, and still are, part of Vistana. Quite similar to what Marriott hotels did with Marriott Rewards when it rebranded it as Bonvoy and included Starwood Preferred Guest and Ritz Rewards under one umbrella. If you are pleased with MVC you will likely be pleased with the "new" program too.

My personal feeling about the DC/Abound system is that the points exchange system is generally quite good, but the Trust points product they sell is pretty bad. I could go into a very long rant about this but suffice it to say that the upfront costs are too high, the maintenance fees are too high (compared to rental values), if you ever want to sell it you lose 80% of what you paid, and resale prices could be driven down further by MVC at any point just by increasing the junk fees. Even for those who are looking to buy from MVC to enroll resale weeks, they can often do much better by buying a weeks product from MVC, which they don't really advertise.

My biggest gripe about the points exchange system is lack of transparency with inventory and hidden booking restrictions. For those who look closely, you will often see high demand weeks where a shorter stay is not available (say 5 nights) but a longer stay (say 7 nights) is available. It's so unintuitive that most people who see no availability for the 5-night stay they want, won't even look for an overlapping 7-night stay. Those seem to me like cases of artificially limiting availability with unofficial restrictions and breaking the promise of "book 1+ nights".


----------



## timsi (Oct 5, 2022)

DanCali said:


> My biggest gripe about the points exchange system is lack of transparency with inventory and hidden booking restrictions. For those who look closely, you will often see high demand weeks where a shorter stay is not available (say 5 nights) but a longer stay (say 7 nights) is available. It's so unintuitive that most people who see no availability for the 5-night stay they want, won't even look for an overlapping 7-night stay. Those seem to me like cases of artificially limiting availability with unofficial restrictions and breaking the promise of "book 1+ nights".


Maybe the 7-night stays originate from legacy week deposits, and it is possible they have to stay that way?


----------



## JIMinNC (Oct 5, 2022)

timsi said:


> Are the 1BR units standalone  or part of lockoffs? Marriott did not report the smaller units separately. At Lagunamar  they report 290 units even if they can be divided into 290 studios and 290 1BR (they are all identical). If that's the case, you may want to use a number significantly higher than 5000, especially if you include week 52.
> 
> Even if I use your denominator and use 52 weeks per year, I arrive at 115 units owned by the trust. I suspect it is more like 60 or 80 if you use a higher number. However, you do not have the complete image unless you know the units owned directly by the developer (look for "maintenance fees assessed to the seller" in the auditor's report)



Maui Ocean Club has dedicated 1BR units as well as 2BR lockoffs.

And you are right about the 115. Bad math on my part. That's what I get for rushing through the calcs right as my wife was calling me to come have a pre-dinner drink on our balcony! I'm going to go back and edit that post so as not to confuse anyone with bad math. Thanks for the heads up.


----------



## SGould (Oct 6, 2022)

timsi said:


> Similar to your quote from the Ko Olina documents, we can go to the pub tomorrow at 17:00, and other Tuggers can join us. This does not mean that those who are not Tuggers can’t come at the same time. We may even find guests at the pub who got there before 17:00.
> 
> Contrast this to the Vistana resorts where we talk about the *exclusive *right of the resort owners to book during the Home Resort Reservation Period and *without competition* from those who are not owners.
> If the right of the owners could be assigned to the non-owners, the Lagunamar and the Vistana Home resort reservation period would be meaningless because just about ANYBODY and their mother could book; if that was the case they would not talk about exclusive rights and about article 13 at WLR that could only be changed with the vote of 90% of the members. To me, this is exactly what the rules wanted to prevent, whether you like it or not.
> ...


 Are you able to reserve what you want today?  Why do you keep your ownership?  Based on all of the threads you have started/responded to it sounds like you own resale.  You should be able to exit easily.  I can’t imagine owning something I was so distrustful of.


----------



## ocdb8r (Oct 6, 2022)

timsi said:


> Thank you for confirming that the language used at the Marriott resorts was just not strong enough and that in 2010 MVC could take advantage of the lack of details; this is why they could start MVC bookings not only 12 but also 13 months before check in. This is what I suspected all along.


You're welcome.  It accompanies my similar confirmation that the Lagunamar language is also not strong enough to restrict what you propose....but as usual you will ignore anything that doesn't advance your own agenda.


----------



## timsi (Oct 6, 2022)

ocdb8r said:


> You're welcome.  It accompanies my similar confirmation that the Lagunamar language is also not strong enough to restrict what you propose....but as usual you will ignore anything that doesn't advance your own agenda.


Oh yes, the _explicit_ exclusive right of the WLR owners to book during the Home Resort Reservation Period, without competition from those who are not owners is the same in your mind with what you quoted from Ko Olina!!!  If this is your thought process, it's testimony that you can't be taken seriously.

It should not come as a surprise if the Marriott team was taking a very serios look at this.  Do you know what is telling me that they had vigorous internal discussions about this when they were drafting the procedures? They put in bold the last part of the "Exchange Members and VSN Members" that refers to transmitting your rights when you deposit because they wanted people to notice it. Of course, that does not make it enforceable in practice when it conflicts with other rules but that is all they could do. Virtually all other exchanges I looked at (RCI, Interval, SFX, 7Accross, Platinum Exchange etc.) have a very similar verbiage about transmitting your rights to the exchange when you deposit. Those exchanges do not put it in bold though, why did Abound have to emphasize it? Abound could not be specific about what rights they were referring to because they would be in conflict not only with our internal documents that specify who owns the VOIS, but also in conflict with public disclosures as a company. 

In the end I believe they are a serious company (or they should be) and they do not want to deal with explicit rule conflicts because of the liability risk. They should thank those who pointed to the issue and not be mad at them. We are where we are but typically the most successful executives want to resolve issues when they come to their desk.


----------



## timsi (Oct 6, 2022)

SGould said:


> Are you able to reserve what you want today?  Why do you keep your ownership?  Based on all of the threads you have started/responded to it sounds like you own resale.  You should be able to exit easily.  I can’t imagine owning something I was so distrustful of.


Only the developer (the flipper would be more accurate in most cases) speaks about ability to book or access to as indication, in their view that they aren’t taking anything away from you.  As an owner I see it from the prospective of preserving what I have. You wouldn’t be very happy if your neighbor put his truck in your driveway and claimed you still had access and you still had the ability to park your car. How ridiculous would that be?


----------



## SueDonJ (Oct 6, 2022)

> *As a moderator* I am also seeing all these posts that are supposedly singular to the Vistana Lagunamar resort all over both the Marriott and Vistana TUG forums, and it's time to end all the duplicate posts/threads. From this point forward please keep the topic to this one thread on the Vistana forum:
> 
> How strong is the exclusive right of the Lagunamar owners to compete for the entire inventory during the Home Resort Reservation Period?
> 
> It would take days to winnow out all of the related posts and move them to that one thread, so please just stop posting in any others and use that thread to continue the discussion if you're so inclined. In the interim I'll be deleting posts and/or locking threads on the Marriott forum if the topic continues to be raised in them, and I'm tagging @DeniseM in this post so that she can decide whether or not to do the same in the Vistana forum.



This thread is on time-out. Take the topic of Lagunamar's super-special rules to the thread where they belong, and then maybe we'll be able to reopen this one so that the people who want to talk about how the DC/Abound is actually working right now will be able to answer the question of what we think about it.


----------

