# simple math seems to suggest points are a terrible investment



## tzahner (Jan 15, 2013)

Correct me if I'm wrong or if there's another way to look at this and justify the purchase of Trust points . . . But if I understand correctly, the current MFs for points are 41 cents per point.  Is that accurate?

If so, here's some simple math.  I own a Platinum ski week at Summit Watch for which (this year) I paid a maintenance fee of $1251.86.  According to this chart, I would need 5225 points to book the same platinum week at Summit Watch through the DC that I already own and can book for my yearly $1251.86 MF.  At .41 per point, those 5225 points, would run $2142.25 in yearly MFs.  So in order to book this week with points, I would have to pay $890.39 more in maintenance fees every year than what I currently pay and that's on top of the $50,000+ up front fee that Marriott would want to charge me to obtain those points (approx $10 per point, correct?).  

Hell, most 2-br Platinum ski weeks at Summit Watch are renting on redweek.com for $2000-$2500.  That barely covers the yearly MFs on the 5225 Trust points required through the DC to book such a week.

If these numbers tell the truth, how can anyone justify a Trust points purchase.

If there's another way to look at this or another way to use the points more economically, please fill me in.


----------



## TheTimeTraveler (Jan 15, 2013)

tzahner said:


> Correct me if I'm wrong or if there's another way to look at this and justify the purchase of Trust points . . . But if I understand correctly, the current MFs for points are 41 cents per point.  Is that accurate?
> 
> If so, here's some simple math.  I own a Platinum ski week at Summit Watch for which (this year) I paid a maintenance fee of $1251.86.  According to this chart, I would need 5225 points to book the same platinum week at Summit Watch through the DC that I already own and can book for my yearly $1251.86 MF.  At .41 per point, those 5225 points, would run $2142.25 in yearly MFs.  So in order to book this week with points, I would have to pay $890.39 more in maintenance fees every year than what I currently pay and that's on top of the $50,000+ up front fee that Marriott would want to charge me to obtain those points (approx $10 per point, correct?).
> 
> ...






You've hit the nail on the head, and I think most Tuggers would agree with your assessment.

The best value is a resale week and not a points purchase.....



.


----------



## Saintsfanfl (Jan 15, 2013)

You are comparing it to your current situation. It's not supposed to be comparable. It is the Vacation club redefined. There are things you can do with the DC that you cannot do with your week. Far more flexibility. It is more about flexibility than affordability. The rentals out there are from people with legacy weeks like yourself. They are generally not from those that booked on DC points.


----------



## tzahner (Jan 15, 2013)

Saintsfanfl said:


> You are comparing it to your current situation. It's not supposed to be comparable. It is the Vacation club redefined. There are things you can do with the DC that you cannot do with your week. Far more flexibility. It is more about flexibility than affordability. The rentals out there are from people with legacy weeks like yourself. They are generally not from those that booked on DC points.



If by flexibility, you're referring to using the points for multiple short stays (particularly Sunday-Thursday) and/or using the points for lots of non-peak times, then perhaps I could buy that.  I guess in that case, I could see where you might be able to stretch the use of the points and get more bang for your buck, but I challenge anyone to do the same math that I've done above and show me where a full week stay during peak season at any resort in the MVC is a better value with points through the DC than it would be to rent the same week from another owner or just to purchase that week for yourself on the resale market and pay the resort MFs on that week vs. the MF on the equivalent number of points required to book that same week through the DC.

And besides, what's more flexible than cash?  I can rent out my Summit Watch week on redweek for $2500 and then use that $2500 to apply toward ANY other vacation that I want (Marriott or non-marriott or cruise or rent points from another DC member . . . isn't $2500 about the price it would cost me to rent 5000 points from a DC member?).  I'll say it again, what's more flexible than cash?  By renting my week out, I can make a profit or use that money for other vacationing needs (and all for a much lower MF than what I would have to pay for points through the DC)

No matter how you slice it, I still can't "get there" when it comes to the cost that Marriott is asking us to pay to join the DC.  "Flexibility" or not.  It just doesn't make sense.


----------



## Beefnot (Jan 15, 2013)

tzahner said:


> No matter how you slice it, I still can't "get there" when it comes to the cost that Marriott is asking us to pay to join the DC.  "Flexibility" or not.  It just doesn't make sense.



Wait, are you saying that if you join the DC with a legacy unit, your legacy MFs automatically go up to the trust MFs?


----------



## puckmanfl (Jan 15, 2013)

good evening...

here's the real kicker!!!!

Suppose the buyer purchases those 5225 DC Trust points  for $50K... religiously pays the MF's ($0.43/pt  by the way)  The owner is not even guaranteed Summitt Watch availability...

I am not sure regarding your details of purchase (retail vs resale) but it doesn't matter.  At the end of the day you are guaranteed a deeded week in your season forever!!!!  With thee ability (if purchased before 6/10) to enroll in DC or use the best point system of all  $$$

Now in defence of Legacy points... I have 2 5 day stays 2014 Summitt for 4500 DC points   10 days total in 2 bedroom.. My MF is $0.35/pt  o, I get 10 nights for $1800 MF, you get 7 for $1250  reasonably close, but my outlay is less because I got my points from an Orlando week  3 bedroom GV plat...

I don't think anytime share is a great investment... It is purely discretionary income used to play in pre paid vacations.  My hobby and passion is maxing this out and trying to beat the system.  For example next month I turned 8000 DC points into a 3 bedroom and 2 bedroom 5 nights stay at RC Vail.  The 3 bedrooms rent out at $2000/night and 2 bedroom at $1500 and are not available on redweek...

Thus for 8000 DC points  $2800 MF's at my ratio, snagged $17,500 worth of Ritz carlton stuff... You can also do this using lock offs, weeks XYZ and other ways of value addition!!!  There is a whole thread on how to snag 3 weeks from II with one week...


----------



## buzglyd (Jan 15, 2013)

I think it's .43 per point and try as I might, I could not justify the purchase given the rental market and the fact that Marriott doesn't offer 3rd party resale benefits.

I'd love to visit the Maui location every year but not at MVC prices.


----------



## tzahner (Jan 15, 2013)

Beefnot said:


> Wait, are you saying that if you join the DC with a legacy unit, your legacy MFs automatically go up to the trust MFs?



No - not at all.  Sorry for the misunderstanding.  By "join" the DC, I was referring to buying trust points and paying the associated MFs that are attached to those points.  Which for people like me, who purchased their resale week after 6/10 is currently the only way to get into the DC since those weeks purchased after 6/10 are not available for enrollment in the program.

My numbers from the original post were all based on buying Trust points only.


----------



## SueDonJ (Jan 15, 2013)

I think you're correct, tzahner, that purchasing DC Points is a much more expensive venture than the Weeks product that was previously offered by Marriott.  For those of us Weeks owners especially, more so still those of us who participate on TUG, the current costs to buy and the yearly fees seem so out of the realm of what timeshares should cost, so exorbitant compared to what we own.

But like Saintsfanfl said, it may not be correct to make the comparison when you consider the customers to whom Marriott is marketing the new product.  Think about the last few years before Marriott introduced the DC, about how much the Weeks intervals at the newest resorts were selling for at the time.  Ko 'Olina, Marco Island, Oceana Palms ... the highest-demand Weeks at those newest resorts were priced upwards of $50K.  Although there has always been and will be certain customers who won't ever be comfortable with purchasing from any entity other than the one with the name on the door, a large percentage of that demographic was effectively priced out of Marriott's product before Points were introduced.  Another way in which "flexibility" is attractive is that Marriott can now offer that demographic a product that will work for them.  Sure, it's less than what they'd get with a resale, but if they want the security/comfort of buying from Marriott they can afford it now where they couldn't before.  "I can purchase an affordable number of Points and use them at any of the resorts for any number of days, and I can add to my ownership as my financial situation improves," is an acceptable risk for someone who wants to buy and it's a lot more palatable than, "I can't afford anything Marriott can offer to me."  I don't think we should underestimate the number of people who truly want to buy into the lifestyle and the number who will only buy from the developers.  

TUG by itself is resale-centric so the prevailing sentiment here is going to be that direct purchase is hardly ever a good option, no matter the product type or company.  Even those of us who purchased direct and feel we got, still are getting, what we were led to expect can't argue that timeshare ownership can be so much less expensive through the vibrant external resale market, especially if we're willing to take risks with the exchange game.  Neither can we deny that more people are exposed today through the internet to that resale market along with the unappealing aspects of timeshare ownership that the sales reps don't address (ie availability issues, escalating MF's, inherent devaluation, etc.)  Add in, too, a vibrant timeshare rental market that's exploded because of the internet.

But as VAC's and other companies' reports show, people are still buying direct.  Quite honestly, I think Marriott's DC Points are a fantastic product and if I didn't already own Weeks that give me enough options, I'd seriously consider purchasing Points despite knowing the risks.  I don't think I'm alone in that on TUG but we're definitely in the minority.  Where I'm not in the minority is with the TUGgers who own high-demand Marriott Weeks and have enrolled them in the DC - every one of us will happily say that we're getting the best of both worlds with the Marriott timeshare options available to us.


----------



## tzahner (Jan 16, 2013)

Excellent points Susan.  Thank you for your perspective.



SueDonJ said:


> Where I'm not in the minority is with the TUGgers who own high-demand Marriott Weeks and have enrolled them in the DC - every one of us will happily say that we're getting the best of both worlds with the Marriott timeshare options available to us.



Agreed.  And I wish my resale weeks were eligible to enroll in the DC.  I would seriously consider doing so if they were.  But as it stands now, my only option for entrance into the DC is through direct purchase of Trust points.  This is an option that I just cannot justify financially, especially considering the resale week options that still exist on the secondary market.

Perhaps Marriott will, at some point, allow us post-6/10 week purchasers to enroll.  But until then . . . I'm afraid the DC is not for me.


----------



## Saintsfanfl (Jan 16, 2013)

tzahner said:


> Perhaps Marriott will, at some point, allow us post-6/10 week purchasers to enroll.  But until then . . . I'm afraid the DC is not for me.



Here is a scary thought. Marriott is buying weeks from owners right now in very large numbers. If they are placing those weeks in the trust, the number of available weeks for you to book your week at your home resort within your season is dropping fast.


----------



## Saintsfanfl (Jan 16, 2013)

puckmanfl said:


> At the end of the day you are guaranteed a deeded week in your season forever!!!!..



In theory, if you had the last remaining legacy week in your particular season, what week would that be? Would Marriott allow you to choose any or would they pre-reserve the trust owned weeks leaving you with very little to no choice?


----------



## EKniager (Jan 16, 2013)

tzahner said:


> And I wish my resale weeks were eligible to enroll in the DC.  I would seriously consider doing so if they were.  But as it stands now, my only option for entrance into the DC is through direct purchase of Trust points.  This is an option that I just cannot justify financially, especially considering the resale week options that still exist on the secondary market.



We took advantage of the program (pre June 2012) to add the points feature to our developer purchased Aruba week.  As you clearly showed earlier in the discussion, the economics are better for us to rent than to convert, but by getting in the game we can at least rent points and take short stays if that ever makes sense.  So far it hasn't but at least it is a future option.


----------



## Janette (Jan 16, 2013)

I think everyone needs to do much research before buying anything, especially dealing with timeshares. It works for us and we are happy. It may not be what you should do. Thanks to all of you who do the research and make the information available. Tug provides wonderful info. We have been in timesharing since 1983 and weeks, destination club points and reward points work for us. It may not for you. Aren't you happy that we have a choice?


----------



## FractionalTraveler (Jan 16, 2013)

Saintsfanfl said:


> You are comparing it to your current situation. It's not supposed to be comparable. It is the Vacation club redefined. There are things you can do with the DC that you cannot do with your week. Far more flexibility. It is more about flexibility than affordability. The rentals out there are from people with legacy weeks like yourself. They are generally not from those that booked on DC points.



I really agree with these statements.  It's not an accurate comparison at all.  It’s more like a generalization of a topic.

Puck's approach to maximize your usage through understanding and exploitation of program benefits and features is brilliant.

Before the DC I could never:

1. Take all my weeks put them together and book one huge vacation in 5 minutes on the website.

2. I could never just stay 2-3 days of my choice at a resort within driving distance of my home.

3. I could never rent those 2-3 days easily to others.

4. I was at the mercy of Interval for exchanges when all I really wanted was to go to another nice MVCI property.

5. I could never stay at a luxury RC residence.

These are only a few examples of things that I can now do quite easily through DC.  Now these things are valuable to our family but I understand they may not be as attractive to other families.


----------



## SueDonJ (Jan 16, 2013)

Saintsfanfl said:


> In theory, if you had the last remaining legacy week in your particular season, what week would that be? Would Marriott allow you to choose any or would they pre-reserve the trust owned weeks leaving you with very little to no choice?



With the Reservation Windows for Weeks opening at least one day earlier than for DC Points, I'd say that in theory the last remaining Weeks Owner would have access to his/her choice provided s/he booked as soon as the window opened.  Probably closer in, as well, because how much would it hurt Marriott to leave just one of each same interval open for a reasonable amount of time, say through a ten- or eight-month window?


----------



## RandR (Jan 16, 2013)

FractionalTraveler said:


> I really agree with these statements.  It's not an accurate comparison at all.  It’s more like a generalization of a topic.
> 
> Puck's approach to maximize your usage through understanding and exploitation of program benefits and features is brilliant.
> 
> ...



I don't think the OP is trashing the DC program, only buying into it fresh.  As many people have shown, enrolling a Legacy week into the "new" program can result in some very nice things.  All of the things you describe above are from enrolling a week(s), not buying straight points.


----------



## Saintsfanfl (Jan 16, 2013)

SueDonJ said:


> With the Reservation Windows for Weeks opening at least one day earlier than for DC Points, I'd say that in theory the last remaining Weeks Owner would have access to his/her choice provided s/he booked as soon as the window opened.  Probably closer in, as well, because how much would it hurt Marriott to leave just one of each same interval open for a reasonable amount of time, say through a ten- or eight-month window?



Then I think the actions of Marriott's resale department in buying up legacy weeks for the trust will result in higher rental prices. Is the demand there to support the higher prices? Probably.


----------



## kjd (Jan 16, 2013)

It's kind of amusing that many people are quantifying whether points are a good or a bad deal by comparing points to maintenance fees. It seems to me the major cost of ownership has always been the depreciation of the asset.  Some folks have lost a lot of money if they had to sell their timeshares.  Therefore, you'll never know the true cost of ownership until you sell.  That is only if you equate value with cost.  

In this market I too believe that it makes more sense to purchase a resale week.  Those of us who bought direct back in the day received a lot of incentive MR points that were used for additional vacations.  Incentives aren't nearly as generous today.  Instead of comparing DC points to maintenance fees it might make more sense to compare DC points to the alternative cost of renting.

Marriott has made DC points just another form of currency.  However, there are intrinsic values in timesharing that make each owner decide whether their purchase was worth it.


----------



## MOXJO7282 (Jan 16, 2013)

puckmanfl said:


> I don't think anytime share is a great investment...



Why do most take this as a given? I don't believe it is 100% of the time. In most cases this statement is true but things in this world are never black and white and I contend that is some cases, like if you can do what puck does, turning $1 spent into 3 or 4 times their value, or what I do, rent excess weeks taking two major trips a year and putting a few coins in my pocket.....

Timeshares in some cases can be good investments!! Your story is an example of such, if you can do it.


----------



## Swice (Jan 16, 2013)

*today's prices*

And not to muddy the water:

We own two plat weeks purchased pre-construction (Myrtle Beach and Lakeshore Reserve in Orlando).      We have LOVED our timeshare experiences and have certainly gotten our money's worth.    If you consider the number of weeks we've vacationed (our "weeks" plus bonus weeks received and "getaways"), then our average cost per vacation (initial costs plus MF divided by number of vacations) is dropping fast.    Our cost per vacation is reasonable now and will only become "cheaper" as time goes on.   

Granted, our costs would be even less had we bought re-sale.     

To be clear-- while I totally agree the new system is expensive (over-priced for new/fresh timeshare members in my opinion), you can't ignore that the "average" cost will come down as more time passes from an individual's up-front investment just like it did with my weeks.   

So I guess the longer one actually uses and enjoys their timeshare -- and spreads out their "investment" over many-many years--  the smaller/lower their costs will be.   

I'm not arguing on behalf of buying into the new system (honestly, I'm not sure that we would).    But to be fair, the averages do go down.


----------



## Saintsfanfl (Jan 16, 2013)

MOXJO7282 said:


> In most cases this statement is true but things in this world are never black and white and I contend that is some cases, like if you can do what puck does, turning $1 spent into 3 or 4 times their value, or what I do, rent excess weeks taking two major trips a year and putting a few coins in my pocket.....
> 
> Timeshares in some cases can be good investments!! Your story is an example of such, if you can do it.



You are responding to Puck's quote by telling him "if you can do what puck does".


----------



## SueDonJ (Jan 16, 2013)

Saintsfanfl said:


> Then I think the actions of Marriott's resale department in buying up legacy weeks for the trust will result in higher rental prices. Is the demand there to support the higher prices? Probably.



I'm not sure I'm following the right train of thought.  Are you saying that you expect Weeks Owners to always have their choice, and thus quasi-control of the reservations for the most valuable rental Weeks, based on that theoretical example?

For that one lone last-remaining Weeks Owner, sure.  But I wouldn't necessarily expect Marriott to extend any sort of courtesy to remaining Weeks Owners when their numbers interfere with Marriott's goals.  Say there are 100 intervals over a period of ten weeks that match a particular resort/unit/view/season type.  One owner, it's no skin off Marriott's back to give him a little bit of time after the Reservation Windows open for each of his eligible intervals.  Heck, Marriott could assign a rep to call him every week to ask if he wants what's now open!  But if your last remaining Weeks Owners of those intervals number 25, or 50 ... I wouldn't expect any creative inventory controls or courtesy from Marriott then.  I'd expect strict allocation of Weeks across the seasonal calendar which is what Marriott says is being done now, and that would affect the highest-demand rental inventory.  And if those Owners don't get in when their windows open, too bad because Marriott and the DC Points Owners will be waiting in the wings.

One person, ten people ... even if Marriott gives them quasi-control of the available reservations, they're not enough to skew the rental market.  Plus Marriott always has the option of enforcing the vague "commercial activity" restrictions in the docs, if ever rental activity negatively impacts their options.


----------



## BocaBum99 (Jan 16, 2013)

Saintsfanfl said:


> Then I think the actions of Marriott's resale department in buying up legacy weeks for the trust will result in higher rental prices. Is the demand there to support the higher prices? Probably.



Your statement does not make sense.  You state that Marriott buying legacy weeks will result in higher rental prices.  The only way that is possible is if it reduces the supply of weeks for rent.  That's because with demand unchanged, a reduction in supply will result in a price increase with everything else being equal.

But, I do not understand how Marriott purchases reduces rental supply.  Those units can be rented by owners who acquire them whether owned directly or by the Trust.


----------



## Saintsfanfl (Jan 16, 2013)

What I am saying is that if a weeks owner can still book the valuable weeks then rental prices will rise. The reason is because Marriott is snagging legacy weeks left and right for the trust. Booking the same week with trust points will result in a much higher cost and a much higher break even point if someone were to rent a week out. 

For example, if you wanted to book a 2BR Ocean Side Thanksgiving week at Ocean Pointe it would cost over $1,700 for the points maintenance fee. A legacy owner only pays $1,290.86. Renting out for $1,500 results in a profit for legacy of $200 but a loss of $200 for trust points. Let's assume there are no legacy weeks or legacy points. Rental prices instantly go up because nobody is intentionally going to book for the purpose of renting out unless it is at least break-even. They may go down that road later if they have to but they will not plan it out to lose money.

Marriott might be on a mission to eliminate legacy weeks or greatly reduce their number. The recent report of them offering a net $1,000 for an OceanWatch Bronze OF troubles me. It only costs 1,125 points to book that week and it would likely sell for $1 or no bids on ebay.



SueDonJ said:


> I'm not sure I'm following the right train of thought.  Are you saying that you expect Weeks Owners to always have their choice, and thus quasi-control of the reservations for the most valuable rental Weeks, based on that theoretical example?
> 
> For that one lone last-remaining Weeks Owner, sure.  But I wouldn't necessarily expect Marriott to extend any sort of courtesy to remaining Weeks Owners when their numbers interfere with Marriott's goals.  Say there are 100 intervals over a period of ten weeks that match a particular resort/unit/view/season type  One owner, it's no skin off Marriott's back to give him a little bit of time after the Reservation Window for each of his eligible intervals open.  Heck, Marriott could assign a rep to call him every week to ask if he wants what's now open!  But if your last remaining Weeks Owners of those intervals number 25, or 50 ... I wouldn't expect any creative inventory controls or courtesy from Marriott then.  I'd expect strict allocation of Weeks across the seasonal calendar which is what Marriott says is being done now, and that would affect the highest-demand rental inventory.  And if those Owners don't get in when their windows open, too bad because Marriott and the DC Points Owners will be waiting in the wings.
> 
> One person, ten people ... even if Marriott gives them quasi-control of the available reservations, they're not enough to skew the rental market.  Plus Marriott always has the option of enforcing the vague "commercial activity" restrictions in the docs, if ever rental activity negatively impacts their options.


----------



## BocaBum99 (Jan 16, 2013)

tzahner said:


> Correct me if I'm wrong or if there's another way to look at this and justify the purchase of Trust points . . . But if I understand correctly, the current MFs for points are 41 cents per point.  Is that accurate?
> 
> If so, here's some simple math.  I own a Platinum ski week at Summit Watch for which (this year) I paid a maintenance fee of $1251.86.  According to this chart, I would need 5225 points to book the same platinum week at Summit Watch through the DC that I already own and can book for my yearly $1251.86 MF.  At .41 per point, those 5225 points, would run $2142.25 in yearly MFs.  So in order to book this week with points, I would have to pay $890.39 more in maintenance fees every year than what I currently pay and that's on top of the $50,000+ up front fee that Marriott would want to charge me to obtain those points (approx $10 per point, correct?).
> 
> ...



This is just one of the many reasons why I dumped my Marriott timeshares.

They really built a very bad point system that makes absolutely no sense.  Keep digging, it gets worse.


----------



## Saintsfanfl (Jan 16, 2013)

BocaBum99 said:


> Your statement does not make sense.  You state that Marriott buying legacy weeks will result in higher rental prices.  The only way that is possible is if it reduces the supply of weeks for rent.  That's because with demand unchanged, a reduction in supply will result in a price increase with everything else being equal.
> 
> But, I do not understand how Marriott purchases reduces rental supply.  Those units can be rented by owners who acquire them whether owned directly or by the Trust.



Because the average cost to book those higher demand weeks will go up. Marriott has rigged the DC points system so higher demand weeks cost more to book in DC points but with legacy the maintenance fees are fixed. If they buy out the legacy weeks there will be less legacy weeks on the rental market versus trust point weeks on the rental market. It increases the average cost point for the rental weeks available.


----------



## larryallen (Jan 16, 2013)

TheTimeTraveler said:


> The best value is a resale week and not a points purchase......



Actually I think the best value is renting.  

The biggest downside of renting is you lose some flexibility, that DC offers, in that you rarely can rent for shorter than a week for the exact days you want. 

Having said that there is something very appealing about "owning" a timeshare. I get it though I don't totally understand it.


----------



## tschwa2 (Jan 16, 2013)

I forgot which TUGGER said it, but there was a theory that Marriott was looking to put about (or no more than) 25% of most resorts throughout each of the seasons to seed the trust.  That way as legacy owners sell and drop out they won't have to offer subsequent resale weeks owners the opportunity to join the DC and points members would be able to directly book in all seasons.  Marriott might have the money in the budget to buy back weeks now but once they reach the levels they are looking for I think the buying will stop. So if you are thinking about getting rid of your off season weeks now is the time to inquire.


----------



## Saintsfanfl (Jan 16, 2013)

And if my suspicion is correct, guess what happens to the value of Marriott legacy resale weeks? I was going to unload one of my weeks to the resale department but now I am having second thoughts.


----------



## Saintsfanfl (Jan 16, 2013)

That could very well be true which is why I probably should get rid of one. Tough decision. 



tschwa2 said:


> I forgot which TUGGER said it, but there was a theory that Marriott was looking to put about (or no more than) 25% of most resorts throughout each of the seasons to seed the trust.  That way as legacy owners sell and drop out they won't have to offer subsequent resale weeks owners the opportunity to join the DC and points members would be able to directly book in all seasons.  Marriott might have the money in the budget to buy back weeks now but once they reach the levels they are looking for I think the buying will stop. So if you are thinking about getting rid of your off season weeks now is the time to inquire.


----------



## SueDonJ (Jan 16, 2013)

Saintsfanfl said:


> What I am saying is that if a weeks owner can still book the valuable weeks then rental prices will rise. The reason is because Marriott is snagging legacy weeks left and right for the trust. Booking the same week with trust points will result in a much higher cost and a much higher break even point if someone were to rent a week out.
> 
> For example, if you wanted to book a 2BR Ocean Side Thanksgiving week at Ocean Pointe it would cost over $1,700 for the points maintenance fee. A legacy owner only pays $1,290.86. Renting out for $1,500 results in a profit for legacy of $200 but a loss of $200 for trust points. Let's assume there are no legacy weeks or legacy points. Rental prices instantly go up because nobody is intentionally going to book for the purpose of renting out unless it is at least break-even. They may go down that road later if they have to but they will not plan it out to lose money.
> 
> Marriott might be on a mission to eliminate legacy weeks or greatly reduce their number. The recent report of them offering a net $1,000 for an OceanWatch Bronze OF troubles me. It only costs 1,125 points to book that week and it would likely sell for $1 or no bids on ebay.



We really have no way of knowing whether Marriott intends to eventually convey all of their owned Weeks to the Trust.  It makes sense for them to convey enough in order to ensure a constant inventory for Points sales, as well as ensure a means by which the MF costs for the higher-value Weeks can be absorbed by Owners as opposed to Marriott.

But it also makes sense for Marriott to outright own certain specific intervals in order to manage the DC Exchange Company.  We know that Marriott can and is taking intervals from II then funneling them through the DC Exchange Company in order to satisfy DC Members' exchange requests.  Presumably Marriott has to replace what they're taking from II but we have no idea of the agreement terms between them.  Theoretically they're able to garner uptrades in II the same as Owners have always been able to do, right?  So Marriott can use their owned lower-demand/cost intervals to replace what they take from II, while conveying to the Trust the higher-demand/costs intervals.


----------



## Quadmaniac (Jan 16, 2013)

Saintsfanfl said:


> What I am saying is that if a weeks owner can still book the valuable weeks then rental prices will rise. The reason is because Marriott is snagging legacy weeks left and right for the trust. Booking the same week with trust points will result in a much higher cost and a much higher break even point if someone were to rent a week out.
> 
> For example, if you wanted to book a 2BR Ocean Side Thanksgiving week at Ocean Pointe it would cost over $1,700 for the points maintenance fee. A legacy owner only pays $1,290.86. Renting out for $1,500 results in a profit for legacy of $200 but a loss of $200 for trust points. Let's assume there are no legacy weeks or legacy points. Rental prices instantly go up because nobody is intentionally going to book for the purpose of renting out unless it is at least break-even. They may go down that road later if they have to but they will not plan it out to lose money.
> 
> Marriott might be on a mission to eliminate legacy weeks or greatly reduce their number. The recent report of them offering a net $1,000 for an OceanWatch Bronze OF troubles me. It only costs 1,125 points to book that week and it would likely sell for $1 or no bids on ebay.



I don't think that will be the case as you are ignoring the facts of outside demand factors. No matter what the cost is, the rental price will be what the market dictates, not what the cost is. Currently we see many people renting their timeshares for less than the annual MF just to recoup costs. You are assuming everyone is going to financially savy and we know that is not the case and probably in the minority rather than the majority.

I think the doom and gloom about everything being gobbled up by Marriott buying back and going DC is just a wild fantasy. The majority are still not part of DC and I don't see it ever getting to that point, as with any system, 100% conversion is unrealistic. 

I think the OP is right on with his analysis. The flexibility you speak of, comes at a very high price and it is very hard to justify at that price.


----------



## SueDonJ (Jan 16, 2013)

BocaBum99 said:


> This is just one of the many reasons why I dumped my Marriott timeshares.
> 
> They really built a very bad point system that makes absolutely no sense.  Keep digging, it gets worse.



Your point of view is much too narrow.  You dumped your Marriotts because the DC negatively impacted your particular ownership and the way you used it, especially with regard to the uptrades you'd consistently gotten from II and wouldn't be able to get from the DC.

But there are many of us Weeks Owners for whom the DC makes perfect sense, for whom the DC adds options which are no doubt valuable, which quite clearly contradicts your blanket condemnation of the program.

As much as I agree with many here that the costs to own DC Trust Points is staggering when compared to Weeks, I still think that it's an attractive product for folks who want to buy into the lifestyle and are comfortable only with direct purchases.  The purchase can be tailored to what is affordable, can be utilized in any number of ways with banking/borrowing and less-then-seven-days opportunities, and can be added to when circumstances permit.  The same old argument of why-buy-from-the-developer-when-there-are-less-expensive-options is in play here but the fact remains that VAC's numbers prove that the product has a market.

I don't disagree with you that the DC doesn't work for you.  I strongly disagree that it's a bad system overall simply because it doesn't work for you.


----------



## bogey21 (Jan 16, 2013)

kjd said:


> .....It seems to me the major cost of ownership has always been the depreciation of the asset.  Some folks have lost a lot of money if they had to sell their timeshares.



Makes sense to me.

George


----------



## Janette (Jan 16, 2013)

The person sitting next to me at the pool paid $3200 to rent from an owner. Not a bad deal. We are on STT 24 night, had 3 weeks last year and two weeks the year before that. We want to be here but we are not going to pay the rental price necessary to do that. We also have weeks this year in Orlando with grandchildren, a week at Oceana Palms, 5 nights at Crystal Shores, a week at Grande Ocean, 3xyz weeks. For us, owning is a blessing. What works for one is not necessarily what is best for another. Lunch is over. Back to the pool.


----------



## tzahner (Jan 16, 2013)

RandR said:


> I don't think the OP is trashing the DC program, only buying into it fresh.



Yes - precisely.  If I were allowed to enroll my two post 6/10 weeks into the DC, I would seriously consider it, because I think the program provides a lot of valuable options.  But since I am not currently allowed to enroll, the cost of buying in fresh with Trust points (in my opinion, anyway) is absurd!  Especially when you consider that I can rent both of my weeks for approx. $2500 each and then use that money as the ultimate "point system" and rent other vacations however I choose to do so.


----------



## Beefnot (Jan 16, 2013)

Quadmaniac said:


> I think the doom and gloom about everything being gobbled up by Marriott buying back and going DC is just a wild fantasy. The majority are still not part of DC and I don't see it ever getting to that point, as with any system, 100% conversion is unrealistic.



Majority and 100% are not synonymous.



SueDonJ said:


> As much as I agree with many here that the costs to own DC Trust Points is staggering when compared to Weeks, I still think that it's an attractive product for folks who want to buy into the lifestyle and are comfortable only with direct purchases.



But that could probably be said of essentially any timeshare for that matter.


----------



## MALC9990 (Jan 16, 2013)

SueDonJ said:


> Your point of view is much too narrow.  You dumped your Marriotts because the DC negatively impacted your particular ownership and the way you used it, especially with regard to the uptrades you'd consistently gotten from II and wouldn't be able to get from the DC.
> 
> But there are many of us Weeks Owners for whom the DC makes perfect sense, for whom the DC adds options which are no doubt valuable, which quite clearly contradicts your blanket condemnation of the program.
> 
> ...



I absolutely agree - I believe that DC Trust points are not a great buy. The only purchase of DC Points I would ever consider ( and it is easy for me to say since it will never apply to me) is if I had resale weeks that could not be enrolled but I could buy a small enough Trust points package with which MVCI would then enroll my otherwise unenrollable resale weeks. However the number of points purchased would have to be pretty small.

For me, enrolling my European weeks was a no-brainer. We only ever exchanged using II for other Marriott Resorts (apart from one trip to Australia) and so now we have another exchange option in addition to II. My enrollment cost was the equivalent of buying a little more than 200 DC Trust points. That took me to premier Plus status and the annual fee is much less than I have been paying to II for exchanges.

I can see how the uninitiated and less than well informed sales target can be persuaded to part with tens of thousands of $$$ in a sales presentation - that's what happened when we bought our weeks before we discovered resales.

It certainly is not a BAD system, not perfect but not BAD either. It works for me so far but I'm not trying to get a high demand peak season week in a US resort quite the opposite I am looking specifically at shoulder season weeks both with DC points and II.

Many of my European Resort week owner friends have not enrolled and those that have have done so for much the same reason as myself - reduce the fees paid to II and get another option to look for exchanges but still maintain our option to use our home resort weeks.


----------



## buzglyd (Jan 16, 2013)

tzahner said:


> Yes - precisely.  If I were allowed to enroll my two post 6/10 weeks into the DC, I would seriously consider it, because I think the program provides a lot of valuable options.  But since I am not currently allowed to enroll, the cost of buying in fresh with Trust points (in my opinion, anyway) is absurd!  Especially when you consider that I can rent both of my weeks for approx. $2500 each and then use that money as the ultimate "point system" and rent other vacations however I choose to do so.



Exactly. I love the Marriott property in Maui and have investigated owning and would love to own there. I'd use it nearly every year.

However, I look at rental prices for the exact same units and decide to keep my "point system" in my bank and not Marriott's.

I'll be renting from Tuggers in the future.


----------



## Mamianka (Jan 16, 2013)

tzahner said:


> Correct me if I'm wrong or if there's another way to look at this and justify the purchase of Trust points . . . But if I understand correctly, the current MFs for points are 41 cents per point.  Is that accurate?
> 
> If so, here's some simple math.  I own a Platinum ski week at Summit Watch for which (this year) I paid a maintenance fee of $1251.86.  According to this chart, I would need 5225 points to book the same platinum week at Summit Watch through the DC that I already own and can book for my yearly $1251.86 MF.  At .41 per point, those 5225 points, would run $2142.25 in yearly MFs.  So in order to book this week with points, I would have to pay $890.39 more in maintenance fees every year than what I currently pay and that's on top of the $50,000+ up front fee that Marriott would want to charge me to obtain those points (approx $10 per point, correct?).
> 
> ...



I'll be honest - I did not have the patience to read through and re-analyze all the back-and-forth on this.  BUT - this very first post struck me as faulty math.  You said you OWN (which means you paid for) your property - and then as we all do, you pay a MF each year.  So where in your math is the amortization of your initial purchase price?  I made a spreadsheet ages ago, because I too was sneered at by people for whom timesharing was NOT a consideration.  We bought a pre-build 2 BR Grand Chateau in 2004, in sheer ignorance - we were taken by the elbow, on the street, by a *kindly sales rep*, and with ZERO knowledge, just hit it lucky.  Yes, that is our belief - we stumbled into something that we enjoy - trading more than visiting.  Then we bought an EOY 2BR at Beach Place just weeks before The Big Change (again, a smart salesperson accessed all our trades into Florida, and pulled this EOY out of his pocket) - and have enrolled them both.  Every penny we have ever spent on these properties in in that SS, as is every day and week we have vacationed on their value. Every year, we get more day/week value than we deposit.  Also included are several conservative-to-exhorbitant estimates of what we would have PAID in cash for those same vacations, and where we would be financially if we have invested every penny, and then never traveled at all, or invested the money AND paid (and I have a lo/med/hi set of charts of that) for the same accommodations.  We are ahead - by a significant amount.  We have no NEED to ever buy any points - my ego is not tied to whether we stay in  Ritz Carlton or trust property, versus our favorite Marriotts.  We have no intention of selling our timeshares - we did not buy them as investments, but to enjoy.  For many people, cars are a poor investment - they have to get a new one every couple of years.  We keep vehicles at least ten years.  Some people prefer to buy a second residence - and then they have the responsibility of its upkeep even when they are not there.  One would think that this forum would attract people who wish to maximize their timeshare use - but we do get a few who consider this to be the worst scheme on the planet.  No, this is not for everyone.  But if you are going to compare apples to oranges, at least disclose all your original apples.  Make your own spreadsheet, and include income you make from rentals, and any cash you spend on rentals (something we have not yet done).  Numbers do not lie - as long as ALL the numbers are there.  Speaking of which - I also have a formula (had to base it on square footage, lacking any other concrete numbers) for all the times we deposited a unit or portion and got something larger.  (We have NEVER traded down.)  This makes us smile even more.  But like the ad says - objects in the mirror are closer than they appear; your mileage may vary.


----------



## Saintsfanfl (Jan 16, 2013)

Mamianka said:


> BUT - this very first post struck me as faulty math.



Are you sure it's faulty? I think you actually managed to reinforce the OP's basic point in the lack of financial sense in purchasing points. 

Leaving out the amortization is correct because it is left out on both sides. The OP is comparing maintenance fees only.


----------



## Beefnot (Jan 16, 2013)

What is faulty about the math?  Why would someone consider a sunk cost (initial purchase price) in the decision whether to outlay more money?  Not just maintenance fees but cash purchase of points too.


----------



## tzahner (Jan 16, 2013)

Saintsfanfl said:


> Are you sure it's faulty? I think you actually managed to reinforce the OP's basic point in the lack of financial sense in purchasing points.
> 
> Leaving out the amortization is correct because it is left out on both sides. The OP is comparing maintenance fees only.




Exactly!  But if Mamianka would like for me to compare initial purchase price on both sides and divide it over a 30 year use period, I could certainly do that.  

Let's start with what I currently own, how much I paid for it up front, and my current MFs

Summit Watch Platinum week - purchase price: $12,700
yearly maintenance fee: $1251.86 (for 2013)
total yearly cost of use divided over 30 years (MF inflation not factored in): $1675.19 per year ($50,255.80 / 30 years)

OceanWatch Platinum week with OS view (my other property) - purchase price: $14,000
yearly maintenance fee: $1035.39 (for 2013)
total yearly cost of use divided over 30 years (MF inflation not factored in): $1502.06 per year ($45.061.70 / 30 years)

*Total cost that I currently pay now is $3177.25 for 2 full weeks (14 days) of vacation during platinum season at premiere properties.*

--------------------------------

Same Math with Trust points (amortized over 30 years)

Points required to book Platinum Summit Watch Week = 5225
Points required to book Platinum OceanWatch week = 4175
Total points required to book the same weeks that I currently own: 9400

initial cost to acquire points - $94,000 (approx. $10 per point)
yearly maintenance fee on 9400 points - $4042 (at .43 per point)

*total yearly cost of use divided over 30 years (MF inflation not factored in): $$7175.33 per year ($215,260.00 / 30 years)*

*Even divided over 30 years, it would cost me $3998.08 more per year to purchase enough trust points to book the exact same 2 weeks of vacation that I already own.*

what other vaction(s) could I book on my own with an extra $4000 per year?


----------



## Mamianka (Jan 16, 2013)

tzahner said:


> *Even divided over 30 years, it would cost me $3998.08 more per year to purchase enough trust points to book the exact same 2 weeks of vacation that I already own.*
> 
> what other vaction(s) could I book on my own with an extra $4000 per year?



I hear you.  Just wanted to see the comparison made WITH factoring in the purchase prices.  In YOUR case, you are right. in MY case - I am.  No two of us are the same.  Now I more clearly see your [point.


----------



## Beefnot (Jan 16, 2013)

Mamianka said:


> I hear you.  Just wanted to see the comparison made WITH factoring in the purchase prices.  In YOUR case, you are right. in MY case - I am.  No two of us are the same.  Now I more clearly see your [point.



I think he probably humored you with figuring in the purchase prices.  Still, it would make absolutely no sense to figure in something that has already been paid in the past and can't be gotten back to whether to put more money down on a new purchase.  To be hyperbolic, if he had spent $150k on his initial legacy purchase years ago, would it then make more sense to fork over the $ to buy new DC points?  It would not.


----------



## Saintsfanfl (Jan 16, 2013)

Beefnot said:


> I think he probably humored you with figuring in the purchase prices.  Still, it would make absolutely no sense to figure in something that has already been paid in the past and can't be gotten back to whether to put more money down on a new purchase.  To be hyperbolic, if he had spent $150k on his initial legacy purchase years ago, would it then make more sense to fork over the $ to buy new DC points?  It would not.



I know a few timeshare salespeople that would strongly disagree with you. It always makes sense to spend more money on timeshares because vacations are worth spending more money on. If I can put some numbers together and make it affordable, would you be willing to make that valuable decision that will improve your life forever?


----------



## hcarman (Jan 16, 2013)

tzahner said:


> Correct me if I'm wrong or if there's another way to look at this and justify the purchase of Trust points . . . But if I understand correctly, the current MFs for points are 41 cents per point.  Is that accurate?
> 
> If so, here's some simple math.  I own a Platinum ski week at Summit Watch for which (this year) I paid a maintenance fee of $1251.86.  According to this chart, I would need 5225 points to book the same platinum week at Summit Watch through the DC that I already own and can book for my yearly $1251.86 MF.  At .41 per point, those 5225 points, would run $2142.25 in yearly MFs.  So in order to book this week with points, I would have to pay $890.39 more in maintenance fees every year than what I currently pay and that's on top of the $50,000+ up front fee that Marriott would want to charge me to obtain those points (approx $10 per point, correct?).
> 
> ...



I know there is an exception to everything.  But, the above is not the case at all Marriott Vacation Clubs.  (I know those of you that have seen my previous posts are guessing what I am going to say).  We own at Crystal Shores - we paid close to $1600 in maintenance fees this year.  If I calculate correctly - the amount of DC points needed for a peak week during my season would work out to a maintenance fee of only $1480.  If someone chooses a lower demand week - still during my season - the points required would work out to a little over $1000.  If I were to book one of these lesser demand weaks as a weeks owner - I am still paying close to $1600 in maintenance fees.  We wish it were the other way around - since buy in was so expensive to begin with.

Last year we calculated at current points cost - it was cheaper to buy enough points to get into this resort than it was for us to buy our week.  And yes, it was a brand new resort which we bought pre-construction - so we bought from the developer and paid a premium.  If we had waited and bought resale, probably would be a different story.

Anyway, just thought I would share that there are some exceptions to the maintenance fees being more for points owners than weeks owners.

However, our Canyon Villas property follows the poster's example for the most part.  All, but a few of the lesser demand weeks in our season would have a much higher maintenance fee if you were using DC points than if you are a week's owner - we currently pay just over $1000.  There are a few weeks that would be a little bit cheaper for a points owner.


----------



## kjd (Jan 17, 2013)

I have a question.  As long as we're talking about the higher cost of DC points and the need for Marriott to provide availability, I ask this.  Wouldn't it be cheaper for Marriott (VAC) to take post 6/10 resale units into the DC instead of trying to buy units from legacy owners?  Maybe there aren't enough of them to lower the cost of DC points.  

I know when they offered us the option of converting to the DC there was a deadline and they said no resales after 6/10 would be allowed into the DC.  Maybe that was then and now is different.


----------



## JanT (Jan 17, 2013)

This is just my opinion, and that's all it is.  I'm not the "analyst" kind of person and won't spend hours and hours working on calculations, trying to decide if something like timesharing is a good financial investment.  Everyone knows in terms of "financial," buying a timeshare is not a good investment.  Someone who bought from the developer is never going to get back what they paid for it.  It doesn't matter whether a person buys points or weeks.  Timesharing is not a good financial investment period.

Now, in some cases, such as my Marriott Grand Chateau week that I purchased resale for $800 plus $300 in closing.  I am now selling that back to Marriott for $2400 minus $500 in fees.  So, I'm making about $800.  It was never my intent to "flip" the timeshare.  It just so happened that I submitted an "interested or not" to Marriott thinking they wouldn't want it.  Turns out they did but that's not going to happen in many cases.

Where the "investment" comes in is when a person decides just how important of an investment their vacation time is.  What kind of flexibility do they want to have, what is their "dream" spot, do they have what we would probably all call "throw away cash" that they can afford to spend to get that one week a year that *they* want.  Ultimately just how much money do they want to spend to accomplish that. That should be determined by what they can afford but let's just say we have "Bob Smith" who wants to shell out $80K for one week at Marriott Ko'Olina for Christmas.  Who are any of us to say that it's not a wise investment, whether points or a fixed week?  What matters is what *Bob* thinks.  And if he's happy, then it's a good investment.  

Purchases made on a whim that end up getting an owner in financial trouble...well, people should be smarter than that.  I, personally, get tired of seeing post after post here about how people got scammed.  I've come to hate the word actually.  Yes, there are scam operations out there but most of these people go to presentations just to get some sort of "bonus."  Many of them hear ahead of time about how these presentations can go.  But, for that "extra bonus," they go anyway and end up buying something they either don't understand or don't even want.  Then when they get back home and two months has elapsed and reality sets in, all of a sudden they were "scammed" and want to walk away from the deal or beg everyone here for a way to get out of it.  Well, the way to get out of it is *use your head*.  Don't buy it in the first place.

Sorry, got off on a rant there.  The bottom line is that timesharing is not a financial investment.  Vacations are and if a person wants to shell out a whole bunch of money and can afford it, I say go for it.  Personally, I wouldn't shell out $80K for one week of vacation even though I can afford it.  I'd be putting that $80K on a vacation home at Ko'Olina and working towards retiring there.  But, old "Bob" who paid $80K - I hope he has a helluva good time.

Again, just my opinion.


----------



## Saintsfanfl (Jan 17, 2013)

I'm selling one to Marriott that I closed on less than 4 months ago. Totally agree it's an anomaly but I'll take advantage while it's there.


----------



## dioxide45 (Jan 17, 2013)

kjd said:


> I have a question.  As long as we're talking about the higher cost of DC points and the need for Marriott to provide availability, I ask this.  Wouldn't it be cheaper for Marriott (VAC) to take post 6/10 resale units into the DC instead of trying to buy units from legacy owners?  Maybe there aren't enough of them to lower the cost of DC points.
> 
> I know when they offered us the option of converting to the DC there was a deadline and they said no resales after 6/10 would be allowed into the DC.  Maybe that was then and now is different.



MVCI is blinded by it's hatred for resales. They don't want to allow post 6/10 resales because they don't want the backlash from their sales staff. A sales rep once told me that they were hoping Marriott would keep all resale purchases out of the new program completely. Though he did admit that they had sold quite a few trust points to resale purchasers that would never have bought weeks directly from them.


----------



## Beefnot (Jan 17, 2013)

JanT said:


> Where the "investment" comes in is when a person decides just how important of an investment their vacation time is. What kind of flexibility do they want to have, what is their "dream" spot, do they have what we would probably all call "throw away cash" that they can afford to spend to get that one week a year that they want. Ultimately just how much money do they want to spend to accomplish that. That should be determined by what they can afford but let's just say we have "Bob Smith" who wants to shell out $80K for one week at Marriott Ko'Olina for Christmas. Who are any of us to say that it's not a wise investment, whether points or a fixed week? What matters is what Bob thinks. And if he's happy, then it's a good investment.



I see where you going.  I don't think most folks would disagree with you conceptually.  As long as Bob Smith doesn't try to use a financial rationalization for his investment.  

As for his happiness determining whether it's a good investment, if he is happy simply because he was ignorant of the alternatives, then I wouldn't necessarily agree.  If he remains authentically content after having been made aware of the alternatives (and again, does not try to financially justify it), then ok, I suppose one could concur that it is a "good" investment for him.



Saintsfanfl said:


> I'm selling one to Marriott that I closed on less than 4 months ago. Totally agree it's an anomaly but I'll take advantage while it's there.



Holy crap.  Good for you.  Wish I would have rolled up the market last year and offloaded this year. I'd have made off like a bandit.


----------



## FractionalTraveler (Jan 17, 2013)

kjd said:


> I have a question.  As long as we're talking about the higher cost of DC points and the need for Marriott to provide availability, I ask this.  Wouldn't it be cheaper for Marriott (VAC) to take post 6/10 resale units into the DC instead of trying to buy units from legacy owners?  Maybe there aren't enough of them to lower the cost of DC points.
> 
> I know when they offered us the option of converting to the DC there was a deadline and they said no resales after 6/10 would be allowed into the DC.  Maybe that was then and now is different.



What leads you to believe that after 2 years of allowing folks to enroll those legacy resale weeks that now suddenly owners are more willing to become DC members?

I think those who liked the program enhancement, enrolled and those who didn't see value in the additional usage option, didn't enroll!


----------



## dioxide45 (Jan 17, 2013)

FractionalTraveler said:


> What leads you to believe that after 2 years of allowing folks to enroll those legacy resale weeks that now suddenly owners are more willing to become DC members?
> 
> I think those who liked the program enhancement, enrolled and those who didn't see value in the additional usage option, didn't enroll!



kjd is referring to those that purchased resale weeks after 6/20/2010. There might be many of those that would be willing to enroll but can't. Though I would think the population is small when you look at the overall picture.


----------



## Saintsfanfl (Jan 17, 2013)

Beefnot said:


> Holy crap.  Good for you.  Wish I would have rolled up the market last year and offloaded this year. I'd have made off like a bandit.



Hindsight. Roll it up and then find they halt the program and get stuck trying to offload on eBay. Bad deal. I had to sell the week anyway because I bought an Oceanfront to replace it. I could likely sell a little higher if I wait but I would rather have the sure cash straight from Marriott.


----------



## FractionalTraveler (Jan 18, 2013)

FractionalTraveler said:


> What leads you to believe that after 2 years of allowing folks to enroll those legacy resale weeks that now suddenly owners are more willing to become DC members?
> 
> I think those who liked the program enhancement, enrolled and those who didn't see value in the additional usage option, didn't enroll!



Ok. I guess it’s possible but I would agree that not many are in that population.  Regardless, I don't think they will risk cannibalization of new Points sales for a legacy resale week enrollments.  That might be BAD market strategy looking ahead.


----------



## SueDonJ (Jan 18, 2013)

FractionalTraveler said:


> Ok. I guess it’s possible but I would agree that not many are in that population.  Regardless, I don't think they will risk cannibalization of new Points sales for a legacy resale week enrollments.  That might be BAD market strategy looking ahead.



They're allowing direct Weeks resales (Marriott Resales Operations) purchased after 6/20/10 to be enrolled IF the buyer purchases a same-value DC Points package at the same time.  It won't surprise me if they make changes down the road to allow the same for external resales but it won't surprise me if they don't, either.  They'll do whatever they have to do to ensure DC success, I'd guess.


----------



## tzahner (Jan 18, 2013)

SueDonJ said:


> They're allowing direct Weeks resales (Marriott Resales Operations) purchased after 6/20/10 to be enrolled IF the buyer purchases a same-value DC Points package at the same time.



I can confirm that this is what the sales exec told me on the phone the other day.  That if I were to purchase a resale week direct from Marriott, I could enroll it IF I were to purchase a same-value DC points package at the same time.  Still expensive and probably overkill unless you need a WHOLE bunch of points.  

She also told me that there was still NO way at this time to enroll post 6/20/10 external resale weeks, but that she wouldn't be surprised if Marriott allowed it at some time down the road (probably with the same conditions that they are allowing on direct resale weeks now).


----------



## bogey21 (Jan 18, 2013)

MOXJO7282 said:


> Timeshares in some cases can be good investments!! Your story is an example of such, if you can do it.



I once bought a Summer (Fixed) Monarch (HHI) Crown Suite Week for $25k; used it for 4 or 5 years; then sold if for $41k.  It can (does) happen.

My gut tells me that there are a few real bargains out there today which can be bought right; used for a number of years; and later sold at a profit.

George


----------



## MOXJO7282 (Jan 18, 2013)

bogey21 said:


> I once bought a Summer (Fixed) Monarch (HHI) Crown Suite Week for $25k; used it for 4 or 5 years; then sold if for $41k.  It can (does) happen.
> 
> My gut tells me that there are a few real bargains out there today which can be bought right; used for a number of years; and later sold at a profit.
> 
> George



Another good example that its not a given that any purchase is a bad investment. I do agree that for the most part buying a timeshare even from resale is not the best decision with the over abundance of available rentals but some have proven to be exceptions and its been well documented here on TUG.


----------



## FractionalTraveler (Jan 19, 2013)

bogey21 said:


> I once bought a Summer (Fixed) Monarch (HHI) Crown Suite Week for $25k; used it for 4 or 5 years; then sold if for $41k.  It can (does) happen.
> 
> My gut tells me that there are a few real bargains out there today which can be bought right; used for a number of years; and later sold at a profit.
> 
> George



You did great but those days may be long gone.  Not to say it can't happen again sometime in next 30 years though.


----------



## larryallen (Jan 19, 2013)

FractionalTraveler said:


> You did great but those days may be long gone.  Not to say it can't happen again sometime in next 30 years though.



Yes I agree that's a rare and unlikely event. However, if you really pay attention to the Ebay auctions and/or make very low ball offers on Redweek you can get some good buys. However, it would take a lot of work and some luck.


----------

