# Marriott Trust Inventory Management



## GregT (Jun 24, 2011)

All,

I have some additional information that I’ve gathered through a conversation with a Marriott executive in Customer Advocacy.   The information is interesting, and helps explain some of what we’ve seen recently.  Some TUGgers may have already figured this out, so I apologize if there is repetition here.  It won’t necessarily make us happy or sad, I just think it may help manage our expectations about the Marriott system.

The purpose of the call was to try and understand how some of the reservations experiences reported previously (kedler and kdorward) and to clarify if Legacy Point owners might be restricted in any future expansion of DClub, as we’ve learned on recent Sales Tours (GregT).  

The following is what I learned, some of which is not novel:

1) Inventory for reservations is present in two “buckets”, Exchange Inventory and Trust Inventory
2) Reservations can only be booked using Points where the underlying week is present (either Trust Points for Trust Inventory and Legacy Points/Exchange Points for Exchange Inventory)
3) Only Trust Point owners have direct access to Trust Inventory
4) Legacy Point owners may be aware that Trust Inventory exists and a week is available for reservation to Trust Point owners (such as Crystal Shores) but the Legacy Point owner isn’t able to book it with Legacy Points (see kdorward)
5) Trust Point owners (who also own Legacy Points) may see Trust Inventory available using their Trust Points, but can’t use their Legacy Points to book it (see kedler).

My fundamental question was trying to understand how Marriott would (actively) manage its inventory to fulfill reservations requests, which should have prevented #4 and #5 from occurring.

As explained to me, it is reasonable to think of Trust Inventory – all of those weeks in the Trust -- as “Home Resort Inventory” (my term).  Someone who owns Trust Points can book any available Home Resort Inventory with their Trust Points.   *Marriott will manage the Home Resort Inventory (opaquely) and will decide when excess Home Resort Inventory exists that therefore is available to be matched against a Legacy Point owners waitlist request.*   Accordingly, it is likely that it will require passage of time (of unknown length before check-in) before Marriott is comfortable actively managing the Trust Inventory and making it available to meet Legacy Point waitlist requests.  It may be a couple days or it may be months from the date of Waitlist Request.

The concept of a “Home Resort Inventory” is not dissimilar from what I have in Wyndham, Hilton and Starwood.   In each system, there is a Home Resort Advantage where people who specifically own that property can book their home property (and only those specific owners can book their home property).  And then at a designated time (Wyndham: 10 months  before check-in, Hilton: 9 months before check-in, Starwood: 8 months before check-in), then the remaining available inventory (if any) is opened up to the owners of points from other properties.   So if I own at HGVC Sea World but want to visit HGVC Kings Land, I have to wait until 9 months before check-in and then hope that there is HGVC Kings Land property available for me to book with my HGVC points.

With these other systems, there is a guaranteed time/month where the remaining available inventory (if any) opens up – with Marriott, they will make it available to match waitlist requests when Inventory Control believes based upon usage patterns and projected demand, that they have excess inventory.  In this manner, it is conceivable that there could be no wait at all – someone could be confirmed 12 ½ months ahead of check-in if they are trying to book something that is considered excessive in its quantity needed.   The example comes to mind if the Trust is deep in Ko Olina and Ko Olina’s low season is October, a Legacy Point user could conceivably be confirmed in September 2011 for a reservation in October 2012 (but would have to Waitlist if requesting a July 2012 reservation).    It’s a novel and unusual (to me) approach, and requires confidence in Marriott’s inventory control procedure and trust (no pun intended) in its desire to fairly match reservation requests for all of its owners, irrespective of Legacy or Trust points.

He did assure me that future expansion properties, which will only be present in the Trust, will be available to Legacy Point users.   However, he also acknowledged the reality that it won’t be  clear how quickly that inventory will be considered  “excess” for purposes of matching Legacy Point users Waitlist Requests, because it may be very modest in its quantities.    Despite this disclaimer, I’d rather know that there is at least a possibility of inventory becoming available, even if over time the rare properties become predominantly reserved by Trust Point owners due to their scarcity (which effectively requires Trust Point ownership to book that scarce week).   

He took great pains to emphasize the fairness of the decisions that Marriott is making and mentioned more than once that Marriott is in the business of making sure all of their owners have a fair and equal opportunity to make their reservations.   This also came up when I asked if we would ever be able to waitlist at 13-months (unlikely) and the reason was concerns over possibly disenfranchising certain owners (non-Premier and Premier Plus) owners to the benefit of the other owners (Premier and Premier-Plus).  Marriott is clearly trying to avoid this, to the extreme that currently there is little practical advantage to being Premier or Premier Plus.

So, in summary:

1) Legacy Points should have access to system expansion in the future
2) Using Legacy Points to reserve properties in the Trust has its best chance for success using the Waitlist
3) Marriott will conduct active inventory control to match Legacy Point Waitlist Requests, but will wait until it is sure there is excess inventory (more than Trust Point owners want)
4) This potential delay in matching a Waitlist Request will be of unknown length – and may complicate other competing travel needs (airfare,  reservation in an adjoining week, etc)
5) Owners of both Trust Points and Legacy Points must understand these points don’t mix seamlessly, and the Point Owner must decide between booking a Trust Points reservation today (out of the Trust, and perhaps borrowing next years Trust Points to secure the reservation) or Waitlisting for a reservation that may not match until 2/4/8 weeks later using their Legacy Points (or some combination of Trust/Legacy)
6) He mentioned more than once that Marriott wants to actively match reservation requests for both Legacy and Trust Points, because they need to establish a pattern of successful point utilization to ensure future participation using points and on-going customer referrals to the program.

It’s a very complicated system – both sophisticated points users and newbies will struggle with the usage of the system, but they will understand it over time.   I note that Worldmark introduced a second type of point (for use only with Wyndham properties – an affiliated system. )  The introduction of the second type of point caused a great deal of excitement/consternation for owners for awhile, but now we just understand that this is just another type of point that has additional features because of its ability to access the affiliated resorts – so now I have WM points and I also have WM+A points and I manage them both and am aware of the capabilities of each.  

One other comment he made – I mentioned that I expected ROFR to become more frequent in the future, as Marriott began to sell thru its existing Trust Points and needed replenishment inventory.  He agreed that it was likely at that some point in the future they would begin to exercise ROFR, but most likely based upon the needs of the Trust Inventory, ie, where the Trust was weak.  He even offered that there have been situations recently where Marriott sees a “hole” in the Trust Inventory and has proactively approached a private seller that is listing a week for sale and offered to purchase the week for the Trust, using recent market data to support the price.  I know Hilton has done this, where they contacted an existing owner about buying back a week, and find it interesting that Marriott has done this also.  This seems like a Super ROFR, where Marriott is using the recent declining market prices (aided by no ROFR?) to their advantage, by finding sellers and making bids based upon the recent market conditions – which simultaneously builds the Trust and presumably keeps down the overall MF of the Trust (since I suspect they are only buying premium weeks with MFs below $0.40 per point)

I believe there are implications here for all of us – and as others have wisely noted, they are primarily long term implications (except for the obvious short term need of figuring out how exactly to book the damn reservation).  I believe in the short and medium term, enrolled Legacy Week owners who wish to use Legacy Points  will continue to make reservations with relative ease and exploit the Legacy 53 properties (and any expansion properties) effectively.   Long term, if you care to think XX years down the road, those years will be spent by Marriott actively ROFRing prime weeks and adding them to the Trust (and expanding to other properties if possible) --- all while simultaneously selling Trust Points that have a Home Resort Inventory booking advantage over the Legacy Point owner to that expanded Trust Inventory.   This presents a different challenge for the pure Legacy Points owner and I don’t have a prediction of what will transpire then.    

I was satisfied with the conversation but only time will tell if reservations are actually made that support and match this understanding.   I hope this has been helpful and instructive – it certainly was to me.  I apologize if much of this is repetitive to other fine TUGgers posts, but I needed to hear it for myself.  I think it will be important to see how often TUGgers get their reservation requests filled, especially  from Waitlist requests.   I’ll probe that one of these days when possible.  

Best to all,

Greg


----------



## dioxide45 (Jun 24, 2011)

Greg, Thanks for the information and insight.

I think one very valid beef that legacy owners can have is that Marriott was selling this as an improvement over II. Based on feedback from owners, they didn't like the uncertainty of II. With DC you would know instantly if you had your reservation or not. The uncertainty of II would be gone. Marriott failed in that regard.

Regardless of what feedback Marriott got from current owners, it is very evident that they designed the system to sell points to new owners. Our feedback really wasn't that important.

Marriott could have done better by doing as other systems do and releasing all inventory at x date. This would have met the expectations of the owners and provided that yes/no, did I get my reservation. The problem however would then be that the system unfairly favors weeks based owners (yah those that supported the product for all those years) over trust owners. As trust owners wouldn't have access to all the weeks in the weeks based system as those could still be under promise to unenrolled and non converted enrolled weeks owners that haven't reserved.


----------



## puckmanfl (Jun 24, 2011)

good morning....

Greg...

Did you ask about the urban legend regarding "purchasing some Trust points,morphs the remaining into some sort of advantage over pure Legacy points!  What about the reports that if you have a certain % of Trust/Legacy points needed for a Trust reservation... you can snag this over a Trust owner!!!

did you ask if there is some sort of "request first thing" where you can keep your week as a "week" while being wait listed.  Otherwise "They got you!!!  you give up your week and hope for the best!!!

just one point after that spectacular review...

TRUST points > LEGACY points.  This dichotomy will GROW as more stuff goes into trust!!!! It will also grow as more customers purchase Trust points increeasing the competition)

I believe Greg is correct... off season Trust reservations will be easy, prime time might be dicey!!!  I am optimistic that my summer KL snag will be the norm, not the exception!!!  I am also hopeful that they sell out in small incremental 2000 point doses (doctor term) to thousands of customers.  This way these customers will not be able to aford (in points) the better Trust weeks...

For example, if there were a total of 100,000,000 pts in the Trust  I would rather have 50,000 owners of 2,000 pts than, 25,000 of 4000 pts as there will be 1/2 the competition for the 4000 point stays...


----------



## dioxide45 (Jun 24, 2011)

puckmanfl said:


> TRUST points > LEGACY points.  This dichotomy will GROW as more stuff goes into trust!!!!



When looking at pure points, this is true. However, when looking at the products overall they are about equal. Trust=Legacy.

A slight edge could possibly go to trust as they have a large pool of "home resorts". However, they are never guaranteed a specific home resort. Because of that, some could argue an edge to legacy weeks owners who are always guaranteed a week at their specific resort.


----------



## puckmanfl (Jun 24, 2011)

good morning...

Dioxide...

You and I and the rest of Legacy owners, all purchased deeds which give us Home Resort usage.  With this deed comes membership in the Marriott Vacation Club, which gives us the right to exchange for MR points, exchange in II etc.  Legacy owners all had the same exchange rights and possibiliites based on the perceived value of our deed.  We both purchased before Crystal Shores and Oceana Palms were built, but we both the same equal right to exchange in based on the value of our deeds (The II exchange formula).  Now, we find out that new customers have better chances to exchange into new properties than you and I do!!!

Imagine that you own a home in a golf and country club.  You have access to golf and dining in addition to your deed.  Now, they build an exclusive new subdivision in your club.  New purchasers here, as an incentive get first dibs on dinner reservations and tee times and you have to wait.  You still have the deed to your house but do you feel even slightly "shafted" here!!!

With Regards to the Club My points are less than a new purchaser!!!.  I know one can say buy more points, but that is not the point.  The owner that purchased Barony platinum in 2000 should not have to spend more to get the value up to a Surfwatch purchased in 2006.

ALL of the customers in the club should have the same exchange rights!!!!


----------



## dougp26364 (Jun 24, 2011)

Marriott has done a most excellent job of reinventing the wheel to a point where it's possibly the worst point system in all of timeshare. Transparency would have been a much better way to do business. This system, as it stands now, is no different than trading weeks through I.I. This is dramatically different from all other point systems that lets you know when you can book and allows you see what inventory is availabe. Marriott has choosen to hide everything from owners and askes them to trust Marriott to do what's right.


----------



## m61376 (Jun 24, 2011)

Greg- Thanks for confirming what many of us had already surmised. At the end of the day, I think the scales tip in favor of the weeks owners who have followed the advice most often given here- buy where you'd like to go most often. I think the hardest obstacle for Marriott to reckon with going forward is inventory even for trust point owners for prime weeks at the bulk of the 53 resorts that has limited, if any, trust inventory. This is the flip side of the coin- trust owners can't book a President's ski week, for ex., or a Christmas/New Year's/President's week in the Caribbean unless those week owners decide to convert to points, because that is legacy exchange inventory and if these prime week owners can't get what they want elsewhere, they don't have the incentive to give up those coveted weeks and they will not be available to trust point owners, regardless of the number of points they own. 

Unless Marriott intends to buy a lot in the open market to fill its voids, it needs those legacy weeks, if only to make its trust point owners happy. And, let's face it- most owners aren't consumed like the people here, and after a little frustration shrug their shoulders and move on, left with a bad taste. I am afraid that the complexity of the "new and improved" system will leave many throwing up their hands and ready to walk away, and Marriott may just find more people either using their weeks, or simply renting them, or depositing weeks in II; it may not be the point allocations or the skim, but the inherent complexity, which causes many owners simply to continue business as usual.

On another note- any comment/info. on what happens after June 30th? I'd like to know if the offer for joining is going to change.


----------



## Dolphin (Jun 24, 2011)

Greg,

Great review of your call and thanks for sharing.

This insight matches what the salesrep at KL a few weeks ago gave us.  When I asked him about this process, he stated that there were a room of Marriott people reviewing inventories, trends, and request to determine when to make a Trust inventory available to Exchange.  At the time I got this picture of people looking at graphs and reports moving inventory around bases on these factors. It told me and what you articulated is there is no set date that Trust inventory is open to Exchange inventory, it depends on the trends and seasons, etc..... So we will never get any guidance on when to expect Trust availability.

I also agree that for at least the short term, legacy owners should not have issues getting in because of my understanding most buyers of Trust points average about 2000 and what can you actually get for that. All that does allows for Trust point owners to break up weeks.  It just becomes very painful and hard to plan for since the trust release to exchange is done on so many factors and not the same for each property.  One will get 13 months out another 3 months out....

BTW, when talking to this rep, he made a comment about Marriott wants to be "II Like" and speculated what if Marriott one day could trade not just Marriott to Marriott, but between all Prime TS Companies.  He did not say this would happen, but just speculated, question is why he would say this. I then asked what Marriotts commitment to II?  Answer was Marriott commitment is just for 4 more years so that might tell you something.   

Considering where the SpinCo is headed it does make me wonder if we could see SpinCo one day take on the role of II with other Major TS players like DVC, etc....


 Just my speculation.....


----------



## Superchief (Jun 24, 2011)

*Strategy for Combined Point Reservations*

Greg, thanks for providing this information. We own 1500 trust points and several legacy resorts (primarily gold). I have learned to take the following strategy when there is only availability for using trust points:

1. Confirm a reservation for the weekend nights using trust points. These will likely be the most difficult to reserve. 
2. Place a waitlist request for the corresponding week nights using legacy points.
3. If necessary (for travel planning), make a backup reservation for the weeknights at a Marriott hotel in the area using MR points. 

Since there are no change or cancellation fees, you can always make modifications to reservations as availability changes. I have also changed my reservations to utilize more legacy (or expiring trust) points as they become available. The key is to not borrow trust points from the following year in order to confirm a reservation. These points become locked into usage for that year. I learned this the hard way when a VOA used borrowed trust points to make a reservation when I had requested one using my plus points.


----------



## kjd (Jun 24, 2011)

Thanks for the information.  As I was reading it I wondered if Marriott will merge the two systems far-far down the road.  Evidently some reps already think it is.  The other day at Beach Place I was hit by the sales rep in the lobby with the statement that legacy owners enjoy the same benefits as trust owners.  How can this statement be true if there are two "buckets" and one can't cross into the other?  

I mentioned that even though I enrolled my weeks I don't like the system and just plan to save money on exchanges and do less than one week stays.  He persisted in calling the two programs equal and it was pretty clear he was interested in only selling points to a legacy owner.  I hope that every time I stay at an MVCI resort that I'm not harassed by reps giving out bad information.  I told them at the desk that I didn't want any sales rep phone calls offering a "tour".  I didn't get any calls during our stay. I was thankful for that.


----------



## myoakley (Jun 24, 2011)

Thanks for a very informative post.  As a new owner, I am trying to understand the whole Marriott system, and am convinced that it has been made needlessly over-complicated.  Perhaps in the future, it will be simplified.  But, in the meantime, I think that the majority of Marriott owners who have enrolled their weeks and/or bought points, and who are not as savvy and committed as Tuggers, will never really be able to get maximum usage from their points.  I am a resale owner, so I am glad that my usage is in straight-forward weeks, making life much simpler for me!


----------



## DanCali (Jun 24, 2011)

dougp26364 said:


> Marriott has done a most excellent job of reinventing the wheel to a point where it's possibly the worst point system in all of timeshare.



After reading the OP those are my thoughts exactly... (with one small edit)


----------



## Swice (Jun 24, 2011)

*In my mind*

In my mind, I'll simply think of future new resorts in the same way I've thought of the new resorts built after our purchases.    New buyers have "home resort" advantage.    I just have to wait until one of the new buyers gives up their spot before my request is granted.

I just don't understand why Marriott is making it hard on itself by making it all so complicated.    

As miffed as I am about the change (two weeks = $50,000), I can't imagine why Marriott would tick off the owners, like the ones I met two weeks ago, who own eight weeks (assuming $20,000 x 8 = $160,000).    Marriott is essentially telling them their $160,000 is not good enough, they need to fork over at least another $30,000 (or more!!!).     I just don't get that logic.    

And for the most part, I just don't see the value (at least for the next ten years at the rate this economy is in), for anyone to supplement their legacy weeks with a "few" Trust points.    They don't help you other than tagging on a few extra days onto your legacy week vacation... or giving you a week in Hilton Head in January.     Yeah, I know the sales example of you can mix-- Monday on Trust points and Tueday on Legacy... but that gets way too complicated.     That example also forces you to convert your legacy weeks into DC points every year (meaning buy more Trust points).

I'll join program next week... but I'm not thrilled about it.    And I'm no longer encouraging others to buy Marriott.

I'm not angry... just saddened and disappointed by the whole situation.


----------



## puckmanfl (Jun 24, 2011)

good morning...

Swice...

In your example... ALL of us have the same opportunity to snag these properties when put in the exchange pool. Priority is based on the value of my deed (determined by II)...

Now I can stay in weeks as always, but if I move to points i am charged a fee... $695 enrollment + $195 + the skim  and after these fees my points are still don't equal the other points!!!!

I still believe it is more theoretical than practical as I haver snagged Trust units, but I believe it will get worse as more Trust owners come on board and more inventory is moved there!!!!


----------



## Swice (Jun 24, 2011)

puckmanfl said:


> good morning...
> 
> 
> I still believe it is more theoretical than practical as I haver snagged Trust units, but I believe it will get worse as more Trust owners come on board and more inventory is moved there!!!!




Yes, Trust will get priority... but I just have to wait it out (like waiting on home resort people to give up their spots now).    At least that is my thinking for the next five-ten years.

Oh I totally agree... it will get worse.   But I believe, thanks to the economy, that it will be a long time before we feel a real impact.

If it weren't for Legacy owners buying extra points, Marriott sales under this new DC system would have been in the toilet.   The buy-in is just too rich for most people right now.


----------



## BarbS (Jun 24, 2011)

I think at some point Marriott will offer to permanently exchange everyone's legacy points for trust points......of course charging another "small" fee and/or skimming another chunk of points off the top during the exchange.


----------



## rsackett (Jun 24, 2011)

BarbS said:


> I think at some point Marriott will offer to permanently exchange everyone's legacy points for trust points......of course charging another "small" fee and/or skimming another chunk of points off the top during the exchange.



But would you want to?  I assume that would change the maint fees to the $0.40/point that Trust owners pay.  Folks that get a LOT of points for their Legacy week would not like that change!  Of course that may convince me to join the points system if I could still get me week at Harbour Point with maint fees of $500 vs the $1000 I pay now!

Ray


----------



## GregT (Jun 24, 2011)

puckmanfl said:


> good morning....
> 
> Greg...
> 
> ...



Puck,

I didn't ask about the first one, because it has to be Sales BS.  It's not (legally) possible to change the nature of the points -- so Trust Points will remain Trust Points and Legacy Points remain Legacy Points.  The % thing is bunk too -- unless its someone gaming the system (ie use your Trust Points to book a one night Wednesday reservation, to break up the week, so its still there for your matching 3 night and 3 night Waitlist Request). 

I should have asked about the second, but didn't.  I'll try to get that answer another time!!!



m61376 said:


> On another note- any comment/info. on what happens after June 30th? I'd like to know if the offer for joining is going to change.



Marilyn, my apologies, this one I definitely should have clarified.  Based upon my Sales Tour, I believe they will leave enrollment open for the long term, just may change the "incentives".  

My rep told me their goal is to have 300,000 owners enrolled in the long run (which makes sense to me -- that's approx $50M in stable, annual revenues).  I'm not sure if that's possible because of the no resale post-June 20th thing, so that may change too someday.   




Dolphin said:


> Considering where the SpinCo is headed it does make me wonder if we could see SpinCo one day take on the role of II with other Major TS players like DVC, etc....



I agree -- it will be interesting to watch the evolution of SpinCo, as it tries to build a viable, growing company.  We've speculated elsewhere that they could become a consolidator of the high-quality timeshares, perhaps acquiring outright (or the exchanging rights to it) Starwood, DVC or HGVC.   Its harder to see the competing hotel chains do that, but perhaps DVC will.

Marriott needs to find a way to both sell to new owners, plus make its existing ownership happy (and want to buy the new product and refer customers to it).

Best,

Greg


----------



## BocaBoy (Jun 24, 2011)

GregT said:


> I mentioned that I expected ROFR to become more frequent in the future, as Marriott began to sell thru its existing Trust Points and needed replenishment inventory.  He agreed that it was likely at that some point in the future they would begin to exercise ROFR, but most likely based upon the needs of the Trust Inventory, ie, where the Trust was weak.  *He even offered that there have been situations recently where Marriott sees a “hole” in the Trust Inventory and has proactively approached a private seller that is listing a week for sale and offered to purchase the week for the Trust, using recent market data to support the price. *   This seems like a Super ROFR, where Marriott is using the recent declining market prices (aided by no ROFR?) to their advantage, by finding sellers and making bids based upon the recent market conditions – which simultaneously builds the Trust and presumably keeps down the overall MF of the Trust (since I suspect they are only buying premium weeks with MFs below $0.40 per point).


I reported a few weeks ago that Marriott did this with us.  They approached us and repurchased our Sabal Palms Red Week for $11,300 (less $500 in administrative fees), which is a lot more than one could sell for today in most private markets.  Our week had been listed with Marriott Resales for close to two years.  It is interesting because Sabal Palms is long sold out and has no ROFR that can be used to buy weeks on the cheap.  It is also interesting because Marriott gets the use of a lot of Sabal Palms weeks each year from owners trading for MR points, but their ability to obtain permanent weeks for the trust is quite limited.  One  last interesting point.  Our Sabal Palms maintenance fee was about .50 per legacy point, so they are obviously not restricting their purchases to weeks with maintenance fees under .40/point.


----------



## RBERR1 (Jun 24, 2011)

Greg,

Does this mean now if you are going rent points you need to be extermely careful of what kind of points you are renting? 

If someone has 4500 legacy pts and they need 5000 pts to book a vacation and then rents 500 pts from someone who only has trust points then they are potentially stuck because then they cannot be combined or may not be combined until the inventory management people move inventory over from one bucket to the other.

Rich


----------



## siberiavol (Jun 24, 2011)

Greg,
Thanks for another great post. I think you clarified Marriott's position about releasing inventory to legacy owners. I don't think Marriott cares a great deal about fairness. They want to maximize profits which is understandable.

Marriott wants to find the sweet spot that keep legacy owners enrolled yet gives an advantage to trust owners who have already shown a willingness to buy the product. The legacy owners want to make the best trades at the lowest cost. Marriott wants more  revenue from legacy owners. Marriott doesn't approach it as a partnership. Neither do I.

Marriott got dollars from the legacy owners through enrollment fees. They get fees yearly but might not be getting as much revenue from multiple week owners as they did before considering they have to pay II and gave up some fees. They need new revenue from the legacy owners and they hope to get it by selling them trust points.I think their success there will be limited as the years go on. Thus I would expect them to start raising the yearly fee for enrolled owners rather quickly. It is a cat and mouse game and we are the mice. I was able to get some cheese because of lower II fees and reduced points for non weekend nights. Marriott will respond for sure and send the mice back to the drawing board.


----------



## windje2000 (Jun 24, 2011)

GregT said:


> All,
> 
> *Marriott will manage the Home Resort Inventory (opaquely) and will decide when excess Home Resort Inventory exists that therefore is available to be matched against a Legacy Point owners waitlist request.
> *
> ...




Good info in this post - thank you

So let's see if I got this right.

If you elect points, Marriott (through the exchange company) controls your Legacy occupancy,  which it can use to satisfy points requests.   

Marriott also controls access to the weeks owned by the Trust.  

A Legacy owner electing points must do so by end of September of each calendar year.  That commits the week (and Marriott will choose a good one) to the exchange company and gives immediate access to it to Trust point owners via the exchange company.  

The system does not provide a corresponding degree of access for the legacy owner to the points inventory . .  unless Marriott decides to put it in the exchange company.  They have now said they won't do that unless they believe no Trust owner wants it.  They'll hold back the weeks.

Since Marriott won't put Trust inventory into the exchange company if there is any likelihood of  Trust point owner demand, the Legacy owner electing points in the hopes of getting a Trust property is in line for that occupancy behind all other Trust owners . . . . even though that Legacy owner may have given up something scarce in a sold out resort which is greatly desired by Trust point owners.  

_If a Trust point owner gets access to a valuable scarce week from the pool of legacy owners, the pool of legacy owners should get immediate access to an equally valuable scarce week owned by the Trust if this exchange system is to be considered fair to all stakeholders.  
_
The opaque manner in which Trust inventory is held back before being declared 'excess' stacks the deck against legacy owners, particularly in the absence of a request first (before points election) capability on the part of Legacy owners.   

The combination of these rules/policies works to give Trust point owners what amounts to an ROFR or option on the Legacy weeks of those who elect points, without giving an equivalent reciprocal option on Trust weeks to Legacy owners because of the Marriott holdback.  

Open questions 

1.  The relationship between the Marriott entities and II, particularly with respect to deposits made to the 'corporate account' and whether or not Marriott is also 'holding' (in the absence of actual requests) II deposits for the benefit of Trust Point owners.  Note that is exactly what they are doing with Trust inventory.

2.  The priorities (if any) accorded the Legacy/Trust classes of points owners in the Exchange Co.


----------



## DanCali (Jun 24, 2011)

windje2000 said:


> Since Marriott won't put Trust inventory into the exchange company if there is any likelihood of  Trust point owner demand, the Legacy owner electing points in the hopes of getting a Trust property is in line for that occupancy behind all other Trust owners . . . . even though that Legacy owner may have given up something scarce in a sold out resort which is greatly desired by Trust point owners.



Hence the absolute need for a "request first" feature.

It makes no sense to me why anyone would convert a week to points and "hope for the best", especially those owners who can otherwise rent their weeks for $1000+ over MFs. If I don't get my exchange, Marriott won't get my week. I have the same philosophy with II...


----------



## ondeadlin (Jun 24, 2011)

dougp26364 said:


> Marriott has done a most excellent job of reinventing the wheel to a point where it's possibly the worst point system in all of timeshare.



Yep, that about sums it up.


----------



## puckmanfl (Jun 24, 2011)

good evening...

windje..
as the presumptive #1 supporter of this sytem in these here parts..evn I am becoming concerned regarding the future.  It was my initial understanding that when a Trust owner snagged Legacy inventory, an equal points equivalent of Trust inventory is placed in exchange company.  This does not appear to be the case!!!


----------



## windje2000 (Jun 24, 2011)

puckmanfl said:


> good evening...
> 
> windje..
> as the presumptive #1 supporter of this sytem in these here parts..evn I am becoming concerned regarding the future.  *It was my initial understanding that when a Trust owner snagged Legacy inventory, an equal points equivalent of Trust inventory is placed in exchange company.  This does not appear to be the case!!!*



Puck - I think we all were thinking exactly that.  I certainly was.  

EDITED TO ADD - *The end result is when a points owner snags a legacy week in the exchange co, Marriott (the Trust) gives the exchange co an IOU, which it subsequently pays off with whatever the Trust points owners don't want.*

It's actually pretty sad that a company with the level of goodwill it enjoyed from satisfied customers has sunk to these depths.

I read your earlier post where you postulate that small point owners contribute less to breakage than larger point owners.  

It takes one 'one day' reservation to break a week and once broken they are no longer available to weeks exchangers.  

Hope you are still enjoying Hawaii!


----------



## dioxide45 (Jun 24, 2011)

RBERR1 said:


> Greg,
> 
> Does this mean now if you are going rent points you need to be extermely careful of what kind of points you are renting?
> 
> ...



If you are renting points, it is important to ask for legacy or trust inventory based on what you already have. Best not to mix the two.




puckmanfl said:


> good evening...
> 
> windje..
> as the presumptive #1 supporter of this sytem in these here parts..evn I am becoming concerned regarding the future.  It was my initial understanding that when a Trust owner snagged Legacy inventory, an equal points equivalent of Trust inventory is placed in exchange company.  This does not appear to be the case!!!



In my initial analogy of marbles and cookies, I essentially indicated that points were points. This is how it should work. When a trust owner books exchange inventory, those points should go in to the exchange company. Then if someone comes along with legacy points and there are enough trust points in the exchange company, that legacy owner should be able to directly book trust inventory with their legacy week going in to the exchange company.

It doesn't seem that trust owners are depositing points in to the exchange company. Marriott is cherry picking what physical inventory they will place there when a trust owner pulls off an exchange.

If trust owners deposited points, then points would be points. At least closer than they are now.


----------



## puckmanfl (Jun 24, 2011)

good evening...

Windje...

I wasn't referring to breakage... Just talking about my own preferences.  I tend to go for the high valued weeks... KL was 7000, Surfwatch 3 bedroom 6 days about 3775.  It was my hypothesis that it would be easier to snag expensive weeks (4000 pts or more) from Trust inventory if all of the Trust owners only had 2000 pts each... In my example, I am better off with 50,000 trust owners with 2000 pts than 25,000 with 4000 pts...

I am home from Hawaii.. if you pm me your email I will send you the pix....

Greg gave them 2 thumbs up.  Werner used them in his yesterland website...


----------



## hotcoffee (Jun 24, 2011)

puckmanfl said:


> good evening...
> 
> windje..
> as the presumptive #1 supporter of this sytem in these here parts..evn I am becoming concerned regarding the future.  It was my initial understanding that when a Trust owner snagged Legacy inventory, an equal points equivalent of Trust inventory is placed in exchange company.  This does not appear to be the case!!!



There was nothing new in Greg's very good synopsis.  I think those of us who have been analyzing the system had already arrived at those same conclusions.  Here are some things to keep in mind:

1. Since most Trust owners own relatively few points.  Most of the Trust inventory is excess.  There is no evidence that this will change anytime soon.  Legacy weeks owners have a huge advantage in points owned over Trust owners.  Enrolled legacy owners are the ones who can most readily exchange into the Hawaiian Trust inventory.

2. While it might be an over simplication to say that "when a Trust owner snagged Legacy inventory, an equal points equivalent of Trust inventory is placed in exchange company", it is still essentially a true statement.  The more Trust owners exchange, the more Trust inventory becomes excess.  The more Trust inventory that becomes excess, the more that will become available to legacy weeks owners.

3. In spite of what they say, it seems doubtful to me that the DC program is currently in its final form.  The economy is showing no signs of any significant improvement.  Survival for the spinoff company is selling points plus making the program work for everyone.  I would be very surprised if the program will be successful the way it is currently structured.  I do not believe there is enough incentive for buying points.  And, if legacy owners do not see enough benefit in electing points, they will just take advantage of the lower cost and use their weeks as before.  I think Marriott would like to see us use the program.  If we cannot get our exchanges, we will not use the program.

I was told early on that Marriott has an internal organization that manages their inventories.  That organization can move inventory around as needed to fill requests.  The best way for us to see more Trust inventory in the exchange pool is to keep pestering them about it.  Squeaky wheels still get the grease.


----------



## GregT (Jun 26, 2011)

RBERR1 said:


> Greg,
> 
> Does this mean now if you are going rent points you need to be extermely careful of what kind of points you are renting?
> 
> Rich





dioxide45 said:


> If you are renting points, it is important to ask for legacy or trust inventory based on what you already have. Best not to mix the two.




Rich, 

Dioxide has given the correct response here -- if you are renting points, it is now more important than ever to confirm the type of point you are renting (Trust/Legacy).  The website referenced below (gtibbitts.tripod.com) has a Sample Points Transfer Agreement which has now been clarified to specify Legacy versus Trust Points (it's been updated last few days, previous version was not clear).  

This confusion on points buckets will not stop me from renting points in or out, it will merely ensure that I am careful with what I am renting.  Frankly, we may now find more dissatisfied points rentors who don't understand what they own or how to use the system.   

Separately, I'm at Ko Olina now -- checked in today (great property, am in Hale Naia tower on 5th floor -- nice view (w/trees)!.  Looking forward to another week!

Best to all,

Greg


----------



## jazzeah (Jun 26, 2011)

We were just at Lakeshore for out "points presentation" and like everyone is saying they want you to buy more points.  We already own 4 t/s weeks - all platinum . MGV, MOW, MGO and MLS and they told us that in order to "get the best deal and trade" we need to upgrade to the "next level" of points system.  Well my hubby, always wanting to be at the "best level" purchased an additional 4K of points.  We now have over 200K in Marriott inventory and I still do NOT know how to effectively use it.  Our rep is too busy getting people to convert to points to help us so I am fumbling through the system rather then just booking the weeks i always use.  

And at 0.40 a point we are looking at a bucket load of money to Marriott in "maintenance fees" looks like 4000 - 5000 per year.   I am sure they will add another tier to get more money out of people.

My main comment is be csreful what the sales rep tells you and again as you see again - if you own where you go, that may be the best situation.  We own at all 4 places and that is really the only place we ever go so I do not know why my hubby felt he had to be the top tier of points because it just costs more.


----------



## dougp26364 (Jun 26, 2011)

hotcoffee said:


> There was nothing new in Greg's very good synopsis.  I think those of us who have been analyzing the system had already arrived at those same conclusions.  Here are some things to keep in mind:
> 
> 1. Since most Trust owners own relatively few points.  Most of the Trust inventory is excess.  There is no evidence that this will change anytime soon.  *Legacy weeks owners have a huge advantage in points owned *over Trust owners.  Enrolled legacy owners are the ones who can most readily exchange into the Hawaiian Trust inventory.
> 
> ...



I think there is just one small correction to be made. Marriott seems to be making it abundantly clear that legacy week owners don't own points. They may give their week up for second class points (as compared to trust owners) but they still own weeks, not points. 

It seems to becoming clearer that those who already own weeks will be second class when it comes to dealing in points based reservations. Weeks owners hold the edge over trust owners in weeks based exchanges. 

The problem is, if you want to have the best of both worlds, you must own in both worlds. Marriott has fractured their ownership base. If you're not satisfied staying in the 53 legacy week resorts you'll either need to own trust points for those resorts or, play the waiting game until trust owners have picked over the inventory. My issue is Marriott hides that information so legacy week owners don't know what to expect.

Marriott was trying to sell this system saying their owners told them they didn't like I.I.'s system. Unfortunately, Marriott has done little to improve on I.I.'s system. It is not transparent and Marriott will do whatever Marriott wants to do, then say trust us. Sorry, I don't trust Marriott. If I want a points based reservations system I'll buy more HGVC or DRI points. Heck, I probably look at ANY points based reservations system rather than dive into Marriott's points House of Horrors.

The entire advantage of a points based reservations system is KNOWING what's available and WHEN it will come available. With HGVC, that's 9 months before the check out date. With DRI it's 10 months before the check in date. With Marriott, if you're a legacy week owner wanting a trust based week, who knows when it might become available. I'm not even convinced Marriott knows when they might release inventory. This system is NO BETTER than I.I.'s system with it's hidden exchange values.


----------



## puckmanfl (Jun 26, 2011)

good morning

Doug...
best post yet on these issues... I think you nailed it!!!!


----------



## DanCali (Jun 26, 2011)

dougp26364 said:


> It seems to becoming clearer that those who already own weeks will be second class when it comes to dealing in points based reservations...
> 
> My issue is Marriott hides that information so legacy week owners don't know what to expect...
> 
> This system is NO BETTER than I.I.'s system with it's hidden exchange values...



And congrats to Marriott for hiding the reality so well that it took most Tuggers a year to figure this out.

Where's that inventory buckets manual explaining the reservations and exchange procedures???


----------



## windje2000 (Jun 26, 2011)

DanCali said:


> And congrats to Marriott for hiding the reality so well that it took most Tuggers a year to figure this out.
> 
> Where's that inventory buckets manual explaining the reservations and exchange procedures???



Shorter Greg T - The end result is when a points owner snags a legacy week in the exchange co, Marriott (the Trust) gives the exchange co an IOU, which it subsequently pays off with whatever the Trust points owners don't want.


Are they doing the same thing with the corporate II account?  They're getting something in return for the bundled fees . . . . and priority access to exchange inventory is essential for selling points.


----------



## wvacations (Jun 26, 2011)

jazzeah said:


> We were just at Lakeshore for out "points presentation" and like everyone is saying they want you to buy more points.  We already own 4 t/s weeks - all platinum . MGV, MOW, MGO and MLS and they told us that in order to "get the best deal and trade" we need to upgrade to the "next level" of points system.  Well my hubby, always wanting to be at the "best level" purchased an additional 40K of points.  We now have over 200K in Marriott inventory and I still do NOT know how to effectively use it.  Our rep is too busy getting people to convert to points to help us so I am fumbling through the system rather then just booking the weeks i always use.
> 
> And at 0.40 a point we are looking at a bucket load of money to Marriott in "maintenance fees" looks like 4000 - 5000 per year.   I am sure they will add another tier to get more money out of people.
> 
> My main comment is be csreful what the sales rep tells you and again as you see again - if you own where you go, that may be the best situation.  We own at all 4 places and that is really the only place we ever go so I do not know why my hubby felt he had to be the top tier of points because it just costs more.



WOW!  40,000 additional points? What level did that you you. As I understand the top level is 13,500 points. Also you may want to prepare for a larger MF bill in January than $4,000-$5.000. 40,000 trust points at $.40 per points is $16,000 in MF plus the MF form the other 4 resorts that you own weeks. Not sure of the MF on the other 4 resorts, but looks like you need toset aside about $20,000 for the bills.

That is quite a purchase and trust in company that do not understand!!

 Good luck!


----------



## windje2000 (Jun 26, 2011)

wvacations said:


> WOW!  40,000 additional points? What level did that you you. As I understand the top level is 13,500 points. Also you may want to prepare for a larger MF bill in January than $4,000-$5.000. 40,000 trust points at $.40 per points is $16,000 in MF plus the MF form the other 4 resorts that you own weeks. Not sure of the MF on the other 4 resorts, but looks like you need toset aside about $20,000 for the bills.
> 
> That is quite a purchase and trust in company that do not understand!!
> 
> Good luck!



I added a $ sign in front of the 40K when I read that post.  

40,000 points is $400,000.  WOW! would be exactly right.


----------



## m61376 (Jun 26, 2011)

jazzeah said:


> We were just at Lakeshore for out "points presentation" and like everyone is saying they want you to buy more points.  We already own 4 t/s weeks - all platinum . MGV, MOW, MGO and MLS and they told us that in order to "get the best deal and trade" we need to upgrade to the "next level" of points system.  Well my hubby, always wanting to be at the "best level" purchased an additional 40K of points.  We now have over 200K in Marriott inventory and I still do NOT know how to effectively use it.  Our rep is too busy getting people to convert to points to help us so I am fumbling through the system rather then just booking the weeks i always use.
> 
> And at 0.40 a point we are looking at a bucket load of money to Marriott in "maintenance fees" looks like 4000 - 5000 per year.   I am sure they will add another tier to get more money out of people.
> 
> My main comment is be csreful what the sales rep tells you and again as you see again - if you own where you go, that may be the best situation.  We own at all 4 places and that is really the only place we ever go so I do not know why my hubby felt he had to be the top tier of points because it just costs more.


If you truly bought 40K points, I would see if you are in the recission period and rescind while you can and rethink this purchase.


----------



## MALC9990 (Jun 26, 2011)

dougp26364 said:


> I think there is just one small correction to be made. Marriott seems to be making it abundantly clear that legacy week owners don't own points. They may give their week up for second class points (as compared to trust owners) but they still own weeks, not points.
> 
> It seems to becoming clearer that those who already own weeks will be second class when it comes to dealing in points based reservations. Weeks owners hold the edge over trust owners in weeks based exchanges.
> 
> ...



My experience of the MVCIAP points system as a both a weeks owner at Phuket Beach Club and a MVCIAP points owner is that this is very true. To exploit the systemk to the best advantage you need to be in both systems. 

The big advantages that the MVCIAP points systems offer over the DC are:

1. I can exchange my Phuket Beach Club Weeks for MVCIAP points and there is only ONE Points Bucket. Points in MVCIAP are Points. To do this I need to have an MVCIAP points account with a minimum number of points.

2. There is an online booking system for making MVCIAP resort reservations - so I can see what is available online at any point upto 13 months out.

The downside is the small number of resorts included in the system.

What we really need is a sinlgle Global MVCI Weeks/Points system covering all resorts everywhere with a single points bucket that WE CAN ALL ACCESS.


----------



## jazzeah (Jun 26, 2011)

*typo - 4k points*

sorry that was  typo - it was 4K pts, too many $ for all of it


----------



## hotcoffee (Jun 26, 2011)

dougp26364 said:


> I think there is just one small correction to be made. Marriott seems to be making it abundantly clear that legacy week owners don't own points. They may give their week up for second class points (as compared to trust owners) but they still own weeks, not points. . . .



Enrolled weeks owners who elect points get significantly more points on average than Trust owners are buying.  I don't see that changing any time soon.  Who is going to use all of that Hawaiian inventory in the Trust?  Is it going to be someone with 2000 points or someone with 4000 or 5000 points?

Why would Marriott keep valuable weeks in the Trust inventory that cannot be used by Trust owners?  As I have said in other threads, they can rent it, move it to the points inventory, or bulk it into II.  What are they likely to do with it?

The problem that I see with the program is that those who weeks owners wanting to reserve their week with points gain no advantage at all by exchanging at 13 months, and get very little advantage exchanging at 12 months.  So, there is no point in being Premier or Premier-plus since the best exchanges will probably not be available until 10 months or less.

Legacy points are not inferior to Trust points. Legacy owners own at their resorts, and Trust owners own Trust inventory.  Trust owners can only reserve weeks that they have enough points for.  Legacy owners have more points to use and can snag better weeks at better resorts as they reach the exchange inventory.  The caveat is that it appears that most weeks will probably not reach the exchange inventory until less than 12 months out.

I'd be more concerned if it appeared that Marriott is selling points like hotcakes, and everyone were buying 5000 and 6000 points apiece.  It that were true, there would be a pretty good reason for believing that the best weeks will never reach the exchange inventory.

I think the current system threatens legacy weeks owners more who don't enroll but exchange via II a lot.  They are the ones who are going to be deprived of the excess Trust inventory that probably would have otherwise been bulked into II.  It is now likely to not hit the II enventory until late - after it becomes clear to Marriott that DC members are not going to reserve it.


----------



## dioxide45 (Jun 26, 2011)

jazzeah said:


> sorry that was  typo - it was 4K pts, too many $ for all of it



I think you may have also had an extra zero on your total? Did you mean you have a total of 20K in points instead of 200K?



hotcoffee said:


> The problem that I see with the program is that those who weeks owners wanting to reserve their week with points gain no advantage at all by exchanging at 13 months, and get very little advantage exchanging at 12 months.  So, there is no point in being Premier or Premier-plus since the best exchanges will probably not be available until 10 months or less.



The only advantage for Premier Plus owners is booking less than 7 nights at the 13 month mark.



> Legacy points are not inferior to Trust points. Legacy owners own at their resorts, and Trust owners own Trust inventory.



Trust owners however can reserve at more home resorts where there is lots of trust inventory. Once I deposit a week for points, I can only see exchange inventory. A trust owner can request first for exchange inventory, a legacy owner can not.




MALC9990 said:


> My experience of the MVCIAP points system as a both a weeks owner at Phuket Beach Club and a MVCIAP points owner is that this is very true. To exploit the systemk to the best advantage you need to be in both systems.
> 
> The big advantages that the MVCIAP points systems offer over the DC are:
> 
> ...



Did MVCIAP weeks owners actually sign their deeds over to Marriott when they signed up for MVCIAP? I honestly think this is where DC has to go. They are selling enrollments now. I can see it now, ten years down the road they will be selling us the new "option". For only another $595-$1995 you can pay us to convert your deeds to trust deeds. What a deal!


----------



## dougp26364 (Jun 26, 2011)

hotcoffee said:


> Enrolled weeks owners who elect points get significantly more points on average than Trust owners are buying.  I don't see that changing any time soon.  Who is going to use all of that Hawaiian inventory in the Trust?  Is it going to be someone with 2000 points or someone with 4000 or 5000 points?
> 
> Why would Marriott keep valuable weeks in the Trust inventory that cannot be used by Trust owners?  As I have said in other threads, they can rent it, move it to the points inventory, or bulk it into II.  What are they likely to do with it?
> 
> ...



What I was pointing out was that legacy weeks owners don't actually own points. They own weeks. Marriott, for a price, allows legacy weeks to be converted to what amounts to second hand points. They're converted weeks points. Legacy owners don't own any points. 

Legacy points stand behind trust points, even if they are given considerably more of them, when it comes to reserving trust inventory. What good is having 50,000 points from converted legacy weeks when you have to wait for all those 2,000 point trust owners to make up their mind before you can reserve trust inventory?

Trust owners own points. Legacy week owners own weeks that can be converted to second hand points with less value in the trust system than trust points. Legacy week owners, no matter how many points they have, will always stand behind trust owners when booking trust inventory, no matter how few trust points a trust owner has.

Right now Legacy week owners do have the advantage in reserving legacy week inventory. Fortunately, that's the majority of the inventory. Marriott does appear to be doing it's best to aquire inventory for trust owners, so this will change.

Marriott is also keeping everything beneath the table. Trust Marriott they say but, we're not going to show you. This is no better than I.I.'s deposit/request and hope system. The exception is you know if you have enough points. You just don't know if you have the right type of points to get the inventory available or, if/when Marriott will move/exchange inventory from one bucket to the other so you can reserve your week.

Marriott had a chance to have the best points based timeshare system in the world. Instead, they have the worst. It's all about control and Marriott has kept all the control.


----------



## dougp26364 (Jun 26, 2011)

DanCali said:


> And congrats to Marriott for hiding the reality so well that it took most Tuggers a year to figure this out.
> 
> Where's that inventory buckets manual explaining the reservations and exchange procedures???



I think I was right in there with calling this program a turd from the begining. In fact, I believe Perry and I flip flopped positions once the program hit the streets. I had thought it would be a great program, much like others already on the market. Perry thought it would be a windfall to Marriott with Marriott keeping all the control. As far as I'm concerned, Perry's initial thoughts before the program was released was correct. 

Marriott is holding all the cards and not allowing owners any real information about how the exchange process works. So how is this any better than I.I.'s exchange process? Wait, I know, it's brining money into Marriott! 

All other points based systems I'm aware of set a home resort advantage that is specified. You KNOW when you can reserve if you own a certain type of week or ownership. You KNOW when inventory is released to the general ownership for reservations. What you don't know is how many owners will book their home resort week and how much inventory will be open those wanting to exchange. After a couple of years owners get a good feel for what supply is there for internal exchanges.

An example would be HGVC and Hawaii. I know that, if I want to book HHV on Oahu, I'd better be ready to book right at the 9 month mark if I want a 7 night stay. There are to many Orlando and Vegas owners competing for the same weeks and they go fast. If I want to book just about any other HGVC location it's not so important as there is almost always inventory.

With DRI, I know that Maui always has good availablity up until about 3 or 4 months before check in dates. I know that waiting until less than 59 days (reservations are often half price) is a risk and may result in only having studio units available if it's high season. 

With Marriott, I'm still guessing. Marriott holds all the cards. Owners don't know what's available, if it's available, what sort of points (legacy or trust) can book a vacation, when Marriott will release inventory et......

This system is not about owners. It's about Marriott finding a way to sell partial weeks at resorts that weren't selling the expensive full week ownership. Marriott keeps all control. Owners are still guessing at what they can get for and exchange and when it will come through.


----------



## dougp26364 (Jun 26, 2011)

MALC9990 said:


> My experience of the MVCIAP points system as a both a weeks owner at Phuket Beach Club and a MVCIAP points owner is that this is very true. To exploit the systemk to the best advantage you need to be in both systems.
> 
> The big advantages that the MVCIAP points systems offer over the DC are:
> 
> ...



BINGO! 

If Marriott had done this, it might have been the best system in the timeshare world. It could have been a giant killer! Unfortunately greed seems to have stood in the way. Marriott was to focused on trying to move expensive inventory by selling partial weeks in the form of small points packages that won't get those owners anywhere except for a few nights here and there.


----------



## dougp26364 (Jun 26, 2011)

dioxide45 said:


> ...............They are selling enrollments now. I can see it now, ten years down the road they will be selling us the new "option". For only another $595-$1995 you can pay us to convert your deeds to trust deeds. What a deal!



I feel the same way about this. DRI (use to be Sunterra) started out with weeks, then went to points and now sells only trust style ownerships. Over the years things have gone from owning weeks to joining the points based internal exchange system to converting deeded weeks to trust based ownership. DRI continues to ask me if I would like to give up my weeks for an ownership in one of their trusts. 

The difference is DRI has a few different trusts. Ownership is in one of those trust and you have home resort adavantage for that group of trusts. I can see Marriott doing something similar down the road to milk more cash out of their current owner base.


----------



## hotcoffee (Jun 26, 2011)

No one will get any arguments from me over whether or not Marriott's system is a flawed system.  I can see its flaws.  However, I have gotten pretty much what I wanted both years so far.  That did not always happen with II.  So, right now, the system seems to be working for me.

Overall, I'm not very optimistic about the future of DC.  In fact, I am not very optimistic about the future of timesharing in general.  I think the best days for timesharing are behind us now.  I think it is going to be a struggle for the spinoff company to survive.  That is not only because DC is a flawed program (which it is), but also because I don't think there is going to be many people willing to shell out $50,000 to buy points in this economy.  So, what would be the incentive to buy points at all?  Their Explorer program seemed good at first until I noticed how many points it takes to do the best vacations.  In the Trust, the best inventory requires too many points to reserve.  I assume that they are trying to sell shorter vacations.  So, I guess they think they can get people to fly all the way to Hawaii for three nights at Ko Olina.  Well, I do not see that happening from anywhere except maybe the west coast.  If the DC program really were to fail, the spinoff company would go down in flames; and Marriott timesharing would be history.

I agree that there should be just one points pot.  I don't know if they can do that legally or not, though.  The Trust is real estate.  But if they can, one points pot would give everyone, Trust owners as well as weeks owners, access to everyone else's inventory to the benefit of all.


----------



## dioxide45 (Jun 26, 2011)

hotcoffee said:


> I agree that there should be just one points pot.  I don't know if they can do that legally or not, though.  The Trust is real estate.  But if they can, one points pot would give everyone, Trust owners as well as weeks owners, access to everyone else's inventory to the benefit of all.



I think they can treat it as one pot. At least at a predetermined time before checkin. Other systems don't seem to have an issue doing that. They just need to provide the proper disclosures and write in to the trust documents that at x date before checkin, all inventory gets placed in to the exchange company.


----------



## taffy19 (Jun 26, 2011)

hotcoffee said:


> No one will get any arguments from me over whether or not Marriott's system is a flawed system.  I can see its flaws.  However, I have gotten pretty much what I wanted both years so far.  That did not always happen with II.  So, right now, the system seems to be working for me.
> 
> Overall, I'm not very optimistic about the future of DC.  In fact, I am not very optimistic about the future of timesharing in general.  I think the best days for timesharing are behind us now.  I think it is going to be a struggle for the spinoff company to survive.  That is not only because DC is a flawed program (which it is), but also because I don't think there is going to be many people willing to shell out $50,000 to buy points in this economy.  So, what would be the incentive to buy points at all?  Their Explorer program seemed good at first until I noticed how many points it takes to do the best vacations.  In the Trust, the best inventory requires too many points to reserve.  I assume that they are trying to sell shorter vacations.  So, I guess they think they can get people to fly all the way to Hawaii for three nights at Ko Olina.  Well, I do not see that happening from anywhere except maybe the west coast.  If the DC program really were to fail, the spinoff company would go down in flames; and Marriott timesharing would be history.
> 
> I agree that there should be just one points pot.  I don't know if they can do that legally or not, though.  The Trust is real estate.  But if they can, one points pot would give everyone, Trust owners as well as weeks owners, access to everyone else's inventory to the benefit of all.


We were told by two different Sales Managers at two different resorts very recently that BIG changes are coming at the end of the year but they wouldn't say what these changes are.

We enrolled with the idea of taking one of the explorer packages (Safari) but then noticed too that they take anywhere from 16,000 to 20,000 points so how many years of saving up would this mean for a lot of people who do not even get 3,000 or 4,000 points?  It would take forever.  It would even take three years for us so that took care of that.  No way are we giving up our fixed/week unit on Maui for three years on a row.

Marriott will have to do something to make the program more user friendly for everyone or it will not succeed in this economy.  Traveling is a luxury and will get even more so if the economy doesn't change for the better which I doubt will happen.

Maybe the best thing is to bail out now before everyone wants to sell their Marriott timeshare.


----------



## DanCali (Jun 26, 2011)

hotcoffee said:


> As I have said in other threads, they can rent it, move it to the points inventory, or bulk it into II.  What are they likely to do with it?



Isn't it obvious they would rent it for a profit?

Isn't that what they are doing with the "Gift of Time"?

Marriott is in the business of making money, not pleasing owners who pay MFs and DC dues regardless of the draconian rules Marriott makes up and doesn't share with the owners..


----------



## dougp26364 (Jun 26, 2011)

hotcoffee said:


> No one will get any arguments from me over whether or not Marriott's system is a flawed system.  I can see its flaws.  However, I have gotten pretty much what I wanted both years so far.  That did not always happen with II.  So, right now, the system seems to be working for me.
> 
> Overall, I'm not very optimistic about the future of DC.  In fact, I am not very optimistic about the future of timesharing in general.  I think the best days for timesharing are behind us now.  I think it is going to be a struggle for the spinoff company to survive.  That is not only because DC is a flawed program (which it is), but also because I don't think there is going to be many people willing to shell out $50,000 to buy points in this economy.  So, what would be the incentive to buy points at all?  Their Explorer program seemed good at first until I noticed how many points it takes to do the best vacations.  In the Trust, the best inventory requires too many points to reserve.  I assume that they are trying to sell shorter vacations.  So, I guess they think they can get people to fly all the way to Hawaii for three nights at Ko Olina.  Well, I do not see that happening from anywhere except maybe the west coast.  If the DC program really were to fail, the spinoff company would go down in flames; and Marriott timesharing would be history.
> 
> *I agree that there should be just one points pot.  I don't know if they can do that legally or not, though. * The Trust is real estate.  But if they can, one points pot would give everyone, Trust owners as well as weeks owners, access to everyone else's inventory to the benefit of all.



Diamond Resorts successfully blends trust points and non-trust points into one exhange pool. DRI does it not only for domestic resorts but for ALL resorts. If DRI (formerly Sunterra) can do it, so can Marriott. My opinion is Marriott does not want to do this because they want to much control.


----------



## dougp26364 (Jun 26, 2011)

iconnections said:


> *We were told by two different Sales Managers at two different resorts very recently that BIG changes are coming at the end of the year but they wouldn't say what these changes are.*
> 
> We enrolled with the idea of taking one of the explorer packages (Safari) but then noticed too that they take anywhere from 16,000 to 20,000 points so how many years of saving up would this mean for a lot of people who do not even get 3,000 or 4,000 points?  It would take forever.  It would even take three years for us so that took care of that.  No way are we giving up our fixed/week unit on Maui for three years on a row.
> 
> ...



I hope there are changes and that those changes are more owner friendly. However, I'm not very optimistic. Marriott had many, many examples of successful points overlay systems and even trust based systems that were overlayed with deed week/pionts based reservation system. Marriott choose to ignore the 4 lane super highway and elected to cut their own path with a dull hatchet through the jungle. IMHO, poor choice for such a large company with so much experience in the hospitality field.

As it is now, we'll take advantage of the one fee for all services and continue to trade in weeks rather than points. That system still works. If there ever comes a time when it doesn't work, we'll cancel our DC membership and put our Marriott weeks back in our personal I.I. account. Fortunately, I have a non-Marriott week with I.I. I've decided I'd be best served by keeping that account open for a few more years until I know how all of this will shake out with Marriott. If things go from bad to worse, I'll move my Marriott weeks back to our personal account and take my chances with the old system, which doesn't seem to be broken. 

IMHO, Marriott needs to address a few critical areas:

1. Put the original seasons back in place. By this I mean stop jacking the points around so that what was once a gold season is now worth less than a silver season. Keep the points the same throughout the orignal seasons at established resorts. If Marriott thought they made a mistake when they originally sold a resort (check the differences in seasons between Oceana Palms and Ocean Pointe), then they should live with it and not punish legacy week owners by re-seasoning established resorts with fluctuating point requirements. 

2. STOP SKIMMING POINTS! If a week is worth 5,000 points to reserve, then give the owner of that week 5,000 points. Other systems respect owners enough to give them what it takes to reserve their week. Why doesn't Marriott do the same. 

3. Online access to reservation!

4. Home resort advantage for trust owners and a set date when all other owners can reserve any units not already spoken for. It would probably be worthwhile to set up a bulk banking date with I.I. at a specified date so they can meet exchange obligations out of the inventory not already reserved by owners.

5. A discount for last minute reservations. Many other systems offer bonus time or up to 50% discounts for last minute reservations.

My bet is the changes we'll see favor Marriott and not the owners but, time will tell.


----------



## jazzeah (Jun 27, 2011)

no that was almost 200k in dollars of Marriott inventory.  we own MGV - 25K, MGO, 40K, MOW, 25K, MLS, 35K and now spent 35K for more points 
so that is 157K of dollars paid to Marriott for purchasing timeshares and now points.  

so you are right not 200K.

eitherway it is what it is, I was on the phone with the Marriott rep yesterday - on hold for 45 mins since they are very busy getting people to convert to points and I found out that you also have to tell them by June 30  to carry over your new DC points or you will lose them by the end of the year.  Way too many dates to remember.  I need a calendar just for Marriott rules.  Luckily I moved them over


----------



## hotcoffee (Jun 27, 2011)

dioxide45 said:


> I . . . .The only advantage for Premier Plus owners is booking less than 7 nights at the 13 month mark.



I forgot about that one.  I guess that is worth something.  The only trouble is that with the way the DC program is currently structured, there is relatively little inventory available 13 months.  If a Premier-plus member has to wait until 10 months, he loses most of his 13 month advantage.



dioxide45 said:


> Trust owners however can reserve at more home resorts where there is lots of trust inventory. Once I deposit a week for points, I can only see exchange inventory. A trust owner can request first for exchange inventory, a legacy owner can not. . . .



One of my main points is that most Trust owners will not have enough points to reserve good weeks at the best resorts.  How many people are going to buy points so they can stay for a week (or less) at a seasonal resort in its off-season?  So, in reality, legacy DC members are only competing again a fraction of the Trust owners for, for example, most of the Hawaiian weeks.  The critical question is how long will Marriott wait until they concede the inventory is excess and give others a shot at it?


----------



## hotcoffee (Jun 27, 2011)

iconnections said:


> We were told by two different Sales Managers at two different resorts very recently that BIG changes are coming at the end of the year but they wouldn't say what these changes are. . . .



I sure hope you are right about big changes coming.  I just don't believe DC is going to fly the way it is now.  I don't think anyone is particularly happy with it.  Worse, the thing the spinoff company needs the most is to sell points.  But, the DC program has not been crafted with enough incentives for people to buy points.  I would never have bought my points had I not had a pretty decent amount of enrollment points to start with.  And, the only reason I had a decent amount of enrollment points was my Hawaiian week.  Had I had a Caribbean week, for example, I would not have bought the points because it does not appear that they awarded the Caribbean weeks as richly as they did the Hawaiian weeks.  Moreover, to start from scratch, having no points at all, requires too much of a commitment in this weak economy that looks to be going nowhere fast.


----------



## jdunn1 (Jun 27, 2011)

I really dislike the destination club.  I think it is a system best designed for only the most elite of marriott owners.  Owners with the best weeks (i.e. summer beach weeks, winter ski weeks, etc...) already had the best trading power, why did Marriott need to create another portal for these owners to get even more for their weeks at the cost of all the other Marriott owners.

My biggest problem with the DC is that Marriott can take a prime deposit from II that wasn't deposited by a DC member exchanging their week for points.  I have no problem with prime week owners getting more points than the rest of us but then limit the weeks available for exchange to only the weeks deposited by other enroled members exchanging for points or developer inventory.

The avereage Joe Marriott owner is getting stepped on by Marriott with ever increasing dues and now the DC club stealing inventory from II.  I feel like Marriott has created a system for the "haves" to take from the "have nots" with the DC.

No offense to all the Legacy week owners that enroled in the DC.


----------



## dougp26364 (Jun 27, 2011)

hotcoffee said:


> I forgot about that one.  I guess that is worth something.  The only trouble is that with the way the DC program is currently structured, there is relatively little inventory available 13 months.  If a Premier-plus member has to wait until 10 months, he loses most of his 13 month advantage.
> 
> 
> 
> One of my main points is that most Trust owners will not have enough points to reserve good weeks at the best resorts.  How many people are going to buy points so they can stay for a week (or less) at a seasonal resort in its off-season?  So, in reality, legacy DC members are only competing again a fraction of the Trust owners for, for example, most of the Hawaiian weeks.  The critical question is how long will Marriott wait until they concede the inventory is excess and give others a shot at it?



They really don't need enough to reserve a full week. They only need enough to reserve a partial week. Once a partial week is reserved anyone looking to book that full week is out of luck. If you think about it from that angle, trust owners with just a few points can have the same impact as if they have enough points to reserve the full week at expensive resorts. 

How many will do this? I guess that's up to speculation. I can say that if I had paid full freight for those points and if I was paying the MF's on those points, I'd be using those points. I'd either save or borrow to get what I wanted for where I wanted to go.

Hawaiian resorts tend to be expensive for many to get to but, that's not always the case if you live on the west coast. I can see weekend stays getting booked at Hawaiian resorts by trust owners with a couple thousand points and that takes that full week out of the exchange bucket. Even though I wouldn't do it, I do know people with enough disposable cash who do similar things. 

And let's not forget the mother Marriott, as owner of those trust weeks, might elect to give the rental option a shot. That could make it an even longer period of time before legacy week owners have access to the inventory.

The main problem I see is that there are no rules for Marriott. They can do what they want with the inventory they control. This is no different and no improvement over what RCI or I.I. offer owners now. The main difference I see is that Marriott controls the inventory rather than I.I. Marriott can elect to put inventory in the exchange pool, use if for promotions, rent or do whatever Marriott decides. There are no rules and there is no transparency for owners to see what it going on.

For many years now I've said it's best to own where you want to go. I've amended that to saying it's best to own where you want to go or be with an internal system that fits you needs. Fortunately for us, with Marriott we purchased units we liked in destinations we enjoy. If all else fails, we'll go to our home resort. The one exception was that we purchased a three bedroom unit in Vegas rather than a two bedroom unit with the thought in mind that we'd lock-off and trade that one bedroom side. So, in a way, we bought to own and use but also to exchange. Fortunately I can still opt out of the DC if necessary and exchange through I.I., even if it means exchanging to non-Marriott resorts. 

I feel for those who have purchased weeks with the loan intention of trading within the Marriott system. These changes have to be a little bit of a stressor. Vacations and vacation planning should not involve stress. Planning should be as simple as possible and as stress free as possible. Unfortunately, Marriott doesn't seem to see it that way.


----------



## dougp26364 (Jun 27, 2011)

jdunn1 said:


> I really dislike the destination club.  I think it is a system best designed for only the most elite of marriott owners.  Owners with the best weeks (i.e. summer beach weeks, winter ski weeks, etc...) already had the best trading power, why did Marriott need to create another portal for these owners to get even more for their weeks at the cost of all the other Marriott owners.
> 
> My biggest problem with the DC is that Marriott can take a prime deposit from II that wasn't deposited by a DC member exchanging their week for points.  I have no problem with prime week owners getting more points than the rest of us but then limit the weeks available for exchange to only the weeks deposited by other enroled members exchanging for points or developer inventory.
> 
> ...



Your point is well taken. Unfortunately, Marriott seems to have overlooked the smaller owners who have just one week or owners who have weeks in less desirable seasons. I agree the system in inherantely unfair to single week owners. Especially those owners who's units don't lock-off. If not for the fact we own two weeks and both of those weeks are lock-off units, I'd see no advantage to us joining the DC. 

No one should take offence to anything posted. It's all just debate as we hash out the pro's and con's of this system. It's important to know how to get the best use out our ownerships. For some, that's joining the DC. For others that staying out of the DC and continuing to use their weeks as they have.

One thing is certain in timeshare exchanging. The rules WILL change. You either need to be able to turn over ownerships (sell what's not working and buy what is working) or be able to modify your usage to get what you want/need from the system. I've had to change the way we get our exchanges several times since we first started in 1998. In some instances it's cost me a little more money. In others it's just been changing how I look for, or how I request, exchanges. Sometimes this means not going to one destination but finding new destinations instead. 

It's not just timeshare exchange rules that have done this but the economy and airline rules as well. For instance, I have nearly 40,000 FF miles with Delta but, due to changes in their FF program, I haven't been able to use them. Some area's are now considerably more expensive to fly into so, we don't go there anymore. TSA changes have us looking at drive to destinations more frequently. Car rental prices have me considering drive to destinations or, fly to destinations where renting a car is optional rather than mandatory to enjoy ourselves. 

The one constant is change. It's forums like that that allow us to keep up with those changes and debate what they mean for each individual.


----------



## dioxide45 (Jun 27, 2011)

hotcoffee said:


> I forgot about that one.  I guess that is worth something.  The only trouble is that with the way the DC program is currently structured, there is relatively little inventory available 13 months.  If a Premier-plus member has to wait until 10 months, he loses most of his 13 month advantage.



That Premier Plus owner has a three month lead on all reservations of less than seven nights. So even if the inventory isn't there at 13 months, it may be there at 12, 11 or even 10 1/2. So they do have a good advantage over a Premier or Standard owner with reservations of less than 7 nights. As Doug pointed out, those less than seven night stays break an entire week that will potentially also make it more difficult for Premier and Standard owners to confirm their exchanges at the 12, 11, etc month mark.


----------



## dioxide45 (Jun 27, 2011)

I think the only way that Marriott could make all unreserved trust inventory available to the Exchange Company at a certain date would to also make all unreserved weeks inventory available in the exchange company as well. They would have to do this based on the percentage of enrolled DC members to enrolled members. Once the date rolls around that is X months from the end of your season, you are automatically converted to points and you can't make a weeks based reservation. Imagine this thread if that were the plan...

Obviously the governing documents don't allow them to do that. But, by making all trust inventory available to legacy owners without equal access of trust owners to legacy weeks, it would make owning legacy weeks more advantageous. Marriott doesn't want that. They want the advantage there for new trust owners, if there is even a real advantage. It helps sell points.


----------



## dougp26364 (Jun 28, 2011)

dioxide45 said:


> I think the only way that Marriott could make all unreserved trust inventory available to the Exchange Company at a certain date would to also make all unreserved weeks inventory available in the exchange company as well. They would have to do this based on the percentage of enrolled DC members to enrolled members. Once the date rolls around that is X months from the end of your season, you are automatically converted to points and you can't make a weeks based reservation. Imagine this thread if that were the plan...
> 
> Obviously the governing documents don't allow them to do that. But, by making all trust inventory available to legacy owners without equal access of trust owners to legacy weeks, it would make owning legacy weeks more advantageous. Marriott doesn't want that. They want the advantage there for new trust owners, if there is even a real advantage. It helps sell points.



I belong to two other points based reservations systems, both of which are successful. If they can do it, Marriott could/should be able to do it.

DRI, for example, began by selling deeded weeks, then added a points based reservations system and then added trust based ownerships to the mix. Yet, DRI handles this issue with ease. It is a much more owner/user friendly system as far as reserving and enjoying vacations.


----------



## m61376 (Jun 28, 2011)

One of the things I don't understand is why Marriott decided to sell trust points without any "home" resort. Most of the systems sell a home resort. In a way, I think that discourages large point purchases. For example, I think a prospective buyer might opt for enough points for a Hawaii week, for example, if they were guaranteed first crack at booking one, if Hawaii is where they want to frequently travel to. It seems that they turned the whole timeshare concept upside down. I guess in theory it sounds nice to buy points that have access to any of 53 resorts just for the asking, until the buyer finds out that their access is really subject to restricted availability.

Maybe it's me, but if someone is asking me to plunk down 40-50K for something, plus obligate me to another $1600-2000 annually in MF alone, I'd want to feel that I was guaranteed getting a reservation that I wanted. Maybe it's just that I am coming from a weeks mentality, but at least with an owned week I know I am buying one week during a specific time period at a specific location, and I am guaranteed one of those weeks. Furthermore, my right to access one of those weeks will be the same now and in ten years from now. With points, there is no guarantee that there will be a single week available at the resort I want to travel to, and there is no guarantee that my access today will be the same as it will be in ten years down the road. Next year Marriott can decide that where I like to go now costs more points, and my only option at that point will be to buy more points, or go for a shorter period (or use a smaller unit). I may be missing something, but the DC set-up seems to have the same potential for point devaluation that Marriott has ascertained is an inherent necessity in the rewards program, except that the rewards program is a perk, while the DC is a pre-paid vacation program being touted basically as buying today and travel tomorrow at today's prices. I fail to see how the DC ensures against future point inflation and, thus, why would buying points make economic sense?

As much as I love week ownership, to me renting makes more sense than points ownership in the Marriott system. At least with Starwood, DVC, etc., I am guaranteed something tangible (ie- a set period of time in a set size unit in a set location) each year, for a set cost. And, while what I own may not be enough for me to reserve equivalent size/number of days elsewhere, at least in these systems I am given the value of what I own, so I don't lose value (and thus am always downgrading because of the ever present Marriott skim) if I choose to try to book elsewhere at 10,9, or 8 months (at pre-specified openings that the various systems allow).


----------



## dioxide45 (Jun 28, 2011)

dougp26364 said:


> I belong to two other points based reservations systems, both of which are successful. If they can do it, Marriott could/should be able to do it.
> 
> DRI, for example, began by selling deeded weeks, then added a points based reservations system and then added trust based ownerships to the mix. Yet, DRI handles this issue with ease. It is a much more owner/user friendly system as far as reserving and enjoying vacations.



I am not saying it can't necessarily be done, but in order to do so, weeks owners would have to give up some rights to their weeks based reservations at x date before checkin. Are enrolled weeks owners willing to do so? If we get access to the trusts inventory at 9 months, trust owners should get access to weeks inventory at 9 months too.

All of this really only effects someone if they exchange in points, from the beginning it was determined that exchanging in points really isn't the best option for most.


----------



## dougp26364 (Jun 28, 2011)

dioxide45 said:


> I am not saying it can't necessarily be done, but in order to do so, weeks owners would have to give up some rights to their weeks based reservations at x date before checkin. Are enrolled weeks owners willing to do so? If we get access to the trusts inventory at 9 months, trust owners should get access to weeks inventory at 9 months too.
> 
> All of this really only effects someone if they exchange in points, from the beginning it was determined that exchanging in points really isn't the best option for most.



That's what I was trying to point out, but apparently did so rather poorly. Legacy weeks owners wouldn't give up much, if anything.With DRI & HGVC I have a home resort priority to book any week I want. I still hold my deeded weeks and I can still reserve my home resort week, using points, during home the home resort advantage period. After the home resort advantage period has expired, anyone can book a week at any resort they want and can book partial weeks if they prefer. So there would have been very little given up and so much more gained IMO.

The difference is, both DRI & HGVC still hold true to their seasons rather than charging different amounts of points for each individual week. Marriott's fatal flaw is straying from their original seasons and event weeks formula. Now, I'm not certain there's any turning back to fix that flaw.


----------



## dougp26364 (Jun 28, 2011)

m61376 said:


> One of the things I don't understand is why Marriott decided to sell trust points without any "home" resort. Most of the systems sell a home resort. In a way, I think that discourages large point purchases. For example, I think a prospective buyer might opt for enough points for a Hawaii week, for example, if they were guaranteed first crack at booking one, if Hawaii is where they want to frequently travel to. It seems that they turned the whole timeshare concept upside down. I guess in theory it sounds nice to buy points that have access to any of 53 resorts just for the asking, until the buyer finds out that their access is really subject to restricted availability.
> 
> Maybe it's me, but if someone is asking me to plunk down 40-50K for something, plus obligate me to another $1600-2000 annually in MF alone, I'd want to feel that I was guaranteed getting a reservation that I wanted. Maybe it's just that I am coming from a weeks mentality, but at least with an owned week I know I am buying one week during a specific time period at a specific location, and I am guaranteed one of those weeks. Furthermore, my right to access one of those weeks will be the same now and in ten years from now. With points, there is no guarantee that there will be a single week available at the resort I want to travel to, and there is no guarantee that my access today will be the same as it will be in ten years down the road. Next year Marriott can decide that where I like to go now costs more points, and my only option at that point will be to buy more points, or go for a shorter period (or use a smaller unit). I may be missing something, but the DC set-up seems to have the same potential for point devaluation that Marriott has ascertained is an inherent necessity in the rewards program, except that the rewards program is a perk, while the DC is a pre-paid vacation program being touted basically as buying today and travel tomorrow at today's prices. I fail to see how the DC ensures against future point inflation and, thus, why would buying points make economic sense?
> 
> As much as I love week ownership, to me renting makes more sense than points ownership in the Marriott system. At least with Starwood, DVC, etc., I am guaranteed something tangible (ie- a set period of time in a set size unit in a set location) each year, for a set cost. And, while what I own may not be enough for me to reserve equivalent size/number of days elsewhere, at least in these systems I am given the value of what I own, so I don't lose value (and thus am always downgrading because of the ever present Marriott skim) if I choose to try to book elsewhere at 10,9, or 8 months (at pre-specified openings that the various systems allow).



I agree whole heartedly. At the very least, Marriott should have placed resorts in trust groups and given new owners the choice of which group they wanted to belong too. They could have "home" resort advantage at that grouping of resorts and open booking at a set timeframe for any resort in the system. That way, one could buy into the Hawaiian group and have their choice of the resorts in Hawaii. They could also have done something like a Western grouping and Eastern grouping, with emphasis on those area's so that owners living either east or west would have a great selection of resorts in their home trust. 

I've said it before. Marriott, for whatever reason, appears to have decided to cut a new road when a four lane super highway already existed. I makes absolutely no sense to me.

We've joined the DC but, the way this thing is set up, I don't see how Marriott is likely to benefit as much as they could have. Because of the skim and the destruction of the season I purchased (each individual week requires different amounts of points), I have no intention of ever exchanging my week for DC points. I'm a member but not a participant. I would have thought it better to have all legacy owners want to participate. 

Had Marriott kept their seasons and, if they had given the amount of points for each week as it took to reserve those same weeks, I think they would have had nearly 100% participation in the program. Owners still want to be guaranteed they have the original availability as when they plunked down those several thousands of dollars. If they join and convert their weeks to points, they lose that benefit. If they join and don't convert there weeks to points, where's the advantage to the owner? Only those who see a benefit of one annual fixed fee vs ala carte fee's will see any benefit. 

Right now, the main benefit I see is to multiple week owners, owners with units that lock-out and owners of very high value resort weeks. Single week owners and owners who bought and use their home resort week will see no benefit from joining. I'm not even so sure that very high value resort week owners will see much value as I would think the majority of those owners purchased specifically to use that very expensive week rather than exchange. This limits how many legacy week owners will find the new system appealing. It further limits those that do find some appeal as to the advantage of giving up their home resort week for the promise made by points based reservations. With the skim, there is a definate cost felt by most legacy week owners.


----------



## m61376 (Jun 28, 2011)

The only added value I might see is in the potential point rental market. For those finding themselves in need of an extra unit, renting points can be a much cheaper avenue.


----------



## GregT (Jun 28, 2011)

All,

This has been an interesting dialogue -- allow me to further speculate, with the same disclaimer that this is repetitive to much of what has been posted by other smart TUGgers.

1) There are approximately 23,000 weeks currently in the Trust (87M points/average of 3,600 points per week -- adjusted a little for Hawaii)
2) 23,000 weeks is a little more than 3% of the ~720,000 weeks that exist
3) Accept that DClub will find brand new buyers of Trust Points (not just current week owners), because SpinCo must
4) Imagine that all of those new buyers purchase 2,500 Trust Points, paying $25K apiece to SpinCo
5) We all believe the days of $1B in annual timeshare sales are gone, but perhaps $250M in annual timeshare sales are not
6) Marriott will need inventory to sell at some future point and will begin ROFRing properties, which will be deposited in the Trust
7) The Trust will begin to grow in size 
8) $250M in sales is likely $40M in inventory cost to Marriott for the ROFR'd properties, which were deposited in the Trust
9) $40M in inventory cost (at an average of $5K per week -- my guess) is 8,000 weeks per year

So, in this hypothetical scenario, at the future point in time where Marriott is successfully selling $250M/year in new product and needs replenishment inventory (via ROFR), then at that future point the Trust begins to grow by ~8,000 weeks per year.  

The 23,000 week Trust -- after 5 years of success from that future point in time, is now bigger by 40,000 weeks -- and is 63,000 weeks in size.    

That's still less than 10% of the total Marriott population of weeks.    However, I expect that 10% will represent a much higher percentage of the premium weeks -- and will likely be the weeks that many people using points  will want to access.   

What if they sell $500M/year?  The Trust grows faster....but can they find those weeks to ROFR (at $5K????).   Hmm....

There are many holes in these assumptions, but this does demonstrate the relative size (small) of the Trust versus the Legacy Weeks.   And it also shows the potential for the very gradual shift of the location of some of the most desirable week for actual users of points -- from the Legacy Weeks bucket and into the Trust Inventory bucket.  

I do believe that SpinCo will find new buyers -- I don't want to discount the skill of a commissioned sales force, selling the dream of flexible vacations in some of the best timeshares in the world.  It's a powerful vision -- and pure Trust Point owners will be shielded from some of the issues that will annoy and frustrate the Legacy Point user.   They will still have to deal with the complicated points chart and expiring points, but they won't feel skimmed and won't have to juggle the usage of both Legacy and Trust points.

Interesting implications for the future.   

Best to all,

Greg


----------



## TheTimeTraveler (Jun 28, 2011)

GregT said:


> All,
> 
> This has been an interesting dialogue -- allow me to further speculate, with the same disclaimer that this is repetitive to much of what has been posted by other smart TUGgers.
> 
> ...






Greg:

I think you hit the nail on the head.   As I recall, Fletch (the ex Marriott Employee) thought it would take 5 to 7 years before this point program would really be rolling.

This is why I think it's important for Legacy Week owners to sign up now, use their weeks the traditional way until the DC point opportunities open up a few years down the line...

Who knows how long the opportunity to convert to points will exist, and at what price to join?   Right now there is a deadline of 6/30/2011, but will that be extended again 




.


----------



## windje2000 (Jun 28, 2011)

GregT said:


> All,
> 
> This has been an interesting dialogue -- allow me to further speculate, with the same disclaimer that this is repetitive to much of what has been posted by other smart TUGgers.
> 
> ...



I agree that Dclub currently represents a small piece of the Marriott timeshare universe.  I think it will stay that way for a while.  It may have a proportionally greater impact on legacy owners than its size would warrant because of the weeks breakage caused by non-traditional days based occupancy.

One thing to keep in mind is that nowhere near all of inventory owned by MAR has been contributed to the trust.

The last inventory data for MAR's I've seen was about $1.4 B,  .. after the $0.7 B impairment. 

Retail value of that inventory (assuming the historical 60% gross profit margin) is between $3.5 B and $5.25 B.  The high end of the range assumes the impairment was temporary.

If the Trust has 87 M points, that's about $870 million in retail value.  Therefore MAR has plenty more to contribute before they need to buy anything, especially if one expects a sales run rate of $250M.    

I think it will be a while before they purchase or ROFR much of anything.  They will probably grab popular weeks for nonpayment of MF and/or debt.

From the first quarter earnings release.



> In the first quarter, Marriott's timeshare business remained focused on increasing the number of existing customers enrolled in its new points-based program.  The program allows customers to purchase timeshare in smaller increments than the traditional one-week product and allows greater flexibility of use.
> 
> Since the program launched in June 2010, over 64,000 existing owners have enrolled more than 123,000 weeks in the points program, continuing to exceed the company's expectations.
> 
> ...



A $250 M run rate may well be a little low - it currently looks like it may well be twice that.  The customer mix changed and is decidedly skewed towards existing customers - and not towards 'new meat.'  How long that will last remains to be seen.

They may well have some ability to 'manage' earnings by selecting what they contribute to the trust - either low priced foreclosures and/or ROFRed inventory versus new existing never sold inventory on their books.

Lastly, I recollect that MAR announced the SEC filings for SPINCO were scheduled for the end of June.  Anyone seen them?


----------



## infamazz (Jun 28, 2011)

m61376 said:


> With points, there is no guarantee that there will be a single week available at the resort I want to travel to, and there is no guarantee that my access today will be the same as it will be in ten years down the road. Next year Marriott can decide that where I like to go now costs more points, and my only option at that point will be to buy more points, or go for a shorter period (or use a smaller unit). I may be missing something, but the DC set-up seems to have the same potential for point devaluation that Marriott has ascertained is an inherent necessity in the rewards program, except that the rewards program is a perk, while the DC is a pre-paid vacation program being touted basically as buying today and travel tomorrow at today's prices. I fail to see how the DC ensures against future point inflation and, thus, why would buying points make economic sense?



This is the word I've been trying to get out about the Marriott DC program - you expose yourself to point "inflation". THIS is how Marriott will continue to generate revenue from previously sold timeshares and points - devalue them over time forcing the owners to purchase additional points simply to keep their prior purchasing power. Anyone who thinks this is not where the program is heading obviously has an overly-altruistic view of Marriott.


----------



## Born2Travel (Jun 28, 2011)

infamazz said:


> This is the word I've been trying to get out about the Marriott DC program - you expose yourself to point "inflation". THIS is how Marriott will continue to generate revenue from previously sold timeshares and points - devalue them over time forcing the owners to purchase additional points simply to keep their prior purchasing power. Anyone who thinks this is not where the program is heading obviously has an overly-altruistic view of Marriott.


 
I believe you are ABSOLUTELY CORRECT - they are not alone in trying to "resell" to their owners and up the ante and fees any way they can - it's all about the money.


----------



## kedler (Jun 29, 2011)

*Thanks*

Hi Greg,

Thanks for taking the time to find out this information it is similar to what I was told - though much more in depth - when I called Customer Advocacy because in my daily hunt to better my initial reservation one of the VOAs told me that she had a Ko Olina 3 bdrom, OV (my first choice) when I wanted that was available with a combination of trust/legacy points and that she would reserve it. To make the reservation I needed to convert another week but I told her that not to convert the weeks to points UNLESS she was absolutely sure the reservation could be made with my combination of trust/legacy points. Well not only did she deposit the week, she cancelled the prior reservation, and then told me that she was looking at it all wrong and could not make the reservation. She told me that the week deposited could not be retrieved as it as a "final" transaction. She never told me about cancelling the first reservation (I found out after the fact when I was checking email and found the cancellation) but was trying to find me another, somehow disconnected me and never called me back! I called back and after 45 min on hold another knowledgeable VOA was able to get me another Ko Olina reservation - 2 bdrm MV for 8 days. 

In any event I called Customer Advocacy the next day to complain bitterly and I'm still told that the deposited week cannot be retrieved even though it was their mistake but that they will try to get me what I wanted in the first place to make it right. The next call I get is that even Customer Advocacy apparently cannot override the inventory system - I was told that there are no more trust/legacy weeks available for Ko Olina for June, unless a cancellation occurs. Apparently on the first of each month more inventory is placed in the system so that is when more mixed weeks will be available. The Customer Advocacy rep - who has been very nice though so far useless - has a request in to get me what I want on July 1 and she is supposed to call me on Friday to update the status and hopefully give me good news. 

I fail to understand why 1. Marriott cannot correct their own mistake by "undepositing" my week (the only answer I have been given is it can't be done) OR 2. override their own inventory system to fix their mistake.  

I like the concept of the point system, flexible reservations, longer and shorter stays, but Marriott's execution of their own system - which it seems many VOAs don't even understand is - is horrific at best and verging on unfair advertising at worst.

IMO Premier status is near worthless right now unless the majority of your points are trust points. If you are after a reservation with primarily legacy points it appears that even 12 months may be too soon to get the better weeks/views/longer stays, etc.

All venting aside we do still have an 8 day reservation at Ko Olina for the week of July 4th   but I'll be one very angry owner if I can't get the reservation I want (3 BR OV) and the other week is still converted to points, even though I told her not to do so unless she was 100% sure she could make the reservation.


----------



## kedler (Jun 29, 2011)

*Check your trust/legacy reservation on Marriott.com*

I was checking another reservation on Marriott.com and noticed that my Ko Olina reservation contained the following information under the link that says "View Details":

"Monday, July 2, 2012 - Wednesday, July 4, 2012
    (2 nights)
MVC EXCHANGE

Wednesday, July 4, 2012 - Friday, July 6, 2012
    (2 nights)
MVC TRUST

Friday, July 6, 2012 - Tuesday, July 10, 2012
    (4 nights)

MVC EXCHANGE"

I find this breakdown very interesting as it seems to be a window into how they are handling these reservations. 

If you have trust/legacy reservations please check it out and let us know what shows up.

Thanks,
kedler


----------



## dioxide45 (Jun 29, 2011)

windje2000 said:


> I agree that Dclub currently represents a small piece of the Marriott timeshare universe.  I think it will stay that way for a while.  It may have a proportionally greater impact on legacy owners than its size would warrant because of the weeks breakage caused by non-traditional days based occupancy.
> 
> One thing to keep in mind is that nowhere near all of inventory owned by MAR has been contributed to the trust.
> 
> ...



It seems that a lot of their inventory is in undeveloped land. Inventory that they really won't place in the trust. I wonder how much inventory they have in built or to be built units.


----------



## m61376 (Jun 30, 2011)

Reading some of the experiences posted above, it seems to me that Marriott has, whether purposefully or not, included yet another "skim" into this convoluted system. Owners are virtually guaranteed to be left with excess points, with legacy enrollees who have purchased trust points virtually guaranteed that they will have excess points left in two pots. It would take an accounting degree and a spreadsheet just to fully utilize ownership- something which 99% of owners will never do.

What a system!...


----------



## windje2000 (Jun 30, 2011)

dioxide45 said:


> It seems that a lot of their inventory is in undeveloped land. Inventory that they really won't place in the trust. I wonder how much inventory they have in built or to be built units.



The mix of inventory is undisclosed as far as I have read.

The most recent breakdown I have seen was in the Susquehanna MVCI presentation (see investor page at Marriott events and presentations) where it was disclosed that as of year end 2008,  inventory was $2B and broke down as follows:

Completed - 37%

Work in process - 26%

Land and infrastructure for future phases - 37%


----------



## dougp26364 (Jun 30, 2011)

m61376 said:


> Reading some of the experiences posted above, it seems to me that Marriott has, whether purposefully or not, included yet another "skim" into this convoluted system. Owners are virtually guaranteed to be left with excess points, with legacy enrollees who have purchased trust points virtually guaranteed that they will have excess points left in two pots. It would take an accounting degree and a spreadsheet just to fully utilize ownership- something which 99% of owners will never do.
> 
> What a system!...



This is not unlike many points based systems. Some will allow you to spend those excess points on services. Some will let you use them to off set or pay for fee's. Some even let you convert them to something like FF miles or Hotel points. Most allow some sort of saving points to the next year or borrowing points from the next year.

If you plan things out, an owner should very rarely lose very many points if they lose any at all.


----------



## mlpmd56 (Jun 30, 2011)

*Wow*

Hello all,
I am a lowly EOY Odd owner of Kauai Beach resort that I bought on ebay for a pittance.  Husband & I LOVED our stay there last January, so luckily I fall in the buy where you want to go category.  When the points system was first rolled out, I thought, Hurray!  I can buy in even though I bought resale.  However Marriott made it fairly clear from the get go that I was going to be a second class citizen forever, and now this thread pretty much confirms it.  So allegedly today is the last day (or maybe extended again...who knows?) and I am convinced I made the correct decision to just keep my week, not pay Marriott extra, and if I ever want to go elsewhere I will just do a "request first" with II or try to rent my week and pay rent somewhere else.  Since our unit is Ocean Front (it is gorgeous and I love it!) I think I should be able to make more than the maintenance fees, and I'll probably just always go myself anyway.  I have been at the Maui Schooner every year for the last 10, and I never tire of Hawaii!
Marriott has a good reputation for nice clean properties, too bad they are screwing their owners!  Marcy


----------



## KarenP (Jun 30, 2011)

*I guess I'm glad I didn't convert!*

I locked off and deposited my Gold MGV with II and now have an absolutely WONDERFUL exchange for a 2 bedroom on Captiva Island with my 1 bedroom for October 2012!  I still have the efficiency part to exchange as well, and I'm seeing some really good trades for it as well!  Seems the trick is still to plan WAY ahead and be VERY flexible to get the most out of your deposits.


----------



## m61376 (Jun 30, 2011)

dougp26364 said:


> This is not unlike many points based systems. Some will allow you to spend those excess points on services. Some will let you use them to off set or pay for fee's. Some even let you convert them to something like FF miles or Hotel points. Most allow some sort of saving points to the next year or borrowing points from the next year.
> 
> If you plan things out, an owner should very rarely lose very many points if they lose any at all.



The problem with Marriott is that other than banking and borrowing, there are no other options for using the leftovers, and there are strict deadlines for the banking. I think the set-up is tilted towards getting people to borrow from net year in a repetitive cycle so as not to waste points. And, with two types of points, those who bought an added 1500-2000 points will likely see shortfalls in both pots.

Of course, those with more experience with points may be more facile in maneuvering through the process, but I'm guessing the average owner won't be.


----------



## dougp26364 (Jun 30, 2011)

m61376 said:


> The problem with Marriott is that other than banking and borrowing, there are no other options for using the leftovers, and there are strict deadlines for the banking. I think the set-up is tilted towards getting people to borrow from net year in a repetitive cycle so as not to waste points. And, with two types of points, those who bought an added 1500-2000 points will likely see shortfalls in both pots.
> 
> Of course, those with more experience with points may be more facile in maneuvering through the process, but I'm guessing the average owner won't be.



As it stands now, I agree. But it's not an inherent problem with the majority of timeshares. On the other hand, I believe most timeshares have a drop dead date for saving points. DRI has several dates which may vary depending upon owner status. One does need to either keep a calender or, simply save the points early in the year and borrow them back as needed, assuming there's no charge or some sort of penalty for doing so.

Marriott has a LONG way to go to catch up with the industry standard for points based reservations system IMHO. This system, at least for us, is greared towards giving Marriott maximum flexiblity while miminizing owners flexability when compared to the two other points systems we actually own and, I suspect when compared to nearly every other points based reservations system out there. It has really soured my opinion on Marriott even being remotely owner friendly.


----------



## kedler (Jul 1, 2011)

*Customer Advocacy came through with reservation!*

Well after many stops and starts and screw ups along the way (see my earlier post), a very nice Customer Advocacy representative was able to get me a mixed trust/exchange (but more exchange) 3 bedroom, ocean view at Ko Olina for 8 days - July 2-10, 2011.


----------



## RBERR1 (Jul 5, 2011)

I used my plus points to adding on two nights to an existing Cypress Harbour reservation which I found pretty easy for 600 pts and worth being able to now cancel a 75K Marriott Rewards reservation. :whoopie: 

While I had the VOA on the phone, I asked the enrolled points vs. the trust points inventory question.  The answer I got was separate pools with no IOUs between them and the two shall never cross. 

What drives me crazy is the inconsistency in the responses.  When I used the chat in the online tool  on the MVCI site I got that the answer which was similar to Greg's.

Personally I just want to know the exact rules so I can play by them.

I am also working on a little experiment to see if I can forecast where there is exchange inventory and when.  I will let you all know the result in a new thread when I am finished if it the experiment is successful.


----------



## gblotter (Dec 5, 2011)

DanCali said:


> Hence the absolute need for a "request first" feature.
> 
> It makes no sense to me why anyone would convert a week to points and "hope for the best", especially those owners who can otherwise rent their weeks for $1000+ over MFs. If I don't get my exchange, Marriott won't get my week. I have the same philosophy with II...


Amen.

With the Destinations Club introduction, Marriott claimed that they were providing an improved trading mechanism in response to negative customer feedback about using Interval International.  At least Interval International gives me a "request first" feature.  In that respect, Marriott has clearly made things worse - not better - with the DC exchange program.  Requiring owners to simply trust Marriott to do the right thing with their exchange request is ludicrous (pay no attention to that man behind the curtain).  At the end of the day, Marriott will manage the various inventory pools in a way that maximizes profit for Marriott - period.  We have already seen this with the "Gift of Time" weeks.  As another tugger commented: "The Exchange Company has granted itself all sorts of legal rights to make changes, including changes that could be quite detrimental to some owners."  Not even Marriott knows when/if they will release inventory to satisfy DC exchange requests - yet we are expected to blindly convert our weeks to points and simply trust them.  Seems to me that most of these trust issues could be addressed with a "request first" feature.  Then Marriott's promise would actually hold true that "you can always use your week the same way you did before".


----------



## puckmanfl (Dec 5, 2011)

good morning...

gblotter...

You can call your trusty VOA and check availability of a DC ressie BEFORE converting to points.  If you like the deal, you may then convert.  Otherwise, you can keep your week.  However, you cannot waitlist without converting to points!!!

This is a major weakness.... It would be nice to say, you can have my week if you snag my resssie... Kind of like the request first feature of II....


----------

