[Persistent Rumor] Marriott Leaving Interval International

[Eli Mairs]

We went to a presentation at Lakeshore Reserve yesterday.
We were told that Marriott is leaving I.I., and this is the last year that Marriott will be depositing weeks into I.I. Once these weeks are depleted, I.I. Will have no more Marriott weeks.
The sales rep mentioned the name of the new company. I should have taken notes, as we were told many things that made no sense to us.
Today, at the Sabal Palms wine and cheese, the Marriott fellow we spoke to, knew nothing about it. He spoke to his boss, who also knew nothing.
Do you Tuggers know about this?
Am I missing something?

 

[JIMinNC]

Some of the sales reps have been using that line for a long time as a scare tactic to sell against people who want to keep using II instead of buying points. Not to say it won't ever happen, but the local sales reps likely know very little about strategic corporate plans until they are announced publicly.

On the other hand, other sales reps have been using the more real rumors that Marriott Vacations Worldwide may actually try to acquire Interval Leisure Group. There may actually be a small bit of fire with that smoke. There were credible reports in Bloomberg News and other business/investment news sources that such an offer was indeed made a few months ago, but recent letters to ILG shareholders from investment firm Front Four Capital (who is pushing ILG to sell to Marriott Vacations) seems to indicate that the ILG management and board may have rebuffed Marriott's offer. So Front Four is apparently pushing a competing slate of directors in an attempt to get them elected to the ILG board, and they would presumably be more receptive to an offer from Marriott Vacations. We will see.

 

[dioxide45]

If Marriott pulls out of II, look for ILGs stock to plummet and then VAC to move in and scoop it up at a bargain.

 

[MOXJO7282]

If Marriott pulls out of II, look for ILGs stock to plummet and then VAC to move in and scoop it up at a bargain.

Isn't this inevitable? I mean they both have to know how much Marriott means to II's success. At some point they play hard ball for a better deal.

 

[Saintsfanfl]

These lies are all to defeat the perceived ability to exchange in II. I was once told at a presentation at Oceana Palms that you could not stay there on an interval exchange. I looked at the sales rep and said I was there on an interval exchange for a total cost of less than $600 and they said well you won't be able to do it any longer. That was before they opened the second tower and now it is even easier to stay there.

Nothing you will hear at a presentation is true. Only one thing is true. 99% of all timeshares drastically decrease in value and Marriott is no exception, weeks or DC Points.

 

[Steve Fatula]

These lies are all to defeat the perceived ability to exchange in II. I was once told at a presentation at Oceana Palms that you could not stay there an interval exchange. I looked at the sales rep and said I was there on an interval exchange for a total cost of less than $600 and they said well you won't be able to do it any longer. That was before they opened the second tower and now it is even easier to stay there.

So true. It's fun when you are staying there on an exchange, and they tell you (before you tell them) you can't stay there via II. And you whip out the confirmation. As you say, they just come up with more excuses, or not next time, or whatever. I did that too! Yes, any day now for over 10 years or so I've heard that we won't be able to trade into other Marriotts, etc. I also like hearing how my lockoff doesn't trade well, another on my long time favorites that I have a history sheet of where I've traded into.

Back to the topic, I thought Marriott was II? Not the entity, but, basically without Marriott, II isn't much. I would think it's to Marriotts advantage for their "flexibility" argument to be in II. MVCI without II is a massive loss for me at least. There really are not that many MVCI resorts, we go to many places where there are none. I would think it's unlikely myself. But you never know. So many rumors going around.

 

[SueDonJ]

Various sales offices have been using this as bait for years. Sure, it's possible for MVW to sever the affiliation with II anytime but if it happens, I wouldn't expect the sales staff to be told about it until it's officially announced. (No sense in giving employees who aren't on a need-to-know basis the opportunity to share corporate secrets and maybe jeopardize deals.) Plus if/when it happens, existing II Members will probably be able to be dually affiliated with II and whatever new exchange company MVW contracts with - that's what happened when MVC left RCI and went with II years ago.

 

[Jayco29D]

Buy where you want to stay and think of exchanging as a bonus!

 

[pedro47]

I have hear this rumor by some Marriott sales staff for the past five (5) years.

 

[Bucky]

Every 6mos or so a thread like this pops up! And people wonder why everybody hates a timeshare salesperson? If their lips are moving, they are usually lying! Just another reason why we never ever attend presentations. We don’t care how attractive the incentives are.

 

[Dean]

Back to the topic, I thought Marriott was II? Not the entity, but, basically without Marriott, II isn't much. I would think it's to Marriotts advantage for their "flexibility" argument to be in II. MVCI without II is a massive loss for me at least. There really are not that many MVCI resorts, we go to many places where there are none. I would think it's unlikely myself. But you never know. So many rumors going around.

While I don't necessarily disagree, let me approach this from a different angle. I think most of us here would look at this through the Marriott lens and for us an II without Marriott is difficult to imagine. But if you look at II from a non Marriott view you aren't likely to exchange to Marriott anyway, at least for the best options other than short notice, so Marriott's presence or absence doesn't have that much effect on their usage or options. And now II has even less inventory that it once did.

Buy where you want to stay and think of exchanging as a bonus!

You've been reading too many DVC boards and it often isn't applicable even there, LOL. I do think exchanging is an integral part of usage for Marriott far more than for DVC.

 

[Jayco29D]

While I don't necessarily disagree, let me approach this from a different angle. I think most of us here would look at this through the Marriott lens and for us an II without Marriott is difficult to imagine. But if you look at II from a non Marriott view you aren't likely to exchange to Marriott anyway, at least for the best options other than short notice, so Marriott's presence or absence doesn't have that much effect on their usage or options. And now II has even less inventory that it once did.

You've been reading too many DVC boards and it often isn't applicable even there, LOL. I do think exchanging is an integral part of usage for Marriott far more than for DVC.

Actually, I adopted this philosophy from TUG (not DVC). I have been reading too many TUG boards! LOL I agree with you Dean. The ability to be able to exchange is important and beneficial for TS owners. I agree trading on II it is an integral part of usage for most Marriott deeded week owners. I certainly like being part of II because they have more resorts I like than RCI and a lot more inventory than SFX. I have not yet used II but I can imagine using them one day for Getaways or to deposit the studio portion of a lockoff.

 

[Retired2025 aka AlmostRetired]

Plus if/when it happens, existing II Members will probably be able to be dually affiliated with II and whatever new exchange company MVW contracts with - that's what happened when MVC left RCI and went with II years ago.

You are 100% correct. When I purchased the Monarch resale in 1996 it traded both RCI and II. I also purchased a Resort World or Orlando the same year that only traded II. I belonged to RCI and II a few times over the years. When Resort World became Celebrity it moved to RCI. I was able to trade both RCI and II. When I gave it away a few years ago, the new owner was only able to trade RCI. When I asked why, I was told while I was grandfathered in, the new owner will not be.

While I don't necessarily disagree, let me approach this from a different angle. I think most of us here would look at this through the Marriott lens and for us an II without Marriott is difficult to imagine. But if you look at II from a non Marriott view you aren't likely to exchange to Marriott anyway, at least for the best options other than short notice, so Marriott's presence or absence doesn't have that much effect on their usage or options. And now II has even less inventory that it once did.

There is a II facebook group. Based on comments over time, I agree with you 100%. Most II members view Marriott as just another timeshare option and many can't get into it anyway because of the priority of Marriott to Marriott exchanges. When Marriott moved from RCI, RCI moved on and forward. II will do the same if it was to happen.

I can count on one finger the Marriott to non Marriott trades I did over 20 plus years. Unless MVCI makes the new exchange system less favorable to week owners, which I doubt since that is where most of the prime weeks come from, nothing should change for most of us.

 

[Dean]

YThere is a II facebook group. Based on comments over time, I agree with you 100%. Most II members view Marriott as just another timeshare option and many can't get into it anyway because of the priority of Marriott to Marriott exchanges. When Marriott moved from RCI, RCI moved on and forward. II will do the same.

If this were to happen, I think there's a good chance II members who are not Marriott would be better off. It would force II to streamline their admin costs plus force them to focus on value and customer service more than they have. I'm not thinking it likely as a change from II to RCI but in effect DC and Trust points will pull volume away from II over time and if Marriott gives additional pushes to including those not included now at a favorable cost, including resale buyers after the cutoff, that will further erode the true participation for MVC in II.

 

[Steve Fatula]

I see your point Dean, maybe my understanding of II business is not so good! Thank you for that. I probably recall some comment made by one of those TS salesmen. You know, that reliable source.

But I don't understand this part: "including resale buyers after the cutoff", I assume you are referring to post 2010 resale weeks? If such a week were able to be enrolled, say for free even, I don't see how that affects II much, at least in a negative way. I would assume most people would not trade their unit for points, seems like you lose on that deal. Thinking of how we have used the system for so long, we would still exchange. In fact, we would exchange more. Right now, such a week we would never exchange as we'd have to pay for another II membership and that's simply not worth it to us. If the week were enrolled, we would not have to pay II again and therefore would exchange all or part of it on a fairly regular basis. So, for us at least, we would use II more. Are we perhaps the minority users? Or, does your comment refer to something other than post 2010 resale weeks? =

 

[JIMinNC]

I assume you are referring to post 2010 resale weeks? If such a week were able to be enrolled, say for free even, I don't see how that affects II much, at least in a negative way. I would assume most people would not trade their unit for points, seems like you lose on that deal. Thinking of how we have used the system for so long, we would still exchange. In fact, we would exchange more. Right now, such a week we would never exchange as we'd have to pay for another II membership and that's simply not worth it to us. If the week were enrolled, we would not have to pay II again and therefore would exchange all or part of it on a fairly regular basis. So, for us at least, we would use II more. Are we perhaps the minority users?

I'll offer a totally different perspective.

I'm in the camp that vastly prefers to "exchange" using the DC Points system rather than II. If I could have enrolled a post-2010 resale week, I would have bought an Every Year resale unit at Maui Ocean Club instead of the EOY we just bought. I bought EOY so I could just use it EOY and not have to worry about exchanging in the years we don't go to Maui. I didn't even open an II account for that week. But if had had the option to convert that week to points in the years we don't go to Maui, I would love that.

I've traded our enrolled Barony Beach Club week twice (2017 week and 2018 week) through II just because it offered a better value than exchanging for points, but those exchanges have just reinforced my dislike for the "Deposit and Wait for a Match" timeshare exchange model. We got what we wanted - HHI Grande Ocean - with the 2017 week (although that trade got cancelled by Hurricane Irma and we've rebooked a replacement week for Palm Desert this coming November), and we're on deposit waiting for a fall 2019 trade to Newport Coast with the 2018 week, but I just dislike that whole II exchange process. Electing for points is not as financially attractive because that Silver Barony week is not an efficient point generator per maintenance fee dollar, but I'm willing to take the $$ hit to gain the better, easier, and more flexible booking approach of DC Points. We elected for points in 2019 and will likely do so again for 2020 and beyond.

If we can ever find a way to enroll the EOY Maui week and/or get more points, I'll probably sell the Barony week. It seems to be a decent II trader, but if you don't like trading, it's just not worth it. It's easy and low stress to trade it to Gold season in HHI - and I would probably continue to be willing to do that kind of simple II trade - but we may buy a full vacation home in HHI, so the Barony week would become unnecessary for HHI access. At that point it just becomes either a general trader or DC point generator for us.

As far as your question about being a minority of users, based on comments I see on Facebook groups of MVC owners, the amount of financial analysis and evaluation that TUGgers do is way out of the ordinary. Typical users don't really worry that much about the numbers it seems. I see many people talking on those pages about all of the great Explorer Collection tours they've used their enrolled points for, and those options are generally panned on TUG as poor uses of points (which they are). So, yes, I do think we here are in the minority.

 

[Steve Fatula]

So, it sounds as if you are in the mostly (if not entirely) Marriott only camp of users. From what it sounds like, you typically have a specific place and time you want to go. We actually find trading super easy and not a problem or hassle at all. We do Marriott maybe 30-40% of the time, the destinations are just too limited for us. So, our method is, gee, let's go somewhere new this year, let's see what we can trade into. Oh, looks like I can get something nice in Uruguay, let's go. To do that via points seems like more of a hassle as you have to buy into II in essence via a too large number of points to do such a trade. So many places we go have no Marriotts. Unless you have another way to do that, the only way is II or renting. We find that going this route opens us up to places we had not really thought about going, but, then appear very attractive once it hits the radar. And we don't do hotels, so, not a choice. So, "let's see where we can go" is obviously much different than your "deposit and wait". Different usages.

I can see though how some or even many might like the simplicity of points. The salesman usually try and sell that aspect during presentations, and it's true. It's always interesting to hear other peoples views on this sort of thing. It seems like one guys hassle is another guys gold mine, etc! But it's enjoyable to read about the different perspectives and appreciate them.

Even when we've had a specific place we want to go, like our upcoming Canary Island trip, we still generally have good luck with our trades. Really, in 20 years, we've never been unable to go anywhere we wanted to. But, at times, it does take some persistence so that could be considered hassle, so, I get it. But points can be too. When we tried to get into Malaga, we had to go on a waiting list for our points usage, which sounds a lot like your II waiting.

So, we are hoping one day we can get the post 2010 enrolled one day so we can trade more. We find trades actually fun! Last year, we stayed at The Colonies at Williamsburg, and, The Estates of Kings Creek. Both were good, neither a Marriott (but there is one there), however, we discovered we really like the Estates and what it offers on site, and will gladly go back any time we can. I like timeshares that are essentially houses, you get your own. So, it was a good find we'd have never found otherwise without II. I would go ballistic if II went away with no replacement in other words! It's an absolute requirement for us.

I guess I am learning that points are not viewed as a negative system by all as activity on other websites forums seemed to indicate when conducting conversations there.

 

[Dean]

I see your point Dean, maybe my understanding of II business is not so good! Thank you for that. I probably recall some comment made by one of those TS salesmen. You know, that reliable source.

But I don't understand this part: "including resale buyers after the cutoff", I assume you are referring to post 2010 resale weeks? If such a week were able to be enrolled, say for free even, I don't see how that affects II much, at least in a negative way. I would assume most people would not trade their unit for points, seems like you lose on that deal. Thinking of how we have used the system for so long, we would still exchange. In fact, we would exchange more. Right now, such a week we would never exchange as we'd have to pay for another II membership and that's simply not worth it to us. If the week were enrolled, we would not have to pay II again and therefore would exchange all or part of it on a fairly regular basis. So, for us at least, we would use II more. Are we perhaps the minority users? Or, does your comment refer to something other than post 2010 resale weeks? =

The presumption is that enrolled owners are less likely to use II and thus II will have less weeks to deal with. If they have much for non enrolled weeks or are not a part of the Trust or DC they likely already a personal II membership.

 

[vpplayer]

MVCI still using it as a sales tactic: per our presentation salesperson this morning at Ko Olina, Marriott is leaving II.

 

[TheTimeTraveler]

June of 2018 will mark 8 years since Marriott first introduced the Destination Point System and I believe the Points Program has done quite well.

Owners of weeks purchased prior to 6/2010 can easily use or convert to points, while most resale weeks acquired after 6/2010 have no choice but to use Interval International should they desire to make an exchange. For this reason alone I believe that Interval International will continue to flourish.

I don't believe Marriott will be leaving Interval International anytime soon.


.

 

[Saintsfanfl]

I'll offer a totally different perspective.
As far as your question about being a minority of users, based on comments I see on Facebook groups of MVC owners, the amount of financial analysis and evaluation that TUGgers do is way out of the ordinary. Typical users don't really worry that much about the numbers it seems. I see many people talking on those pages about all of the great Explorer Collection tours they've used their enrolled points for, and those options are generally panned on TUG as poor uses of points (which they are). So, yes, I do think we here are in the minority.

This is a fact.

 

[Jayco29D]

I'll offer a totally different perspective.

As far as your question about being a minority of users, based on comments I see on Facebook groups of MVC owners, the amount of financial analysis and evaluation that TUGgers do is way out of the ordinary. Typical users don't really worry that much about the numbers it seems. I see many people talking on those pages about all of the great Explorer Collection tours they've used their enrolled points for, and those options are generally panned on TUG as poor uses of points (which they are). So, yes, I do think we here are in the minority.

Jim, your post is so accurate. Sometimes my eyes just gloss over at some analysis paralysis by Tuggers. I like a good deal but it is not worth my time to maximize every dollar on every vacation or waste so much time on minutiae. Happier people are "satisficers" not "maximizers". It sounds like the folks in the MVC FB owner group are happy.

Here are some good articles. Many Tuggers appear to be maximizers.

https://www.psychologistworld.com/cognitive/maximizers-satisficers-decision-making

https://www.psychologytoday.com/articles/201109/field-guide-the-maximizer

 

[Steve Fatula]

I would be guilty of that as my profile states. I am mostly a maximizer when it comes to vacations and money, but nothing else. But that fits the profile as most people are not one of the other in all aspects. As a former system and network admin (amongst other tech jobs), had to make quick instant judgement calls all the time when massive money was on the line. Other times, when a complex situation arose, it was more time for maximizing to debug very complex systems as it was necessary in some cases to resolve a situation. It may not be worth non maximizers time, very true statement. But that does not mean it can't or shouldn't be worth someone else's time, perhaps that gives them great joy (the process). Satisficers like to take the work that a maximizer has done and use it. Coming from where I came to where I am now, I am glad I was mostly a maximizer on money. If you say that a maximizer can't be as happy by definition as some articles claim, then I would suggest the population of true maximizers by that definition is very very tiny. The part about 'buyers remorse' is 100% untrue, at least for me, so, perhaps I don't fit their definition of maximizer. Or, they are wrong or it doesn't always apply. I never regret a decision. So, in that sense, I think one can learn to be a "controlled maximizer" (invented term). Which then becomes a satisficer with nothing more than a little more stringent requirements. Maybe that's really what I am at least in money. I would expect a maximizer to not be able to invest money for example, since the possibilities are really endless and far too complex with too many uncertainties.

Maximizers seem to stress out satisficers for some reason. I really don't understand that at all, why would what someone else does in their own life stress you out? But I get the feeling I am stressing some of you out.

My own conversations on various timesharing forums had lead me to believe the exact opposite, that the people who hated timeshares mostly were the ones who expected everything to just work with no effort or time, i.e., they wanted to believe the salesman and were shocked that maybe it wasn't all true. But I can see from this forum, there is another class of people who appear to be happy and appear to not spend too much time. I am very glad to see that, too many negatives out there.

 

[tperez]

MVCI still using it as a sales tactic: per our presentation salesperson this morning at Ko Olina, Marriott is leaving II.

And per our presentation salesperson yesterday morning at Grande Vista, the Marriott merger with ILG is a done deal.

 

[bazzap]

And per our presentation salesperson yesterday morning at Grande Vista, the Marriott merger with ILG is a done deal.

Your salesperson must be very busy then, running resort sales presentations whilst at the same time playing a key role in MVC’s Corporate Mergers and Acquisitions team