Timber Lodge Presentation

[Big Matt]

...but that's pretty much what just happened to me.

I have a load of points that I've been accumulating for years and the ones I got in the early days are worth less. In my example though it's something like: I spent 28 days to get 7, but now they're only worth 5.

I\Hypothetically, lets say I had to pay for 28 nights in order to get 7 free nights. Once I earn those points by paying for 28 nights I shouldn't discover later that I now need to stay 35 nights because Marriott just devalued the points it gave me (which were the equivalent of staying for 28 nights).

 

[dioxide45]

I wouldn't doubt that sales are still being made at any sales center. TS sales haven't dropped 100% anywhere. However, many offices may not only have say 10 sales reps when they used to have 20. So it may seem that sales are brisk because each rep is still selling the same number of units, but over all sales have dropped.

 

[jimf41]

restricting resale rights?

This is a topic that has reared it's ugly head before. But try to think outside the box a little. According to my conversations with the folks in Corporate they did actually consider this but dumped it due to " owner backlash". I can only assume they read the responses to Dave M's thread last winter and didn't want to open that can of worms. But they still have to come up with some strong incentives to get you to pay a 40% premium on their product.

Instead of restricting anyones rights all they have to do is offer an extra incentive to a developer week. That could take the form of an increased reservation window to allow them to use the chances of reserving a desired week as leverage in their sales pitch. It could be a lot of other things as long as they don't restrict the rights on any existing deeds.

I don't know how much business they lose to resales but with platinum weeks readily available for less than 10k I think they are going to implement something that will be a benefit to developer bought weeks that is not currently included.

With the situation as it is now I'm not going to buy a developer week or a resale week until I see what changes they make if any at all. From all I can gather the rumors of these changes are all pointed at this January. We'll see.

 

[m61376]

Jim-
If I remember correctly, the suggestion of an increased reservation window was discussed in the previous thread, and the consensus was that all owners had to have the same rights of usage, and that included the ability to reserve weeks.

Maybe it is wishful thinking, but I would be shocked if they implemented any changes that alienated a large portion of their potential sales base. The economy will hopefully turn around, and they will once again begin new construction. Current happy owners- whether developer or resale- present a potential pool of pre-construction and on-going development purchasers.

While changing the rules going forward will devalue everyone's ownership because it will make all ownerships, whether direct purchases or resale purchases, worth less on the resale market, they could make future resale owners second class citizens, so to speak. While I personally think that would be a business mistake because it lowers everyone's values, it would not create the overwhelming antagonism that changing current rules of ownership would effect. Thus, as Dave and others suggested, the strong likelihood is that all current owners will be grandfathered when any new rules are put into place.

What is a bit worrisome is, with transfers taking so long, what if Marriott institutes changes to future non-developer purchases and buyers are trapped in the transfer process?

You are right that it will be interesting to see how things develop, but with the economy such as it is I am confident that whatever changes Marriott makes it will do its best not to antagonize current owners, because that's their present and future customer base.

 

[jimf41]

While changing the rules going forward will devalue everyone's ownership because it will make all ownerships, whether direct purchases or resale purchases, worth less on the resale market, they could make future resale owners second class citizens, so to speak.

They didn't have a problem making single week owners second class citizens when they implemented the 13 month rule. It also didn't devalue anyone's week as far as I can see.

Thus, as Dave and others suggested, the strong likelihood is that all current owners will be grandfathered when any new rules are put into place.

I think this would have to be a condition if they decide to make any significant changes. I also think the grandfather clause would end when the current owner sells privately.

You are right that it will be interesting to see how things develop, but with the economy such as it is I am confident that whatever changes Marriott makes it will do its best not to antagonize current owners, because that's their present and future customer base.


I am not so sure about this. If they grant a significant new benefit to developer buyers and grandfather the benefit to all current owners and exclude all future resale buyers, who have they antagonized? I don't think they are concerned with future resale buyers. If the benefit were significant enough they could all but eliminate future private resales. It's a scary thought, but they could corner both the developer and resale markets with a little ingenuity. I think it all boils down to how much of a threat to their business is posed by the resale market. If it's 5 or 6% as I've read in some threads then I don't think it's worth their while to change anything. If it's 20% or more then I'll bet on Marriott tilting the playing field in their favor.

 

[pwrshift]

Those of you with a chunk of points should be looking at using them in 2009 and booking before the change in mid January ... the 7 night pkgs stay the same until then and the Cat7 hotels remain Cat7, unless you book them after mid Jan. I've booked 4 holidays in 2009 into Cat7 hotels already, 3 of them with 120k FF miles - and looking for more.

Hotel availabilities seem much easier to get (even on the old standard stytsm) than I've seen in years and FF seats more plentiful to Europe than ever. Don't miss this chance -- if you can take that 2nd honeymoon in 2009 - book it now...and fly biz class! Vienna? Paris? London? You may have to do the FF seats before year end to get the current US-Europe biz class miles.

Time will tell if the new system's non-blackout dates will work better, but there's a premium for that change as few people were booking anytime rooms at twice the points. But the jump in the packages expecially into Cat8 is quite the increase...and we don't know what hotels will jump into the Cat7 level to fill the void! Book them now...for long time memories.

Brian

 

[m61376]

They didn't have a problem making single week owners second class citizens when they implemented the 13 month rule. It also didn't devalue anyone's week as far as I can see.


I think this would have to be a condition if they decide to make any significant changes. I also think the grandfather clause would end when the current owner sells privately.

I am not so sure about this. If they grant a significant new benefit to developer buyers and grandfather the benefit to all current owners and exclude all future resale buyers, who have they antagonized? I don't think they are concerned with future resale buyers. If the benefit were significant enough they could all but eliminate future private resales. It's a scary thought, but they could corner both the developer and resale markets with a little ingenuity. I think it all boils down to how much of a threat to their business is posed by the resale market. If it's 5 or 6% as I've read in some threads then I don't think it's worth their while to change anything. If it's 20% or more then I'll bet on Marriott tilting the playing field in their favor.

When they made prior changes (ie- implementing the 13 month rule) they applied them evenly to all owners in a given class. I do agree that by grandfathering all current owners they won't antagonize their current owner pool, which is their potential future buyer pool (that was the point I was trying to make), although I do think they run the risk of devaluing everyone's ownership because of decreased saleability.

Making future resale purchasers second class citizens, so to speak, in the Marriott system would make it even harder to sell, even when the economy turns around. It may look good to Marriott, but will the effect trickle down with time; will people realize that future saleability is so diminished that they will hesitate to buy? I guess it will boil down to which is more of a threat: the small resale market or the perception of diminished value to buyers.

At any extent, I'm confident that whatever changes they implement will impact future buyers in the short run, but affect everyone in the long run should they choose to sell.

 

[dioxide45]

Resale Restrictions

The only people concerned about the resale market are the sales people. I am sure that Marriott, as a corporation doesn't give it a second thought, they even profit from it. Sales reps however are worried about that one single resale purchase because it could be you buying resale instead of buying from them. The resale market is small and insignificant to Marriott overall.

 

[Latravel]

When I told the sales rep Marriott could not restrict a persons use of their unit, she stated it would be harder for resale owners to get the weeks they want. This could very probably mean they would give extra priviledges to developer bought units instead of restricting resale owners. It will be very interesting to see what happens.

 

[Stefa]

When I told the sales rep Marriott could not restrict a persons use of their unit, she stated it would be harder for resale owners to get the weeks they want. This could very probably mean they would give extra priviledges to developer bought units instead of restricting resale owners. It will be very interesting to see what happens.

There is no reason for Marriott to do this, assuming it is even legal. Most direct purchasers don't realize there is a resale market, so Marriott gains nothing by being so punitive. My guess is it would actually hurt sales if potential buyers understood that their unit would be virtually worthless if they ever needed to sell.

 

[m61376]

There is no reason for Marriott to do this, assuming it is even legal. Most direct purchasers don't realize there is a resale market, so Marriott gains nothing by being so punitive. My guess is it would actually hurt sales if potential buyers understood that their unit would be virtually worthless if they ever needed to sell.

Interesting point, and I think you are right; I think most owners and potential buyers are unaware of the resale market and, furthermore, I really think most who have seen an ad or overheard conversation about resales believe there is something really different if they don't buy directly from Marriott.

In order to sell the product, salespeople need to focus potential buyers on the positive- on their use now and in the future, the insurance of quality family time, etc. (all the sales pitch stuff). The concept of a high value week (after all, look at how prices keep on escalating so it is somewhat of an investment ...at least that's the underlying sales message) shouldn't be marred with reference to resale ability and diminished value of resale units. It is not a big stretch for a potential buyer to feel hesitant if he/she was made aware of a diminished resale value. While there are direct buyers who are aware of the resale market and have bought for the ability to trade for points, most customers are in the dark and it is in Marriott's best interests to keep them that way.

Have you ever gotten into a conversation with another owner while on vacation who looks at you incredulously and with disbelief if you tell them there is another way to buy other than directly through Marriott?