[2013] Unit Placement Discussion [orig "Homeless In Paradise ..."]

[FractionalTraveler]

I just realized that my Trust Points have made me homeless.......

What do you mean homeless; I'm a Premier Plus Owner? Right?

I'm homeless in the Trust since no MVCI property recognizes me as an owner!

This is year 3 for the DC and I now have made over 20 reservations using my DC points. Not bad you might say But you see the problem is that the system always treats me as a lost soul from the backstreets of exchanger city.:annoyed:

How can I tell of this injustice? Easy just look at your reservation on Marriott.com under the Summary of Room Charges under the dates or under the Rate Rules and what do I always see "MVC EXCHANGE".

Wait could that be a coincidence? NO not at all! I have proof.. Yea, what proof?

Stayed in February at the Ritz Carlton Vail. Now I know for sure that puppy is only in the Trust. So what type of reservation do you think I got? Yep, you guessed it. "MVC EXCHANGE".

I'm told real owners have priority; I'm just another guest looking for something for free. Since we don't really know the source of inventory, what if that unit I reserved was actually from the Trust? Would I be a legit owner then? Would Marriott recognize my existence then? Would they give me that sought after discount privilege card at check-in so I can eat on property at a reasonable price?

Would I really be an exchanger if the unit was from the Trust? Can the property be challenged to show me that it was not from the trust? Could they even be able to tell the difference in the source of that inventory?

Being homeless in the trust stinks! How can that be though? Wait a minute, I'm paying Marriott top dollar for those Trust Points.

My salesman said if I bought those points I would have DIRECT access to all those wonderful properties in the Trust. Oh wait a minute, I think his lips were moving.....

Journey to be continued......

FT

 

[amanda14]

Great Post

 

[chunkygal]

Very interesting observation

 

[dioxide45]

So has any points owner ever seen their rate rules ever say anything other than "MVC EXCHANGE"? I would expect that if something was booked directly out of the trust, then it should say something different, but perhaps it doesn't. Though one would suspect that whenever using a mix of trust and legacy points, the reservation would always be going through the MVC Exchange Company.

 

[FractionalTraveler]

So has any points owner ever seen their rate rules ever say anything other than "MVC EXCHANGE"? I would expect that if something was booked directly out of the trust, then it should say something different, but perhaps it doesn't.

Good question. Out of my 20 DC reservations some have been at properties where there is a high concentration of Trust units (i.e. Crystal Shores, Timber Lodge, Newport Coast, RC Vail)

Not a one of them said anything different than "MVC EXCHANGE".

I suspect they will keep this a secret as it allows them ample room to manipulate the pools of inventory to maximize their revenue/profit models.

The outcome of all this is a homeless Trust Points Owner.

 

[puckmanfl]

good morning...

Fractional...

just my hypothesis here...

were your reservations with PURE Trust or a combination of Trust and Legacy. If any Legacy points were involved, by definition the inventoryt has to ocme from exchange inventory and Exchange Company. The true test is to see if there are any PURE trust point reservations out there!!!

 

[FractionalTraveler]

good morning...

Fractional...

just my hypothesis here...

were your reservations with PURE Trust or a combination of Trust and Legacy. If any Legacy points were involved, by definition the inventoryt has to ocme from exchange inventory and Exchange Company. The true test is to see if there are any PURE trust point reservations out there!!!

Puck, Good hypothesis but I tested that one already as well.

Since the website allows me to allocate my points from either converted points or pure trust points. I have done this several times reserving on pure trust points from my portfolio. Same end result. "MVC Exchange".

Did this for memorial day at Crystal Shores and now at Ocean Point for Fathers day weekend.

 

[dioxide45]

Puck, Good hypothesis but I tested that one already as well.

Since the website allows me to allocate my points from either converted points or pure trust points. I have done this several times reserving on pure trust points from my portfolio. Same end result. "MVC Exchange".

Did this for memorial day at Crystal Shores and now at Ocean Point for Fathers day weekend.

How far in advance were the reservations made. I wonder if a pure trust points reservation 13 months out would be different from one say 7 months out. Perhaps if your reservations were closer to checkin, MVCI had already moved the inventory to the Exchange Company even though you did use pure Trust Points?

 

[Superchief]

FT,
This is a very interesting point. I also own some trust points and have had a few DC point stays, but I didn't notice this on my reservation. My major concern when staying on points is what is my location assignment priority. It appears that each resort has their own policy regarding where DC point redeemers (trust or legacy) stand in the priority line. Some have told me that DC points are equal in priority to single week owners staying on owned week. Others give a slightly lower priority. In my experience, my villa assignments on DC points have been similar to my owned weeks: some good, some ok.
Have you noticed any difference in your villa assignment?

The other benefit of home resort is that we get to vote for board members. I still don't know how this workds for DC trust. This is my third year of point ownership and I have never received any information regarding the board. Do you have any information regarding this?

 

[hawk5]

This is a great question. I have wondered about this a few times. I do not own DC points but have thought about what may happen to the boards when Marriott buys back weeks to put in the trust. I would think the pool of people who own weeks who want to be on the board could eventually shrink if they can buy back enough weeks. Also, I'd their a board for resorts that are almost purely trust?

 

[cp73]

F

The other benefit of home resort is that we get to vote for board members. I still don't know how this workds for DC trust. This is my third year of point ownership and I have never received any information regarding the board. Do you have any information regarding this?

Somewhere buried in the documents there is probably a trustee (Marriott don't you think) who does the voting for the trust for board members and any other actions requested at the resorts. Dont worry though the trustee has your best interest !!

 

[ilene13]

This thread is very interesting. Last July 4th week we were at Surfwatch where we own a platinum 3 bedroom unit. I went to the owners meeting. There was a couple at the meeting making some comments about tha Marketplace and why did the management make it so small. The resort manager explained the reasons and that it was based on comments from owners. This couple said that they owned trust points only and they considered themselves owners of all the MVCI resorts and they were not informed of changes etc at any resorts. They were a bit put out. As a Surfwatch owner I do not feel that someone who purely owns trust points has a say in the operations of the resorts.

 

[dioxide45]

Somewhere buried in the documents there is probably a trustee (Marriott don't you think) who does the voting for the trust for board members and any other actions requested at the resorts. Dont worry though the trustee has your best interest !!

The Trustee is First American Trust, FSB. There is a MVC Trust Owners Association that is comprised of all trust owners and a board of directors for the Association.

The MVC Destinations Multisite POS document does provide information related to voting by the beneficiaries (owners).

The section I got this from begins on page 103 of the POS.

ARTICLE II
MEMBERSHIP AND VOTING PROVISIONS

Section 1. Membership: Membership in the Association shall be limited to owners of Interests. Permitted transfers of ownership of an Interest, either voluntary or by operation of law, shall terminate transferor's membership in the Association with respect to such Interest, and said membership shall become vested in the transferee. If ownership of an Interest is vested in more than one person, then the vote of all of the persons so owning said Interest shall be cast by the Voting Member (as defined in Section 5 of this Article). If ownership of an Interest is vested in a corporation, partnership, trust, or other legal entity, said entity shall designate an individual as its Voting Member, which may be an officer, partner, member, employee, or other individual thereof designated.

Section 2. Voting:
(a) For purposes of voting and quorum, each Beneficiary shall be entitled to the number of votes equal to the number of Interests owned by such Beneficiary. Developer shall be entitled to vote for each Interest owned by Developer. Where art Interest is owned by more than one party, the policies set forth in Section 5 of this Article shall govern regarding voting for that Interest. Developer may exercise the right to vote any Developer-owned Interests in the same manner as any other Beneficiary.
(b) A majority of the total votes represented in person or by proxy at a meeting at which a quorum is present shall decide any question, unless the Trust Agreement, these Bylaws or the Articles of Incorporation of the Association provide otherwise.

Section 3. Quorum: Except in those specific instances otherwise provided in these Bylaws, the presence in person or by proxy of fifteen percent (15%) of the Interests of the Association shall constitute a quorum for any meeting.

Section 4. Proxies: Votes may be cast in person or by general or limited proxy in accordance with controlling law. To the extent permitted by law, votes may also be cast digitally, whether via the internet, e-mail, or otherwise electronically, or by any other means in accordance with procedures established by the Board. All proxies shall be in writing and signed by the person entitled to vote (as set forth below in Section 5 of this Article).

Any proxy given shall be effective only for the specific meeting for which originally given and any subsequently reconvened meeting thereof.

In no event shall any proxy be valid for a period longer than one hundred eighty (180) calendar days after the date of the first meeting for which it was given.

Each proxy shall specifically set forth the name of the Beneficiary voting by proxy, the name of the person authorized to vote the proxy, the date the proxy was given, and the date, time, and place of the meeting for which the proxy was given.

Limited proxies shall set forth those items for which the holder of the proxy may vote and may indicate whether such vote shall be affirmative or negative for each such. item. Limited proxies given for election meetings shall indicate the candidates for which the proxy holder shall vote.

If a proxy expressly provides, any proxy holder may appoint a substitute to act in the proxy holder's place. If such provision is not made, substitution is not authorized.

Every proxy shall be revocable in writing at any time at the discretion of the Beneficiary executing it.

Proxies may be received electronically, whether via the Internet, email, or otherwise electronically, shall have legal effect, and may be utilized for Association votes, provided that the electronic signature is authenticated through use of a password, cryptography software, or other reasonable means and that proof of such authentication is made available to the Board.

Section 5. Designation of Voting Member: If an Interest is owned by one (1) Beneficiary, the Beneficiary's right to vote shall be established by the recorded title to the Interest. If an Interest is owned by more than one (1) Beneficiary, the Beneficiary entitled to cast the vote for the Interest may be designated in a certificate, the form of which shall be promulgated by the Association, signed by all of the record owners of the Interest and filed with the Secretary/Treasurer of the Association. If an Interest is owned by other than a natural person (e.g., a corporation, partnership or other legal entity) or the Developer, the officer, partner, member, employee, or other authorized representative thereof entitled to cast the vote of the Interest for such legal entity shall be designated in a certificate for this purpose, the form of which shall be promulgated by the Association, signed by the President or Vice-President of the entity and attested to by the Secretary or Assistant Secretary of the entity, in the case of a corporation, or a general partner in the case of a general or limited partnership, or such other person entitled to represent an entity as deemed acceptable to the Board, and filed with the Secretary/Treasurer of the Association. The person designated in such certificate who is entitled to cast the vote for an Interest shall be known as the "Voting Member." Such certificates shall be valid until revoked in writing or superseded by a subsequent written certificate, Or until a change in the ownership of the Interest concerned.

If a voting certificate is not on file with the Secretary/Treasurer of the Association for an Interest owned by more than one Beneficiary or by a legal entity, the vote of the Interest concerned shall not be considered for purposes of establishing a quorum, nor for any purpose requiring the approval of the Interest's Voting Member unless the individuals required to designate the Voting Member instead execute a proxy with respect to such Interest as set forth in Section 4 of this Article, Notwithstanding the foregoing requirement, if an Interest is owned by a husband and wife and the spouses and do not designate a Voting Member, the vote for such Interest may be cast or a proxy may be executed by either spouse without evidence of the concurrence of the absent spouse; provided, however, in the event both spouses cast conflicting votes or execute multiple proxies, the vote of the spouses' Interest shall not be considered for purposes of establishing a quorum, nor for any purpose requiring the approval of the Interest's Voting Member.

So it seems that owners should be able to vote, but for what? The BOD. That would be my guess. Beneficiaries would elect the BOD who would then decide how to vote the trusts proxies for each resort every year.

 

[GregT]

FT,

That is a very interesting observation. I would be curious to see what your experience was in terms of getting desirable rooms?

I've got a post going in the HGVC forum, where I note that, even though I don't own in Hawaii, I have gotten terrific rooms each time I've visited HHV.

I do note that they reserve the Diamond Head side primarily for owners, but I've always gotten a high floor on Ewa side, which still has a terrific view.

I hope you are getting excellent rooms for your reservations, because Trust Point purchasers are keeping the ship afloat.

Your observation is quite interesting, as I said though, and I would be curious if you could document your room request experience over time.

Best,

Greg

 

[Superchief]

Dioxide, Thanks for posting this information. I assume we should be contacted when there is something to vote for. I have not received any such communication. Have any other trust owners had an opportunity to vote on any issues?

 

[Superchief]

This is a great question. I have wondered about this a few times. I do not own DC points but have thought about what may happen to the boards when Marriott buys back weeks to put in the trust. I would think the pool of people who own weeks who want to be on the board could eventually shrink if they can buy back enough weeks. Also, I'd their a board for resorts that are almost purely trust?

I am an owner at Oceana Palms, which is primarily owned by the trust. Our board is dominated by MVC people, and Maintenance fees have increased faster than my other MVC resorts. Our property taxes are also much higher than my Ocean Pointe week, and seem to fluctuate greatly from year to year.

 

[SueDonJ]

Isn't this one of the suppositions that we've have had all along about the Destination Club, that DC Trust Members don't have a home resort advantage despite almost all of the resorts having had at least a few units conveyed to the DC Trust? And that even though Trust Members have direct access to Trust intervals that Exchange Members don't have, the way the inventory is being managed is through the DC Exchange Company? That's what I've thought, anyway, that inventory controls appear to be seamless because the system is designed to make instant deposits (from all sources) to the Exchange Company when DC Trust and Exchange Members make requests, regardless of the origin of the intervals and regardless of the technical availability controls for all DC Members.

This wording (bolding is mine) from the Exchange Procedures doc is what the supposition is based on:

(page 2)

III. B. Distribution.
1. Trust Members. For administrative convenience in the operation of the Program and for determination of the respective rights of Members to enjoy the benefits of the Program, each Member will be assigned a Distribution each Use Year. The Distribution represents the reservation rights of the Member’s Interests during a particular Use Year in relation to other Interests participating in the Program during that Use Year. A Member will be permitted to use his or her Affiliate Program points each Use Year to make a reservation for Accommodations that are part of the Member’s Affiliate Program or the Member may voluntarily participate in the Program by converting all or a portion of his or her Affiliate Program points into Exchange Points for the purpose of making a reservation through the Program. Unless otherwise provided by Exchange Company, Members may not convert his or her Affiliate Program points into Exchange Points except in connection with making a reservation through the Program. Currently, the conversion of Affiliate Program points into Exchange Points is one-to-one; however, Exchange Company reserves the right to vary the conversion ratio in Exchange Company’s sole discretion, including, but not limited to, on an Affiliate Program-by-Affiliate Program basis.

2. Exchange Members. Each calendar year, an Exchange Member may Deposit Use Periods associated with the Exchange Member’s Interest with the Exchange Company during the applicable Deposit Window. Exchange Members are required to Deposit Use Periods in 7-consecutive evening increments (in accordance with the usage calendar associated with the Exchange Member’s Component). Lock-off portions of an Accommodation are not eligible to be deposited. Deposits may only be made during the Deposit Window for the Use Period that the Exchange Member desires to Deposit. With respect to an Exchange Member who owns an alternate year Interest, unless the Exchange Member banks or borrows Exchange Points as may be permitted by these Exchange Procedures, such Exchange Member will be entitled to Deposit Use Periods associated with his or her Interest for usage of Exchange Points only during the calendar year in which such Exchange Member’s use rights occur, and will be required to use their Exchange Points during the same calendar year; provided, however, such Exchange Member will be assessed Exchange Company Dues on an annual basis.

For administrative convenience in the operation of the Program and for determination of the respective rights of Exchange Members to enjoy the benefits of the Program, the Exchange Company will assign a Distribution of Exchange Points to each Exchange Member for Use Periods Deposited by the Exchange Member for exchange each Use Year. The number of Exchange Points in a Distribution for a particular Use Period is based on various factors such as relative daily and seasonal demand, Accommodation capacity, size, view, and furnishings,
(page break)
and other valuation parameters established by the Exchange Company and may vary periodically by such factors. The number of Exchange Points in a Distribution is not in any way intended to be reflective of the economic value of any Interest.

When an Exchange Member Deposits a Use Period with Exchange Company, such Exchange Member assigns and Exchange Company will automatically have all of such Exchange Member’s rights to reserve and use such Use Period for the given Use Year. Once such Use Period has been deposited with Exchange Company, it may not be withdrawn.

3. All Members. The Exchange Points necessary to reserve a Use Period are identified on the Exchange Point Schedule. Exchange Company will review the Exchange Point Schedule at least annually and amend the Exchange Point Schedule as necessary to maintain an equitable distribution of the usage requirements based on various factors such as relative daily and seasonal demand, Accommodation capacity, size, view, and furnishings, and other valuation parameters established by Exchange Company or as might be required by law. Any such modification to the Exchange Point Schedule shall not require approval by the Members or amendment of these Exchange Procedures. Exchange Company may also temporarily discount the number of Exchange Points otherwise required on the Exchange Point Schedule from time to time to reduce the number of Exchange Points required to reserve specific Use Periods at specific Accommodations in the event Exchange Company deems such discounts beneficial to the Program. Such temporary adjustments of the Exchange Point Schedule shall not require an increase in the number of Exchange Points required to reserve other Use Periods within the Program.

This is why I've argued that DC Members should be incorporated into the Priority Placement lists such that they're considered to be Owners rather than exchangers, because they're not using an external product to reserve intervals. The DC Exchange Company "bucket" set-up appears to somewhat align with II's and other exchange companies' pool systems, but the similarity ends there in that the only people using DC Points are actual Marriott owners/members! I don't think Marriott will ever share their secrets related to the machination of inventory controls, but I sure do wish that they'd publish a statement confirming for Owners, Members and the Resort Personnel just exactly where DC Members fit on the Priority Placement Lists. IMO they're certainly more comparable to Weeks Owners than to any external exchange company users.

Voting matters at the individual resorts are a different story than unit placement, IMO, because the ownership of record for the individual intervals conveyed to the Trust is the Trustee, not the Trust Members. The Trust Members' deeds show that they own interests in the Trust, not in the individual resorts.

Finally, aside from the "MVC EXCHANGE" designation on DC reservations, the only other designation I've seen for DC intervals is the "MVC POINTS BULK" that folks have reported on II exchange confirmations. I don't remember anything resembling, "MVC TRUST."

 

[SueDonJ]

Dioxide, Thanks for posting this information. I assume we should be contacted when there is something to vote for. I have not received any such communication. Have any other trust owners had an opportunity to vote on any issues?

I agree, great find by Dioxide, and I agree with him that Trust Members voting rights are probably limited to BOD elections and maybe other matters related to the Trust/Affiliation issues. Their deeds do not extend to voting rights at the individual resorts.

Is there also something in the docs that specifies term limits for BOD members? Perhaps DC Trust Members haven't yet received voting proxies because the term limits of the original BOD haven't yet come up against expiration?

 

[dioxide45]

This is why I've argued that DC Members should be incorporated into the Priority Placement lists such that they're considered to be Owners rather than exchangers, because they're not using an external product to reserve intervals. The DC Exchange Company "bucket" set-up appears to somewhat align with II's and other exchange companies' pool systems, but the similarity ends there in that the only people using DC Points are actual Marriott owners/members! I don't think Marriott will ever share their secrets related to the machination of inventory controls, but I sure do wish that they'd publish a statement confirming for Owners, Members and the Resort Personnel just exactly where DC Members fit on the Priority Placement Lists. IMO they're certainly more comparable to Weeks Owners than to any external exchange company users.

Voting matters at the individual resorts are a different story than unit placement, IMO, because the ownership of record for the individual intervals conveyed to the Trust is the Trustee, not the Trust Members. The Trust Members' deeds show that they own interests in the Trust, not in the individual resorts.

Finally, aside from the "MVC EXCHANGE" designation on DC reservations, the only other designation I've seen for DC intervals is the "MVC POINTS BULK" that folks have reported on II exchange confirmations. I don't remember anything resembling, "MVC TRUST."

Susan, I do agree that the resorts should be incorporating DC based reservations in to the placement priority system. Though I think we will have to agree to disagree as to where that placement should lie.

While from the customers point of view, their DC reservation is a reservation with MVCI, they believe it should be the same as any reservation made with owner services. However, legally it is different, it is still an exchange. If we are going to separate the trust bucket and exchange bucket, then we should still be separating a home resort reservation from an exchange reservation with points.

Now that doesn't speak to direct trust reservations, those should be treated the same as owners at the resort. I think the problem is that the room assignment peeps at the resort really can't tell the difference between points reservation and the another. They probably all look the same. Though they can tell the difference between a home resort reservation, a points reservation and an II exchange.

The real problem comes in when a trust owner reserves something through the exchange company that was likely trust inventory to start out with. Where does that get placed?

The problem when you start adding points exchanges to the same level as weeks owners staying on their home resort week, is you get increased competition for priority placement. More unhappy owners, and resentment toward each other. I think the resorts will continue to keep priority placement pecking order somewhat vague as to make their job easier in explaining poor placements to owners.

In the end the whole priority placement system is just a way to give people a warm and fuzzy. It really doesn't mean much in the end once you are in your unit. There is so much leeway and so many variables, that they really shouldn't bother publishing such a policy as in the end, people further down the pecking order will end up getting better placements than those higher up. Far too many variables...

 

[SunandFun83]

Trust point owners need same priorit for room choice

I stayed at Ocean Pointe for two weeks in March, 2013. This property is notorious for giving really terrible room locations to everyone except the people who stay 4-8 weeks. Those week owners lock-off and camp out in the best rooms and they never leave.

The Interval Exchange I got was assigned first floor parking lot and it was so bad, that it was offensive. See my review on TUG. I ran into two trust point owners who made reservations with points. They were essentially paying twice as much as I was and twice as much as most week owners for these reservations. The trust owners also got lousy room locations because the best rooms were all taken by "Owners'. Well, the one lady I talked to went nuts on the front desk about the room priority for trust owners and she got moved to the third floor (out of 6).

I think representatives of the trust point owners need to make a fuss about room assignment priority. and Marriott better listen. Why buy points if the "old week owners" get the best rooms.

I think room assignment downgrades for exchangers is a visible and explicit strategy of Marriott to push people away from Interval International exchanges into buying points, then they better get great rooms with those points.

 

[FractionalTraveler]

How far in advance were the reservations made. I wonder if a pure trust points reservation 13 months out would be different from one say 7 months out. Perhaps if your reservations were closer to checkin, MVCI had already moved the inventory to the Exchange Company even though you did use pure Trust Points?

I don’t quite remember but it was nothing specific. Anywhere between 13 months to 2 weeks is probably a fair estimate.

 

[dioxide45]

I stayed at Ocean Pointe for two weeks in March, 2013. This property is notorious for giving really terrible room locations to everyone except the people who stay 4-8 weeks. Those week owners lock-off and camp out in the best rooms and they never leave.

The Interval Exchange I got was assigned first floor parking lot and it was so bad, that it was offensive. See my review on TUG. I ran into two trust point owners who made reservations with points. They were essentially paying twice as much as I was and twice as much as most week owners for these reservations. The trust owners also got lousy room locations because the best rooms were all taken by "Owners'. Well, the one lady I talked to went nuts on the front desk about the room priority for trust owners and she got moved to the third floor (out of 6).

I think representatives of the trust point owners need to make a fuss about room assignment priority. and Marriott better listen. Why buy points if the "old week owners" get the best rooms.

I think room assignment downgrades for exchangers is a visible and explicit strategy of Marriott to push people away from Interval International exchanges into buying points, then they better get great rooms with those points.

I think the problem at Ocean Pointe is how their policy is setup. Unlike the SC resorts that use a rotation system for assignments, Ocean Pionte does not. This keeps the same owners that own lots of weeks getting the same great units year after year. It is all about how many weeks you own at Ocean Pointe. So the two week owner will always be below the 4 week owner.

I have heard about owners moving after their first week to a better view and once they get in a primo unit, that is where they stay until their stay ends. I think a rotation system like the SC resorts use also has its benefits. Though this may or may not help exchangers (MVC or II).

 

[cp73]

How about this. I think the point trust owners should be a lower priority than the deeded owners. Why? Because they own a smaller percent interest in that resort than do the deeded owners. Consider your typical points owner who purchased the equivelant of one week has his/her ownership that is spread out over all the resorts that have trust ownership. A lot smaller percent than a one week deeded owner.

 

[Bill4728]

My current DC pt reservation at my home resort also says "MVC exchange" so maybe all dc pt reservations say that?

 

[dioxide45]

My current DC pt reservation at my home resort also says "MVC exchange" so maybe all dc pt reservations say that?

I think that is what FT is saying. All DC reservations seem to be going through the MVC Exchange Company. The concern is that even pure trust point reservations are also.