[2018] Marriott Ko Olina - Rooms Control Villa Prioritization

[bazzap]

I think what Sue is saying is that the Trust owns the week, just like you own your week, so the Trust should be treated the same as you regarding their ownership of that specific week... and by virtue of that, whomever books that week owned by the Trust should be treated the same as you would be treated when using your ownership. Not arguing one side or the other, but I can certainly see both sides of the argument.

I agree 100% with BocaBoy.
A Resort weeks owner has invested and committed totally in that one resort.
A DC trust points owner has invested and commiitted into all MVC trust resorts and therefore their per resort investment and commitment is significantly less.
If trust points owners were to be treated the same as weeks owners at all resorts, they would effectively be getting the same benefit as owners who had bought weeks in every single resort at a cost no doubt of many $millions.
This would clearly be unjustifiable.

 

[Fasttr]

I agree 100% with BocaBoy.
A Resort weeks owner has invested and committed totally in that one resort.
A DC trust points owner has invested and commiitted into all MVC trust resorts and therefore their per resort investment and commitment is significantly less.
If trust points owners were to be treated the same as weeks owners at all resorts, they would effectively be getting the same benefit as owners who had bought weeks in every single resort at a cost no doubt of many $millions.
This would clearly be unjustifiable.

Just taking your argument to the extreme a bit and playing devil's advocate. If you placed your weeks ownership into a Family Trust for your children after you pass, and as such, each of your children (lets say you have 4 of them) is a Trustee in that Family Trust after you pass. Lets also say they rotate usage and each of your 4 children get to use the week once every 4 years. Do you feel each of your 4 children should be treated as an owner when they use that week. They paid nothing for that week and it is the Trust that actually owns the week. Just saying....its not as black and white as you would like to make it from a truly legal standpoint. The Trust, just like an individual is the owner of the week and has the same rights as any other owner.

 

[Dean]

Just taking your argument to the extreme a bit and playing devil's advocate. If you placed your weeks ownership into a Family Trust for your children after you pass, and as such, each of your children (lets say you have 4 of them) is a Trustee in that Family Trust after you pass. Lets also say they rotate usage and each of your 4 children get to use the week once every 4 years. Do you feel each of your 4 children should be treated as an owner when they use that week. They paid nothing for that week and it is the Trust that actually owns the week. Just saying....its not as black and white as you would like to make it from a truly legal standpoint. The Trust, just like an individual is the owner of the week and has the same rights as any other owner.

Let me take it the other way. For disclosure, I agree that Trust and DC should not be treated the same as an owner at that resort using their week. I do feel DC and Trust should be treated the same, ahead of all exchanges and that an owner exchanging in should be treated the same as any other Marriott exchange member. But the problem with the idea that a Trust reservation should be the same as any other owner would mean they get home resort priority at all resorts using Trust/DC points. Maybe this could be a sales angle. The other alternative is to treat the all the same just like they were a renter using an owners week.

 

[bazzap]

Just taking your argument to the extreme a bit and playing devil's advocate. If you placed your weeks ownership into a Family Trust for your children after you pass, and as such, each of your children (lets say you have 4 of them) is a Trustee in that Family Trust after you pass. Lets also say they rotate usage and each of your 4 children get to use the week once every 4 years. Do you feel each of your 4 children should be treated as an owner when they use that week. They paid nothing for that week and it is the Trust that actually owns the week. Just saying....its not as black and white as you would like to make it from a truly legal standpoint. The Trust, just like an individual is the owner of the week and has the same rights as any other owner.

I hesitate to suggest this, but if you start looking at all possible, different scenarios, there could be a case made that MVC should follow the recent trend of some airline frequent flyer programmes and base their benefits (including priority allocation) purely on total $ spend be that MVC weeks, trust or enrolled points or a combination of all of these?

 

[dougp26364]

I think one could make any case they want about who should be more important from an owners perspective when it comes to room placement............but MVC really doesn't have to care about the owners perspective do they? What they care about is selling timeshares/points and, if you can tell a buyer that, as a trust points owner, you have top priority and, if you have status, your at the top of the heap in priority, that's what MVC will do.
How long have salesmen been promoting "super charge" your enrolled points? Well, would it be any surprise to any of us that those who have "supercharged" their enrolled points are given priority when it comes to room placement?
Believe what you want. The rules change with the direction the sales wind is blowing. I stopped paying to maintain any sort of status years ago. If my room assignment suffers, it's going to suffer. I'm not willing to give MVC another $15,000+ to "supercharge" my enrolled points in order to have a status advantage or any other advantage. In another 10 years it will be something else and another $15,000 plus the higher MF's associated with owning more and more timeshares/points.
Argue it how you want. MVC already has YOUR money. Even if you sell your timeshare interest they still have YOUR money. What they want is someone else's money or more of your money in order to keep playing the game. Any point of view other than that which promotes additional sales is likely a moot point.

 

[hangloose]

Quite an interesting turn on this thread with plenty of opinions. My goal was just to give further visibility into how MKO rooms control prioritizes. My personal hope is that I can learn from my poor room placement this year as a Legacy Owner to help my room placement in future years. Sounds like book early and don't lockoff a 3BR OV are the answers for my MKO 3BR week.

I do feel for Marriott Rooms Controls, especially at high demand resorts during peak periods. With the introduction of the DC Pts program and potential daily check in/check out, it has to be an extremely challenging endeavor to manage. Almost nearly impossible. There must be some software program they use to help at least calculate the first pass, then they tweak based on other factors? In any event, I don't envy their position at all.

As far as Owner prioritization, my personal opinion leans towards Weeks Owners reservations having priority over DC Pts reservations. While each is an "Owner" respectively, it does seem that Weeks Owners invested in that single property. Giving a DC Pts reservation (who technically own at all resorts) priority, seems off to me. That's like saying every MVC Week Owner has priority at any MVC resort (almost). Either way, MVC "Owners" both Legacy and DC Pts should take top billing on the priority list above all others.

In the end, it wouldn't surprise me if prioritization changes over time...based on individual resort prioritization formulas, changes in the MVC program, sales tactics changing impacting rules, etc. More of a reason to own Fixed week, Fixed unit where possible...to avoid the floating season challenges which impact villa placement (reservation dates, etc).

Just my 2 cents. I hope others share what they hear from other MVC resorts around their villa prioritization. I'm now also a bit worried that locking off my other weeks at MOC (2BR OF) or MPB (3BR OF) may see the same fate at my MKO (3BR OV) week did this past month. Time will tell.

No matter what villa I get, I'll still enjoy my vacations as I build those memories with my family!

 

[JIMinNC]

I'm now also a bit worried that locking off my other weeks at MOC (2BR OF) or MPB (3BR OF) may see the same fate at my MKO (3BR OV) week did this past month. Time will tell.

Reading this thread gave me the exact same thought regarding our newly-acquired 2BR OV at MOC. We'll be booking the whole unit for our first visit in 2019, but considering this issue does give me pause about locking off in the future (especially considering we aren't enamored with trying to rent the studio portion anyway). From where I sit, this just adds another reason to hope that we can find an opportunity to enroll this post-2010 external week before our next use year in 2021. That way, if we don't need the full 2BR in 2021, we could elect for points and just book the 1BR in whatever view we want.

 

[BocaBoy]

I think what Sue is saying is that the Trust owns the week, just like you own your week, so the Trust should be treated the same as you regarding their ownership of that specific week... and by virtue of that, whomever books that week owned by the Trust should be treated the same as you would be treated when using your ownership. Not arguing one side or the other, but I can certainly see both sides of the argument.

Reading this thread gave me the exact same thought regarding our newly-acquired 2BR OV at MOC. We'll be booking the whole unit for our first visit in 2019, but considering this issue does give me pause about locking off in the future (especially considering we aren't enamored with trying to rent the studio portion anyway). From where I sit, this just adds another reason to hope that we can find an opportunity to enroll this post-2010 external week before our next use year in 2021. That way, if we don't need the full 2BR in 2021, we could elect for points and just book the 1BR in whatever view we want.

Jim, I wouldn't worry about it. We have locked off our Maui (new towers) ocean front weeks many times, although not in the past 3 or so years. And we have with only one exception gotten superior room assignments every time. The one exception is when we made a very late reservation (available only because of a cancellation) and were near the bottom of the date stamp list. It was still a good view but not on a particularly high floor. If anything, ocean view villas in the original section should be even easier for you.

 

[JIMinNC]

Jim, I wouldn't worry about it. We have locked off our Maui (new towers) ocean front weeks many times, although not in the past 3 or so years. And we have with only one exception gotten superior room assignments every time. The one exception is when we made a very late reservation (available only because of a cancellation) and were near the bottom of the date stamp list. It was still a good view but not on a particularly high floor. If anything, ocean view villas in the original section should be even easier for you.

That’s good to know. Maybe the situation hangloose experienced was unique to KoOlina 3BR and maybe had more to do with the late date stamp he mentioned in the other thread.

What I will be interested to see next year is what effect our 12 month date stamp will have on our placement at MOC. We will be reserving our full 2BR week this coming week at the 12-month mark, but multiweek owners will be ahead of us with their earlier date stamp. So it will be interesting to see how much a 12-month date stamp hurts us vis-a-vis the 13-month folks.

 

[TXTortoise]

Possibly previously lost in this thread, but if you reserve at 12 or 13 months at MOC, then decide to lock off later and not change any dates, you should contact room control.
I received guidance that they would note the original date on both units and prioritize accordingly. No way to to assure that happens, but the fact that they offered it shows they are being thoughtful in their approach.

 

[dougp26364]

Here’s what I’ve observed as times have changed.

1.Booking as early as possible has a definite impact, but it only goes as far as the “class” of reservation you hold (owner/trust points, Marriott exchanger, renter, all other exchangers)

2. Elite status or being a multi-week owner works as a tie breaker when all other things are equal.

3. When exchanging, even getting the reservation at the furthest point in time and having elite status or being a multi week owner, if it’s high season and the resort has high owner occupancy, you can still receive a crappy room assignment.

4. The DC allowing elite status point reservations at 13 months has had an effect on our ability to book the arrival day and unit placement at our home resorts as weeks owners. This year was the first time we didn’t have our choice of arrival days booking on the first day reservations could be made (Thursday and Friday arrivals were off the table already). Ticks me off that I’ve been a weeks owner at this resort since 2001 and now I appear to be trumped by points reservations that can be booked 13 months in advance.

On the plus side, we were able to book, using points, the unit size and view we wanted at MOC. So I may be somewhat shafted at my home resort of Ocean Pointe but I’m likely on the other end of that shaft using points to book into MOC a full 13 months in advance. So I guess the blade cuts both ways.

I’d have felt better about the points program if not for the skim. If it wasn’t for that I could convert my Ocean Point week to points, book 13 months in advance and have my choice of arrival days. Instead MVC gives me fewer points for my week than what it takes to book the same week. But this debate has been hammered so much it’s just beating a dead horse. It’s better to understand the playing field and manipulate it to best of your ability to get the best results you can for your own situation.

 

[JIMinNC]

Here’s what I’ve observed as times have changed.

4. The DC allowing elite status point reservations at 13 months has had an effect on our ability to book the arrival day and unit placement at our home resorts as weeks owners. This year was the first time we didn’t have our choice of arrival days booking on the first day reservations could be made (Thursday and Friday arrivals were off the table already). Ticks me off that I’ve been a weeks owner at this resort since 2001 and now I appear to be trumped by points reservations that can be booked 13 months in advance.

I don't think the DC 13 months reservations is directly responsible for why you couldn't get your arrival day. Remember, weeks owners can book their week the day before points owners. For example, for a Feb 23 check-in, multi-weeks owners were able to book at 13-months on Monday, January 22. Points owners could not book until Tuesday, January 23. Same thing at the 12-month point - weeks owners could book their week on Thursday, February 22. Points owners could do 12-month bookings the next day, Friday, February 23.

While we don't know exactly how they do it inside the black box that is the DC exchange system, TUGgers in the know have said they have been told by senior folks at MVC (not sales) that based on the number of enrolled & elected weeks at the resort and the percentage of Trust ownership for each week, MVC's system ensures that weeks owners don't snarf up all the desirable weeks before the points owners get a chance. Supposedly, this protection/allcoation goes all the way down to the check-in day level. Think of it that if there are 100 units available in a given resort/unit size/view, and the Trust owns 20 of those, and another 25 are elected for points by enrolled owners, points owners would have access to 45 intervals, while weeks owners would retain exclusive access to the other 55. But while the available intervals for weeks owners has declined in my example, so have the number of weeks owners competing for that inventory, since those owned by the Trust or those who elected for Points are now only competing for the 45 intervals in the Points bucket, leaving the remaining weeks owners to compete for the 55 intervals left in the weeks bucket. So, the system balance should be exactly as it was before.

I think a possible explanation for your experience with the Thursday/Friday check-ins is that it may be more likely that those weeks owners who want to book the highest-demand weeks (I'm assuming you are talking about a high demand school holiday or something like that) are less likely to choose to elect for points, whereas those who are not targeting those in demand weeks might be more inclined to elect points. As a result, the demand for those high-demand weeks in the weeks bucket falls less than the supply of weeks is reduced, making it somewhat more competitive than it was previously.

 

[dougp26364]

I don't think the DC 13 months reservations is directly responsible for why you couldn't get your arrival day. Remember, weeks owners can book their week the day before points owners. For example, for a Feb 23 check-in, multi-weeks owners were able to book at 13-months on Monday, January 22. Points owners could not book until Tuesday, January 23. Same thing at the 12-month point - weeks owners could book their week on Thursday, February 22. Points owners could do 12-month bookings the next day, Friday, February 23.

While we don't know exactly how they do it inside the black box that is the DC exchange system, TUGgers in the know have said they have been told by senior folks at MVC (not sales) that based on the number of enrolled & elected weeks at the resort and the percentage of Trust ownership for each week, MVC's system ensures that weeks owners don't snarf up all the desirable weeks before the points owners get a chance. Supposedly, this protection/allcoation goes all the way down to the check-in day level. Think of it that if there are 100 units available in a given resort/unit size/view, and the Trust owns 20 of those, and another 25 are elected for points by enrolled owners, points owners would have access to 45 intervals, while weeks owners would retain exclusive access to the other 55. But while the available intervals for weeks owners has declined in my example, so have the number of weeks owners competing for that inventory, since those owned by the Trust or those who elected for Points are now only competing for the 45 intervals in the Points bucket, leaving the remaining weeks owners to compete for the 55 intervals left in the weeks bucket. So, the system balance should be exactly as it was before.

I think a possible explanation for your experience with the Thursday/Friday check-ins is that it may be more likely that those weeks owners who want to book the highest-demand weeks (I'm assuming you are talking about a high demand school holiday or something like that) are less likely to choose to elect for points, whereas those who are not targeting those in demand weeks might be more inclined to elect points. As a result, the demand for those high-demand weeks in the weeks bucket falls less than the supply of weeks is reduced, making it somewhat more competitive than it was previously.

Interesting, but, we are not able to book at the 13 month date. We own multiple weeks but not at the same resort.

I’ve always booked online due to my schedule. Perhaps if I called it might be different.

The reason I’m reasonably certain points is affecting my availability is our history of booking dating back to 2002. We’ve ALWAYS had our choice of arrival dates until this year. Sure it could be somethin g else but, post DC points we’ve been unable to get our first choice of building (we prefer Kingfish) and this year Thursday and Friday arrival dates were not available, even if we locked off our unit.

Our situation is complicated by the fact we own a 3 bedroom ocean front unit and those are a definite minority of units at this resort.

 

[JIMinNC]

Interesting, but, we are not able to book at the 13 month date. We own multiple weeks but not at the same resort.

I’ve always booked online due to my schedule. Perhaps if I called it might be different.

The reason I’m reasonably certain points is affecting my availability is our history of booking dating back to 2002. We’ve ALWAYS had our choice of arrival dates until this year. Sure it could be somethin g else but, post DC points we’ve been unable to get our first choice of building (we prefer Kingfish) and this year Thursday and Friday arrival dates were not available, even if we locked off our unit.

Our situation is complicated by the fact we own a 3 bedroom ocean front unit and those are a definite minority of units at this resort.

The situation is exactly the same at 12-months. Note my dates above, that for 12-month reservations, weeks owners can reserve on Thursday, and points owners can't reserve until the next day, on Friday.

At the 12-month mark, I'm convinced it is far, far better to reserve online than calling because you can get access to the inventory within seconds of release. I'm preparing to book our MOC week this coming Thursday on weeks release date, but I went online last Thursday morning to do a dry run, and I could have booked any of the three available check-in days - Fri, Sat, Sun - within a few seconds of 9am. If I had tried to call, it would have taken longer just to get through the phone menu, and if I was put on hold, who knows when I would have been able to book. I watched the inventory for about 20 minutes, refreshing the availability page, and Friday check-ins lasted about 5 minutes or less, Saturday check-ins about 9 minutes, and the Sunday check-ins were still there 20 minutes after release.

Also remember that the weeks and points reservations that can be booked at 13 months are still limited to the 50% or so of the inventory that MVC makes available for 13-month reservations. They still hold a proportionate amount of inventory for release in both the Points and Weeks buckets for the 12-month release date.

I think you are correct that the DC Points system is making it somewhat harder, but not for the reason that DC Points owners are booking the time before weeks owners. If MVC is managing the buckets as we believe they are, then all buckets should still be in balance across the entire season/year. The weeks system should still be in theoretical balance since the weeks and points buckets are kept separate (just like cash reservations are in a different inventory bucket than owner usage), but I suspect that certain weeks tend to attract traditional weeks owners at a higher than average rate, making those specific weeks harder to get despite the average proportional split between the weeks and points buckets. The fact that you just noted above that you own a somewhat rare unit at the resort, means that it only takes a few people that get in ahead of you, looking for the same week, to beat you to the punch. Is the week you were looking for a high-demand holiday week? I think those are the weeks that might tend to attract traditional weeks owners at a higher rate vs Points owners.

 

[Steve Fatula]

Here’s what I’ve observed as times have changed.

3. When exchanging, even getting the reservation at the furthest point in time and having elite status or being a multi week owner, if it’s high season and the resort has high owner occupancy, you can still receive a crappy room assignment.

4. The DC allowing elite status point reservations at 13 months has had an effect on our ability to book the arrival day and unit placement at our home resorts as weeks owners. This year was the first time we didn’t have our choice of arrival days booking on the first day reservations could be made (Thursday and Friday arrivals were off the table already). Ticks me off that I’ve been a weeks owner at this resort since 2001 and now I appear to be trumped by points reservations that can be booked 13 months in advance.

It depends on the resort. At MDS, I can say in 20 years I have never received a crappy room and as far as I recall, always get my choice. If I didn't once, I likely forgot, but, it's simply not an issue in high season where they are always sold out. Not sure what gives priority there. On the down side, I have filled out their form for preferences for all of those 20 years (or whenever it first became available), and, not once have they ever received my preferences. I still do it each year, and, a few days later always call, and they always tell me they didn't receive it, and, I always tell them to fix it, but give them my preferences over the phone.

As far as 13 months goes, if you are not multi week, what my last presentation salesman said is to reserve the stay at the 13 month mark via points. Then, when 12 month window comes into play, call and have MVCI cancel the points reservation and book the room via your ownership. He claims they can hold the cancel just for you and rebook without using it even if it isn't otherwise available on the phone. Have not tried this myself as I always book exactly the day it becomes available and have not had trouble. Since the cancel is more than 60 days out, the points just go back into your account.

 

[hangloose]

Our situation is complicated by the fact we own a 3 bedroom ocean front unit and those are a definite minority of units at this resort.

I picked up an Ocean Pointe 3BR OF Platinum last year. While a fantastic resort, villa and view....I have the same future concern as you do. It is going to be very hard to book the prime weeks (Presidents, Easter, etc) at 12 or even 13 months. So many owners at Ocean Pointe who stay all winter and own MANY weeks. I think this one is just as hard as prime Hawaii, unfortunately...and DC booking may make limited 3BR villas even harder. Time will tell.

 

[JIMinNC]

As far as 13 months goes, if you are not multi week, what my last presentation salesman said is to reserve the stay at the 13 month mark via points. Then, when 12 month window comes into play, call and have MVCI cancel the points reservation and book the room via your ownership. He claims they can hold the cancel just for you and rebook without using it even if it isn't otherwise available on the phone. Have not tried this myself as I always book exactly the day it becomes available and have not had trouble. Since the cancel is more than 60 days out, the points just go back into your account.

If what other TUGgers have been told by MVC people outside of Sales, this might not work as advertised by the sales rep, since the general understanding has been that the Points and Weeks reservations are in somewhat separate "buckets". So the cancelled points reservation would go back to other points owners, not to a weeks owner. I doubt a sales rep has much more insight into the complex inventory allocation processes used by MVC than we do, to be honest.

Having said that, the general strategy he mentioned might actually be a viable way to ensure you have some sort of reservation if it is a week you must travel. Book it with points first at 13-months to ensure you have the week booked. Then, when the 12-months weeks inventory opens up a month or so later, try to book it with your week. If the system works as we believe it to work, that weeks reservation would have to be separately available in the weeks bucket, but if it is and you book it, you can then cancel the points reservation and get your points returned to your account without penalty. So a similar strategy to what your rep advocated, just a slightly different twist/sequence.

 

[dougp26364]

It depends on the resort. At MDS, I can say in 20 years I have never received a crappy room and as far as I recall, always get my choice. If I didn't once, I likely forgot, but, it's simply not an issue in high season where they are always sold out. Not sure what gives priority there. On the down side, I have filled out their form for preferences for all of those 20 years (or whenever it first became available), and, not once have they ever received my preferences. I still do it each year, and, a few days later always call, and they always tell me they didn't receive it, and, I always tell them to fix it, but give them my preferences over the phone.

As far as 13 months goes, if you are not multi week, what my last presentation salesman said is to reserve the stay at the 13 month mark via points. Then, when 12 month window comes into play, call and have MVCI cancel the points reservation and book the room via your ownership. He claims they can hold the cancel just for you and rebook without using it even if it isn't otherwise available on the phone. Have not tried this myself as I always book exactly the day it becomes available and have not had trouble. Since the cancel is more than 60 days out, the points just go back into your account.

Way to much work to book a simple vacation week.

 

[Steve Fatula]

Way to much work to book a simple vacation week.

Depends how badly you want it, he said he could not get it. Whats your alternative to help him? JIMinNC may be correct in that it can't work, but, there's no penalty to trying either since the cancellation that far out means nothing. So, another strategy is to book via points at 13 months, then, convert your week into points if it is not available at 12 month mark as JIMinNC mentioned, so you get most of the points you used back depending on the season. Not the best use of points, but it might get you where you want to be when you want. Yes, you lose some, but again, depends how badly you want it. As far as "way too much work", might be 5-10 minutes? Cheaper than a throw away week with MF yearly to me at least. Everyones desires and use is different. I would find a way if I wanted it that badly.

 

[Dean]

Interesting, but, we are not able to book at the 13 month date. We own multiple weeks but not at the same resort.

I’ve always booked online due to my schedule. Perhaps if I called it might be different.

The reason I’m reasonably certain points is affecting my availability is our history of booking dating back to 2002. We’ve ALWAYS had our choice of arrival dates until this year. Sure it could be somethin g else but, post DC points we’ve been unable to get our first choice of building (we prefer Kingfish) and this year Thursday and Friday arrival dates were not available, even if we locked off our unit.

Our situation is complicated by the fact we own a 3 bedroom ocean front unit and those are a definite minority of units at this resort.

You likely know but the weeks do not have to be at the same resort to use the 13 month window, they simply have to be bookable at the same time for concurrent or consecutive reservations.

 

[dougp26364]

You likely know but the weeks do not have to be at the same resort to use the 13 month window, they simply have to be bookable at the same time for concurrent or consecutive reservations.

.

Which doesn’t work out for us and, is just to much hassle to book a simple vacation week

 

[vpplayer]

Marriott's Ko Olina Rooms Control will prioritize villa placement in this order:

PRIORITY

1- OWNERS (Weeks, Pure Vacation Club Points and Hybrid Vacation Club Point Owners)

• Note: I've asked for clarity on this point, to understand whether Weeks or DC Pts reservations are given priority first.

2- ENROLLED OWNER (When Using Exchange Points)

3- OWNER EXCHANGE (MVC Site and Non-Site Owner Exchange)

4- MARKETING GUEST

5- RENTAL GUEST

6- NON-MVC OWNER EXCHANGE


OTHER BLOCKING FACTORS

7- CONFIRMED RESERVATION TYPE (Villa Size and View Type)

For 3BRS, MKO is limited in number. As such, full 3BR villas are blocked first, then 2BR Master of a 3BR unit second.

• Note: I've asked for clarity on this point, as it indicates locking off a 3BR will always place the 2BR Master at a disadvantage for villa placement, given all full 3BRs are blocked first.

8- BOOKING DATE - An important factor in which many Owners will book 12 – 13 months in advance. Although even booking dates doesn’t always mean that an Owner will get the location and high floor. The reason for that is the Friday, Saturday, Sunday arrivals, along with Destination Point Owners who arrive any day of the week. Best to say that it has to be available on your arrival date based on availability.

9- OTHER FACTORS: ADA, Length of Stay, Scheduled/Unscheduled Maintenance, Emergency Situations, Villa Preferences (communicated by guests)

Interesting timing for me. Searching through this site and others has been my research in advance of a presentation we will be attending tomorrow morning. It's been very helpful, thank you to everyone.

We are a Ko Olina deeded 1-week OV owner (2007), and are currently (as I type this) in the first of two weeks having locked off the efficiency for this week and the 1B villa next. We drank the kool-aid 11 years ago, but but not for the purpose of trading, but because we love it here. Our experience with room assignments have been positive (disclaimer - I'm always at the computer ready to hit the button at the very second the inventory is released at T-minus 12 months), and somehow made the 15th floor corner in the Hale Moana this time around. Since 2010, I have been fearful that the "competition" for room assignments between points owners and deeded owners would reduce the likelihood of us getting our desired assignments. Not yet for us although I only have a limited number of data points. We aren't here every year, but will do so once I retire in a couple of years. So far, so good.

Apologies if this is a little off-topic but I have yet to see any advantage in enrolling in points for someone in our situation, even if we have to take a year off from time to time. But I signed up for the presentation more for the education of how points work and cost (the expected sales deceptions notwithstanding). OK and for the freebies. I am curious how the salesperson would justify points when:

1. My deeded week gets me in every year (although the maintenance cost has and probably will continue to increase -- $2200 this year)
2. MVCI can set the points required to anything they want. I know they've already done so, perhaps yearly? I just haven't bothered to check.
3. If I exchange my week for points, they are not enough to get into my own resort for most of the year.
4. On top of all that, why would I ever want to PAY an enrollment fee for conversion?

Having said that, the advantage of converting to points does in theory (and hopefully in practice) provide more flexibility in trading locations within the MVC network, and I hope that is true.

I'm actually a huge fan of Marriott Hotels (PFL), but I truly feel bad for all of the victims of MVCI's deceptive practices. We got lucky, relatively speaking.

As an aside, I've made a couple of observations this week:
1: It's not a ghost town, but the number of guests here at Ko Olina BC by my estimation this week so far is considerably lower than in the past.
2: Check-in dates seem to be available long after the inventory is released.

 

[TXTortoise]

The ability to rent points was the sole reason I enrolled my meager pre-2010 Vail Week, worth all of 550 points, via an Encore visit.

Recent threads have folks enrolling simply by watching a webcast at home. No fees other than a new II account at $180(?) a year.

 

[Steve Fatula]

I don't think this is true: "MVCI can set the points required to anything they want.". I believe it's pretty much a constant except for calendar differences year to year causing slight date changes.

I always hated points as well at first. The main reason is they are so darn expensive. There is some extra flexibility there, and, when used in certain manners, can yield better results. We find ourselves taking advantage of the 25% discount for reservations within 30 days. That makes them go further. So, 4,500 points we own is 4 weeks for us. Sometimes, II getaways are cheaper, other times, the points are cheaper or there are no getaways. Overall though, we still do like our weeks better. A little extra flexibility is nice though.

We've been tracking in a spreadsheet month by month what Marriott resorts had weeks available in which months 30 days out to assist with our planning. It doesn't mean they are available every year like that, it's just a tool to see what typical options might be for various months. It's been very surprising how many have that availability actually. Much more than we thought.

 

[vpplayer]

I don't think this is true: "MVCI can set the points required to anything they want.". I believe it's pretty much a constant except for calendar differences year to year causing slight date changes.

I believe you are accurate, thanks for the correction. I reexamined previous years' charts going back to 2012, and the variances for the full weeks seem to be based on those with calendar holidays and seasonal demand. What was interesting was around 2016 they were adjusting some rates down to the day of the week. Looks like they are now back to a simpler rate structure -- two daily rates for a given week: S-Th, and Fr-Sat, which do seem to consistently add up to the weekly rate. The cynic in me wonders if that will remain the case. Splitting a lock-off -- not surprisingly -- costs more than keeping the 2bdr villa intact. They figured that one out early.