CLOSED: Thread Dedicated to the Upcoming/Anticipated Integration of Vistana & Marriott Ownerships (Marriott Link + Vistana Discussion)

[dioxide45]

Not sure where changing the star option chart values came into question. However Marriott is too busy trying to figure out the conversion, I doubt they are worried about adjusting the SO chart. If they did, How would that affect the Westin and Sheraton flex ownerships? Would they be able to increase values or decrease others legally now that they have been selling flex ownerships?

Before Flex they had much more leeway to adjust things as they wanted. That is how they were able to increase OF at WKORV StarOptions. They didn't decrease anything else. Just increased them. At that time it was a pure overlay program. Once they started conveying weeks to the trusts, they probably lost that ability as in order to increase something they would have to decrease something else. With the Flex trusts setup as they are and with inventory declared at specific point values, I don't see how they can increase or decrease any point values at any of the resorts.

 

[Ken555]

I think I heard it somewhere before. If they decrease points for one season, they have to increase points in another season. So the total points available for the resort has to remain the same? Because of that, no way anyone would decrease any season to anger any customers. Not sure it’s still valid today?

Any change is likely to anger someone. The question is only if it is possible, and since you mentioned a possible legal remedy I wanted to be very clear, based on my recollection of the issue. I’m sure others know more details than I. That said, there are many changes which have the potential to anger us.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[CPNY]

Does anyone think that since exchange fees will now be removed and included in the price of the Club dues, they will combine the brand preference/priority period? So all Vistana and Marriott owners can see all brands at the same time?

 

[rcv82]

Any change is likely to anger someone. The question is only if it is possible, and since you mentioned a possible legal remedy I wanted to be very clear, based on my recollection of the issue. I’m sure others know more details than I. That said, there are many changes which have the potential to anger us.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

In looking at the declarations for WKORV, it very clearly states that the network operator can change point assignments anyway they want once per year. The only restriction is that the total points given out to owners have to match the available units to use with the points.

So I think the answer to whether it is possible is YES for points that are currently StarOptions. Weeks owners purchase their weeks and the ability to exchange in a network using points is an added benefit but the point values are not contractual.

HomeOptions (Flex, Nanea), even though they look like (and are aligned to) StarOptions, are probably harder to change because owners directly purchased the points and the share of ownership they represent.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[robertk2012]

I believe they can make whatever changes to the club they want, including eliminating it altogether.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

We can all stop paying too

 

[DanCali]

They will cut this off by having a date by which Vistana owners are not eligible to buy enrollable weeks on the resale market. That is what they did with the DC. Is that what you were thinking or something else?

I just don't see why they treat resale mandatory now differently than they would later.

If we agree that it's not feasible for resale mandatory to participate later (because it will destroy the retail points market) then why let those weeks in now? The arguments I read are "they are already part of SVN" but that argument will also apply later on too.

With the DC in 2010 there was obviously no SVN and all resale was grandfathered to allow enrollment at higher cost. Either they do the same here, or they leave out all resales (retros aside). But I can't see them treating resale mandatory resorts different than resale voluntary resorts. What they are doing is not changing SVN, so SVN membership probably wouldn't matter.

 

[ocdb8r]

... But I can't see them treating resale mandatory resorts different than resale voluntary resorts. What they are doing is not changing SVN, so SVN membership probably wouldn't matter.

I could see three levels of "grandfathering" based on the below"

• Direct Purchase (lowest fee)
• Resale Mandatory (medium fee) - resale mandatory already has full access to SVN)
• Resale Voluntary (highest fee) - I presume paying the fee to "grandfather" you in will give you access to both MVC DP and SVN. To me it would be strange to permit a Resale Voluntary resort access to DP but not SVN (not saying it couldn't be done...but seems like a strange "sell" for the normal consumer). As such, making the fee slightly higher could be justified by the additional access provided.

 

[kozykritter]

I just don't see why they treat resale mandatory now differently than they would later.

If we agree that it's not feasible for resale mandatory to participate later (because it will destroy the retail points market) then why let those weeks in now? The arguments I read are "they are already part of SVN" but that argument will also apply later on too.

With the DC in 2010 there was obviously no SVN and all resale was grandfathered to allow enrollment at higher cost. Either they do the same here, or they leave out all resales (retros aside). But I can't see them treating resale mandatory resorts different than resale voluntary resorts. What they are doing is not changing SVN, so SVN membership probably wouldn't matter.

Since the DC enrollment eligibility is being presented as an add-on benefit for Vistana ownership and not a change to the current VSN program's structure (fee consolidation is a separate act), they can set whatever criteria they want for eligibility to participate. From the initial information that's been received through various sources noted here on TUG, it would appear that line would be qualified versus unqualified. Developer/retro'd are in, the rest are out if you trust Denise's source/others. It's the same line they draw for eligibility to convert to bonvoy points, award bonvoy status or count ownership towards elite levels. The word mandatory is a red herring here. It describes required participation in the VSN for those specific resales/properties and that will continue regardless of how other ownership benefits are changed.

 

[Ken555]

I suppose another scenario might include the eventual elimination of SOs altogether, some years from now. They could offer whatever promotion they want now to convert weeks to DP, which will likely take them several years at best to meet most owners and convince them to do so. After, they could remove SOs and offer yet another program to convert to DP while simultaneously converting flex to DP, assuming that’s even possible.

Long term it seems cumbersome and kind of silly for Marriott to have multiple trading networks. But, it wouldn’t surprise me either way.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[DanCali]

...They could offer whatever promotion they want now to convert weeks to DP, which will likely take them several years at best to meet most owners and convince them to do so...

I'd be very curious to know what percent of pre-2010 owners actually enrolled their weeks. The allowed enrollment for ~2K for resale owners and $600 for retail buyers (numbers may be off slightly, and slightly higher for 2+ weeks owners). That's a no-brainer compared to the $30K required to enroll post-2010 weeks, but I have a feeling quite a few owners still have not enrolled even 12 years later. And I wouldn't be surprised if the percentage is lower on the retail week owners' side.

We just purchased a Marriott week from an original MVC buyer from 20 years ago who had not enrolled it at all. I believe he was just using or renting the week, as he always intended to do. Most people don't like change and they definitely don't like getting ripped off twice. I'm not saying those enrollment fees are a ripoff, but when owners discover that their full price retail purchase is actually worth 80%-90% less, they don't necessarily want to buy anything else from that company ever again...

 

[CPNY]

I suppose another scenario might include the eventual elimination of SOs altogether, some years from now. They could offer whatever promotion they want now to convert weeks to DP, which will likely take them several years at best to meet most owners and convince them to do so. After, they could remove SOs and offer yet another program to convert to DP while simultaneously converting flex to DP, assuming that’s even possible.

Long term it seems cumbersome and kind of silly for Marriott to have multiple trading networks. But, it wouldn’t surprise me either way.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

If that happened down the road, I would assume that mandatory resale units would be a big winner. The club resorts have to be part of the network program. I’m just confused on how they can change the membership fee for VSN members who are not part of the conversion opportunity. Everyone will pay the new increased club dues but not have access to all of the benefits?

 

[CPNY]

I'd be very curious to know what percent of pre-2010 owners actually enrolled their weeks. The allowed enrollment for ~2K for resale owners and $600 for retail buyers (numbers may be off slightly, and slightly higher for 2+ weeks owners). That's a no-brainer compared to the $30K required to enroll post-2010 weeks, but I have a feeling quite a few owners still have not enrolled even 12 years later. And I wouldn't be surprised if the percentage is lower on the retail week owners' side.

We just purchased a Marriott week from an original MVC buyer from 20 years ago who had not enrolled it at all. I believe he was just using or renting the week, as he always intended to do. Most people don't like change and they definitely don't like getting ripped off twice. I'm not saying those enrollment fees are a ripoff, but when owners discover that their full price retail purchase is actually worth 80%-90% less, they don't necessarily want to buy anything else from that company ever again...

I just got off the phone with someone looking to sell their Marriott who also never enrolled with original purchased week because they didn’t feel the points would be good for them and they didn’t know how it worked. Also, to their knowledge they think Marriott bought Sheraton but they aren’t sure. Many people are unaware of how versatile ownership can be.

 

[Ken555]

I'd be very curious to know what percent of pre-2010 owners actually enrolled their weeks. The allowed enrollment for ~2K for resale owners and $600 for retail buyers (numbers may be off slightly, and slightly higher for 2+ weeks owners). That's a no-brainer compared to the $30K required to enroll post-2010 weeks, but I have a feeling quite a few owners still have not enrolled even 12 years later. And I wouldn't be surprised if the percentage is lower on the retail week owners' side.

We just purchased a Marriott week from an original MVC buyer from 20 years ago who had not enrolled it at all. I believe he was just using or renting the week, as he always intended to do. Most people don't like change and they definitely don't like getting ripped off twice. I'm not saying those enrollment fees are a ripoff, but when owners discover that their full price retail purchase is actually worth 80%-90% less, they don't necessarily want to buy anything else from that company ever again...

I recall this being mentioned many times over the years. The distinction here is that we have a network many owners use, so the loss of it would have a profound impact on their usage, unlike the legacy Marriott weeks only owners. Of course, this doesn’t apply to all.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[Ken555]

If that happened down the road, I would assume that mandatory resale units would be a big winner. The club resorts have to be part of the network program. I’m just confused on how they can change the membership fee for VSN members who are not part of the conversion opportunity. Everyone will pay the new increased club dues but not have access to all of the benefits?

I disagree. I see few reasons for Marriott to be nice to mandatory owners, though offering those an easy to swallow transition would be beneficial for all and likely increase their short term sales goals.

You’re forgetting that, other than possibly flex as previously mentioned, they could simply eliminate the club altogether.

As for the fees…sorry, I just don’t have such faith in the info posted in this thread as accurate since it’s all from the sales weasels and we have already convinced ourselves (based on what I read earlier) that some of it is outright fictitious. I would applaud Marriott for doing the right thing by allowing mandatory owners into the new program at minimal, or no, cost and it would have a positive impact on my appreciation of the company and my future relationship with it.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[CPNY]

I disagree. I see few reasons for Marriott to be nice to mandatory owners, though offering those an easy to swallow transition would be beneficial for all and likely increase their short term sales goals.

You’re forgetting that, other than possibly flex as previously mentioned, they could simply eliminate the club altogether.

As for the fees…sorry, I just don’t have such faith in the info posted in this thread as accurate since it’s all from the sales weasels and we have already convinced ourselves (based on what I read earlier) that some of it is outright fictitious. I would applaud Marriott for doing the right thing by allowing mandatory owners into the new program at minimal, or no, cost and it would have a positive impact on my appreciation of the company and my future relationship with it.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

I agree with you that there are reasons for Marriott to be nice to mandatory owners.

My question is In regards to eliminating the the club. Are you talking about the elimination of the VSN completely? If they eliminated it completely and/or replaced with the DC Exchange, wouldn’t the mandatory resorts automatically be a part of that new exchange network? I would think by having both the VSN and the DC Exchange overlay, they could keep the mandatory resale units out of the overlay program.

 

[Eric B]

Just sat through an update/sales presentation at WSJ. They said the conversion rate for ownerships here would be 28:1, the same as all the Westins. They offered to retro all of my weeks (7 resale) for $5K each in new purchases and were offering "close out pricing" on deeds/ownership certificates here - 25% off of what they started out at. Here are a couple more pictures of point cost charts for the Marriott bookings:

Somewhat interesting that their statement was that I would only get 28:1 as a conversion for my fixed week fixed unit ownerships - if true it might be beneficial for a 1 BR Premium Platinum+ week in April where that would yield more points than booking it would cost through the DC. Seems odd, but ok. Same would be true for my studio week 51, where I would get 40 more points than it would cost.

 

[Ken555]

I agree with you that there are reasons for Marriott to be nice to mandatory owners.

My question is In regards to eliminating the the club. Are you talking about the elimination of the VSN completely? If they eliminated it completely and/or replaced with the DC Exchange, wouldn’t the mandatory resorts automatically be a part of that new exchange network? I would think by having both the VSN and the DC Exchange overlay, they could keep the mandatory resale units out of the overlay program.

They could do either. And no, technically I don't think they are required to do anything for mandatory resale owners. Though perhaps there could be an argument that DC is simply the Club in another form, and that might create some liability for them. I doubt they will eliminate it, I'm just postulating that it is possible. This is yet again another reason why we have always suggested that it's best to buy where you want to go. FWIW, I'm attempting to rent my 2023 WKV week and it will be interesting (for me) to see if I can and at what price as that will also have an impact on my decision whether or not to enroll the week in DP (I've had to bank my SOs each of the last two years and will again this year, so didn't want to continue the trend - I'm traveling a lot this year to non-timeshare destinations I don't have time to use all the weeks I have...just started a seven week trip, during which I'll visit the HGVC Scotland properties so looking forward to that... sorry, got off-topic here...).

 

[CPNY]

They could do either. And no, technically I don't think they are required to do anything for mandatory resale owners. Though perhaps there could be an argument that DC is simply the Club in another form, and that might create some liability for them. I doubt they will eliminate it, I'm just postulating that it is possible. This is yet again another reason why we have always suggested that it's best to buy where you want to go. FWIW, I'm attempting to rent my 2023 WKV week and it will be interesting (for me) to see if I can and at what price as that will also have an impact on my decision whether or not to enroll the week in DP (I've had to bank my SOs each of the last two years and will again this year, so didn't want to continue the trend - I'm traveling a lot this year to non-timeshare destinations I don't have time to use all the weeks I have...just started a seven week trip, during which I'll visit the HGVC Scotland properties so looking forward to that... sorry, got off-topic here...).

I always appreciate your insights. Sounds like an awesome trip! Enjoy that. If all else fails with the VSN, there is always interval.

 

[dioxide45]

I'd be very curious to know what percent of pre-2010 owners actually enrolled their weeks. The allowed enrollment for ~2K for resale owners and $600 for retail buyers (numbers may be off slightly, and slightly higher for 2+ weeks owners). That's a no-brainer compared to the $30K required to enroll post-2010 weeks, but I have a feeling quite a few owners still have not enrolled even 12 years later. And I wouldn't be surprised if the percentage is lower on the retail week owners' side.

We just purchased a Marriott week from an original MVC buyer from 20 years ago who had not enrolled it at all. I believe he was just using or renting the week, as he always intended to do. Most people don't like change and they definitely don't like getting ripped off twice. I'm not saying those enrollment fees are a ripoff, but when owners discover that their full price retail purchase is actually worth 80%-90% less, they don't necessarily want to buy anything else from that company ever again...

The numbers for many years were around 45% enrollment. I beleive that has started to go up as Marriott offered free enrollment. It might stand somewhere between 50-60% by now.

 

[DanCali]

The numbers for many years were around 45% enrollment. I beleive that has started to go up as Marriott offered free enrollment. It might stand somewhere between 50-60% by now.

It says a lot that after 12 years many of the "lowest hanging fruit" are not even willing to enroll in the DC exchange for free (albeit it'd cost ~$200-$250 extra each year in club dues).

To all those who are worried that exchange opportunities in VSN will dry up I think that means their kids might have to worry about that problem, but I don't see it happening anytime soon.

 

[dioxide45]

It says a lot that after 12 years many of the "lowest hanging fruit" are not even willing to enroll in the DC exchange for free (albeit it'd cost ~$200-$250 extra each year in club dues).

To all those who are worried that exchange opportunities in VSN will dry up I think that means their kids might have to worry about that problem, but I don't see it happening anytime soon.

The only difference with VSE is that perhaps everyone will be enrolled for free (excluding possibly resale VIOs), but that would mean probably over 90% enrollment rate.

 

[CPNY]

It says a lot that after 12 years many of the "lowest hanging fruit" are not even willing to enroll in the DC exchange for free (albeit it'd cost ~$200-$250 extra each year in club dues).

To all those who are worried that exchange opportunities in VSN will dry up I think that means their kids might have to worry about that problem, but I don't see it happening anytime soon.

Let’s just say it does…. The least they can do is have joint preference in interval for all MVW brands….. so many good Marriott weeks in sightings forum lately that only Marriott can see lol.

 

[pchung6]

Let’s just say it does…. The least they can do is have joint preference in interval for all MVW brands….. so many good Marriott weeks in sightings forum lately that only Marriott can see lol.

Oh no. I hope it remains only VSN can see VSN resorts and only Marriott can see Marriott. At least the same brand gets higher priority (Westin to Westin, Marriott to Marriott).

 

[Mowogo]

The only difference with VSE is that perhaps everyone will be enrolled for free (excluding possibly resale VIOs), but that would mean probably over 90% enrollment rate.

One thing to remember since many facets of this whole acquisition were driven by Marriott hotels both directly and indirectly. If the hotels want the timeshares to be integrated anywhere close to the level that the hotel brands are. Thus while MVW may have wanted to have some sort of fee, seamless transfers between the different systems may have ranked higher than the extra income from fees. The way you get seamless transfers is to have a program that doesn't cost too much more for the added benefits so that more will play in the new program. If it was a purchase then you have a lot of owners that would run away, and they need the inventory exchanging quickly.

 

[CPNY]

Oh no. I hope it remains only VSN can see VSN resorts and only Marriott can see Marriott. At least the same brand gets higher priority (Westin to Westin, Marriott to Marriott).

Wah I don’t want to buy another timeshare lol