Definitive (I believe) answers to some important points program questions

[Andar]

Thanks!

Once again DaveM helps timeshare users wade through the mountains of (?) with simple, accurate information. T hanks so much for all you do here.

 

[Latravel]

It's so much better and calmer to read posts based on facts and comments directly from Marriott versus posts based on analysis by people who may add some hysteria to the mix.

Thanks Dave! I think I may be reading only your posts from now on.

 

[JimIg23]

I agree, although I don't see how fixed week owners could lose, as they are guaranteed their fixed week, if they want it.

using you example, my read is that of the 400 units available for 13 month reservation, either pool can reserve it, but points cannot exceed 50% of their point allocation for season. So, say in your resort "points" holds 100 platinum weeks, only 50 could be reserved by 13 months.

 

[JimIg23]

Dave: Could you get them to clarify what fees/expenses Every Other Year owners would have and if they pay them in the year they are able to use their unit or have to pay some of them annually? Thank you!

I was told one EOY still pays annual 169

 

[ilene13]

Well, points owners can also book ahead of the 13 month window using the same techniques that we use currently in weeks. If the playing field is somehow slanted in favor of points, I am concerned about the ever increasing costs to always be at the front of the line, especially given the "skim".

Bottom line, I bought multiple weeks specifically to ensure my ability to reserve the weeks I need. Anything that potentially impinges on my ability to do that causes me great concern.

If my fears are groundless, that would be great. I suppose only time will tell.

Touche, I agree with you

 

[hipslo]

No. The 13 month window for weeks owners typically opens on a Tuesday if the first checkin day at the resort if Friday. Just do an example using a calendar and you'll see.

Using check in days in February, it seems to me that weeks owners actually have an advantage over points owners, based on the info provided by the inventory calendar. Most other months, it is the other way around. I have checked this for the next several years and it seems to be consistently the case.

I have recently begun looking at this another way, though. Perhaps it is the case that marriott itself, having the rights of a mutliple week owner with respect to weeks turned in for points, makes its reservations at 13 months out, in direct competition with multiple week owners, and the calendars only relate to when that inventory, already reserved by marriott for the points "pool", is then made available to points owners.

If that is the case, then multiple week owners would be competing head to head with marriott itself for the prime weeks at 13 months.

Bottom line, I remain troubled by marriott's unwillingness to be forthcoming about how the allocation/ competition between weeks and points is going to work.

While I understand that Dave is comfortable that his ability to reserve the weeks he wants at 13 months will not change, and I respect that, he has not given us any information as to WHY he believes that to be the case, other than that he believes that less people may be seeking the prime weeks due to cost. That doesnt seem realistic, though. There are 400,000 weeks owners. If only 100,000 of them convert to points, any of those owners who own enough points become elgiible to seek the prime weeks at issue, in some cases at 13 months. And marriott will keep selling more points, so the universe of those eligible will be increasing all the time. It seems unrealistic to think that competition would ever go down. (I understand that all weeks owners who do not convert will still be able to reserve SOME week in their season, but that is not the question).

Dave, I sincerely appreciate all you do, and what you have done in putting this post together, but I still feel that the inventory allocation question has not been answered, and must conclude that is becuase marriott just doesnt want to answer it. That troubles me.

 

[hipslo]

using you example, my read is that of the 400 units available for 13 month reservation, either pool can reserve it, but points cannot exceed 50% of their point allocation for season. So, say in your resort "points" holds 100 platinum weeks, only 50 could be reserved by 13 months.

That may be, though we haven't received any word on this yet from marriott. Even if that is the case, it potentially gives points owners a much higher proportion of those prime weeks (12.5% in your example) that the points pool bears to the overall number of weeks in platinum season (2.7% in your example), which works to the detriment of current 13 month owners.

 

[m61376]

Responses to questions posed in this thread
As I implied in my O.P. I won't be able to address questions for which there is no answer (e.g., Do you think Marriott will play fair?).Whether it's actually a separate pool or not, I don't know for sure. However, I do know that Marriott is committed to ensuring that every weeks owner is able to reserve a week within their season. Thus, the only weeks at our home resorts that will be available to points owners to reserve at 13 and 12 months will be Marriott-owned weeks, weeks traded for Marriott Rewards points and weeks traded for points by Enrolled owners. I have spent enough time discussing this point that it doesn't worry me as to whether I will be able to reserve a week as easily as I have in the past. Stated another way, BocaBoy's comment above was directly on point: "If no one has relinquished a week for points in your season at a sold out resort, there can be no inventory for points users. It is as simple as that.
.

I understand what you are saying- but unfortunately it doesn't address the question of whether, as hipslo asked, there will be a pro rata allotment for each week. Doing it by the season assures everyone of a week in their season, but not that there won't be increased competition for the prime weeks. I think that is a very important distinction.

Owners who trade in for points are trading in the right to any week in the season. If owners using points can have access then to "any week" there will necessarily be increased competition for the prime weeks, unless there is a pro rata distribution according to week/point ownership of EACH reservation period.

 

[gblotter]

the central question for me

I understand what you are saying- but unfortunately it doesn't address the question of whether, as hipslo asked, there will be a pro rata allotment for each week. Doing it by the season assures everyone of a week in their season, but not that there won't be increased competition for the prime weeks. I think that is a very important distinction.

Owners who trade in for points are trading in the right to any week in the season. If owners using points can have access then to "any week" there will necessarily be increased competition for the prime weeks, unless there is a pro rata distribution according to week/point ownership of EACH reservation period.

Finally someone has encapsulated my primary concern about this new points program. It would be great if DaveM could get a definitive answer from Marriott.

 

[Dave M]

Competition for reserving weeks

I believe if you carefully read what I have written on the topic of trying to reserve a week, you'll have a hard time coming up with a real concern about reserving -unless you own at a very new resort such as Marco Island.

I'll try one more time with an example.

Assume a resort that is 100% sold out. If no weeks owners at that resort (1) trade for Marriott Rewards points or (2) enroll and trade the use of their weeks for Club points, there will be no inventory available at that resort that can be reserved by Marriott or anyone owning points. Only to the extent that one of those two events happens will there be any competition from points owners, and that competition will be limited.

Further, if Marriott owns some unsold weeks at that resort, Marriott has always been able to compete with us to make reservations for those weeks and, similarly, will be able to do so for points owners once those unsold weeks are deposited in the trust.

Essentially, no change. Same number of weeks available to points owners as are available to Marriott to reserve now.

The only significant difference is that some weeks owners might choose to enroll in the new program and trade the use of their weeks for Club points. That means more competition for those traded weeks from points but an equal lesser level of competition from the weeks owners who traded for points.

Thus, it’s a zero-sum game. There should be just as many weeks available and just the same competition for reserving weeks as there are now.

On the other hand, if you choose to believe a conspiracy theory - that Marriott has a plan to treat us unfairly in the reservation process and somehow circumvent the limitations on reservations to illegally shut out weeks owners, I can't help with that. But I don't believe it.

 

[Dave M]

I'll also address this earlier post by Marilyn (m61376):

I would like it confirmed that each group would only have access to their fair share percentage of each week/arrival date, so that week owners would not be competing with point owners for premium weeks and home resort priority would be kept intact for week owners.

I don't think you will get that confirmation, Marilyn, just as you wouldn't have been able to get a similar confirmation in the past that Marriott wouldn't try to reserve more than its fair share of weeks for (e.g.) July 4th week at a beach resort using weeks under its control.

Bottom line: It's exactly the same competition from points owners that we have had in the past from Marriott with respect to weeks that were under its control.

 

[hipslo]

I believe if you carefully read what I have written on the topic of trying to reserve a week, you'll have a hard time coming up with a real concern about reserving -unless you own at a very new resort such as Marco Island.

I'll try one more time with an example.

Assume a resort that is 100% sold out. If no weeks owners at that resort (1) trade for Marriott Rewards points or (2) enroll and trade the use of their weeks for Club points, there will be no inventory available at that resort that can be reserved by Marriott or anyone owning points. Only to the extent that one of those two events happens will there be any competition from points owners, and that competition will be limited.

Further, if Marriott owns some unsold weeks at that resort, Marriott has always been able to compete with us to make reservations for those weeks and, similarly, will be able to do so for points owners once those unsold weeks are deposited in the trust.

Essentially, no change. Same number of weeks available to points owners as are available to Marriott to reserve now.

The only significant difference is that some weeks owners might choose to enroll in the new program and trade the use of their weeks for Club points. That means more competition for those traded weeks from points but an equal lesser level of competition from the weeks owners who traded for points.

Thus, it’s a zero-sum game. There should be just as many weeks available and just the same competition for reserving weeks as there are now.

On the other hand, if you choose to believe a conspiracy theory - that Marriott has a plan to treat us unfairly in the reservation process and somehow circumvent the limitations on reservations to illegally shut out weeks owners, I can't help with that. But I don't believe it.

In the aggregate that is true, and I believe that those calling in at 12 months should see no significant difference. As to any particular week, especially those "prime" weeks that would otherwise become available at 13 months, it is not necessarily the case, as illustrated by my specific example. Inventory allocation remains the key. If a single week owner turns in a week for points, that single week owner couldnt have reserved at 13 months, but the week turned in could let a points owner reserve a prime unit at 13 months, thereby increasing competition at 13 months for prime units.

Its as if more single week owners at a sold out resort begin buying more weeks to become multiple week owners (either resale at that resort, or elsewhere). If that were to occur, there would be more competition at 13 months (this could happen under the prior system). But now, they dont have to buy another week, all they have to do is turn in a single week for points, and someone else gets into the 13 month pool.

Its pretty simple, actually. And I dont mean to imply that marriott will be screwing anyone, or treating anyone unfiarly. Just that the new system, by its very nature, potentially increases competition at 13 months for prime weeks over what exists currently.

 

[hipslo]

I'll also address this earlier post by Marilyn (m61376):I don't think you will get that confirmation, Marilyn, just as you wouldn't have been able to get a similar confirmation in the past that Marriott wouldn't try to reserve more than its fair share of weeks for (e.g.) July 4th week at a beach resort using weeks under its control.

Bottom line: It's exactly the same competition from points owners that we have had in the past from Marriott with respect to weeks that were under its control.

Right, but the weeks under its control could go up dramatically if lots of folks convert to points. If those folks are single week owners, the competition at 13 months could also correspndingly go up dramatically.

I think we have our answer.

 

[SueDonJ]

Thanks so much, Dave, for taking the time and having the patience to wade through all this, and knowing the right way to ask the questions. Much appreciated.

 

[BocaBum99]

I agree, although I don't see how fixed week owners could lose, as they are guaranteed their fixed week, if they want it.

They can lose in unit assignments.

 

[LAR]

Thanks, Dave!

Just one more expression of appreciation, Dave. I dont know where you find the time to keep up with all of this but I'm very grateful for all you are doing on this board.

 

[LAX Mom]

Assume a resort that is 100% sold out. If no weeks owners at that resort (1) trade for Marriott Rewards points or (2) enroll and trade the use of their weeks for Club points, there will be no inventory available at that resort that can be reserved by Marriott or anyone owning points. Only to the extent that one of those two events happens will there be any competition from points owners, and that competition will be limited.

This is one of my big concerns about the points system. There are many Marriott resorts that are sold out with high owner occupancy rates. Yet Marriott will tell prospective buyers that they can buy points to get a ski season week at Park City. Marriott won't have any ski season weeks at Park City unless some owners trade their weeks for Marriott Rewards points or trade their weeks for Club points. Just because a ski season owner at Park City enrolls doesn't give Marriott access to that week. The owner must actually trade for points.

I think a fair of amount of owners might enroll in this system, but just continue to use their weeks in the past. This is going to make it tough for Marriott to deliver the inventory they are using to sell these points.

Essentially Marriott is using this points system to sell the popular resorts that have already sold out.

 

[LAX Mom]

Assume a resort that is 100% sold out. If no weeks owners at that resort (1) trade for Marriott Rewards points or (2) enroll and trade the use of their weeks for Club points, there will be no inventory available at that resort that can be reserved by Marriott or anyone owning points. Only to the extent that one of those two events happens will there be any competition from points owners, and that competition will be limited.

This is one of my big concerns about the points system. There are many Marriott resorts that are sold out with high owner occupancy rates. Yet Marriott will tell prospective buyers that they can buy points to get a ski season week at Park City. Marriott won't have any ski season weeks at Park City unless some owners trade their weeks for Marriott Rewards points or trade their weeks for Club points. Just because a ski season owner at Park City enrolls doesn't give Marriott access to that week. The owner must actually trade for points.

I think a fair of amount of owners might enroll in this system, but just continue to use their weeks as in the past. This is going to make it tough for Marriott to deliver the inventory they are using to sell these points.

Essentially Marriott is using this points system to sell the popular resorts that have already sold out.

 

[KarenP]

Thanks, Dave! (and one question)

Wow, Dave, you sure went above and beyond for us Tuggers! Thank you so very much!

I'm on the fence about enrolling in points, but would probably go ahead in order to give me more options in the future if Marriott could DEFINITIVELY say:
(1) whether points could be resold in the future, and
(2) whether and how a legacy week with points could transfer the same ownership down the road.

Thank you again!!

 

[Bunk]

Wow, Dave, you sure went above and beyond for us Tuggers! Thank you so very much!

I'm on the fence about enrolling in points, but would probably go ahead in order to give me more options in the future if Marriott could DEFINITIVELY say:
(1) whether points could be resold in the future, and
(2) whether and how a legacy week with points could transfer the same ownership down the road.

Thank you again!!

Dave: As to Karen's questions above:
Is there any way there could be a disadvantage in selling a unit that has enrolled in the points program as opposed to a unit that has declined to participate in the new program.

 

[m61376]

I'll also address this earlier post by Marilyn (m61376):I don't think you will get that confirmation, Marilyn, just as you wouldn't have been able to get a similar confirmation in the past that Marriott wouldn't try to reserve more than its fair share of weeks for (e.g.) July 4th week at a beach resort using weeks under its control.

Bottom line: It's exactly the same competition from points owners that we have had in the past from Marriott with respect to weeks that were under its control.

Certainly you are much more experienced in this than I am, and maybe I am missing something, but I see a very big difference IF Marriott just sets the points/week pool as a percentage of the season and not of each week/reservation period- and let me emphasize it is an IF that I am awaiting verification about.

The reason is simple- right now I am competing with x number of deeded weeks owners in my season. All of a sudden, there can be any unknown numbers of owners who want to come to my resort, who don't own there. So, while the number of weeks available to reserve hasn't changed, the number of people who are looking to reserve into especially the more popular weeks can be any subsection of 400,000 owners (actually, 400,000+, with all the new point owners they hope to solicit), and not just the owners at my resort.

Responding to your above example- As a resort gets sold out, in the past, Marriott has fewer and fewer weeks under its control. In this situation, over time Marriott will have more and more weeks in the point system, unless the system fails, which I consider unlikely. So the reality is that there will be more competition for reservations, because competition is no longer limited to only owners who purchased in a given season.

As Hipslo pointed out, Plat. ski weeks were sold out long ago. Now Marirott is selling points- and telling skiers that if they buy enough points they too can reserve a Feb. ski week. Now, while it is true that only the number of ski weeks can be reserved that exist, and that, moreover, every deeded week owner has to be able to book a week in their season, now you not only have Summit Watch owners, for ex., competing for a Feb. ski week there, but you have any points owner- perhaps hundreds or thousands additional skiers- who are now trying to reserve the same weeks. Of course, there still has to be a week in the Plat. season for every week owner to reserve- but there may be double or triple (or more) competition for those Feb. weeks from point owners added to the pool. If point owners can book a majority of those Feb. weeks just because they were the majority of people calling in, it would not be fair to the week owners who may still be entitled to a majority of the total inventory (assuming that week owners own a majority of the inventory; in reality, each group is entitled to their share of the inventory).

So that's why I think that it makes a big difference as to whether the inventory pool is a percentage of the season or the allotment is a percentage of each week/reservation period, because the outside point competition for certain weeks at many locations will be fierce.

NCV is a great example- I venture to guess that there will be many outside exchangers looking to use points to book those 10 summer weeks. Just because one week is turned in for points does not mean that there will be only one additional point owner looking to compete for those weeks. Unless I am missing something, that's where I think your explanation falls short.

As Lisa points out- Marriott is selling points with the illusion of being able to book whenever and wherever you want to go- even if the resort was sold out long ago. That's why competition will only worsen over time for prime weeks, and current week owners should be able to book their fair share of each prime week in their season.


Just another bit of info. to add- as of now, the online II club account has complete week exchange access. Point exchanges will be available online by the end of July.

 

[brigechols]

This is one of my big concerns about the points system. There are many Marriott resorts that are sold out with high owner occupancy rates. Yet Marriott will tell prospective buyers that they can buy points to get a ski season week at Park City. Marriott won't have any ski season weeks at Park City unless some owners trade their weeks for Marriott Rewards points or trade their weeks for Club points. Just because a ski season owner at Park City enrolls doesn't give Marriott access to that week. The owner must actually trade for points.

I think a fair of amount of owners might enroll in this system, but just continue to use their weeks as in the past. This is going to make it tough for Marriott to deliver the inventory they are using to sell these points.

Essentially Marriott is using this points system to sell the popular resorts that have already sold out.

AFAIK, Summitt Watch is not sold out.

 

[bw3]

competition for prime gold weeks

In the aggregate that is true, and I believe that those calling in at 12 months should see no significant difference. As to any particular week, especially those "prime" weeks that would otherwise become available at 13 months, it is not necessarily the case, as illustrated by my specific example. Inventory allocation remains the key. If a single week owner turns in a week for points, that single week owner couldnt have reserved at 13 months, but the week turned in could let a points owner reserve a prime unit at 13 months, thereby increasing competition at 13 months for prime units.

Its as if more single week owners at a sold out resort begin buying more weeks to become multiple week owners (either resale at that resort, or elsewhere). If that were to occur, there would be more competition at 13 months (this could happen under the prior system). But now, they dont have to buy another week, all they have to do is turn in a single week for points, and someone else gets into the 13 month pool.

Its pretty simple, actually. And I dont mean to imply that marriott will be screwing anyone, or treating anyone unfiarly. Just that the new system, by its very nature, potentially increases competition at 13 months for prime weeks over what exists currently.

I agree with hipslo's concerns. Using a slightly different example at Grande Ocean, there will be even more competition for the weeks from late May to mid June. These are gold weeks at Grande Ocean but platinum at all the other ocean resorts on HHI. These weeks are booked within one minute of availability. Currently, I can reserve my 5 gold weeks around May 14 and run them all the way to platinum and add platinum weeks to the same reservation. If Marriott owns bronze, silver and gold, they could see the 13 month window starting in December 2010 to book a reservation taking one unit for each week from Jan 1, 2012 through late May 2012 and then concurrently take all the 13 month gold units on the same reservation. Yes, this is unlikely but I am going to expect more of these weeks gone long before current owners can reserve them.

 

[DanCali]

The only significant difference is that some weeks owners might choose to enroll in the new program and trade the use of their weeks for Club points. That means more competition for those traded weeks from points but an equal lesser level of competition from the weeks owners who traded for points.

Thus, it’s a zero-sum game. There should be just as many weeks available and just the same competition for reserving weeks as there are now.

Dave,

Here is where I think the argument lacks...

Let me summarize your logic

• 
  First you say with respect to Marriott owned weeks nothing changed. They could have reserved them before and they still can. True - but now instead of reserving to rent, they also have an incentive to reserve on behalf of the Trust to make the points program successful. maybe it's a minor issue, but nevertheless an important issue that could prove to be major after all.

• 
  With respect to Owners who enroll and convert to points, you say that it washes out (zero sum game). My issue with that argument is:
  
  (i) "those traded weeks" are just weeks in a season. They are not trading in reserved weeks. In fact, owners who know they will convert to points will not bother to make a reservation at their home resort. So yes, these guys will not compete for the prime weeks
  
  (ii) On the flipside, you now have the points people who compete for those weeks.
  
  You equate this a zero sum game and say:

  That means more competition for those traded weeks from points but an equal lesser level of competition from the weeks owners who traded for points.Thus, it’s a zero-sum game.

  
  But that is not really the case because you do not take into consideration the number of resorts. When owners from a resort give up a week in a season to the points inventory, you can have owners from 50 other resorts competing for it. If it were a 2 resort system, you could say "zero sum game". But surely the number of resorts affects the competition? If any points owner could reserve summer Hawaii weeks in the points inventory, the competition is not the same if there are 2 resorts in the system versus 50 resorts.
  
  The mitigating factor to what I said above is that points will be competing for prime weeks at all 50 resorts so the demand gets spread out, but you can imagine that some resorts/weeks may get impacted by the number of competing resorts much more than others.
  
  I'll give an extreme example for illustrative purposes. Suppose there is a Hawaii resort and an Orlando resort (2 resort system). So when Hawaii owners convert to points, the Orlando points people now compete with Hawaii weeks people for prime weeks, and Hawaii points people compete with Orlando weeks people for prime Orlando weeks. I agree that this is similar to the zero sum game you describe.
  
  Now think of the same system with 1 Hawaii resort and 15 Orlando resorts. Arguably, all Orlando people who convert to points want to go to Hawaii because if they wanted Orlando they would stay at their home resort (unaffected by skimming). Is it still a "zero sum game" when owners from the 15 resorts compete for Hawaii weeks in the points system? What about if it were 50 Orlando resorts?
  
  Obviously, it's an extreme example, and things are somewhat more balanced in Marriott's system, but the issue is there nevertheless.
  
  The ONLY way to solve this problem is a separate inventory pool with pro-rata allocation of checkin days based on owners who convert to points.
  

 

[RedDogSD]

Dave,

Now think of the same system with 1 Hawaii resort and 15 Orlando resorts. Arguably, all Orlando people who convert to points want to go to Hawaii because if they wanted Orlando they would stay at their home resort (unaffected by skimming). Is it still a "zero sum game" when owners from the 15 resorts compete for Hawaii weeks in the points system? What about if it were 50 Orlando resorts? [/COLOR]

[/LIST]

I totally understand your concern, and even though Marriott did not say it explicitely, we HAVE to imply that they are keeping a somewhat seperate inventory. Otherwise, lets just assume that EVERY owner at all 15 of your Orlando resorts converts their weeks to points and only 10% of Hawaii owners convert their weeks to points. Lets further assume that all of the Orlando owners are going to try for Hawaii first, and then only take Orlando if they have to. Now, the other 90% of Hawaii owners did not trade for points, so their ONLY option is to get a week in Hawaii.

Marriott has said that all owners will have a week in their season. If they let the owners from the 15 Orlando resorts reserve any more than 10% of the weeks, then the Hawaii owners will be unable to reserve them, which is contrary to what they are saying.

Now, as to what weeks are available within their pool, good question. For each time period that opens up, they would have to have some limitation. They could not let the 15 Orlando resort owners, who only have the right to try to reserve 10% of the Hawaii weeks, all take 100% of the 4th of July weekly intervals, or something like that. I am sure that the system was programmed in a somewhat fair manner where if 10% of the weeks are available to the Points pool, then they can only take 10% of the total weeks available within each weekly interval. Maybe not EXACTLY 10%, but I am not worried about it being unfair.