Marriott Destination Points...They have done it!!!!!! {Merged}

[davidvel]

So, you actually believe that when Marriott wants to withdraw a week from II, they will simply submit some type of a search similar to what we do and hope for a hit? I suspect that the computer will be programmed to hit on the week they want as soon as it is deposited. They might pop a week in to cover the one they are taking, but I cannot imagine that they will not get what they want.

Marriott is not the only partner of II, as you indicate. Good Marriott inventory in II is a huge draw and asset to the entire II system.

I am one of the biggest skeptics, but I cannot imagine that II agreed to allow Marriott to take any week it wants in exchange for any week Marriott chooses. This makes no sense from II's perspective.

But many argue II will screw you for its "big partners." If it did, why only now with its discombobulated new system, and not previously? Why hadn't Marriott asked for such a system over the past decades (which you think II would so graciously agree to), so it could sell the best weeks (Hawaii, ski, etc.) for big $$$ through its regular reservations system? This is where it could make big $$$.

Also, why does everyone think that Marriott with its new system will suddenly love its new customers (points club) and give them all the great weeks???

I see no significant difference in trading, reserving, or anything else. (except a HUGE case infusion from all those who join.) As someone once said, the more things change, the more they stay the same.

 

[tombo]

You all keep banging this drum, but I am with Dean on this one.

I have purchased two timeshares with Marriott. In both of them (Florida and Virginia) I had to specifically sign a document that stated:

1. I understand that timeshares are NOT an investment, and my purchase should not be based on any perceived investment value.
2. I understand that I have NO right to exchange, trade for points, lock off, or do anything EXCEPT occupy my full week during one week during the season that I purchased. My purchase should not be based on any expectation of any of this continuing.
3. I understand that anything that was promised to me that is not in this written contract is null and void. During my second purchase I had to get the salesman to hand write in a promise made to me that was not in the document and get initialed by both of us. My purchase should not be based on anything that is not written.

To claim after the fact that you did not understand this is not believable to me. Kind of like the people who make 2,000 a month and sign up for a 5,000 a month mortgage payment. No one forced you to make the deal, in fact the State Attorney General has done his best to make you turn down the deal and even provided you a recission period if you are stupid enough to sign the deal.

.

I have never purchased a retail week from anyone (thank goodness). I have a college degree and have taken plenty of business courses. In spite of that when I was younger and very naive I almost purchased a timeshare retail based on what the salesperson told me (not Marriott), and if I had it would (as I know now) never have done half the things the salesmen told me it would do. I dodged the bullet because of the financing costs and buyer's remorse when it was time to sign, not because the contract spelled out what I was actually buying in a clear and easy to understand manner. I could just as easily have saddled myself with a decade of payments for a timeshare in Orlando that would not have been good for me in any form or fashion. The salesman of course told me that all the legal stuff was just what all contracts contained, but the program worked exactly like it was explained to me.

People are sold timeshares believing that they are getting what they are told in the sales process. People assume that the sales people couldn't say it if it wasn't true, especially sales people who work for a reputable company like Marriott. You fault the people who believe the lies, not those telling them, which is hard to believe.

You are correct that the disclaimers are there and make it harder to sue them since it is your word against theirs as to what you were told in the presentation. If Marriott really explained that what they were promising was a pipe dream, if during the sale they explained the reality that only a week in season is guaranteed, no exchanges, no other resorts, and no prime weeks are ever actually guaranteed, they would rarely sell one. They sell lies and promises that are possible to deliver, but doubtful in reality. They sell lies while closing the sale with a legal contract that absolves them of all the lies they promulgated to sell their product. It is kind of like being in the Mafia, killing people as part of the business, and then by going to confession all the bad things you did go away allowing you to do them over and over again but still be able to justify your actions.

It is as I said earlier, blaming the victim for being trusting while accomodating the crook for doing immoral and illegal actions is plain wrong. The contact disclosure does not absolve them from lying to make sales. It is called fraud and misrepresentation and many timeshares have been sued for doing those things.

Festiva paid about $340,000 to the Missouri attorney general for making sales in a false and misleading manner. http://www.legalnewsline.com/news/213804-time-share-company-agrees-to-pay-339000-settlement
Excerpt:
"The company was also accused of rushing consumers into sales by creating a high-pressure sales environment.

Under the agreement, Festiva agreed to stop using false and misleading sales pitches to market and sell its time shares. "


Bluegreen sued for same
http://www.attorneygeneral.gov/press.aspx?id=3999
Exceprt:According to the lawsuit, numerous deceptive statements were made to consumers during these presentations in an effort to get them to sign contracts immediately, including phony claims that prices would increase the next day, misrepresentations about when and where consumers could travel if they made a purchase and false statements about certain fees being waived.

Corbett said that some consumers bought vacation programs because they were told they were entitled to a one-week stay in Hawaii, only to learn afterward that the program they purchased could not be used in Hawaii."

Lawsuit against trendwest:
http://whatswrongwithwyndham.com/Uploaded/California vs Trendwest - Consent Decree.pdf

Excerpts:
"M. Materially misrepresenting the location of resorts or availability of
services.
N. Materially misrepresenting the value of vacation credits needed to
stay at a particular resort at a particular time or materially misrepresenting the
quantity of vacation credits sufficient to obtain any other benefit or service.
O. Materially misrepresenting the ability or ease with which an owner
may check the availability of a property or service, or make a reservation or
exchange vacation credits.:

It is not the way moral people or reputable businesses act or feel IMO, and yes it is still illegal to misrepresent facts to make the sale even if you have a contract with disclaimers. Fraud and misrepresentation liability does not go away because you have clauses stating that even if the company used fraudulent statements to sell their product, that they don't have to honor the sales pitches which aren't in writing. If the attorney generals in more states would send undercover agents to these presentations they could and would sue Marriott and many other companies IMO possibly stopping these deceitful sales practices. Hopefully they will sue more in the near future.

 

[edge4414]

Contracts

I find it unbelievable that so many on this board think that just because Marriott put certain disclaimers in their contract that their contracts can't be challenged in court. It would surely take deep pockets or a class action but I'm sure good lawyers in contract law could go through the contracts and find numerous clauses that could be challenged. Example;
"Exchange Company (MVC Exchange Company] has the right to establish priority lists, lottery systems, or other alternative methods off reserving accommodations in an effort to ensure the fair and equitable reservations and use of accommodations during holidays, events, and other high demand periods. If implemented, access to certain use periods by a member may be restricted in a given year based upon the member's ranking in a lottery or some other allocation methodology established by Exchange Company".
Fair and equitable means what? Let's assume weeks owners cannot get the reservations they want or have been accustomed to under the previous system. Is that fair and equitable? Could it be challenged? If there is a will there is a way to challenge if the system becomes "unfair to a group". I'm sure there are many similar vague clauses which could be challenged. I am not a Lawyer but I am familiar with contracts and believe almost anything that is vague can be challenged in court with a reasonable chance at success.

 

[RBERR1]

Do certain properties have another way out?

I own three weeks.

One Cyrpress Habour Special
One Barony Beach O/S Gold
One Sunset Pointe Summer

I am having still a tough time to figure out what to do with the points thing because it sounds like there are no straight answers about how exactly things work except there is some skimming going on and there is an upfront to join.


The question I have relates to the fact that Cypress Harbour and Sunset pointe also are RCI properties. I am not sure if any of the others are. I am trying to figure out whether people have had luck trading these properties with RCI and did you get good value for it. I was curious if the individual properties can make a decision to join RCI also and then it might get interesting.

The other question I have is anybody going to be asking for a special meeting of their HOA to have either vote to either offficially endorse or vote against allowing the property to become part of the program. I know there is a clause in the docs about once you join you can't do it but I think we need to know where the majority of the owners are on this at each resort.

 

[KarenP]

Is "enrollment" permanent?

If enrollment of weeks into points ends at some point (because the enrollment is for a certain period of time), then won't everyone have to pay to enroll again?

 

[SueDonJ]

I own three weeks.

One Cyrpress Habour Special
One Barony Beach O/S Gold
One Sunset Pointe Summer

I am having still a tough time to figure out what to do with the points thing because it sounds like there are no straight answers about how exactly things work except there is some skimming going on and there is an upfront to join.


The question I have relates to the fact that Cypress Harbour and Sunset pointe also are RCI properties. I am not sure if any of the others are. I am trying to figure out whether people have had luck trading these properties with RCI and did you get good value for it. I was curious if the individual properties can make a decision to join RCI also and then it might get interesting.

I can't answer about value within RCI because my resorts don't have that option. But it's a good question, and yours is the first post I've seen that points out a third option for existing deeded Weeks owners - don't enroll with Marriott's points and hope that the exchange history with II continues, enroll with Marriott's points, or continue as is with the exchange value you've received with RCI. I see it as the more choices an owner has, the better.

The other question I have is anybody going to be asking for a special meeting of their HOA to have either vote to either offficially endorse or vote against allowing the property to become part of the program. I know there is a clause in the docs about once you join you can't do it but I think we need to know where the majority of the owners are on this at each resort.

I don't think this option is a possibility because the resorts themselves are not enrolled in the system. Each individual owner has to choose whether or not to enroll his/her individual week(s) into the Exchange Company, not into the Trust.

Is there an possibility for a majority of owners at one resort to vote that no owner at that resort can choose enrollment in the Points system? I doubt it, but would like to see an attorney try to answer this.

 

[SueDonJ]

If enrollment of weeks into points ends at some point (because the enrollment is for a certain period of time), then won't everyone have to pay to enroll again?

Enrollment can be renewed annually with payment of the Club Dues, but it's unclear if it's an automatic renewal or if you have to declare renewal. In either case, if you are un-unrolled for a period then I'd guess that if you even have the option to re-enroll, you will then pay another enrollment fee.

 

[bobcat]

Enrollment can be renewed annually with payment of the Club Dues, but it's unclear if it's an automatic renewal or if you have to declare renewal. In either case, if you are un-unrolled for a period then I'd guess that if you even have the option to re-enroll, you will then pay another enrollment fee.

Well what do you know?. In the mailbox was a letter from Marriott about their new points system. Nothing new. They said they would contact us to go over the points system. We will use our week in Sept. I guess sometime before they will give us a time and place to tell us about the Marriott points system. The latest and greatest. We will keep our week and deed. We all know the points value will go up every year to book your week. Can not wait to hear the speech. :hysterical:

 

[davidvel]

Interesting. Marriott can charge a fee of up to $1 per point to waive its ROFR on a sale of an interest in teh new TRUST program. So if you buy 1000 points for $9,200 it will cost you or your buyer $1,000 as an ROFR waiver fee. Talk about devaluing your interest.

 

[Dean]

Not at MRD.

Haven't seen the docs there but I bet there is language that gives them the right to unilaterally make reservation changes. Otherwise they would not have been unable to add the month reservation change to those resorts that were in existance before.

Dean,

Sales people lie. It's a fact. But you justifying lies as a means to achieve sales is puzzling to me and I don't know how to react to that.

I do honor my commitments. I pay my MFs... Your statement

Some sales lie, many do not and with Marriott I'd say most don't. I'd make a big difference between slanting to the positives and glossing over the negatives rather than truly lying, I think the latter is relatively rare with Marriott. There's more to honoring the commitment than just paying fees. It includes taking responsibility for the documents you signed and/or took responbilility for on purchase including the one that says verbal issues are not binding.

I also don't understand how you can justify a company telling people (verbally of course) that a product appreciates and the devising various schemes intended to purposely depreciate that same product just to increase their profits. If your timeshare is worth zero to you - I'll buy from you for a couple hundred dollars. If it's worth more than zero, you should care - it affects you as well.

Caring about the outcome is a different discussion IMO. I have hopes, expectations and realities in timeshares, they are all quite different. BTW, for most Marriott purchases, you also signed papers including a clause that specifically acknowledges that you are not expecting resale appeciation or rentals. To me this comes down to reading the paperwork and giving precedence to the info included there over verbals.

I can't beleieve that you condone the blatant systemic use of lies to sell timeshares as an acceptable business practice because there is a clause in the contract stating that no promises or claims made verbally are binding. If it was your retired parents they lied to and sold a week, I guess that would be OK even if they were older and not at the top of their mental game. If they sell your wet behind the ears children based on lies and put your children into debt for 30 years, it is OK because your children shouldn't have been so stupid and uneducated in the ways of business. You would probably call it a learning experience you are glad marriott taught them the hard way. I guess Marriott and Bernie Madoff can employ the same sales tactics of lies, mistatements, and half truths, and if only Bernie had been as legally smart as Marriott and got the buyers to sign a contract relieving him of all responsibility for verbal promises, then he would just be doing business with people who deserved to be ripped off too. Do you feel that con men who can find a way to legally protect themselves from prosecution by using a legal contract voiding all verbal promises and statements they made are simply good businessmen?

People do not DESERVE to be sold one thing in a sales presentation which is in reality far different than what they actually own when they sign the contract. To infer that customers who aren't business and contract savy deserve to be ripped off is ridiculous. That is like the woman in a short skirt who is raped being at fault for wearing the short skirt or having too many drinks. Don't blame the victim for being a victim, blame Marriott for preying on people who don't know better. People go to a sales presentation, they are promised that they can get Hawaii every year, that they are locking in a lifetime of vacations at todays prices,that buying this timeshare will save them 10 times what it costs to buy it, they are promised that what they are buying will have one of the highest resale values in the industry, and the sales staff and Marriott know all of that is a lie, yet they tell the lies every day to sell timeshares. They operate selling timeshares promising many things that aren't true, but it is OK since when it comes time to sign the contract all verbal promises and descriptions they used to sell the timeshare are now null and void.

I don't do business that way, I don't condone businesses which operate in such a manner, and I am shocked that anyone feels that selling in such a manner, whether legal or not, is an acceptable business practice. I guess anything you can do which is legal is acceptable to you no matter whether it is moral or right.

If it happened to a relative of yours, whether the misleading sale was made by Marriott or any other company, I bet you would feel differently. I can't imagine anyone looking their children or parents in the eye after falling vicitm to a sham of a sales presentation and saying it is your fault, you were stupid, you trusted the sales person, rather than blaming the sales person for misleading your parents/kids into buying something that wasn't close to what they were told they were buying. Perhaps you can without any qualms look strangers and/or family in the eye and say you screwed up, it is your fault, and now you must take responsibility for your legal contract you signed based on lies and half truths you were told by the sales dept. If you have no qualms treating people in such a manner, perhaps you should sell for Marriott because if you only care about what is legal with no regards to morality, there is a bunch of money to be made.

See my info earlier in this post. The truth is that if these issues are a reality in timeshares, if they bother people that much, they really shouldn't be involved. It's not a question of condoning the info you quote but rather giving the contractual information the lead by about 98%. The buyer is responsible for understanding what they're getting into. As I've said many times, as a group timeshares sales are at or below the level of used car sales.

 

[Dean]

I'd like to comment on Dean's comment: "We've already established that verbal agreements are not binding. I think people have to get over the timeshare sales rhetoric and start taking responsibility for the agreements they signed up for legally."

The conclusion that verbal lying is OK because verbal lies do not create binding contracts is terribly cynical and will excuse all types of dishonest behavior in our business and personal relationships.

It may be cynica in your viewl but it is 100% accurate. To me it is simply realistic. Hopefully anyone thinking of buying in to a timeshare will learn this here and not the hard way.

Foreclosed weeks due to delinquent MF don't become property of Marriott, they belong to the HOA.

I would expedect an agreement to buy them or sell as points for a fee since Marriott itself will apparently no longer be selling weeks.

 

[timeos2]

The question I have relates to the fact that Cypress Harbour and Sunset pointe also are RCI properties. I am not sure if any of the others are. I am trying to figure out whether people have had luck trading these properties with RCI and did you get good value for it. I was curious if the individual properties can make a decision to join RCI also and then it might get interesting.

Two positives with the RCI connection - two potential negatives. First the RCI option is a good one. It creates one additional option for exchange that most Marriott owners aren't lucky enough to have. Because of that relatively low amount of deposits they carry a high exchange value (big demand, low supply in that system). Second RCI will accept ONLY what you own for deposit. No games of substituting a similar week. You get to deposit exactly what you purchased/owned. Ask Wastegate owners how important THAT is. Wastegate also went down the path of substituting lesser weeks for deposit to II rather than the deeded time actually due to the owner. It is so sad to Marriott now sinking to that lowlife action.

The downsides have to be considered as well. You pay to be an RCI member (not so bad if you have other weeks in RCI as one fee covers them all) but you can drop your II fees so that makes up for a good portion of that fee. Plus there is the extremely member unfriendly court finding that allows RCI to rent owner deposits for TRADE to be redirected to rentals after a very short window of trade only being allowed. That has really ruined the RCI Weeks system as a long term option unless you don't mind that the best times may be siphoned off to rentals after only 30 days. Move quickly if you use RCI to get the best trades - wait a few days to claim a trade & it may be gone to rental.

Overall, for now, RCI may be the superior choice for those Marriott resorts that can be used there.

 

[tombo]

There's more to honoring the commitment than just paying fees. It includes taking responsibility for the documents you signed and/or took responbilility for on purchase including the one that says verbal issues are not binding.



Caring about the outcome is a different discussion IMO. I have hopes, expectations and realities in timeshares, they are all quite different. BTW, for most Marriott purchases, you also signed papers including a clause that specifically acknowledges that you are not expecting resale appeciation or rentals. To me this comes down to reading the paperwork and giving precedence to the info included there over verbals.

See my info earlier in this post. The truth is that if these issues are a reality in timeshares, if they bother people that much, they really shouldn't be involved. It's not a question of condoning the info you quote but rather giving the contractual information the lead by about 98%. The buyer is responsible for understanding what they're getting into. As I've said many times, as a group timeshares sales are at or below the level of used car sales.

I am not involved with retail timeshare sales, I hopefully will not go to another 90 minute "lie fest" just to receive a gift, but in spite of the fact that they might not impact me personally, I do have empathy for those who fall victim to the high pressure informative tour they attended on a whim. I feel bad for the 1000's who on vacation are lured into a "non sales presentation" for a product they weren't interested in buying, lied to about the product, sold, and by the time they return home the recission period has passed and they are stuck with a product that won't do many of the things they were told it would do in the sales presentation.

Most people do not understand what they are buying or they wouldn't buy. You can't try it out before you buy it like a car. You assume everything in the II book is yours to get because as the salesman said, Marriott is the strongest brand in II, and it will get any trade you want. Plus Marriott has internal trade advantage through II, so you are buying a week that will get you the vacations you want anywhere in the world just as they said. The fact that you can trade through II and the fact that you get internal trade advantages are in writing, so it is true when they said that exchanging a Marriott week will get you what you want. Months later you try to reserve and find that many things you were promised are not available. Now you can't get out of the contract, you call the sales rep and they say hey we never promised you that (even though they did). Read your contract. It is now the customers fault for believing the lies, not the developer's fault for telling them lies to make a sale. It is blaming the victim for being a victim. It is saying that the sales staff has no resposibility to actually deliver on what they sell during the presentation, but the customer has to deliver on what they sign.That makes no sense.

Is Marriott better than most? Sure. However I have been told plenty of things in Marriott presentations I know aren't true. I have the benefit of years of experience with timeshares and TUG while most who attend presentations have no personal point of reference other than what the salesmen promise.

Yes timeshare sales techniques are notoriously crooked, high pressure events savvy business people know to avoid and say no to. That is what makes it the most disconcerting. The ones who are least educated and informed are the ones they successfully prey upon.

As you said these issues are reality. Fraud and misrepresentation in timeshare sales is reality, and it is illegal too. Just because it is reality does not make it something that people should condone or simply ignore.

 

[tombo]

It may be cynica in your viewl but it is 100% accurate. To me it is simply realistic. Hopefully anyone thinking of buying in to a timeshare will learn this here and not the hard way.

.

Fraud and misrepresentation in a sales presentation is illegal no matter what the contract states at closing. If you read one of my previous posts I have specific cases where attorney generals sued Festiva, Bluegreen, and Trendwest for using false, misleading, and deceptive statements to sell timeshares. Yes developers get away with it day after day, but the difference between being sued because what they are doing is illegal and the act being illegal is 2 different things. People sell drugs on the street corner every day and it is illegal, but more often than not they get away with it for a long time before being prosecuted. The main problem is the developers won't let you record the sales presentation, so it comes down to your word against theirs if you do try to sue. In addition hiring an attorney is cost prohibitive. If more attorney generals activelly pursued criminal charges and law suits against developers for fraud and misrepresentation, perhaps some of the lies could be stopped.

Make no mistake, to sell a product using lies, misrepresentation, and outright fraud is illegal and the contract doesn not absolve them of their legal responsibility to factually sell their product.

 

[Dean]

As you said these issues are reality. Fraud and misrepresentation in timeshare sales is reality, and it is illegal too. Just because it is reality does not make it something that people should condone or simply ignore.

The question is is it illegal and can you prove it. I am not unsympathetic to those taken advantage of but they have to take most of the responsibilty in such a situation when they signed (or assumed responsiblity with resale) for a contract that includes specific info. I personally would not rely on class action suites to protect my own interest.

 

[DanCali]

BTW, for most Marriott purchases, you also signed papers including a clause that specifically acknowledges that you are not expecting resale appeciation or rentals. To me this comes down to reading the paperwork and giving precedence to the info included there over verbals.

So how is buying a Marriott timeshare different from buying Google stock? Because if I read the Google prospectus, it sounds like a terrible buy...

Risks related to IPO

•Our stock price could decline rapidly and significantly.

•The auction process for our public offering may result in a phenomenon known as the “winner’s curse,” and, as a result, investors may experience significant losses.

•The auction process for our initial public offering may result in a situation in which less price sensitive investors play a larger role in the determination of our offering price and constitute a larger portion of the investors in our offering, and, therefore, the offering price may not be sustainable once trading of our Class A common stock begins.

•Successful bidders should not expect to sell our shares for a profit shortly after our Class A common stock begins trading.

•Our initial public offering price may have little or no relationship to the price that would be established using traditional valuation methods, and therefore, the initial public offering price may not be sustainable once trading begins.

•If research analysts publish or establish target prices for our Class A common stock that are below the initial public offering price or then current trading market price of our shares, the price of our shares of Class A common stock may fall.

•Our stock price may be volatile, and you may not be able to resell shares of our Class A common stock at or above the price you paid.

•Future sales of shares by our stockholders could cause our stock price to decline.

Never mind - I think know the diference. Google management try to create value for shareholders while Marriott management work hard to purposely destroy value for owners and then hide behind boilerplate clauses that if anyone would always take seriously they wouldn't buy any asset.

I could are less about those clauses and what they say (and I didn't buy from Marriott to begin with). What I do care about is WHY the asset depreciates. If it's the economy, that's fully understandable. If it's Marriott creating new rules that are purposely designed to destroy value, shame on them. And I'm happy to share my opinion about Marriott with anyone interested in buying from them.

 

[Dean]

So how is buying a Marriott timeshare different from buying Google stock? Because if I read the Google prospectus, it sounds like a terrible buy...

Risks related to IPO



Never mind - I think know the diference. Google management try to create value for shareholders while Marriott management work hard to purposely destroy value for owners and then hide behind boilerplate clauses that if anyone would always take seriously they wouldn't buy any asset.

I could are less about those clauses and what they say (and I didn't buy from Marriott to begin with). What I do care about is WHY the asset depreciates. If it's the economy, that's fully understandable. If it's Marriott creating new rules that are purposely designed to destroy value, shame on them. And I'm happy to share my opinion about Marriott with anyone interested in buying from them.

In many ways the principles are the same between stocks and timeshares but the realities are often different. Enron or Worldcom might have been better stock comparisons for your point though. You would take the risk that Google would fail and if it did, so would the value of the shareholders. However, there is a fundamental difference between stock and timeshare. With a stock, the value to both groups are linked, this not necessarily true for timeshares at least looking at resale value. I realize you're picking the legal/contractual pieces you want to accept and those you do not. Buying resale you legally assume the risks signed up for by the original owner.

I don't think resale will be nearly as bad as some do and it may actually be better for many options. What Marriott has done is define the true value of the lower demand weeks/resorts so the spread may be even better than before. IMO I think some of the low season options were over priced because of the anticipated internal trading option.

 

[tombo]

I don't think resale will be nearly as bad as some do and it may actually be better for many options. What Marriott has done is define the true value of the lower demand weeks/resorts so the spread may be even better than before. IMO I think some of the low season options were over priced because of the anticipated internal trading option.

Low demand weeks were always of low "real" value although some used them to get great trades. However using points Marriott can sell low demand seasons/weeks/resorts and get top dollar for them by selling them as points.

If a dog season is assigned 1900 points, Marriott can sell an owner 3 of those yellow weeks out of it's trust or allow owners to convert 3 yellow weeks into points getting the points member 5700 annual points which is enough to get you most good weeks/seasons. Now instead of good inventory in-good inventory out, or bad inventory in-bad inventory out like it was using weeks, using points you can put all bad inventory in and have enough points to take good inventory out.

Points is points. No matter what week(s) are actually deposited into exchange inventory for the points given, the resulting points can be exchanged for any good inventory the points member can afford. If enough people buy large numbers of points based on yellow weeks inventory (and/or convert their yellow week inventory), you will see a huge crunch as increased numbers of owners are able to reserve prime inventory whether they actually deposited a prime week, or a group of dog weeks. Few points members will want to spend their expensive points on the dog weeks deposited for the points they receive. Most members will try to use their points for the better weeks, and the shortage of access to prime weeks will eventually get much worse because as I said, points is points.

Grinning all the way to the bank is Marriott who invented a way to bundle dog weeks into a prime points packages allowing new members to reserve the best weeks without Marriot having to add a single week/resort to the Marriott system. Now the dog inventory marriott was saddled with has instead become worth millions of points to sell to new members. With dog weeks and points Marriott can offer people access to anything Marriott has, even access to 13 month advance reservations trumping any prime week owned if one wants to buy enough dog weeks (oops points) to give them Platinum plus status.

 

[Dean]

Low demand weeks were always of low "real" value although some used them to get great trades. However using points Marriott can sell low demand seasons/weeks/resorts and get top dollar for them by selling them as points.

If a dog season is assigned 1900 points, Marriott can sell an owner 3 of those yellow weeks out of it's trust or allow owners to convert 3 yellow weeks into points getting the points member 5700 annual points which is enough to get you most good weeks/seasons. Now instead of good inventory in-good inventory out, or bad inventory in-bad inventory out like it was using weeks, using points you can put all bad inventory in and have enough points to take good inventory out.

Points is points. No matter what week(s) are actually deposited into exchange inventory for the points given, the resulting points can be exchanged for any good inventory the points member can afford. If enough people buy large numbers of points based on yellow weeks inventory (and/or convert their yellow week inventory), you will see a huge crunch as increased numbers of owners are able to reserve prime inventory whether they actually deposited a prime week, or a group of dog weeks. Few points members will want to spend their expensive points on the dog weeks deposited for the points they receive. Most members will try to use their points for the better weeks, and the shortage of access to prime weeks will eventually get much worse because as I said, points is points.

Grinning all the way to the bank is Marriott who invented a way to bundle dog weeks into a prime points packages allowing new members to reserve the best weeks without Marriot having to add a single week/resort to the Marriott system. Now the dog inventory marriott was saddled with has instead become worth millions of points to sell to new members. With dog weeks and points Marriott can offer people access to anything Marriott has, even access to 13 month advance reservations trumping any prime week owned if one wants to buy enough dog weeks (oops points) to give them Platinum plus status.

I think off season Marriott weeks have often been over priced, at least until the current economics came into play. Even at $1500, a Bronze equivalent HP week was overpriced IMO largely because people were buying to use for Marriott to Marriott trades off season and flexchange. Selling off season weeks as if they're high season points is simply the nature of points programs, a point that was made several times on the before thread by those on both sides of this isle. IMO Marriott was behind on creating this points program, it's something they should have done 5-6 years ago. However, as I've noted, I do disagree with some of the how it was done. I would have preferred a progam more like DVC.

 

[GeezerGreg]

What a great way to generate profit

The new points system is an ingenious way for Marriott to increase the top and bottom line of their timeshare business in a down market. This is accomplished by using creative ways to convert and increase their core product at little to no cost and to increase fees collected from existing customers.

How does Marriott create more usable inventory (points) from people who retain weeks?
Answer: Marriott is now able to dump inventory of units it cannot sell/trade into II and in return Marriott will poach the best weeks from II (in HI.) Get ready for a bunch of availability in Marco Island through II. In Addition Marriott can trade in weeks of low point value for those of higher point value and I doubt Marriott will stand behind or even shoulder to shoulder with other owners who have in the past acquired these weeks through II.

How does Marriott create more usable inventory (points) from people who convert to weeks?
Answer: Due to the fact that very few resorts have points value equal to what they rent for (ie a Plat 2BR at MMC converts into 2375 points and rents for 2900) Marriott will create about 20% value when week owners convert. Thus for every 5 owners they can convert to Destination Points they can sell another new member a points membership of equal value. It really is like printing money for them.

What about fees?
Answer: Marriott will charge all members $165 annually for a system that incrementally costs them next to nothing. In addition they probably already have negotiated a bulk rate with II that gives them additional leverage and costs them much less than the fees they will collect.

Why are they doing this?
Answer: Marriott has very smart business leaders and saw an opportunity to create a product that will make them tons of money whether a significant number of people uses it or not. They created a new product that allows their customers to break the week product they purchased into days and created a method in which they could sell this new customers. It also allows them to open the door to new opportunities where they can partner with other products they operate on the travel and hotel side of their business.

Who loses?
1) Owners who buy into the hype and promises from the sales staff and convert while not utilizing the new features of the points. For example someone who converts their week then has to use two of their weeks to get one week.
2) Owners who bought lockouts under the promise of 2 weeks and end up converting to points lose the additional value / cost associated with the lockout.
3) Owners who typically traded through II to get higher point value / larger units

Who wins?
1) Marriott
2) Anyone who has a high point resort who traded into low point locations through II without taking advantage of the AC program.
3) People who never had a full week open to use their week.

The ugly side
One more note is that where potential profit exists business can and historically have done things to make quick profits on the backs of existing customers. My main concerns with the current setup is the potential for the following:
1) Marriott front running trades through II.
2) Marriott over selling points (selling more points than is available to book)
3) Marriott adding hidden fees in the form of housekeeping credits, ...
4) Marriott ramping up special assessments and maintenance fees for weeks owners in order to make them into convert.
5) Marriott renting 'unused' days in the points inventory.
6) Marriott forcing members to pay to extend points expiration or purchase addition points in order to book a vacation.

 

[detjason]

The good and the bad

Altough I must admit I havent read the 1,569 replies to this post, this is an update from my June 25 prediction (among others) that this new point system benefits new customers and penalizes existing owners. Although I am sure what I am about to say has been previously predicted or imagined in previous posts, allow this to be my two cents to add or detract from the good vs. bad debate. I will preface my opinions with this. I am a Marriott fan and continue to be. I am not bashing them or criticizing their marketing decisions in principle, but I am evaluating these changes based on my self-interest and the "bang for my buck" that I have enjoyed for 10 years.

I own one week that I purchased from Marriott and two weeks that I purchased on the resale market, all 2BRs (Orlando, Vail and Hilton Head). My Orlando property alone has allowed me to travel to Hawaiii 8 out of the last 10 years via an II trade. With a little flexibility, I have ALWAYS received the trade I was requested from II, including Aruba, Vail, Newport Beach, Boston, Lake Tahoe, Las Vegas, etc. This includes multiple trips to those locations as well as getting two seperate villas during the same periods for other family members. For example, last week I had an oceanview 2br at the Waiohai in Kaui and a second 2br at Kauai beach Club oceanfront for my guests. This will be impossible with the points unless I save all three of my weeks for 5+ years, which would cost me $15,000 in maintenance fees for what I just accomplished with $1700 in maintenance fees.

I went to the Marriott presentation about the new point system in Kauai last week. The sales manager confirmed what I thought and that the old way of trading through Interval for other Marriott properties will eventually be difficult, if not impossible. I didnt even ask him how it would affect me. His actual sales pitch was basically "I hope you enjoyed the ride, because its over." I am not exagerating.

He said repeatedly that "corporate" was upset about how so many people were benefiting from the resale market and that Marriott was missing out on that action. Needless to say, I didnt shed a tear that it wasnt sufficient that Marriott made hundreds of millions of dollars on the initial sale of there properties, but wanted to keep doing so in perpetuity.

The bottom line for those of us that have been enjoying the best timeshare program in the industry was "if you want to keep playing, you have to start paying." Again, this is not an exageration. He was very specific in explaining the desire that "corporate" had for pulling the rug out from owners who purchased on the resale market and to create a system that forces second hand owners to pay to play. In doing so, they also pulled the rug out from those who had purchased from Marriott and didnt pay top dollar for Hawaii or its equivalent.

The second motivation of course for Marriott is that instead of running out of villas to sell, they can sell points for eternity. I honestly do not know how they can guarantee that the system will not become gridlocked by selling points. With weeks, it was an easy formula. They could sell each villa 52 times and there was virtually no way to oversell a property. But with points, I would argue the opposite; there is no way to know if a property overwhelmed with reservations and gridlockedup for years. But Marriott's desire to increase profits isnt even my issue nor is it productive in this discussion about whether to join or not join the new point system.

There are a few pieces of good news if you join the point system.

1. You can still "try" to trade through Interval like we normally do. I originally didnt realize that the traditional Interval trade for a full week at another Marriott week is still an option. So you dont lose this option, you just gain the option of using points. Currently, we have three options every year (occupy, exchange with II, exchange for MR points). The new point system allegedly creates a 4th option, leaving other options untouched.

2. The second piece of good news, which is small, is that the new annual $165 to $199 club dues will cover your Interval dues and that internal Marriott exchanges will be free. This is especially a deal if you own more than one week or have a lock off.

The other "advantages" of staying less than one week at a property arent really attractive to me, but I guess adding days to a traditional 7 night stay is more appealing.

Lastly, according to the MVCI website, the weeks of traditional owners who DO NOT join the point system will remain in the II inventory and not be available to the point members. Although this sounds fishy to me, I guess we have to trust this statement. Although this seems like good news because we can expect "some" inventory remaining with II, we also know the opposite is true that the 41,000 owners that have signed up for the new points will NOT be available in the II inventory that we used to use.

In the end, I will be joining the club to "test drive" it, but I wont be buying anymore points. I may just convert the week I bought from Marriott to points to see how I like it and leave the others as traders with II. However, this will force me to have to seperate II memberships and dues. I do believe enrollment fees will go up an the incentive to enroll of 800 points will disappear.

I think that my opportunity to travel to places like Hawaii will decrease no matter what I do. I refuse to buy more points, there is no value for me in that.

 

[dioxide45]

Altough I must admit I havent read the 1,569 replies to this post, this is an update from my June 25 prediction (among others) that this new point system benefits new customers and penalizes existing owners. Although I am sure what I am about to say has been previously predicted or imagined in previous posts, allow this to be my two cents to add or detract from the good vs. bad debate. I will preface my opinions with this. I am a Marriott fan and continue to be. I am not bashing them or criticizing their marketing decisions in principle, but I am evaluating these changes based on my self-interest and the "bang for my buck" that I have enjoyed for 10 years.

I own one week that I purchased from Marriott and two weeks that I purchased on the resale market, all 2BRs (Orlando, Vail and Hilton Head). My Orlando property alone has allowed me to travel to Hawaiii 8 out of the last 10 years via an II trade. With a little flexibility, I have ALWAYS received the trade I was requested from II, including Aruba, Vail, Newport Beach, Boston, Lake Tahoe, Las Vegas, etc. This includes multiple trips to those locations as well as getting two seperate villas during the same periods for other family members. For example, last week I had an oceanview 2br at the Waiohai in Kaui and a second 2br at Kauai beach Club oceanfront for my guests. This will be impossible with the points unless I save all three of my weeks for 5+ years, which would cost me $15,000 in maintenance fees for what I just accomplished with $1700 in maintenance fees.

I went to the Marriott presentation about the new point system in Kauai last week. The sales manager confirmed what I thought and that the old way of trading through Interval for other Marriott properties will eventually be difficult, if not impossible. I didnt even ask him how it would affect me. His actual sales pitch was basically "I hope you enjoyed the ride, because its over." I am not exagerating.

No one knows how II inventory will be affected, not even that sales person you spoke with. So they didn't really confirm anything. They just wanted to create the sense of fear. A great selling tool. The ride will likely still continue for many years to come.

He said repeatedly that "corporate" was upset about how so many people were benefiting from the resale market and that Marriott was missing out on that action. Needless to say, I didnt shed a tear that it wasnt sufficient that Marriott made hundreds of millions of dollars on the initial sale of there properties, but wanted to keep doing so in perpetuity.

Corporate was only upset about one thing and it wasn't about people benefiting off the current system and "taking advantage". They were upset about all of the unsold inventory that they couldn't unload in the current economic environment. The system wasn't setup to punish current owners, it was setup to clean the books of inventory that was costing the company money.

The bottom line for those of us that have been enjoying the best timeshare program in the industry was "if you want to keep playing, you have to start paying." Again, this is not an exageration. He was very specific in explaining the desire that "corporate" had for pulling the rug out from owners who purchased on the resale market and to create a system that forces second hand owners to pay to play. In doing so, they also pulled the rug out from those who had purchased from Marriott and didnt pay top dollar for Hawaii or its equivalent.

The second motivation of course for Marriott is that instead of running out of villas to sell, they can sell points for eternity. I honestly do not know how they can guarantee that the system will not become gridlocked by selling points. With weeks, it was an easy formula. They could sell each villa 52 times and there was virtually no way to oversell a property. But with points, I would argue the opposite; there is no way to know if a property overwhelmed with reservations and gridlockedup for years. But Marriott's desire to increase profits isnt even my issue nor is it productive in this discussion about whether to join or not join the new point system.

Marriott can not sell points in perpetuity. There are only a certain number of points in the new trust (about 40 million). Once that is gone they have to find new ways to get new inventory, either by buying weeks back and conveying them to the trust, or by building new resorts and placing them in the trust. The points are deeded just like the weeks are and there are controls there to prevent them from selling more points than they have inventory to support. Gridlock can still happen if they sell all the points on the premise of booking prime weeks, since only so many prime weeks exist there will be disappointed owners who can't get what they were "promised".

There are a few pieces of good news if you join the point system.

1. You can still "try" to trade through Interval like we normally do. I originally didnt realize that the traditional Interval trade for a full week at another Marriott week is still an option. So you dont lose this option, you just gain the option of using points. Currently, we have three options every year (occupy, exchange with II, exchange for MR points). The new point system allegedly creates a 4th option, leaving other options untouched.

2. The second piece of good news, which is small, is that the new annual $165 to $199 club dues will cover your Interval dues and that internal Marriott exchanges will be free. This is especially a deal if you own more than one week or have a lock off.

The other "advantages" of staying less than one week at a property arent really attractive to me, but I guess adding days to a traditional 7 night stay is more appealing.

Lastly, according to the MVCI website, the weeks of traditional owners who DO NOT join the point system will remain in the II inventory and not be available to the point members. Although this sounds fishy to me, I guess we have to trust this statement. Although this seems like good news because we can expect "some" inventory remaining with II, we also know the opposite is true that the 41,000 owners that have signed up for the new points will NOT be available in the II inventory that we used to use.

Weeks deposited in to II by enrolled and non enrolled owners will be there for all members. Marriott has the ability to exchange for those weeks also in order to fulfill points requests.

In the end, I will be joining the club to "test drive" it, but I wont be buying anymore points. I may just convert the week I bought from Marriott to points to see how I like it and leave the others as traders with II. However, this will force me to have to seperate II memberships and dues. I do believe enrollment fees will go up an the incentive to enroll of 800 points will disappear.

I think that my opportunity to travel to places like Hawaii will decrease no matter what I do. I refuse to buy more points, there is no value for me in that.

As I said before, Hawaii will still be doable in the future just as it is today.

 

[DanCali]

...I went to the Marriott presentation about the new point system in Kauai last week. The sales manager confirmed what I thought and that the old way of trading through Interval for other Marriott properties will eventually be difficult, if not impossible.

...
In the end, I will be joining the club to "test drive" it, but I wont be buying anymore points. I may just convert the week I bought from Marriott to points to see how I like it and leave the others as traders with II. However, this will force me to have to seperate II memberships and dues. I do believe enrollment fees will go up an the incentive to enroll of 800 points will disappear.

Would you be joining the club is the salesperson had said what Marriott itself is saying - that if you don't enroll you can use your week as always and the program will have no impact on you? Considering the salesperson is commission driven, I would not give assign salesperson more credibility than the corporation he works for.

The sales person used one of the oldest sales tactics in the book - FUD. Also, here is a list of of a few tactics employed by car salesmen... did you encounter any of these tactics in your presentation?

As for test driving the program - you can save the money and hassle. Read the threads from the first couple of days when people made reservations and learn from Tuggers' experiences - for now, it certainly doesn't drive like a Rolls Royce... Maybe it will in the future and maybe it won't -

 

[windje2000]

. . .

His actual sales pitch was basically "I hope you enjoyed the ride, because its over." I am not exagerating.

He said repeatedly that "corporate" was upset about how so many people were benefiting from the resale market and that Marriott was missing out on that action. Did you ask him why MArriott sold a product that declined in value by 75-90% Did you ask him how buying a second hand ANYTHING at the prevailing market price affects the producer? Maybe that used Beemer you bought affected BMW, or that second hand house affected Toll Brothers. Needless to say, I didnt shed a tear that it wasnt sufficient that Marriott made hundreds of millions of dollars on the initial sale of there properties, but wanted to keep doing so in perpetuity.

The bottom line for those of us that have been enjoying the best timeshare program in the industry was "if you want to keep playing, you have to start paying." Again, this is not an exageration. He was very specific in explaining the desire that "corporate" had for pulling the rug out from owners who purchased on the resale market and to create a system that forces second hand owners to pay to play. In doing so, they also pulled the rug out from those who had purchased from Marriott and didnt pay top dollar for Hawaii or its equivalent. How about those who bought developer weeks? Those weeks are being treated pretty much like resales. Remember - All weeks were once developer weeks!

The second motivation of course for Marriott is that instead of running out of villas to sell, they can sell points for eternity. Actually they can't - there are blue sky and/or fraud statutes to prevent that. I honestly do not know how they can guarantee that the system will not become gridlocked by selling points. With weeks, it was an easy formula. They could sell each villa 52 times and there was virtually no way to oversell a property. But with points, I would argue the opposite; there is no way to know if a property overwhelmed with reservations and gridlockedup for years. But Marriott's desire to increase profits isnt even my issue nor is it productive in this discussion about whether to join or not join the new point system.

There are a few pieces of good news if you join the point system.

1. You can still "try" to trade through Interval like we normally do. I originally didnt realize that the traditional Interval trade for a full week at another Marriott week is still an option. So you dont lose this option, you just gain the option of using points. Currently, we have three options every year (occupy, exchange with II, exchange for MR points). The new point system allegedly creates a 4th option, leaving other options untouched.

2. The second piece of good news, which is small, is that the new annual $165 to $199 club dues will cover your Interval dues and that internal Marriott exchanges will be free. This is especially a deal if you own more than one week or have a lock off. You think that fee benefit will last forever? Didn't the salesman just tell you they are out to 'make the resale buyer pay to play?

The other "advantages" of staying less than one week at a property arent really attractive to me, but I guess adding days to a traditional 7 night stay is more appealing.

Lastly, according to the MVCI website, the weeks of traditional owners who DO NOT join the point system will remain in the II inventory and not be available to the point members. If NOBODY joins and/or nobody who joins elects points, nothing will happen to II. Although this sounds fishy to me, I guess we have to trust this statement. Although this seems like good news because we can expect "some" inventory remaining with II, we also know the opposite is true that the 41,000 owners that have signed up for the new points will NOT be available in the II inventory that we used to use. I Don't believe that 41,000 statistic and those who enrolled are not all going for points

In the end, I will be joining the club to "test drive" it, but I wont be buying anymore points. I may just convert the week I bought from Marriott to points to see how I like it and leave the others as traders with II. However, this will force me to have to seperate II memberships and dues. I do believe enrollment fees will go up an the incentive to enroll of 800 points will disappear.

I think that my opportunity to travel to places like Hawaii will decrease no matter what I do. I refuse to buy more points, there is no value for me in that.

There's so much inconsistency and BS here its almost funny.

There's such a large number of original owners relative to DClub enrollees and points buyers that the effect on II will be seen years from now if at all.

Good luck on your test drives and enjoy your plus points and fee benefits as long as they last. They are the sole reasons to join.

 

[sparty]

2. The second piece of good news, which is small, is that the new annual $165 to $199 club dues will cover your Interval dues and that internal Marriott exchanges will be free. This is especially a deal if you own more than one week or have a lock off.

Not to get hung up on semantics, but not all internal exchanges are free. For example, get a week 53 at your home resort and trade it. Have to deposit to interval and pay the fees...