Marriott Maui Preview in one hr-any questions?

[m61376]

If they make future resale owners into second class citizens, you will see the value of those units drop to close to zero. It will be similar to Starwood where the mandatory resorts have much more value than the voluntary. Doing that hurts all the owners since even direct buyers may want to sell their units at some point.

I have made that point myself before, so I couldn't agree with you more. I think overall it will be bad for Marriott as a whole, and will be bad for all owners, but I am not sure what the immediate impact would be to Marriott. Will people hesitate to buy if they realize that they'll recoup virtually nothing if they choose to sell or will Marriott count on most people being oblivious to this and view it as a potential boost for developer purchasing?

That's why I think the status of future resales may be iffy, because Marriott may feel that it will enhance their bottom line to exclude future resale purchasers from any internal trading program that's developed. It would be unfortunate in my opinion, as you point out.

 

[pwrshift]

Unequal owners with points?

The problem I see with a points program (not the Marriott Rewards program) is that it will probably make us unequal owners. Not sure how that could be based, but perhaps the price you paid might govern your 'position' on the ladder... with resale buyers well below direct buyers. Or perhaps the annual MF will position your TS points value. Maybe the 'trading power' of your TS will govern the number of points you get for your TS ... with prime seasons netting out with more points than off seasons at that TS.

Right now we are 'equals' -- there's a mad rush for booking the more prime weeks in your 'color' season but everyone has the same chance. Points may change that dramatically.

I like the way it is now ... where I have an equal chance to trade my low MF cost Manor Club week into Naples or Maui. Time will tell. But if the Naples owner gets 3 pts to my 1 pt for MMC it might mean my 'week' becomes only 2 days. My BeachPlace is in the middle perhaps with MF about $1050 but, and although the trading for MR points is always available to me, I seldom trade it except to upgrade a lockoff studio for a 1-2 bdrm if it comes available through Interval.

Brian

 

[m61376]

Brian-
I see a lot of potential problems if Marriott adopts a plan similar to what was alluded to in their survey. Aside from the likely disappointment from not getting those great upgrades, there will potentially be a lot of unhappy owners whose even Platinum properties may be relegated down the ladder. People bought into the Marriott system with the expectation of trading a week for a week and I think will be irate if suddenly their nice Platinum week is only worth a few days elsewhere.

I don't think a valuation based on purchase price will be feasible, because even in the same property prices paid vary greatly. To do so would be to severely penalize not only resale owners, but direct purchasers who bought early on, some of whom paid less than others later paid resale. So I don't foresee that as a tenable way of doing things. Personally, I think the valuation will be based on trading power and Marriott's assessment of resort value if they decide to do unequal valuations. However, while owners of peak beach weeks/seasons, winter ski weeks and the like, as well as owners at the newer premium properties may benefit, I think it would foster many disgruntled owners, who may suddenly find their Platinum weeks requiring 2 years worth of trades to get a single week at more premium destinations. This wasn't the concept people were sold on and it isn't what they have come to expect and would likely just cause people to continue trading in II and bypass the Marriott system. If Marriott is going to have an internal trading system that will be financially beneficial for them, they have to appeal to a broad spectrum of their owners and that is going to be a monumental task; they need to make most people feel like it is an improvement or the program will falter before it gets a start.

 

[We Love Fun]

Ritz Carlton Home Resort and Points System

People bought into the Marriott system with the expectation of trading a week for a week and I think will be irate if suddenly their nice Platinum week is only worth a few days elsewhere.

Remember that the only thing any of us has contractually is the ability to reserve a week during the specified season at the resort listed on our deed. Any ability to exchange or use a week at another location is a separate arrangement (except, maybe, for some Florida Club locations).

The Ritz Carlton Destination Club preserves the home resort option through its "Home Club" membership. The "Portfolio Membership" offers ownership of a portfolio of properties (possibly the entire MVCI portfolio) and the ability to stay at those locations using points obtained from their ownership of the Portfolio. It appears those members don't have "good traders" or "bad traders" but instead get a number of points. It appears that the original points are based on the resort and season where the owner purchased their week(s).

The "cost" in points appears to vary by location, season, day of the week, and size of accommodation and appears to allow partial-week reservations as well as full weeks. This would benefit a low season traveller who wanted shorter stays during the mid-week but would take more points for those who wanted premium destinations during high-demand periods.

TUG seems to have a number of people who have learned how to "game" the current system to get what they perceive to be the best weeks. I suspect any new system with a new set of rules will result in new ways to game the system to one's benefit. Some will like it better, some won't.

Moderator - should we start a new thread for discussion of the RC Destination Club program and how it could be applied to MVCI?

 

[taffy19]

In S.D?

At least as to my resort, Shadow Ridge, the reservation rules (12/13 month) are specifically set forth in the deeded documents. The rules are concise and specific. Notably, there is no distinction between an original purchaser and resale purchaser in those docs. Marriott cannot change any terms of the deed, CC&Rs and Timeshare declaration. In fact, Marriott is simply a manager for the respective HOAs which actually owes the obligations to owners. Simply put Mariott cannot change the "rules" (actually deeded usage rights) for reserving, or using your week, because they are deeded entitlements.

Under CA law, no "rule," changed or not, can supercede or contradict the declarations. In any conflict between a rule and the declarations, the declarations prevail. The Declaration sets forth in detail how reservations can be made. Either you own two weeks, or you fall under the 12 month rule.

Rights to reserve your use week.
(The following is paraphrased from the recorded Shadow Ridge Timeshare Declaration.)

"Timeshare Interest" is defined as the interest in the timeshare condominium referenced in the respective Timeshare Declaration for the resort. [paras. 1.85 and 1.87]

Reserving
Owners who own more than one "Timeshare Interest" may reserve use weeks 13 mos. in advance of (down to 75 days before) the use week reserved, only if they reserve such weeks concurrently or consecutively. [para. 2.1-d-i]

Owners other than above may reserve use weeks 12 mos in advance of (down to 75 days before) the use week reserved. [para. 2.1-d-ii]

[remaining provision relates to reserving within 75 days.]

These provisions are obviously the most material part of a timeshare owner's rights with respect to the property. I can see no conceivable way the substantive rights granted by the Timeshare Declaration could be unilaterally altered by Marriott or its affiliated companies, high priced lawyers or not.

Within any timeshare project, whether it be Marriott or others, the rules apply as they do in any condominium project governed by CC&Rs. Here, the CC&Rs state that only those owners who have 2 or more weeks can (and have a right to) reserve 13 mos. out and the Association/Marriott must follow those declarations in allowing reservations.

Importantly, "Owner" is defined as any owner of a timeshare interest deed, or any successor purchaser (RESALE PURCHASER, see para 1.61.) As such, resale buyers are entitled to the same deeded rights of an original purchaser no matter what price was paid. This is no different than neighbors in a condo complex that paid drastically different prices for their unit twenty years apart.

As to Marriott's new program...

No resale buyer has a right to be a part of any new exchange program, etc., or any particular priority.

Obviously, timeshare ownership and the legalities surrounding them are complicated. I enjoy these discussions because they relate to all the promises and lay-opinion given by the salespepople, and put all their simple, strightforward explanations in a more complex context. The more info people have, the better, which I understand the primary purpose of TUGBBS to be.

I implore everyone to keep the distinction between your rights to reserve (deeded) vs. any new points/ exchange program (which can have any rules they want and you agree to when signing up).

NO CHARGE...

Shadow Ridge is a newer resort than the MDSV-I. As far as I know, the 13 months reservation rule wasn't included in our documents because this perk didn't even existed yet when this resort was built nor was it mentioned in the year we bought either by the Marriott re-sale office. Originally, we bought at the MDSV-II but rescinded our contract one day later to buy a unit at the MDSV-I from their re-sale office because we liked the far away views better here plus it had a fireplace too. I don't remember if this clause was included in the documents of the MDSV-II since we gave all the documents back but it wasn't mentioned verbally either. That I know.

I still have the MDSV-I documents somewhere but not handy so cannot look it up to make 100% sure or copy the exact clause here but I did look it up once before. They have the right to make changes to the reservation procedure and that was done when the 13 months rule came about so they have the right to change it again in the future too but everyone will always have the chance to reserve a week in the season they bought because they have the right amount of weeks in every resort since they are numbered.

I recently called the person again who gave us the MVCI workshop and asked him what the status was. This person is not a sales person so he has no reason to lie. There is a team of Marriott people working on this new system and no decision has been made if re-sale owners would be grandfathered or not but the internal exchange system is in the works and will be rolled out next year. It has been shared with the sales staff too so that's why we hear so many rumors. Of course, they can still scrap it completely because it is too expensive (this was mentioned here) or they cannot make the right decision what is best for the company since it is so complex.

It will be very difficult to keep everyone happy but as more people will start finding out that buying re-sale is a bargain, they will have to do something to stop this trend by either giving very many MRPs to the direct buyer or other perks that make it attractive to buy from the developer direct or they will lose more business. All the timeshare developers are doing this today already and it will have an effect on the re-sale prices as we all know already with Starwood or Wyndham.

Buying a timeshare was never meant to be an investment except for an investment in quality vacation time so buy where you like to go most often and you will not be so disappointed with all the changes that keep on coming and always cost more too. JMHO.

We already booked our fare for next year in Maui. Since we are staying four weeks again, we will have to move at least three times. :annoyed: It would be so much nicer to rent a condo for a whole month than keep on moving from resort to resort. To me that is much more flexible now nor would you have to worry about ever increasing maintenance fees or special assessments either. Timesharing has changed a lot from when we started in 1983 and not for the better but we are still happy at the resorts we own so will keep them for now.

 

[RandR]

Buying a timeshare was never meant to be an investment except for an investment in quality vacation time so buy where you like to go most often and you will not be so disappointed with all the changes that keep on coming and always cost more too. JMHO.

I did buy where I want to vacation but I bought Marriott because of the number of ts locations they have so I could trade into them if I want to. If they "devalue" what my property is worth so that I can't trade equally into other Marriott ts' I will be quite disappointed.

 

[sdtugger]

I still have the MDSV-I documents somewhere but not handy so cannot look it up to make 100% sure or copy the exact clause here but I did look it up once before. They have the right to make changes to the reservation procedure and that was done when the 13 months rule came about so they have the right to change it again in the future too but everyone will always have the chance to reserve a week in the season they bought because they have the right amount of weeks in every resort since they are numbered.

If you can locate your MDSV-I documents, it would be interesting to see the exact language. The only language quoted so far on TUG does have the 13 month rule in it. If it is a change from older deeds, it would be interesting to see the older language.

We've beaten up the issue of whether Marriott can change the system to essentially limit owners to lesser weeks during the season that they own. I believe even the early skeptics were persuaded that Marriott couldn't make such a change without exposing themselves to significant liability. I'm not sure that is what you were trying to say here. But, I maintain that Marriott could not take away valuable reservation rights without significant legal liability.

 

[davidvel]

Remember that the only thing any of us has contractually is the ability to reserve a week during the specified season at the resort listed on our deed. Any ability to exchange or use a week at another location is a separate arrangement (except, maybe, for some Florida Club locations).

You summed up my dozens of posts and pages of legal jargon in one simple sentence that is what everyone needs to understand: Rights to reserve NOT= rights to trade in any particular system. People shoudn't confuse the two.

 

[davidvel]

If you can locate your MDSV-I documents, it would be interesting to see the exact language. The only language quoted so far on TUG does have the 13 month rule in it. If it is a change from older deeds, it would be interesting to see the older language.

Hopefully she can scan the pertinent page and let us review. If not, I'll eventually get a copy and see. I am always intrigued about this "They have the right to make changes to the reservation procedure", which in my opinion is a material deeded right in the interest that CANNOT be changed. (yes I know they "did it" but lots of things happen legally that shouldn't...)

I still have the MDSV-I documents somewhere but not handy so cannot look it up to make 100% sure or copy the exact clause here but I did look it up once before.They have the right to make changes to the reservation procedure and that was done when the 13 months rule came about so they have the right to change it again in the future too but everyone will always have the chance to reserve a week in the season they bought because they have the right amount of weeks in every resort since they are numbered.