Marriott points and internal exchange program - the latest info

[PerryM]

You answered your own question.

Your car is an expense on top of an expense.

Not only do you have the upfront costs of purchasing the car, you also have the continued yearly expenses to maintain that car.

I can park the car and not use it - no expenses. However, that car keeps depreciating each year.

Try that with your timeshare - don't pay that MF and you will convince yourself that you have an asset that needs upkeep whether you use it or not.

But this is a fundamentally different way of viewing your timeshare - its your decision.

 

[FlyerBobcat]

Doug,

You might not have considered a possible residual value on your timeshare purchase when you are "done with it", but I really don't understand how you can so easily neglect the fact that it could & very well might be worth something.

Using this information certainly could help one choose a unit.... it seems only too logical to me.

If torn between two "very similar" units that you are considering purchasing, and one seems to be a much better bet to hold its resale value, are you saying that you wouldn't weigh that in on your purchase decision?

Because we bought it STRICTLY as an investment in vacation lifestyle. When we purchased our first timeshare, we made the mistake of believing the salesman when he said we were buying a piece of the Las Vegas Strip or, we were buying property. That's not true. Even a deeded week is still a RTU and not real property. The only thing you own is the RTU that space in perpetuity. There are generally provisions for disolving the covenent/contract for the right to use that may have residual value but, that's it. To buy a timeshare with the expectation of having any value past the vacation experience if foolish at best.


Sure I'm concerned about the cost. What I'm not concerned about is the cash value after I purchase. Unlike a few, I realized very soon after my first purchase that a timeshare has very little to no cash value after purchase. It's only an investment in time/vacation.



You've just summed up owning a timeshare. After you purchase, you're week has zero cash value. You can't mortgage it or take out a home equity loan against it. Why? Because banks realize what you don't. It has no real cash value. Marriott can not hurt what doesn't really exist.

The only way Marriott can make a decision to lower the value of my "property" would be if they limited my enjoyment of our ability to use our ownership. Any cash or residual value is purely coincidental and base solely on what I can market and sell it for. I have no expectation of any cash return on my purchase.



Owning set out rules that allow us first choice vs renters getting what's left over. Owning guarentee's the view we purchased. Owning should give us preference over exchangers for location of the unit. Owning locks in the up front cost. Owning FORCES us to take vacation (I won't waste my money easily). Before timeshare, we took vacations, on average, once every 5 years. After buying our first timeshare we now vacation 6 times per year plus take a few weekend trips.





Then you have made a poor choice. We've owned for 11 years. Every time I run the numbers, owing hasn't saved me money. Timeshare is an expensive way to vacation but, it's how we prefer to vacation. We've had some great timeshare vacations but, if I add up all the costs of owning, I find I've spent more than if I rented.

I suppose that, if I own and use for a long enough period of time, I may be able to justify the cost of ownership vs the cost or renting. With the cost of MF's, special assessments, exchange fee's et.... I'm not holding my breath on every seeing a significant return on the money I've spent. If money was my concernt, I'd have been better off leaving that money in the bank and renting. But, this wasn't my concern when I purchased. It wasn't a concern because I understood the basic rule of timeshare. The rule is that is not a cash investment. It's a lifestyle investment.

 

[AceValenta]

I actually don't agree. I believe we have some educated guesses we can make. Those educated guesses can help prepare us for the future. I know what action I am going to take based on what I've learned on this thread.

I know that it's speculation and what I am thinking could be wrong. But, even if it doesn't pan out, it's what I have wanted to do anyway.

That is my point! Based on what facts? In order to make an educated guess you need factual information. An informed guess or educated guess is a guess that is based on a degree of experience, knowledge, or information.

I don't doubt the experience or knowledge of people on this board. It is the information we have that isn't reliable it is pure opinion.

Right now, we have nothing but rumors, opinions and ideas. Nothing is provided to us from Marriott, the main decision makers in all of this.

All the words provided in the OP are open ended:

"In Development"
Scheduled
if
expects
anticipated
intent
likely
I don't know

I never like the term "inside source"....too open ended. Where do they work within the organization?

Right now there aren't any facts. We aren't getting any details

WHO is spreading this info?
WHAT is the program?
WHY? We know this, if it at all happens.
WHEN? Scheduled release date? Hasn't this been 3 years running......
and HOW will the program work?

Until you know the answers to all these questions, then you can't make a decision. There are a lot of what if's out there! A lot of people creating speculative assumptions.

The main thing is, who is the source? Marketing Department? VP? Janitor? Disgruntled former employee? Timeshare owner (We are all figuratively speaking "inside Marriott" as owners)? Salesperson? Some guy that just left a presentation?

We don't have anything in writing? It is pure conjecture at this point to know what the program is. Is it going to be a $1 or $5000 to join? How many points do I get? Will resales be excluded or included? The list goes on and on.

Unless we are sitting on the board of Marriott or in their development department we have no idea what is going to happen. Maybe if we had more info from Marriott we might be able to plan ahead and make that educated guess. Right now we have nothing but some post that someone talked to someone. We have nothing factual.

 

[LisaRex]

This new program, which I’ll call MEP (Marriott Exchange Program) for the sake of discussion, sounds a lot like Starwood’s exchange program SVN. Generally speaking, if you buy from Starwood you are automatically a member of SVN; If you buy on the resale market, you are excluded from SVN. (There are exceptions, but not relevant to my main point.)

And it’s a system guaranteed to fail. Why? Because virtually every timeshare is eventually sold. As these units are sold, whether they sell for $40k or $.01, the end result is one less unit in inventory for MEP members to book. If resale owner is barred from using MEP, or if it's too cost prohibitive to join MEP, they will simply use II. Or they’ll book a high demand week at the resort they paid for and try to rent it out on Redweek. End result is that it's one less unit in MEP and MEP becomes less valuable over time.

Oops.

If I understand it correctly, all Marriott owners now enjoy a generous period where the entire Marriott exchanged inventory in II is available exclusively to other Marriott owners. Once MEP rolls out, right off the bat, MEP inventory is going to be a fraction of what it was under II because resale owners won’t be allowed to deposit their weeks in the program. How exactly is that benefical to folks who paid a fortune to buy from the developer? II inventory as well will be reduced because MEP owners will use MEP. So the introduction of MEP dilutes both programs!

Well, that sounds fabulous, doesn’t it?

Cases to ponder:

Westin Maui, one of a handful of resorts that mandate participation in SVN (even for resale owners) continuously has robust availability in both SVN and II. It’s currently one of the easiest trades for Starwood owners. Another great resort, Westin Mission Hills, has the II/SVN split deal. When an SVN owner called to book a Spring Break week several months ago, she was told there was no inventory available. The same week was available in II.

 

[BocaBum99]

That is my point! Based on what facts? In order to make an educated guess you need factual information. An informed guess or educated guess is a guess that is based on a degree of experience, knowledge, or information.

I don't doubt the experience or knowledge of people on this board. It is the information we have that isn't reliable it is pure opinion.

Right now, we have nothing but rumors, opinions and ideas. Nothing is provided to us from Marriott, the main decision makers in all of this.

All the words provided in the OP are open ended:

"In Development"
Scheduled
if
expects
anticipated
intent
likely
I don't know

I never like the term "inside source"....too open ended. Where do they work within the organization?

Right now there aren't any facts. We aren't getting any details

WHO is spreading this info?
WHAT is the program?
WHY? We know this, if it at all happens.
WHEN? Scheduled release date? Hasn't this been 3 years running......
and HOW will the program work?

Until you know the answers to all these questions, then you can't make a decision. There are a lot of what if's out there! A lot of people creating speculative assumptions.

The main thing is, who is the source? Marketing Department? VP? Janitor? Disgruntled former employee? Timeshare owner (We are all figuratively speaking "inside Marriott" as owners)? Salesperson? Some guy that just left a presentation?

We don't have anything in writing? It is pure conjecture at this point to know what the program is. Is it going to be a $1 or $5000 to join? How many points do I get? Will resales be excluded or included? The list goes on and on.

Unless we are sitting on the board of Marriott or in their development department we have no idea what is going to happen. Maybe if we had more info from Marriott we might be able to plan ahead and make that educated guess. Right now we have nothing but some post that someone talked to someone. We have nothing factual.

The above bolded sentence is where I disagree with you. Nothing is ever fully knowable. Once they announce it, we can all speculate that they will cancel it within a year. Or, Marriott will go bankrupt with it. There is simply a probabililty for every possible future state. The judgement of a decision maker to take in the information they are getting and place bets on likely outcomes is the huge difference between those who take control of their futures and those that let their futures happen to them.

There are calculated risks with EVERYTHING we do in life. I'll tell you one thing that I am willing to bet on. That is that Dave M has better information than anyone else on this board about Marriott. I am willing to bet on it. If you aren't, that's fine. But, don't say that we can't make decisions based on it. I can and I am.

 

[Zac495]

I actually don't agree. I believe we have some educated guesses we can make. Those educated guesses can help prepare us for the future. I know what action I am going to take based on what I've learned on this thread.

I know that it's speculation and what I am thinking could be wrong. But, even if it doesn't pan out, it's what I have wanted to do anyway.

What will you do, Jim? Would you buy now? I lean towards no for resale and of course not developer - not in a box, not with a fox, not in a tree - just let me be!

 

[BocaBum99]

This new program, which I’ll call MEP (Marriott Exchange Program) for the sake of discussion, sounds a lot like Starwood’s exchange program SVN. Generally speaking, if you buy from Starwood you are automatically a member of SVN; If you buy on the resale market, you are excluded from SVN. (There are exceptions, but not relevant to my main point.)

And it’s a system guaranteed to fail. Why? Because virtually every timeshare is eventually sold. As these units are sold, whether they sell for $40k or $.01, the end result is one less unit in inventory for MEP members to book. If resale owner is barred from using MEP, or if it's too cost prohibitive to join MEP, they will simply use II. Or they’ll book a high demand week at the resort they paid for and try to rent it out on Redweek. End result is that it's one less unit in MEP and MEP becomes less valuable over time.

Oops.

If I understand it correctly, all Marriott owners now enjoy a generous period where the entire Marriott exchanged inventory in II is available exclusively to other Marriott owners. Once MEP rolls out, right off the bat, MEP inventory is going to be a fraction of what it was under II because resale owners won’t be allowed to deposit their weeks in the program. How exactly is that benefical to folks who paid a fortune to buy from the developer? II inventory as well will be reduced because MEP owners will use MEP. So the introduction of MEP dilutes both programs!

Well, that sounds fabulous, doesn’t it?

Cases to ponder:

Westin Maui, one of a handful of resorts that mandate participation in SVN (even for resale owners) continuously has robust availability in both SVN and II. It’s currently one of the easiest trades for Starwood owners. Another great resort, Westin Mission Hills, has the II/SVN split deal. When an SVN owner called to book a Spring Break week several months ago, she was told there was no inventory available. The same week was available in II.

Very good insight!

 

[SueDonJ]

... If I understand it correctly, all Marriott owners now enjoy a generous period where the entire Marriott exchanged inventory in II is available exclusively to other Marriott owners. Once MEP rolls out, right off the bat, MEP inventory is going to be a fraction of what it was under II because resale owners won’t be allowed to deposit their weeks in the program. How exactly is that benefical to folks who paid a fortune to buy from the developer? II inventory as well will be reduced because MEP owners will use MEP. So the introduction of MEP dilutes both programs!

Yes, the system now in place is as you described - within II there is an MVCI-preference whereby when a unit is deposited it is available to only other MVCI owners for a limited period of time.

But the rest of your post is speculation. What if this MEP proposal is rolled out in conjunction with a renegotiated contract between MVCI and II? What if the terms of that contract provide that every single week in the MVCI inventory is assigned for bookkeeping purposes an exchange point value, whether or not an owner chooses to opt in to the system? And what if it's negotiated in the new MVCI/II contract that every single week deposited for exchange must be made available first to those who have opted in to the new system, subject to the limitations of those pre-determined point system values?

Think about it. Each owner who makes a deposit will be given the trade value of their week that is attached to whatever system they choose, whether they opt into the new one or stay with the old. Each week deposited for exchange will be offered to owners based on the priority that MVCI has pre-determined - MEP members having top priority. Wouldn't the number of weeks deposited for exchange still equal the number of owners searching for exchanges, subject to the limitations of a single week's trade value? Isn't that the system which is currently in effect?

Or, is there something somewhere which stipulates that if MVCI rolls out a dual-provider exchange system, then the inventory must be separated according to the individual owners' chosen provider?

I have no idea, it's food for thought.

 

[rickandcindy23]

This is going to kill II! Having Marriott was quite a feather in II's cap, and to lose that will affect their bottomline in a huge way. II will likely offer AC's for most deposits now. With the low prices of resales, now is not a bad time to get a Marriott.

Love the preference period in II for Starwood resale buyers.

 

[RandR]

So in other words, you don't mind if resale buyers are treated like second class citizens. (Had to use that phrase again.)

Everything else in your post is rehash. But this is a direct insult rather than a perceived insult, and it pisses me off despite your use of a smiley. Rather passive/aggressive there, don't you think?

Where did I say that I'm okay with any owners being treated as second-class citizens? Oh, that's right, NOWHERE. Consider that it's entirely possible that any change implemented by MVCI that favors on the surface developer purchasers could in fact negatively impact my personal ownership usage, such as in this proposal if the exchange point value of my weeks does not afford me the exact same trade value that I've enjoyed up to this point with II. Would I perceive that as MVCI treating me as a second-class citizen? No, of course not, it's just the way the system would work.

Perhaps we'd all be better off if we could only stick to "the way the system works" as opposed to who of us are holier-than-thou.

Below is your quote from an earlier post. In the quote you say that if Marriott implements any changes that offer advantages to developer purchasers you would not complain as long as it does not remove any deeded right. To me that means that any changes made, as long as they don't impact you negatively, you are okay with. If owners of the same type of unit at the same property are treated way differently with respect to how they can use the system, then yes I would call the one group second class citizens. I obviously knew going in that Marriott could make changes, we all did. That's not the point. But to subjugate one group that has been loyal to the product just because of the way they bought it is ridiculous. I am saying this about current resale owners. I do not want to throw new resale owners under the bus, but if a new system is put into place, they will know the rules going in and can make a decision based on that information.

To say that hey that's just the way the system works is crazy. If Marriott changed the system and you got screwed and just said oh well, that's the way it goes that's sad.

And finally, I'll say here what I've said in many of the developer v. resale discussions on TUG. If Marriott/MVCI implements any changes with respect to ownership that offer an advantage to developer purchasers, I will not complain about MVCI making those changes so long as they do not remove any deeded rights from any owner and/or so long as any legal challenge to them could be successfully defended by MVCI.

 

[PerryM]

This is going to kill II! Having Marriott was quite a feather in II's cap, and to lose that will affect their bottomline in a huge way. II will likely offer AC's for most deposits now. With the low prices of resales, now is not a bad time to get a Marriott.

Love the preference period in II for Starwood resale buyers.

If I were II I'd start my own Marriott Owners Points program. Model it after RedWeek and have it ready to be released the second Marriott releases their program.

Make it $99 to join, and the first year's membership is free, and $49 for each deposit.

Make it a "no brainier" for Marriott owners while they ponder Marriott's new scheme. Make it a viable competitor to Marriott and one that won't deflate the resale value of the timeshare involved.

II has just as much marketing power in the timeshare exchange business as Marriott and could instantly transform II into something much more powerful since the Point program would be an instant replacement for their week based system down the road.

 

[ecwinch]

If I were II I'd start my own Marriott Owners Points program. Model it after RedWeek and have it ready to be released the second Marriott releases their program.

Make it $99 to join, and the first year's membership is free, and $49 for each deposit.

Make it a "no brainier" for Marriott owners while they ponder Marriott's new scheme. Make it a viable competitor to Marriott and one that won't deflate the resale value of the timeshare involved.

II has just as much marketing power in the timeshare exchange business as Marriott and could instantly transform II into something much more powerful since the Point program would be an instant replacement for their week based system down the road.

Without the ability to do partial stays, it would only be second-rate.

 

[PerryM]

Without the ability to do partial stays, it would only be second-rate.

The ability to offer partial stays has nothing to do with the exchange company - it has everything to do with the actual resort.

Most resorts have a weekend check-in - Fri, Sat, Sun which is really a rotation of the same cleaning staff.

If the resort offers daily maid service then partial stays are a possibility but that opens the door for remnant/scrap days that go unused.

 

[SueDonJ]

Below is your quote from an earlier post. In the quote you say that if Marriott implements any changes that offer advantages to developer purchasers you would not complain as long as it does not remove any deeded right. To me that means that any changes made, as long as they don't impact you negatively, you are okay with. If owners of the same type of unit at the same property are treated way differently with respect to how they can use the system, then yes I would call the one group second class citizens. I obviously knew going in that Marriott could make changes, we all did. That's not the point. But to subjugate one group that has been loyal to the product just because of the way they bought it is ridiculous. I am saying this about current resale owners. I do not want to throw new resale owners under the bus, but if a new system is put into place, they will know the rules going in and can make a decision based on that information.

To say that hey that's just the way the system works is crazy. If Marriott changed the system and you got screwed and just said oh well, that's the way it goes that's sad.

Honestly, what more do you want? I've acknowledged already that it is entirely possible for Marriott/MVCI to implement changes that may negatively affect my ownership as much as any other owner's, and I would have no recourse to challenge those changes if the contracts stipulate that Marriott/MVCI has the rights to make those changes.

What, you want me to agree that my thinking is "sad" and "crazy?" Okay, fine, call me sad and crazy then if you feel that insulting me somehow makes your point valid. Whatever that point may be.

 

[BocaBum99]

What will you do, Jim? Would you buy now? I lean towards no for resale and of course not developer - not in a box, not with a fox, not in a tree - just let me be!

What I am going to do is dump my Bronze weeks and trade up to Platinum weeks. Why?

1) With Marriott not exercising ROFR, prices now are very good when compared to historical levels. It's possible to get a below market value price, especially when there appears to be no floor to prices. When Marriott exercises, it's virtually impossible to get a steal. In this market, it is.

2) This program will scare owners from buying, reducing demand again and further contributing to the opportunity to get a below market unit. It pays to be bold when everyone else is scared as long as you have calculated your risks properly.

3) I agree with Dave M that Marriott will want to create a program that provides a huge incentive for a mass number of owners to enroll into the program. 2 years ago, I thought this would be a critical criteria for success. When Dave said they are focused on it, that tells me that Marriott gets it. That is good. Furthermore, I believe the best deals will be provided to Platinum owners at highly desirable locations. If Marriott doesn't get these owners to convert, the program is doomed to failure. There is no guarantee of success, so a future plan must accommodate both potential outcomes.

4) All resales will take a hit in value when this program is launched. Even more so when the program hits critical mass. The overall value decrease will probably be equal to something close to the enrollment fee for the program as Perry points out. Highly desirable platinum weeks will experience less decline since Marriott wants these weeks in the program and will actively exercise ROFR when the time is right. Other weeks will depreciate much more in value. To protect my investment, I just need to make sure I get the unit for enough below market to accommodate the future decrease in value. The potential cost of that loss in value is the option value of being positioned to enter the program at a relatively cheap cost. The lower I can get the unit below market, the cheaper that option costs me.

5) I've wanted to do this anyway. I just haven't had the time to do anything about it. If I am right about what will happen, I will have a great option to join the new program with reduced risk and at resale prices. If I am wrong about it, I still upgraded my bronze weeks to platinum and will enjoy better trades in the future. If things go back to the way they were, I will profit handsomely by getting cheap platinum weeks when the market was soft. If the market collapses and all Marriott's go to zero value, that is the risk I am taking by employing this strategy.

 

[RandR]

What, you want me to agree that my thinking is "sad" and "crazy?" Okay, fine, call me sad and crazy then if you feel that insulting me somehow makes your point valid. Whatever that point may be.

Susan, I am not trying to insult you. You are very likely correct that we will have no voice in this and that in past changes complaints from us have not worked, but that doesn't mean we should go down without making noise. Everything here is speculation so we don't know what will happen or when. When and if it does happen, owners who are dissatisfied should complain. Loud and long. Don't give Marriott a free pass, let them know how you feel.

I said earlier that we are all in this together and I meant it.

 

[hotcoffee]

"Interesting to read all the comments made by resale purchasers justifying why Marriott won't do anything to change their current ownership rights. Is anyone getting just a wee bit nervous here?"

I was thinking the same exact thing as you! Another observation is reading how people think it's just wrong to make any changes that could hurt resale buyers (for many reasons such as property values, investments, etc) yet in the same paragraph state it's ok for Marriott to make changes to future resale purchasers.

I would suggest that both of these posts reflect sour grapes rather than logic. What owner, direct or resale, who is thinking logically would want his right to sell trashed?

None of my comments concern buyers. My comments only concern owners. Both owners and Marriott itself benefit from high resale values - just like car owners and car manufacturers do. High resale values do not benefit buyers. High resale values benefit owners.

If Marriott were to trash resales - even if current resale owners were to get grandfathered into the new system and are in no way harmed by it, I would eventually get rid of my unit at the best price I could get.

 

[indyhorizons]

If I were II I'd start my own Marriott Owners Points program. Model it after RedWeek and have it ready to be released the second Marriott releases their program.

Make it $99 to join, and the first year's membership is free, and $49 for each deposit.

Make it a "no brainier" for Marriott owners while they ponder Marriott's new scheme. Make it a viable competitor to Marriott and one that won't deflate the resale value of the timeshare involved.

II has just as much marketing power in the timeshare exchange business as Marriott and could instantly transform II into something much more powerful since the Point program would be an instant replacement for their week based system down the road.

This would assume that a new II program would not violate their current agreement with Marriott, would it not?

 

[PerryM]

This would assume that a new II program would not violate their current agreement with Marriott, would it not?

Assuming the agreement will terminate between Marriott and II.

II has little to fear after the new Marriott system - they would simply do what RedWeek is already doing.

 

[BocaBum99]

Susan, I am not trying to insult you. You are very likely correct that we will have no voice in this and that in past changes complaints from us have not worked, but that doesn't mean we should go down without making noise. Everything here is speculation so we don't know what will happen or when. When and if it does happen, owners who are dissatisfied should complain. Loud and long. Don't give Marriott a free pass, let them know how you feel.

I said earlier that we are all in this together and I meant it.

I don't like the idea of complaining. It rarely leads to a positive outcome. Rather, I would anticipate the potential moves of the developer and position my portfolio to best make use of what they are likely to do at the lowest possible cost. Or, dump it and get out. Those are actions you can actually take that will result in something happening. Complaining just puts me in a bad mood and nothing improves as a result of it.

 

[SueDonJ]

Susan, I am not trying to insult you. You are very likely correct that we will have no voice in this and that in past changes complaints from us have not worked, but that doesn't mean we should go down without making noise. Everything here is speculation so we don't know what will happen or when. When and if it does happen, owners who are dissatisfied should complain. Loud and long. Don't give Marriott a free pass, let them know how you feel.

I will always agree that going directly to the source will result in more satisfaction than is possible to gain by any other method. But why wait? Several pages back Superchief suggested that letters be sent to Mr. Babich now. It's as good a strategy as any for doing all you can do to make your opinions clear, especially if you feel as strongly as you appear to about all this.

I said earlier that we are all in this together and I meant it.

If that is truly the case, then I will thank you to stop putting words in my mouth that I have not said, and attributing a caste system among owners which I have not done.

 

[m61376]

Yes, the system now in place is as you described - within II there is an MVCI-preference whereby when a unit is deposited it is available to only other MVCI owners for a limited period of time.

But the rest of your post is speculation. What if this MEP proposal is rolled out in conjunction with a renegotiated contract between MVCI and II? What if the terms of that contract provide that every single week in the MVCI inventory is assigned for bookkeeping purposes an exchange point value, whether or not an owner chooses to opt in to the system? And what if it's negotiated in the new MVCI/II contract that every single week deposited for exchange must be made available first to those who have opted in to the new system, subject to the limitations of those pre-determined point system values?

Think about it. Each owner who makes a deposit will be given the trade value of their week that is attached to whatever system they choose, whether they opt into the new one or stay with the old. Each week deposited for exchange will be offered to owners based on the priority that MVCI has pre-determined - MEP members having top priority. Wouldn't the number of weeks deposited for exchange still equal the number of owners searching for exchanges, subject to the limitations of a single week's trade value? Isn't that the system which is currently in effect?

Or, is there something somewhere which stipulates that if MVCI rolls out a dual-provider exchange system, then the inventory must be separated according to the individual owners' chosen provider?

I have no idea, it's food for thought.

A knowledgeable source has stated that Marriott will never discontinue the weeks program for exchanges. Thus, owners who retain their current ownership will continue to trade in a weeks based system, and not some paperwork conversion to points as you suggest. I am fairly confident that this source has the correct information.

 

[Dave M]

In my capacity as moderator....

Susan and RandR -

Please stop the bickering. You would be best served by ignoring (or at least not responding to) the other's posts. If you don't stop, don't complain that you weren't warned. For reference, please read the "Be Courteous" section of the Posting Rules, located on the above blue bar.

Further, please don't comment here about this warning. Doing so would also violate the Posting Rules. If you (or anyone) feel the need to discuss it, take it behind the scenes.

 

[JimC]

...Also, DVC recently instituted a change whereby the points were reallocated across the calendar, resulting in some folks requiring more points (in some cases, than they've purchased) for the same week/unit vacation they've enjoyed up to this point. Speculation was that Disney was responding to the historical traits of DVC'ers utilizing more weekday points than weekend in order to use less points, so they applied a more even point distribution to increase weekday points to take advantage of members' vacation habits. Don't kid yourself - DVC is in it for the money, too.

No, none of this makes any company's questionable/deceptive sales practices more correct, but it does speak to your argument about MVCI being less "ethical" than others.

DVC did a reallocation in 96 and then again this year to re-balance supply and demand. They were and are required to not change the total number of points required across the year. Thus any increases had to be offset in total by decreases elsewhere. That is a bit different then the points issues discussed here.

 

[Dave M]

A knowledgeable source has stated that Marriott will never discontinue the weeks program for exchanges. Thus, owners who retain their current ownership will continue to trade in a weeks based system, and not some paperwork conversion to points as you suggest. I am fairly confident that this source has the correct information.

I don't know your source, but so am I. However, I'm also quite confident that some future non-Asian MVCI resorts will be points-only or mostly-points resorts.