My 6206/26 experiment

[GregT]

Sue,

There are four different fixed week 27 three bedrooms in the trust. However, only 6206 is a contiguous unit with both week 26 and week 27 in the trust. Accordingly, under all scenarios someone had to move on a Saturday.

You can argue either way - that they should give priority to the person with the single point reservation, or that they should give priority to the person who is extending a home week.

Acknowledging that I am conflicted, I believe they should extend someone with a home week, versus a pure points owner. Changing rooms is a risk when making a point reservation that overlays a fixed week system. When I stayed at certain Wyndham properties, which were similar point overlays on fixed weeks, the reservation confirmation would tell us that there was a chance we would have to change rooms on the Saturday. I would think Marriott should highlight the same issue to its point users.

Although I'm glad Marriott is working with us, they really should make clear who has priority, a home week owner looking to extend the room, or a pure point user who is making a single reservation.

Best,

Greg

 

[SueDonJ]

Hmmmm. If I make a single Points reservation I expect that I'll be staying in the same unit for the entire length of that reservation. Whether it's with Trust or Exchange Points, regardless of where, when, how many days or in what particular unit configuration, if my entire stay is covered by one single reservation number then I expect they will not be moving me from unit to unit. I also don't want them to confirm a reservation request for me if they can't place me in a single unit for the entire length of stay, unless they give me separate reservation numbers for each segment.

Greg, you do have that expectation, that a single Points reservation can be broken up into different units? Maybe with Wyndham it's okay but you're saying that Wyndham notifies owners/members of the possibility when using Points. I've never seen anything remotely close to that statement issued by Marriott, and I don't want it to be a Marriott practice. One reservation number, one key - that's what works for me.

 

[SueDonJ]

I really need to stop thinking about this thread.

Greg, I'm sorry, but you've lost me. Based on what you've said I don't agree that you and the other guy had an equal shot at Unit 6206 for the days of your reservations that are within Week 26. I don't think, like you do, that it can be argued either way. I think it's a slam-dunk in the other guy's favor.

If 6206 is the only unit that's available through the Trust for the consecutive Weeks 26 and 27, and the other guy's single reservation includes days from each of those Weeks while yours only includes days from Week 26 ... there's no question in my mind that the other guy should get it. No question at all. If a single unit hadn't been available at the time he requested an 8-day stay, Owner Services wouldn't have been able to issue him a confirmation number for his desired stay. Or, they could have told him then that he could book all 8 days in segments with a separate confirmation number for each, giving him the choice of booking it knowing then that he may have to move. I believe a single reservation number guarantees a single unit for the entire stay, and in this case the limited inventory for the particular unit configuration plays a very big part.

You, on the other hand, knew when you booked each segment of your stay that only your fixed Week/Unit segment had a guaranteed placement in that particular unit. While your Owner status can play a part in unit placement, it comes nowhere near what I think would be required to justify impacting another owner's/member's reservation to the extent that leaving you in 6206 would have impacted the other guy's single reservation.

I still think you're in the running for VIP-of-the-Week next time - if similar inventory issues aren't in play - but we'll probably forever disagree on this.

 

[GregT]

If 6206 is the only unit that's available through the Trust for the consecutive Weeks 26 and 27, and the other guy's single reservation includes days from each of those Weeks while yours only includes days from Week 26 ... there's no question in my mind that the other guy should get it. No question at all. If a single unit hadn't been available at the time he requested an 8-day stay, Owner Services wouldn't have been able to issue him a confirmation number for his desired stay. Or, they could have told him then that he could book all 8 days in segments with a separate confirmation number for each, giving him the choice of booking it knowing then that he may have to move. I believe a single reservation number guarantees a single unit for the entire stay, and in this case the limited inventory for the particular unit configuration plays a very big part.

Why do you say that? The system shows availability that crosses rooms, and I can book a 3 night reservation, checking in Friday that is backed by two entirely different rooms (one night on Friday, two nights starting Saturday). That reservation requires a room change. Crossing Saturday introduces the risk of a room change, whether it's 3 days or 8 days.

Marriott should clarify if their policy is to favor a single points reservation over a home week owner that is trying to extend their home unit. That may be their intention.

 

[taffy19]

All,

Hawaii trip coming soon!!!!! Aulani for three days, than Maui Ocean Club for 13 days....looking forward to it!

But updating my thread.....in the end, the 6206 experiment failed. My experiment was to secure a reservation for six nights in a 3BR during Week 26 using points, and then connect it to my owned 3BR fixed week 25, so I could stay the entire time in a single unit, more specifically, 6206.

But....I couldn't get Maui Ocean Club to leave me in 6206 for the continuation of my trip. There is another reservation, pure points, that checks in on Sunday the 28th for 8 nights and one of us would need to move rooms. And the person who will change rooms is me.

At first I was pretty tweaked about this, considering all of the history. I had a lengthy conversation with David Wong about it (who is a stand-up guy, I really like him) and he told that the adjacent guest was similar to me in profile (multi-week MOC owner/early reservation time stamp, but on a single reservation not two reservations) and that there was a very special occasion that was compelling such that he be allowed to stay.

The thing that resonated with me was the special occasion part -- David was very passionate that this was something special and unique that was planned during this guests trip.

And that got me over my being tweaked about my room switch. (and I'm still going to Maui after all.)

I don't know what the special occasion is. But I have a soft spot for veterans, so I'd like to think it is a veteran renewing his vows on July 4th, maybe even a WWII vet. That would be awesome -- I'm not trying to be sarcastic here -- I was bummed about it, and then the thought hit me that maybe it's a veteran celebrating a July 4th wedding anniversary. I'd change rooms for that guy any day, without a second thought. Heck, I'd buy him dinner (now I hope the real reason is not because its some kid's Sweet 16 ) Since I'll never know, I'd rather think about the vet.

Meanwhile, David is doing what is possible to try to make my room change as painless as possible and I'm sure he will.

Just closing the loop on this long topic -- but bittersweet ending to the long tale. In my world, fixed weeks > floating weeks > points.

On July 4th, please join me in a toast to the veteran who is renewing his vows (and if you read in the Maui Bugle about a raging birthday party for a Hollywood celebrity, don't tell me about it).

Best,

Greg

Greg, are they going to put you in another 3 BR oceanfront now? Could it be in the Lahaina or Napili Villas?

I hope for you that it will be a floor where there is no concrete at the bottom part of the balcony so you can look straight down since you haven't seen one of these balconies yet.

Still not fun to have to move but you may be in one of the units that have this type of view and you do not need to take your bar stool outside. That is a good idea but the 2 BR lanai is just too small to take more furniture out but the view from inside makes up for it.

I have seen the open balcony (lanai) and it is really nice because we visited someone who stayed in one of these units so I am hoping that you will get that too.

Have a great vacation as it is getting close.

 

[jewls]

What resort is MOC?

 

[SueDonJ]

Why do you say that? The system shows availability that crosses rooms, and I can book a 3 night reservation, checking in Friday that is backed by two entirely different rooms (one night on Friday, two nights starting Saturday). That reservation requires a room change. Crossing Saturday introduces the risk of a room change, whether it's 3 days or 8 days.

Marriott should clarify if their policy is to favor a single points reservation over a home week owner that is trying to extend their home unit. That may be their intention.

To me this isn't a priority placement issue between Weeks Owners and Points Users; it's simply a matter of accommodating each single reservation with a single check-in and check-out day (within the inventory parameters of Weeks and Points.) IMO that's infinitely more important on the placement scale than any owner's/member's request to stay in a single unit over a period of multiple reservations. In this case between the two of you the only guaranteed placement is your fixed Week 25/Unit 6206. Beyond that placement you are both being accommodated according to the inventory and placement rules.

I just haven't ever heard of someone checking into a Points stay with a single reservation number only to learn that they have to be moved from unit to unit. It follows, logically I think, that the system is designed to prevent booking such a stay unless separate reservation numbers are assigned to each segment. If separate confirmation numbers are issued then of course moving is a possibility, but not within a single reservation.

Is there anyone on TUG who has come across this, who has had to change units during a multi-day stay that was covered by only one reservation number? It can't happen using Weeks; I doubt it can happen using Points.

 

[SueDonJ]

What resort is MOC?

Maui Ocean Club.

 

[dioxide45]

What resort is MOC?

The problem is that there are two "Ocean Clubs" in the Marriott Vacation Club system. One in Maui and one in Aruba. When people use M, some confuse it with "Marriott" and think Aruba instead of Maui. Not so much in this thread, but in others.

 

[Fasttr]

To me this isn't a priority placement issue between Weeks Owners and Points Users; it's simply a matter of accommodating each single reservation with a single check-in and check-out day (within the inventory parameters of Weeks and Points.) IMO that's infinitely more important on the placement scale than any owner's/member's request to stay in a single unit over a period of multiple reservations. In this case between the two of you the only guaranteed placement is your fixed Week 25/Unit 6206. Beyond that placement you are both being accommodated according to the inventory and placement rules.

I just haven't ever heard of someone checking into a Points stay with a single reservation number only to learn that they have to be moved from unit to unit. It follows, logically I think, that the system is designed to prevent booking such a stay unless separate reservation numbers are assigned to each segment. If separate confirmation numbers are issued then of course moving is a possibility, but not within a single reservation.

Is there anyone on TUG who has come across this, who has had to change units during a multi-day stay that was covered by only one reservation number? It can't happen using Weeks; I doubt it can happen using Points.

GregT....I gotta go with SueDonJ on this one.

If I were to make an 8 night DC point ressie, I would expect to stay in the same room for the entire length of my stay. Alternatively, if in order to get my 8 nights, I had to make a 5 night ressie and a 3 night ressie to secure my dates, then I would HOPE that in the end, I would get to stay in the same room, but I would go in realizing there is a possibility I may be moved according to my two reservations.

 

[GregT]

GregT....I gotta go with SueDonJ on this one.

If I were to make an 8 night DC point ressie, I would expect to stay in the same room for the entire length of my stay.

Oh, I definitely agree that the person who is making the 8 night DC point reservation expects to stay in the same room for the entire length of the stay.

But is that the right expectation in a points overlay on a fixed week system? Why do we think the system doesn't allow a reservation that crosses a Saturday, with the inventory sourced from different underlying units? I know I've seen several instances with Friday check-in's that cross Saturday -- and there wasn't a Trust week to support one or both of the weeks.

But back to who gets priority. To take an extreme example, if Joe checks vacationclub.com today, and sees a newly available 8-day reservation in late June 2015 that crosses a Saturday, should Joe get a room preference over the home resort owner extending their week?

Is that what TUGgers think? Maybe it is.

I reiterate, I think Marriott should simply make clear if it prioritizes a single points reservation over a home resort owner extending their week. There can only be a few of us that this affects, but the clarity would be appreciated.

I'm certainly not going to redeem my 6206 for points only to try to book it back again with the points, but I would not book another 3BR to try to append it, because I will be out of luck every time to someone who can overlap my last day of occupancy, and who crosses a Saturday.

And for the record -- the answer that I would completely agree with is if the pure points reservation is using 100% Trust Points -- because then they are truly booking inventory that "they own". Then they should get the reservation.

Best,

Greg

 

[Fasttr]

Oh, I definitely agree that the person who is making the 8 night DC point reservation expects to stay in the same room for the entire length of the stay.

But is that the right expectation in a points overlay on a fixed week system? Why do we think the system doesn't allow a reservation that crosses a Saturday, with the inventory sourced from different underlying units? I know I've seen several instances with Friday check-in's that cross Saturday -- and there wasn't a Trust week to support one or both of the weeks.

I have seen many times where a multi night ressie is not available, but if I check using the flex toggle looking at 1 night increments, there is availability on each night that I need. I am assuming that is the systems way of telling me that there is not one contiguous string of nights in a single villa available to be booked for the multi night ressie I originally desired.

 

[GregT]

I have seen many times where a multi night ressie is not available, but if I check using the flex toggle looking at 1 night increments, there is availability on each night that I need. I am assuming that is the systems way of telling me that there is not one contiguous string of nights in a single villa available to be booked for the multi night ressie I originally desired.

Okay, so I've seen it both ways

Back to my question -- in a points overlay on a fixed week system, should the point user get room preference over home resort owners for the reservation that crosses a Saturday.

Yes or No


I would vote:

Yes they should get preference if they are using Trust Points to book a week sourced from the Trust;

or

Yes they should get the preference if they booked the conflicting reservation first;

Otherwise, I think it should go to the home resort owner

 

[SueDonJ]

Oh, I definitely agree that the person who is making the 8 night DC point reservation expects to stay in the same room for the entire length of the stay.

But is that the right expectation in a points overlay on a fixed week system? Why do we think the system doesn't allow a reservation that crosses a Saturday, with the inventory sourced from different underlying units? I know I've seen several instances with Friday check-in's that cross Saturday -- and there wasn't a Trust week to support one or both of the weeks.

But back to who gets priority. To take an extreme example, if Joe checks vacationclub.com today, and sees a newly available 8-day reservation in a couple weeks that crosses a Saturday, should Joe get a room preference over the home resort owner extending their week?

Is that what TUGgers think? Maybe it is.

I reiterate, I think Marriott should simply make clear if it prioritizes a single points reservation over a home resort owner extending their week. There can only be a few of us that this affects, but the clarity would be appreciated.

I'm certainly not going to redeem my 6206 for points only to try to book it back again with the points, but I would not book another 3BR to try to append it, because I will be out of luck every time to someone who can overlap my last day of occupancy, and who crosses a Saturday.

And for the record -- the answer that I would completely agree with is if the pure points reservation is using 100% Trust Points -- because then they are truly booking inventory that "they own". Then they should get the reservation.

Best,

Greg

Once I figured out that your other guy is also using Trust Points for his single reservation that's concurrent to some of the days of your second of two reservations and also extends into the next week, and that Unit 6206 is the only conforming unit that has had both Weeks 26 and 27 conveyed to the Trust, that's when for me this stopped being about the arbitrary priority placement system (and its inherent Weeks Owner v. Trust/Exchange DC Member dichotomy) and instead became an issue of correct inventory management.

It is not correct for Marriott to issue a single reservation confirmation for multiple days and then after check-in force the holder of that reservation to change units at any point in the stay. (Unless, of course, maintenance issues arise blahblahblah.) According to what you've said here that's what would have to happen to the other guy in order for Marriott to accommodate your request to stay in the single unit for the entirety of your two reservations.

I just don't see this as Marriott prioritizing an arbitrary request of a Trust Member over that of a Weeks Owner. Expecting a single unit for consecutive days of a single reservation isn't an arbitrary convenience item!

If the other guy was holding the same six-day reservation as you're holding - impacting only Week 26 and not Week 27 as well - and Marriott still forced you to move for your second stay, then you'd have a case of arbitrary priority placement and you could question Marriott all you want about whether Weeks Owners requests are being usurped by Trust Members. But that's not what's happening here, IMO. Here the guy has legitimate priority over you by virtue of the fact that the unit you want (but can't claim entitlement to) appears to be the only one that conforms to his confirmed reservation.

 

[SueDonJ]

I have seen many times where a multi night ressie is not available, but if I check using the flex toggle looking at 1 night increments, there is availability on each night that I need. I am assuming that is the systems way of telling me that there is not one contiguous string of nights in a single villa available to be booked for the multi night ressie I originally desired.

Okay, so I've seen it both ways ...

I've only seen what Fasttr has seen, I think. What looks different when multi-nights can be booked with one reservation number but still require a unit change during the stay?

Back to my question -- in a points overlay on a fixed week system, should the point user get room preference over home resort owners for the reservation that crosses a Saturday.

Yes or No


I would vote:

Yes they should get preference if they are using Trust Points to book a week sourced from the Trust
Yes they should get the preference if they booked the conflicting reservation first
Otherwise, I think it should go to the home resort owner

My vote is, that's a leading question so the results will be skewed.

Seriously, I'm just not understanding why you're seeing this as a matter of arbitrary requests. If 6206 is the only unit that's available for the entirety of the other guy's reservation, and there are other units which will accommodate the second of your two reservations, Marriott is doing the right thing here. Isn't it their only choice?

{ETA} Consider also, Greg, that for the intervals in question - your 6-night Points stay and his 8-night Points stay - the difference between you two has nothing to do with you being a Weeks Owner at the resort. You're both Trust Members using Trust Points. The only variable is the length of stay and they must accommodate both of you equally within the parameters of availability and inventory management.

 

[LAX Mom]

Oh, I definitely agree that the person who is making the 8 night DC point reservation expects to stay in the same room for the entire length of the stay.

But is that the right expectation in a points overlay on a fixed week system? Why do we think the system doesn't allow a reservation that crosses a Saturday, with the inventory sourced from different underlying units? I know I've seen several instances with Friday check-in's that cross Saturday -- and there wasn't a Trust week to support one or both of the weeks.

I think part of the problem with this issue is they way Marriott has marketed and sold these Destination Club points. The sales rep doesn't explain that this is a "points overlay on a fixed week system". They are sold points & told they can book a stay in Maui for 3 nights, 8 nights, 10 nights.....whatever they desire. They aren't informed that if they cross a Saturday they might have to move rooms.

Most of the Marriott owners (weeks & points) don't have the knowledge about the program that we have on TUG. They wouldn't understand this issue and it could create some bad press for Marriott. Marriott wants to keep selling lots of points, so I doubt they will change to a system that requires a change in rooms if you go over a Saturday night.

I'm truly sorry that Greg's plan to stay in 6026 didn't work. It certainly seemed like a great way to accomplish what he wanted. I hope they put you in a unit that you like as much, or even better than 6026!! But I can understand that someone with an 8 day reservation is not expecting to change rooms during the stay.

 

[davidvel]

I think part of the problem with this issue is they way Marriott has marketed and sold these Destination Club points. The sales rep doesn't explain that this is a "points overlay on a fixed week system". They are sold points & told they can book a stay in Maui for 3 nights, 8 nights, 10 nights.....whatever they desire. They aren't informed that if they cross a Saturday they might have to move rooms.

Most of the Marriott owners (weeks & points) don't have the knowledge about the program that we have on TUG. They wouldn't understand this issue and it could create some bad press for Marriott. Marriott wants to keep selling lots of points, so I doubt they will change to a system that requires a change in rooms if you go over a Saturday night.

This is dead-on. Should be added to the DC points sticky!

 

[SueDonJ]

This is dead-on. Should be added to the DC points sticky!

I think it's dead-on that Marriott marketing doesn't include all the nuances - but have they ever? Even when Weeks were the only game in town they didn't share all the inventory/availability metrics or the tricks that experienced owners used to get the best possible value. As for them not explaining during a Points sale that, "[prospects] aren't informed that if they cross a Saturday they might have to move rooms," well, of course the sales reps don't say that! For one thing, they never go that much into detail during presentations. For another, it's not the fact that a Saturday may be involved that causes a move.

When it comes to consecutive nights using DC Points, the inventory metrics aren't affected by Saturday stays or fixed Weeks/Units; they're affected by the different pools of available intervals (regardless of whether Saturdays and fixed weeks/units are in play.) As far as I've experienced using DC Points, and it appears Faster as well, the system doesn't allow consecutive nights to be booked under one reservation number if a move will be required, and, Marriott doesn't move owners/members from one unit to another during a consecutive nights stay that is confirmed under one reservation number. Again, it's not all that different from the Weeks system in that way, and it's something that we all have had no problem understanding for all these years. "Consecutive stays under different reservation numbers may require a move from one unit to another (unless you're dealing with Fixed Weeks/Units, of which there are very few.)" That's it, it's simple and it applies whether you're talking Weeks or Points.

If Greg can show that the reservation system does automatically book DC Points consecutive nights under a single reservation number regardless of whether a move will be required, then I'll say I'm wrong and maybe change my thinking about all this. But I just don't understand how it can happen; it doesn't gibe with how I know the online system works and how I know the telephone reps book requested stays. And for what it's worth, TUG has never had a posted report about it happening.

This is another in a long list of good threads to refer to when trying to figure out the inventory metrics. But I'd say that as a Sticky thread it would generate more questions than answers. Don't we want to reserve Sticky status for the things that help us rather than set us to banging our heads on our desks?

 

[LAX Mom]

I think it's dead-on that Marriott marketing doesn't include all the nuances - but have they ever? Even when Weeks were the only game in town they didn't share all the inventory/availability metrics or the tricks that experienced owners used to get the best possible value. As for them not explaining during a Points sale that, "[prospects] aren't informed that if they cross a Saturday they might have to move rooms," well, of course the sales reps don't say that! For one thing, they never go that much into detail during presentations. For another, it's not the fact that a Saturday may be involved that causes a move.

I agree. The sales reps have never gone into a lot of detail in the presentations. Most owners don't spend hours on TUG figuring out how to best use their purchased points.

But Marriott's vacation club program is different from many others because it started out as a week program and then switched to points. These available inventory pools makes it more complicated.

I know if I purchased points from Marriott and reserved an 8 night stay at one of the Marriott properties, I would not expect to be moved to a different room during my stay.

 

[Bill4728]

one thing not currently discussed, just because unit 2606 is the only 3 bd in the trust doesn't mean that now (1 month before checkin ) that other 3 bd owners at MOC haven't given their week to MVC and that Greg will be staying in that other unit.

When the DC first came out, there was a huge discussion about how was MCV going to deal with a point system overlayed over a week based TS resort. This is the kind of thing that could happen.

 

[SueDonJ]

I agree. The sales reps have never gone into a lot of detail in the presentations. Most owners don't spend hours on TUG figuring out how to best use their purchased points.

But Marriott's vacation club program is different from many others because it started out as a week program and then switched to points. These available inventory pools makes it more complicated.

I know if I purchased points from Marriott and reserved an 8 night stay at one of the Marriott properties, I would not expect to be moved to a different room during my stay.

Me too, which is why I think it's correct that Marriott is moving Greg out of 6206 so that the guy who booked an 8-night stay can move into it, as they're both Trust Members using Trust Points and it's the only like unit that's had both Weeks 26 and 27 conveyed to the Trust. It's nothing to do with ownership status or arbitrary priority placement systems, but everything to do with fulfilling confirmed reservations correctly (meaning, for me, according to how they say they're handling the inventory pools.)

* This thread/issue has grabbed my attention like only a few do. Greg, I hope you realize that I really do commiserate with you - there's nothing like the disappointment that comes with unit placements sometimes. I like your attitude, that you'll be at your favorite place and are luckier for it.

 

[GregT]

If Greg can show

I think the thread has run its course. I can't prove it and we are all speculating.

I did call Maui Ocean Club and talked to Guest Relations (who helped with my original room requests) and asked how frequently a point user on a single reservation has to change rooms. They said it was infrequent but it happens, and cited 3BRs as an example because of fixed week owners. I don't what it all means.

Closing on a positive note, I think Maui Ocean Club will come through for me. They've indicated they will let me stay in 6206 one extra night, and then move to the other 3BR which will be in Napili Tower on Sunday morning, so a clean room transfer. I will adopt the positive perspective that I get to try a new tower and that someone who needed the room more than me will have it. I still hope its a vet.

Kudos to David Wong and the MOC team for helping me out here.

Best,

Greg

 

[LAX Mom]

I think the thread has run its course. I can't prove it and we are all speculating.

I did call Maui Ocean Club and talked to Guest Relations (who helped with my original room requests) and asked how frequently a point user on a single reservation has to change rooms. They said it was infrequent but it happens, and cited 3BRs as an example because of fixed week owners. I don't what it all means.

Closing on a positive note, I think Maui Ocean Club will come through for me. They've indicated they will let me stay in 6206 one extra night, and then move to the other 3BR which will be in Napili Tower on Sunday morning, so a clean room transfer. I will adopt the positive perspective that I get to try a new tower and that someone who needed the room more than me will have it. I still hope its a vet.

Kudos to David Wong and the MOC team for helping me out here.

Best,

Greg

Great positive attitude! I hope you enjoy the Napili Tower and the great view. I'm sure you will! Best wishes for a fantastic vacation!

 

[GaryDouglas]

I believe they're all fixed Units as well as Weeks?

Not sure what you mean by this. There are 2 bdrm OF floors at Napili and Lahaina that are fixed, but not all.

OK, now I see what you are saying. They have fixed units in the villas (Napili/Lahaina) and fixed weeks, like the suites (Moloka'i,Lana'i, et.) have for Christmas week.

 

[davidvel]

I think the thread has run its course. I can't prove it and we are all speculating.

Nice try Greg. A Tug thread doesn't end until we say it ends, and then only after rampant speculation, opinion, (friendly) argument, salesman bashing, and then more speculating.

Kidding of course. Good thread!