Hi Sheri - Most of us still love the resorts, and our concerns are with the decisions being made by management.
For instance, what if you bought a beautiful, new, very expensive car, but then the dealer began tinkering with the warranty on that car. Every time you tried to get promised service, the rules were different, and you found out that the service that you had been promised when you bought, had all been changed, without notice - wouldn't you still love your new car, but be furious with the dealer? That's where I am with Starwood, today....
I agree with Denise. I still love the resorts. My beef is with corporate, not local management.
Disclaimer first: I do not know what back room deal Starwood struck with II to go along with all this zaniness. There is no formal legal affiliation documentation that I've seen yet.
Starwood turned my ownership and separate membership with II into 'Let's Make a Deal'. If I want to 'request first', I need to give up my great reservation, which I legally own, in exchange for a 'mystery week' to assign to II. Then II needs to determine the value of that 'mystery week' and decide what to offer me for it. How does II know what's behind door number 3? They need to offer me an exchange for my 'mystery' prize first. Then, they are stuck with whatever reservation week Starwood put in that envelope. If I were II, I would offer much less for a 'mystery week' than for a 'known and fixed reservation'. Knowing which actual week is offered for trade at any given time allows II to perform real-time internal inventory management. That will then let II determine first what their current supply/demand is. Then, II can decide what our exchange is really worth to them before offering anything in trade. That is why, no surprise here, our weeks do not trade as well under the new system. II must assume the possibility of getting zonked with less desirable seasonal weeks.
Some weeks are much harder to dispose of than others. We've all seen summer getaways at SDO available for a tiny fraction of owner MF. By applying these new rules to non-seasonal ownerships, Starwood has transformed these ownership away from the original design and legal contractual agreements. SDO 1-52 was a system designed and sold as a rolling 12 month window, first-come, first-served ownership. Fair or unfair we can argue all day with those owners who now want to sit and wait around until the last minute to try to use their ownership. However, the rules are what they are, that is the rules which were originally marketed, sold and everyone contractually agreed to. Now we have a system where all legacy contract owners can only offer 'the risk of the lowest common denominator' with our 'mystery week' to II when we want to exchange. If you do not like what II offers you, surprise, your original reservation is likely no longer available. That is, you may get zonked. What right does Starwood have to interfere with how owners decide to use their OWN week?
I do not believe what I've been told without the 'fine print'. I do not believe there is an averaging for all weeks of the year, evenly, to create a season as has been claimed by Starwood. I think there is only what Starwood has leftover and wants to give up at the time. How could it be any different? Why did II agree to this?
I'm too old to dance around Monty Hall and dress everyday like it's Halloween. Starwood must legally stay out of a private transaction between owners and II (or any other 3rd party for that matter). SDO HOA members have a fiduciary responsibility to all dues paying owners and must not agree to go along with this new system or else they open themselves to scrutiny. II must be careful not to craft affiliation agreements which could be viewed as violating important anti-trust consumer protections or else they do as well. I refuse to play 'Let's Make a Deal'. As owners, we do not have to.
I will continue to do this with or without II & Starwood. They are not the only game in town. 
