With all due respect, the poll is biased with regard to whether or not one is an SVN-member or a non-SVN member. I'll attempt to explain below (but it's early and I'm only on my second cup of coffee, so bear with me).
For background purposes, we own 4 SVN units and 3 non-SVN units (yes, I broke down and bought another SVN unit recently). Despite rumors to the contrary, I'm capable of being objective on this issue.
SVN members agree to the terms surrounding external exchange requests when they become members. Some of the relevant language is as follows:
V. External Exchange Program
In order to increase the range of options available to SVN Members, SVN Operator has made arrangements for each SVN Member to have access to an External Exchange Program. All external exchange requests will be handled by SVN Operator.
The more relevant language is as follows:
c. Bulk Banking for Anticipated External and Starwood Preferred Guest Program Exchanges.
SVN Operator has the right, but not the obligation, to reserve a number of Floating Vacation Periods from time to time at any time thirty (30) days after the beginning of the Home Resort Fixed Priority Period, and any unreserved Vacation Period after the Home Resort Fixed Priority Period, for the purpose of depositing the reserved Vacation Periods with an External Exchange Program on behalf of SVN Members based on SVN Operator's determination, in its sole discretion, of anticipated SVN Member demand to access an External Exchange Program or the Starwood Preferred Guest Program. Vacation Periods deposited with the External Exchange Company may be assigned to SVN Members on a first-come, first-served basis, and assignments are based on the unit size and Season the SVN Member owns. When Home Resort inventory is not available in the bulk deposit accounts, deposits assigned to SVN Members may be designated from other SVN Resorts. This does not affect the SVN Member’s ability to obtain the requested external exchange.
The bold sentence is the infamous language that permitted Starwood to deposit a mud week in Colorado for a Maui owner. The red sentence is for comic relief only as it underscores Starwood's ignorance of the process!
The new procedures ensure that an SVN member will always receive a deposit with trading power that represents the average trading power of all weeks in the applicable season at the home resort. Voila -- no more mud weeks in Colorado deposited for Maui owners. It is a BETTER, MORE FAIR, process for SVN members. I would even go so far as to state it's a "real" ehancement, for once!
For those of you who believe I never have anything nice to say about Starwood, you can put this in the record book: Starwood has improved the external trading process of SVN members.
Now, let's talk about non-SVN members:
First, it's important to understand a major difference. IMHO, most who purchase at mandatory resorts (i.e., join SVN), do so with the intention of using their home resort or trading through the network. II trading is simply a "nice to have." It's not really an important part of their buying decision. (As evidence of this, I ask you how much time your sales rep spent on the II trading process. I don't think mine even brought it up the last time I sat through the dreaded presentation.) On the other hand, external trading is important to non-SVN owners who don't have the ability to do internal trades.
But, far more importantly, those who purchased floating weeks under pre-Starwood deeds/CCRs, never delegated full control of the exchange process to Starwood (in the interest of convenience, we may have delegated the authority to sign exchange company contracts, but that did not include the ability to select weeks for deposit). We had the clear right to book any available week within our season and deposit it to an external exchange company if desired.
It only takes about 5 minutes of google research to learn that state statues MANDATE Starwood furnish, upon sale, langauge such as the above in order to control external trading. The appropriate langage does not exist in pre-Starwood deeds/CCRs. Could Starwood have added it without our consent after-the-fact? Possibly. But, if they did, was it legal to do so or did it require owner consent? Several of us have attempted to find the answers to these questions. But, to date, Starwood appears to be unable or unwilling to provide any documentation that pertains to any legal authority to control deposits for non-SVN members. I smell a rat....
And ... I'm getting to the end of my rant, I promise:
The bottom line is that non-SVN floating week members DO NOT BENEFIT by the blended trading power process. We had better trading power when we were able to book and deposit weeks of our choosing.
I'm sure some will continue to argue that we were taking advantage of loop holes that have now been closed. That's simply not true. All non-SVN owners of the same season have the same ability to book any available week within the season. Some of us have found that booking a prime week and depositing it to II, where it received superior trading power, was the best possible use of our ownership for OUR purposes. Other decide to book and occupy a prime week. One is not better than the other -- it's a matter of personal preference. And, we all own the exact same thing. We pay the exact same maintenance fees to keep the resort running and we should all have the same rights to use our weeks in whichever manner works best for us.
I was explaining the issue to one of my brothers (poor thing -- he was stuck in a car with me and couldn't escape). He's the president of his condo HOA in San Francisco. He said, "You know ... I think I know what you mean. I hate it when people who bought foreclosed units for half the price we paid have the audacity to complain about things. But, they have the exact same ownership rights and pay the exact same HOA fees that I do. I don't like it, but I have to suck it up." He got it. Now, if only we could make Starwood understand that they don't have the right to screw resale buyers at every turn ... and, further, it's not in their best interest to do so as it simply rains bad publicity down on them.
Rant over ... back to your regularly scheduled program.
