NO Access to trusts pool by enrolled owners (Marriott's response - post #447)

[windje2000]

At 8 am 12 months in advance points owners can reserve weeks deposited for points (the same as weeks owners can). That is not a garage sale, that is a invitation to come to all owner's only sales even though you don't wn there.

Have a good one. Gone fishing.....

So trust owners have equal rights to deeds owners if there is something on the tables at the garage sale or swap meet, which is a better analogy. If there's nothing on the tables at the swap meet, . . .

Good luck - Hope they're biting.

 

[puckmanfl]

good morning...

Im going fishin' too... bright and early on 7/26. I have my atomic clock set for 9:00:000001 am EST and my points VOA on speed dial... Using points as bait. Keeping the weeks as weeks, until I see the fish, then convert...

will report in as soon as trading is done!!!

 

[Dean]

good morning

great!!!

now I have 3 options

#1 stay in "weeks" in a world where MVCD is now a COMPETITOR for exchanges

#2 play in points that < trust points and rely on MVCD to do the correct thing and co-mingle inventory..

#3 sell my deeds at a 80% loss AND pay an additional 130K to get my equivalent number of post skim points. Total cost for this 180K yikes

Think I will stay with door #1 and door #2 and hope for the best on 7/26!!!!

Tombo, please help me!!!!

IMO, being a well positioned member of option #2 is going to be the best overall situation to be in. By well positioned, I mean good resorts/seasons owned and enough points to be Premier or Premier Plus. I can't even imagine starting over with Marriott as a new Trust owner given the price realities you reference, basically higher than DVC prices for both up front and yearly fees. If they get a break in some areas, I'd say they truly paid for it.

To me it's not really any different than if Marriott shut down their sales completely, you simply freeze where we are for the inventory already alloted and function from there. The main difference is if you owned at a resort with significant unsold inventory, you might lose your resort completely or see your dues go up dramatically. Take Crystal Shores for example with a current subsidy of over $300 a week and limited amenities. Without such a move, it would likely never be completed, it still might not be, but there was a real chance of it going under without something to sustain it given it's level of sales and other constraints.

 

[kedler]

The non trust owner neither owns nor is paying maintenance fees on the trust inventory. Owners should come first, just like owners come first in your home resort. The trust owners do not have direct access to the inventory represented by deeds. Why should a non trust owner have direct access to trust inventory? It's the home resort of the trust owners.

The trust and the exchange company are separate entities, exactly like your home resort and II are separate entities.

If you enroll, you have access to what trust owners and deeded enrolled owners are willing to deposit in the exchange company.

Not different from II - you have access to inventory that deeded owners are willing to exchange and have deposited in the II exchange company.

Well said!!!

I recall lots of angst that points owners were going to be able to "get" our weeks.

Now everyone is complaining that we can't "get" the trust inventory.

Marriott Exchange Company is an internal exchange company for Marriott weeks and beneficial interest/points owners to exchange what we own - no more, no less.

Who gets what week/reservation is up to Marriott but does that really differ from who gets what in II? If I call II and get a 3 bdrm Aruba Surf Club with a 2 bdrm MGV outside of flexchange (which I did) I'm I getting preferential treatment or was that luck? Whether we are exchanging through MEC or II I don't think we'll ever really know.

We own deeded weeks at our home resort - we have first dibs on the weeks in the season we own or to the fixed week at our HOME resort.

Weeks owners can give up "first dibs" for MEC inventory (if enrolled), II inventory (regardless of enrollment), MRP (regardless of enrollment, unless resale week owner), extras in the MVCD Program (if enrolled) or extras in II (regardless of enrollment).

New points owners own deeded beneficial interests they have first dibs on the inventory in the trust - remember they too have a deeded right - in their case its a deeded right to use x(the number purchased) beneficial interests in the trust - the Trust is their HOME "resort".

New Points owners can give up "first dibs" for MEC inventory, II inventory, MRP or extras in MEC and maybe II.

There are weeks owners who own weeks at the 11 resorts in the trust who will enroll in the program or who will continue to deposit in II - our "access" to the 11 resorts may be limited by the trust but it is not gone.

The new points owners will want access to more that those 11 resorts so they will deposit their points in MEC to exchange for enrolled points or they will deposit their points in II to exchange for II inventory. Again our access to the trust inventory is not gone it may be limited.

My gut instinct is that MEC will try very hard to fill enrolled weeks owners requests with what ever inventory they have on Monday (in the same haphazard way this program was rolled out) to provide more inventory to the new points owners, most of whom no doubt think they have easy access to all Marriott resorts in the program.

 

[GregT]

IMO, being a well positioned member of option #2 is going to be the best overall situation to be in. By well positioned, I mean good resorts/seasons owned and enough points to be Premier or Premier Plus. I can't even imagine starting over with Marriott as a new Trust owner given the price realities you reference, basically higher than DVC prices for both up front and yearly fees. If they get a break in some areas, I'd say they truly paid for it.

To me it's not really any different than if Marriott shut down their sales completely, you simply freeze where we are for the inventory already alloted and function from there. The main difference is if you owned at a resort with significant unsold inventory, you might lose your resort completely or see your dues go up dramatically. Take Crystal Shores for example with a current subsidy of over $300 a week and limited amenities. Without such a move, it would likely never be completed, it still might not be, but there was a real chance of it going under without something to sustain it given it's level of sales and other constraints.

I agree with this and how we need to think about the new system.

As much as I dislike skimming and uncertainty around inventory access, it also does keep Marriott in the timeshare game. I want them to someday build out the 4th tower at Ko Olina, the additional building at St. Kitts, and the final building at Frenchman's Cove (I think there is one more). And perhaps they will have less ambitious expansion into new areas as well.

If Marriott had elected to get out of the business completely (either sell the management role or go solely to property management) that would have been less desirable, in my view, so I have to accept the skimming (but will never like it). I hope for modest expansion of the properties in the future and this may be the best chance of that.

So it is up to us TUGgers to figure out the new system and where is the best place to play in it. I agree with Dean that a Premier/Premier Plus that has the ability to play in points (even if we never do) leaves the most options and most ability to utilize whatever system is best.

All the best,

Greg

 

[dioxide45]

What seems to be at issue here and why trust owners get first crack is that trust owners will always be doing a Request First type of search. Their points won't be deposited in to the exchange company until they get out what they want.

This is different for weeks enrollees. Enrollees can do request first or deposit first. By depositing a week for points, they have done a deposit first. This gives those trust owners request first access to that week. The problem happens if the weeks owners all hold out for inventory and don't convert until they see it, then there will be gridlock.

I have to agree with others that Marriott will be seeding the exchange company with plenty of trust points that have been bulk banked. This will facilitate the flow of plenty of enrolled weeks in to the exchange company.

It doesn't really matter how Marriott facilitates this, as long as people get the exchanges they want, those people will be happy.

 

[Dean]

I agree with this and how we need to think about the new system.

As much as I dislike skimming and uncertainty around inventory access, it also does keep Marriott in the timeshare game. I want them to someday build out the 4th tower at Ko Olina, the additional building at St. Kitts, and the final building at Frenchman's Cove (I think there is one more). And perhaps they will have less ambitious expansion into new areas as well.

If Marriott had elected to get out of the business completely (either sell the management role or go solely to property management) that would have been less desirable, in my view, so I have to accept the skimming (but will never like it). I hope for modest expansion of the properties in the future and this may be the best bet.

So it is up to us TUGgers to figure out the new system and where is the best place to play in it. I agree with Dean that a Premier/Premier Plus that has the ability to play in points (even if we never do) leaves the most options and most ability to utilize whatever system is best.

All the best,

Greg

While I don't like the skim nor the 3 bucket of points with Trust owners having better options (at a higher cost) than enrolled owners, I do understand it. From a legal standpoint I'm not sure they have any other choice related to access since technically this IS a new timeshare system with the old one being essentially frozen. It's very analogous in many ways to RCI weeks vs RCI points.

 

[m61376]

I agree with the conclusion that Trust Points > Enrolled Points. While this conclusion has an impact on my decsion to enroll, since I don't plan on trading using points, it isn't going to control my decision.

The key to my decision is what access will I have as an enrolled owner versus a non-enrolled member. It is important to know if inventory deposited by enrolled members go into the Marriott Vacation Club Destinations exchange system in which enrolled members have direct versus indirect access to. On the flip side, would an enrolled member thus have indirect access to Interval inventory and a non-enrolled member have direct access to Interval's inventory?

Does the key question become which pool is going to have the best inventory and which owner has priority (direct vs indirect access) to that pool?

Or- is an enrolled week owner treated as a regular week owners unless he/she converts to points in a given year? From what I was told, enrolled week owners using weeks continue with business as usual and are not privy to MVCD deposits, except insofar as MVCD makes comparable exchanges in II for week deposits which point owners have requested.

 

[windje2000]

What seems to be at issue here and why trust owners get first crack is that trust owners will always be doing a Request First type of search. Their points won't be deposited in to the exchange company until they get out what they want.

This is different for weeks enrollees. Enrollees can do request first or deposit first. By depositing a week for points, they have done a deposit first. This gives those trust owners request first access to that week. The problem happens if the weeks owners all hold out for inventory and don't convert until they see it, then there will be gridlock.

I have to agree with others that Marriott will be seeding the exchange company with plenty of trust points that have been bulk banked. This will facilitate the flow of plenty of enrolled weeks in to the exchange company.

It doesn't really matter how Marriott facilitates this, as long as people get the exchanges they want, those people will be happy.

Equal access/rights to the exchange company inventory is imperative if Marriott expects this to work. It won't work if any class of exchange participants perceives the deck is stacked against them.


Not communicating with the 400,000 people who are your best customers?


Absolutely . . . positively . . . insane.

 

[hotcoffee]

Equal access/rights to the exchange company inventory is imperative if Marriott expects this to work. It won't work if any class of exchange participants perceives the deck is stacked against them.
. . . .

Both points owners and enrolled weeks owners have access to the same inventory. The WEB site now makes that pretty clear. Unsold weeks, weeks deposited by enrolled owners, weeks traded for MRP, and weeks from delinquent MF owners are all part of the Points inventory. Moreover, unsold weeks in the Trust will also be available just like unsold weeks at the other 42 participating resorts. The only part of the Trust that they will probably have to hold back will be enough weeks to account for all of the purchased points. Those who purchased points have to be given the right to use them. So, they will probably have to withhold enough of a cross section of weeks to account for any possible way that current points owners might want to reserve them.

 

[BocaBoy]

I agree that the Marriott response was poorly worded. However, it is clear to me that weeks owners who exchange for points in a given year have access to ALL trust inventory IF THEY USE POINTS TO RESERVE. They can not reserve a week the old way from the points inventory. (And that is no surprise. I do not think any of us ever thought we could reserve the old way from trust inventory.)

 

[DanCali]

I agree that the Marriott response was poorly worded. However, it is clear to me that weeks owners who exchange for points in a given year have access to ALL trust inventory IF THEY USE POINTS TO RESERVE. They can not reserve a week the old way from the points inventory. (And that is no surprise. I do not think any of us ever thought we could reserve the old way from trust inventory.)

Yes - 100% correct. They have access, not direct access. And to gain access it is an exchange, not a reservation.

And I think most of us though that "points are points", meaning we could reserve trust inventory. Just look at the posts between June 20 and July 10.

Clearly Trust Points > Legacy Points not only in this aspect but others as well. See my next couple of posts responding to others.

Both points owners and enrolled weeks owners have access to the same inventory.

Again, Access < Direct Access...

 

[windje2000]

Both points owners and enrolled weeks owners have access to the same inventory. The WEB site now makes that pretty clear. Unsold weeks, weeks deposited by enrolled owners, weeks traded for MRP, and weeks from delinquent MF owners are all part of the Points inventory. Moreover, unsold weeks in the Trust will also be available just like unsold weeks at the other 42 participating resorts. The only part of the Trust that they will probably have to hold back will be enough weeks to account for all of the purchased points. Those who purchased points have to be given the right to use them. So, they will probably have to withhold enough of a cross section of weeks to account for any possible way that current points owners might want to reserve them.

I think dioxide was pointing out that points owners always are the equivalent of 'request first' exchangers while legacy owners who elect points are the equivalent of 'deposit first'.

The inventory is the same; the access procedure is not. That's the difference he was pointing out.

 

[hotcoffee]

I agree that the Marriott response was poorly worded. However, it is clear to me that weeks owners who exchange for points in a given year have access to ALL trust inventory IF THEY USE POINTS TO RESERVE. They can not reserve a week the old way from the points inventory. (And that is no surprise. I do not think any of us ever thought we could reserve the old way from trust inventory.)

It appears that Marriott does not want to get involved with any of the debates going on here. They have already posted on the my-vacation club WEB site what inventory is available to enrolled owners. I don't think they are going to say anything more. Anyone who truly wants to know can just go there and read it for themselves:

1. Go to my-vacationclub.com
2. Pull down the "Plan and Book My Vacation" menu
3. Choose "Things to know before you start"
4. Under "Making or Changing a Reservation", click on "Enrolled owner"
5. Under "Reservations with Your Vacation Club Points", click on "Marriott Vacation Club Collection"
6. After reading the first bullet under "When can I make a reservation?", notice that it says "Enrolled Owners may request and reserve any resort in the Marriott Vacation Club Destination Exchange Program". Then click on the little number 5 after the title.
7. Read what the Marriott Vacation Club Collection consists of. Notice that the 11 resorts in the Trust are included in the "Marriott Vacation Club Destinations Exchange Program". It previous said that an enrolled owner can reserve any of them.

 

[DanCali]

What seems to be at issue here and why trust owners get first crack is that trust owners will always be doing a Request First type of search. Their points won't be deposited in to the exchange company until they get out what they want.

This is different for weeks enrollees. Enrollees can do request first or deposit first. By depositing a week for points, they have done a deposit first. This gives those trust owners request first access to that week. The problem happens if the weeks owners all hold out for inventory and don't convert until they see it, then there will be gridlock.

I think this is on the right track but needs to be emphasized more.

Trust Owners always do a "Request First" when they exchange with points. If they have what they need in the trust then no exchange. If what they want is not in the Marriott Exchange Company, then no exchange. Also, if it's not in the Exchange Company, they can waitlist with a VOA (Request First) for an exchange with the Marriott exchange company. In fact, they can probably keep a "home resort" reservation in the process. Only when the exchange is fulfilled, do those points make it into the Marriott Exchange Company and converted enrolled weeks can reserve trust inventory. Hence, the points never get deposited until an exchange is guaranteed -> always "Request First"

Enrolled weeks can reserve at their home resort or browse point inventory ("request first", or browse for "instant exchange" if you will) in the Marriott Exchange Company. If they don't see what they want they can wait list for the exchange, but we were told that to waitlist then you have to convert to points. This effectively turns it into a "Deposit First". What is also important hre is that once you convert, you cannot change your mind and go back to using your home resort as a week. You may be able to exchange with points to an off season week at your home resort, but due to skim many weeks are out of play.

This is an important distinction - if the exchange you want is not there there is no "Request First" for enrolled weeks. You cannot "waitlist" while keeping your home resort reservation. Or can you?

 

[hotcoffee]

I think dioxide was pointing out that points owners always are the equivalent of 'request first' exchangers while legacy owners who elect points are the equivalent of 'deposit first'.

The inventory is the same; the access procedure is not. That's the difference he was pointing out.

Agreed. But remember, there is a lot more inventory in the Trust than there are points owners. Much of that will end up being available to points exchangers. What is more important is many (if not most) of the points owners will not have enough points to directly reserve a lot of the inventory in the Trust. That inventory will end up being available for exchanges (both internal and II).

 

[windje2000]

Agreed. But remember, there is a lot more inventory in the Trust than there are points owners. Much of that will end up being available to points exchangers. What is more important is many (if not most) of the points owners will not have enough points to directly reserve a lot of the inventory in the Trust. That inventory will end up being available for exchanges (both internal and II).

You are absolutely right about that. Moreover, it will be a long time before there are as many points interests as weeks interests, and they will then represent half the universe of traders.

My personal view is that it will be a long time before I see a material effect on trading in II.

 

[hotcoffee]

. . .
Again, Access < Direct Access...

Okay. I don't have the time to stay around here and read every post in this and every other thread about this program. If the train of thought now has evolved to "access" versus "direct access", then I don't have any issue with that. I've said from the beginning that Trust owners have to have inventory to use their points for. Therefore, Marriott cannot simply take everything out of the Trust for exchanges any more than they can at the resorts where weeks owners have to be able to reserve their weeks.

 

[DanCali]

The non trust owner neither owns nor is paying maintenance fees on the trust inventory. Owners should come first, just like owners come first in your home resort. The trust owners do not have direct access to the inventory represented by deeds. Why should a non trust owner have direct access to trust inventory? It's the home resort of the trust owners.

The trust and the exchange company are separate entities, exactly like your home resort and II are separate entities.

If you enroll, you have access to what trust owners and deeded enrolled owners are willing to deposit in the exchange company.

Not different from II - you have access to inventory that deeded owners are willing to exchange and have deposited in the II exchange company.

So when you go to a presentation, is Marriott selling the points as a different product than your "exchange points" or are they saying "points are points"? Are they telling you that if you buy 1000 points you cannot combine them with your inferior "exchange points" to get direct access to trust inventory? Or do they let you believe you'll have the ability to do a direct reservation at Marco Island by buying 1000 points?

When you spend $10K on 1000 points they are only good to enhance your "trading power" with points exchanges. The "exchange points" you get for converting your week will never have direct access to trust inventory whether combined with "real points" or not.

By the way, would you pay II $10K for a boost in your trading power? Oh wait - II never skimmed on your trading power when you enrolled, so maybe you don't have to...

 

[Clemson Fan]

Sorry, but I think this thread is total hogwash. The black helicopter folks are really having a heyday trying to analyze and pick apart every single word in the documents and they're creating their own interpretation based on their own underlying beliefs. The wording is ambiguous for a reason as all "fine print" seems to be from any company. Legal ambiguity is a good thing for companies because it helps prevent any lawsuits. It's like any answer you get from a politician who rarely answers any questions directly.

There may or may not be 2-3 different buckets of points. Marriott may have legally had to set it up that way since they're attempting to commingle their old weeks system of sales and their new points system. So what is what I say! I do believe that the way the system will work is that effectively a point is a point. Marriott may not legally be able to say that, but I really think that's how it's effectively going to work.

Ironically, all the black helicopter folks are providing the Marriott TS salesmen with some of their future sales tactics. I can see it now, "you better buy some new points so you can make all of your legacy points equal in value." We'll see it twisted so many times by the timeshare salesmen to show how their shinny new points are so much better then your legacy points that it will be comical.

Hogwash is what I say!!! Points will effectively be points even if "legally" speaking there may be several buckets.

Best wishes to all! I'm still going to thoroughly enjoy my vacations in Marriott units whether they be my own units or ones I get exchanging.

 

[DanCali]

Okay. I don't have the time to stay around here and read every post in this and every other thread about this program. If the train of thought now has evolved to "access" versus "direct access", then I don't have any issue with that. I've said from the beginning that Trust owners have to have inventory to use their points for. Therefore, Marriott cannot simply take everything out of the Trust for exchanges any more than they can at the resorts where weeks owners have to be able to reserve their weeks.

Sayng you have "access" to trust inventory is like II saying you have access to 3000 resorts... it is meaningless... it's a sales pitch rather than a statement of fact.

If this is what you have been pointing to in the past two weeks - that we can make exchanges into trust resorts rather than direct reservations - that was not the point we were trying to clarify... I think we all knew that part. The issue is making a trust resort reservation rather than exchange (i.e., access versus direct access - and that's Marriott's words, not mine).

Just like you could never trade into Ocho Cascadas if there were no deposits, you will never have access to trust inventory if there are no "green marble" (trust points) deposits. Marriott will obfuscate this reality by doing bulk deposits. It doesn't change the reality.

 

[hipslo]

Agreed. But remember, there is a lot more inventory in the Trust than there are points owners. Much of that will end up being available to points exchangers. What is more important is many (if not most) of the points owners will not have enough points to directly reserve a lot of the inventory in the Trust. That inventory will end up being available for exchanges (both internal and II).

Points owners get first crack at trust inventory, and can reserve trust inventory directly. Enrolled owners who trade for points can reserve trust inventory as well, but only if it has been made available to the exchange program. This would occur if (i) a trust owner seeks to reserve non - trust inventory, and marriott does not pull the requested inventory out if II (if the requested inventory is pulled out of II, marrott would presumably replace the II inventory with trust inventory). However, if marriott pulls the requested inventory out of what enrolled weeks owners have deposited for points, then they'd need to replace that inventory with trust invenntory that would then become available to enrolled weeks owners using points in the year at issue.

As to the balance of trust inventory, while marriott could presumably choose to make it available to enrolled owners who elect points in exchange for their deposited weeks, I dont see why anyone would think that marriott is OBLIGATED to do so. Perhaps they will, as a practical matter, but that is different than an obligation to do so. Also, as the number of pioints sold increases, marriott would have less and less flexibility to make trust inventory available to enrolled weeks owners who elect points, since the inventory would need to be ehld back for points owners, unless and until they use their points to make a reservation outside of the trust inventory.

 

[hipslo]

Sorry, but I think this thread is total hogwash. The black helicopter folks are really having a heyday trying to analyze and pick apart every single word in the documents and they're creating their own interpretation based on their own underlying beliefs. The wording is ambiguous for a reason as all "fine print" seems to be from any company. Legal ambiguity is a good thing for companies because it helps prevent any lawsuits. It's like any answer you get from a politician who rarely answers any questions directly.

There may or may not be 2-3 different buckets of points. Marriott may have legally had to set it up that way since they're attempting to commingle their old weeks system of sales and their new points system. So what is what I say! I do believe that the way the system will work is that effectively a point is a point. Marriott may not legally be able to say that, but I really think that's how it's effectively going to work.

Ironically, all the black helicopter folks are providing the Marriott TS salesmen with some of their future sales tactics. I can see it now, "you better buy some new points so you can make all of your legacy points equal in value." We'll see it twisted so many times by the timeshare salesmen to show how their shinny new points are so much better then your legacy points that it will be comical.

Hogwash is what I say!!! Points will effectively be points even if "legally" speaking there may be several buckets.

Best wishes to all! I'm still going to thoroughly enjoy my vacations in Marriott units whether they be my own units or ones I get exchanging.

Actually, the language is quite clear. Legally, points owners have a slightly different set of rights than enrolled owners who exchange for points. Characterizing the (very real) legal distinction as "black helicopter" thinking doesnt change that.

Whether or not these legal distinctions will make a practical difference, on the other hand, is just speculation. If I had to guess, I would say it is unlikely to make a practical difference, at least inititally, and perhaps never. But that is not because a "point is a point". And it is not a certainy, either.

 

[SueDonJ]

I'm not sure that this thread has been meaningless because it has definitely solidified our understanding that Trust Members and Exchange Members will both have to utilize the Exchange Company in the stipulated manners to gain access to inventory that each doesn't own, and that Marriott has some ways (MRP-exchanges, foreclosures, etc.) to manipulate that inventory. Knowledge is power, so they say.

Once we've gained that knowledge, though, what it all boils down to is still the same thing - are we better off enrolling to gain whatever additional benefits are available to us as an Exchange Member, or are we better off not enrolling and using our Week(s) in whatever ways are possible with the advent of the Destination Club?

That answer is going to be different for every one of us based on what we own, how we were able to use it before and how this knowledge leads us to believe we'll be able to use it in the future, and what we think about Marriott going forward. None of us can make that decision for anybody else because what's important to one isn't important to another. If you think you'll be more successful and/or less stressed using Marriott's exchanges instead of II's, and the fees make it worthwhile, then enroll. If you don't, don't. If you think Marriott has now topped the list of Worst Timeshare Scumbucket Companies Ever, then don't enroll. If you don't think so, enroll. It's not as difficult a decision as we seem to be making it, especially as Marriott doesn't NEED a majority of the existing weeks to make the DC work.

 

[windje2000]

So when you go to a presentation, is Marriott selling the points as a different product than your "exchange points" or are they saying "points are points"? Are they telling you that if you buy 1000 points you cannot combine them with your inferior "exchange points" to get direct access to trust inventory? Or do they let you believe you'll have the ability to do a direct reservation at Marco Island by buying 1000 points?

When you spend $10K on 1000 points they are only good to enhance your "trading power" with points exchanges. The "exchange points" you get for converting your week will never have direct access to trust inventory whether combined with "real points" or not.

By the way, would you pay II $10K for a boost in your trading power? Oh wait - II never skimmed on your trading power when you enrolled, so maybe you don't have to...

Haven't been to a points presentation! Been to a total of one sales presentation --- where I didn't buy. Actually don't plan on attending another one.

Do salespeople lie, omit, obfuscate, imply, let you believe what isn't true, etc? That was my one experience. They seem to have problems with those who show up with an HP-12C and a pad.

Write down everything they say that's important to you and tell them as a condition of purchase they will sign a side contract giving you the right to 'put' the interest to them at the original price should the representations therein documented prove false. No falsehoods no downside. Separates the wheat from the chaff real quick. Especially if you know the answers better than the salesperson.

Figure can lie and liars can figure. If you are from the NY metropolitan area, you'll remember Sy Syms always used to say 'an informed consumer is our best customer' Guess Sy isn't advising Marriott.