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

[BocaBoy]

Once a weeks owner exchanges for points in a given year, he can then use those points to make a RESERVATION for that year on exactly the same terms (and from exactly the same inventory) as a points owner can. The election of points is the exchange, not the making of the reservation. Legacy points are not less valuable than purchased points. That is what I meant when I said access. Honestly, it is not that hard.

I do concur, however, that the official Marriott response was horribly written.

 

[Clemson Fan]

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.

I agree with that. In practicality a point will be a point and the only time it will be different is when a timeshare salesman is trying to close a sale.

 

[Clemson Fan]

I do concur, however, that the official Marriott response was horribly written.

Actually, it was exactly what I expected. Giving a straight answer to people emotionally charged on a particular subject from a big corporation is like a politician giving a straight answer. IOW, it ain't gonna happen!

 

[hipslo]

Once a weeks owner exchanges for points in a given year, he can then use those points to make a RESERVATION for that year on exactly the same terms (and from exactly the same inventory) as a points owner can. The election of points is the exchange, not the making of the reservation. Legacy points are not less valuable than purchased points. That is what I meant when I said access. Honestly, it is not that hard.

While you sound quite certain about all this, with all due respect, I think you are wrong. The focus needs to be on the trust inventory being given to the exchange company. The exchange comes into play on the trust side of the equation, not the weeks side. (I would say "honestly, its not that hard", but I don't think that would add to the discussion).

 

[SueDonJ]

While you sound quite certain about all this, with all due respect, I think you are wrong. The focus needs to be on the trust inventory being given to the exchange company. The exchange comes into play on the trust side of the equation, not the weeks side. (I would say "honestly, its not that hard", but I don't think that would add to the discussion).

I agree with you that the exchange happens after an Exchange Member elects to convert a week to points AND is matched to whatever inventory is available in the Exchange Company (whether it's been put there by a Trust or Exchange Member electing to exchange outside of their owned interest.)

You made a really good point, too, with your post about Marriott not being obligated to co-mingle the inventory in such a way that Exchange Members can expect to receive any and all exchanges to Trust inventory. But what benefit does it serve Marriott to not co-mingle? That's what I don't understand. Of course it's reasonable to try to figure out the limitations here, but isn't it also useful to try to figure out why they'd apply them to the detriment of Exchange Members? If EM's realize as the system rolls on that Marriott is not co-mingling, and they're not getting access to Trust inventory that they thought they'd have, then wouldn't they stop converting their Weeks and go back to using their ownerships on a week-to-week basis? Wouldn't that result in Trust Members having much more limited access to the existing sold-out resorts, which would be bad for the overall success of the DC?

And I apologize if you took my last post to mean that I think enrollment is an easy decision or one that needs to be made immediately. That wasn't what I meant but I can see how it could be taken that way. What I meant is that it appears there is enough information now for each of us to figure out if enrollment might be an enhancement or not for the week(s) we own. Plus there is still the choice to sit back and watch to see how others are able (or not!) to make it all work.

 

[hipslo]

I agree with you that the exchange happens after an Exchange Member elects to convert a week to points AND is matched to whatever inventory is available in the Exchange Company (whether it's been put there by a Trust or Exchange Member electing to exchange outside of their owned interest.)

You made a really good point, too, with your post about Marriott not being obligated to co-mingle the inventory in such a way that Exchange Members can expect to receive any and all exchanges to Trust inventory. But what benefit does it serve Marriott to not co-mingle? That's what I don't understand. Of course it's reasonable to try to figure out the limitations here, but isn't it also useful to try to figure out why they'd apply them to the detriment of Exchange Members? If EM's realize as the system rolls on that Marriott is not co-mingling, and they're not getting access to Trust inventory that they thought they'd have, then wouldn't they stop converting their Weeks and go back to using their ownerships on a week-to-week basis? Wouldn't that result in Trust Members having much more limited access to the existing sold-out resorts, which would be bad for the overall success of the DC?

And I apologize if you took my last post to mean that I think enrollment is an easy decision or one that needs to be made immediately. That wasn't what I meant but I can see how it could be taken that way. What I meant is that it appears there is enough information now for each of us to figure out if enrollment might be an enhancement or not for the week(s) we own. Plus there is still the choice to sit back and watch to see how others are able (or not!) to make it all work.

That wasnt directed at you - it was directed at another poster who used those same words ("honestly it isnt that hard") to suggest that anyone who didnt agree that enrolled owners electing points would have the right to make direct reservations of trust inventory was somehow dense and missing the point.

For me, this whole topic has no bearing on the decision to enroll. I have already enrolled. As the owner of 5 high cost resale weeks, I already have a great deal of money invested in this system. The opportunity to forever have my resale weeks stand on an equal footing with developer weeks for $400 per week is a no brainer. That said, I have no intention to ever turn my weeks in for points (or MR points either, for that matter), but compared to what I have already spent, the additional cost is relatively minor, and it keeps my options open for the future.

I have no idea whether the two inventory pools will be intemingled to such an extent that they are effectively one pool, and I dont have any real stake in that, as I dont intend to use points. So, you may be right, or others may be right. Only time will tell. The only thing that is clear to me is that, as a legal and structural matter, there is a distinction between trust points and enrolled owner points. Whether or not that will make a difference, I will leave that speculation to others.

 

[hotcoffee]

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.

There is one huge difference than just having weeks deposited into the points exchange program to what I have saying. That is the availability of unsold weeks to points exchangers. Unsold weeks are not available to weeks exchangers unless they are bulk deposited into II. However, they will form an important part of the points inventory. Since the Trust contains all of the unsold weeks at the 11 resorts that currently a part of the Trust, most of those will be available to points exchangers because most new points purchasers will not have enough points to get many of them (particularly the Hawaiian weeks). In addition, there are unsold weeks elsewhere (such as Frenchmen's Cove) that have not been added to the Trust. These are also available to points exchangers.

I think we still disagree on perhaps two issues:

1. the availability of unsold weeks, weeks obtained from MRP trades, and weeks that are either in default or where the owners are delinquent on MF to the points inventory, and
2. the fact that Trust points exchange one-for-one with Exchange points (section III., A., 1., sentence 5, of the document "EXCHANGE PROCEDURES FOR MARRIOTT VACATION CLUB DESTINATIONS EXCHANGE PROGRAM"); and, therefore, can be combined with the points of enrolled members who elect points.

 

[m61376]

You made a really good point, too, with your post about Marriott not being obligated to co-mingle the inventory in such a way that Exchange Members can expect to receive any and all exchanges to Trust inventory. But what benefit does it serve Marriott to not co-mingle? That's what I don't understand. Of course it's reasonable to try to figure out the limitations here, but isn't it also useful to try to figure out why they'd apply them to the detriment of Exchange Members?

The only issue I can see is that, over time, as more people buy points, they are really buying a piece of the trust. The question is does that legally entitle them to first dibs on the trust units, so that Marriott would have to keep at least enough inventory in the trust pool to satisfy all the owners should they elect to reserve weeks in the trust? Over time Marriott may have to keep the bulk of the trust inventory in the trust pool, and may only be able to release it if a trust owner elects to use points for exchange inventory outside the trust (in which case Marriott will effectively exchange that trust week either into the club pool or into II, depending upon where the inventory being used to fulfill the point owner's request came from.

That's why I think it will likely take several years before we see the real impact of the uneven access of legacy and trust points. Right now there is plenty of inventory to go around, but as the trust gets sold and there is more competition for all weeks, those wonderful trade posts that I fully expect to see come Monday may be meaningless. I personally don't think we will see a difference between legacy and trust points until the trust is at least half sold. That's when the real competition, especially for premium weeks, will be felt.

And, in response to hotcoffee's post above- that may be when we will really see the difference between merely having access and having direct access. I think that issue will first be seen when looking to book high demand weeks, esp. at properties where there is a big difference in demand for maybe a dozen or less weeks out of the year.

 

[DanCali]

I think we still disagree on perhaps two issues:

1. the availability of unsold weeks, weeks obtained from MRP trades, and weeks that are either in default or where the owners are delinquent on MF to the points inventory, and
2. the fact that Trust points exchange one-for-one with Exchange points (section III., A., 1., sentence 5, of the document "EXCHANGE PROCEDURES FOR MARRIOTT VACATION CLUB DESTINATIONS EXCHANGE PROGRAM"); and, therefore, can be combined with the points of enrolled members who elect points.

It is now as clear as daylight - you will have aceess to these only through indirect access via the exchange company. You will not have direct access.

If a real points owner deposites points in the points exchange or if Marriott bulks deposits points into the points exchange, you will see this inventory. Otherwise, you won't.

 

[hotcoffee]

The only issue I can see is that, over time, as more people buy points, they are really buying a piece of the trust. The question is does that legally entitle them to first dibs on the trust units, so that Marriott would have to keep at least enough inventory in the trust pool to satisfy all the owners should they elect to reserve weeks in the trust? . . .

While this is probably going to be true, it is also highly probably that many (if not most) points owners will exchange rather than use inventory in the Trust. The reason is that they have no home resort, and the 11 current resorts in the Trust will seem somewhat confining - especially to the ones who don't have enough points to reserve a decent week in many of the resorts). People with fewer points than required for some of the nicer resorts will, in some cases, bank points to take a better vacation in alternate years. Then, there is also the Explorer program that gives them more options than simply going to one of the 11 resorts in the Trust. For those enrolled owners with enough points for great exchanges, I think the points program will work very well - even long term.

 

[m61376]

While this is probably going to be true, it is also highly probably that many (if not most) points owners will exchange rather than use inventory in the Trust. The reason is that they have no home resort, and the 11 current resorts in the Trust will seem somewhat confining - especially to the ones who don't have enough points to reserve a decent week in many of the resorts). People with fewer points than required for some of the nicer resorts will, in some cases, bank points to take a better vacation in alternate years. Then, there is also the Explorer program that gives them more options than simply going to one of the 11 resorts in the Trust. For those enrolled owners with enough points for great exchanges, I think the points program will work very well - even long term.

Yes- but legacy point users will have to wait for trust point users to decide not to use inventory before it becomes available to the legacy point pool.

And, while I agree that all this flexibility and the Explorer program, cruises, etc., all sound wonderful, that all carry a big price tag. I think that's a big hurdle going forward. Timeshares have historically appealed to a certain class- people with discretionary income, but with limitations. The really wealthy joined destination clubs, own vacation condos, or simply book whatever and whenever they want to go. I see the cost of the points starting to out price their value. When non-owners can book many of the weeks for less than the MF's, that becomes a real problem. When owners can simply google one of the Explorer trips and discover that they could book the trip directly for less than their MF's on the points required, as someone in another thread posted, that's a problem. Same with cruises. I am not so sure in this Internet savvy time that people are going to spend thousands for points and then be so quick to use them on the optional uses Marriott is offering. It's too easy today to see the fair market value. Ten years ago I would agree that people would jump at the alternatives even at the inflated price points, but today I am not so sure. I may be wrong; time will tell.

 

[hotcoffee]

It is now as clear as daylight - you will have aceess to these only through indirect access via the exchange company. You will not have direct access.

Agreed.

If a real points owner deposites points in the points exchange or if Marriott bulks deposits points into the points exchange, you will see this inventory. Otherwise, you won't.

This is more of a paperwork exercise for Marriott because they are the 2000 pound gorilla and ultimately control both programs. If they want something in the Trust, and there is plenty of surplus, do you doubt that they effectively will just take it? I feel pretty confident (based upon what I have been told by my points specialist) that if you request a week at a certain resort with a certain view, and there is an available week in the Trust that is surplus (i.e., not accountable to existing sold points), they will confirm you into it.

 

[SueDonJ]

The only issue I can see is that, over time, as more people buy points, they are really buying a piece of the trust. The question is does that legally entitle them to first dibs on the trust units, so that Marriott would have to keep at least enough inventory in the trust pool to satisfy all the owners should they elect to reserve weeks in the trust? Over time Marriott may have to keep the bulk of the trust inventory in the trust pool, and may only be able to release it if a trust owner elects to use points for exchange inventory outside the trust (in which case Marriott will effectively exchange that trust week either into the club pool or into II, depending upon where the inventory being used to fulfill the point owner's request came from.

That's why I think it will likely take several years before we see the real impact of the uneven access of legacy and trust points. Right now there is plenty of inventory to go around, but as the trust gets sold and there is more competition for all weeks, those wonderful trade posts that I fully expect to see come Monday may be meaningless. I personally don't think we will see a difference between legacy and trust points until the trust is at least half sold. That's when the real competition, especially for premium weeks, will be felt.

And, in response to hotcoffee's post above- that may be when we will really see the difference between merely having access and having direct access. I think that issue will first be seen when looking to book high demand weeks, esp. at properties where there is a big difference in demand for maybe a dozen or less weeks out of the year.

I think it will take quite a while, years, before we need to worry about whether or not the Trust inventory is sufficient to keep Trust and Exchange Members happy. It seems to me that Exchange Members have the upper hand here because without their deposits the Trust Members are going to have very limited exchange opportunities. If Marriott doesn't act so that Exchange Members can get successful exchanges through the DC, they'll just not pay their DC dues and revert back to Weeks usage which will limit exchange inventory even further. If enough EM aren't participating then Marriott is going to have to invest capital into conveying more Weeks to the Trust to open up inventory for Trust Members. Why would they do that when it's so much more economical for them to simply co-mingle the inventory as it exists?

 

[DanCali]

Incentives and Potential Conflicts of Interest

Marriott DOES have an incentive to deposit trust points in the Points Exchange. It's not really just to make the exchange successful, but rather to trasfer value from owners to Marriott.

Tomorrow, there will be lots of green marbles waiting to be picked up. Those points already deposited by Marriott represent weeks owned by Marriott. By definition each points exchange someone makes is a downtrade due to skim. So Marriott gives you a week worth 3500 points and takes your week worth 4000 points. Then they take that week worth 4000 points and give it to someone who surrenders a week worth 4500 points (but got only 4000 points due to skim). Then they take that week worth 4500 points and give it to someone who surrenders a week worth 5000 points (but got only 4500 points due to skim). Then they take that week worth 5000 points and give it to someone who surrenders a fixed Hawaii week worth 6000 points (but got only 5000 points due to skim).

Now they can take that fixed Hawaii week and rent it out since all this cascade of exchanges started with points owned by Marriott. So Marriott can start with a 2BR in Orlando and 7 exchanges later end up with GregTs 2BR fixed week at the Maui Villas which they can rent out... With those incentives, you will see all the green marbles you want.

So why did I put the "Conflicts of Interest" in the title of this post? Once Marriott ends up with the 2BR Hawaii week, they may decide to rent it out, rather than fill someone's exchange request because they'd rather not take a 2BR Gold Summit Watch 2 years in a row for the 2BR in Hawaii (I'm referring to someone with a less desirable week willing to borrow points to get a prime week at a prime resort). They may also prefer to rent that week rather than give that exchange to a trust points owner who is waiting for it. Lots of potential for conflicts of interest...

 

[hipslo]

I think it will take quite a while, years, before we need to worry about whether or not the Trust inventory is sufficient to keep Trust and Exchange Members happy. It seems to me that Exchange Members have the upper hand here because without their deposits the Trust Members are going to have very limited exchange opportunities. If Marriott doesn't act so that Exchange Members can get successful exchanges through the DC, they'll just not pay their DC dues and revert back to Weeks usage which will limit exchange inventory even further. If enough EM aren't participating then Marriott is going to have to invest capital into conveying more Weeks to the Trust to open up inventory for Trust Members. Why would they do that when it's so much more economical for them to simply co-mingle the inventory as it exists?

But if marriott has access to inventory to satisfy points trusts requests via weeks deposited into II, which I believe is the case, is there really a compelling need for them to also ensure that they get inventory from enrolled owners who convert to points?

 

[SueDonJ]

But if marriott has access to inventory to satisfy points trusts requests via weeks deposited into II, which I believe is the case, is there really a compelling need for them to also ensure that they get inventory from enrolled owners who convert to points?

Hmmm. So you're thinking that whether Exchange Members make their deposits as Weeks in II or as Points or Weeks in the Exchange Company, the Trust Members' exchange requests will be filled by either II or Marriott? I guess so, but if Exchange Members are only using II, won't Marriott have to make deposits into II whenever they pull inventory from there? Both II and Marriott have said that "comparable" weeks will be deposited; where will that inventory come from? (Of course this doesn't get into whether "comparable" means the same thing to Marriott, II and the exchangers.)

 

[hotcoffee]

Computerization probably renders many of these issues insignifcant

We talk here about depositing weeks and Trust points almost as if things were like they were 30 years ago. It is almost as if Marriott has to pick up a piece of paper and move it somewhere in order to deposit a week into the exchange inventory. I was a programmer for many years in a past life. I was also an Oracle database administrator for a number of years. All of these Marriott programs - the Trust, the Exchange company, the resorts - are all either owned or managed by Marriott. That makes it pretty easy to create a central inventory database containing all of the weeks managed by Marriott. You would not need three databases - one for the weeks inventory, one for the points inventory, and one for the Trust inventory. You can do it easiest with just one database. One way would be to have a category field for each week (or whatever division they choose) that designates what category the week belongs to (e.g., W for weeks, T for Trust, E for Exchange, and other codes for other categories). Then you can move a week around by just changing the letter designator. That can happen instantaneously. You could also have a availability flag. Set the flag to a 1 if the week is available to be searched by the points exchange search engine, and set it to 0 if it is not searchable. Then to drop weeks into the Exchange inventory (i.e., deposit them), you just set the availability flag to a 1 for each week to be made searchable. Presto! You can instantly deposit scores of weeks into the exchange inventory without physically moving anything or doing any paperwork. I don't know if they actually did it this way, but I could have created a database for them; and there was a time I could have written a lot of the software.

Since Marriott controls or manages all of these facilities, it becomes somewhat of a mute point as to whether they can move inventory around or have inventory searchable or not seachable. They control everything. So, they can pretty do whatever they want whenever they want. Fortunately, they have every incentive to make the Points program a major success, and I suspect they will do whatever it takes to make that happen. They are not going to allow unused weeks to just lay around if someone actually wants them. That would make no sense.

 

[DanCali]

They are not going to allow unused weeks to just lay around if someone actually wants them. That would make no sense.

Of course not - they are Marriott's weeks. Marriott can rent them at will, unless you give them a better week for a worse week, in which case they will trade for your week and rent that one out.

 

[hotcoffee]

Of course not - they are Marriott's weeks. Marriott can rent them at will, unless you give them a better week for a worse week, in which case they will trade for your week and rent that one out.

Perhaps over the long haul. Right now, I would bet they are going to try to make as much inventory available as possible for points. In fact, I bet they will be going out of their way to try to make this thing work.

Monday has all the makings of organized chaos. I'm not expecting it to go smoothly. Eventually it will get better, though.

 

[Dean]

We talk here about depositing weeks and Trust points almost as if things were like they were 30 years ago. It is almost as if Marriott has to pick up a piece of paper and move it somewhere in order to deposit a week into the exchange inventory. I was a programmer for many years in a past life. I was also an Oracle database administrator for a number of years. All of these Marriott programs - the Trust, the Exchange company, the resorts - are all either owned or managed by Marriott. That makes it pretty easy to create a central inventory database containing all of the weeks managed by Marriott. You would not need three databases - one for the weeks inventory, one for the points inventory, and one for the Trust inventory. You can do it easiest with just one database. One way would be to have a category field for each week (or whatever division they choose) that designates what category the week belongs to (e.g., W for weeks, T for Trust, E for Exchange, and other codes for other categories). Then you can move a week around by just changing the letter designator. That can happen instantaneously. You could also have a availability flag. Set the flag to a 1 if the week is available to be searched by the points exchange search engine, and set it to 0 if it is not searchable. Then to drop weeks into the Exchange inventory (i.e., deposit them), you just set the availability flag to a 1 for each week to be made searchable. Presto! You can instantly deposit scores of weeks into the exchange inventory without physically moving anything or doing any paperwork. I don't know if they actually did it this way, but I could have created a database for them; and there was a time I could have written a lot of the software.

Since Marriott controls or manages all of these facilities, it becomes somewhat of a mute point as to whether they can move inventory around or have inventory searchable or not seachable. They control everything. So, they can pretty do whatever they want whenever they want. Fortunately, they have every incentive to make the Points program a major success, and I suspect they will do whatever it takes to make that happen. They are not going to allow unused weeks to just lay around if someone actually wants them. That would make no sense.

To a degree, still they are working on an imperfect system with many variables including start day, view type, area demand, etc. The truth is that many weeks do go unused for a number of reasons. Marriott let weeks sit open at Surfwatch the week before 4th of July offering them for rent but not for MR points and it looks like they ultimately went unused from what I could tell.

 

[hipslo]

Hmmm. So you're thinking that whether Exchange Members make their deposits as Weeks in II or as Points or Weeks in the Exchange Company, the Trust Members' exchange requests will be filled by either II or Marriott? I guess so, but if Exchange Members are only using II, won't Marriott have to make deposits into II whenever they pull inventory from there? Both II and Marriott have said that "comparable" weeks will be deposited; where will that inventory come from? (Of course this doesn't get into whether "comparable" means the same thing to Marriott, II and the exchangers.)

My understanding is that marriott can take weeks out of II to satisfy points requests, whether the II inventory comes from enrolled owners depositing their weeks, or regular, non enrolled owners depositing their weeks. Yes, they would need to replace that inventory with comparable inventory, which presumably would be trust inventory. So, to the extent that trust inventory is going into II, it isnt going to enrolled owners who elect points. Though I suppose once the trust inventory gets into II, they could then pull it back out to satisfy the request of an enrolled owner who elects points, so long as it is still replaced by something comparable.

Come to think of it, viewed that way, it sure does sound like a lot of intermingling will be taking place. The only real distinction is that enrolled owners arent getting first crack at the trust inventory, which may first need to go into and out of II a coulple of times before it goes to the enrolled owners. However, I suppose it is possible that as a practical matter, this will be a distinction without a difference.

 

[Dean]

My understanding is that marriott can take weeks out of II to satisfy points requests, whether the II inventory comes from enrolled owners depositing their weeks, or regular, non enrolled owners depositing their weeks. Yes, they would need to replace that inventory with comparable inventory, which presumably would be trust inventory. So, to the extent that trust inventory is going into II, it isnt going to enrolled owners who elect points. Though I suppose once the trust inventory gets into II, they could then pull it back out to satisfy the request of an enrolled owner who elects points, so long as it is still replaced by something comparable.

Come to think of it, viewed that way, it sure does sound like a lot of intermingling will be taking place. The only real distinction is that enrolled owners arent getting first crack at the trust inventory, which may first need to go into and out of II a coulple of times before it goes to the enrolled owners. However, I suppose it is possible that as a practical matter, this will be a distinction without a difference.

My understanding is that they can "exchange" for weeks within II for this purpose subject to the normal II exchange rules and that Marriott as a corporate member falls under the same basic parameters as all of us do, including trade power. Maybe that's what you meant by saying they "can take weeks out of II to satisfy points requests", but I took it as saying they have direct access ahead of other II members which I understand is not the case for weeks deposited.

 

[hipslo]

My understanding is that they can "exchange" for weeks within II for this purpose subject to the normal II exchange rules and that Marriott as a corporate member falls under the same basic parameters as all of us do, including trade power. Maybe that's what you meant by saying they "can take weeks out of II to satisfy points requests", but I took it as saying they have direct access ahead of other II members which I understand is not the case for weeks deposited.

I meant exactly what you said, thank you for the clarification. My point relates primarily to the sources of inventory potentially available to marriott to satisfy requests of enrolled owners using points. Given all of their unsold trust inventory, it seems likely that marriott will not have any real difficulty making "comparable" desposits to II, with sufficient trading power, to get the inventory needed to satisfy enrolled owner points requests. Even playing by the same rules, they simply have so much inventory to work with that they ought to be able to get what they want, when they want it. Individual users of II then get access to the comparable deposits.

 

[JimIg23]

I am not very happy with these buckets....

However, just as long as I can 1)secure my week 2) then check if points are available for a specific time I want before converting to points, so I can still use/II trade without getting stuck, I am coming around to I may not like it, but for now it is fine. I still think with the amount of deeded weeks owners out there, Marriott will have to adjust the program to fit us if there is not alot of points deposits. I still think they will need the weeks once there becomes alot of "Trsut members"

 

[Fredm]

Since Marriott controls or manages all of these facilities, it becomes somewhat of a mute point as to whether they can move inventory around or have inventory searchable or not seachable. They control everything. So, they can pretty do whatever they want whenever they want. Fortunately, they have every incentive to make the Points program a major success, and I suspect they will do whatever it takes to make that happen. They are not going to allow unused weeks to just lay around if someone actually wants them. That would make no sense.

Absolutely. We mentally compartmentalize inventory into all these buckets, cookie and marble jars. But, Marriott manages all of it. Including the reservation inventory of legacy owners who do not join the D-club.

Marriott must make the system work well for all owners. If it does not, long term success will be compromised by their own hand. That's why Marriott is prepared to deposit inventory it obtains from MRP conversions. It's all one bucket from their prospective (although it must be managed within some legal parameters).

No one questioned what inventory Marriott cherry picked when an owner converted for MRP's.
Why? Marriott paid for the inventory. Now, Marriott views it as an inventory resource to make their system function.

Marriott will capture inventory for their purposes. No surprise here. THAT is an object of the exercise. How they do it makes for interesting arm chair quarterbacking. But, at the end of the day the proof will be in the eating. So far, no meals have been served.