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

[Dean]

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.

OK, thanks. It does raise an interesting aspect, that for the first time (as far as I know) II will allow essentially a retrade or "rental" of an exchange on a formal basis. I realize they've always done the behind the scenes "you scratch my back, I'll scratch yours" thing including sweetheart deals to many of the employees in the industry including Marriott sales staff.

It is my belief that Marriott will do the same thing we all do in exchanging, get as much as they can for as little as possible. As I posted on one of these thread's a few weeks ago, they will take out the 4th of July HH week and put in the late August week, as an example. We'd all do the same thing if in their shoes.

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"

I think many of us are in that boat, some just got there more quickly than others. "It is what it is" applies. I doubt some will get past some of the up front issues and even 10 years from now you'll still see posts from those on a crusade still angry about this. I can't imagine anyone on the ownership side that's thrilled with every aspect of the new program. However, as you point out, in the end we'll figure out ways to make it work for us or we'll move on. I do still believe that a subset of owners that convert will be far better off than they were before this new program but realize that it could have been far better but also far worse.

 

[SueDonJ]

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.

That's exactly how I'm thinking it will all work. It's going to be interesting tomorrow trying to figure out if Marriott has set this all up so that, as hotcoffee says, they'll be able to just click a few buttons and do more instant matches than are possible in the old II system. We know already that the first step of an II exchange has been removed - we won't have to wait for Marriott to verify our ownership - now we'll have to see if the inventory can be moved from bucket to bucket instantly. I think this will be possible at roll-out but am not sure it can continue to happen with the same frequency as time goes on.

 

[gblotter]

Marriott must make the system work well for all owners. If it does not, long term success will be compromised by their own hand.

I don't understand why you feel that way, but time will tell. Marriott is interested in maximizing their profit - not in seeing that you get the reservation you want. Just ask the owners at NCV. Marriott has not hesitated in scooping up the prime summer NCV weeks for rentals - no matter how disenfranchised the owners feel about it.

No one questioned what inventory Marriott cherry picked when an owner converted for MRP's.

Plenty of NCV owners questioned the cherry picking by Marriott - Marriott doesn't care.

Now, Marriott views it as an inventory resource to make their system function.

Based on Marriott's past behavior, I disagree. Marriott views it as a source of profit first and foremost.

Marriott will capture inventory for their purposes. No surprise here.

Yep.

But, at the end of the day the proof will be in the eating. So far, no meals have been served.

True, but the real proof may not be seen for years. Marriott will only be serving food after they themselves have gorged at the trough. Just like airline seats, there are sophisticated computer models a-plenty to guide Marriott in their inventory management. There is currently much excess inventory, and only so many rooms can be rented out at the prices they are asking. Leftovers will be made available to the exchange, and leftovers will be plentiful at least for a while. As more points owners join the system and excess capacity disappears, then it will get interesting. Business Rule #1: When Marriott has control over a week, expect that Marriott will use that week for its own profit to the maximum extent possible. It is naive to think that Marriott will sacrifice the profit from a prime week rental just to make a timeshare owner happy with a reservation. As I said before - just ask the NCV owners about that.

 

[Fredm]

NCV Platinum Season owners suffer a bad deal on summer reservations because most of the Platinum 25 weeks want the same 7-8 weeks.

Marriott was indeed greedy by selling NCV Platinum Season the way they did. But, that is a different argument than the one you are providing. Yours do not speak to my comments.

 

[gblotter]

NCV Platinum Season owners suffer a bad deal on summer reservations because most of the Platinum 25 weeks want the same 7-8 weeks.

Marriott was indeed greedy by selling NCV Platinum Season the way they did. But, that is a different argument than the one you are providing. Yours do not speak to my comments.

When the entire NCV summer season is unavailable for timeshare reservations, yet you can book those same NCV summer weeks at marriott.com, that is not because of the competition between owners. It is because Marriott scooped up those weeks before owners ever even had a chance.

 

[BocaBum99]

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.

I think this is essentially correct.

 

[Fredm]

When the entire NCV summer season is unavailable for timeshare reservations, yet you can book those same NCV summer weeks at marriott.com, that is not because of the competition between owners. It is because Marriott scooped up those weeks before owners ever even had a chance.

Weeks are available on Marriott.com because Marriott is an owner also. They control weeks that remained unsold, acquired by deed-backs, defaults, and weeks converted to MRP.
I am sure they took their share (by week) and rented them.
There is no evidence that Marriott took more than their share. If they did, that's another story. I would be the first to holler foul. But, you have not cited a reason for me to think otherwise. My observations have been that Marriott is careful about such matters.

While NCV is a particularly sensitive example because of the oversold season (as I have already acknowledged), most owners system-wide have been generally satisfied with Marriott's management.

Marriott has demonstrated its greed in the past by extending its prime season for sales purposes. Similar (but not as severe) reservation issues exist with the Hawaii resorts. A 50 week season competing for the summer calendar. The month of May at the desert resorts, etc.
But, I am not aware of Marriott taking more than their share (by week)for its purposes.

Now, back to my point.
Greed is a motive I trust. We look at the same issues differently. You see greed as a motive to kill the goose that lays the golden eggs. I see it as nurturing the goose to lay as many eggs as possible, long term. Marriott's motives are, no doubt, self-serving. In order to maximize the potential of its enterprise Marriott is willing to use its own inventory (heretofore rented) to make the exchange system work well.
At the end of the day, the result is more inventory for its ends.

We will NEVER know how Marriott manages that process.
I do know that it is not the simplistic analysis thus far offered by some here.
The "skim" is an example of that. A 10% skim does not offset the 15% Marriott is contributing by surrendering MRP inventory to the exchange inventory. They have a different, more profitable, way of capturing inventory for their benefit.
I don't know exactly how they will do it, but neither does anyone else.

Each of us has a different bottom line when determining whether the D-club is beneficial to us. We will soon begin to observe how well the reconstituted system works. THAT will speak volumes. The rest goes in the trash bin.

 

[TrapperDog]

Reserving with combo points

I'm a new poster, so I apologize for not understanding despite hours reading posts on this...

I own two weeks at shadow ridge. If I buy 1000 points and deposit one of my weeks for DC points (total 4075 DC points) would I be able to reserve a time period -- using DC points -- that was longer than the 1000 points?

 

[hotcoffee]

I'm a new poster, so I apologize for not understanding despite hours reading posts on this...

I own two weeks at shadow ridge. If I buy 1000 points and deposit one of my weeks for DC points (total 4075 DC points) would I be able to reserve a time period -- using DC points -- that was longer than the 1000 points?

You will have 5075 points to use for an exchange under the scenerio you described.

 

[DanCali]

I'm a new poster, so I apologize for not understanding despite hours reading posts on this...

I own two weeks at shadow ridge. If I buy 1000 points and deposit one of my weeks for DC points (total 4075 DC points) would I be able to reserve a time period -- using DC points -- that was longer than the 1000 points?

The points you get for your week can only be combined with points you purchase to do points exchanges. This is different than booking trust inventory directly. You are relying on points owners (including Marriott) to deposit points in the Marriott Exchange Company and only then can Marriott fulfill your points exchange request.

Only your 1000 points will have direct access to trust inventory.

 

[windje2000]

Greed is a motive I trust. We look at the same issues differently. You see greed as a motive to kill the goose that lays the golden eggs. I see it as nurturing the goose to lay as many eggs as possible, long term. Marriott's motives are, no doubt, self-serving.

The question becomes - what do we have that Marriott wants that will help it achieve its goals? That's when we're the geese laying egg$. (If not, we're foie gras.)

What are Marriott's goals? - Sell that inventory somehow - if it sells as points, sell it as points.

What do we legacy owners have? 1. deeded weeks and 2. dollars.

We own weeks - Marriott needs/wants weeks for exchange in the DClub - they're selling the dream.

We have $ - Marriott wants us to buy points and it seems the sales staff will say just about anything to achieve that.

We have $ - Marriott wants an enrollment fee. The enrollment fee has 'sweeteners' including bundled fee benefits, 800 bonus points, and time pressure on resale owners.

If they can entice one to exchange for points, they get skim and potentially unused points expirations. Borrowing points from future years can lock you in.

They get you to agree to never vote against them.

If you go points, you never reserve your week, they do. They get to reserve your week up front if you waitlist. If need to borrow and you don't get your waitlist, too bad for you - the borrowed points stay borrowed.

Fred, I think you and I will agree on what Marriott wants -- CASH FLOW!

If you buy points - they receive big (and profitable for book purposes) cash flow.

If you enroll and don't buy points, they receive the enrollment fee, the possibility of skim and the possibility of selling you points. Small cash flow. Plus enhanced access to your weeks via points exchange or II reservation and your cooperation with DClub.

If you don't enroll, as a customer you generate no future incremental cash flow and therefore have no incremental value.

The geese that generate incremental future cash flow are the egg laying geese. If you're not the goose that lays the egg$, you're foie gras. You get foie gras by slaughtering geese. If its true that they only expect 20% enrollment, 4 of 5 owners are not egg layers but rather foie gras.

Lastly, in the long run, Marriott like any developer has a build vs buy decision to make. They just got burned badly ($700MM) by building resorts they couldn't sell. Looking at the way this is structured to add provisions which negatively affect resale marketability/liquidity and resale value, they may have decided to try buying.

Like you I too believe in greed. But I can't escape the indications that they have effectively written off 80% of their customer base by implementing a plan that makes other points programs look decidedly more attractive than theirs.

 

[Fredm]

The question becomes - what do we have that Marriott wants that will help it achieve its goals? That's when we're the geese laying egg$. (If not, we're foie gras.)

What are Marriott's goals? - Sell that inventory somehow - if it sells as points, sell it as points.

What do we legacy owners have? 1. deeded weeks and 2. dollars.

We own weeks - Marriott needs/wants weeks for exchange in the DClub - they're selling the dream.

We have $ - Marriott wants us to buy points and it seems the sales staff will say just about anything to achieve that.

We have $ - Marriott wants an enrollment fee. The enrollment fee has 'sweeteners' including bundled fee benefits, 800 bonus points, and time pressure on resale owners.

If they can entice one to exchange for points, they get skim and potentially unused points expirations. Borrowing points from future years can lock you in.

They get you to agree to never vote against them.

If you go points, you never reserve your week, they do. They get to reserve your week up front if you waitlist. If need to borrow and you don't get your waitlist, too bad for you - the borrowed points stay borrowed.

Fred, I think you and I will agree on what Marriott wants -- CASH FLOW!

If you buy points - they receive big (and profitable for book purposes) cash flow.

If you enroll and don't buy points, they receive the enrollment fee, the possibility of skim and the possibility of selling you points. Small cash flow. Plus enhanced access to your weeks via points exchange or II reservation and your cooperation with DClub.

If you don't enroll, as a customer you generate no future incremental cash flow and therefore have no incremental value.

The geese that generate incremental future cash flow are the egg laying geese. If you're not the goose that lays the egg$, you're foie gras. You get foie gras by slaughtering geese. If its true that they only expect 20% enrollment, 4 of 5 owners are not egg layers but rather foie gras.

Lastly, in the long run, Marriott like any developer has a build vs buy decision to make. They just got burned badly ($700MM) by building resorts they couldn't sell. Looking at the way this is structured to add provisions which negatively affect resale marketability/liquidity and resale value, they may have decided to try buying.

Like you I too believe in greed. But I can't escape the indications that they have effectively written off 80% of their customer base by implementing a plan that makes other points programs look decidedly more attractive than theirs.

Just my view of the matter.

What legacy owners have is inventory. Without it, the program will not work well. Marriott's timeshare business does not thrive without it.
The only way to get that inventory is to make the system function well enough for legacy owners to want the options it provides. It is a long term view of the business.

Sure, Marriott can trade inventory with I.I., but it can only trade what is given to them in the first place.

Selling the dream to new points buyers will work once. If Marriott cannot deliver on the dream because it is not awash in inventory will cut the re-buys off at the pass. And, forget about the referrals. Not Marriott's MO. Longer term, selling points and converting legacy owners are opposite sides of the same coin.

One can believe that Marriott is willing to discard 80% of its owner base, or, believe that Marriott's self interest lies in cultivating its owner base. Absent some compelling reason to think otherwise, I simply default to the latter.

I do not believe for one second that Marriott's goal is to only convert 20% of its owner base. I do believe that they cannot convert more than 20% in the short term. The logistics make it impossible. Heck, most have not even been notified yet. But, ANY enterprise that does not shoot for the lions share is a bush league player. Give it a few years. The first 12-18 months are a boot-strap. They have been selling points and legacy conversions for 5 weeks.

Having said this, I prefer the legacy system. It has worked very well in the past, and do not see it changing very much.
I.I. has been a great exchange vehicle and I expect it to remain so. The concerns expressed by some are overblown, IMO.

 

[windje2000]

Just my view of the matter.

What legacy owners have is inventory. Without it, the program will not work well. Marriott's timeshare business does not thrive without it.
The only way to get that inventory is to make the system function well enough for legacy owners to want the options it provides. It is a long term view of the business.

Sure, Marriott can trade inventory with I.I., but it can only trade what is given to them in the first place.

Selling the dream to new points buyers will work once. If Marriott cannot deliver on the dream because it is not awash in inventory will cut the re-buys off at the pass. And, forget about the referrals. Not Marriott's MO. Longer term, selling points and converting legacy owners are opposite sides of the same coin.

One can believe that Marriott is willing to discard 80% of its owner base, or, believe that Marriott's self interest lies in cultivating its owner base. Absent some compelling reason to think otherwise, I simply default to the latter.

I do not believe for one second that Marriott's goal is to only convert 20% of its owner base. I do believe that they cannot convert more than 20% in the short term. The logistics make it impossible. Heck, most have not even been notified yet. But, ANY enterprise that does not shoot for the lions share is a bush league player. Give it a few years. The first 12-18 months are a boot-strap. They have been selling points and legacy conversions for 5 weeks.

Having said this, I prefer the legacy system. It has worked very well in the past, and do not see it changing very much.
I.I. has been a great exchange vehicle and I expect it to remain so. The concerns expressed by some are overblown, IMO.

Marriott's actions speak for themselves. I don't see a lot of actions that would fall into the category of 'cultivating the owner base', starting with how they rolled this out and continuing with the specifics of how the plan works and the way it's being communicated.

There once was a lot of goodwill in the owner group. I've never heard a pejorative nickname attached to Marriott timeshares until now. That goodwill has been impaired if not lost forever. I wonder what percentage of current legacy owners would encourage someone they know (and don't dislike) to buy the DClub. If you haven't been over there, read Bill Marriott's blog. What do you think the poolside/owner wine and cheese party chatter will be? It will start with skim and go downhill from there.

The DClub plan is not legacy owner friendly. For legacies DClub accomplishes two things - occupancy by day and greater trading ability for high value units that may have been undervalued in II trading. On the other hand, DClub trading ability for many average and particularly lower value units is diminished. I'd guess the losers outnumber the winners.

Moreover, the plan suggests that actions are being influenced more by short term profitability goals rather than embracing a long term view of 'cultivate the customer base.'

You can fool all of the people some of the time etc. Like many organizations, I wonder if Marriott realizes how quickly the internet can make an increasingly large percentage of any user group too smart to be fooled.

You are absolutely right - without the inventory provided by enrolled owners, DClub fails because they won't be able to sell the dream. I don't think they'll get as much as they would like with this plan.

 

[BocaBum99]

Just my view of the matter.

What legacy owners have is inventory. Without it, the program will not work well. Marriott's timeshare business does not thrive without it.
The only way to get that inventory is to make the system function well enough for legacy owners to want the options it provides. It is a long term view of the business.

Sure, Marriott can trade inventory with I.I., but it can only trade what is given to them in the first place.

Selling the dream to new points buyers will work once. If Marriott cannot deliver on the dream because it is not awash in inventory will cut the re-buys off at the pass. And, forget about the referrals. Not Marriott's MO. Longer term, selling points and converting legacy owners are opposite sides of the same coin.

One can believe that Marriott is willing to discard 80% of its owner base, or, believe that Marriott's self interest lies in cultivating its owner base. Absent some compelling reason to think otherwise, I simply default to the latter.

I do not believe for one second that Marriott's goal is to only convert 20% of its owner base. I do believe that they cannot convert more than 20% in the short term. The logistics make it impossible. Heck, most have not even been notified yet. But, ANY enterprise that does not shoot for the lions share is a bush league player. Give it a few years. The first 12-18 months are a boot-strap. They have been selling points and legacy conversions for 5 weeks.

Having said this, I prefer the legacy system. It has worked very well in the past, and do not see it changing very much.
I.I. has been a great exchange vehicle and I expect it to remain so. The concerns expressed by some are overblown, IMO.

I think that Marriott put too much emphasis on the "exchange" element of this new program. It's almost as if they said it so much internally that they were going to make an internal exchange system that they lost sight of what they were actually trying to do, which is to create a better (more effective) and more profitable system.

As a result, they just created a partial week version of the II system. Completely wrong paradigm for a points system. What they should have done was take a look at a few of the systems that had success in converting owners from a fixed/floating week system and copied their model and learned from their mistakes.

That's okay, the world is littered with companies who tried to reinvent the wheel and ended up with a square thing that wouldn't turn.

 

[SueDonJ]

I think that Marriott put too much emphasis on the "exchange" element of this new program. It's almost as if they said it so much internally that they were going to make an internal exchange system that they lost sight of what they were actually trying to do, which is to create a better (more effective) and more profitable system.

As a result, they just created a partial week version of the II system. Completely wrong paradigm for a points system. What they should have done was take a look at a few of the systems that had success in converting owners from a fixed/floating week system and copied their model and learned from their mistakes.

That's okay, the world is littered with companies who tried to reinvent the wheel and ended up with a square thing that wouldn't turn.

I'm confused. If you search this board as far back as 2006 the speculation about a new Marriott system was that they would be developing an internal exchange system. Here's a thread that was begun 5/4/06 and this is Dave's Post #10:

As I reported here a few months ago, Marriott is in the early stages of developing an internal trading mechanism that would be handled without II. The implementation is still several years away.

However, Marriott will not "break away" from II. Marriott will need II for owners who choose to exchange into non-Marriotts.

This isn't a question of "if" it will happen, but "when" it will happen.

There are plenty of posts/threads since 2006 (and probably before then if we could access the old boards) that mention an internal exchange system being developed by Marriott. (And of course, what's been rolled out doesn't match all of the speculation.) But I don't know why anybody would have expected a new program focused on something other than internal exchanges.

 

[BocaBum99]

I'm confused. If you search this board as far back as 2006 the speculation about a new Marriott system was that they would be developing an internal exchange system. Here's a thread that was begun 5/4/06 and this is Dave's Post #10:


There are plenty of posts/threads since 2006 (and probably before then if we could access the old boards) that mention an internal exchange system being developed by Marriott. (And of course, what's been rolled out doesn't match all of the speculation.) But I don't know why anybody would have expected a new program focused on something other than internal exchanges.

You shouldn't be confused. Marriott did create an internal exchange system just like they said they were going to do. They modeled it after II and they missed a great opportunity to make a great points system.

A point system also allows internal exchanges and the best ones do it great. Marriott isn't even as good as RCI Points which is one of the worst point systems in the industry. It's not even close to the best in the industry. I can't think of any point system that is worse than Marriott's.

I still plan on joining because I'll get some great trades unlike Perry who paid maintenance fees on a 2br unit and got a partial week in a studio. He would have been better off locking off this Summit watch and exchanging for a full week at MOC with either the studio or 1br half. He would have gotten a full week instead of a partial week and he would have had another week to trade. Perry does weird things sometimes.

 

[pfrank4127]

I'm confused. If you search this board as far back as 2006 the speculation about a new Marriott system was that they would be developing an internal exchange system. Here's a thread that was begun 5/4/06 and this is Dave's Post #10:


There are plenty of posts/threads since 2006 (and probably before then if we could access the old boards) that mention an internal exchange system being developed by Marriott. (And of course, what's been rolled out doesn't match all of the speculation.) But I don't know why anybody would have expected a new program focused on something other than internal exchanges.

That was very interesting reading that old thread! Thanks!!

 

[SueDonJ]

You shouldn't be confused. Marriott did create an internal exchange system just like they said they were going to do. They modeled it after II and they missed a great opportunity to make a great points system.

A point system also allows internal exchanges and the best ones do it great. Marriott isn't even as good as RCI Points which is one of the worst point systems in the industry. It's not even close to the best in the industry. I can't think of any point system that is worse than Marriott's.

But it was you who confused me, Boca, when you said, "It's almost as if they said it so much internally that they were going to make an internal exchange system that they lost sight of what they were actually trying to do ..." I think what they were actually trying to do was to develop an internal exchange system!

I agree that whatever they've developed hasn't rolled out as The Best anything, that's for sure. We'll have to see what we think of it a year or so in before we completely pan it, though.

I still plan on joining because I'll get some great trades unlike Perry who paid maintenance fees on a 2br unit and got a partial week in a studio. He would have been better off locking off this Summit watch and exchanging for a full week at MOC with either the studio or 1br half. He would have gotten a full week instead of a partial week and he would have had another week to trade. Perry does weird things sometimes.

Don't we all?

 

[Dean]

But it was you who confused me, Boca, when you said, "It's almost as if they said it so much internally that they were going to make an internal exchange system that they lost sight of what they were actually trying to do ..." I think what they were actually trying to do was to develop an internal exchange system!

I agree that whatever they've developed hasn't rolled out as The Best anything, that's for sure. We'll have to see what we think of it a year or so in before we completely pan it, though.



Don't we all?

II developed their partial week option in large part due to DVC's input from what I can gather. In the past II has been rumored to be working on their own points program.

Every system I know of that works with points AND has cash type exchange options (cruises, hotels, etc) puts a lot of emphasis on those other options in the sales process. However, I'm not aware of a single one that consistently gives good value for those other options.

My interpretation of what Marriott was/is trying to do is multi-factored but ultimately it comes down to long term profit enhancement and protection. Hopefully it'll be win-win for them and their customers, we'll have to see. However, unlike many here, I think there is more involved in Marriott's plan than pure short term profit.

 

[dioxide45]

Perry does weird things sometimes.

Apparently view was very important to Perry, given the price he paid for a OF studio. The only explanation I have for Perry is that all those years he was touting great trades, he was actually trading down in view but up in location or unit. Seems view was 90% and the other only 10%.

 

[SueDonJ]

That was very interesting reading that old thread! Thanks!!

You're welcome! If you're interested in reading more, click on "Advanced Search" in the drop-down menu up there at "Search" on the blue line, and then input "internal exchange" for the search terms, "Dave M" as the User Name (because he had contacts for related info,) and choose the Marriott board under "Search in Forums." All kinds of goodies for you there.

 

[dioxide45]

I think while many people referenced an "internal exchange system", more people thought it would be more of an internal reservation system across multiple resorts rather than an exchange company. I don't think there are any other companies out there with a point system that is actually an exchange company (other than RCI). The rest seem to allow reservation flexibility at a certain date prior to check in. HGVC and DVC are examples of this. If the time is not reserved, it can be booked.

I think Marriott took this route because it gives them ultimate control over inventory where the other systems may not provide that to the management companies.

 

[Dean]

I think while many people referenced an "internal exchange system", more people thought it would be more of an internal reservation system across multiple resorts rather than an exchange company. I don't think there are any other companies out there with a point system that is actually an exchange company (other than RCI). The rest seem to allow reservation flexibility at a certain date prior to check in. HGVC and DVC are examples of this. If the time is not reserved, it can be booked.

I think Marriott took this route because it gives them ultimate control over inventory where the other systems may not provide that to the management companies.

DVC has a registered exchange company which they use only for exchanges external to their system but directly with other companies. Bluegreen, Club Cordial & Club Intrawest do the same thing, BG with shell and the other 2 reciprocal to DVC. I don't know if they have formally registered an exchange company, if they have, I'm not aware of it though Jim would be in a much better position than I would to know regarding BG.

My suspicion is that the only legal and reasonable way they could provide "direct" access between the current weeks system and the points system was something along the lines of what they've done. Else you either wouldn't have a connection at all and would simply run them independently freezing the current system where it is OR you'd convert the current members who did elect to participate directly to the trust itself with the benefits but negatives included. With that approach likely the only conversion option allowed would be an additional purchase and it's very possible they would have done so by exchanging what you currently owned for other inventory to get the right number of points. That'd be quite an increase in dues with the current structure.

 

[BocaBum99]

I think while many people referenced an "internal exchange system", more people thought it would be more of an internal reservation system across multiple resorts rather than an exchange company. I don't think there are any other companies out there with a point system that is actually an exchange company (other than RCI). The rest seem to allow reservation flexibility at a certain date prior to check in. HGVC and DVC are examples of this. If the time is not reserved, it can be booked.

I think Marriott took this route because it gives them ultimate control over inventory where the other systems may not provide that to the management companies.

Exactly....

 

[Fredm]

.... they just created a partial week version of the II system. Completely wrong paradigm for a points system. What they should have done was take a look at a few of the systems that had success in converting owners from a fixed/floating week system and copied their model and learned from their mistakes.

Boca, that is exactly what Marriott has done.
Created a partial week exchange mechanism for legacy owners.
It is an additional option. Enrolled members should exercise the legacy system for weekly trades.

How well it will work remains to be seen. But, it will be directly related to legacy conversions.

Tuggers have put this under a microscope, diced and sliced it, and uncovered the shortcomings. Most of which are distinctions without a difference as a practical matter when using the legacy system.

So, the sales proposition for the 95%+ of legacy owners who do not read TUG is a simple one: keep what you already enjoy, but have the added ability to make partial week reservations/exchanges, potentially save on fees, make travel arrangements, and convert to MRP's (if a resale owner). I think that will sell quite well. It will take couple of year or more for Marriott to get around to all owners. But, over time Marriott will achieve its goal of controlling the whole shebang (or most of it).

I mean, you said you are converting, warts and all. If it has some backhanded appeal to you, how do you think less insightful owners will view the offer?

Pluses and minuses aside, I do think it will be successful for Marriott. And Marriott's success will mean that there will be enough inventory for the system to work well. That will be the bottom line for most.

Marriott is 5 weeks into a multi-year migration. Meanwhile, legacy owners have not surrendered anything, or lost what they had pre-June 20. As I have stated before, that is the biggest take away from this whole thing.

It is not that Marriott has focused too much on creating a partial week exchange/reservation system. It is our obsession with it. Nothing is compelling us to deal with it, except liking to hear ourselves talk:hysterical: