Open Letter to Marriott

[dioxide45]

Why the skim? Why solve the breakage question by permanently discounting the value, versus instituting an Open Season?

The new program does have an open reservation season at the 60 day mark. The problem with it though is that it doesn't do much more than the Priority 3 period. Open reservation allows all members to book single nights at the 60 day mark. The problem is that there are very very few members that can only book in open reservation. Almost all members can book single nights at 10 months. So when the 60 day mark comes a long, there isn't really any incentive for more people to book additional single nights.

I think this is where Marriott goofed. They should have made the Priority 3 reservation period a five or two night requirement. You had to either book the Sun - Thurs time period or the Fri - Sat time period, not just single nights at the 10 month mark.

 

[GregT]

This isn't true, it isn't as simple as points in equals points out. It costs more to book a studio and a 1BR separately. So if I put in 2000 points with my 2BR, I can't get equal accommodation (a 1BR and a studio) with those same 2000 points.

With apologies, most of the HGVC properties I've looked at are "mathematically clean", ie a 2BR requires 7,000 points to book, a 1BR
requires 4,800 to book, and a Studio requires 2,200 to book.

What HGVC didn't do is differentiate points in locations (which they should have, and are starting to do now).

IE, 7,000 points in Las Vegas or Orlando gets you a 2BR unit, and if you own in Las Vegas and Orlando, you can use your 7,000 points to book a 2BR at Hilton Hawaiian Village in Oahu (Kalia/Lagoon Towers) or at Waikoloa on the Big Island -- and these aren't affiliate properties.

It's interesting that their newer properties (not necessarily better but newer) like Kingland and Grand Waikikian have broken the trend and now require (significantly) higher points values.

There is a home resort advantage -- it's an interesting system.

Frankly, Marriott incorporated most of what is the best about the different systems I'm familiar with (HGVC, Worldmark and Wyndham) and overlaid it with their existing properties.

Owners were expecting for the first time to quantify the difference in locations/weeks, so that's not surprising (but perhaps disappointing).

But the level of skim doesn't appear commensurate to the lost value of the existing owners. Worldmark has a 90% occupancy rate, system wide, all properties (with a few of the duds being majority of the vacant units). There is very rarely availability at the best properties during the equivalent of Platinum -- there's a Sightings board at WMOwners devoted to alert the members when something IS available.

Frustrating stuff...

Best to all,

Greg

 

[dioxide45]

I think the skim is there more to adjust for broken weeks rather than just plain breakage. Breakage in II is a week that goes unused. II doesn't have broken weeks. Breakage in the new Marriott system may only be a week here and a week there. Broken weeks will be high, but overall breakage may still be low.

 

[jerseygirl]

Marylyn --You may be correct that Hilton started as a point system (I don't know the history -- certainly the affiliates started as weeks systems), but it's very comparable to Marriott's "legacy" system in that all members own a specific deeded week. One cannot simply decide to buy 1000 (or 5000) points. Yes, weekends are higher, percentage-wise, than Marriott is charging for weekends. But, it's not fair to call it "skimming" since points in = points out for all trades. "Skimming" refers to the fact that, in most (all?) cases, even a fixed week owner is not receiving the same number of points for trading out as are required to trade in. You will not find any instances of that in Hilton's, Hyatt's, Starwood's, or DVC's systems.

This isn't true, it isn't as simple as points in equals points out. It costs more to book a studio and a 1BR separately. So if I put in 2000 points with my 2BR, I can't get equal accommodation (a 1BR and a studio) with those same 2000 points.

Dioxide -- you're right. Sorry, I keep forgetting that a one-BR plus Studio does not equal a 2-BR L/O in Marriott's system (I guess it's so implausible to me that I'm blocking it! ). Having said that, my point was that Hilton doesn't skim points from any owner/member. All points out = points in, whether it be a one-BR for a one-BR, a two-BR for a two-BR, or a one-BR plus a studio for a two-BR lockout.

At Starwood resorts with both dedicated 2-BRs and 2-BR L/Os (e.g., Harborside), the 2-BR L/Os have more point value than the dedicated 2-BRs (and they split into 2 one-BRs). I always thought the situation at Grande Vista was strange. I remember reading that a 2-BR L/O was priced the same as a regular 2-BR and owners could end up with either/or when they reserved. I know that theoretically they're the same, but I would think value would be placed on the ability to split the two units for two weeks of usage or rent one side. Do they distinguish them at all differently in the new system? (Or, perhaps I've always just misunderstood the situation based on something I read here on TUG.)

 

[m61376]

A few comments to several of the above posts:

Greg- while I totally agree with you, I'd like ot go one step further- what about the resorts where owners weren't allocated enough points to book ANY weeks in their season? What about the Plat. Plus fixed week Waiohai owner who received less points for his fixed week than it would cost him to book it?

Now- to counter Marylin's argument that you can always continue to use the system as you always have. In fact, if Marriott can take week deposits that were put in II by week owners (whether or not they are part of the new program or not) and use those weeks to fulfill requests by points owners (or week owners using points) from the waitlist, than EVERY owner, whether or not they elect to convert, just lost a big piece of the current system. If Marriott is the designated higher value request, then the peak weeks will go to the highest bidder- and guess what's left? Week owners may have a hard time trading into any peak weeks if point owners want those weeks.

So cheerleading the new program by saying that it is simply an overlay system with lots of nice benefits if you choose to use them, lower fees (ignoring the 7-15% commission Marriott is taking on each transaction), and that current owners have nothing to lose if they choose not to join or if they join and just continue business as usual may all sound good in the sales office, but - personally- I think is quite fallacious.

 

[bogey21]

How in the world are non-sophisticated owners going to figure out what is going on? I'm talking about those people who bought a lock-off, say 10 years ago, to use, trade and/or rent and have been doing the same things with their Weeks for years. Isn't their world now changed dramatically?

George

 

[BocaBoy]

hawaii Values

Ko Olina and Waiohai owners seem unhappy because they think they should have equal value to Maui, despite the fact that Maui is in greater demand and cost 50% more to buy. That is nonsense IMHO. I own at all three resorts and I feel this is a correction of an inequity that has gone on too long.

 

[brigechols]

Ko Olina and Waiohai owners seem unhappy because they think they should have equal value to Maui, despite the fact that Maui is in greater demand and cost 50% more to buy. That is nonsense IMHO. I own at all three resorts and I feel this is a correction of an inequity that has gone on too long.

While I cannot speak for other Ko Olina or Waiohai owners, this Ko Olina owner could care less about Maui allocated points. I was not allocated enough points at Ko Olina to book any week during the year. Yes, I can still reserve a week at my home resort under the previous system but it is one of many factors that I considered when evaluating whether or not to join the Club.

 

[scrapngen]

Ko Olina and Waiohai owners seem unhappy because they think they should have equal value to Maui, despite the fact that Maui is in greater demand and cost 50% more to buy. That is nonsense IMHO. I own at all three resorts and I feel this is a correction of an inequity that has gone on too long.

I am a Waiohai owner and I have no particular feelings toward Maui trades - I am an unhappy Waiohai owner because one of my fixed weeks that was sold to me 6 months ago at a premium price as a Plat plus week is now allocated the same points as a cheaper Plat week at the same resort. AND it is not enough points to book any but the lowest level weeks at that same resort. Yes, since it is a fixed week I can always book my premium week. But it certainly is not allocated a fair number of points within my own resort - according to price paid and how many points it would cost to reserve. It makes no sense for me to go to points. I actually wanted to puchase another week in the next year, but would not buy the new points, as I like having a home resort.

Nothing to do with Maui points.

 

[m61376]

Bocaboy- Just to add- the new Maui towers may be 50% more expensive, but the original section doesn't have a 50% purchase premium, unless I am mistaken in the pricing.

There are many non-Hawaii owners who are very unhappy with the point allocations. There are owners at other resorts that didn't get enough points to book ANY week in their season. And you refer to pricing being higher, so one should get more points- what about the fact that last week Marirott felt OS in Aruba was almost 5k more valuable, but suddenly this week OS=OV? And, since you are talking about pricing- what about that fact that Marirott rents some units for double what other properties rent for (since price equates to value, right) but gives the higher rental properties significantly less points? There are MANY inconsistencies in the point valuations.

I agree with one inference you made- pricing should relate to value. But pricing charged for resorts also relates to the time of construction, so there is an inflationary factor. Real value is represented by what Marriott itself can charge to rent the villas at Marirott.com. That would reflect quality and demand. But the point values don't represent that.

 

[kamumma1]

Dear Marriott

Dear Marriott -

Overall, there are pros and cons to this new point system. For our family, we bought 2 weeks in Orlando that we were going to mostly trade and travel to a variety of places. Our rep "sold" us on the idea that we could buy cheaper units and trade almost anywhere. We take 2 week long vacations with Marriott each year. Should we switch to the point system however, we will not be able to travel to a majority of places on the number of points we would receive, without investing many thousands more into your company. While it is nice to be able to pick your view at the resort, and to choose how many days you want to stay - if we switch to the points system, we would no longer be able to use our timeshares in the way that they were sold to us. It is switching the rules 1/2 way through and frankly we wouldn't have purchased what we did back then if the rules are the way they are now. Even if we continue to use the system the way we were sold, there is going to be less inventory at Interval as anyone joining the points system will no longer be depositing there - making exchanges more difficult. I am also wary as to how Marriott is allowed to "take weeks" from the Interval inventory. I am also wary as to how Marriott is allowed to change what our units are worth in terms of points. We have really enjoyed the resorts and hotels that we have traded and exchanged into and would like to continue to do so in the future. However, if the exchange process becomes too limiting or doesn't allow us to make decent trades, we will most likely be selling our units vs sinking thousands of additional dollars into a system just to get what we originally purchased.

Concerned,
Kathy Mumma

(I also sent this to the Marriott Owners Advocacy Group)

 

[mjbaran]

Dear Marriott -

Overall, there are pros and cons to this new point system. For our family, we bought 2 weeks in Orlando that we were going to mostly trade and travel to a variety of places. Our rep "sold" us on the idea that we could buy cheaper units and trade almost anywhere. We take 2 week long vacations with Marriott each year. Should we switch to the point system however, we will not be able to travel to a majority of places on the number of points we would receive, without investing many thousands more into your company. While it is nice to be able to pick your view at the resort, and to choose how many days you want to stay - if we switch to the points system, we would no longer be able to use our timeshares in the way that they were sold to us. It is switching the rules 1/2 way through and frankly we wouldn't have purchased what we did back then if the rules are the way they are now. Even if we continue to use the system the way we were sold, there is going to be less inventory at Interval as anyone joining the points system will no longer be depositing there - making exchanges more difficult. I am also wary as to how Marriott is allowed to "take weeks" from the Interval inventory. I am also wary as to how Marriott is allowed to change what our units are worth in terms of points. We have really enjoyed the resorts and hotels that we have traded and exchanged into and would like to continue to do so in the future. However, if the exchange process becomes too limiting or doesn't allow us to make decent trades, we will most likely be selling our units vs sinking thousands of additional dollars into a system just to get what we originally purchased.

Concerned,
Kathy Mumma

(I also sent this to the Marriott Owners Advocacy Group)

Kathy, WELL DONE!!
My sentiments exactly.

 

[Y-ASK]

However, if the exchange process becomes too limiting or doesn't allow us to make decent trades, we will most likely be selling our units vs sinking thousands of additional dollars into a system just to get what we originally purchased.

Marriott's reply:

Thank you for your kind words and we would like you to know that you are free to sell both of your timeshares at any time. In fact we are in need of your weeks for our Trust Inventory so please sell your timeshares for pennies on the dollar and we will be happy to pick them up via ROFR for said pennies on the dollar.

Have a nice day,
Marriott...

On a more serious note, please be prepared for signficantly lower offers (if any) that you may receive when you put them up for sale. I'm sure there are going to be other owners that will be selling also and if you're having problems with trading so will everyone else who decides not to enroll.


Y-ASK

 

[Clemson Fan]

Now, Marriott has suddenly decided to change their mind, and for a small entry fee, allow all resale owners the benefits that other's most likely paid 20+ thousand dollars additional to receive.

My opinion........You got a gift! Be happy. Be very, very happy, but stop expecting those that paid much, much, more than you based on what Marriott told them not to have a reaction to Marriott's decision.

What gift??? Am I missing something here? IMO the exchanging your week for MRP’s has become a worthless option over the past several years. Can’t I use cash to buy 50K points/year for roughly the same prorated cost of my MF’s, plus I’m not losing the use of my week?

Unless you got like 500K points or something (and you’re a point hawk who knows how to maximize it) as a bonus for buying developer, there was really no good reason to buy developer. The trading your week for MRP option is nothing to write home about. I hate to say it, but those who bought developer and then who found TUG later on and who aren’t point hawks just frankly made a costly mistake. They’re using the trading for MRP option as a rationalization to justify their costly mistake, but that’s all it is – rationalization. IMO, you need to just acknowledge the mistake in your mind and just get over it and enjoy your weeks to the best of your ability. Writing letters to Marriott with the expressed intention of punishing resale owners makes no sense whatsoever because in the end it’s just hurting yourselves even further. Punishing resale owners only benefits the Marriott timeshare salesmen – that’s it! Unless you are a Marriott timeshare salesman or are directly related to one, going out of your way to protect their interest makes no sense because in the long run their interests are in direct conflict to our interest as owners. They don’t want any viable resale market because it’s competition to them and they want to crush that competition. However, without a viable resale market the value of our weeks will be completely up to Marriott and we all know from past experience that except for the most sought after weeks Marriott could care less about the value of our weeks.

Punishing resales will ONLY devalue our weeks. My biggest concern about the new points program is Marriott not allowing any future resale weeks to be included. I’m not in the market for a week nor am I looking to sell my weeks, but someday we will ALL probably be in the market to sell our weeks. However, by not allowing future resale weeks to be included it will severely devalue ALL our weeks. We should be writing letters to Marriott expressing frustration over them not allowing future resales to be reasonably allowed to join their new points system. It makes good sense for Marriott as a whole because they will get more weeks to participate and they can collect more in fees as long as they are somewhat reasonable.

 

[ArtsieAng]

Clemson Fan

What gift??? Am I missing something here? IMO the exchanging your week for MRP’s has become a worthless option over the past several years.

Be that as it may, when Marriott charges tens of thousands of dollars per week, for the privilege, and then decides that for a mere $1999, they will allow resale weeks the same privilege, it's a gift. IMO

BTW, I disagree with your assessment. I've read numerous times on this board that people were converting, or considering converting because Marriott was grandfathering them into the system, and allowing them the option to trade in their week for points.

Punishing resales will ONLY devalue our weeks.

Someone has to buy retail in order for you to buy resale. Let's not forget that fact.........What incentive is there to pay tens of thousand of dollars more to Marriott, when in the end, it makes little difference?

 

[hipslo]

What incentive is there to pay tens of thousand of dollars more to Marriott, when in the end, it makes little difference?

Many of us feel that there never has been any incentive to buy developer (at least none that was worth anything).

Now, if the new points system were a good, desireable system, and resale owners were excluded from joining, that would certainly have been an incentive to purchase direct. The fact that marriott has not drawn that distinction, at least as to prior resales, ought to tell you everything you need to know about how loyal marriott feels towards direct purchasers over resale purchasers, at least where there is money to be made off of those resale owners.

 

[ArtsieAng]

Many of us feel that there never has been any incentive to buy developer (at least none that was worth anything).

I don't disagree, but obviously, some did. At any rate, that has been Marriott's spiel, and many bought into it.....Again, if no one buys retail, there can be no resale market.

Now, if the new points system were a good, desireable system, and resale owners were excluded from joining, that would certainly have been an incentive to purchase direct. The fact that marriott has not drawn that distinction, at least as to prior resales, ought to tell you everything you need to know about how loyal marriott feels towards direct purchasers over resale purchasers, at least where there is money to be made off of those resale owners.

Yup, I agree.

 

[Clemson Fan]

Someone has to buy retail in order for you to buy resale. Let's not forget that fact.........What incentive is there to pay tens of thousand of dollars more to Marriott, when in the end, it makes little difference?

I recently bought DVC directly from DVC. Why, because they support their product with an active ROFR and there’s an active resale market. There’s a very active resale market for DVC outside the confines of DVC that they allow to exist. Knowing that I could turn around and sell my DVC points (granted probably for a 20-30% loss) made it very palatable to me and a no brainer decision with the incentives DVC was giving me. I can honestly recommend DVC to friends and family, for Marriott I cannot.

Allowing a resale market to exist helps support one’s product. Relying on a flashy sales presentation and gimmicks like MRP’s to capture unsuspecting customers in this day and age is a bad business model IMO. Destroying the resale market will in the end destroy the underlying value of the product. It’s been proven time and time again by other timeshare companies.

Just follow DVC’s example and support your underlying product and in the long run it will be very successful.

 

[RBERR1]

letter to Marriott

Dear Mr.Marriott,

I was hoping that Marriott would create some kind of point system for its owners and it is nice to see that you have created one. However, I have some questions and concerns about how it is being implemented. I think that the difference in points between what an individual receives versus the amount required to pay for the same week in the same resort is not acceptable. The value of a week should be the same regardless.

I am also concerned about the lack of transparency between MVCI and II relating to the new system. There is an impression(rightly or wrongly) that Marriott and II have an agreement to take any weeks deposits by weeks owners and give them to Marriott to use for its point requests over other weeks owners searching for the same property. I believe that both organizations need to send out a simple statement explaining how this is going to work because being transparent is the best way to avoid misunderstandings.

My last concern has to do with the MVCI staff ability to answer questions about the program. When you call MVCI, the answers you get are very inconsistent. If you call three times, you get very different answers about any question about the system. I have always said that the MVCI staff have been amazing but this is making them look like they are incompetent which is not the impression you want.

I believe that there is potential for this to be a great point system with a few minor changes and clarifications. Based on what I see now, I feel there is insufficient disclosure in simple terms to make a proper decision and so I sit on the fence for now about whether to join.
Thank you for the opportunity again for me to provide my feedback.

Sincerely,

 

[eileenpat]

Letter to Marriott

Perfect! You have expressed the concerns to a "T"!

 

[AndrewH]

I purchased two Platinum weeks at Grande Vista in February 2010 directly from Marriott, paying nearly $60,000 for the privilege. In July 2010 (when taking my first vacation) I was invited by a salesman to buy into the new points based system. His advice was that I pay an additional $10,000 to increase my points to above 6,400, a threshold that would qualify me for preferential treatment when booking holidays at other resorts.

At risk of repeating what has gone before, my concerns about the new scheme are twofold:

(1) The points I receive from my purchase in February 2010 are insufficient to "buy" two weeks at my home resort. This is an outrageous and arbitrary value debasement that has been imposed in less than six months. It similarly inhibits my ability to stay at other resorts.

(2) (In response to the salesman's defence that I needn't worry because I will still be able to trade weeks through II) Marriot intends to remove inventory over time from II, and hence the scope to swap into other resorts will reduce. Note in this context the expectation by Marriott that 80% of weekly owners will (pay up and) transfer into the points system, leaving those who dislike undergoing a shakedown having an unpopular rump of properties from which to select. Looks like my choices in the future will be Florida or bronze weeks in Baghdad.

I actually quite like the proposed points based system, which is transparent and elegant. What I dislike is the fact that it is being introduced in a way which requires owners like myself to pay a second "entry" fee to acquire entitlements that I thought I had already purchased. I consider the discount on points allocation to be entirely capricious in this regard. The fact that I am suffering the dilution less than six months into my Marriott relationship makes me feel very sore.

The salesman who delivered the pitch to me was surprisingly candid. He explained that I didn't question having to buy periodic software upgrades from Microsoft, and should look at Marriott Vacation Club as being no different. His argument was essentially, "you are already in for $60k, what's the problem with another $10k to get what you want?" The responses he gave to my ever more incredulous questions evidenced that the Marriott sales team (read Marriott Inc) know that many weekly owners will be losing out, or at least obliged to pay further capital lump sums if they are not to lose out.

Looking on the bright side, do I get an award for being the sucker of the year?

 

[5infam]

Nicely done Andrew - and Welcome to TUG!!!