Speculation About Marriott's New Timeshare Structure [merged]

[Stefa]

There are many other concerns wrt devaluation, besides limiting access to your home resort. There's limiting exchange opportunities, the likely limitations on like for like (size and number of days) for many trades, etc..

But wouldn't those effect all owners no matter how they purchased? The point I was trying to make is that, other than a (likely) higher buy in cost, there isn't anything known about the new system that distinguishes between develper and resale weeks. I don't see any reason for there to be conflict between developer and resale buyers here on TUG.

 

[SueDonJ]

Working backwards- as Dave posted, most (if not all) the resort documents contained wording about the 13 month rule- so most, if not all, people purchasing should have been aware of it when making their purchase decision. That is very different from changing rules/benefits after the fact. Marriott has never had 2 subsets of owners wrt usage of their property- which is why I still maintain that it is unfair for them to superimpose such a categorization., You are free to disagree- it doesn't make you right and me wrong (or vice versa, of course). I think I have read and understood your stance on this more than correctly; I think everyone here might be getting a little tired of that bantering, so let's agree to disagree.

Now, the governing docs for most resorts contain the 13-mo wording, yes. But the same is not true for when it was implemented. iconnections, I believe, has posted that it changed the rules/benefits of her ownership after the fact and, she believes, devalued the ownership for her and all single-week owners at the time. Regardless of how/why it was done or what any of us feel about it now, I brought it into this discussion only to prove the point that Marriott does have a history of devaluing ownership for certain owners by changing rules/benefits after the fact. That's it. I don't see where anyone can disagree with that, if an owner who was a direct beneficiary of it has stated it to be so.

As for the first part- yes, of course, there has always been a filtering system, and not even a Plat. premium week was guaranteed of a like for like trade. But, there was always at least the potential (subject to availability, of course) of a 2BR Platinum unit in one locale getting a 2 BR elsewhere for the same period of time (7 days). If you look at the Asia Pacific program (and I reference that only because it is a Marirott designed program that they felt was equitable and salable) some Plat. 2BR weeks will only qualify for smaller units and/or shorter time frames. So there stand the very real possibility that there will be a lot of unhappy Platinum week owners, to say nothing of Gold, Silver and Bronze week owners. In fact, if you look at the other program, even owners of premium Plat. resorts may not have enough points to trade back into peak weeks (and I am not just talking about holiday weeks- weeks with TDI's greater than 120). So that's what I referring to when I summarized it as limitations on like for like.

Again, m, I guess I'm just not getting worked up over the possibility of a points system providing less usage value if it also offers the opportunity for more, because we already are working with an II system that provides disparity. But we'll just have to see the details of what Marriott rolls out, if they do, to determine if it will work for us individually. The available AP program information is too severely limited, especially insofar as how its working today, to consider it as the barometer of what we might expect.

 

[brigechols]

m61376,

Thanks for posting the link to the Asia Pacific program discussion thread. Very interesting read! Can anyone explain why Ko'Olina, Waiohai, and Grand Chateau are part of the Asia Pacific program? Logic dictates that points for a 1 bedroom plus studio should equal the points for a 2 bedroom lockoff but that does not appear to be the case (Ko Olina 2 bedroom 48,900 points, 1 bedroom 33,100 points, and studio 22,300 points) . Still using Ko Olina as an example, there is no point distinction based on the view so 48,900 points could provide either a 2 bedroom island view or ocean view. If Marriott does roll out a points based system, will they assign the same point value for Ko Olina, Waiohai, and Grand Chateau as assigned under the Asia Pacific program?

Just went to the Mariott AP website and noted that Membership in Marriott Vacation Club, Asia Pacific is not open to US Residents.

 

[PerryM]

Coconut telegraph here...

Wyndham makes no bones about resales - they hate them and that's why they go for 5 cents on the dollar. Buy from Wyndham and by the time the ink dries you lost 95% of your "investment". They don't buy resale under ANY circumstances I know of.

Marriott seems to want it both ways - hate resales but they become a resale buyer to further their own interests. Isn't that what we do when we buy resale - let someone else lose 40%+ and use, exchange, and rent?

Marriott is the largest resale buyer in the world and they want to lecture us about buying resale? Hello?????

Now Marriott demands we pay for being a resale owner yet they are just as guilty.

It's spelled hypocrisy and it won't go unnoticed by Marriott owners....

(From my laptop while under a coconut tree by Duke's Restaurant)

 

[SueDonJ]

Coconut telegraph here...

BWAHAHahahahahah! That's even better than a crackberry! :hysterical:

 

[dougp26364]

Wyndham makes no bones about resales - they hate them and that's why they go for 5 cents on the dollar. Buy from Wyndham and by the time the ink dries you lost 95% of your "investment". They don't buy resale under ANY circumstances I know of.

Marriott seems to want it both ways - hate resales but they become a resale buyer to further their own interests. Isn't that what we do when we buy resale - let someone else lose 40%+ and use, exchange, and rent?

Marriott is the largest resale buyer in the world and they want to lecture us about buying resale? Hello?????

Now Marriott demands we pay for being a resale owner yet they are just as guilty.

It's spelled hypocrisy and it won't go unnoticed by Marriott owners....

(From my laptop while under a coconut tree by Duke's Restaurant)

Why is everyone always assuming Marriott will copy Wyndham? Why not any of the other many points based systems out there? Some of the other points based reservations systems even employ the dreaded ROFR, which artificially props up the resale values to much higher than 5 cents per point.

I agree with Fletch. Some of you are way over thinking this. Absolutely nothing has happened and a few of you are tossing the baby out with the bath water. Before we condem Marriott, I think we at least owe it to them to actually see what's being offered first, then we can disect it and decide if it's good deal or bad. The way you guys are going at these shadows you'd think you were fortune tellers or some other nonsense.

Tell me, exactly how can Marriott be hypocritical when they haven't DONE anything yet? Do you have some sort of crystal ball that will tell you the future? Hypocrisy can't exist until they actually do something. Even when they do make an announcment, unless you know what they're going to say you can't make that statement. You're way off base at this time and your way over thinking this. You're getting your knickers in a knot over something that hasn't happened and, IMHO, isn't likely to happen. At least not in the realm your mind is wandering.

 

[Latravel]

I agree with Fletch. Some of you are way over thinking this. Absolutely nothing has happened and a few of you are tossing the baby out with the bath water. Before we condem Marriott, I think we at least owe it to them to actually see what's being offered first, then we can disect it and decide if it's good deal or bad...

Very well said. I may be foolish but I believe Marriott will put out a good product IF they decide to go that route. Based on their past performance, they are doing something right and I just don't believe they are completely incompetent, hypocritical or vindictive as some may suggest. I am looking forward to seeing what they have to offer and if it fits with my vacation needs.

 

[SueDonJ]

I agree with you two, Doug and Heidi. I think it will be interesting (and maybe a little exciting, too ) to see what Marriott might roll out here. But in the meantime, I love playing "what if" with these discussions - I learn something new all the time.

 

[DanCali]

Very well said. I may be foolish but I believe Marriott will put out a good product IF they decide to go that route. Based on their past performance, they are doing something right...

Does this include the Asia Pacific points system?

 

[PerryM]

Believe Marriott

Why is everyone always assuming Marriott will copy Wyndham? Why not any of the other many points based systems out there? Some of the other points based reservations systems even employ the dreaded ROFR, which artificially props up the resale values to much higher than 5 cents per point.

I agree with Fletch. Some of you are way over thinking this. Absolutely nothing has happened and a few of you are tossing the baby out with the bath water. Before we condem Marriott, I think we at least owe it to them to actually see what's being offered first, then we can disect it and decide if it's good deal or bad. The way you guys are going at these shadows you'd think you were fortune tellers or some other nonsense.

Tell me, exactly how can Marriott be hypocritical when they haven't DONE anything yet? Do you have some sort of crystal ball that will tell you the future? Hypocrisy can't exist until they actually do something. Even when they do make an announcement, unless you know what they're going to say you can't make that statement. You're way off base at this time and your way over thinking this. You're getting your knickers in a knot over something that hasn't happened and, IMHO, isn't likely to happen. At least not in the realm your mind is wandering.

Ok, who has been spreading fear among owners for 4 years now? Marriott; that's who.

They have used the hypothetical internal exchange system to put fear into folks who bring up the topic of resales - right?

Since Marriott is the one spreading this constant rumor for 4 years now I have to assume they are serious and the rumor is correct.

The new Marriott internal exchange system is a sales tool designed to hurt the resale market - just as they keep telling us for 4 years now - "Better not buy resale our you'll get screwed".

I was told this same rumor at least 3 times over the 4 years - this year our salesrep played dumb and shrugged his shoulder.

Why on earth not believe Marriott's own agents when they keep telling us the same thing for 4 years now?

Marriott could have kept it's big fat mouth closed for 4 years but they decided to spread fear far and wide.

The rumor helps Marriott - they dropped the ROFR and spread this rumor and resale prices fall - they then snap up resales at some point and punish owners who do the same thing. Even Wyndham has the decency to at least not do this to their owners.

I don't know if a lot of owners will be ticked off at this performance but Marriott is the one tarnishing their image with this rumor, not us.

I believe them...

 

[dioxide45]

Cost

I guess for many people it will come down to cost. If the cost is equivalent to what we pay today: $89 II fee + $109 for an exchange, then they will get a lot of people to convert. However, if Marriott uses it as a cash grab and charges anything even close to or more than $300 per year for a week, it will fail. Why pay more for something that you already have? The only gain would be some extra flexibility that you can already get with ShortStay.

With ShortStay you have to be flexible and able to travel on shorter notice, though according to that survey from over a year ago, it seems that the new system wasn't going to permit shorter stays except within a smaller window before checking.

This is all a big if, because I am doubtful that we will ever see it.

 

[m61376]

m61376,

Thanks for posting the link to the Asia Pacific program discussion thread. Very interesting read! Can anyone explain why Ko'Olina, Waiohai, and Grand Chateau are part of the Asia Pacific program? Logic dictates that points for a 1 bedroom plus studio should equal the points for a 2 bedroom lockoff but that does not appear to be the case (Ko Olina 2 bedroom 48,900 points, 1 bedroom 33,100 points, and studio 22,300 points) . Still using Ko Olina as an example, there is no point distinction based on the view so 48,900 points could provide either a 2 bedroom island view or ocean view. If Marriott does roll out a points based system, will they assign the same point value for Ko Olina, Waiohai, and Grand Chateau as assigned under the Asia Pacific program?

Just went to the Mariott AP website and noted that Membership in Marriott Vacation Club, Asia Pacific is not open to US Residents.

The Hawaiian resorts are geographically closer and Vegas is a popular destination for esp. Japanese tourists.

It would seem logical that stufio + 1BR =2BR, but even when you look at Marriott's website for rentals 2BR's are cheaper than a studio + a 1BR.

It's anyone's guess what kind of point values they assign. Hopefully it won't be akin to the AP program, or I think it will be hard to get it off the ground (of course, that's my opinion on that).

 

[m61376]

Now, the governing docs for most resorts contain the 13-mo wording, yes. But the same is not true for when it was implemented. iconnections, I believe, has posted that it changed the rules/benefits of her ownership after the fact and, she believes, devalued the ownership for her and all single-week owners at the time. Regardless of how/why it was done or what any of us feel about it now, I brought it into this discussion only to prove the point that Marriott does have a history of devaluing ownership for certain owners by changing rules/benefits after the fact. That's it. I don't see where anyone can disagree with that, if an owner who was a direct beneficiary of it has stated it to be so.

I was just repeating what Dave stated in another post: "The documents for most or all Marriott resorts contain a provision allowing owners of multiple weeks to reserve concurrent or consecutive weeks 13 months in advance. Some resort documents specifically state that the privilege is offered to owners of multiple weeks at that particular resort.

Marriott decided back in the early 1990s to extend that privilege to those who own at different resorts. "

It is possible that there was an isolated resort or resorts that did not have it- which is why I paraphrased his statement including the most if not all. Clearly it has been this way for almost 2 decades.

Regardless, as has been discussed many times before about that rule, it was applied evenly across the board and always provided for at least half of every reservation period to be available for single week owners. You keep on bringing it up as substantiating your contention that Marriott has devalued ownership for certain subsets of owners so they can do it again. However, again we'll have to disagree there; while I recognize that you feel there is a relationship to creating an ownership class system, I just don't see how your analysis applies.

 

[dougp26364]

Ok, who has been spreading fear among owners for 4 years now? Marriott; that's who.

They have used the hypothetical internal exchange system to put fear into folks who bring up the topic of resales - right?

Since Marriott is the one spreading this constant rumor for 4 years now I have to assume they are serious and the rumor is correct.

The new Marriott internal exchange system is a sales tool designed to hurt the resale market - just as they keep telling us for 4 years now - "Better not buy resale our you'll get screwed".

I was told this same rumor at least 3 times over the 4 years - this year our salesrep played dumb and shrugged his shoulder.

Why on earth not believe Marriott's own agents when they keep telling us the same thing for 4 years now?

Marriott could have kept it's big fat mouth closed for 4 years but they decided to spread fear far and wide.

The rumor helps Marriott - they dropped the ROFR and spread this rumor and resale prices fall - they then snap up resales at some point and punish owners who do the same thing. Even Wyndham has the decency to at least not do this to their owners.

I don't know if a lot of owners will be ticked off at this performance but Marriott is the one tarnishing their image with this rumor, not us.

I believe them...

The fear is spread by irrational rumors running rampent on internet forums.

You've been on more TS presentations than I have so you tell me, how many salesmen don't have some sort of fear speech to discourage resale purchases? Every presentation I've been on the salesman has a predictable reaction when you mention the R word. This is nothing new to TS sales floors so why is it such a big deal with Marriott?

F.E.A.R = False Evidence Appearing Real.


Sure a TS salesman wants to discourage resale purchases. They work on commision. What would you expect from them? To tell you to go out and buy resale rather than buy from them right now? Come on, you're off base on this. We're the ones spreading the "fear", not Marriott.

 

[dougp26364]

I guess for many people it will come down to cost. If the cost is equivalent to what we pay today: $89 II fee + $109 for an exchange, then they will get a lot of people to convert. However, if Marriott uses it as a cash grab and charges anything even close to or more than $300 per year for a week, it will fail. Why pay more for something that you already have? The only gain would be some extra flexibility that you can already get with ShortStay.

With ShortStay you have to be flexible and able to travel on shorter notice, though according to that survey from over a year ago, it seems that the new system wasn't going to permit shorter stays except within a smaller window before checking.

This is all a big if, because I am doubtful that we will ever see it.

It has to be cost effective or one heck of a great system for it to work. If there's no real incentive to make the change, the change won't be made and the system will fail.

 

[PerryM]

#203

The fear is spread by irrational rumors running rampent on internet forums.

You've been on more TS presentations than I have so you tell me, how many salesmen don't have some sort of fear speech to discourage resale purchases? Every presentation I've been on the salesman has a predictable reaction when you mention the R word. This is nothing new to TS sales floors so why is it such a big deal with Marriott?

F.E.A.R = False Evidence Appearing Real.


Sure a TS salesman wants to discourage resale purchases. They work on commision. What would you expect from them? To tell you to go out and buy resale rather than buy from them right now? Come on, you're off base on this. We're the ones spreading the "fear", not Marriott.

But this is an orchestrated rumor by a Fortune 500 company (#203 out of 500) - for 4 (four) years now. Thousands of their agents spreading the same rumor to tens/hundreds of thousands of owners/customers.

There is a HUGE difference between an incompetent salesrep cooking up some lame excuse for not buying resale and a MAJOR corporation spreading a rumor to hurt their owners.

Make no mistake about this - the rumor created and pushed by Marriott is designed to frighten owners/non-owners. The logical reason for this is to lower resale prices and allow them to recycle resales for peanuts.

Marriott's behavior is gutter marketing - they are simply joining the ranks of the lesser respected timeshare organizations. They make their own reputation; not me.

 

[dougp26364]

But this is an orchestrated rumor by a Fortune 500 company (#203 out of 500) - for 4 (four) years now. Thousands of their agents spreading the same rumor to tens/hundreds of thousands of owners/customers.

There is a HUGE difference between an incompetent salesrep cooking up some lame excuse for not buying resale and a MAJOR corporation spreading a rumor to hurt their owners.

Make no mistake about this - the rumor created and pushed by Marriott is designed to frighten owners/non-owners. The logical reason for this is to lower resale prices and allow them to recycle resales for peanuts.

Marriott's behavior is gutter marketing - they are simply joining the ranks of the lesser respected timeshare organizations. They make their own reputation; not me.

I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree. I think you're seeing shadows that just aren't there. I've heard similar stories that are consistant from other timeshare developers. I don't believe that there was a shooter on the grassy noll in Dallas either.

 

[taffy19]

I was just repeating what Dave stated in another post: "The documents for most or all Marriott resorts contain a provision allowing owners of multiple weeks to reserve concurrent or consecutive weeks 13 months in advance. Some resort documents specifically state that the privilege is offered to owners of multiple weeks at that particular resort.

Marriott decided back in the early 1990s to extend that privilege to those who own at different resorts. "

It is possible that there was an isolated resort or resorts that did not have it- which is why I paraphrased his statement including the most if not all. Clearly it has been this way for almost 2 decades.

Regardless, as haWs been discussed many times before about that rule, it was applied evenly across the board and always provided for at least half of every reservation period to be available for single week owners. You keep on bringing it up as substantiating your contention that Marriott has devalued ownership for certain subsets of owners so they can do it again. However, again we'll have to disagree there; while I recognize that you feel there is a relationship to creating an ownership class system, I just don't see how your analysis applies.

Our DSV-I was a resale that we bought from the Marriott direct as we exchanged our DSV-II contract to a DSV-I the next day.

The 13 months advance booking perk wasn't in existence yet and wasn't mentoned in the contract as far as I remember but there is a clause that they can make changes from time to time. *

After the change, we still had our 12 months in advance booking privilege so we kept that feature but people, who could book earlier, most likely booked the best weeks so they were no longer available to the one week owners. *This is what we noticed and were unhappy about as we could no longer get early March. *

It really made a change for the worst to us and this is why we decided to upgrade to a fixed week and unit in Maui and we like it..

 

[PerryM]

I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree. I think you're seeing shadows that just aren't there. I've heard similar stories that are consistant from other timeshare developers. I don't believe that there was a shooter on the grassy noll in Dallas either.

Please don't put words in my mouth.

Just listen to what the Marriott Salesreps say and what Marriott releases will be very close to what they keep warning us:

"Better not buy resale or you'll get screwed with the new Marriott Owner Internal Exchange System".

Just you watch...

 

[SueDonJ]

... I brought it into this discussion only to prove the point that Marriott does have a history of devaluing ownership for certain owners by changing rules/benefits after the fact. That's it. ...

... You keep on bringing it up as substantiating your contention that Marriott has devalued ownership for certain subsets of owners so they can do it again. However, again we'll have to disagree there; while I recognize that you feel there is a relationship to creating an ownership class system, I just don't see how your analysis applies.

... It really made a change for the worst to us and this is why we decided to upgrade to a fixed week and unit in Maui and we like it..

Thanks, iconnections; I thought it was you who had posted before about being "caught" by that change.

m, IF a new exchange program is rolled out and IF the only difference for resale and direct buyers is a sliding initiation fee, how will that be "creating an ownership class system?" I do see it as similar to the 13-mo rule, in that folks will have to decide for themselves if it makes sense to pay a premium for a certain usage benefit.

 

[m61376]

iconnections- Please understand I am not trying to be dismissive of your past situation. However, at least half of each of the "best" weeks (of each week, actually) are saved for the 12 month mark. At some resorts there are a few super desirable weeks that get booked very fast, and unless you call in exactly a 9 and are lucky, you may not get what you want.

I am glad the fixed week works better for you. For some people, they do. You save the aggravation of having to make reservations, but lose the flexibility of floating weeks. Everything is a trade off and it is good to have options to suit your needs.

 

[m61376]

m, IF a new exchange program is rolled out and IF the only difference for resale and direct buyers is a sliding initiation fee, how will that be "creating an ownership class system?" I do see it as similar to the 13-mo rule, in that folks will have to decide for themselves if it makes sense to pay a premium for a certain usage benefit.

As far as I know, owners weren't given a choice to pay a premium in to be able to book at 13 months. I assume by paying a premium you meant that they had the option of adding an additional week of ownership and booking weeks consecutively or contiguously. But, at least as far as I know, it was never a question of paying an additional fee for the privilege.

The difference is very clear- EVERY owner had the same option of buying another week at the same cost and on-going obligations (MF's, etc.). All owners who bought under the same set of rules of usage at least should continue to be treated equally.

Sue- it is clear we are never going to see eye to eye on this- and it seems silly and perhaps disrespectful of other Tugger's time to have to read through the bantering. I recognize that you don't feel that Marriott would be treating resale owners unfairly; please accept that I do. I am sure some people agree with you and others with me- it doesn't really matter. Let's just agree to disagree and move forward rather than constantly rehashing the same diatribe.

 

[taffy19]

I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree. I think you're seeing shadows that just aren't there. I've heard similar stories that are consistant from other timeshare developers. I don't believe that there was a shooter on the grassy noll in Dallas either.

Doug, I am with you as we have taken several updates on all three Islands and the sales people didn't spread any rumors. I even asked them about the new system and some even hadn't heard about it yet. I heard it on an owner type meeting where they explain how to use the system to your advantage but he could not give any further details. I will ask again when we are there in a few weeks but now we are in Mexico and my computer fried. Too many nasty storms so have to use iPhone where I can get free WiFi but it works.

 

[taffy19]

iconnections- Please understand I am not trying to be dismissive of your past situation. However, at least half of each of the "best" weeks (of each week, actually) are saved for the 12 month mark. At some resorts there are a few super desirable weeks that get booked very fast, and unless you call in exactly a 9 and are lucky, you may not get what you want.

I am glad the fixed week works better for you. For some people, they do. You save the aggravation of having to make reservations, but lose the flexibility of floating weeks. Everything is a trade off and it is good to have options to suit your needs.

We don't lose the flexibity of booking any other week or unit but have to go through II instead. Some of the best weeks are there as you know already. You put them there to make a very good exchange.

Half the inventory is available but does that mean half of the
most desirable weeks? Who says that as it may be the weeks for the whole season and the best weeks go first. We noticed a big difference after this new perk. It no longer affects us now but it can happen again with a new system. This is what Sue was trying to mention.

 

[m61376]

We don't lose the flexibity of booking any other week or unit but have to go through II instead. Some of the best weeks are there as you know already. You put them there to make a very good exchange.

Half the inventory is available but does that mean half of the
most desirable weeks? Who says that as it may be the weeks for the whole season and the best weeks go first. We noticed a big difference after this new perk. It no longer affects us now but it can happen again with a new system. This is what Sue was trying to mention.

According to many posts it is not just half the weeks in the season but half of every week. Actually, it goes further- it is half of every arrival date. I recently verified this when the SC went to Thursday-Monday reservations. Only 50% of every arrival date is released at 13 months. At least half of every arrival date is reserved for 12 months or less (the other 50% plus any remaining inventory from the 13 month booking).

The reason why some owners noted a big difference is two-fold- some resorts have either too long a season and/or some super desirable weeks in that season and less than half the owners generally utilize the 13 month rule (even multiple week owners may not use it), so that the competition is less for that half of the inventory. t doesn't indicate that Marriott didn't save half. In fact, there have been many posts about people who couldn't get what they wanted at 13 months, but were able to once the 12 month inventory was released.

I am glad using II for exchanges to complement your fixed week has worked well for you.