As we have only a few days left it might be an interesting idea to open up a small poll on TUG to see what the majority of informed MVCI owners is thinking what is going to hit us next week.
My personal guess is the new programm is based on the AP system. There might be a few minor adjustments but the main ideas will be used. Honestly when i first went to that AP presentation i was like "Jeez! What are those guys trying to sell me?". Nowadays i am still :hysterical: about 98% of that system. I don´t think that more than 5% of Tuggers will like what they see next week.
As for the loopholes/smart buyers. I am also with Boccabum that one should go where the current developer money and inventory is and say goodbye as soon as the party gets too crowded. So finding an opportunity to get those 10,000 or whatever amount of points is needed to get some of those 2BDR Flexchanges during the next few years might be a reasonable approach IF one is flexible.
Would i exchange my weeks into points under the current AP rules ? You bet not.
MVCI is likely trying to dry out the inventory in II and they might be successful doing that in a few years. Also MVCI is likely to tweak around with maintenance fee calculations hitting resistant week owners ("outlaws") with higher fees. However i am still optimistic that in the long run, after the new programm went through the first "enhancements", an old week is much more valuable than some points.
Largely, I think your analysis is right, and I respect that you've had more opportunity to examine the AP program. Rolling out something akin to the AP program makes sense from a business perspective, because it would allow them to have a similar offering system-wide and combine the reservation systems. As I stated above, money is money, whether it is paid in dollars, converted from Japanese Yen, British pounds, the Euro, etc., and Marriott really doesn't (nor should they from a business perspective) care about its source. I also feel that the AP program gave Marriott a chance to dip their toes in the water, so to speak, and time to test and tweak both the offering and the reservation system, and on a smaller scale rectify issues with a dual ownership type reservation system. When I first heard of the AP program a few years back I felt it was a trial run, so your premise is based on a good foundation.
The only part I disagree with is: "MVCI is likely to tweak around with maintenance fee calculations hitting resistant week owners ("outlaws") with higher fees." legally, whatever fees set by each HOA must be paid, either by the week owner or by an allocation from the Marriott point trust MF's. But, for argument's sake, if the HOA sets the MF at 1k, the weeks owner pays 1K and Marriott must reimburse the HOA 1k for each week in the points system. Now, how Marriott charges the points owner can be manipulated; under the weeks system, every owner pays the 1K per week, regardless of season owned. Under the points system, a Platinum week may be allotted 40,000 points, a Gold week 30,000, a Silver 20,000 and a Bronze 10,000, for argument's sake. If Marriott has those 4 weeks in their points system, they must turn over 4K to the HOA for those 4 weeks. However, they do not have to charge each of those owners $1000 as they do now. The Platinum week owner may be charged $1600, the Gold $1200, the Silver $800 and the Bronze $400, reflecting their relative point ownership. The HOA still gets their 4K from the 4 weeks, but now the season owned impacts the distribution of charges.
BUT- Marriott cannot arbitrarily charge resistant owners, who retain their weeks, a higher portion of the carrying charges, since MF's are divided evenly amongst ownership weeks. IF Marriott was to tweak the system, as you suggest, and increase the MF's for weeks owners, it would similarly have to assess point owners to cover those fees.
The bigger issue is how will Marriott determine MF's? In the AP program, MF's are uniform across the board, so that, in effect, everyone absorbs the cost of higher MF properties. In the old system, a lower season owner paid less to purchase, but still received one week of use and since the cost of running the resort is relatively the same (of course, there are some different variables depending on time of year) across the year, so the expenses are divided evenly. In the AP system, the purchase price is determined by the number of points purchased, the size of the unit they can get is determined by the number of points owned, the property location and value, the size of the unit and the time of the year. MF's are based on the number of points owned, period. So if you own more points, presumably you get to reserve more- whether more time, a bigger unit, or a more premium location or season- but you also pay more, both up front to purchase and on a on-going basis (higher MF's). I can see the equity argument from both perspectives; I think the rub here is int he switch mid-stream.
In the AP program, I can assume Platinum owners are happy that they get significantly more points, but aren't so thrilled about now paying the lion's share of the MF's. New points purchasers probably view that as making sense and being fair, because Bronze week owners are no longer purchasing the same 1 week use in a 2BR unit that the Platinum week owners are, just paying less up front to use in a lesser season. The point equivalent of a Bronze week will now likely be perceived as having a more realistic value, and buyers will feel they should pay the MF's accordingly, especially since the illusion Marriott promoted during sales of easy trades through II, using the lock off to trade into a 1BR or even a 2BR at another time, will no longer be there. What you own and what you get will clearly be there on the points chart, and salespeople will no longer be able to sell the elusive dream of easy up-trades.
The high MF Hawaii owner will likely like the system wide calculation of MF's, but Plat, week owners at other high value resorts may not appreciate paying the lion's share of the MF's. For Hawaii owners it is a win-win situation- all the weeks are already Plat. , with a few Plat. Plus, so dividing the MF's amongst seasons will have little difference, but since their MF's are on the high side, they will come down and the Manor Club, Branson and Orlando owners, etc., who have lower MF's, will basically be subsidizing the higher fees elsewhere.
