Trading Power is now Sticky

[Clark]

For those of you who private messaged me asking for it (and everyone else too), a link to the Trading Power calculation of various Marriott resorts (as calculated in real time using data from a certain unnamed website) may now be found in the Sticky Thread titled "Marriott Timeshare FAQ's".

Courtesy of DaveM

 

[GregT]

For those of you who private messaged me asking for it (and everyone else too), a link to the Trading Power calculation of various Marriott resorts (as calculated in real time using data from a certain unnamed website) may now be found in the Sticky Thread titled "Marriott Timeshare FAQ's".

Courtesy of DaveM

This is terrific, thanks very much Clark!

(and thanks also DaveM for putting it as a sticky!)

 

[EKniager]

Not that I have any special knowledge, but the numbers seem reasonable to me.

Thanks for sharing.

 

[puckmanfl]

good morning....

My lowly 3 bedroom GV with a "trading power" of 6... has snagged Maui L/N towers in June (100) Waiohai in june (83)...

Always important to remember to remember in II trade power...bigger is better... 3 bedrooms in lowly resorts often trump 2 bedrooms...

Before DC, I put up my 3 bedroom GV and my 2 bedroom Koolina simultaneously for a plat mountainside Feb week. The 3 bedroom GV trade came through first....

just sayin....

not sure the owners trade data reflects true trading power...
The only request I have received from this site are uptraders looking to snag winter hawaii with gold/silver weeks...at other places...

 

[thinze3]

Puck, that's why I suggest to people to buy a platinum MGV 3BR. Dollar for dollar, it may be the best value there is. Flexibility, $5-6K entry fee, and just over $1200 MF.

 

[CashEddie]

I think this is a great start but I don't agree with all the numbers there. There is too small of a sample size to start to draw any conclusion on trading power. These numbers are based solely on data from that one site. While some of us may use that site, the greater majority are using II and the DC for exchanges.

II has their TDI. It takes lots of data to develop a statistical index that can be reliably used and referenced.

If we somehow had hooks into the II, RCI, DC trading systems to pull confirmed trade data, I could see this database being very useful. Until there is more data, the numbers we see on this site will be anecdotal at best.

 

[jimf41]

I thank Clark and Dave M for the effort but honestly the numbers are not of much value. The Orlando units alone, of which I own not one, are probably the most requested units in the system. Lakeshore Reserve 8 and Maui 100. There are just 20x more folks that want to go to Orlando than Maui in any given year. I know Orlando is flooded with TS's but so is Hawaii.

I know from my own experience that it's harder to get to Ocean Pointe 22 or Frenchmans Cove 61 in FEB/MAR than it is to get to Kawaii Lagoons 83 at any time of the year.

Methinks the chart is a little skewed towards those who like to visit Hawaii.

A nice chart and it took some time to produce but I don't think it's accuracy warrants a sticky.

 

[Clark]

I would be the first to agree that the data will improve as the sample size gets larger.

But still, there is something going for it -- it's actual current data, with an explanation of how it is calculated. So it's not based on feelings or assumptions or anecdotal experiences.

The commentary about Orlando caused me to do a little more anaylsis to see if the smallish sample size is causing the current data to be qualitatively different from the legacy data concerning Orlando vs. Hawaii in particular.

The Trading Power is being calculated from the "new" database on the updated site, and being only just over a month old, that database currently has less than 200 members listing their exchange preferences, whereas the "legacy" database on the website has well over 1000 members who listed their exchange preferences over the last 10 years

In that legacy database Maui Ocean Club was the most-listed overall (just as in the new database), and of the Orlando resorts, Grande Vista was the most listed. Maui was listed more than 10 times as often as Grande Vista.

Or if I look at all 7 Orlando resorts in total and compare how many times they were listed compared to all 3 Hawaii resorts, the Hawaii resorts were listed 7 times as often.

So, at least for the Orlando / Hawaii comparison the current new database is in qualitative agreement with the legacy database, both giving Hawaii a big edge in trading power.

The data is what it is. It's not subjective. And as more people enter their data, it's quality will only improve.

 

[BocaBoy]

There are just 20x more folks that want to go to Orlando than Maui in any given year. I know Orlando is flooded with TS's but so is Hawaii.

Yes, there are quite a few timeshares in Hawaii, but nowhere near the huge supply in Orlando. Not even close.

 

[tschwa2]

I don't know. "Where would you like to go?" seems rather subjective. I would much rather hypothetically go to Hawaii than Williamsburg and have had several opportunities to grab studios, 1 bedrooms and even 2 bedrooms. I even had a 2 bedroom reserved for spring Break 2012 but cancelled within the 24 hours because we can't afford the airfare at this time. We are going to Hilton Head for the week instead. We did go to Williamsburg last summer. We are thinking about Utah for next summer. None of these trips are because - ah if I only had the trading power to go to Hawaii. I have never stayed in any of the Marriott's in Orlando (don't like the heat or crowds) but know a ton of people have. Some possibly go to Orlando because they couldn't get the trade into Hawaii for the specific week(s) they needed but I can't believe someone who is open to the entire year (remember it's all platinum time in Hawaii) and attempted to trade at least a one bedroom Marriott couldn't trade in using a gold or platinum week anywhere in the system when requested at least a year in advance.

 

[CashEddie]

I would be the first to agree that the data will improve as the sample size gets larger.

But still, there is something going for it -- it's actual current data, with an explanation of how it is calculated. So it's not based on feelings or assumptions or anecdotal experiences.

The commentary about Orlando caused me to do a little more anaylsis to see if the smallish sample size is causing the current data to be qualitatively different from the legacy data concerning Orlando vs. Hawaii in particular.

The Trading Power is being calculated from the "new" database on the updated site, and being only just over a month old, that database currently has less than 200 members listing their exchange preferences, whereas the "legacy" database on the website has well over 1000 members who listed their exchange preferences over the last 10 years

In that legacy database Maui Ocean Club was the most-listed overall (just as in the new database), and of the Orlando resorts, Grande Vista was the most listed. Maui was listed more than 10 times as often as Grande Vista.

Or if I look at all 7 Orlando resorts in total and compare how many times they were listed compared to all 3 Hawaii resorts, the Hawaii resorts were listed 7 times as often.

So, at least for the Orlando / Hawaii comparison the current new database is in qualitative agreement with the legacy database, both giving Hawaii a big edge in trading power.

The data is what it is. It's not subjective. And as more people enter their data, it's quality will only improve.

Hey Clark,

I re-read the method of how you are calculating these numbers and want to get some clarifications. When you "count" a resort as being requested for a possible exchange, does that "count" indicate an actual completed exchange or just "I really would like to go to..." request?

From reading your methods of calculations, it sounds like the numbers are based on "this is where I would like to go" types of requests vs actual confirmed trades. I haven't used that site so I don't know how it works so just trying to get a better understanding of your numbers. Thanks.

 

[dioxide45]

The table only represents trade power of the website it is on. So if you own week that scores very high, you have a high probability of getting a good week in exchange. If you own a low valued week, then chances are slim.

Something else to remember, the people using this site are using it for different reasons than they may use II. Take Orlando for example, someone isn't going to go to ownertrades to pick up an Orlando week. Most know they can pick them up cheap on II via getaway or they are a fairly easy trade in II. They are not going to offer up their Maui week and ask for an Orlando week. Likewise I wouldn't take my Orlando week there and expect to get Maui.

I think ownertrades works well for people looking for pretty equal high value weeks. For those of us using lock offs to trade up in unit size in the off season through II, it doesn't work well.

This isn't a knock on the site, it has a niche audience that it will work well for.

 

[Clark]

Eddie, the calculation for each resort is based on the number of times owners have indicated in their exchange preferences that they would consider an exchange to that resort.

It is not based on actual exchanges (which btw, I would not be able to do calculations with since actual exchanges are made directly between the principals with no "reporting" back to the site).

Even if actual exchanges could be used it would not (to me) be better. For example Resort1 with very high owner occupancy would likely have fewer actual incoming exchanges than Resort2 with lower owner occupancy. But resort1 could be a highly prized exchange precisely because there are limited incoming exchanges so to have it rated lower than resort2 base on actual exchanges would not necessarily make sense.

I don't really want to get off into debating what is or isn't a good measure of trading power, but this method (while not perfect) has two advantages: 1. There is a logic to it, and 2. It can be done with data at hand.

So, for whatever someone wants to make of it, there it is. Someone has a better / different way? Love to see it.

 

[Dave M]

Adding to your comments, Clark....

II does not attempt to differentiate the trading power of individual resorts - except within the limited geographical area to which an individual Travel Demand Index applies. Rather, the II chart gives a relative demand rating to individual weeks within a year - in that specific geographical area.

Your trading power chart is the first attempt I have seen that tries to do that. Is it perfect? Of course not. But it sure helps, especially when used along with the TUG Resort Ratings.