Unlike Greedy Marriott, Disney 'changes the game" the RIGHT way!

[WelcomeHome]

Unlike Marriott's, one-sided, "the customer comes last" Destination Club program, Disney just "turned the tables" on the timeshare game the RIGHT way.

Since the Marriott DC Club was announced, I've felt rejected and ashamed to be a Marriott owner - and so incredibly pround to be a Disney DVC owner since they just announced their new program. Disney did it with class, total respect for its customer base, and a clear understanding that customer loyaly and satisfaction is the ONLY key to success.

Marriott's getting what it deserves with the poor responses to the DC club (which they have the nerve to attempt to portray as a success with only approximately 10% of the membership falling for their skim scam - I'm insulted by how stupid Marriott assumes their customers must be).

Look at what a class act Disney maintains while desperate Marriott resorts to disgraceful policies and tactics. Disney does it with idgnity - no smoke and mirrors, no fees and no needs for customers' chasing the truth! Disney did it with just a few paragraphs of fair, honest talk! Take a look at how Disney plays the winning hand by respecting their customers:

http://dvcnews.com/index.php/news-p...dvc-to-create-direct-purchase-benefit-program

You're getting what you deserve Marriott - you should be ashamed of yourself!

We Marriott owners should be asking Marriott how Disney came up with such a simple, easy way of accomplishing their corporate adjenda without really hurting anyone while all Marriott came up with is a selfish, slanted new program which negatively affects about 90% of their entire customer base?

Best wishes,
Dave

 

[SueDonJ]

Unlike Marriott's, one-sided, "the customer comes last" Destination Club program, Disney just "turned the tables" on the timeshare game the RIGHT way.

Since the Marriott DC Club was announced, I've felt rejected and ashamed to be a Marriott owner - and so incredibly pround to be a Disney DVC owner since they just announced their new program. Disney did it with class, total respect for its customer base, and a clear understanding that customer loyaly and satisfaction is the ONLY key to success.

Marriott's getting what it deserves with the poor responses to the DC club (which they have the nerve to attempt to portray as a success with only approximately 10% of the membership falling for their skim scam - I'm insulted by how stupid Marriott assumes their customers must be).

Actually I'm more insulted by your insinuation that every person who chooses to enroll Week(s) in Marriott's DC is "stupid." If I felt a need to insult anyone, i'd say the "stupid" ones are the ones who refuse to acknowledge that it works for some and doesn't work for others depending on the Weeks that are owned.

Look at what a class act Disney maintains while desperate Marriott resorts to disgraceful policies and tactics. Disney does it with idgnity - no smoke and mirrors, no fees and no needs for customers' chasing the truth! Disney did it with just a few paragraphs of fair, honest talk! Take a look at how Disney plays the winning hand by respecting their customers:

http://dvcnews.com/index.php/news-p...dvc-to-create-direct-purchase-benefit-program

You're getting what you deserve Marriott - you should be ashamed of yourself!

We Marriott owners should be asking Marriott how Disney came up with such a simple, easy way of accomplishing their corporate adjenda without really hurting anyone while all Marriott came up with is a selfish, slanted new program which negatively affects about 90% of their entire customer base?

Best wishes,
Dave

It's fairly obvious how Disney came up with it - they copied Marriott's blueprint of giving the MRP-exchange benefit to only those who purchased direct (prior to the advent of the DC) and now to those who enroll their Week(s).

FWIW, DVC'ers on the disboards.com are not all as happy with Disney today as you are. Check out Direct Buy vs. Resale - Is this just the first step? and other similar threads over there today. There is some legitimate concern that Disney will now differentiate usage options between direct-purchases and external-resales, which some expect will cause a further decrease in already-plummeting DVC resale values.

 

[WelcomeHome]

Actually I'm more insulted by your insinuation that every person who chooses to enroll Week(s) in Marriott's DC is "stupid." If I felt a need to insult anyone, i'd say the "stupid" ones are the ones who refuse to acknowledge that it works for some and doesn't work for others depending on the Weeks that are owned.
.

Please forgive me if I offended you in any way but I believe you misunderstood me. I stated that Marriott assumes their customers are stupid for believing the salespeoples' story that "everyone is enrolling in the program" when the reality is only a small minority of owners have converted.

And secondly, I completely agree that the new program is EXCELLENT for people with sufficient points to reach the priority status level - I'm the FIRST to admit it works for some people but unfortunately that is only the small minority of Marriott owners. I don't think anyone would contest the premise that the majority of owners with only insufficient points to reach the priority levels are not very happy campers.

So most importantly, I apologize if I incorrectly offended you in any way - it was certainly not my intention.

My point was that Disney found a much better solution and as a member of both the Marriott boards and the Disney boards, I can tell you without hesitation that the Disney boards has never seen such an outpouring of poor reactions and negative threads that have appeared on this Marriott board since the release of the new DC program (at least since 2004 when I purchased DVC).

I still believe that Disney found a much better, lower impact and customer friendly solution to the problem.

Sincere best wishes,
Dave

 

[JanT]

You know, I am really tired of all the Marriott bashing. Recognize that the DC program works for some and not for others. No, we didn't join the DC and don't intend to. I'm not particularly happy with all aspects of it and I understand people being upset but really....let's move on from all the temper tantrums.

And if you can't, and your distaste for Marriott is so strong, do us all (and yourself actually) a favor, sell your Marriott weeks - even if you have to give it (them) away, get out of the Marriott system and buy somewhere else. Your blood pressure will thank you!!!

 

[SueDonJ]

Please forgive me if I offended you in any way but I believe you misunderstood me. I stated that Marriott assumes their customers are stupid for believing the salespeoples' story that "everyone is enrolling in the program" when the reality is only a small minority of owners have converted.

And secondly, I completely agree that the new program is EXCELLENT for people with sufficient points to reach the priority status level - I'm the FIRST to admit it works for some people but unfortunately that is only the small minority of Marriott owners. I don't think anyone would contest the premise that the majority of owners with only insufficient points to reach the priority levels are not very happy campers.

So most importantly, I apologize if I incorrectly offended you in any way - it was certainly not my intention.

My point was that Disney found a much better solution and as a member of both the Marriott boards and the Disney boards, I can tell you without hesitation that the Disney boards has never seen such an outpouring of poor reactions and negative threads that have appeared on this Marriott board since the release of the new DC program (at least since 2004 when I purchased DVC).

I still believe that Disney found a much better, lower impact and customer friendly solution to the problem.

Sincere best wishes,
Dave

Thanks for the response, Dave.

I agree with you that some (most?) Marriott reps have resorted to ridiculous statements in order to garner DC sales. No question. But it's only some - since the advent of the DC I've spoken to my sales rep a few times, two different Marriott execs several times and a different VOA every time I've called to check on availability for reservations. I must be the exception to the TUG rule because none of them have told me that "everyone is enrolling in the program" - I've only heard that assertion here on TUG. The Marriott reps that have talked about their expectations of the new DC program with me have said that it appears it will be a success because they're in the process of reaching their enrollment/sales goals, so I don't have any experience with reps who are making ridiculous statements to try to sell a "skim scam" to me. And that's what I objected to in your post, Dave, that line about "10% of the membership falling for a skim scam." Those of us who see actual usage value in the DC have not fallen for a scam of any kind, because we've had the benefit of knowledge and expertise from decent Marriott reps as well as TUGgers.

TUG is such a valuable resource and I'm so thankful for it because it allows all of us to dissect and analyze every aspect of timesharing, including the inevitable changes that every timeshare company makes to their business. Without the speculation thread before the advent of Marriott's DC and all of the posts since its release, none of us Marriott owners would have been as informed as we were when we made our choice whether to enroll or not. I believe that we're as hurt by hyperbolic "all or nothing" statements from TUGgers, as we are by those from any Marriott reps who stray from the truth in order to make their point.

About DVC? I love the product and if Don was as big a Disney freak as me then maybe I could convince him to buy in. But DVC isn't any more insulated from the market effects on timeshares than any other company, and there have always been rogue DVC salespeople who will say anything to make a sale. With this statement today you can bet that will ramp up across the entire sales force because now they'll be able to say that there is a tangible difference between the direct-purchase and external-resale product. And their sales pitch will not be 100% forthcoming in the same way that their statement today isn't - in that it doesn't address at all the effects that their newly-announced usage differential will have on resale values that are already plummeting (mostly because Disney has stopped exercising ROFR on all but two resorts.)

Timeshare sales are a struggling market no matter which name is on the resorts. The companies are all responding in ways that will better serve their businesses, and I don't think it can be said of any of them that everything they do is either 100% good or bad. We've always had to evaluate the particular products and the companies' rights to change their product, for good or bad, and in that respect Marriott is no better or worse than DVC or Starwood or Hilton, etc.

 

[Werner Weiss]

Unlike Marriott's, one-sided, "the customer comes last" Destination Club program, Disney just "turned the tables" on the timeshare game the RIGHT way.

I guess I don't see how today's DVC policy change announcement demonstrates that "Disney just 'turned the tables' on the timeshare game the RIGHT way."

Disney is now adopting the timeshare industry's offensive practice of artificially reducing the value of resales.

In the past, DVC treated developer and resale members/owners exactly the same. It was one of the ways that DVC demonstrated the highest level of integrity in the timeshare industry.

DVC announced today that as of March 21, 2011, new DVC resale members/owners will no longer be able to use their DVC points for the Concierge Collection (luxury hotels), the Disney Collection (DCL cruises and non-DVC Disney resorts) or the Adventurer Collection (active vacations). They will still be able to use their DVC points for DVC resorts and timeshare exchanges through RCI and two smaller timeshare entities, with no change in the rules.

Disney's new policy is not as obnoxious as Marriott's policy of extracting substantial money from resale buyers of "beneficial interests" (Marriott DC Trust points) to make those points normally usual for Marriott Vacation Club resorts. At least the ability to use DVC points for DVC resorts is built into the points and conveys fully to resale buyers.

(The paragraph above is not "Marriott bashing." It's a legitimate comparison of how Disney and Marriott treat resale points differently.)

The ironic thing is that when resales are artificially made less desirable, the people who lose the most are those of us who bought from the developer. We now own something that sells at a lower price than it should. So if we want to sell (or need to sell), we get less than we should. On the other hand, the resale buyer pays what it's worth. Because it's worth less (or perceived to be worth less), the resale buyer pays less. It's a bad deal for the developer customer and a good deal for the resale customer.

 

[Mr. Vker]

You know, I am really tired of all the Marriott bashing. Recognize that the DC program works for some and not for others. No, we didn't join the DC and don't intend to. I'm not particularly happy with all aspects of it and I understand people being upset but really....let's move on from all the temper tantrums.

And if you can't, and your distaste for Marriott is so strong, do us all (and yourself actually) a favor, sell your Marriott weeks - even if you have to give it (them) away, get out of the Marriott system and buy somewhere else. Your blood pressure will thank you!!!

I completely agree with your post. We dont like the points and arent joining. Others do and thats great. However, I will get frustrated if the changes do prohibit me from using my weeks the way I was told I could when originally purchased. I never want to be forced into points. I know Marriott II exchanges are never guaranteed, but I dont want them becoming impossible now when that was a big selling point with weeks.

 

[wof45]

I completely agree with your post. We dont like the points and arent joining. Others do and thats great. However, I will get frustrated if the changes do prohibit me from using my weeks the way I was told I could when originally purchased. I never want to be forced into points. I know Marriott II exchanges are never guaranteed, but I dont want them becoming impossible now when that was a big selling point with weeks.

I also don't understand the point of slamming Marriott for adding a new feature that might or might not be a benefit, but does not have a cost if you don't join.

Yes, a lot of people who have not joined are concerned about what trades they might get through II in the future, but that is all speculation since the experiences we have seen reported are with both II trades and also with DC points purchases -- so it appears to me that Marriott has messed up their inventory process rather than taking things away.

It also appears to be comparing apples and oranges, since Marriott started a new points system, while Disney already has a points system and suddenly made resale buyers 2nd class citizens if you want more than reserving for occupancy or trading. If you look at the DC points resale documentation, it also says a resale will only be able to make reservations and trade, but not through the corporate II account.

I also find the whole skim discussion a little childish. They offer points for what you own, and they have a price list for what you can get for points. If you don't like it, you can either not enroll your weeks, or if you same enough on fees to make enrollment beneficial, you can not turn your legacy weeks into points. Is that really any different than the discussion about MRP and that people would like to receive more and would like to spend fewer for stays.

 

[Scott_Ru]

Actually, the assumption that the new program is entirely separate from the old one that we had originally signed up for ... and that consequently it will not impact us at all ... is still be seen. I suspect that with all the new pushing for partial weeks, the new separate holdings for those with Destination Points (and by the way we did opt in just to protect ourselves), etc. it just might become much more difficult to get our desired locations in the future.

Time will tell. But I do think that the strikely negative response to the new program, and the way that Marriott rolled it out, suggest that Marriott did not consider it's customer base very well. The single most telling thing for me is that if I swap any or all of my Marriott weeks for Destination Points, I will not have sufficient points to get back into my own property. I cannot see how that cannot be viewed as other than devaluation.

Just my thoughts.

 

[rickandcindy23]

And if you can't, and your distaste for Marriott is so strong, do us all (and yourself actually) a favor, sell your Marriott weeks - even if you have to give it (them) away, get out of the Marriott system and buy somewhere else. Your blood pressure will thank you!!!

This post is just mean, and I don't believe the OP deserved it.

DVC shouldn't deny any member the same rights, whether resale or developer, but at least they took away the worst parts of DVC, like trading through RCI.

 

[Werner Weiss]

DVC shouldn't deny any member the same rights, whether resale or developer, but at least they took away the worst parts of DVC, like trading through RCI.

All DVC "members" (owners) can still trade through RCI, including resale buyers after the new policy goes into effect.

 

[hotcoffee]

. . . The ironic thing is that when resales are artificially made less desirable, the people who lose the most are those of us who bought from the developer. We now own something that sells at a lower price than it should. So if we want to sell (or need to sell), we get less than we should. On the other hand, the resale buyer pays what it's worth. Because it's worth less (or perceived to be worth less), the resale buyer pays less. It's a bad deal for the developer customer and a good deal for the resale customer.

I argued this point way back when the rumors of the new program started getting posted here on TUG. At that time, there was some suggestion that resale purchases might be penalized or excluded. All of us have lost by the tanking of the resale market. The more one originally paid, the bigger one loses.

What is surprising about this thread is the implication that the DVC has done things better. I read through the DVC announcement in the OP link, and it looks to me like Disney has taken a page from the Marriott book. I see absolutely nothing positive about that announcement. DVC is penalizing resales. Worse, the DVC announcement might be a hint that resale purchases are going to continue to be penalized industry-wide.

 

[myoakley]

The ironic thing is that when resales are artificially made less desirable, the people who lose the most are those of us who bought from the developer. We now own something that sells at a lower price than it should. So if we want to sell (or need to sell), we get less than we should. On the other hand, the resale buyer pays what it's worth. Because it's worth less (or perceived to be worth less), the resale buyer pays less. It's a bad deal for the developer customer and a good deal for the resale customer.[/QUOTE]

I concur 100% that this approach will cause resale prices to fall. And the greater the discrepancy between the developer price and the resale price, the more likely it is that buyers will decide to forgo the developer "perks" and opt for the cheaper resale price. It seems to me that the developers are hurting themselves in the long run - and those who purchased from them.

 

[wof45]

What is surprising about this thread is the inplication that the DVC has done things better. I read through the DVC announcement in the OP link, and it looks to me like Disney has taken a page from the Marriott book. I see absolutely nothing positive about that announcement. DVC is penalizing resales. Worse, the DVC announcement might be a hint that resale purchases are going to continue to be penalized industry-wide.

I think that Disney just gave up on what at Marriott was ROFR -- or the market price support. The economy is still a mess in the vacation markets, so this is not a surprise as the corporations (Marriott, Disney and the others) decide how they can survive and perhaps keep sales moving.

 

[rickandcindy23]

All DVC "members" (owners) can still trade through RCI, including resale buyers after the new policy goes into effect.

Werner, I apparently read that wrong, and I have been wanting to buy DVC for a long time, but Rick and I still need to get a round tuit to do it. I wouldn't use RCI. Sounds like no cruises with points...is that correct?

Love your website, as a Disney lover, born in 1955, same year Disneyland was born.

 

[SueDonJ]

This post is just mean, and I don't believe the OP deserved it. ...

Hmmmm. What's to say that anybody on this site deserves to be spoken to/written about in any negative way?

I misinterpreted the OP's comment about "stupidity" and he's since come back and explained that further. But IMO the OP was mean by referring to the Owners who have enrolled their Week(s) as "... approximately 10% of the membership falling for [Marriott's] skim scam." (I'm pretty sure that's the OP's opinion - no Marriott rep has referred to the DC as a "skim scam.")

 

[hotcoffee]

I think that Disney just gave up on what at Marriott was ROFR -- or the market price support. The economy is still a mess in the vacation markets, so this is not a surprise as the corporations (Marriott, Disney and the others) decide how they can survive and perhaps keep sales moving.

It would not surprise me if the industry tries to penalize resales purchases even more. With people picking up resales dirt cheap, I think they will still need to improve the incentives a lot more to make developer sales attractive enough to entice people to forego resales.

 

[Werner Weiss]

Werner, I apparently read that wrong, and I have been wanting to buy DVC for a long time, but Rick and I still need to get a round tuit to do it. I wouldn't use RCI. Sounds like no cruises with points...is that correct?

New DVC resale members/owners on and after March 21 won't have option to use the Concierge Collection (luxury hotels), the Disney Collection (DCL cruises and non-DVC Disney resorts) or the Adventurer Collection (active vacations). There's also the concern that now that Disney has adopted the practice of having two classes of owners, other restrictions could follow.

The good news is that when it comes to booking reservations at DVC resorts or making exchanges to other timeshares, resale buyers of DVC points after March 21 will still have all the same rights and rules as those who bought from Disney.

If I read DVC's Public Offering Statement correctly, the ability to use DVC point system is an integral part of a DVC member's ownership. That means there should never be a need for resale buyers to spend thousands of dollars to make their points usable (and an artificial corresponding decrease in resale value by a similar amount for the original owner).

I don't like what Disney announced today, but it's not nearly as obnoxious as how Marriott deals with the resale of "beneficial interests" (DC Trust points).

Love your website, as a Disney lover, born in 1955, same year Disneyland was born.

Thank you!

 

[BocaBoy]

Thanks for the response, Dave.

I agree with you that some (most?) Marriott reps have resorted to ridiculous statements in order to garner DC sales. No question. But it's only some - since the advent of the DC I've spoken to my sales rep a few times, two different Marriott execs several times and a different VOA every time I've called to check on availability for reservations. I must be the exception to the TUG rule because none of them have told me that "everyone is enrolling in the program" - I've only heard that assertion here on TUG. The Marriott reps that have talked about their expectations of the new DC program with me have said that it appears it will be a success because they're in the process of reaching their enrollment/sales goals, so I don't have any experience with reps who are making ridiculous statements to try to sell a "skim scam" to me.....Those of us who see actual usage value in the DC have not fallen for a scam of any kind, because we've had the benefit of knowledge and expertise from decent Marriott reps as well as TUGgers.

Thank you for an excellent post. We need to keep some balance at TUG and not just believe the opinions of a few (including me) represent the vast majority of owners. I do not like some things about the new program, but everything I see says that their sales are going very well and a lot of owners are buying extra points. My salesman in Maui told me this week that many are using the new program to add points to an existing week so that between the week's points and the extra points they have enough to go to a higher end resort than before. It is similar in that regard to their former equity upgrade program where an owners could trade in a week as partial payment on a more expensive week. I have enough exchange points available that I won't buy any more, but it makes sense to me that many owners would find that attractive.

I am in Maui this week and I can tell you that the sales office is selling A LOT of points to existing owners.

 

[windje2000]

Thank you for an excellent post. We need to keep some balance at TUG and not just believe the opinions of a few (including me) represent the vast majority of owners. I do not like some things about the new program, but everything I see says that their sales are going very well and a lot of owners are buying extra points. My salesman in Maui told me this week that many are using the new program to add points to an existing week so that between the week's points and the extra points they have enough to go to a higher end resort than before. It is similar in that regard to their former equity upgrade program where an owners could trade in a week as partial payment on a more expensive week. I have enough exchange points available that I won't buy any more, but it makes sense to me that many owners would find that attractive.

I am in Maui this week and I can tell you that the sales office is selling A LOT of points to existing owners.

The last stats I have seen indicated 19,500,000 points sold from inception to 12/15/2010.

Assume an average price of $9.50.

Total $ sales = $185 million. For just less than half a year, including the summer which should be prime selling time. I don't believe the post Xmas months are prime selling time for timeshare.

That's a run rate of about $370 million per year, assuming no seasonal.

They were doing a lot better selling weeks.


Timeshare contract sales were

$1.2 billion in 2007

$1.1 Billion in 2008

$0.7 Billion in 2009

Source: Marriott 2009 Annual Report, p 35 Business Segment Information

 

[SueDonJ]

The last stats I have seen indicated 19,500,000 points sold from inception to 12/15/2010.

Assume an average price of $9.50.

Total $ sales = $185 million. For just less than half a year, including the summer which should be prime selling time. I don't believe the post Xmas months are prime selling time for timeshare.

That's a run rate of about $370 million per year, assuming no seasonal.

They were doing a lot better selling weeks.


Timeshare contract sales were

$1.2 billion in 2007

$1.1 Billion in 2008

$0.7 Billion in 2009

Source: Marriott 2009 Annual Report, p 35 Business Segment Information

Wouldn't their business plan have consisted of looking to the future and comparing how well Weeks would sell relative to the inventory that would be available? No question that if they were able to continue developing new resorts and selling the same product as before then Weeks might possibly out-sell Points. But with limited development funds available as well as a depressed timeshare market, I think it's unreasonable to expect that future development of new resorts and selling of prime Weeks at such resorts would have continued at the same pace much beyond 2010 as those periods you're referencing.

There have been reports on TUG of a new Marriott system for several years; this wasn't a hastily-prepared incomplete idea for Marriott and was actually implemented after the original target date. If they hadn't introduced the DC as a vehicle to move the non-prime Weeks that were sitting unsold; as a means to generate revenue among a certain number of existing Owners by enhancing their previously-purchased products; and, in the form of a product that could be purchased by new customers for less than the $60K-plus Weeks at the newer resorts (Crystal Shores, Maui, etc.) then IMO Marriott's entire timeshare business would have suffered to a far greater degree than its reputation has among some existing Owners who don't stand to gain an advantage from the DC.

 

[wof45]

There have been reports on TUG of a new Marriott system for several years; this wasn't a hastily-prepared incomplete idea for Marriott and was actually implemented after the original target date. If they hadn't introduced the DC as a vehicle to move the non-prime Weeks that were sitting unsold; as a means to generate revenue among a certain number of existing Owners by enhancing their previously-purchased products; and, in the form of a product that could be purchased by new customers for less than the $60K-plus Weeks at the newer resorts (Crystal Shores, Maui, etc.) then IMO Marriott's entire timeshare business would have suffered to a far greater degree than its reputation has among some existing Owners who don't stand to gain an advantage from the DC.

I totally agree. I have been wondering how they were going to sell the silver and bronze weeks with the same high MF as the platinum and gold weeks. With DC points, all they need to do is reserve the bad weeks for fewer points, and reserve great weeks for higher points.

And this really is a way to reserve at any property rather than just the one you own, and then hope to trade for another.

They just don't present it very well. But maybe it does present well to TS newbies

 

[windje2000]

Wouldn't their business plan have consisted of looking to the future and comparing how well Weeks would sell relative to the inventory that would be available? No question that if they were able to continue developing new resorts and selling the same product as before then Weeks might possibly out-sell Points. But with limited development funds available as well as a depressed timeshare market, I think it's unreasonable to expect that future development of new resorts and selling of prime Weeks at such resorts would have continued at the same pace much beyond 2010 as those periods you're referencing.

There have been reports on TUG of a new Marriott system for several years; this wasn't a hastily-prepared incomplete idea for Marriott and was actually implemented after the original target date. If they hadn't introduced the DC as a vehicle to move the non-prime Weeks that were sitting unsold; as a means to generate revenue among a certain number of existing Owners by enhancing their previously-purchased products; and, in the form of a product that could be purchased by new customers for less than the $60K-plus Weeks at the newer resorts (Crystal Shores, Maui, etc.) then IMO Marriott's entire timeshare business would have suffered to a far greater degree than its reputation has among some existing Owners who don't stand to gain an advantage from the DC.

Business plan? Forecasts are at best educated guesses and at worst bald faced lies. Most fall somewhere in the middle of these extremes, but virtually all are in some way self serving. Since weeks sales didn't continue in parallel with points sales, we'll never know how weeks sales would have fared.

I respectfully disagree with the notion that this was anything but a hastily prepared quick fix for a huge decline in sales. I cannot think of one well executed aspect of this program. Just looking at how disorganized the legal docs are and the lack of preparedness by the staff on day one for early adopters suggests exactly the opposite.

The objective of the exercise was to sell timeshare interests. Timeshare sales will probably be half of what they were in 2009 despite an improving economy and owner demographics which probably were less affected by the economic decline.

 

[amyhwang]

On a slightly different note, I just spent 2 nights at Marriott's Harbour Lake, then the following 7 nights at Disney's Boardwalk Villas. I absolutely have always LOVED the Boardwalk Villas, and the Epcot resort area. We've taken our kids at least 15 times, and almost always stay in that area (BWV, Swan, Dolphin, BWI).

This time, I noticed that we went from an immaculate Marriott villa, with tons of space and a real dining table, plus a kitchen that was better stocked, to a villa in need of renovation, which was much smaller, with a small table for 2 for eating (and I did cook a few meals).

Years back, I had really wanted to buy into DVC, but even with the inconvenience of driving, in Orlando I'd prefer Marriott. Yes, I've loved Disney (to a fault, and spent tons of $$$ there) but have been so pleased with Marriott that it's our first choice now.

I also have some friends that bought Ko Olina prior to it being built (we visited years back while on Oahu) as well as some other properties, and for them, if they join the new points system, they will have a HUGE advantage. For me, it won't work, as I don't like the skim. But, Disney and Marriott to me is apples to oranges. With Disney, you pay for the convenience of being right there in the resort.

 

[dioxide45]

I think one thing Disney did right was setting a drop dead date in the future. This allowed people currently in the closing process to complete their transfer and still have access under the old way. Marriott rolled out their new system without any warning (other than rumor) and set the date of roll-out to be the date that they begun excluding resale purchases. DVC did better than Marriott in this case.

Also, I think there is a misconception that most of the weeks in the trust are all dog weeks in low season. While I am sure there are lots of them, the trust is made up primarily of weeks they couldn't sell because they were just plain too expensive. There are lots of Hawaii, Oceana Palms, and Marco Island weeks in the trust. Many of them platinum and platinum plus. I don't think Harbour Lake had any weeks initially deposited in to the trust, and there were not many Branson weeks either. Of what was built at those resorts, the inventory available was mostly sold out.

The problem is that Marriott was holding on to some very overpriced inventory, even after their write downs. They had to sell it somehow. And the DC Trust afforded that opportunity.