posted 05-08-2001 06:17            

I've been reading bbs archives trying to get up to speed. A recurring theme is 'buy resale', but I get a mixed message from posts by Marriott owners. Many seem comfortable with the idea of buying new.

Why did you buy Marriott? What would you differently if you had it to do over?

Our dilema is that we like what we see of Marriott, but they appear to be more expensive--even at resale prices--than other, seemingly comparable resorts.

posted 05-08-2001 10:22            

1. Very nice resorts, good/reputable company behind it, and I daresay they have the most agressive expansion plans of any developer (e.g. more locations to trade into/visit). You also get preferential exchange priority to trade within the Marriott family of resorts than non-Marriott owners trying to trade into a Marriott. Plus the internal exchange fee is only $69 (currently) compared to the normal II exchange fee ($120?) And the real biggie in my opinion--the Rewards Point program.....(see #2)

2. If you want to participate in the Rewards point option (where you can exchange your week (but you still have to pay your m/f that year + pay an exchange fee of over $100) for a certain number of points--frequency and point values depend upon resort and season purchased--and use those points for airfare, hotel stays, etc.) then you MUST buy directly from Marriott. You could still buy a "resale" Marriott from Marriott (at a resort that has already sold out, and probably save a little money over a brand new week/resort), but you still must buy directly from Marriott to get the Points option. If you aren't interested in the Rewards points option, then there's no real advantage to buying directly from Marriott. You get all the same benefits in #1--just no points option. You could buy a private resale on the open market for thousands less than what Marriott will charge you.

Yes, Marriott's (in general) are more expensive than others (purchase price and maintenance fees), but it all depends upon what you're looking for in a timeshare. We're very pleased with our 2 weeks we bought directly from Marriott (because we wanted points), although they are pricey and I probably can't afford a 3rd (unless I buy an offseason privately, but even then the m/f aren't cheap).

posted 05-08-2001 13:42            

With the point system as it is now, I wouldn't buy new.

This is only a start in the erosion of the Marriott Rewards Plan. Marriott changed the packages last year by cutting out the free car rental, they did it again this year, and they'll continue to do it next year by making many more hotels a category 7. The writing is on the wall...buy resale and forget the points. The accountants at Marriott have made resale the way to go now and it'll take Marriott a while to figure that out.

If your platinum week is worth 110,000 points trading it in each year, it's now worth at least 10-20% LESS this year alone because they just raised the point requirements that much. As a result, the reasons for buying directly from Marriott has diminshed tremendously and will continue to do so. Imagine how little 110,000 points will be worth in 10 years!

Marriott will come to their senses when new sales fall off as they're bound to do. So don't buy direct at this time.

Time to sell your MAR stock as well, IMHO.

posted 05-08-2001 17:16            

The biggest disadvantages to owning a Marriott, in my opinion, are:

1) High maintenance fees which will only climb higher.

2)II. Some people like it, but belonging to both as I do, the contrast is so great it is startling. RCI has far, far, far more inventory available...and with a strong trading RCI week...you will have far more opportunties available to you than you will with even the best Marriott. It's amazing to me how I can search RCI online and find what I want just sitting there the FIRST TIME I look...time after time. Even with on going searches and working with vacation counselors at II (which are better than their virtually inventory-less website) II just can't even begin to compete with RCI.

posted 05-08-2001 18:39            

I disagree with pwrshift that the change in points values will have any meaningful effect on new Marriott sales. The average buyer doesn't spend nearly as much time analyzing the relative value of points as the people on this bulletin board. They'll still hear the marketing "sizzle" the points program offers, and that won't change. New buyers probably won't even make the connection that the points values have changed. There aren't enough TUG members to have a meaningful impact on the marketplace. As a result, I don't expect the change to have any impact on Marriott sales. I agree that the point program has minimal "real" value now (for us, it didn't have much value, even at the old levels since we need condo accomodations for a family of 4 rather than hotel space), but I think that will be lost on 90% of the prospective buyers.

posted 05-08-2001 21:19         

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jimmy:

"...As far as the Steve's point that membership in RCI is better than II because of the greater number of resorts, just remember that while RCI does have more resorts than II, they also have many more mediocre resorts. Many RCI resorts are old, converted condos or motels which serve to inflate the real value of the larger network. By contrast, II is the trading company for the highest quality resort chains - Marriott, Starwood, Hyatt, Four Seasons, Disney, and now new Trendwest sales. The fact that Starwood is putting their higher-end Westin properties in II, while keeping some of their lesser properties in RCI says to me that II is carving out the better properties as their niche. I am only an RCI member right now, but I can tell you that I wouldn't even think about trading our Embassy Maui for 75% or more of the inventory in RCI.[/B]

---

Jimmy,

Thanks for voicing your opinion on this rather controversial topic. I agree with your viewpoint, having been an RCI member for some 12 years and II member for four. As I have already stated a couple of times before, the so-called RCI "superiority" in numbers is a plain fiction which ignores several key factors, e.g. huge variations in resort quality, their geographic locations, your trading power, etc. For all practical purposes no single individual T/S owner would ever consider even 10% of the RCI listings, or about 350 resorts in total. Even if one insisted on using TEN RCI exchanges per year ( assuming you did buy TEN weeks to trade with and are happy to pay TEN M/F and TEN exchange fees every year !!!) you would need 35 years of your life to exchange into each of the 350 resorts only once ! You may never reach this 10% target if RCI continues to sign up new resorts or if you decide to visit the same resort twice or more ! In real life, therefore, one may as well forget about the rest of the 3,500 RCI listings, or some 3,150 names shown in their Directory ! And, btw, these "resorts" could never become real inventory, since many are simply undesirable because of their quality and/or location, others are never available, or at least not available in season. As well, one cannot ignore two other factors affecting the "inventory", - the unit size and the trading power of the week offered. Surely all your weeks are not equal and there are many times more "average" resorts than there are GC and RID combined ! And the "average" resorts could be further rated as grade "A", "B" or "C" depending on the location, season, etc. It takes a very experienced and skilful Tugger to trade a blue grade "B" studio for a 2 bdr. red week in a GC resort ! Some do claim success, but there are many more owners who have to compromise by accepting something less than the best exchange. Thus the term "inventory" for an "average" T/S owner is not a constant, it's a flexible and always moving target !
The fact is that everybody is selective in exchanging their T/S weeks, no matter which exchange company you use. This is perfectly normal in any transaction where we exchange goods/services for money. People do not pretend, for example, that they would consider EVERY make and model of a car, do they ? Why, than, would anyone perpetuate a myth that he/she would consider all 3500 T/S "resorts" just because they happen to be advertised by RCI ?

Mike

posted 05-09-2001 04:01            

I found that a summer week at any of those resorts are no more expensive (and sometimes cheaper) than other non-Marriott resorts like, Cottages at Shipyard, Port 'O Call, Southwind etc

It's no secret that I'm not a Marriott cheerleader even though I am an owner. (The possiblity of new resorts in places that I might consider going stops me from selling up.) My biggest problem is that I don't like the way things are run at II but that might be my personality type.

For eg., last year at the end of January, I requested a few resorts in Scotland from II using my HP summer week. I requested the same resorts from RCI (with a week that I bought for quarter the price and three-fifths the maintenance). Got one of the resorts from RCI within a couple of weeks. Judging from someone else's experience, II wouldn't have fulfilled my request till early this year. I'm not the type to sit back & wait.

Regarding resorts in II & RCI, more than you realise are dual affiliated, but more of the hotel brands are in II. I would make a list of the places you want to go to and then check to see, which has more resorts that you would consider exchanging to. II has more Aruba, RCI has more Ireland, II has more Paris, RCI has more New York, II has more Key West, RCI has more Venice ....

If I had to do it again, I would have bought a Marriott that was dual-affiliated so that I wouldn't feel so trapped.

posted 05-09-2001 14:51            

IMO, the worst thing about II, besides their online availability, is having to wait so long to get a requested exchange. I usually have gotten my exchanges with RCI about 18 to 12 months out, whereas, with II I'm only getting my exchanges from 3 to 6 months out (for the tougher exchanges). This is not good for frequent flier usability.

In comparing the two exchange companies, I'd have to say that they both have their good points and bad points. I like the online availability of RCI but I think overall, II has better quality resorts and much better bonus weeks. If I had to use just one exchange company, I would choose II, although it isn't easy to sit back and wait so long for an exchange to come through. But fortunately, I don't have to make that choice as my resorts are all dual-affilliated, except for HP.

posted 05-09-2001 16:47            

II's online availability is so depressing that it might drive me away to Sfx, but that might be jumping into the fire, as their availability does not seem to be much better.

posted 05-09-2001 17:33            

The Southern California Coast. II never has any availability online in this area. In fact, the best I have been able to come up with even working with vacation counselors is winter in Capistrano Beach...an area totally devoid of charm where the resorts sit right smack on the busy highway with it and the railroad tracks between them and the beach.

II does have Four Seasons Aviara, but try and get a 2 bedroom unit there in the summer. II also has Marriott's Newport Coast Villas...but it's impossible to get into with a non-Marriott trade...and it is tough to get in the summer even with a Marriott exchange. The availability just isn't there.

In contrast, RCI has lots of resorts with decent availability on the Southern California Coast. I have an exchange this summer for a 2 bedroom at Winner's Circle and an exchange to Villa L'Auberge for next summer. Both of these weeks I found sitting online...no vacation counselor, no on-going search, no hassle. There were lots of other choices available, too...Tamarack, Carlsbad Inn, San Clemente Cove, Carlsbad Seapointe, Grand Pacific Palisades. That is freedom.

Some people may point out that a lot of resorts in Southern California are dual affiliated...including Tamarack, Villa L'Auberge, Wave Crest, Winner's Circle, etc. But try and get a summer exchange into one of them through II! All of them are primarily RCI resorts...and the vast majority of exchanges go through RCI.

A sampling of other areas I like where RCI is far superior: the Oregon Coast, Jackson Hole, Santa Fe, Colorado (outside of Vail), Western Canada. In all of these locations an exchange through II is virtually impossible....especially during peak season.

As for the argument that II resorts are far superior...let's take a look at another place I like to go...Scottsdale. Marriott will likely build there in the future, but let's look at what is there now. II has the Four Seasons...but try getting a 2 bedroom unit in the winter. It just doesn't happen. The other II resorts...which are available sometimes...are Orange Tree and Epic's Scottsdale Links Resort. In contrast, RCI has Sheraton's Desert Oasis, Scottsdale Villa Mirage, and Scottsdale Camelback Resort (this last one is dual affiliated, but again, almost all the exchanges go through RCI). These resorts aren't as classy as the Four Seasons...but they have better locations...and they are available...and they are considerably nicer, IMHO, than Orange Tree or especially Epic.

There are other examples...but I'm sure if you've read this far...you've read more than you wanted to already. :-)

Steve

posted 05-10-2001 13:15            

I wonder if anyone has ever equated how much a Marriott point is worth in cents? On average frequent flyer miles are equivalent to 2 cents.

We bought on Kauai because we love the island and plan to go there 4 out of 5 years. We bought Marriott because they have a superior product to anything else that we have seen in Hawaii.

We learned so much from TUG and the TUG BBS. Thank you fellow tuggers for sharing so much wisdom. If I meet any of you by the pool at the Kauai Marriot I'll buy you a drink!

posted 05-10-2001 14:03            

We are both new to the TS experience & recent owners with Marriott.

Still, I believe that a relevant question in the Marriott debate is "why do you want a timeshare?" and " how does this TS fit my lifestyle?"

My wife and I purchased our Marriott TS primarily to use the property on at least a tri-annual basis, while building points for those years that we do not stay at our property (Ocean Pointe)OR to trade within Marriott' resort system.

We see the Rewards program as a tool to obtain greater flexibility to complement some of the other travel we ordinarily do every couple of years. Likewise the Marriott VISA card with its Rewards.

Our profession requires continuing education certification & our employer provides an annual allowance which we may accumulate. Thus for the past 6 years we make it a point to find a meeting in Hawaii every 2 years which is thus employer subsidized.

Our "after-meeting" time is spent at a Marriott property in Maui where we earn more Rewards points. In essence we combine business with pleasure. Sure, we still spend out of pocket money for this part, but feel we are getting good value for the buck between employer subsidy & the additional Rewards.

We see Marriott's VC and the Rewards as a good means for taking a nice vacation and earning points to use as we choose (travel or airline miles). We are happy with our Florida TS destination, but also like the idea of swapping out occassionally to a different Marriott VC resort such as Spain or Aruba.

I guess for us, our TS interest is not so much trading within the II/RCI and its rich selection of destinations as it is having a few nice MVCI destinations to choose from. Likewise we did not buy a TS only to sell it in a few years.

One's goals and objectives are critical.

We feel that over time, our investment with Marriott, will give us a fair deal. Perhaps if one is driven by needs for liquidity, preference for a more diverse trade selection, or a desire to invest as little as possible, the higher price of a Marriott TS (at least developer prices) may not be the best thing for them.

Well, that's how we arrived at our decision anyhow.