How are rooms assigned? Shouldn't priority be given to multiple MVCI owners??

I thought rooms are assigned by:
1. owners of multiple weeks at the resort using their assigned weeks
2. owners of single weeks at the resort using their assigned week
3. multiple Marriott week owners from any resort who have traded into the resort through II
4. single Marriott week owners from any Marriott resorts who have traded in through II
5. other exchangers

I am now being told it is up to the resort to determine who gets which room

Case in point the resort is doing it this way:
1. owners of multiple weeks at the resort using their assigned weeks
2. Owners of a single week at the resort who are using their assigned week
3. owners here who have exchanged back into this resort on an II trade
4. Multiple week Marriott owners from any other resort
5 single week MVCI owners from any other resort
5. other non marriott exchangers


In this case if you own a week at this Marriott you can exchange it for another week here and get preferential views.By doing it this way even if you have a less than impressive view, if you own here, you will be upgraded to a great view. My question is "isn't it ridiculous to be able to trade a cheaper view for a better view through II. If this was the case what's to stop me from buying a cheap view with the expectation of always being upgraded??

I think if you exchange your week(s) away you should go into the pool of other Marriott owners by multiple or single week classifications. You should no longer have priority over multiple MVCI week owners (even if you own here and you are a single week owner) since we have more of an investment in Marriott.

How do you feel about that and why does Marriott allow its GMs to assign rooms any way they wish regardless of how many Marriott weeks you own??

I don't understand how these rooms are assigned. I am a multiple week owner. i own Oceanside at Barony and Grande Ocean Gold Time. I have inquired several times at both resorts when using my assigned week about a upgrade to Ocean Front and been told flat out "No" "You are always assigned the view you own." No upgrades to a better view allowed and yet twice I have come across renters who rented directly from Marriott in Ocean Front units and no they didn't ask for or pay for Ocean Front they just were assigned it.

I have to say that nothing is guaranteed when trading back into a resort. So I would not buy a lesser view with the expectation of always being able to negotiate a better view on a trade.

The scenario you described as a change has been the scenario at the Barony for at least the last 5 years, so I do not think it is all that "new". Perhaps some resorts did it a little differently when it came down to number 3 or number 4. Our resort also assignes renters last within a view category.

I have to say, I do agree that owners at a resort traveling not in their purchased season should have some priority over non owners at that resort ...

Beverley

I would say that it doesn't have to do with getting and Ocean view for an Island view price.
It would have more to do with getting a courtyard islands view over a parking lot island view.

In which case I think an owner at that resort (even trading back in) would have preference over the room 'view' available.

icydog: Where does an owner who owns two weeks -- but at different Marriott resorts and which happen to fall in different times of the year -- fit in? We own Platinum 'summer' at Newport and Platinum Winter at Desert Springs Villas I.

You raise a lot of interesting questions. We are "2 week" owners @ Marriott Ocean Pointe. We own Platinum "oceanside". During one vacation we recieved a very undesirable room location. We did not like it but we put up w/ it by rationalizing that everybody has to get the less desirable rooms some of the time. We "share", right?
So, imagine our surprise when we met another family around the pool & they told us that they had traded into Ocean Pointe from some timeshare in a desert & that they were given a prime Oceanfront villa? We asked Management about this ( w/o mentioning names of course...). We wondered if there was a "desert" view that wld be comparable to an "oceanfront" view & they said "No....they just lucked out." Well, my question was...why the heck didn't they put us in that oceanfront villa instead of giving it away to a non-owner? I am not suggesting that one should purchase oceanside w/ the expectation of getting oceanfront but in a case where it is between an owner & a trader shouldn't owners trump traders? Btw, we both checked in on the same day.

smoothair said:

You raise a lot of interesting questions. We are "2 week" owners @ Marriott Ocean Pointe. We own Platinum "oceanside". During one vacation we recieved a very undesirable room location. We did not like it but we put up w/ it by rationalizing that everybody has to get the less desirable rooms some of the time. We "share", right?
So, imagine our surprise when we met another family around the pool & they told us that they had traded into Ocean Pointe from some timeshare in a desert & that they were given a prime Oceanfront villa? We asked Management about this ( w/o mentioning names of course...). We wondered if there was a "desert" view that wld be comparable to an "oceanfront" view & they said "No....they just lucked out." Well, my question was...why the heck didn't they put us in that oceanfront villa instead of giving it away to a non-owner? I am not suggesting that one should purchase oceanside w/ the expectation of getting oceanfront but in a case where it is between an owner & a trader shouldn't owners trump traders? Btw, we both checked in on the same day.

Click to expand...

It might not seem fair but, when an ocean front owner exchanges their week, the view doesn't increase their exchange power but the ocean front unit IS deposited with I.I. The reason I believe this is that I've learned the configuration difference for the master suite of the OF unit or, if you're exchanging into OP and you reserve a 3 bedroom villa you're always going to get an OF villa.

The ocean front villa at OP is listed as a 2 bedroom 6/6 on I.I. The 2 bedroom OV villa is listed as 6/8. The OV villa's second bedroom lists a king size bed while the OF villas lists two single beds. The OV villa lists the mini kitchen the studio LO has while the OF villa does not. Recently, at a owners update at MGC, they had an I.I. Marriott desk manager on teleconfrence to speak with. I ask her directly about the room assignments based on what was reserved and what was listed on the confirmation for room amenities. Specifically I pointed out the differences mentioned above about OP. What she told me is if you exchange into a 2 bedroom 6/6 you will recieve a 2 bedroom 6/6. Since the 2 bedroom 6/6 is only OF, you will recieve an OF unit with the exchange. Now you won't necessarily get preference as to what floor but you will get one of the prime OF units.

We'll be testing what she said this coming November as we exchange our unit for points and then used another week we own to exchange back into OP. The unit I have exchanged for is listed as a 2 bedroom 6/6. If what I was told by the I.I. Marriott desk rep is correct, we should get one of the OF units somewhere in the resort. Otherwise the confirmation information will be incorrect and I would have a legitimate complaint with I.I.

There is one thing that I think should always be the same - if you're using your own week at your own resort, you should get the building/view/#br that you purchased. If that means that you might be in a less-desirable unit than an exchanger or renter, so be it. Can you imagine the problems the room assigners would have if they had to listen to owners complain along the lines of, "but I know of others who were upgraded in the same exact situation ... I'm an owner and should be higher on the ladder than a renter ... that other MVCI property doesn't do it this way" and on and on and on. At some point the trickle-down from the assigner trying to be everybody's best friend could affect every owner using their own week and it would be unfair.

I do agree with casey, though - if the only difference in available rooms is the view within a category, owners should have priority. First, owners using their own week, then owners trading into their home resort, then multiple-week owners exchanging/renting, then single-week owners exchanging/renting, then finally non-MVCI exchangers/renters.

Now when it comes to trades I don't know what to expect because our first one will be next month. I'm excited to get to Waiohai and find out where they're putting us, but I plan on calling soon to make a few requests to help the process. It can't hurt, anyway.

Our first AC experience last September was great. From reading here we were expecting to be assigned to a garden room at Barony, but we ended up oceanside on a high floor and fell in love with the resort. Any room would have been fine, really, but the unexpected treat pushed us over the edge and convinced us to purchase after we got home.

Susan

All the worries about exchanging or a decent view...

When I read the thread here and also the fierce competition for good ocean view condos for personal use by the owners in the Starwood system thread, I am so pleased that we decided to buy a fixed week which came with fixed time but it was the week we wanted anyway to add on to our other two weeks, so that sealed the deal.

I remember that we were told that we were always guaranteed this oceanfront unit here at our fixed time only but if we exchanged back in at this resort, at a different time, we were not guaranteed an oceanfront unit here or anywhere else. It was clearly stated so we have no intention of ever exchanging through II, I hope.

There are other choices we can make like a direct exchange with another owner at their resort or try renting it out or have the Marriott do it for us if they pay a decent rate. I know this has changed not too long ago but it may change again for the better.

I also remember her using the term that II is color blind so II doesn't pay any attention to what season one has bought. We really didn't pay too much attention to what else was mentioned about exchanging because we mainly bought for use and we are happy timeshare owners.

I am already counting down the days for our next visit to Maui and it will be at least three weeks and some extra days!

Of the 3 Marriott T/S I own none are sold by view only season.

Yes, Susan, but the reality is that after you purchase you may very well end up in that garden room or worse. Meanwhile, "non-owner/traders" will be sitting on their balcony enjoying a majestic view while you, the Owner, are looking @ the license plates in the parking lot.

smoothair said:

Yes, Susan, but the reality is that after you purchase you may very well end up in that garden room or worse. Meanwhile, "non-owner/traders" will be sitting on their balcony enjoying a majestic view while you, the Owner, are looking @ the license plates in the parking lot.

Click to expand...

When using your owner week you are supposed to be assigned the view that you bought ... no exceptions. When you are trading in through II you can be assigned what ever is available.

This can easily mean that if an ocean front owner deposited their week and (theoretically) everyone else was there on their owner week, the trader will get the oceanfront unit regardless of what they used to trade, etc. This is as it should be. Owners are entitled to what they purchase, nothing more and nothing less. Renters and traders get what ever is available via the trading system and the points system.

Beverley

smoothair said:

Yes, Susan, but the reality is that after you purchase you may very well end up in that garden room or worse. Meanwhile, "non-owner/traders" will be sitting on their balcony enjoying a majestic view while you, the Owner, are looking @ the license plates in the parking lot.

Click to expand...

Beverly's right - that's not the reality if I reserve a week with MVCI Owner Services. For example, at Barony we purchased oceanfront, so next May when I go to stay for the week that I reserved today we will be in an oceanfront unit. Now I can request a higher floor, or a certain building, or a certain oceanfront unit in those buildings, but only the oceanfront is guaranteed.

The second week that I reserved today for next May is at SurfWatch in a 3BR unit in one of the two oceanside buildings. We're guaranteed to get that because that's what we purchased. Which floor, which of the two buildings, which end of the building, which unit ... those things can be requested, but only the oceanside 3BR is guaranteed.

My third week will be reserved as a Surfwatch 3BR oceanfront (Marriott calls that building oceanvista), but when I put it in for a trade I know that I may not get a comparable unit even if I trade back into that property for a different week. More likely I will get fewer bedrooms in a non-oceanfront unit no matter where I accept for a trade, but I don't have a problem with that because those are the Marriott/II rules and I know them going in.

If you have reserved a week at your home resort through MVCI Owner Services, with no trade or exchange or rental, and have received a unit classification other than what is specified in your closing papers, then you have a legitimate argument with Marriott.

Susan

When staying at your home resort during your reserved week, I don't see any reason why Marriott would "upgrade" you to a better view. You've paid for your view, and you didn't pay for the view you are trying to upgrade to.

With regards to II, when a OceanFront owner banks their week, the week is deposited into II as a OceanFront unit. That is why people ask all the time what different room type codes mean, like ZZGV, ZZOF, etc. (I made those up, but you know what I mean). So if I deposit my Gardenview and then request an exchange back to my home resort, maybe I'll get a OceanFront, but maybe I'll get a Gardenview exchange.

If this information is not accurate, then I've been missing something over the past many months of reading similar posts. Dave M, you can probably straighten this out?? Thanks.

But why shd a Non-Owner who is trading from the Desert get an Oceanfront villa @ Ocean Pointe when I am an Oceanside Owner & I get parking lot? It makes no sense to me. Seems that "Oceanside Owner" should get priority over "Desert Non-Owner with No Well Defined View". I am just trying to make some sense out of all of this. The "desert owners" in my scenario described above shd have had my villa & I shd have had theirs. I think that Owners shd come before Traders!

Owners DO come before traders! Even if we can't figure out the priority list for exchanging, the one certain thing that we can count on is that owners will be guaranteed the specific unit size and building type that they purchased. You purchased oceanside and got oceanside. Sure, you got the dreaded parking lot instead of courtyard (or whatever) view in that oceanside building, but you did get what you paid for! Exchangers get what is left over after owners have been placed; that's fair and according to the rules. Also fair is that certain owners do not receive preferential treatment or upgrades unless all owners do.

Let me ask you - how many other oceanside owners were enjoying their home resort at the same time you were there, and why should the room assigner have chosen you to be upgraded to the oceanview unit instead of any of them? If you had been upgraded, how should the room assigner have placated them? Musical Units until everybody is in a unit type that they didn't purchase? That would be chaos with folks complaining all over the registration areas, but it would be a reality if Marriott arbitrarily decided room assignments or completely changed the system so that the purchased unit/building type is made worthless.

For what it's worth, the dreaded parking lot view would take a little bit away from my vacation, too. When it happens to me at my home resort, then the next time I call to reserve my week I will be nicely asking the rep to note that it might be someone else's turn for the less-desirable of my options. Of course, no guarantees...

Susan

Susan, I am not saying that it should have been us but it should have been an Owner.....any Owner..."first past the post"...I don't care...
Owners trump traders in my view. But that is not the way it works. In fact, I really do not know how it works & that was my original question.

smoothair said:

Susan, I am not saying that it should have been us but it should have been an Owner.....any Owner..."first past the post"...I don't care...
Owners trump traders in my view. But that is not the way it works. In fact, I really do not know how it works & that was my original question.

Click to expand...

ONLY if they are there on a traded week ... When an owner is on their purchased week they are not entitled to anything other than what they purchased. When purchasing Ocean View you accepted that view and should not expect to be in an Ocean front unit regardless of where someone else is placed.

Having said that, let me explain an experience I had with the Barony. I go to the Barony every summer as you may go to Ocean Point every winter. I go for a minimum of 2 weeks, usually 3 or 4. I own one summer week at the Barony and one Silver week at the Barony and numerous other resorts including Ocean Point. I trade through II for the other 2 - 3 weeks to add on to my owner week at the Barony.

One summer, we had our owner week reserved and then a second week at the Barony (on a trade) then we checked out and went to Florida and came back for a third week at the Barony (on a trade). Our owner week is an "oceanside" unit, we were placed in an oceanside unit and were not made to change units. They were allowed to do this because the second week was a traded week. If we owned the second week during platinum season and it was a garden view, we would have to move. Period.

When we returned for the 3rd week, we asked if they had any oceanfront units available we would really be happy to have one assigned to us. Since it was close to the end of the season and they had availability, they gave it to us. I think they did consider that we are owners at that resort but they are also bound by the rules and could only accommodate our request because we were there on a trade.

Susan's suggestion is a good one about referencing your last room assignment for hopes of a better one the next time you go. Ocean Point is "grid lock" in the high platinum season just as the Barony is in July (their high platinum season). Some people are going to have unit assignments they are not the happiest with. It cannot be avoided at a resort that is so well liked. Be happy that you were smart enough to buy such a prestigious resort.

Perhaps you might consider purchasing a second week, Ocean Front, and then place you oceanside unit in for a trade each year for the week after your oceanfront unit week. As a trader you may get to stay in that oceanfront unit for the two weeks. Of course there are absolutely NO guarantees.

Beverley

I think there is some confusion here.

At most resorts that have view categories (e.g., Oceanfront and Oceanside), owners, renters and exchangers are all preassigned to one of those specific categories.

Owners at the resort get assigned to one of the categories based solely on what they own. They are not supposed to be upgraded to a higher view category. If they were routinely upgraded, it would never make sense for anyone to buy the most expensive view category. Those who rent privately from an owner get the same view and priority that the owner was entitled to.

Renters - those who rent from Marriott - get assigned a view category based on what they pay for. If you don't believe me, go to Marriott.com and pick a resort such as Grande Ocean and go through the motions of pricing a one-week stay. You'll see that, as a renter, you'll pay different rates for different views. However, even as a renter, you won't often see a Marriott guarantee of "Oceanfront".

Exchangers are supposed to get the view that is the same as that deposited by the owner of the week that the exchanger is confirmed into. Thus, if the exchanger is lucky enough to be matched with an Oceanfront unit that was deposited, that's the view the exchanger is supposed to get. Some resorts don't follow that guideline and, in fact, II specifically states on its confirmations that views are not guaranteed.

Finally, once all with reservations have been assigned to a view category (at resorts that have them), the prioritization suggested in the OP takes over. Although the exact ranking varies slightly at various resorts, here is the published priority for Grande Ocean, one of my home resorts, for making unit assignments within each view category:

• Multiple-week Marriott Grande Ocean Owner stays
• Single-week Marriott Grande Ocean Owner stays
• Marriott Grande Ocean Owners, returning on an exchange
• Marriott multiple-week owners on an exchange
• Marriott single-week owners on an exchange
• Rental and sales preview guests
• Non-Marriott owners on an exchange.

Thus, the best views/floors/confirmed preferences within a category are assigned based on that priority list.

If Marriott didn't do it that way and, for example, gave all exchangers Oceanside units, that would mean that some Oceanside owners would be "forced" to take upgrades to Oceanfront units during busy summer weeks. It's a rare, rare day that Marriott gives those Oceanfront units to Oceanside owners. "If you want Oceanfront at your resort, you have to buy it." However, as suggested above, exchanging back into your home resort gives you at least some chance for that upgrade, depending on the resort and the luck of the exchange.

Two added notes:

• As with any rule, there will always be exceptions. Thus, there have been numerous posts on this forum from people who have been assigned a unit that seems contrary to what they should have been assigned. It happens. As long as premium-view owners at the resort who are using their week get the view they paid for, the resort has the authority to move others around as needed to make the overall assignments work as well as practical. If you think making those assignments is easy, you should ask to sit with a rooms-control person for a while as I did!
• Whether Marriott should or shouldn't change the priority system or whether a particular resort should conform to what other resorts do is an argument I'll leave to others. For me, I accept that my assigned view might be better or worse in some circumstances and I'll leave it to Marriott to judge what's most fair for the overall group that is staying at the resort at the same time I am.

Dave M said:

... If you think making those assignments is easy, you should ask to sit with a rooms-control person for a while as I did! ...

Click to expand...

What a job - you're guaranteed to have at least one person not happy with you, and your day is made if at least one person stops by to thank you for placing them in the Best Unit Ever.

I do call before a trip and make requests but it's difficult to know where the fine line is between having your preferences noted and being a major Can't-Be-Satisfied-Owner. (Yes, I do think Marriott might use that CBSO notation, ha!) So when I call, my requests are always preceded by, "Of course you can't make any guarantees but if the option is available..."

For those others of you who make the call, maybe you can tell me if what I'm planning for our next trip will make me a CBSO. We have two units the first week and one the second (although I'm still hoping to pick up a second unit for the second week with an AC in flexchange.) I'm going to ask that 1) we be placed so that we can stay in the same unit for both weeks, 2) if a dreaded parking lot view is the only way that can happen then nevermind that request and we'll move if something else is available for either week, and 3) the second unit for the first week be in the same building as ours. That's it. (If the AC works for the fourth week we'll leave that to chance - no sense risking the wrath of the Room Gods!)

So, too much?

Susan

I would say, "way too much". Because of the complexities of the assignment process, you'll do much better and likely have a better chance at success if you can decide on a simple reasonable request and make it. As I recall, there is a limit of about 40 (?) characters in the field on the computer screen where the requests are entered. That's about enough room to summarize one request.

Expanding, for other possible requests (not yours), if I ask for a (1) high floor, (2) end unit (3) in the Dolphin building, I may well get none of those. If all three of my requests don't match up to a unit that's available to be assigned when my assignment priority comes up, the rooms control person may well put my request to the bottom of the pile or might give me the one of the three requests that is least important to me.

Keep it simple to have the best chance. My head would be reeling trying to write down and sort out what your actual choices seem to be!

smoothair said:

Susan, I am not saying that it should have been us but it should have been an Owner.....any Owner..."first past the post"...I don't care...
Owners trump traders in my view. But that is not the way it works. In fact, I really do not know how it works & that was my original question.

Click to expand...

I understand your point and it does make sense in theory, but in practice it would cause too much aggravation all around. The room assigners wouldn't have any guidelines to follow. But more importantly, the owners could not be safe and secure in their purchase. They wouldn't be guaranteed their unit type, they would feel in competition with other owners for available upgrades, those who had received upgrades in the past would begin demanding them every time, those who purchase at the highest tiers would have a legitimate gripe against the practice of upgrades for other owners ... it would be mess.

Honestly, as an owner, I don't want to know or hear that when other owners are using their own units they are being given upgrades over what they purchased, not unless the same thing happens for me. Every time. And I sort of like the surprise factor in exchanges - it worked for me at Barony, but I understand it may not work every time or even next time.

Susan

Dave M said:

... Keep it simple to have the best chance. My head would be reeling trying to write down and sort out what your actual choices seem to be!

Click to expand...

Ah, see, I knew I would get an honest answer! "High floor" and "as near to each other as possible" it is.

Oh, and a teal chenille ottoman. I demand a teal chenille ottoman. It's not a real vacation without one.

thanks Dave,
Susan

There are two different issues being discussed (and sometimes being misunderstood) here:

1. Categories of room inventory
2. Prioritization of room assignment within a category

For #1, it might be easier to think of a resort with two different view categories as two different resorts. Let's suppose that there's a resort called Two-View Vllas, with spectacular waterfall-view rooms on one side of the building and garbage-dump-view rooms on the other side of the building. So think of it as Waterfall Villas and Garbage Dump Villas.

Some owners own Waterfall Villas, and some owners own Garbage Dump Villas. II considers both to be equal and only sees the resort as Two-View Vllas. Some II members successfully trade into Waterfall Villas, while others successfully trade into Garbage Dump Villas. It doesn't matter what view those II members had at their home resort, or whether the II members own multiple weeks, or whether the II members own Marriott or something else. II is in the business of facilitating exchanges of comparable weeks, based on various factors, but the view category and the number of weeks owned are not part of that formula.

Now #2 comes into play. Owners and II exchange guests are preassigned as Dave M explained so well.

smoothair said:

But why shd a Non-Owner who is trading from the Desert get an Oceanfront villa @ Ocean Pointe when I am an Oceanside Owner & I get parking lot? It makes no sense to me. Seems that "Oceanside Owner" should get priority over "Desert Non-Owner with No Well Defined View". I am just trying to make some sense out of all of this. The "desert owners" in my scenario described above shd have had my villa & I shd have had theirs. I think that Owners shd come before Traders!

Click to expand...

Another quick thought, smoothair. I still don't agree that you should have been upgraded to oceanfront, but I do think that you should have been given priority over an exchanger for the oceanside units. I would hope that an exchanger would be placed in the dreaded parking lot view while an owner using his/her own week would get the courtyard view. Both are the same building/class, but one is clearly superior to the other and the owner should have preference in that situation. That makes sense.

Don't suppose there is any chance that your room assigner would let you know if that was the case during your week?

Susan