SVO’s VP of “Strategic Technology” earns award!

Hi Gang,

No, it's not for actually implementing any "strategic technology" or anything like that. It's for scoring the highest on a test. Click here for details.

Maybe the reason we owners still don’t have the ability to do on-line reservations is because this guy was busy studying for that test.

Too bad he didn’t also compete in the coveted “most use of acronyms and buzzwords in a story” award. He would win that one hands down.

I bet somebody is going to get a raise (at our expense of course) for this.

-nodge

nodge said:

Hi Gang,

No, it's not for actually implementing any "strategic technology" or anything like that. It's for scoring the highest on a test. Click here for details.

Maybe the reason we owners still don’t have the ability to do on-line reservations is because this guy was busy studying for that test.

Too bad he didn’t also compete in the coveted “most use of acronyms and buzzwords in a story” award. He would win that one hands down.

I bet somebody is going to get a raise (at our expense of course) for this.

-nodge

Click to expand...

I think we should all send an email congratulating him - and give him some 'constructive' feedback on SVO's database and reservations systems (or lack of...).

Note : incorrect email address.

Wow, CHTP of the Year, hmmmm...

Maybe it's Czar of High Technology Procrastination

DavidnRobin said:

I think we should all send an email congratulating him - and give him some 'constructive' feedback on SVO's database and reservations systems (or lack of...).
ian.cole@starwoodsvo.com

Click to expand...

Great Idea! All of you "Good Cops" out there fire away.

You know, I didn't even know that SVO had a "VP of Strategic Technology." I wonder how many other VP's SVO has? Where does one look to find that sort of information? Does SVO have anyone working for it that isn't at least a VP?

saluki said:

Wow, CHTP of the Year, hmmmm...

Maybe it's Czar of High Technology Procrastination

Click to expand...

Nice! :rofl:

I think I tracked down the first question from the exam:

1. It's 2008 and off-the-shelf commercial hotel room inventory databases with on-line availability checking and booking systems are commercially available for reasonable prices, what do you do?

a. Buy one and implement it; or,
b. Mumble something incoherently about "modules" whenever asked about the status of implementing such a system and then continue studying for this test.

Everyone except one at the exam must have selected the "wrong" answer "a."

- "Bad Cop" nodge

OK - I just ripped off an quick email to Ian. It was not as eloquent as I would have liked, and I will probably get a computerized response - but you never know...
I invited him to come to our forum - and forewarned him that there was so much resentement in regards to the database and reservation system - that there was likely to be backlash - but did say that if he is looking for honest (yet brutal) feedback - this was the place to be.

DavidnRobin said:

OK - I just ripped off an quick email to Ian. It was not as eloquent as I would have liked, and I will probably get a computerized response - but you never know...
I invited him to come to our forum - and forewarned him that there was so much resentement in regards to the database and reservation system - that there was likely to be backlash - but did say that if he is looking for honest (yet brutal) feedback - this was the place to be.

Click to expand...

I'll be gentle.

Hey that reminds me, did anyone remember to remove the solution from SVO's perm?

Oops. Sorry SVO. It'll grow back.

-nodge

Unfortunately - the email bounced back - so the email address is incorrect.
I put the address in as last.first - it should be first.last - I will try this.

Email is:
ian.cole@starwoodvo.com

He is out of office until Monday.

Nodge -- we need you. If there were no bad cops, we'd all be speaking with funny british accents, having high tea, spelling words incorrectly with s's where z's belong, etc.

jerseygirl said:

Nodge -- we need you. If there were no bad cops, we'd all be speaking with funny british accents, having high tea, spelling words incorrectly with s's where z's belong, etc.

Click to expand...

Well OK then . . . . I'll carry on. . .

Hey, let’s have our own multiple choice question, but before I ask it, I’ve got to give you a little background.

Background:

Let's go back to 1999. Starwood just sold its gambling properties in Vegas and is flush with $3 Billion in cash from that sale and looking for the next big thing.

Much like "Walgreens" using the location of "Rite Aid's" to figure out where to put their new pharmacies, Starwood looks to its primary competitor and sees Marriott is "all that" with timeshares and Starwood feels behind the curve. Moreover, Starwood is eager to not only get in the timeshare game, but also appear to folks that it has already been in the game a while. (Our Walgreens was at this corner first!).

Accordingly, Starwood stumbles onto a preexisting timeshare company (Vistana) led by an entrepreneur/developer (think Rodney Dangerfield in "Caddyshack") who is doing reasonably well selling timeshares the good ol’ fashioned way (you know, sleazy, high pressure '70's-style timeshare sales) in Orlando and a couple of other desirable places. Starwood and this entrepreneur “negotiate” a deal, which, to put nicely, given Starwood’s cash and overwhelming desire to catch-up to Marriott, involved Starwood bending over.

The net result was that Starwood now “owned” Vistana (and, given the way Vistana consumated/negotiated the transaction, the two may even be considered married to each other in Tennessee). However, the entrepreneur was put in charge of the “new” company, and he was given complete control over it, begging the question "who really owned whom?"

Multiple Choice Question:

So the big day comes for Starwood to announce this wonderful new “acquisition.” When interviewed by the media, and in order to sell the deal to existing Vistana owners, this entrepreneur/developer, who is now the new CEO of SVO, with no obligation to seek permission or authority from anyone at Starwood to implement things related to SVO, says:

a. “With this acquisition, we’re pretty much going to do nothing to help owners book their rooms online. In fact even in 10 years, we still won’t have that ability. But, we will hire a vice president of ‘strategic technology’ someday, and with a little luck, he will pass a test, so we’ve got that going for us. Hey, did somebody step on a duck?”

or,

b. “[With this acquisition Starwood] is investing in technology that will make Vistana’s reservations system more advanced than any timeshare system currently on the market. […] We have customized software to run the properties and track guests, but we don’t have the technology for the customer to dial up on the computer and through interactive capabilities, reserve rooms. […] I think in the timeshare industry that will be an absolute home run.”

Check your answer here.

-nodge

I like this part:

According to Barry Sternlicht, Chairman and CEO of Starwood, resorts targeted for vacation ownership space include the Phoenician, Westin La Paloma, Westin Mission Hills, Westin Harbor Island, Sheraton Bal Harbour, Sheraton Key West and the St. Regis Aspen. He said hotels in Portugal, Sardinia and Malta also have excess land for timeshare development.

Click to expand...

Hmmm....at least we go Mission Hills.

OK, bear with me here . . . . .

The very, very TOP DOG of SVO reported that his company “is investing in technology that will make Vistana’s reservations system more advanced than any timeshare system currently on the market.” Yet, nearly 10 years after he made that statement, SVO owners still have squat, while many of the other timeshare companies now offer on-line inventory checking and booking. So what can we learn from this?

1. The TOP DOG that made those statements isn’t accountable to anyone, so he can freely make promises and re-nig on them at will with impunity (and he and everyone else in top management at SVO knows it); and,

2. We are wasting our time attempting to get, or othwerwise expecting, Starwood’s hotel reputation for customer service, etc. to apply to its timeshare business. Starwood simply bought Vistana in 1999, but as part of that deal Vistana top management made darned sure that Vistana management continued to run this timeshare business. Essentially, we all bought our timeshares from a no name, no frills, “Vistana, Inc.” that was (and still is) masquerading as Starwood.

I think that it is fair to say that Vistana management’s view of customer service falls a great deal lower than Starwood hotel’s standards. But, given the nature of the original timeshare purchase deal between Starwood and Vistana, there isn’t much Starwood can do about it, except of course, watch its good customer service reputation continue to be tarnished by the former Vistana management (and its hand picked pack of cronies).

It may have taken me a few years to figure this out, but I think I now understand why SVO treats us villa owners with such contempt, despite being "owned" by Starwood, a company known for its excellent customer service . . . because it can, and there's nothing the real Starwood can do about it.

-nodge

Hmm... very interesting opinion. You may be 100% correct. I knew we were just cattle...

Ken555 said:

Hmm... very interesting opinion. You may be 100% correct. I knew we were just cattle...

Click to expand...

In SVO Top Management's eyes, we're sheep, it's a wolf, and Starwood is the sheepskin cloak that Starwood paid the wolf $600 million to wear.

BAAAAAAAA. Why hello there funny looking fellow sheep. Is that a picture of the Westin St. John pool you're holding there?

-nodge

Wow - bet you didn't think this thread getting bumped up, but...

I did receive a response from Ian Cole that specifically dealt with Starwood's poor database and reservation system - and thought I would share.

Because of the standard email disclaimer at the end of corporate emails, I did ask if I could share and was not told that I could not share. Besides, I stated that I was writing as a representative of the Starwood Forum on TUG, and his email was in response to this. So I will take the liberty...

My initial email {shortened} was...
*****
Ian -
{excerpt}
We are a group of SVO Owners who have an invested interested in SVO and SVN, and its well-being. We tend to be somewhat jaded because we are educated owners, but our intentions are good.

I am writing you because of the various issues I have seen over the years with the SVO database, the reservation system, and the lack of communication between the two. I am not in the IT field, but work in a large company that heavily relies on databases, links between databases, and extraction of data. I am very aware of the many issues that are lacking at Starwood in this regard.

SVO/SVN’s database and reservations system that links to the database needs a major overhaul. In today’s field of technology – it seems as if the IT system is stuck in the 90s (and not even the late 90s). I have constantly brought up this issue with Starwood and SVN management – only to be told that they are working on it. However, after a couple of years, it seems that perhaps this is just giving lip service to the issue. I think that the lack of a modern database and reservation system is actually costing SVO millions of dollars which only goes to hurt everyone involved (Owners, Stockholders, and Management)

I could go on about the variety of issues about the problems that SVO and SVN is having in regards to a modern IT system. I will not, because I am sure that you are also aware. If you want specifics, I will be glad to list. I also invite you to read our SVO forum, and even post if you are allowed to. Be forewarned that there is such resentment of the IT system at SVO that there will be a backlash – however, I think you will also get honest feedback that you could never get from a paid focus group.

Best Regards
David
PS – please do not send me a computerized response. I have received too many of these from SVO as it is.
****

Ian's response...
{excerpt}
I’m aware of TUG , and while I don’t read the forum frequently, I do catch up occasionally to understand feedback from our customers. On several occasions a TUG thread has made us aware of an issue and we’ve worked to correct it, or to incorporate an additional perspective.

As an example, we have a project underway to address growing customer feedback about non-receipt of our email confirmations. We are working to both improve the existing transmission path as well as to implement a new tool that we believe will help the emails pass through the ever vigilant spam filters.

We understand the customer feedback around our reservations system. The Owner Services team constantly pushes us to improve in this area. As you mention, a major overhaul is needed, and is in progress. While there are many commercial hotel reservations and inventory systems, our industry does not have commercially available reservations or inventory systems that would support the flexibility of our product while also scaling to the number of owners and providing the proper protections for our customer data. Given this reality, we are undertaking phased software development to replace our existing legacy inventory and reservations systems.

We have already implemented the new inventory system and are currently working on the core of the new reservations engine which will allow owners to search inventory based on the SVN business rules including handling items like the SVN windows, lock-offs, etc. This engine will be tied to mystarcentral.com and will allow true inventory search and online booking. Many customers use the existing online reservations request forms, but as you are aware they do not allow the owner to search availability based on their ownership. We are focused on this and it is a major part of our technology efforts and future plans.

At the same time we are working on the search portion of the reservations engine, we are also improving other parts of the reservations process. We are currently automating the SPG Conversion process on mystarcentral.com. This will allow the online owner to elect to convert, receive an immediate confirmation and have their SPG points balance updated immediately. We are targeting to have this in place for the opening of the next SVN conversion window.

I hope this insight into our planning and progress shows that we are focused on the right issues. If you have feedback outside the areas I mentioned, I welcome this feedback.

Thank you for your email,
Ian
*****

to be continued...

It was very nice not to get a computerized response - so that was a good start. I wrote him back thanking him - again an excerpt (and edited a bit)...

*****
Hi Ian,

Thanks for the response. If you do not mind, I will share this information with my fellow Tuggers. Some TUG contributors my have useful suggestions .

It is not my field, but from my experiences of using web-interfaces and data control – I think that MyStarCentral is a very poor web-interface in order to accomplish the scope of what is being intended. ....... that is “Garbage In – Garbage Out”. What I mean buy this – if a process (managing databases and reservations) is designed to accomplish greater flexibility that can be attained by the constraints of the overall system (MSC) then the intended output will be severely limited by the system.

Marriot has somewhat overcome this obstacle with their reservation/database system. Hopefully, Starwood can also create a world-class system.

Again – thanks for the response.
*****

Ian's response...

As for User Interface design – We have to consider many types of users and this does lead to some tradeoffs. We have to balance the needs of the person new to the product with those of the expert consumer and the groups that are in-between. While you might be looking for maximum options and flexibility those that are new to the product may be looking for simplicity. In the hotel world, this often leads to multiple user interfaces; one for the average customer and another for the frequent traveler. In the information technology world this is similar to the Mac vs. Windows debate – both are perfect for certain audiences.

I believe we are on a path to build a world-class system that will support a wide range of customer types, but as you mentioned earlier, we will need customer feedback to get there, and we won’t declare success until we have feedback from our customers to ratify that we met the goal.

If you have specifics on why you believe Marriot’s web reservations UI to be ideal, I’d love to have that feedback, especially if you own both products. As I mentioned earlier there are many inputs to the design process, but we will gladly incorporate another data point.

Thanks again for the dialog,
Ian

Props to Ian for writing you back. My husband develops technology used for large travel firms, and I know it is slow going when you can't buy something off the shelf that is scalable.

I am anxious for the day they can start rolling out this functionality.

See how a little information and directness calms the savage SVO owner.

SVO's VP of "Strategic Technology" said:

I’m aware of TUG , and while I don’t read the forum frequently, I do catch up occasionally to understand feedback from our customers. On several occasions a TUG thread has made us aware of an issue and we’ve worked to correct it, or to incorporate an additional perspective.

As an example, we have a project underway to address growing customer feedback about non-receipt of our email confirmations. We are working to both improve the existing transmission path as well as to implement a new tool that we believe will help the emails pass through the ever vigilant spam filters.

We understand the customer feedback around our reservations system. The Owner Services team constantly pushes us to improve in this area. As you mention, a major overhaul is needed, and is in progress. While there are many commercial hotel reservations and inventory systems, our industry does not have commercially available reservations or inventory systems that would support the flexibility of our product while also scaling to the number of owners and providing the proper protections for our customer data. Given this reality, we are undertaking phased software development to replace our existing legacy inventory and reservations systems.

We have already implemented the new inventory system and are currently working on the core of the new reservations engine which will allow owners to search inventory based on the SVN business rules including handling items like the SVN windows, lock-offs, etc. This engine will be tied to mystarcentral.com and will allow true inventory search and online booking. Many customers use the existing online reservations request forms, but as you are aware they do not allow the owner to search availability based on their ownership. We are focused on this and it is a major part of our technology efforts and future plans.

At the same time we are working on the search portion of the reservations engine, we are also improving other parts of the reservations process. We are currently automating the SPG Conversion process on mystarcentral.com. This will allow the online owner to elect to convert, receive an immediate confirmation and have their SPG points balance updated immediately. We are targeting to have this in place for the opening of the next SVN conversion window.

Click to expand...

Wow David!

You got a response from SVO regarding this subject that doesn't use the word "modules." I'm impressed!

Regarding the SVO VPST EIEIO's comment that "[o]ur industry does not have commercially available reservations or inventory systems that would support the flexibility of our product while also scaling to the number of owners and providing the proper protections for our customer data," somebody better let Hilton and Hyatt know that their already functioning online timeshare inventory checking and booking systems don't exist yet.

The fact remains that ALL hotel reservation systems have to have some form of rules checking "modules", user interface, inventory security, blah blah blah, etc. Otherwise, everyone would be getting the Travel Agent Secretary rates and/or deleting the entire database, etc. Part of the deal with buying an off-the-shelf reservation system is that these things still have to be customized for a particular implementation, and those service providers typically offer that customization for an additional fee.

I'm still waiting for my latest SVO luggage tag message decoder to arrive in the mail, but I suspect when I run this latest SVO message through it, we'll discover that it is really saying:

"Online reservation systems cost money, and we would rather put YOUR MONEY in OUR pockets, but it is still a pet project for one of our in-house computer geeks and he says he'll work on it when he has time."

-nodge

KISS-UP nodge version: Great news SVO! Keep up the good work! Computers are hard.

It sounds promising.

Well, I am impressed that you received such replies. I will try not to be as jaded as others and hope for the best. My DH designs and maintains the on line presence of the second largest newspaper company in the US. He is in charge of getting 50+ local papers websites that are functional and can be searched for data (on line classifieds, articles, pictures, etc).

I KNOW that when they make even the minutest modification, it takes weeks of testing and "launching" in little steps just to get it up and running flawlessly. Redesigning a huge database like what Starwood maintains must be a total nightmare. I cannot imagine what a hellish (and expensive) task they must have to catch up to our modern day expectations.

I am not saying they shouldn't be accountable. I am just saying it's really, really hard! So again, kudos to Starwood for the first professional response I have seen to an owner complaint in a long time.... (remember the post from someone a few months back where someone from Starwood said there was an online department that handles "owner gripes." I'll never forget that stellar response from corporate. Ian seems much better at PR at least.

Katherine

SDKath said:

Redesigning a huge database like what Starwood maintains must be a total nightmare. I cannot imagine what a hellish (and expensive) task they must have to catch up to our modern day expectations.

Click to expand...

The "hellish" problem SVO has now was caused by its own greed over these past 10 years.

Back when Vistana was acquired by Starwood, there were only a few resorts to deal with. In the past nearly 10 years, SVO/Vistana has increased its inventory nearly 5 fold, but still did SQUAT (until only recently apparently if at all) to improve its original database structure to the point where it can even think of offering online access to owners.

The increase in ownership also remarkably increased SVO/Vistana's fee revenues to the tune of $20 million PER YEAR (plus its “management fees” recouped from each resort) or so, yet SVO/Vistana still did squat to improve anything over these past nearly 10 years.

SVO's brand spanking new CEO (but who was really just the regular old Vistana CEO) said at the time of Starwood's acquisition that it "is investing in technology that will make Vistana’s reservations system more advanced than any timeshare system currently on the market," but Starwood/Vistana still did squat in these past nearly 10 YEARS!

Moreover, the required complex "rules" verification module is only needed to enforce the outrageously complex (voluntary/mandatory, can't combine staroptions on resales, SVN/Vistana Plus, 12 month / 8 month booking windows, pre-Starwood 1-52 week floaters but requalled at gold staroptions, etc.) rules imposed by SVO in its efforts to promote new developer sales at current SVO owners' expense.

I'm all for being hopeful, but at what point should we give up? 11 years? 15 years? 20 years?

SVO seems so preoccupied with Marriott (I can hear SVO Management now . . .. “Marriott doesn’t have online booking, so we don’t need it either”), it doesn’t seem to realize that Hilton, Hyatt, and even WorldMark/Wyndam (I think) are walking all over it here.

I wonder if any of these online timeshare organizations had an award winning “VP of Strategic Technology” telling them how difficult everything would be?”

-nodge

DavidnRobin,

Great job at contacting and creating a dialog with SVN - keep it up!

As for the contents of Ian's responses, I would be excited if he would contribute to this thread here and solicit our comments directly. That would truly show SVNs desire to learn from the owners directly rather than through whatever existing processes and procedures they currently have.

It certainly sounds as though Ian understands the complexity and challenge of his target audience. Building a first version with a simple approach makes a lot of sense on multiple levels. However, as SVNs owners become more and more computer savvy (inevitable) we will demand more and more features from them. SVN needs a commitment to bringing their systems current and then keeping them current - which is an on-going challenge.

I look forward to seeing SVN bring this to fruition *correctly*, which is not necessarily *soon*. Extending on Ian's Mac vs Windows comment... let's hope Ian and his team bring us an elegant (and working!) Mac solution and not one from Microsoft...

In my experience with Corporations - no way is Ian (a VP) is going to touch this forum - but he made read it (or someone else...). Starwood Lurker on FlyerTalk serves a different role in a different capacity.

Did I make an error about Marriott - is it Hyatt/Hilton? - not sure, no plans to have another TS system to worry about it. SVO works well for us and our lifestyle.

I would like to stay on the positive side, but have doubts that things will significantly change.

IMO - using MSC as a portal is a mistake - what a horrible interface (as I wrote... politely). If this is going to serve as an interface - well... forget about it.

First - before anything the SVO database needs to be corrected and put into a flexible database system that is accessable via any platform. If they do not recogize this and try to work a system around it - whatever is done will be doomed to fail.

I work in a company that uses both Macs and PCs - with a vast UNIX style servers (inter-connected) with both intranet and internet capabilities that stores way more data than Starwood (and certainly SVO) could even come close to.

From my experiences in dealing with SVO/SVN - they need to 1) rebuild their database, 2) link to a reservation system for SVO VOIs that can coordinate, store, and access relevant data, and 3) create a web interface. But that is just my simple mind approach.

nodge is correct - not doing this upfront will be a large hurdle to overcome - but as we say... challenges are opportunities (oops - too much corporate kool aid...)

I will be glad to pass on examples/suggestions.

DavidnRobin said:

In my experience with Corporations - no way is Ian (a VP) is going to touch this forum - but he made read it (or someone else...). Starwood Lurker on FlyerTalk serves a different role in a different capacity.

Click to expand...

There is always hope... hence my opinion that even VPs need to circulate with their customers on occasion. And, Starwood Lurker on FlyerTalk is a great example of what SVN does *NOT* have.

IMO - using MSC as a portal is a mistake - what a horrible interface (as I wrote... politely). If this is going to serve as an interface - well... forget about it.

Click to expand...

Sorry, it's way too early to make a blanket statement like that - I can't agree. We have no idea how they plan to integrate their online reservation system with MSC, and it's way too early to criticize it. I suggest you consider Ian's statement about addressing different audiences with different features. The MSC may end up being the simplest of those, and for basic online reservations there's nothing wrong with the design.

First - before anything the SVO database needs to be corrected and put into a flexible database system that is accessable via any platform. If they do not recogize this and try to work a system around it - whatever is done will be doomed to fail.

Click to expand...

I would be shocked to discover that the SVO database is not in such a database today. The location the data is stored has absolutely nothing to do with how it is presented. Even legacy systems may be accessed by modern interfaces and you wouldn't have any reason to believe it was served by an archaic database.

I work in a company that uses both Macs and PCs - with a vast UNIX style servers (inter-connected) with both intranet and internet capabilities that stores way more data than Starwood (and certainly SVO) could even come close to.

Click to expand...

I agree that the SVN database, even with all the members and rooms, etc is a relatively simple source. There can't be more than several thousand rooms to track, each in various ways and from different perspectives, and significantly less than a million owners.

From my experiences in dealing with SVO/SVN - they need to 1) rebuild their database, 2) link to a reservation system for SVO VOIs that can coordinate, store, and access relevant data, and 3) create a web interface. But that is just my simple mind approach.

Click to expand...

Well, I think you're correct in assuming they need to optimize their data, verify that their data structure can handle their current and future needs, and integrate it in a manner enabling them to take advantage of modern web technolgies (flex, etc). That's my way of saying I agree.

nodge is correct - not doing this upfront will be a large hurdle to overcome - but as we say... challenges are opportunities (oops - too much corporate kool aid...)

I will be glad to pass on examples/suggestions.

Click to expand...

I can say with some experience that this is not an overly complex database - at least the portion we know about. It's also not simple, either. The goal of any system is to make it more efficient for the users - be it internal employees or customers. At the same time, the system should save SVN money and perhaps even make them additional revenue. Keep in mind that typically the simpler systems are, believe it or not, harder to create. There is still some art in designing and implementing an operational database system - occasionally the logical approach fails. I give them credit for building it themselves, though it's a shame they can't find a commercially available system that's built already which they can acquire. However, I know from personal experience and industry results that all custom database projects fail more than 90% of the time - in other words, they may succeed at building a system which works, but fails in meeting their stated goals (which we do not know).

Also, keep in mind that corporate web projects which are intended for consumers tend to have rather bureaucratic procedures during development which multiples the development timeline. I can tell you story after story of procedural interference which delayed and prevented an on-time completion of these projects. It can be quite ridiculous.

Of course, in the end we're just consumers. We want to be able to go to their web site, find an available unit based on our ownership criteria and make a reservation in real time and receive a confirmation. There really is little excuse they have for not providing this capability years ago.

This isn't rocket science. There are commercially available workflow, rules-based tools that could get this up and running in months. Very simplified example:

How many SOs available? (See below -- might be a selling tool to skip this rule!)
Which resort or resorts would you like to check?
What timeframe?
Which size unit (or show all)?

Show units available according to three basic windows (owner preference window, 8-month window, 90-day window)

You can add the restrictive rules if you want to complicate matters, e.g.,

Is this Nodge -- if yes, restrict to parking lot/dumpster views only

I'm not sure about Marriott's UI, but Hyatt's does everything an owner needs it to do. When you first start, you see your number of available points. You then select one or more resorts to search. Once you put in your date and size parameters, it shows ALL resorts (from your list) with availability. You then must review each available resort one-at-a-time. You see all available units (based on any size parameters you entered), whether you have enough points or not (which is effective in making me wish I had more points). You can also be added to the waitlist if what you're looking for is not available.

Is it perfect? No. For example, I wish I could see all available resorts/units at once instead of checking one resort at a time. But, I wouldn't trade it for phone reservations, that's for sure!

Hilton's UI is great for the club resorts -- but, like Hyatt, you have to check one location at a time (you can see all of Vegas at once, but not Vegas and Honolulu, for example). You still have to make phone calls for the affiliated resorts. Again, is it perfect? No -- but it's a whole lot better than no online reservations.

The one advantage to being "late to the party" is that Starwood could come out with the best online tool in the market. Of course, that would require listening to owners (certainly not one of their strong points), a solid investment, and a commitment to "speed to market."

It's obvious they aren't going the very simplistic route which is possible. Ian mentions integrating the ability to convert your week to StarPoints online, which indicates integration of some fashion with the SPG site and database. That means working with Starwood's IT dept (assuming that's separate from the SVO group), and would complicate the project.

It's a shame they don't simply provide a quick and easy solution sooner rather than later, and then upgrade as necessary to integrate with other systems later on.

And no, it's not rocket science. But it's often misunderstood that corporate projects (especially for public companies) require significantly more work than those for small or medium businesses.