• The TUGBBS forums are completely free and open to the public and exist as the absolute best place for owners to get help and advice about their timeshares for more than 30 years!

    Join Tens of Thousands of other Owners just like you here to get any and all Timeshare questions answered 24 hours a day!
  • TUG started 30 years ago in October 1993 as a group of regular Timeshare owners just like you!

    Read about our 30th anniversary: Happy 30th Birthday TUG!
  • TUG has a YouTube Channel to produce weekly short informative videos on popular Timeshare topics!

    Free memberships for every 50 subscribers!

    Visit TUG on Youtube!
  • TUG has now saved timeshare owners more than $21,000,000 dollars just by finding us in time to rescind a new Timeshare purchase! A truly incredible milestone!

    Read more here: TUG saves owners more than $21 Million dollars
  • Sign up to get the TUG Newsletter for free!

    60,000+ subscribing owners! A weekly recap of the best Timeshare resort reviews and the most popular topics discussed by owners!
  • Our official "end my sales presentation early" T-shirts are available again! Also come with the option for a free membership extension with purchase to offset the cost!

    All T-shirt options here!
  • A few of the most common links here on the forums for newbies and guests!

Are the Destination Points Charts a Fraud? [Minimum Stay Booking Requirements]

Superchief

TUG Member
Joined
May 6, 2009
Messages
3,945
Reaction score
2,843
Points
448
Location
Cincinnati, OH
Individual resorts appear to have a lot of control over how inventory is made available for VC points reservation. As a Chairman member, I should be able to reserve at any resort at 13 months. However, I discovered several patterns at Hilton Head resorts and Canyon Villas when I was checking availability.
Surf Watch only released 3BR at 13 months. I checked every date in Jan and Feb 13 months in advance and only 3 BR were available for any checkin date. Similarly, Canyon Villas only had studios available in March at 13 months (I checked every March check-in date). I was requesting 6-7 day stays.The smaller HH resorts had no availability until the 12 Month mark. These requests were for the lowest season. It is obvious that each resort is playing their own games, and this just isn't ethical.
 

Ewiike

TUG Member
Joined
Apr 17, 2018
Messages
74
Reaction score
18
Points
68
Resorts Owned
Marriot's Harbour Lake , Sheraton Vistana Villages
This is why I say that Sheraton's point system is much better. No restrictions , you can book whenever and whatever you want if the unit available...
I don't understand why Marriott likes to keep up this complicated system?:shrug:
 

Fasttr

TUG Review Crew
TUG Member
Joined
Jun 26, 2013
Messages
6,259
Reaction score
3,401
Points
498
Location
Connecticut
Resorts Owned
Marriott's Grande Ocean (Enrolled)
MVC Trust Points
Seems to me this is yet another good line to use at sales presentations for those who MVC is attempting to sell up in ownership status to be able to book 1+ nights. "I'm sorry Mr. MVC sales rep, but folks on TUG have shown on many occasions where 7 nights is available, but 1 night is not, so why should I purchase more points for the privileged to be frustrated that I cannot book the <7 nights that I desire. Thanks but no thanks....now where do I collect my incentive for attending the presentation?"
 

catharsis

TUG Member
Joined
May 23, 2010
Messages
446
Reaction score
84
Points
238
Individual resorts appear to have a lot of control over how inventory is made available for VC points reservation. As a Chairman member, I should be able to reserve at any resort at 13 months. However, I discovered several patterns at Hilton Head resorts and Canyon Villas when I was checking availability.
Surf Watch only released 3BR at 13 months. I checked every date in Jan and Feb 13 months in advance and only 3 BR were available for any checkin date. Similarly, Canyon Villas only had studios available in March at 13 months (I checked every March check-in date). I was requesting 6-7 day stays.The smaller HH resorts had no availability until the 12 Month mark. These requests were for the lowest season. It is obvious that each resort is playing their own games, and this just isn't ethical.

In fairness I'm not 100% sure that's the same issue. It's important to recall that for non trust resorts like those you mention that the only inventory which can be made available for points reservation is inventory which Marriott trust actually owns or which has already been elected over 13 months in advance. (Maybe they only *own* 3 beds in HHI?)

So while frustrating and inconvenient I'm not sure what you suggest is unjustifiable.

Specifying(and placing a price on) an ability to book one night at a time and then arbitrarily removing that right is different in nature.

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk
 

JIMinNC

TUG Review Crew: Expert
TUG Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2005
Messages
4,879
Reaction score
4,428
Points
599
Location
Marvin, NC (Charlotte) & Hilton Head Island, SC
Resorts Owned
Marriott:
Maui Ocean Club
Waiohai Beach Club
Barony Beach Club
Abound ClubPoints
HGVC:
HGVC at Sea World
The opaque nature of the "black box" MVC inventory management process has always been a frustration for many of us on TUG who delve into the weeds on that kind of thing, and I'll count myself in that camp, but when you try to think about it objectively, trying to manage this process in a way that accommodates the desires and wishes of owners who want to stay for a week and owners who want to stay for a few days, while minimizing breakage, has to be an incredibly complex process. With points, it is so much more complicated than the old simple days of weeks-based ownership where certain units were designated as Friday, Saturday, or Sunday, check-in units and everyone stayed for 7 nights. I think they have to manage things now more like a hotel would than a traditional timeshare.

In reality, all travel companies now have very complex systems that drive their inventory allocation. We're all familiar with the complex seat and fare allocation algorithms the airlines use to maximize the seat occupancy and fare yields. Hotels also have to balance the same types of issues as points-based timeshares with regard to demand balancing, since they have to accommodate an even wider variety of stay lengths than a timeshare would. Last night, for example, I was on the phone with Hilton to book a single free weekend hotel night on the back end of our early 2019 Hawaii trip so we could fly home on a day with significantly cheaper air fares. Our first choice property was available for a three night weekend stay (with one of them free), but not just a single night. I had to book at another location to get the single night. (Interestingly, the "second choice location" was at the same property - the Hilton Waikoloa Village - but apparently they now consider the Ocean Tower building there a separate hotel property from the other two towers, even though Ocean Tower shares the same check-in desk and amenities as the other two buildings. It now shows up as a separate hotel on Hilton.com, but at the same address as the rest of the resort. The other two buildings required a three-night minimum for that specific weekend in mid-March, but the Ocean Tower could be booked as a single night.)
 

Superchief

TUG Member
Joined
May 6, 2009
Messages
3,945
Reaction score
2,843
Points
448
Location
Cincinnati, OH
In fairness I'm not 100% sure that's the same issue. It's important to recall that for non trust resorts like those you mention that the only inventory which can be made available for points reservation is inventory which Marriott trust actually owns or which has already been elected over 13 months in advance. (Maybe they only *own* 3 beds in HHI?)

So while frustrating and inconvenient I'm not sure what you suggest is unjustifiable.

Specifying(and placing a price on) an ability to book one night at a time and then arbitrarily removing that right is different in nature.

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk
Since I own both trust and enrolled points, I find it very difficult to believe that Surfwatch has no 2BR availability in the lowest demand season at the 13 month mark. I think anyone who checks availability on a regular basis will find some concerning inventory availability patterns in the inventory released for specific resorts. The new website search feature makes it much easier to spot these restriction patterns,

When I was checking Canyon Villas, I also checked DSV1. I would think that DSV1 would have lower trust ownership than CV. CV only had studios while DSV1 had all villa types available for points reservations at 13 months. There is a lot of 'black box' going on at MVC right now.
 

kds4

TUG Member
Joined
Jan 6, 2011
Messages
1,803
Reaction score
401
Points
293
Location
USA
Resorts Owned
Marriott Weeks and DC Points
With such a variety of ways in which inventory is being restricted property to property (minimum nights, unit sizes, etc.), it makes one wonder how much of this is central control versus individual property GM? Are these GMs educated about the ownership documents and intelligently managing inventory or acting as if they are hotel managers (with the corresponding flexibility to do with their inventory as they will). Is MVCI corporate 'aware' of what is happening (and again just trying to be responsible stewards) or could MVCI consider it preferable to maintain a 'see no evil, hear no evil' position until this becomes an elephant in the room (that ultimately poops on someone, sorta like the recent cruise settlement debacle) ... :ponder:
 

GregT

TUG Member
TUG Member
Joined
Jul 19, 2007
Messages
7,128
Reaction score
1,886
Points
599
Location
Carlsbad, CA
Resorts Owned
Marriott: Maui Ocean Club Lahaina Villas (3BRx5), Ko Olina, Shadow Ridge II, Willow Ridge, Aruba Ocean Club, DC Points HGVC: Flamingo, Sea World, I-Drive, Starwood Bella (x4), SDO, TradeWinds, Worldmark
Interesting to see these findings (but I wish we could change the title of this thread).

I don't think there is fraud here, but even now Marriott is trying to figure out how to make the system work. They didn't have the inventory, so needed to be able to access it (ie, enrolling weeks). Now they have the inventory (Trust and enrolled weeks) and they have to figure out how to make it available. They knew breakage would be a problem, but their initial effort to address it (skim) missed, as they skimmed properties that are always full (MOC), and missed on other properties where there is more availability than anticipated (Orlando?).

I do not think this is nefarious by Marriott (nor is it a desire to help the greater good). Maybe they want to make sure that someone who only wants 2 nights is forced to take 3? That's one less empty night. Maybe they see too many waitlists that they can't fill because of these breaks?

I do think that this change, plus the 60 day discounted reservations, are ways they are trying to avoid having empty rooms. But I appreciate the sightings noted so we can understand the current reservations experience.

Best,

Greg
 
Last edited:

TheTimeTraveler

TUG Member
Joined
Jan 23, 2008
Messages
5,952
Reaction score
2,857
Points
648
Location
Florida
.

Maybe I am wrong, but if I want one night using DC Points and am told I can have that one night but must take an additional six nights then why wouldn't I take those 7 nights and then call back and cancel the 6 that I didn't want?

Why wouldn't that scenario work?

Also, as an alternative, Marriott Reward Points are "sometimes" a viable option to obtain one or two nights.




.
 

BocaBoy

TUG Member
Joined
Jun 5, 2009
Messages
5,332
Reaction score
410
Points
368
Location
Wisconsin
Resorts Owned
Grand Chateau
I have made many 1-5 night reservations at different resorts, most often on Hilton head island. I have encountered this situation a few times, but it never bothered me and was never something where a minor adjustment on my part could not solve it. When I read this thread, it could seem that this is a big problem with overall availability, but I am sure it is only a very tiny % of available nights or weeks that are impacted. And this thread has revealed a work around in the rare case when having that precise night is critical and this situation (absent the work around) prevents it. I am also struck by the eagerness of some to attribute nefarious motives to MVCI where there is no evidence or motive on their part to suggest that. In truth, I think I would have to give Marriott an A for their management of the point system.

On a side point, I don't think the skim was intended to cover breakage from an availability standpoint, which is what this thread is about. Rather, I believe the skim was intended to pay for the extra costs incurred by allowing short reservations. I have never had a problem with the skim, which seems reasonable to me.
 

alexadeparis

TUG Review Crew
TUG Member
Joined
Jun 1, 2008
Messages
1,765
Reaction score
514
Points
474
Location
Phoenix, AZ
Resorts Owned
Points: Hilton EVEN, Hyatt ODD Annual: WSJ, HRA
None of the other major point systems operate with a skim, and they all work just fine, I call bullshit. This is pure Marriott greed and trickery. They think they are being slick, and they are right in the sense that they have been getting away with it for how long?
 

GregT

TUG Member
TUG Member
Joined
Jul 19, 2007
Messages
7,128
Reaction score
1,886
Points
599
Location
Carlsbad, CA
Resorts Owned
Marriott: Maui Ocean Club Lahaina Villas (3BRx5), Ko Olina, Shadow Ridge II, Willow Ridge, Aruba Ocean Club, DC Points HGVC: Flamingo, Sea World, I-Drive, Starwood Bella (x4), SDO, TradeWinds, Worldmark
I believe the skim was intended to pay for the extra costs incurred by allowing short reservations. I have never had a problem with the skim, which seems reasonable to me.

It's a tough call - my skim is 13.3% - or approx $400/week from a MF perspective. Or it's 1,575 in skimmed points, which is worth $1,000 in rental value. And there is Zero availability for 3BR weeks at MOC.

I agree with @alexadeparis -- it's bullshit.

But I did agree with your other comments.

Best,

Greg
 
Last edited:

davidvel

TUG Member
Joined
May 9, 2008
Messages
7,432
Reaction score
4,476
Points
648
Location
No. Cty. San Diego
Resorts Owned
Marriott Shadow Ridge (Villages)
Carlsbad Inn
This is what everyone warned about in 2010, and has commented upon since. Everyone knew this was simply a way to sell a new dream with less restrictions on Marriott, and more chances to fudge in their favor.

Just like with using computer algorithms to automatically reserve weeks for the DC, while legacy owners have to use the crappy web services they build or god forbid call in and wait on hold just to find out all the best intervals have been reserved. People justify this because its "fair" or necessary for Marriott to run its D Club. Of course, only Marriott and the Club get to decide what's fair for them and legacy weeks owners.

Once you allow them to be in control and violate the CC&Rs in favor of their Club, with rules that they can change on a whim to their advantage, its a quick ride downhill.
 

Dean

TUG Review Crew
TUG Member
Joined
Jun 7, 2005
Messages
9,909
Reaction score
3,580
Points
648
None of the other major point systems operate with a skim, and they all work just fine, I call bullshit. This is pure Marriott greed and trickery. They think they are being slick, and they are right in the sense that they have been getting away with it for how long?
I don't disagree that it's not ideal, I would point out that many of the other systems were either created as a points system or have grown up with a points system. Thus any "skim" would be built in. I'd also point out that the skim for some is created by the fact that the points are not the same for each and every interval during a given weeks season. The true skim would be the difference in sum of the points generated for owners for a resort (or trust component) compared to the points required to reserve for the year adjusted by a reasonable number of points for maintenance and lost days due to the operation of the points system. Points systems account for the variables with less points sold, weeks systems by not selling all units for all weeks, normally off season weeks are the ones held back.

Let's say a platinum season is 10 weeks long (25-34) with the cost for weeks 25-29 being 5000 points per villa and 30-34 being 4000. Giving 4500 per Platinum week owned would be a 100% return even if one normally stayed successfully during one of those higher cost weeks under the weeks system. Given 4000 points would be a 10% skim in this example even if it cost 20% more to reserve the higher cost week. You can adjust for view types easily.

Lastly, this has no direct affect on anyone unless they chose for it to. If they are a weeks owners, even if enrolled, they can still use just like they always did with no loss technically. Now they have the potential to use with more flexibility and can decide if the additional cost is worth it to them. Trust members bought in and either knew or should have know the costs before they were past their cancelation deadline.

IMO a roughly 4% "skim" would be neutral. The difference for MGO for Platinum is 6.7% for OS & 9.3% for OF I believe. And we still talk about buying hybrid options as a better and cheaper alternative to the Trust purchase in many cases.
 

vacationtime1

TUG Review Crew: Veteran
TUG Member
Joined
Sep 7, 2006
Messages
5,159
Reaction score
2,750
Points
649
Location
San Francisco
Resorts Owned
WKORV-OF (Maui)
WKV x2 (Scottsdale)
Doesn't Marriott's absolute voting control over the DC Trust permit it to "vote" to change the reservation rules?

Wasn't that disclosed by Marriott when the DC points were sold (disclosed somewhere in the fine print or in the recorded documents)?

Isn't this what everyone is always worried about in any kind of points or trust arrangement -- that ownership rights can be modified by a third party?
 

Dean

TUG Review Crew
TUG Member
Joined
Jun 7, 2005
Messages
9,909
Reaction score
3,580
Points
648
Doesn't Marriott's absolute voting control over the DC Trust permit it to "vote" to change the reservation rules?

Wasn't that disclosed by Marriott when the DC points were sold (disclosed somewhere in the fine print or in the recorded documents)?

Isn't this what everyone is always worried about in any kind of points or trust arrangement -- that ownership rights can be modified by a third party?
This is the nature of points systems IMO. They do have a fiduciary responsibility to mange it appropriately but I'm sure there are opportunities for abuse.
 

vacationtime1

TUG Review Crew: Veteran
TUG Member
Joined
Sep 7, 2006
Messages
5,159
Reaction score
2,750
Points
649
Location
San Francisco
Resorts Owned
WKORV-OF (Maui)
WKV x2 (Scottsdale)
This is the nature of points systems IMO. They do have a fiduciary responsibility to mange it appropriately but I'm sure there are opportunities for abuse.

The trustees could credibly argue that they are properly exercising their fiduciary duties by changing the reservation rules to reduce "breakage" for the benefit of all trust beneficiaries.

I agree that this is the nature of points systems; points are fundamentally different than deeded interests in real property.
 
Last edited:

SeaDoc

TUG Member
Joined
Jul 11, 2008
Messages
349
Reaction score
191
Points
253
Location
Palm Desert, CA
Resorts Owned
Chairman's Club:
2 Marriott Newport Coasts-PLAT;
1 Marriott Desert Springs I-RED;
1 Marriott Timber Lodge - Summer-PLAT;
3 StarElite Vistana: 2 Westin Lagunamar-PLAT
To address your question specifically: The only property of the 72 currently available is RC-St. Thomas which requires a 3 night stay. Your ability to book less than 7 nights is based on your ownership level. If you are Executive or higher (7000+), you have a full 13 month 1 day at a time reservation opportunity. If however, you have less than that, you must book at least 7 nights minimum from 13 months out to 10 months out. Less than 10 months out, you can book one day at a time. That is true for all of the 72 villa properties, and that may be your reason for the question. Hope that helps.


New to the DP program here. Looking to book a 4-night stay. I'm finding that quite a number of resorts require a minimum 7-night stay...something the sales folks never informed us about. They told us we could book midweek stays and never mentioned any restrictions. Is there something here I do not understand? Or were we misled?
 

CA Richard

TUG Member
Joined
Jun 13, 2008
Messages
117
Reaction score
46
Points
389
Location
Southern California
I have made many 1-5 night reservations at different resorts, most often on Hilton head island. I have encountered this situation a few times, but it never bothered me and was never something where a minor adjustment on my part could not solve it. When I read this thread, it could seem that this is a big problem with overall availability, but I am sure it is only a very tiny % of available nights or weeks that are impacted. And this thread has revealed a work around in the rare case when having that precise night is critical and this situation (absent the work around) prevents it. I am also struck by the eagerness of some to attribute nefarious motives to MVCI where there is no evidence or motive on their part to suggest that. In truth, I think I would have to give Marriott an A for their management of the point system.

On a side point, I don't think the skim was intended to cover breakage from an availability standpoint, which is what this thread is about. Rather, I believe the skim was intended to pay for the extra costs incurred by allowing short reservations. I have never had a problem with the skim, which seems reasonable to me.
Well said BocaBoy. I’m Chairman’s Club and also have booked numerous short stays at many resorts. But I also understand that there is a need for Marriott to not allow too many broken weeks or it could become extremely difficult for people to get full weeks when they want them, so I am happy to live with the restrictions. It was actually one of my concerns when the point system came into being. Think about it, especially for places one might fly to for a week or two like Hawaii, where I would assume the majority of people are looking for full week vacations, it would be a shame if it became difficult to get full weeks because there were too many broken weeks. So if I run into having to book a full week instead of 5 days at DSI in March as indicated in my post early in this thread, I really don’t have a problem with that as I recognize it’s to my benefit the next time I want a full week in a high demand resort/week.
 

Steve Fatula

TUG Member
Joined
Jun 12, 2017
Messages
3,723
Reaction score
2,718
Points
349
Location
Calera, OK
Well said BocaBoy. I’m Chairman’s Club and also have booked numerous short stays at many resorts. But I also understand that there is a need for Marriott to not allow too many broken weeks or it could become extremely difficult for people to get full weeks when they want them, so I am happy to live with the restrictions. It was actually one of my concerns when the point system came into being. Think about it, especially for places one might fly to for a week or two like Hawaii, where I would assume the majority of people are looking for full week vacations, it would be a shame if it became difficult to get full weeks because there were too many broken weeks. So if I run into having to book a full week instead of 5 days at DSI in March as indicated in my post early in this thread, I really don’t have a problem with that as I recognize it’s to my benefit the next time I want a full week in a high demand resort/week.

Totally agree. I don't see how a thread that put the word Fraud in the title, of which there is zero evidence of and should be changed, has degraded into a bunch of complaints about a program many people are loving and using, and, then, exaggerating to a huge extent a "problem" that is really minor in nature and has a number of workarounds. I definitely see the need to not breakup too many weeks or longer stays. People would definitely complain about that, and that would be a much larger problem than this issue is. I'd far rather have access to longer than 1 night stays than accommodate too many 1 night stays. 1 night stays should have lower priority the way I look at it, to fill in nights here and there where a mismatch of checkin dates occurred. To put 1 night stays on equal status with longer stays just isn't wise, it would hurt more than it benefits since less nights per year would be able to be booked, hurting more than helping. I would consider 1 night stays as a hotel stay of sorts, not a vacation. This is a vacation club. I think that Marriott therefore is doing the right thing here.
 
Last edited:

Fasttr

TUG Review Crew
TUG Member
Joined
Jun 26, 2013
Messages
6,259
Reaction score
3,401
Points
498
Location
Connecticut
Resorts Owned
Marriott's Grande Ocean (Enrolled)
MVC Trust Points
To address your question specifically: The only property of the 72 currently available is RC-St. Thomas which requires a 3 night stay. Your ability to book less than 7 nights is based on your ownership level. If you are Executive or higher (7000+), you have a full 13 month 1 day at a time reservation opportunity. If however, you have less than that, you must book at least 7 nights minimum from 13 months out to 10 months out. Less than 10 months out, you can book one day at a time. That is true for all of the 72 villa properties, and that may be your reason for the question. Hope that helps.
OP figured that out in his post #10. That said, since you have insider information, do you care to comment on some of the other posts (post 11 as an example) that have seen instances where there appear to be minimum nights required in certain instances at other resorts than Ritz ST.
 
Last edited:

SeaDoc

TUG Member
Joined
Jul 11, 2008
Messages
349
Reaction score
191
Points
253
Location
Palm Desert, CA
Resorts Owned
Chairman's Club:
2 Marriott Newport Coasts-PLAT;
1 Marriott Desert Springs I-RED;
1 Marriott Timber Lodge - Summer-PLAT;
3 StarElite Vistana: 2 Westin Lagunamar-PLAT
I would be happy to, as I am speaking only as a CC member of this program. In the 5 years I have booked online I have NEVER come across the issues that many of you are experiencing. Being on the west coast, I have confined myself to this region - west of the Mississippi. Perhaps, there is a regionality involved in preventing single day usage over longer stays to minimize costs of frequent check-ins, increased maid service involvement, etc. If someone could screen shot these issues, it might be of benefit to all of us.

OP figured that out in his post #10. That said, since you have insider information, do you care to comment on some of the other posts (post 11 as an example) that have seen instances where, based on their ownership level, they should have been able to book 1 night, but the system was only showing 7 nights as available.
 

MOXJO7282

Tug Review Crew
TUG Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2005
Messages
5,523
Reaction score
1,300
Points
599
I love democracy and capitalism but I do believe it's biggest flaws is the "caveat emptor" element that too many businesses get away with. I do believe Marrriott TSs and DP Corp programs do have an element of that. It shouldn't be that salesman should be able to lie as long as it's not in writing or stretch the truth and I see this happening in many sales scenerios.

Look at almost every "as seen on TV product". I'd have to say 90% that I've seen is practically worthless but they make the products seem like it's the greatest thing since sliced bread and when you get it home it's a piece of garbage. These companies make millions pushing these garbage products.

Now Marriott is not a bad product, of course I think it's a great product that has given my family so much enjoyment and much more but I do think they manipulate the truth or omit important details to make a sale as is the case with the OP and many many others.

The ironic thing for me is this type of salesmanship is what got me going with Marriott when I fell for the "why buy Maui when you can buy Orlando and trade into Maui?" The salesman knew I wanted president's week in Maui and didn't think I could afford Maui so he pushed me to something I could afford a gold Grande Vista to make the sale, insisting I could trade into Maui for in the winter. Now is that technically possible? Yes it is. Is it likely. no not at all. This just happens too much for me and I wish there was a higher level of transparency and accountability.
 

Fasttr

TUG Review Crew
TUG Member
Joined
Jun 26, 2013
Messages
6,259
Reaction score
3,401
Points
498
Location
Connecticut
Resorts Owned
Marriott's Grande Ocean (Enrolled)
MVC Trust Points
I would be happy to, as I am speaking only as a CC member of this program. In the 5 years I have booked online I have NEVER come across the issues that many of you are experiencing. Being on the west coast, I have confined myself to this region - west of the Mississippi. Perhaps, there is a regionality involved in preventing single day usage over longer stays to minimize costs of frequent check-ins, increased maid service involvement, etc. If someone could screen shot these issues, it might be of benefit to all of us.
Screen shots are in post 11 that I mentioned. Check it out.

Also in full disclosure, I had modified my post a bit after you had apparently grabbed it for your reply. Please read my edited post as it may make more sense when comparing to post 11 screen shots.
 

Bunk

TUG Member
Joined
Jan 28, 2010
Messages
1,162
Reaction score
972
Points
323
Location
New York
Marriott also has a fiduciary duty to the weeks owners. In developing its algorithm, it is appropriate for Marriott to set aside a sufficient number of units that can be reserved for 7 days by the weeks owners. If all of the "elites" can break apart weeks whenever they want, what will be left for the "non-elites".
 
Top