posted 01-19-2003 16:16               

Craig, Marriott question. Under the Marriott -II request first option, II is to advise the member at 75 days to allow the request to be converted to a deposit if desired. What would the deposit date be in this situation, the true date of deposit or the date the request was placed? Since I had a request first pending at the time this NEW policy was announced, I elected not to cancel my request and lose my place in line but it looks like I may not be successful and may need to convert it to a deposit soon. Your suggestions would be helpful.
------------------
Dean
My Home Page

posted 01-20-2003 05:54               

quote:

---

Originally posted by BL:
I've taken the liberty of cutting and pasting Dean's request from a different thread to start a new question. I believe this more closely follows the parameters of the thread in that we're trying to avoid tacking on several somewhat related subjects in a single thread. BL

Craig, Marriott question. Under the Marriott -II request first option, II is to advise the member at 75 days to allow the request to be converted to a deposit if desired. What would the deposit date be in this situation, the true date of deposit or the date the request was placed? Since I had a request first pending at the time this NEW policy was announced, I elected not to cancel my request and lose my place in line but it looks like I may not be successful and may need to convert it to a deposit soon. Your suggestions would be helpful.

---

posted 01-22-2003 06:25               

quote:

---

Originally posted by Dean:
I was afraid that's what you were going to say. Doesn't seem fair to use the rules and written and then have the rules changed in the interim to put the member at a disadvantage they were not at before.

---

posted 01-22-2003 17:24               

I do not disagree entirely with your perspective. However, I'd like to ask if you feel its unfair that you potentially had more trade power with your request first request? If you had been confirmed, would you still think it was unfair?

In any case, I'm not trying to be argumentative. With the weeks that you own, I doubt your trading power will be reduced to the point it has a significant impact on your ability to get your desired exchanges.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Dean:
Contact the owner and allow a conversion to a deposit without losing the existing request or count the deposit trade power from the date the original reqest was placed.

---

posted 01-23-2003 03:58               

quote:

---

Originally posted by CraigU:
The truth is members using request first have somewhat of an advantage. With the request first method of exchange, the lead time is calculated using the date the request is placed, not the day the unit is made available to the system.

I do not disagree entirely with your perspective. However, I'd like to ask if you feel its unfair that you potentially had more trade power with your request first request? If you had been confirmed, would you still think it was unfair?

In any case, I'm not trying to be argumentative. With the weeks that you own, I doubt your trading power will be reduced to the point it has a significant impact on your ability to get your desired exchanges.

---

posted 01-23-2003 06:47               

I meant to convey, depending on the side of the issue you fell, when we made this change some had an advantage and some may have been disadvantaged. As I've stated before, the adjustments made are resort specific. I doubt you experienced much, if any, reduction in value.

Did this make it any more clear?

quote:

---

Originally posted by Dean:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by CraigU:
[b]The truth is members using request first have somewhat of an advantage. With the request first method of exchange, the lead time is calculated using the date the request is placed, not the day the unit is made available to the system.

I do not disagree entirely with your perspective. However, I'd like to ask if you feel its unfair that you potentially had more trade power with your request first request? If you had been confirmed, would you still think it was unfair?

In any case, I'm not trying to be argumentative. With the weeks that you own, I doubt your trading power will be reduced to the point it has a significant impact on your ability to get your desired exchanges.

---

[/B][/QUOTE]

------------------
Craig Urbine
Vice President
Member Services
Interval International

posted 01-23-2003 11:43               

quote:

---

Originally posted by Dean:
Craig, thanks again for responding. Since I'm in the middle of a request I can't make any changes at this time without losing the chance of being successful which means that if the request is unsuccessful I'm going to need to convert to a deposit from Marriott request first at just around 3 months before the week. I still feel it's not reasonable to see ANY reduction in trade power in this situation since the change occured after the request first was arranged. The future trade situation is different as the change has been made and announced.

---

posted 01-23-2003 18:15               

quote:

---

Originally posted by Dean:
Thanks Craig, that's nice. I'd like to do it but leave the current request intact. The request of for an early July exchange and the week is a HP week 35. I had originally planned to try for the exchange and then if unsuccessful deposit later. That is still my plan. Can we do the deposit now and keep the current request in place (not cancel and restart it) or should we wait until it's about too late and then do as you offer. Either is fine with me, tell me what to do. I definitely want to either exchange for the current request or deposit. Tell me what's best and what info you need to get this done or how to do it through a VC if that's best. Thanks again.

---