How Interval's added fees affect weeks owners

[dmharris]

I have always had great luck trading our Marriott Grande Vista to get off-season Marriott top resorts, e.g. Newport Coast, Waiohai, Aruba, Oceana Palms, Grande Ocean. However, with the new upgrade fee (I trade our lock off and 1 bedroom as two weeks) makes me pause, because I'm thrifty, and wait for the 59 day window where the fee goes away. Am I cutting off my nose to spite my face? Should I just bite the bullet and pay the fee when I see the week I want? (I'm full of idiomatic expressions). My usual opportunity to pick up my January Newport Coast has come and gone, I fear. It was there months earlier, but with the fee, so I waited for the 59 day window. Is the point system eating my lunch (here I go again)?

So I see the new polling feature, so let's try that, okay?

 

[bazzap]

I am hardly pleased with the upgrade fee, although if it were to prove to offer an improved chance of securing an exchange with my lock offs I might find it more acceptable.
However, I almost exclusively request lock off exchanges for long haul trips so can't risk waiting for the less than 59 days upgrade for free.
I do though at least get the benefit of reduced upgrade fees with my Interval Platinum membership.

 

[IngridN]

I always waited until flex to upgrade to 2 bedroom units. I don't like the new fee, however, do like the option of upgrading prior to flex. Did that last year and will continue do so so.

Ingrid

 

[dmharris]

Ah, Barry, I didn't know the fees were reduced for an upgraded II membership. By how much? Is it worth it if we only own one timeshare?

 

[cp73]

however, do like the option of upgrading prior to flex. Did that last year and will continue do so so.

Ingrid

Is this just on whats available at the moment or can you place a request and wait?

 

[dmharris]

CP, it could be either.

 

[1st Class]

I dislike II's new fee structure, so rather than pay the fee, I'm renting out my owner weeks and renting back what I might have used II to exchange for. Yes, it is a little more work, but really very little, and I typically come out ahead. To be fair, there really should be a cost reduction for those who will accept a smaller unit than is deposited.

On another topic, I've also noticed that the getaways have seen a recent uptick in price as well.

I don't know if I will renew my II membership when it expires next year. It really isn't working for us now.

 

[dmharris]

All very interesting. I too am wondering if II has lost it's value for weeks owners. Somewhat, not completely.

 

[IngridN]

Is this just on whats available at the moment or can you place a request and wait?

I believe it's only on what's available after matches have been made. I now see with my gold studio and 1 bedrooms, stuff I couldn't see before, however, there is a fee associated with any size upgrade. It does annoy me that I have to pay an upgrade fee now when trading with my Plat+ 1 bedroom into a gold season 2 bedroom. II should also give credit or eliminate the fee in those cases.

 

[bazzap]

Ah, Barry, I didn't know the fees were reduced for an upgraded II membership. By how much? Is it worth it if we only own one timeshare?

I would doubt if many owners could justify the Interval Platinum or Gold membership fees with just one weeks ownership, however below is what it offers you as far as upgrades are concerned.
"The cost to upgrade your unit size is $99 per upgrade step. Interval Platinum members will pay a reduced rate of $59 per upgrade step, and Interval Gold members will pay a reduced rate of $79 per upgrade step"

 

[dougp26364]

I haven't had the opportunity as of yet but, I have absolutely no plans to pay a fee to upgrade my Ocean Pointe studio to a 1 bedroom or larger.

Having said that I also don't need to make that upgrade because we own enough timeshares it's s moot point. I can see where if a person only owns one timeshare and if locks off, they might grumble about it but, it's still cheaper than buying, and paying MF's, on another timeshare.

It was really an intelligent move by II. At least as far as increasing profits while offering nothing new.

We will drop our personal II account when it's time to renew. At this point we're trading less thru the exchange companies and either staying at our home resorts or making internal trades. We will, of course, have access thru MVC's corporate account for enrolled weeks owners in the DC

 

[PamMo]

I've paid the fees to upgrade, but hated doing it. Other than the weeks we own and use every year, we're starting to think renting is the way to go.

 

[mjm1]

It does annoy me that I have to pay an upgrade fee now when trading with my Plat+ 1 bedroom into a gold season 2 bedroom. II should also give credit or eliminate the fee in those cases.

I agree with your idea here. One should get some credit for value of trading a higher demand week for a lesser demand week, which could offset the increase of size traded into.

Mike

 

[nokaoi9]

While not thrilled about the new upgrade fee, it'd be an easier pull to swallow I could lock off a unit and place an ongoing request for a larger sized unit.

During a recent promotion through II, I upgrade to platinum. I figure I'll exchange and upgrade at lease twice, plus expect to do a few getaways before the two years the membership is good for. Another big savings will be when family/friends take advantage of a getaway week. The $50 discount plus the week, plus the $49 (I think this is the fee) for the guest certificate makes it a no brainer for us.

 

[bazzap]

While not thrilled about the new upgrade fee, it'd be an easier pull to swallow I could lock off a unit and place an ongoing request for a larger sized unit.

During a recent promotion through II, I upgrade to platinum. I figure I'll exchange and upgrade at lease twice, plus expect to do a few getaways before the two years the membership is good for. Another big savings will be when family/friends take advantage of a getaway week. The $50 discount plus the week, plus the $49 (I think this is the fee) for the guest certificate makes it a no brainer for us.

You can place an ongoing request with a lock off for a larger size unit in resorts which only have larger sized units. We do it all the time.

 

[dmharris]

You can place an ongoing request with a lock off for a larger size unit in resorts which only have larger sized units. We do it all the time.

Barry, I've done this as well in the past. However, not since the new II fees for upgrading. Do they charge you for an ongoing request when it entails an upgrade? Thanks!

 

[Bill4728]

If by paying a small fee $99 I can get an exchange that I wouldn't even see then I'm fine with paying the fee.

 

[cp73]

Iam ok with paying the upgrade fee. In fact I remember responding that way when I answered a survey they had taken some time back. My thought was there have been times when i took a 2 bedroom unit when i really didn't need it. A 1 bedroom would have been fine. If this fee prevents someone from taking a larger size unit and then makes it available to someone who will use I think that is ok. My thought is that now maybe more larger size units will be available. Maybe this is just wishful thinking.

 

[davidvel]

I'm not OK with the new fee. Marriott promised me free Marriott to Marriott trades when I enrolled my week. Many paid $2,400 for this privilege. Now only some Marriott to Marriott trades are free. Whats to keep them from adding new fees to these "free" trades in the future?

 

[PamMo]

My issue is that I could always see larger units during online searches in the past. I was OK locking off and depositing an expensive-to-own Maui, Kauai, or even Harborside week, because I could get a nice 2BR+ for a 1BR deposit , or a 1BR+ for a studio. So, I see the new upgrade fees simply as a way to unbundle services to add a new revenue stream for Interval.

This change just makes it more attractive for me to bank my Marriott and Vistana points or rent our weeks vs deposit them in Interval.

 

[bazzap]

Barry, I've done this as well in the past. However, not since the new II fees for upgrading. Do they charge you for an ongoing request when it entails an upgrade? Thanks!

Both my lock off weeks are DC enrolled (I am not sure if that makes any difference?) but I have a current ongoing request with one of them and I have not had to pay an upgrade fee before Interval come up with the exchange.

 

[NboroGirl]

I've never taken advantage of the system like many TUGGERS; I've only traded for equal size in the past: 2 BR for 2BR, or studio for studio. I recently traded a prime 3BR week at MGV for a 2BR summer week at MOC. I told II that I would accept a 2BR (knowing I probably would never get a 3BR). This trade seems perfectly fair to me because I am relatively certain that I paid a lot less for my 3BR MGV week than the person who bought their MOC week.

However, given II's new fees, if I trade a week for a smaller unit at a comparable or 'lesser' resort, than I think a credit issued by II would be fair. If they charge for up-sizing, they ought to credit for down-sizing. I know it'll never happen, but it seems like the right thing to do.

 

[AlmostRetired]

I locked off my EYO 2 BR at the Grand Chateau and traded the 1 BR for a 2 br at the Marriott Surf in Aruba. I never like to pay more than I have too but I was happy to pay the upgrade fee.

 

[dioxide45]

My issue is that I could always see larger units during online searches in the past. I was OK locking off and depositing an expensive-to-own Maui, Kauai, or even Harborside week, because I could get a nice 2BR+ for a 1BR deposit , or a 1BR+ for a studio. So, I see the new upgrade fees simply as a way to unbundle services to add a new revenue stream for Interval.

This change just makes it more attractive for me to bank my Marriott and Vistana points or rent our weeks vs deposit them in Interval.

Exactly. I don't think long term that the fees are going to allow me to see more larger units with our studio and 1BR units than I could see before. It is simply a new fee for no added benefit to line the pockets of II and its shareholders. I don't disagree with that, but I don't have to like it.

 

[dougp26364]

For those who think it would be fare for I.I. to give credit when you trade "down", I doubt that's ever going to happen. II is in the business to make money, not treat owners fairly. They have a captive audience and they know it. They have contracts with resorts and THOSE are the customers they'll be more concerned with keeping. Both RCI and I.I. know that, if you want to exchange, you'll most likely exchange through them.

If you want a fare system, then they'd need to open up the competition. Get rid of the exclusive contracts between an exchange company and resort. Allow owners to switch between exchange companies based on value. As it is now it's a modified monopoly. Owners can essentially use one company or nothing at all. Yes there are a few smaller independent exchange companies out there but, they're so small as to be insignificant.

Exchanging is not a fare system. Owners are trapped into whatever company their resort puts them in. We have little to no say in the matter.

FWIW I agree they should give a credit when you trade down. I just don't see it happening because they don't have too in order to keep your business or, to keep enough business to keep profits where they want them.