Just Got The Royal Screw From Rci

[MichaelColey]

Originally Posted by Carolinian

As to the ''majority'', I note that a poll on another site showed an almost even split between those who had equal or better trading power from Points Lite and those who had lost trading power. Given that timeshare boards are dominated by those with better weeks, and few of us here own blue weeks (I once did but that was many years ago), and those off season weeks got shafted more than most, I think it is clear that a majority is worse off under Points Lite. The stories I heard from resort managers of the deluge of off season owners who exchanged calling in and wanting to bail out after Points Lite was announced indicates there was a lot of dissatisfaction at that level.

For people who own blue weeks, they're already screwed. RCI just made it transparent.

[vckempson]

Originally Posted by MichaelColey

For people who own blue weeks, they're already screwed. RCI just made it transparent.

Trying to save money by buying a blue week reminds me of a quote.

“It's unwise to pay too much, but it's worse to pay too little. When you pay too much, you lose a little money - that's all. When you pay too little, you sometimes lose everything, because the thing you bought was incapable of doing the thing it was bought to do. The common law of business balance prohibits paying a little and getting a lot - it can't be done. If you deal with the lowest bidder, it is well to add something for the risk you run, and if you do that you will have enough to pay for something better.”
― John Ruskin

[Carolinian]

Originally Posted by MichaelColey

For people who own blue weeks, they're already screwed. RCI just made it transparent.

Well, no, they weren't. Not when there was a 45 day window. Points Lite was the final demise of the 45 day window. But they are now, without a doubt.

Chrystal deHahn, RCI's founder recognized the importance of the exclusivity principle to the sustainability of the ownership / exchange model of timesharing. When Cendent took over, they threw that away with their rental programs to the general public. Mrs. deHahn also recognized that sustainability was important to the members and resort affiliates as well as the exchange company, and the 45 day window was an important part of that. RCI gave developers promotional materails that pushed the 45 day window, and of course the sales weasels promoted it. RCI's steady whittling away at the 45 day window since Cendent took over has been kicking the props out from under their resort affiliates.

When I owned a blue week it was primarily to trade for blue times when I wanted to go to Europe and did not want to waste using my summer holiday beach week for a blue trade. Through TUG, I found out that SA weeks were a cheaper option to do that, and ditched the blue week (sold it for a couple hundred dollars). But as an HOA officer, I learned how important the 45 day window was to blue week owners who exchanged through RCI,and thus important to the financial health of the HOA.

But that is a different issue and off topic from the point raised by the OP, which is RCI's shell game of different valuations for weeks at the same point iin time depending on whether it is a deposit or an exchange. They don't do that in regular Points, and it is just a scam to do it in Points Lite.

Oh, and the RCI cheerleading squad is slipping. 140+ posts before you show up?

[ampaholic]

Originally Posted by Carolinian

Well, no, they weren't. Not when there was a 45 day window. Points Lite was the final demise of the 45 day window. But they are now, without a doubt.

Chrystal deHahn, RCI's founder recognized the importance of the exclusivity principle to the sustainability of the ownership / exchange model of timesharing. When Cendent took over, they threw that away with their rental programs to the general public. Mrs. deHahn also recognized that sustainability was important to the members and resort affiliates as well as the exchange company, and the 45 day window was an important part of that. RCI gave developers promotional materails that pushed the 45 day window, and of course the sales weasels promoted it. RCI's steady whittling away at the 45 day window since Cendent took over has been kicking the props out from under their resort affiliates.

When I owned a blue week it was primarily to trade for blue times when I wanted to go to Europe and did not want to waste using my summer holiday beach week for a blue trade. Through TUG, I found out that SA weeks were a cheaper option to do that, and ditched the blue week (sold it for a couple hundred dollars). But as an HOA officer, I learned how important the 45 day window was to blue week owners who exchanged through RCI,and thus important to the financial health of the HOA.

But that is a different issue and off topic from the point raised by the OP, which is RCI's shell game of different valuations for weeks at the same point iin time depending on whether it is a deposit or an exchange. They don't do that in regular Points, and it is just a scam to do it in Points Lite.

Oh, and the RCI cheerleading squad is slipping. 140+ posts before you show up?

Well the name Chrystal deHahn (sic) finally showed up - Oh, for the good old days.

Can we hire her back to run our Viking Ship Vacation Club????

[MichaelColey]

Originally Posted by Carolinian

Well, no, they weren't. Not when there was a 45 day window. Points Lite was the final demise of the 45 day window. But they are now, without a doubt.

I continue to contend that Blue week owners were already screwed with or without RCI. Sure, they could get 45 day reservations before (and they should still be able to get them at 30 days now -- just like with II). But at virtually every resort, Blue week owners are paying the exact same MF as the owner of the Redest week. If they're not already screwed, I don't know what else you would call it.

You can't make RCI out to be evil because they don't give a lot of trading power for Blue weeks. That's the way it SHOULD be.

Originally Posted by Carolinian

Oh, and the RCI cheerleading squad is slipping. 140+ posts before you show up?

You must have missed my 9 earlier posts in this thread.

[bogey21]

Originally Posted by vckempson

“It's unwise to pay too much, but it's worse to pay too little. When you pay too much, you lose a little money - that's all. When you pay too little, you sometimes lose everything, because the thing you bought was incapable of doing the thing it was bought to do. The common law of business balance prohibits paying a little and getting a lot - it can't be done. If you deal with the lowest bidder, it is well to add something for the risk you run, and if you do that you will have enough to pay for something better.”
― John Ruskin

Makes sense to me!

George

[Carolinian]

You miss the more important changes in last minute inventory - 1) That not all of it gets marked down in the new regime, 2) that much of it gets rented instead of put up for exchange in the 45 day window, and most importantly 3) RCI has put a lot of competition out there for those weeks that did not used to be there - the Points members and now any Points Lite member using a handful of points lite. In the old days, someone would think long and hard about using a powerful week for a short notice exchange, so the blue week owners had a lot to pick from. Now they don't. Huge change.

As to MF, that is sometimes a matter of state law. But it is a division of actual costs, not based on exchanging. It costs the same to clean a blue week unit as it does a red week one, the same to insure it, the same for property taxes, the same to manage it, about the same for utilities (hear in winter, a/c in summer), etc.

Weeks in oversupply, whether it be because they are off season or becuase they are in overbuiilt areas, should not get the trading power of prime weeks. One of the biggest frauds in the new RCI system is handing our trading power like candy in overbuilt areas, where they systematically give more trading power for deposits than they require for an exchange into the same week. However, it was RCI over many years which created the dependence of HOA's on the 45 day window to keep blue week owners happy. RCI produces the materials that hyped that model and provided them to developers. It is just dirty pool for RCI to now pull that rug out from under HOA's. They have suckerpunched their resort affiliates.

You are trying to get this thread OT, as the real point of the OP is RCI's fraudulent shortchanging of owners of prime weeks on trading power. You own in overbuilt, and often overpointed areas (I don't know all the details of exactly what you own) so you cheerlead for a process that systematically cheats owners of better weeks. Your sidekick also owns in overbuilt and overpointed areas.

The point about the blue weeks was that ''the majority'' is NOT better off in the Points Lite system, as blue week owners certainly are not, and it appears about half of better week owners are not, based on polls.

Originally Posted by MichaelColey

I continue to contend that Blue week owners were already screwed with or without RCI. Sure, they could get 45 day reservations before (and they should still be able to get them at 30 days now -- just like with II). But at virtually every resort, Blue week owners are paying the exact same MF as the owner of the Redest week. If they're not already screwed, I don't know what else you would call it.

You can't make RCI out to be evil because they don't give a lot of trading power for Blue weeks. That's the way it SHOULD be.

You must have missed my 9 earlier posts in this thread.

[mpumilia]

Originally Posted by MichaelColey

For people who own blue weeks, they're already screwed. RCI just made it transparent.

I would never buy a blue week (or any week for that matter anymore), but I do own floater weeks as part of my ownership (1 week red, 1 week floater each year-same maintenance fees). Most of the floaters are red (pink) and white, but there a just a few blue weeks thrown in the 20 year schedule. I have one coming up in a couple of years and I told my husband I look forward to using it at our home resort. Same with the white and pink weeks - use them now that the kid is grown. It will be nice and quiet and I will be able to get my reading done, some baking, actually watch a movie, etc. Total relaxation- hey - it's better than being on my hell-hole job schedule! the hell with RCI and TPU's!

[vckempson]

Originally Posted by MichaelColey

You can't make RCI out to be evil because they don't give a lot of trading power for Blue weeks. That's the way it SHOULD be.

+1. Spot on.

Of course it should be that way. To argue that Blue weeks deserve better is just more of the "We're the 99%" crap. It smacks of "income redistribution", only in a timeshare wrapper.

I'm sure I'll take heat on this one. Oh well.

[Beefnot]

Originally Posted by Carolinian

As to MF, that is sometimes a matter of state law. But it is a division of actual costs, not based on exchanging. It costs the same to clean a blue week unit as it does a red week one, the same to insure it, the same for property taxes, the same to manage it, about the same for utilities (hear in winter, a/c in summer), etc.

You may be right on state law, I dunno, but depending on how one views it, it does not cost the same to maintain a blue week as it does a red week. There is a disproportionate amount of wear and tear and maintenance derived from units being used than unused. If at a given resort, prime weeks are at 100% occupancy while blue weeks are at 40% occupancy, then the blue weeks may be subsidizing the maintenance of the red weeks.

[Mel]

The problem is in trying to justify the current exchange model based on resale prices. People who get the best deal in terms of TPU get it because they own prime weeks. The original purchasers of those weeks paid a premium to own those weeks.

As for the OPs contention regarding ingoing vs. outgoing TPU, that's part of the way the system is designed. It is also how many points systems are designed. As an example, if you own floating weeks and put them into a points system, they often credit you with the average value of your floating week - and then within a certain period, you can book any of the weeks you could normally book for the same number of points, even if it is listed for more. For many of those owners, this is actually a better deal than when the resort chose which weeks were deposited, because the exchangers always lost out in those systems (the best weeks were reserved for owners planning to use their weeks).

When we deposit our weeks, RCI makes an offer we can accept or reject. If we don't like RCI's offer, we can deposit our week elsewhere, or rent or use it ourselves. If RCI was the only option, this might be considered an unfair trade practice, but we do have other options. The current TPU system is set up like a currency, and there are 2 transaction for every deposit. When you deposit, you are in essence selling your week to RCI for a certain number of credits. Once RCI "owns" the week, they can sell it for whatever they want.

The system is transparent in that you know what TPU you are offered, and have a choice. You then also know what you can book with your TPU. What is not transparent is everybody else's transactions.

Yes, it appears than some resort are "overpointed" but we have to ask why. Carolinian would argue that RCI is in bed with the developers. But RCI is a business, and they are not likely to do something that is against their own best interest. RCI must be getting something in exchange for awarding these high TPU. Many of these same resorts used to offer "bonus certificates" to their owners when they deposited their weeks - and in their sales presentations would imply that RCI was offering these bonus weeks, which indicated just how much RCI wanted their deposits. The reality was that those bonus weeks represented developer inventory deposits. Maybe the same thing is happening, but in a less transparent way. Maybe those deposit points represent 50% more than the true value, because for every 2 deposits to RCI the developer gives RCI another week.

Whatever is happening, it really doesn't matter much. We all have the choice to use RCI or not, and are given adequate information to make such a decision. Our society has devolved to the point that everybody feels entitled to everything, and this is just another example. People need to take responsibility for their own decisions - good and bad.

[Carolinian]

Originally Posted by vckempson

+1. Spot on.

Of course it should be that way. To argue that Blue weeks deserve better is just more of the "We're the 99%" crap. It smacks of "income redistribution", only in a timeshare wrapper.

I'm sure I'll take heat on this one. Oh well.

Look at the big picture. The issue of trading power is not really about the color of weeks. It is about supply and demand. The overbuilt areas, such as where you own, have the same supply / demand curve as blue weeks, as there are a glot of them in the system. A fair and honest exchange system would give them similar values.

But again, you are gettin OT. The issue in this thread is RCI assigning different values at the same point in time to the same week depending on whether it is a deposit or taken as an exchange, and that is simply a fraud. They don't pull that fast one in regular RCI Points.

[Margariet]

Originally Posted by Mel

The problem is in trying to justify the current exchange model based on resale prices. People who get the best deal in terms of TPU get it because they own prime weeks. The original purchasers of those weeks paid a premium to own those weeks.

As for the OPs contention regarding ingoing vs. outgoing TPU, that's part of the way the system is designed. It is also how many points systems are designed. As an example, if you own floating weeks and put them into a points system, they often credit you with the average value of your floating week - and then within a certain period, you can book any of the weeks you could normally book for the same number of points, even if it is listed for more. For many of those owners, this is actually a better deal than when the resort chose which weeks were deposited, because the exchangers always lost out in those systems (the best weeks were reserved for owners planning to use their weeks).

When we deposit our weeks, RCI makes an offer we can accept or reject. If we don't like RCI's offer, we can deposit our week elsewhere, or rent or use it ourselves. If RCI was the only option, this might be considered an unfair trade practice, but we do have other options. The current TPU system is set up like a currency, and there are 2 transaction for every deposit. When you deposit, you are in essence selling your week to RCI for a certain number of credits. Once RCI "owns" the week, they can sell it for whatever they want.

The system is transparent in that you know what TPU you are offered, and have a choice. You then also know what you can book with your TPU. What is not transparent is everybody else's transactions.

Yes, it appears than some resort are "overpointed" but we have to ask why. Carolinian would argue that RCI is in bed with the developers. But RCI is a business, and they are not likely to do something that is against their own best interest. RCI must be getting something in exchange for awarding these high TPU. Many of these same resorts used to offer "bonus certificates" to their owners when they deposited their weeks - and in their sales presentations would imply that RCI was offering these bonus weeks, which indicated just how much RCI wanted their deposits. The reality was that those bonus weeks represented developer inventory deposits. Maybe the same thing is happening, but in a less transparent way. Maybe those deposit points represent 50% more than the true value, because for every 2 deposits to RCI the developer gives RCI another week.

Whatever is happening, it really doesn't matter much. We all have the choice to use RCI or not, and are given adequate information to make such a decision. Our society has devolved to the point that everybody feels entitled to everything, and this is just another example. People need to take responsibility for their own decisions - good and bad.

What a good, clear statement!

[MichaelColey]

Originally Posted by Carolinian

You are trying to get this thread OT, as the real point of the OP is RCI's fraudulent shortchanging of owners of prime weeks on trading power.

Originally Posted by Carolinian

But again, you are gettin OT.

So when we respond to your drivel, we're getting OT?

Originally Posted by Carolinian

The overbuilt areas, such as where you own, have the same supply / demand curve as blue weeks, as there are a glot of them in the system. A fair and honest exchange system would give them similar values.

For most weeks, that's certainly the case. You can get most Orlando and Branson weeks for 5-10 TPU, which is comparable to (and less than some) Blue weeks at other resorts. Top demand weeks (like New Years) are quite a bit higher, but they should be.

[Beefnot]

What is OT?

[vckempson]

Originally Posted by Beefnot

What is OT?

I can only presume it's "overtime".

[Karen G]

Originally Posted by Beefnot

What is OT?

I think it is Off topic

[SOS8260456]

It means off topic.

[vckempson]

Thanks. That makes more sense.

[Beefnot]

I was thinking it meant Over the Top. Ok, now it all makes sense. I agree with MichaelColey's last response re: OT.

[Ridewithme38]

But we've got to all admit, Caroline is fun, isn't she?

[geekette]

ride, you're new here.

Not CaroLINE, but CaroLINIAN. Male. Possibly another Steve, I don't recall anymore. Just glad he's back.

What I like most about Caro is that he has never flipflopped, never backpedalled on what he believes in, and has on more than one occasion predicted the next step in RCI's greed.

Maybe I don't agree with Everything he says, but I do like to read his responses as much is right on with what I think about RCI, exchanging, etc.

[timeos2]

Originally Posted by MichaelColey

You can't make RCI out to be evil because they don't give a lot of trading power for Blue weeks. That's the way it SHOULD be.

Right on Michael! That has been my thought since the DeHann (sp?) years. There should NEVER have been what amounts to free upgrades to better (ie more desirable times even if there may be an excess in total availability) times. That RCI ever offered that was an unintended bonus. The very fact that it was utilized by the retail sales weasels tells you that they knew it shouldn't exist but while it did they were going to use it to help market otherwise unsellable times! Rather than make the time they had to sell more attractive by lower fees or off season amenities to make it desirable they instead charged full fees and wanted other, better resorts and locations to shoulder the burden. And for RCI to eventually eat the dog weeks that couldn't be given away! Thus the door was opened to cheap rentals and we all know how that has corrupted the whole system. Now rentals are the key to RCI and exchange is a poor afterthought at best.

So while some want to blame RCI actions as the cause of the collapse of fair exchanges I see it as the 45 day window & free undeserved upgrades that eventually killed an otherwise good system. Too late now to undo it so the exchange companies don't get my deposits. They can't rent what they don't have.

[vckempson]

ride, you're new here.

Not CaroLINE, but CaroLINIAN. Male. Possibly another Steve, I don't recall anymore. Just glad he's back.

I think you missed the intent. Ride is clearly aware of that already.

[Bourne]

Originally Posted by geekette

ride, you're new here.


What I like most about Caro is that he has never flipflopped, never backpedalled on what he believes in...

unlike our esteemed friend from the waste gate las Vegas penthouse...