# I LOVE RCI right now!!!



## krmlaw (Jan 8, 2009)

I had 2 dog traders. And I had 2 good traders. 

I used my good traders to trade for great places 6 months ago. But I didnt know what to do with the dog traders. I called RCI and asked them if there was any way I could switch the units that I used to trade with 6 months ago, to get my 2 good units back, and they said no problem ... 

So now I still have my same reservations, but the dog traders are gone and I have my good traders back! 

Has anyone else ever experienced this?


----------



## krmlaw (Jan 8, 2009)

Oh yeah, 

My dog traders were pulling 75,000

My good traders I got back are pulling 148,000

Now THERE is a difference!!!


----------



## rhonda (Jan 8, 2009)

Curious:  Were you charged a new RCI Exchange fee for the swap?  Thx!


----------



## krmlaw (Jan 8, 2009)

No! I thought I would be, but I wasnt. They just swapped out the week I had original used to trade with for the week I told them to. :whoopie:


----------



## gorevs9 (Jan 8, 2009)

Sometimes it just takes getting the right VC.  Last year, I wanted to change a Points reservation from a studio to a 1 BR.  The first VC was going to do a cancellation, then book a new reservation, which was going to cost me a loss of points on the cancellation and an additional exchange fee.  I called back the next day and talked to a different VC.  She just changed the reservation and only "charged" me the additional points needed for the 1 BR.:whoopie:


----------



## Toughbeat (Jan 8, 2009)

WOW! talk about the old adage, "*It can't hurt to ask*." Awesome!!!!


----------



## MuranoJo (Jan 8, 2009)

Be careful, you never know who's watching.  A bird in the hand could quickly fly away tomorrow.    There's some history of that here on TUG.


----------



## Carl D (Jan 8, 2009)

I'm somewhat surprised that many here would think this is a good thing.

Doesn't this distort & weaken the trading pool? I mean, now someone with a legitimate strong trader is left with sub par resorts to choose from.

Does II also allow this bait & switch policy?


----------



## BevL (Jan 9, 2009)

I had it happen when I phoned in to confirm a unit with a one in four rule.  The VC offered to use a deposit which expired earlier than the one I had used, and which was a significantly weaker week.  

The next day I received an email form asking me to rate my RCI experience and in particular my VC.  SHe got very high marks from me.


----------



## Garnet (Jan 9, 2009)

I agree with Carol D....  Great for you.  Not so good for the other points holders.....


----------



## Garnet (Jan 9, 2009)

I thought this was the "point" of the points program.....not having people have the overly-lopsided exchanges that may occur in weeks.


----------



## Carolinian (Jan 9, 2009)

Garnet said:


> I thought this was the "point" of the points program.....not having people have the overly-lopsided exchanges that may occur in weeks.



The lopsided trades are, in fact, built into the Points system with grossly overpointed resorts, thanks to developers politicking RCI, on one hand, and the rip-off (to Weeks) generic grids for raiding the Weeks system on the other.

The so-called lopsided trades in Weeks are not lopsided at all, but simply the market speaking that maybe some weeks didn't have the real supply / demand curve to make them as hoidy-toidy as some people thought.  In Weeks, the market forces of supply and demand govern what a week is really worth as opposed to the rigged and frozen values of Points.


----------



## bnoble (Jan 9, 2009)

> Doesn't this distort & weaken the trading pool?


It depends on what is being switched.  If the lesser traders could see it anyway, it doesn't matter.

I do this often with Wyndham generics.  You can't search online with those, so I use a fixed week to hold, and then rebook with the generics.  Sometimes the generic has sufficient trade power, other times it doesn't.


----------



## krmlaw (Jan 9, 2009)

Im glad I was able to switch to the quicker expiring weeks! I had called to ask if i could switch, because of the expriation on the weeks, and they said no problem! There was a big difference in their trading power, but I just assumed RCI wouldnt have made the switch if I couldnt pull the same resorts with either weeks?


----------



## Carl D (Jan 9, 2009)

Bad form.
As a DVC Member, now that I will be affected by these type of policies, I am not real happy.

If I do opt to trade my DVC, I may lose my trade to the owner of Crappyville Resorts.
In addition, my DVC traded villa may go to an owner of RoachHaven Vacation Villas.

Nice.


----------



## Steve (Jan 9, 2009)

krmlaw said:


> Im glad I was able to switch to the quicker expiring weeks! I had called to ask if i could switch, because of the expriation on the weeks, and they said no problem! There was a big difference in their trading power, but I just assumed RCI wouldnt have made the switch if I couldnt pull the same resorts with either weeks?



Actually, RCI often will make the switch even if the lesser weeks won't pull the exchanges that you previously made with your stronger weeks.  This was a topic of intense debate here on TUG several years ago.

Steve


----------



## JEFF H (Jan 10, 2009)

Steve said:


> Actually, RCI often will make the switch even if the lesser weeks won't pull the exchanges that you previously made with your stronger weeks.  This was a topic of intense debate here on TUG several years ago.
> Steve



Years ago this was true but I don't belive it is common practice anymore.

Currently You can switch the deposit used to confirm the week only if the deposit used has enough trade power to pull the confirmed week.
 Its always possible you may find a RCI rep willing to bend the rules in your favor but generally that is not going to happen.


----------



## bnoble (Jan 10, 2009)

I don't believe it is common practice either.  As I wrote above, I have been told that the week I put on hold with my visible trader cannot be confirmed with my Wyndham generic.  So, it is certainly not automatic.


----------



## Carl D (Jan 10, 2009)

JEFF H said:


> Currently You can switch the deposit used to confirm the week only if the deposit used has enough trade power to pull the confirmed week.


If that's the case, than why not use the lower quality trader in the first place?


----------



## bnoble (Jan 10, 2009)

Generally, most people who are thinking things through would do so.  But, sometimes folks make mistakes.  

There are also situations in which that's not possible or convenient.  The Wyndham Generics, for example, can only be exchanged when the Wyndham-RCI desk is open, and that has shorter hours than the "regular" call center, vs. the online tool which is always available.

Unless it is broken.


----------



## Carl D (Jan 10, 2009)

Okay... But I recall people here actually boasting about their "bait & switch" tactics used in the past. They actually bragged about using a high quality unit to make the trade, then switch it to a low quality unit.

Not the biggest deal in the world to me, as I will rarely (if ever) trade my DVC.


----------



## bnoble (Jan 10, 2009)

I suspect that the RCI VCs do sometimes bend the rules a bit, but it seems to be increasingly the exception.   I don't get too worked up about it, and I use RCI a lot.


----------



## Steve (Jan 10, 2009)

bnoble said:


> I suspect that the RCI VCs do sometimes bend the rules a bit, but it seems to be increasingly the exception.



Or people just don't talk about it as much publicly since the big fuss a few years back.

Steve


----------



## bnoble (Jan 10, 2009)

I'm basing that on personal experience, not so much what I read.


----------



## JEFF H (Jan 11, 2009)

Carl D said:


> If that's the case, than why not use the lower quality trader in the first place?



Often times I will have different weeks searching for different resorts and dates. When I get confirmations I will sometimes find I should use the deposit that expires sooner for the confirmation.
Trade power is another valid conceren. I don't want to waste a really good trader on a easy exchange if I have a lower power week that will pull the same confirmation.
When I don't have enough trade power RCI will tell me sorry I can't see your confirmed week with that deposit.


----------



## JEFF H (Jan 11, 2009)

Carl D said:


> Okay... But I recall people here actually boasting about their "bait & switch" tactics used in the past. They actually bragged about using a high quality unit to make the trade, then switch it to a low quality unit.
> Not the biggest deal in the world to me, as I will rarely (if ever) trade my DVC.



Several years Ago "bait & switch" tactics worked really well with RCI.
RCI reps would allow trade power overrides to make the switch.
From my own personal experience RCI does not normally allow this anymore.
You can switch the deposit only when the deposit you want to use has the trade power to confirm the week.
I have been told sorry we can't switch the deposit when I did not have enough trade power.


----------



## Carl D (Jan 11, 2009)

JEFF H said:


> Often times I will have different weeks searching for different resorts and dates. When I get confirmations I will sometimes find I should use the deposit that expires sooner for the confirmation.
> Trade power is another valid c. I don't want to waste a really good trader on a easy exchange if I have a lower power week that will pull the same confirmation.
> When I don't have enough trade power RCI will tell me sorry I can't see your confirmed week with that deposit.


Your particular situation may be completely valid and legit. However That's not really a true example of what used to be described here as the "bait & switch".
For whatever reason (no personal experience, just what I read here), after a hard week was snagged, RCI let you reconfirm that week with a much lower trading week. That ploy was used quite often, and was a known way to get a good week in exchange for a poor week.
Perhaps RCI has clamped down on that loop hole? The OP didn't sound that way, but who knows?
Again, I'm not any sort of expert here. I'm just going by what I've read.


----------



## Carl D (Jan 11, 2009)

JEFF H said:


> Several years Ago "bait & switch" tactics worked really well with RCI.
> RCI reps would allow trade power overrides to make the switch.
> From my own personal experience RCI does not normally allow this anymore.
> You can switch the deposit only when the deposit you want to use has the trade power to confirm the week.
> I have been told sorry we can't switch the deposit when I did not have enough trade power.


Thank you, this is pretty much what I was trying to say.

Unfortunately, I didn't see this post before I wrote my last post.


----------



## krmlaw (Jan 12, 2009)

I just called to see if my original week had enough trading power to make the switch, and they said yes. They cant make the switch unless the week you want to use can pull similar trades. SO, looks like my dog traders arent such dogs after all!


----------



## ciscogizmo1 (Jan 12, 2009)

krmlaw said:


> Oh yeah,
> 
> My dog traders were pulling 75,000
> 
> ...



Okay... this is really confusing.  I'll be new to RCI since I own DVC.  So, I'm just trying to understand this.  If RCI is mostly a point system then, why does trade power come into play?  Should it just be you need X amount of points to stay at Y resort?  If they are doing what you saying above then, they truely aren't a point system.  It would be no different than II.  It seems like over the years one of the GREATEST agruments for RCI was that it was a point based system.  So, what gives?


----------



## krmlaw (Jan 12, 2009)

RCI has points and weeks. Not all RCI accounts and members own points, many own certain weeks at resorts.


----------



## Egret1986 (Jan 12, 2009)

*Trade Power is only in the Weeks System, not Points System*



ciscogizmo1 said:


> Okay... this is really confusing.  I'll be new to RCI since I own DVC.  So, I'm just trying to understand this.  If RCI is mostly a point system then, why does trade power come into play?  Should it just be you need X amount of points to stay at Y resort?  If they are doing what you saying above then, they truely aren't a point system.  It would be no different than II.  It seems like over the years one of the GREATEST agruments for RCI was that it was a point based system.  So, what gives?




RCI has both Weeks and Points accounts.  When you are using the Weeks side, everything you can exchange for is based on the trade power of the week that you are exchanging with.  There is no trade power required in Points.


----------



## ciscogizmo1 (Jan 12, 2009)

krmlaw said:


> RCI has points and weeks. Not all RCI accounts and members own points, many own certain weeks at resorts.


  I still don't get it as you said that you used your dog trader is pulling 75,000 and your good traders are pulling 148,000.  so, it appears from an outsider that you are using points.  What does 75,000 and 148,000 mean?


----------



## wackymother (Jan 12, 2009)

ciscogizmo1 said:


> I still don't get it as you said that you used your dog trader is pulling 75,000 and your good traders are pulling 148,000.  so, it appears from an outsider that you are using points.  What does 75,000 and 148,000 mean?



The number of units available against those deposits, I would guess? That would make sense b/c expiring weeks would see fewer deposits than weeks that have a trading period extending a couple of years into the future. 

Also it wouldn't really imply anything about trade power if there's only a few months left on the trading period.


----------



## Carl D (Jan 12, 2009)

wackymother said:


> Also it wouldn't really imply anything about trade power if there's only a few months left on the trading period.


How would this relate to the bait & switch scenario? That may not be what you're referring to, but I'm curious regardless.

Wouldn't (shouldn't) the dog trader need the trade power to pull the great week at the time the OP snagged it with the good trader?

Confusing... let me try again..

In other words, just because the dog can pull the week *now* should be of no consequence, unless it was able to pull it at the time she got it with her strong trader.

A bit confusing, but I hope you get my point.


----------



## wackymother (Jan 12, 2009)

Carl D said:


> How would this relate to the bait & switch scenario? That may not be what you're referring to, but I'm curious regardless.
> 
> Wouldn't (shouldn't) the dog trader need the trade power to pull the great week at the time the OP snagged it with the good trader?
> 
> ...



The week that has less time left to exchange will see fewer weeks. Nothing to do with power--just with time. 

A week with ONE year left in the exchange period might see 50,000 units available. The same week, with TWO years left in its exchange period, might see 100,000 available units. Just because there's twice as much time left in the exchange period.

Also, this is clearly not a case of bait and switch. The OP called RCI and they told him that yes, the expiring week WOULD pull the exchange he got. Otherwise they would not have made the change.


----------



## ciscogizmo1 (Jan 12, 2009)

wackymother said:


> The week that has less time left to exchange will see fewer weeks. Nothing to do with power--just with time.
> 
> A week with ONE year left in the exchange period might see 50,000 units available. The same week, with TWO years left in its exchange period, might see 100,000 available units. Just because there's twice as much time left in the exchange period.
> 
> Also, this is clearly not a case of bait and switch. The OP called RCI and they told him that yes, the expiring week WOULD pull the exchange he got. Otherwise they would not have made the change.


  Okay... that totally makes more sense to me.  I didn't realize he was comparing how many units were available.

AND, WOW that is alot of availability..


----------



## krmlaw (Jan 13, 2009)

Glad someone explained it, as it was confusing to me  haha. 

Yeah, RCI told me the second week had so many more units because it expired further out, almost another year. So instead of seeing 75,000 units, I can now see 150,000 units available.


----------



## JEFF H (Jan 14, 2009)

krmlaw said:


> Glad someone explained it, as it was confusing to me  haha.
> Yeah, RCI told me the second week had so many more units because it expired further out, almost another year. So instead of seeing 75,000 units, I can now see 150,000 units available.



So I guess you just wrongly assumed you had a dog trader based on the available number of exchanges available shown on RCI exchange page?

Its really funny all the terms that get thrown around here and the different things they mean to different people.
Bait & switch
reconfirm
Dog Trader
Tiger trader
And let not forget RCI spinning, I get dizzy just thinking about it all.


----------



## krmlaw (Jan 14, 2009)

Yeah! Here i was thinking my trader was bad, but it was just because it expired soon, which makes sense.


----------

