# WEEKS owners - OPINIONS - new RCI Program



## DeniseM

This is where you can air it out, ladies and gentlemen - BUT please remember the TUG rule of courtesy.


----------



## crazyhorse

I know much of this will have been discussed before on other threads.
But to recap some of the area.

If we take the RCI example as factual, it gives a couple of examples of exchange values, deposits and surpluses of 5,10,15,20 and 30 "lite points".

First of all, again if factual, this goes against the idea that there could be 50 odd exchange bands. There only appear to be 5 bands shown.

*Opinion*- these may be

first 0.001 to 5.00 type exchanges (the dogs and others) all rounded up to make the 5 band
next the 5.01 to 10.00 types all rounded up to make the 10 band.
next the 10.01 to 15.0 types all rounded up to make the 15 band.
next the 15.01 to 20.0 types all rounded up to make the 20 band.
next the 20.01 to 30.0 types all rounded up to make the 30 band.

This is only an opinion, and I guess the bands could go up to a 50 band, and there may also be an intermediate 25 band, and a 35 band, and a 45 band.
Making 10 bands in all.

Is such a simplified system workable? Is there enough clear space here in relative Trading Value between " the dogs" and the most desirable resort in the most desirable timeshare interval?

Clearly it should be simpler to administrate, (avoids exact numerical values) and still possible for a member to combine say 2 weeks to jump up several bands, or use a leftover 5 "lite point" value to use against a "dog" or to combine to enable exchange into the band above your own resort.

With the 10 bands, if you trade against the resorts in your own band, this will keep RCI`s principle of allowing weeks exchange only against resorts of similar quality, but at the same time the use of  residual or combined "lite points" will allow exchange into "dogs" if you want them, or exchange into the better resort options.

If you don`t wish to be bothered with "lite points" extra facilities, normal trading in the band of your own week is still possible but the choice may be limited.


----------



## MichaelColey

A fairly new member (Dave599) has posted quite a few details about the new system that he learned from a friend who works at RCI.  The details he has provided have been very specific and I feel they're credible.  He has specifically said that the numeric trading value will be whole numbers from 5 through 60, so 5, 6, 7, ..., 58, 59 and 60.

Some of the other details he has posted:

* There will be a fee to combine deposits, possibly $79.
* The RCI web site will be closed from 11/12 - 11/14 and the new site will roll out on 11/15.
* There will be a calculator on RCI that will show you the trading power you can get (before you deposit).
* Trading value will be whole numbers from 5 through 60.  Most (70%) will be 10 through low 20s.
* Group priorities will still work.  Combining weeks within the same group will retain group priority.
* Last minute inventory will only take a trading power of 5.
* Combined deposits and/or change will be good for 2 years.
* PFD can only be done with whole, uncombined weeks.  If you combine or use a week and get change back, you can't PFD the resulting deposit.
* Banding is likely going away (or technically switching to 56 bands: 5-60).


----------



## crazyhorse

*Michael*:I see the posts you refer to now.

Dave599 _did_ refer to whole numbers in his post of the 22 Oct, and thus the many resulting bands from 5 through 60.

However in his last post on the 31st Oct, he writes

"My *feeling* is bands will not exist it will be an exact number system"

and referring to a fee,

"there will be a fee it could be 69 or 99 or 109 it was my friends best guess on *internal rumors* I don't think she has be "officially" told yet."

So we have nothing definite yet regarding bands.

I can visualise RCI shutting down the system for a few days before the 15th in order to load up and run the new website. Staff will also be needed to be trained up to help telephone enquiries and provide assistance on exchanges.

They will also need training on how to update the very large database of weeks in the inventory.  

That is if they haven`t been trained up yet. I would envisage some leaks regarding this before it is all up and running.


----------



## MichaelColey

The post I quoted was in the "facts" thread, but my response is more of an opinion so I'm responding in this thread.





crazyhorse said:


> Now say your tiger is worth 58 points, you will have change over when you exchange into a 56 point resort, but this change is worth only 2 "lite points".
> 
> As you wouldn`t be able to get anything for these 2 points, such a system would be less useful to you than the coarse 5 point model. It would also mean practically *every exchange* that was made by members would result in "change" left over and in my opinion would be a little crazy.


I agree.  These small amounts of change will likely be fairly worthless.  The one exception would be if you have another trade that you would like to do but you're just a little short.  Say you're going to Orlando and you have a deposit that's worth 19 which would get you into a ton of places there, but you really want to go to Animal Kingdom Lodge and it takes 21 points.  In that case, it might be worth a modest fee to combine the change with your other deposit.

In any case, there's not much difference for that example between the current situation, a 56 band scenario, and "rounded to a multiple of 5" scenario.  In the current situation, you would get nothing back from that trade.  In a 56 band scenario, you would get 2TP in change that you probably wouldn't use.  In a "rounded to a multiple of 5" scenario, they would likely be in the same band so no change back.

Perhaps RCI might consider combining any change that has a TP under 5 into another deposit for free (or a significantly lower fee), so that at least they can be used.

The other thing a 56 band scenario would do would be to force us to consider which deposit would be best to exchange.  If I'm looking at an exchange into a unit with a TP of 26, I might be better off using a deposit with a TP of 31 rather than one with 27, as I know I could use the 5.

Also, if I have a deposit with a trading power of 17 and am looking at exchanging into a 1BR for 15 or a 2BR for 17, there's no reason not to go with the 2BR.


----------



## bnoble

> Perhaps RCI might consider combining any change that has a TP under 5 into another deposit for free


You're a funny guy.


----------



## "Roger"

On the FACTS/QUESTIONS board, someone asked the question

"How will you feel about having to pay a fee to use that change back?"

To tell you the truth, I am puzzled by the question.  Suppose, for example, I make an exchange from tier J to tier F? (I want to avoid speculating about how many "bands" there are.) In other words, I make what RCI considers a trade down.  Now let us compare what happens in the old system vs. the new one.

*Current Weeks* system: Once I have made the exchange, that's it - I am out of options.  Whatever extra value I had for having a better week is lost.

Now I am trying to figure out how might I be "worse off" (?) within this new system  (and this is why the question puzzles me).

New *"Points Lite" *system:  Admittedly, if I want to use the "change" back, apparently I will have to pay an extra fee.  I might, for example, use that "change" in combination with my deposit next year to make a trade up. Yes, I might be charged an extra fee, but under the current Weeks system, I do not even have that option.  I simply would never get that chance to trade up.  So what have I lost?

Another option, would be to either use that "change" by itself or in combination with other "change" to make an extra exchange?  The thing to note here is whether I do that or not (and incur extra fees) is totally up to me.  If I just ignore the "change" (let it go to waste), _I am no worse off that if I had made the same trade in the Weeks system._  (Remember, that in the current Weeks system, I have no further options but to accept the loss of part of the value of my unit.)

Perhaps some people will be adamantly opposed to ever paying RCI one red cent of extra fees.  They will refuse to ever use any extra change that they receive.  In doing so, they are no worse off than currently.  But should they dictate that the rest of the owners are never even be given the option?  

The bottom line is that the Points Lite system gives people added flexibility.  Whether people want to use it or not is up to them.  If they don't, they haven't lost anything over what they had before - at least, not with regard to when they make an exchange downward.


----------



## MichaelColey

"Roger" said:


> *Current Weeks* system: Once I have made the exchange, that's it - I am out of options. Whatever extra value I had for having a better week is lost.
> 
> Now I am trying to figure out how might I be "worse off" (?) within this new system (and this is why the question puzzles me).


If you're trading down, you're definitely not any worse off and likely will be beter off.  If you're currently trading up (within your band), you'll lose some advantages from the current system.  I have a feeling that most of my trades are "up", so I'm probably in that category.  (I recently trading a 1BR Branson unit for a 2BR DVC Wilderness Lodge [*more* than 45 days out], for example!)  But I think some of the other benefits from the changes will more than offset any losses I see in this area.  (And it's not even confirmed that trading up within a band goes away, although I think it's very likely.)



"Roger" said:


> Perhaps some people will be adamantly opposed to ever paying RCI one red cent of extra fees.


Perhaps some people are just opposed to anything RCI does.


----------



## Carolinian

Trading within a range or band was what has offered flexibility.  Going to an exact number ends that flexibility.  Having to tie up more than one week, including all of one and a few points lite from another to get one trade also destroys the flexibility of what you can do with the second week.  You have to use it for an RCI trade, and you can no longer use it yourself, rent it, let a friend use it, exchange it with another exchange company, etc.

The RCI Happies always see everything RCI does as giving more ''flexibility'' but in reality all of those changes really just change the TYPE of flexibility involved.  For many of us, who like clean one for one trades, the flexibilities lost are far more damaging than any flexibilities gained.

Of course, we have seen dueling RCI insiders or purported insiders in these threads, with one saying it will be an exact number system and the other saying it will be bands.  One of them is wrong.  The band system would certainly be less negative than the exact number system because the band system at least preserves some of the flexibility of the old system.


----------



## miamidan

Carol,

I get what you are saying.  It seems you like a socialist exchange economy where the people who bring the best exchange deposits to any exchange company subsidize those members that bring the lesser desired inventory.  In the system that you support there is nothing that supports the free market or inspires people to bring great inventory to the system.

I favor a system that rewards those that bring high demand inventory to the system more than those that bring average or low demand inventory to an exchange system.

I don't know what the exchange system will look like on November 15th but, I can't help but, think that it will be better.  I know of no other business where you make transactions but, don't know the value of your currency or the cost of comparative items.

I get that you hate the changes made at RCI.  I get that nothing they do will ever please you.  I can not believe the amount of effort you put into a program/company that you dislike so much.

With that said again I am looking forward to seeing all inventory, potentially making multiple exchanges for one deposit and knowing the value of various pieces of inventory.


----------



## zazz

miamidan said:


> Carol,
> 
> I get what you are saying.  It seems you like a socialist exchange economy where the people who bring the best exchange deposits to any exchange company subsidize those members that bring the lesser desired inventory.  In the system that you support there is nothing that supports the free market or inspires people to bring great inventory to the system.
> 
> I favor a system that rewards those that bring high demand inventory to the system more than those that bring average or low demand inventory to an exchange system.
> 
> I don't know what the exchange system will look like on November 15th but, I can't help but, think that it will be better.  I know of no other business where you make transactions but, don't know the value of your currency or the cost of comparative items.
> 
> I get that you hate the changes made at RCI.  I get that nothing they do will ever please you.  I can not believe the amount of effort you put into a program/company that you dislike so much.
> 
> With that said again I am looking forward to seeing all inventory, potentially making multiple exchanges for one deposit and knowing the value of various pieces of inventory.



Well without getting into socialism vs the free market, I agree with this.  It sounds like a lot of people have been getting pretty sweet exchanges over the years, upgrades from what they owned.  Under a pure "like for like" system, thats not going to be available as often unless you book last minute.

I get the impression that the ability to upgrade from a unit at the bottom of the trade band to a unit at the top of the band has become a bit of an entitlement. People have been doing it for so long that it has become a right.

But I suppose that a person with a really top quality week to exchange may  chafe at the thought of losing exchanges to someone with a slightly lesser week, someone who knows the RCI system and can exploit it.

The new system will be better for me as I will be able to see what's out there and what it will cost.  If the new system doesn't work for me, I am sure there will be other options.  I bring crappy weeks and expect crap in return.  But its better than letting a few Wyndham points go to waste.


----------



## MichaelColey

One thing that the new system will bring in will be new way to use low value traders.  If weeks are cheap enough, it may be more economical to combine two bad weeks rather than pay higher maintenance fees for a single week.

Assuming the fee to combine is $80 and that the trading powers range from 5-60...  If you have a dog week with a $100 MF (my UDI can get multiple weeks for about that), you can combine two 5's and get a 10 for $280.  Then you can combine two 10's and get a 20 for $640.  That's assuming they're only worth 5.  If they're worth 10, you end up with a 40 for $640.  A 40 is supposed to pull Manhattan Club (and they pay over $2000 in maintenance fees).

I'm anxious to see the trading powers of my various deposits and other weeks from my resorts to figure out which is really the best value.


----------



## krmlaw

I guess im just nervous that RCI will change our trading power before they roll out the new program. 

Right now my top traders can both pull DVC, 2 beds, any time of the year.

What happens if they no longer? 

Thats what im most worried about.


----------



## bnoble

What happens?  You adjust.

Even if this program were to never happen, the chance *always* exists that your trading power can be re-evaluated.  c.f. 5/30/09, or South Africa's Black Sunday.  Nothing is ever guaranteed going forward.


----------



## MichaelColey

It would be a relatively minor adjustment, too.

Assuming you're usually trading up (and TUG members are probably much more likely to be doing that), you can still trade up but it'll cost you part of another deposit.  Maybe you have a 25 and usually trade into a 30 and they both happen to be in the same band.  Instead of being able to do that every year, you would just be able to do it 5 times in 6 years, plus you'll pay 5 combine fees (probably around $400) over that time.

But the new system opens up other possibilities, too.

Extending the example, what if the unit you really wanted was a 35 and it's currently in the next higher band.  Today, you could never get into it.  Under the new system, you could combine two 25s and get into it, and still have 15 left over for other exchanges.  Combine 10 of that with another 25 and you can get into the nicer property again.  Use the last 5 for a last minute trip.  Instead of getting three 25s (or trading up into 30s), you get two 35s and one last minute trip.

The new system provides far more flexibility.


----------



## Carolinian

While I am from Carolina, my name is not Carol.

What is it about bands that you just don't get?  Bands don't mean that anyone can get the best deposits.  They just simply recognize the fact that there is no realistic way to get the value of any timeshare down to a precise number that is absolutely valid against all other timeshares, and the best way to adjust for this fact is to allow weeks of roughly similar values to trade even with each other.  This does not mean that an offseason week in Lonesome Prarie, Kansas should be able to trade for any week in London or New York, for example.

BTW, the only currency involved will be the extra currency you will have to pay RCI in fees.





miamidan said:


> Carol,
> 
> I get what you are saying.  It seems you like a socialist exchange economy where the people who bring the best exchange deposits to any exchange company subsidize those members that bring the lesser desired inventory.  In the system that you support there is nothing that supports the free market or inspires people to bring great inventory to the system.
> 
> I favor a system that rewards those that bring high demand inventory to the system more than those that bring average or low demand inventory to an exchange system.
> 
> I don't know what the exchange system will look like on November 15th but, I can't help but, think that it will be better.  I know of no other business where you make transactions but, don't know the value of your currency or the cost of comparative items.
> 
> I get that you hate the changes made at RCI.  I get that nothing they do will ever please you.  I can not believe the amount of effort you put into a program/company that you dislike so much.
> 
> With that said again I am looking forward to seeing all inventory, potentially making multiple exchanges for one deposit and knowing the value of various pieces of inventory.


----------



## Carolinian

bnoble said:


> What happens?  You adjust.
> 
> Even if this program were to never happen, the chance *always* exists that your trading power can be re-evaluated.  c.f. 5/30/09, or South Africa's Black Sunday.  Nothing is ever guaranteed going forward.



. . . and the very best way to adjust is to adjust which exchange company you use.  That's why I will no longer be keeping one week at a time in RCI.  My two summer UK weeks are being split between DAE and SFX, while I just put my summer OBX week up for rent again.  I'll use the rental profits for a hotel based trip in Europe.


----------



## miamidan

Carolinian said:


> While I am from Carolina, my name is not Carol.
> 
> What is it about bands that you just don't get?  Bands don't mean that anyone can get the best deposits.  They just simply recognize the fact that there is no realistic way to get the value of any timeshare down to a precise number that is absolutely valid against all other timeshares, and the best way to adjust for this fact is to allow weeks of roughly similar values to trade even with each other.  This does not mean that an offseason week in Lonesome Prarie, Kansas should be able to trade for any week in London or New York, for example.
> 
> BTW, the only currency involved will be the extra currency you will have to pay RCI in fees.



Carolina,

I think that companies at some point have to define their values.  What other industry does not?

I would imagine that in the new program some will pay more with extra benefits some will pay the same and some will pay more.  The great thing is it is a choice.

You say you own in the outerbanks.  I believe there is a very wide red season there.  Should a week 40 owner(not sure if that is even a red week) get the same value as a week 27 owner?  If I were a week 40 owner I would sure hope that I did and if I were a week 27 owner I would certainly hope that I got greater value.

If you shop at wal-mart or any other store you know there are normal prices and then marked down prices.  Why would RCI's new points lite system work any differently?

I can't imagine a publicly owned company intentionally starting a program that will drive owners away.    If you own prime weeks and can pull out multiple weeks you will probably pay more fees but, gain extra benefits.  From what I have read/seen this has been happening in the background previous to this.  

I understand bands but, perhaps you don't understand that it is probably prime weeks and not mediocre weeks that prime any exchange system and keep it functioning.  

If I can gain better value from any company they will get my expenditures whether it is mcdonalds, Wal Mart, Pottery Barn or the local ballet studio. I have no problem paying more if there is value.

Enjoy your day and I look forward to your open minded discusssions on all things timeshare! :rofl:


----------



## miamidan

Carolinian said:


> . . . and the very best way to adjust is to adjust which exchange company you use.  That's why I will no longer be keeping one week at a time in RCI.  My two summer UK weeks are being split between DAE and SFX, while I just put my summer OBX week up for rent again.  I'll use the rental profits for a hotel based trip in Europe.



Good for you enjoy your trips with them!!!!!:whoopie:


----------



## Dori

*Point values of resorts for New RCI rollout*

I just spoke to my resort, Harbour Inn, and got the point values for my weeks. The blue studio is 9 and my red Christmas week is 17. Yikes! It looks like we will be going nowhere with values so low. In the past, we have had decent trades into places like Orlando and LV, with these weeks. We have owned since 1992.

Does anyone know the values at their resorts? if so, we might want to post here, so we can get a feel for what's in store.

Thanks.

Dori


----------



## siesta

I've read that within 45 days, when trade power is usually waived, that exchanges will have a value of 5.  Also you can combine deposits, so you really have a 26 on your hands, which I would imagine could pull something pretty decent.  But we will see.


----------



## MichaelColey

That sounds reasonable to me. A blue studio week in the middle of winter in Canada. I'm a bit surprised that it gets a 9. As for the Christmas week, looking at II's Demand Index, it looks like week 51 is pretty average, while 52 is a strong week. I'm not sure why, but based on that I would think 17 for a studio would be fairly good.

Also, I just searched for Harbour Inn for December 2011, and I see 12 units (up to 2BR) and even my worst trader (that only sees 55k units) can see all 12. The studios are available in Extra Vacations for $323.99 earlier in December and $521.99 for weeks 51 or 52, so I think the ratio between 9 and 17 are about right.

I suspect that many Orlando and Vegas weeks will have comparably low trading powers, so you'll probably still be able to get decent exchanges there.

I'm anxious for 1/15 so I can see what my weeks get.


----------



## WINSLOW

krmlaw said:


> I guess im just nervous that RCI will change our trading power before they roll out the new program.
> 
> Right now my top traders can both pull DVC, 2 beds, any time of the year.
> 
> What happens if they no longer?
> 
> Thats what im most worried about.




I have an opposite question

Right now DVC doesn't have a real RCI account.  How will RCI's change effect a DVC deposit?

DVC should be rated high, will RCI or DVC give a DVC owner a "Point Lite" Value?  or will we just get the same one for one trade?  

We have DVC and have never traded in RCI, but if we were to get a value where we could get multiple down trades maybe more DVCers would deposit weeks.

Just wondering how anyone thinks DVC deposits might work?

Thanks 
Crystal


----------



## rickandcindy23

Dori, they said trading power won't change.  I have a blue Colorado week, 2 bedroom, and I can see some 3 bedrooms at the Hiltons (OLCC, too) in Orlando with the week during off-season.  Does that mean my week has good trading power?  No, it means Orlando has too much inventory in the off-season months, and Hiltons' 1-in-4 rules create an issue with trading power that makes my blue week look good.  

Maybe they will drop the 1-in-4 with this new system.  Seems like the smart thing to do.  

The new system will definitely take size into consideration.  I used to see identical inventory between my red studio and my red two bedroom, same week deposited.  Now I see a little less with the studio.


----------



## Keep Traveling

I don't believe this will affect corporate accounts like DVC, Hilton, Worldmark.

KT


----------



## Timmuscat

Has anyone heard if Wyndham point owners will retain any preference in the new RCI system when trading their generic deposits back into wyndham properties?


----------



## kool_kat

Keep Traveling said:


> I don't believe this will affect corporate accounts like DVC, Hilton, Worldmark.
> 
> KT



I don't think it is going to affect corporate accounts either.  With Hilton, we already have a "change back" built in as it takes less points to book an RCI exchange than to book the same with Hilton.  For example, a 1 bedroom in RCI is only 3,400 points in red time.  A 1 bedroom through Hilton's internal booking is 4,800.

Also, the Hilton's 2011 member's guide is already online and it shows no changes to the number of points it will take to book RCI.  I would think any major changes to corporate accounts would have to be negotiated.


----------



## Carolinian

Dori said:


> I just spoke to my resort, Harbour Inn, and got the point values for my weeks. The blue studio is 9 and my red Christmas week is 17. Yikes! It looks like we will be going nowhere with values so low. In the past, we have had decent trades into places like Orlando and LV, with these weeks. We have owned since 1992.
> 
> Does anyone know the values at their resorts? if so, we might want to post here, so we can get a feel for what's in store.
> 
> Thanks.
> 
> Dori



RCI CLAIMS they will not change trading power, but they have spoken with a forked tongue in the past when they have claimed that.  Only time will tell.  If they tell the truth for a change this time, then you should still be able to trade into overbuilt areas like Orlando and LV.  If it turns out you cannot, that will be solid evidence that they lied about not changing trading power.


----------



## bellesgirl

*Ongoing search*

Does anyone have thoughts about how an ongoing search would work?  Would you put in a request with a maximum number (assuming the scale of 5-60 is accurate).  Trading down would not be an issue but how would you trade up to combine points?  Or do you have to combine first?  I am having a hard time figuring out how RCI will handle this major part of the exchange process.


----------



## MichaelColey

bellesgirl said:


> Does anyone have thoughts about how an ongoing search would work? Would you put in a request with a maximum number (assuming the scale of 5-60 is accurate). Trading down would not be an issue but how would you trade up to combine points? Or *do you have to combine first?* I am having a hard time figuring out how RCI will handle this major part of the exchange process.


I was thinking about this more the last couple days, and I suspect that you'll have to combine first.  But the good thing is that you should be able to look in advance to see how much trading power it would take for the choices you want, so you'll know how much to combine or which deposit to use.

If you look at each deposit you make, each has a "Relation" number.  This is a sequential number that identifies individual deposits.  When you combine two deposits, I bet it removes those two "Relations" from your account and creates a new one with the combined trading power.


----------



## crazyhorse

Anyone have an answer to the question: Is this new Lite Points System of exchange going to be "World Wide", or are say South Africa or Asia staying as they are at present?

If it is a World Wide system, will it be rolled out at precisely at the same time say 0600hrs Eastern Standard Time?

I`m thinking of how RCI might coordinate it all with the various internet servers they may be using.

Will the RCI website used for Lite Points be totally different from the present?

Any opinions? Or leaks?

:deadhorse:


----------



## miamidan

Carolinian said:


> RCI CLAIMS they will not change trading power, but they have spoken with a forked tongue in the past when they have claimed that.  Only time will tell.  If they tell the truth for a change this time, then you should still be able to trade into overbuilt areas like Orlando and LV.  If it turns out you cannot, that will be solid evidence that they lied about not changing trading power.



I think that what RCI has said (and don't quote because i am not them and did not stay at a holiday inn last night) is that trading power is not changing.  

I think we all know or knew that in the past all weeks had an assigned value but, we traded in bands now there will be set values.  I can't see that overnight RCI would limit transactions.  I would foresee them still discounting prices when they have too much inventory etc.  

In other words if you work the system right i still think a 9 will get a 14 without combinging deposits.  not because of bands but, because of active revenue management


----------



## bellesgirl

MichaelColey said:


> I was thinking about this more the last couple days, and I suspect that you'll have to combine first.  But the good thing is that you should be able to look in advance to see how much trading power it would take for the choices you want, so you'll know how much to combine or which deposit to use.


How would you know how much to use if what you want is not yet available?  If it was available you would not have to do a search.  Unless you are saying there is going to be a table somewhere that shows the value of all resorts for every size and week.  Even then you may not have a specific resort in mind, just an area and time frame.

If I was designing the system, I would give people the option to do a search against "all deposits" which would combine your total available points.  Then when you got a match you could see how much it would take to get that exchange and opt in or out.  I am not a member of RCI Points but I would guess that is how that system works.


----------



## crazyhorse

_Anyone have an answer to the question: Is this new Lite Points System of exchange going to be "World Wide", or are say South Africa or Asia staying as they are at present?_

Well, visiting the various worldwide websites I have answered my own question.

As Michael Coley has shown elsewhere, the USA RCI website is off line for the weekend, reopening 0000hrs 15th November.

Other websites eg India, Europe, Australasia show the same shutdown notice, the websites look similar in appearance, so it seems the new system comes in at the same point in time.

One exeption is the website for Africa. This has a different format and they talk of weeks worth points with points balances.

http://www.rci.co.za/Public/SearchForResortV2.aspx?pageID=18

Also you can search for a week exchange before you make your own deposit (apparantly) although I cannot get into their system without a membership.

So I get the feeling that RCI for Lite Points will be using the system currently used by RCI Africa, or something somilar.

If Africa have a workable system and usable website, it would seem obvious to adopt it.


----------



## "Roger"

There are three divisions to RCI:  RCI-North America (which includes everything in this hemisphere, RCI-Europe, and RCI-Pacific (which includes Asia).  All of these divisions are part of Wyndham Worldwide.  I am not sure what the exact affiliation agreements are between RCI-South Africa and the rest of RCI, but RCI-South Africa is not part of Wyndham Worldwide (and thus not really part of RCI).  Think of them more as being like a separate mini-system that can trade through RCI.

For the existing Points program, while RCI points are the same across the three divisions (one point from the RCI-NA program is equivalent to one point from the RCI-Europe program), there are some differences between the rules that Points members fall under from division to division.  (See the sticky at the top of the Points board.)  

RCI-South Africa is another matter.  My understanding is that they have their own points program with point values not at all connected with the RCI Points program.  This is simply a different program (not part of Wyndham Worldwide) and it would come as no surprise that they would not be part of Points Lite.


----------



## chriskre

MichaelColey said:


> Perhaps some people are just opposed to anything RCI does.



Amen to that brother Coley.  :rofl:  

I think this new system sounds so much like RCI points which for the record I am pretty fond of.   

I think it's a very fair system.  I know, I know,   the developers are in cahootz with RCI, yada yada, but for me the PFD have been a great thing.  

I know in advance the exact value of my PFD.  If I deposit it more than 6 months in advance I get 38K.  If I deposit within 6 mos. I only get 28K.  If I decide not to deposit or can't make up my mind I can always use my week.  I see this as a win-win.   So far so good for me.  Maybe I'm just too naive to the evils of RCI but after being with them for 10 years and having tons of great vacations it's just hard for me to jump on the hate wagon.  

I'm actually looking forward to seeing what happens to my weeks that are already eligible for PFD and see if the Points Lite opens up other options.  If not then I can always use my week and I fare no worse.


----------



## Twinkstarr

chriskre said:


> Amen to that brother Coley.  :rofl:
> 
> I think this new system sounds so much like RCI points which for the record I am pretty fond of.
> 
> I think it's a very fair system.  I know, I know,   the developers are in cahootz with RCI, yada yada, but for me the PFD have been a great thing.
> 
> I know in advance the exact value of my PFD.  If I deposit it more than 6 months in advance I get 38K.  If I deposit within 6 mos. I only get 28K.  If I decide not to deposit or can't make up my mind I can always use my week.  I see this as a win-win.   So far so good for me.  Maybe I'm just too naive to the evils of RCI but after being with them for 10 years and having tons of great vacations it's just hard for me to jump on the hate wagon.
> 
> I'm actually looking forward to seeing what happens to my weeks that are already eligible for PFD and see if the Points Lite opens up other options.  If not then I can always use my week and I fare no worse.



I'm not as familiar with RCI as I am II, since my lone RCI resort I use most of the time. Though I did get 2 nice trades with the 2 RCI deposits the seller tossed in for free. Can't beat a 2br President's Weekend at Boyne MI and a 2br Wyndham Kona Hawaiian for just exchange fees.

I'm just hoping they don't forget to make the Wyndham generic deposits visible. I have one in now and I like being able to search myself because  don't like having to call in and the fact I like poking around, never know I might see something that maybe wasn't on my list or just might be fun to try.


----------



## richontug

I definitely agree about making Wyndham generic deposits visible.
Poking around has resulted in great vacations for us in Crete and Portugal!

Rich


----------



## Carolinian

Poking around on RCI's rental offerings can make for even more affordable vacations.  I once found mulitple options of summer rentals on Crete, for example from ~$200 / week from RCI rentals.

That seems to be where the most value in the ''new RCI'' is located, but you have to keep a close watch on what you want as prices change.




richhunt said:


> I definitely agree about making Wyndham generic deposits visible.
> Poking around has resulted in great vacations for us in Crete and Portugal!
> 
> Rich


----------



## Twinkstarr

Carolinian said:


> Poking around on RCI's rental offerings can make for even more affordable vacations.  I once found mulitple options of summer rentals on Crete, for example from ~$200 / week from RCI rentals.
> 
> That seems to be where the most value in the ''new RCI'' is located, but you have to keep a close watch on what you want as prices change.



I poke around on the rental offerings also, mostly US and there are some really good deals.

I don't plan on making Wyndham deposits that often, but I really dislike having to call and getting a newbie or clueless RCI VC. 

I don't call II either so it's not a slam on RCI.


----------



## miamidan

Carolinian said:


> Poking around on RCI's rental offerings can make for even more affordable vacations.  I once found mulitple options of summer rentals on Crete, for example from ~$200 / week from RCI rentals.
> 
> That seems to be where the most value in the ''new RCI'' is located, but you have to keep a close watch on what you want as prices change.



Thanks that really helped the conversation about the new changes!


----------



## krmlaw

i read somewhere we can find out the value of our units if we call our resort? right?

i might do that today


----------



## bnoble

Except that the raw number doesn't mean much.  You need to also know what the *other* numbers are.


----------



## MichaelColey

Do you mean the numbers for units you might want to exchange into?


----------



## bnoble

Indeed.

I will not be surprised to see that the credit values have a "long tail"---a fairly small number of intervals that have credit values in, say, the upper quartile, while the bulk of even what most would consider "good stuff" is assigned what might initially appear to be middling numbers.  This is based on things that a few "insiders" have hinted at, along with simple observations of trade power across several different deposits and accounts.

Calling the resort now is just going to give you a false sense of (in)security until you know the whole score.  And, in less than a week (plus whatever time it takes to fix what they break in the initial deployment ) we'll know both sides of the equation.  At that point you'll know for sure whether you've been screwed or not, rather than just suspecting!

(I fully expect everyone to believe they were screwed, because everyone seems to think what they own is worth more than it is.  And, if my "long-tail" suspicion is true, it will look like almost everyone got screwed, even when objectively they really didn't.  Human nature, I suppose, but it should be fun to watch heads explode.)


----------



## Carolinian

miamidan said:


> Thanks that really helped the conversation about the new changes!



Don't know why you have your panties in a twist.  Points Lite is a change that makes RCI's rentals even more attractive for those using RCI.  Heck, it is the one reason that I am not going to ask for a refund on my remaining membership.  I have gotten some darn good prices on cheap RCI rentals for times and places I wanted to go.


----------



## Tommart

Dori said:


> I just spoke to my resort, Harbour Inn, and got the point values for my weeks. The blue studio is 9 and my red Christmas week is 17. Yikes! It looks like we will be going nowhere with values so low. In the past, we have had decent trades into places like Orlando and LV, with these weeks. We have owned since 1992.
> 
> Does anyone know the values at their resorts? if so, we might want to post here, so we can get a feel for what's in store.
> 
> Thanks.
> 
> Dori



Dori,
I do not know my values.  I assume your numbers do not include the bonus for depositing up to 9 months in advance.  Is that correct?

Tom


----------



## miamidan

Carolinian said:


> Don't know why you have your panties in a twist.  Points Lite is a change that makes RCI's rentals even more attractive for those using RCI.  Heck, it is the one reason that I am not going to ask for a refund on my remaining membership.  I have gotten some darn good prices on cheap RCI rentals for times and places I wanted to go.



Hopefully after a couple days next week of actually analyzing my ownership values and how that works with exchanging I will have as thorough understanding of the new program as you.  Since you seem to have a thorough understanding of the new roll out can you answer

a.  how much will instant exchange cost in trading power
b.  Will a fly to week require less trading power as the likelihood of it being used decreases?
c.  What is the fee to combine
d.  How long is the "change back" valid for

As this forum is about facts I would appreciate facts and not speculation.

Thanks in advance,


----------



## MichaelColey

miamidan said:


> d. How long is the "change back" valid for


I believe RCI said that the change back is valid for the same period of time as the original deposit.

Dave has said that if you combine deposits or change, the resulting "deposit" is good for 2 years.


----------



## Carolinian

Strange answer to my post about the value of RCI rentals, which is, indeed, a fact not speculation.  I have personally gotten some darn good deals from them for less than m/f plus exchange fee for places and times I wanted to go.

As to your questions, I would point out one fact that you may want to consider.  What is a ''drive to'' or ''fly to'' destination is highly subjective depending on where each member is personally located.  For some Orlando may be ''fly to'' and for others ''drive to'' for example.





miamidan said:


> Hopefully after a couple days next week of actually analyzing my ownership values and how that works with exchanging I will have as thorough understanding of the new program as you.  Since you seem to have a thorough understanding of the new roll out can you answer
> 
> a.  how much will instant exchange cost in trading power
> b.  Will a fly to week require less trading power as the likelihood of it being used decreases?
> c.  What is the fee to combine
> d.  How long is the "change back" valid for
> 
> As this forum is about facts I would appreciate facts and not speculation.
> 
> Thanks in advance,


----------



## Twinkstarr

bnoble said:


> Indeed.
> 
> I will not be surprised to see that the credit values have a "long tail"---a fairly small number of intervals that have credit values in, say, the upper quartile, while the bulk of even what most would consider "good stuff" is assigned what might initially appear to be middling numbers.  This is based on things that a few "insiders" have hinted at, along with simple observations of trade power across several different deposits and accounts.
> 
> Calling the resort now is just going to give you a false sense of (in)security until you know the whole score.  And, in less than a week (plus whatever time it takes to fix what they break in the initial deployment ) we'll know both sides of the equation.  At that point you'll know for sure whether you've been screwed or not, rather than just suspecting!
> 
> (I fully expect everyone to believe they were screwed, because everyone seems to think what they own is worth more than it is.  And, if my "long-tail" suspicion is true, it will look like almost everyone got screwed, even when objectively they really didn't.  Human nature, I suppose, but it should be fun to watch heads explode.)



When exactly will RCI be back online next Monday? I certainly don't want to miss the 1st heads exploding. :hysterical: . I love that sort of thing.


----------



## miamidan

Carolinian said:


> Strange answer to my post about the value of RCI rentals, which is, indeed, a fact not speculation.  I have personally gotten some darn good deals from them for less than m/f plus exchange fee for places and times I wanted to go.
> 
> As to your questions, I would point out one fact that you may want to consider.  What is a ''drive to'' or ''fly to'' destination is highly subjective depending on where each member is personally located.  For some Orlando may be ''fly to'' and for others ''drive to'' for example.



i would consider Hawaii and the Caribbean to be obvious fly to destinations with very minimal drive to or local market to consume.


----------



## bnoble

> When exactly will RCI be back online next Monday?


Another piece of mail that someone posted suggested that it would be back at 5AM.  It will be interesting to see if the web site even vaguely works and/or how long it will take to stabilize.

I'm imagining that things will be Badly Broken for several weeks at least---look at how poorly just switching to more bands went on 5/30/09.  So, it might be more like a slow boil than a fast-twitch explosion.


----------



## Bourne

bnoble said:


> I'm imagining that things will be Badly Broken for several weeks at least---look at how poorly just switching to more bands went on 5/30/09.  So, it might be more like a slow boil than a fast-twitch explosion.



That would be boring. I like the "exploding stuff"...especially the one with "brown bits" thrown in...:hysterical:


----------



## MichaelColey

Twinkstarr said:


> When exactly will RCI be back online next Monday?





bnoble said:


> Another piece of mail that someone posted suggested that it would be back at 5AM.


That may have been a local time (perhaps in Europe?).  The RCI web site says "Due to new product and service enhancements being made over the upcoming weekend, RCI.com will be unavailable to process transactions from 12:01am Eastern Standard Time Friday, November 12th through *11:59pm Eastern Standard Time Sunday, November 14th*."  So, Sunday night around midnight, it should be back.  With such a long outage and so many things for them to do and check, I wouldn't be surprised if it's up earlier (if things go smoothly) or later (if they don't).


----------



## Carolinian

[*Moderator Note: * This is the first of what will no doubt be many posts moved from the RCI WEEKS  FACT Discussion Thread to the RCI WEEKS OPINION Discussion Thread. This should not have to be done through a merger; but OPINION posts improperly posted will be moved.]

Anything can have both pluses and minuses, and while I strong suspect which will predominiate in this change, there are some potential pluses:
- RCI may get rid of its extremely aggravating downward quality filter if they are going to show everyone everything.  While the upward filter has always made more sense, it may go, too.
- RCI may be forced to replace its unfair (to Weeks members) crossover grids for Points trades into Weeks with something like a conversion factor instead.  With the values revealed, it would otherwise be extremely obvious that they were cheating Weeks members and paint a bullseye on themselves for another lawsuit.


----------



## Dori

Tom. I don't know if this includes the early bonus. these are the numbers my resort gave to me. I'll call to ask when we get home from our trip. We are in South Korea now, preparing to attend our son's wedding on Sunday!

Dori


----------



## Carolinian

MichaelColey:  I think I see one factor that may be the source of our differences on a wide range of RCI related issues from RCI rentals to Points Lite.

Here is your list of upcoming trips from your signature: Upcoming trips: Galveston, Orlando, Branson, Las Vegas, Orlando, Orlando, New York, Branson, Orlando, Branson, RTW Trip 

The RTW sounds like great fun, and something I would love to do myself, but it would not appear to be timeshare based.  Assuming that the others mostly are, what is striking is the very high percentage of your timeshare travel that is to overbuilt areas.

In contrast, my own upcoming trips are: Charleston / Savannah, Italy (Sicily), France (Brittany), Greece (Crete), Ireland, UK (canalboat), Norway/Sweden, Ukraine (Crimea), Italy (Venice), and Canary Islands (Gran Canary). Of the five of those that are timeshare, only one, Canary Islands, is to an overbuilt area.

For someone who mainly exchanges into overbuilt areas, RCI's various changes are probably not a concern.  For for those of us who want to travel to areas of less supply and greater relative demand, they are game changers in a very negative way.

I guess our attitudes are largely influenced by our own travel patterns, and particularly what we are looking for in timeshares.


----------



## Mel

Carolinian said:


> For someone who mainly exchanges into overbuilt areas, RCI's various changes are probably not a concern.  For for those of us who want to travel to areas of less supply and greater relative demand, they are game changers in a very negative way.
> 
> I guess our attitudes are largely influenced by our own travel patterns, and particularly what we are looking for in timeshares.


This statement is right to the point - what exactly are the travel patters of the typical timeshare owner/exchanger?

I'm sure we can agree those patterns have changed significantly over time.  Many factors contribute:

Family structure has changed for most who bought more than 20 years ago (I bought in 1991 before kids, and now have 3 ranging in age from 8-15).  Others had kids 20 years ago, and they have grown and moved out.  Those families either now travel with extended families needing bigger units, or just as a couple needing smaller units.

Timeshares are marketed to a different audience than 20 years ago as well.  The biggest marketing programs are in those programs you consider overbuilt - but if a large percentage of owners and exchangers want to travel over and over to those same places, then are they really overbuilt?

When we go to a timeshare presentation, they ineveitably ask what 5 destinations we dream of visiting.  That's a lofty dream, and possible with timeshare, but the reality is that most families are not going to visit all 5 of those dream destinations, and many won't visit any of them - not because of the accomodations, but because of everything else involved in such a trip.  Even my own family vacillates between visitng new places and returning to places we enjoyed, so see whatever we missed the first time.  While a Disney trip is expensive, Orlando is a great base for everything else in the area too, as well as having nice weather the majority of the year (this past week excepted, but it was still nicer than here when it snowed on Monday).

This change offers some real potential to many long-time owners.  That empty nest couple that purchased 20 years ago owns a 2BR summer unit, used many times for the family vacation.  They are close to retirement age, and see them vacationing primarily in 2 different ways:  

1) Travelling as a couple during the offseason, a 1BR would be wonderful, but a studio in a nice resort area with plenty of activities would be fine.  If their 2BR beach unit is worth 30 credits, it would be great to trade for a smaller unit in Hawaii, but it seems a waste to trade for an offseason studio worth only 10 credits.

2) Their children are grown, and married, and there might even be grandchildren.  So now a "family" vacation involves more people, and requires a larger unit.  Their 30 credits won't get them an exchange into a unit that will work, but it might be worthwhile to combine the 10 credits left from this year's trade with next year's deposit to have 40 credits to get that larger unit.  To have that kind of flexibility is worth paying a fee to combine those credits.  

Consider the situation being discussed on the other thread about lockoff units.  I too would prefer a 2BR unit, but often cannot find one, because so many resorts are now being built as lock-offs.  Assuming the credits work like RCI points resorts, and full-unit deposits are encouraged, there will be more large units, and more choice.  Rather than pay 2 exchange fees for the two sides of a lock-off unit (and hope the resort will put me in adjoining units), I pay a fee to combine my points, and exchange into a single combined unit (and am gauranteed connecting units).  Perhaps I had 2 deposits that would have allowed me to exchange into 2 larger sides, but instead I do this (sacrificing a bit of extra space for the convenience of a full unit), it leaves a larger half for someone else later.

I realize that RCI has members around the world, but if we look at the North American membership (and particularly US members), a large percantage is families with children, who were sold on the idea of vacationing with the kids.  Those families are going to travel more like Michael - returning over and over to familiar places where they know the kids will be happy.  Knowing the families from my daughters' schools, most would prefer a trip where someone else is entertaining their kids.  How many families take their kids to Hawaii or Europe?  The cost of the airfare is prohibitive, and the flights are long, and not considered worthwhile unless you can go for 2 or 3 weeks - and that's not a reality for most families.

I look forward to seeing the new numbers, and compiling a list with everyone else to see just what percentage of resorts fall into different ranges.  I expect to see a bell curve, with 60-80% falling in a small range, maybe 25-35, and the remainder to be obviously either low-end (deep blue studios), or exceptional high end resorts.  This time next week, we will have a better picture.


----------



## MichaelColey

Carolinian said:


> MichaelColey: I think I see one factor that may be the source of our differences on a wide range of RCI related issues from RCI rentals to Points Lite.
> 
> Here is your list of upcoming trips from your signature: Upcoming trips: Galveston, Orlando, Branson, Las Vegas, Orlando, Orlando, New York, Branson, Orlando, Branson, RTW Trip
> 
> The RTW sounds like great fun, and something I would love to do myself, but it would not appear to be timeshare based. Assuming that the others mostly are, what is striking is the very high percentage of your timeshare travel that is to overbuilt areas.


Yes, I think that's certainly one factor.  All of this will be with timeshares.  With the RTW trip, we'll probably use Starwood and Hilton for some, but we hope to use timeshares for most.  We still have quite a bit of planning to do (and accumulating of weeks/points to exchange) before we'll be ready for that trip.

We have tremendous flexibility on when and where we travel, so that makes timeshares much more appealing to us than to most.


----------



## jjmanthei05

Carolinian said:


> Anything can have both pluses and minuses, and while I strong suspect which will predominiate in this change, there are some potential pluses:
> - RCI may get rid of its extremely aggravating downward quality filter if they are going to show everyone everything.  While the upward filter has always made more sense, it may go, too.
> - RCI may be forced to replace its unfair (to Weeks members) crossover grids for Points trades into Weeks with something like a conversion factor instead.  With the values revealed, it would otherwise be extremely obvious that they were cheating Weeks members and paint a bullseye on themselves for another lawsuit.



Are you talking about the cross over grids from RCI points or from points systems(IE wyndham, worldmark, HGVC ect). If you are just talking about RCI points then wouldn't it be more fair to just create the cross over grid to the points side from weeks? Wouldn't that even everything out?

Jason


----------



## Carolinian

It is not me who is saying they are overbuilt.  That is common knowledge to everyone in the timeshare industry who does not have their head in the sand.  Do you remember RCI employee Bootleg who used to post here?  Do you remeber his acronym for the overbuilt areas of North America? OBWM - Orlando, Branson, Williamsburg, Massanutter,  It is purely a factual matter of supply and demand.  If you come to this side of the pond, you could add Canary Islands, Hungary, and Finland, and probably Spain.  Las Vegas has also been moving toward overbuilt.

Most people who like to go to the same place tend to be own to use people who do not even belong to exchange companies.  If one likes the same place, that is the smart way to go.  On the Outer Banks, the majority of owners in several resorts I am familiar with are own to use owners who do not even belong to exchange companies.  I have traded into some resorts in France and Germany where the managers have told me that over 90% of owners use their weeks at the resort and do not belong to exchange companies.




Mel said:


> This statement is right to the point - what exactly are the travel patters of the typical timeshare owner/exchanger?
> 
> I'm sure we can agree those patterns have changed significantly over time.  Many factors contribute:
> 
> Family structure has changed for most who bought more than 20 years ago (I bought in 1991 before kids, and now have 3 ranging in age from 8-15).  Others had kids 20 years ago, and they have grown and moved out.  Those families either now travel with extended families needing bigger units, or just as a couple needing smaller units.
> 
> Timeshares are marketed to a different audience than 20 years ago as well.  The biggest marketing programs are in those programs you consider overbuilt - but if a large percentage of owners and exchangers want to travel over and over to those same places, then are they really overbuilt?
> 
> When we go to a timeshare presentation, they ineveitably ask what 5 destinations we dream of visiting.  That's a lofty dream, and possible with timeshare, but the reality is that most families are not going to visit all 5 of those dream destinations, and many won't visit any of them - not because of the accomodations, but because of everything else involved in such a trip.  Even my own family vacillates between visitng new places and returning to places we enjoyed, so see whatever we missed the first time.  While a Disney trip is expensive, Orlando is a great base for everything else in the area too, as well as having nice weather the majority of the year (this past week excepted, but it was still nicer than here when it snowed on Monday).
> 
> This change offers some real potential to many long-time owners.  That empty nest couple that purchased 20 years ago owns a 2BR summer unit, used many times for the family vacation.  They are close to retirement age, and see them vacationing primarily in 2 different ways:
> 
> 1) Travelling as a couple during the offseason, a 1BR would be wonderful, but a studio in a nice resort area with plenty of activities would be fine.  If their 2BR beach unit is worth 30 credits, it would be great to trade for a smaller unit in Hawaii, but it seems a waste to trade for an offseason studio worth only 10 credits.
> 
> 2) Their children are grown, and married, and there might even be grandchildren.  So now a "family" vacation involves more people, and requires a larger unit.  Their 30 credits won't get them an exchange into a unit that will work, but it might be worthwhile to combine the 10 credits left from this year's trade with next year's deposit to have 40 credits to get that larger unit.  To have that kind of flexibility is worth paying a fee to combine those credits.
> 
> Consider the situation being discussed on the other thread about lockoff units.  I too would prefer a 2BR unit, but often cannot find one, because so many resorts are now being built as lock-offs.  Assuming the credits work like RCI points resorts, and full-unit deposits are encouraged, there will be more large units, and more choice.  Rather than pay 2 exchange fees for the two sides of a lock-off unit (and hope the resort will put me in adjoining units), I pay a fee to combine my points, and exchange into a single combined unit (and am gauranteed connecting units).  Perhaps I had 2 deposits that would have allowed me to exchange into 2 larger sides, but instead I do this (sacrificing a bit of extra space for the convenience of a full unit), it leaves a larger half for someone else later.
> 
> I realize that RCI has members around the world, but if we look at the North American membership (and particularly US members), a large percantage is families with children, who were sold on the idea of vacationing with the kids.  Those families are going to travel more like Michael - returning over and over to familiar places where they know the kids will be happy.  Knowing the families from my daughters' schools, most would prefer a trip where someone else is entertaining their kids.  How many families take their kids to Hawaii or Europe?  The cost of the airfare is prohibitive, and the flights are long, and not considered worthwhile unless you can go for 2 or 3 weeks - and that's not a reality for most families.
> 
> I look forward to seeing the new numbers, and compiling a list with everyone else to see just what percentage of resorts fall into different ranges.  I expect to see a bell curve, with 60-80% falling in a small range, maybe 25-35, and the remainder to be obviously either low-end (deep blue studios), or exceptional high end resorts.  This time next week, we will have a better picture.


----------



## MichaelColey

Carolinian said:


> It is not me who is saying they are overbuilt. That is common knowledge to everyone in the timeshare industry who does not have their head in the sand. Do you remember RCI employee Bootleg who used to post here? Do you remeber his acronym for the overbuilt areas of North America? OBWM - Orlando, Branson, Williamsburg, Massanutter


We're getting pretty far from the topic of this thread.  While these areas may be overbuilt, that's not to say that there aren't resorts and weeks that have tremendous value.  The DVC properties attract loyal owners willing to pay $10-$25k upfront and well over $1k per year for enough points for a typical 2BR unit.  Wyndham Bonnet Creek and the HGVC properties do well.  Summer, Spring and holiday weeks at top Orlando resorts are in high demand.  Bluegreen Wilderness Club at Big Cedar (a phenomenal resort) in Branson is very hard to get into in the summer.  Some weeks I've deposited from these two "overbuilt" areas have traded like Tiger and Tiger Cub properties, seeing 115k - 145k total units.


----------



## rickandcindy23

DocPepsi said:


> Wouldn't the 'Trade Value' and 'Trade Power' in aggregate have to basically be equal?  Otherwise, there would be a huge imbalance in terms of equity correct?
> 
> I mean if you treat this as a free-market economy, if you give people more Money (Trade Power) than the value of the goods (Trade Value) then the entire economic system is at a fault.



No.  They can do whatever they want, because it's RCI.  I understand that RCI gives good trading (not the greatest_ value to people in Orlando, because it's all red, so say an Orlando week in October is given 25 points, and if you have a week that is blue and worth 15 points, RCI will allow you to see that 25 point week and book it, because are they really going to sell it for 25 points?  

This makes sense to me because I can currently see some 3 bedrooms at the Hiltons in Orlando for fall of 2011.  I cannot book any of them with my blue week, which is the week I am using, because I already used my 1-in-4, but those are sure there, and Hilton owners get great value from even those Hilton fall deposits.  So that is how I believe it will work, according to an RCI person.  I think it's going to be okay for most of us.


----------



## rickandcindy23

Michael, what's RTW that Carolinian would like to do himself?  

Trading value is different from deposit value, so basically there will be discounted weeks that you can get with a slightly less trade.  I love the idea of that.  

I am feeling okay about the changes.  I think people are worried over nothing, and I don't care that Orlando is overbuilt.   

It is hard to get Orlando Gold Crowns in prime summer months with just any deposit, but any "red" week should get them.  And my sis wanted a week in Orlando for prime summer, early July, a few years back, and I had a blue week we were just going to lose, so I told her to put in a request for a 2 bedroom in Orlando, and she chose only Silver and Gold Crowns, and she got it with my blue week, eight weeks out.  

I don't even try to get summer, but I betcha I could easily get Orlando Gold Crowns that have the 1-in-? rules with an ongoing search for summer, if I wanted one today.  Those ridiculous rules keep a lot of inventory floating around.  And now that Orange Lake decided that its own owners that don't pay for their points system will no longer get priority into the resorts (cannot even see much anymore), Orange Lake developers have hurt the OLCC owners, when before they said, "Oh, you can use your studio to trade into a bigger unit, because you pay the same MF's." 

I don't think anything that happens on Monday is going to hurt much.


----------



## Mel

DocPepsi said:


> Wouldn't the 'Trade Value' and 'Trade Power' in aggregate have to basically be equal?  Otherwise, there would be a huge imbalance in terms of equity correct?
> 
> I mean if you treat this as a free-market economy, if you give people more Money (Trade Power) than the value of the goods (Trade Value) then the entire economic system is at a fault.



Think of our weeks as the inventory in a store.  The Trade Value is the retail value of the goods.  When the product is new, and a significant number of people are purchasing, those goods will sell at their full retail value.  As time goes on, and more people already have what they want, the current value of those goods goes down.  In a free-market system we see this as discounts, or even clearance sales.

Thus your week will have a Trade value which is fairly rigid, but a trade power that fluctuates based on supply and demand, and on how likely RCI will be able to find someone to use that week - the closer you get to the use date, the less likely someone will want that week, so the trade value goes down.  Subce RCI takes deposits, you could look at it like a used book store.  When they already have 20 copies of a given book, they may choose not to buy your book, or they may choose to buy at a lower price than they gave you for the same book 2 weeks ago (if they think they will eventually be able to sell it).  On the other hand, if they have none in stock, and know 5 people were asking for that book in the last week, they might encourage you to sell your copy by offering more.  The overall value of your book doesn't change, but the value to the bookstore does.


----------



## MichaelColey

rickandcindy23 said:


> Michael, what's RTW that Carolinian would like to do himself?


RTW = Round The World.  Sometime in the next few years, we plan on taking about 3 months and spending a week or two in each of about 6-10 places around the world.  Figuring out when 6-10 places is the tough part.  We'll be using OW150C awards through AA (already have most/all of the miles saved up), need to find a route of no more than 25k miles on OneWorld alliance partners where we're likely to find Fri/Sat flights (since we're going to try to do timeshares for most of the trip) with enough award seats available for all of us to places where we'll likely be able to find timeshare (or Hilton or Starwood or possibly Marriott or Hyatt) availability.  There are so many places we would like to go (New Zealand, Africa, Israel, Dubai, Phuket, Moscow, Europe, Hawaii, Maldives, Tokyo, etc.), but I know we can't do it all.


----------



## Bourne

Word of advice. 

Keep the list as 6-10...i.e. flexible. The OW150C awards need hours with a rez agent. The only one that may be hard on your list is Maldives. You only have so many hops per continent without backtracking.


----------



## Carolinian

I also like the fact that Sint Maarten is the most overbuilt in timeshare island in the Caribbean, as it is my favorite island.  That makes it the easiest to trade into.  Now, Orlando, if I went more than once every 5 or 6 years, I would have mouse overload, but it is a fun place to go every now and then.



rickandcindy23 said:


> Michael, what's RTW that Carolinian would like to do himself?
> 
> Trading value is different from deposit value, so basically there will be discounted weeks that you can get with a slightly less trade.  I love the idea of that.
> 
> I am feeling okay about the changes.  I think people are worried over nothing, and I don't care that Orlando is overbuilt.
> 
> It is hard to get Orlando Gold Crowns in prime summer months with just any deposit, but any "red" week should get them.  And my sis wanted a week in Orlando for prime summer, early July, a few years back, and I had a blue week we were just going to lose, so I told her to put in a request for a 2 bedroom in Orlando, and she chose only Silver and Gold Crowns, and she got it with my blue week, eight weeks out.
> 
> I don't even try to get summer, but I betcha I could easily get Orlando Gold Crowns that have the 1-in-? rules with an ongoing search for summer, if I wanted one today.  Those ridiculous rules keep a lot of inventory floating around.  And now that Orange Lake decided that its own owners that don't pay for their points system will no longer get priority into the resorts (cannot even see much anymore), Orange Lake developers have hurt the OLCC owners, when before they said, "Oh, you can use your studio to trade into a bigger unit, because you pay the same MF's."
> 
> I don't think anything that happens on Monday is going to hurt much.


----------



## Carolinian

I would suggest St. Petersburg over Moscow.  Both are interesting but St. Petersburg is more so.  Also it has a timeshare and Moscow does not.  Of course there are good deals to be had on apartment rentals in St. Petersburg, too.

Also, if you run into backtracking problems, you might want to look at short RT's on LCC's to backtrack at a low cost without screwing up your RTW fare. There are lots of LCC's in Europe and Asia and even one operating out of Dubai now!

You can find clickable links to LCC's here: http://www.timeshareforums.com/links/airline-websites-9/




MichaelColey said:


> RTW = Round The World.  Sometime in the next few years, we plan on taking about 3 months and spending a week or two in each of about 6-10 places around the world.  Figuring out when 6-10 places is the tough part.  We'll be using OW150C awards through AA (already have most/all of the miles saved up), need to find a route of no more than 25k miles on OneWorld alliance partners where we're likely to find Fri/Sat flights (since we're going to try to do timeshares for most of the trip) with enough award seats available for all of us to places where we'll likely be able to find timeshare (or Hilton or Starwood or possibly Marriott or Hyatt) availability.  There are so many places we would like to go (New Zealand, Africa, Israel, Dubai, Phuket, Moscow, Europe, Hawaii, Maldives, Tokyo, etc.), but I know we can't do it all.


----------



## MichaelColey

Thanks for the advice!





Bourne said:


> Word of advice.
> 
> Keep the list as 6-10...i.e. flexible. The OW150C awards need hours with a rez agent. The only one that may be hard on your list is Maldives. You only have so many hops per continent without backtracking.


Right, that's the hard one, but I would really like to check out the Hilton resorts there - incredible award redemption value, as they normally go for $800-1000 per night.

The hardest part will probably be finding availability for 4 or 5 tickets.  We may have split into 2 and 3 and take separate flights for some.


Carolinian said:


> I would suggest St. Petersburg over Moscow. Both are interesting but St. Petersburg is more so. Also it has a timeshare and Moscow does not. ... Also, if you run into backtracking problems, you might want to look at short RT's on LCC's to backtrack at a low cost without screwing up your RTW fare.


Yeah, I'm torn between the two.  Tons of history in both.  St. Petersburg would be less out of the way, also.  I'm definitely considering LCCs for some side trips (like to Phuket), starting on one coast and ending on another (and doing the domestic flying on a separate ticket), and other options to maximize the use of my 25k OW150C miles.

Moderators: Sorry for the off topic posts.  If you want to split these RTW posts off to a separate thread, this is probably more appropriate for the TUG Lounge.


----------



## Mel

rickandcindy23 said:


> And now that Orange Lake decided that its own owners that don't pay for their points system will no longer get priority into the resorts (cannot even see much anymore), Orange Lake developers have hurt the OLCC owners, when before they said, "Oh, you can use your studio to trade into a bigger unit, because you pay the same MF's."


Where did you hear that?  Nothing has changed with regard to resort priority at Orange Lake - I own west village, and when I compared all my deposits this afternoon, I very clearly have priority into West Village.  I don't have priority into the other sections of the resort, but I never did.

My top trader sees over 4000 weeks available in the Orlado area, while my OLCC week sees 3000.  That top trader see about double the availability in East Village and North Village, 6 River Island week compared to that OLCC deposit.  But it only sees 278 West Village units, compared to 384 showing as available as an internal exchange.  That suggests that home resort priority is still intact.  Management might be able to pull it off at River Island, but I doubt it.  Availability may have gone down, because internal trades can now be handled in-house.  That's fine by me, because that drives RCI's supply down, which can only be good for my trade power.


----------



## ajmace

*Opinion and facts.....*

RCi.com down now - does it reopen 5am Monday in England?
I am looking forward to checking that I am still able to do the same exchanges as I was yesterday. This is my understanding of the assurance given by RCI that trading power remains the same. But you will now be able to see its actual value.

Am I right in thinking the new site should be open in England at 5 am on Monday November 15th? If so I'll get up early to see that everything is as promised!


----------



## crazyhorse

See my answer in the other "facts" thread.


----------



## ajmace

*Australian exchanges*

Talking of RCI's three division I could never understand why I get so few Australian exchanges offered to me.  I live in the Uk and get in excess of 100000 exchanges offered to me in North America, Africa, carribean and Europe. 

But when I try for Australia I get very few exchanges offered.  Can anyone else comment on their experience in chasing Australian exchanges.  Perhaps the new system will produce a dramatic improvement!!


----------



## Keep Traveling

I think the people that can combine weeks are going to get some very nice trades that they couldn't get before.

I only have two deposits but plan on snagging something really awesome...So the good stuff will go quick.

For example.  I don't think Manhattan Clubs will be available much anymore know that I can combine two crappers traders in to a super trader...Now just the cost of the combine to worry about.

I for one hope maybe the 1 in 4 rules are removed..>That would be nice...

KT


----------



## Carolinian

For many people, haing to combine m/f's will make that option illusory, especially when RCI pops a new fee for combining fees on members.  However, enough of it will probably happen that it will run knowledgable owners of better weeks straight to SFX.  That is who is getting one of my summer UK weeks now instead of RCI.  The other goes to DAE.



Keep Traveling said:


> I think the people that can combine weeks are going to get some very nice trades that they couldn't get before.
> 
> I only have two deposits but plan on snagging something really awesome...So the good stuff will go quick.
> 
> For example.  I don't think Manhattan Clubs will be available much anymore know that I can combine two crappers traders in to a super trader...Now just the cost of the combine to worry about.
> 
> I for one hope maybe the 1 in 4 rules are removed..>That would be nice...
> 
> KT


----------



## Carolinian

MichaelColey said:


> .
> Yeah, I'm torn between the two.  Tons of history in both.  St. Petersburg would be less out of the way, also.  I'm definitely considering LCCs for some side trips (like to Phuket), starting on one coast and ending on another (and doing the domestic flying on a separate ticket), and other options to maximize the use of my 25k OW150C miles.



A good day will let you see a good part of the major sights of Moscow. You might consider storing your luggage at the station in St. Petersburg, and taking a sleeper on the overnight Red Arrow train to Moscow, arriving in the early morning, spend the day in Moscow, then take the Red Arrow back the next night.  They have both 2 and 4 berth compartments, and if your number of passengers is not equal to one of those numbers, you can buy the extra space in the compartment and have it to yourself.


----------



## Carolinian

The fact is that the best way to find Australia exchanges is to look at a different exchange company - www.daelive.com  Even as a non-member, you can go online and look at the exchanges in Australia that are availible to you if you join.



ajmace said:


> Talking of RCI's three division I could never understand why I get so few Australian exchanges offered to me.  I live in the Uk and get in excess of 100000 exchanges offered to me in North America, Africa, carribean and Europe.
> 
> But when I try for Australia I get very few exchanges offered.  Can anyone else comment on their experience in chasing Australian exchanges.  Perhaps the new system will produce a dramatic improvement!!


----------



## MichaelColey

The posts I'm quoting and responding to are from the Facts thread, but since they're opinion I'm responding here in the Opinion thread.





Tommart said:


> I then watched the Points video. I'm not a Points member so I don't fully understand it. I watched 2-3 minutes of hype with no content on current changes. Then the video dedicated about 5 seconds to this weekend's change. *RCI will make it easier for Points members to search for Weeks units.*
> 
> If RCI is making it easier for Points members to select Weeks deposits, it concerns me if they do not make it easier for Weeks members to select Points deposits. This is a potential negative of this weekend's change.
> 
> Watch the Points Video on RCI.com. Do you have the same concern?


Nope, not concerned.  Points members have always had the ability to "raid weeks".  I'm in RCI Points as well, but I find it much more cost effective to use weeks for weeks rather than points for weeks.  I only use RCI Points for short stays and things I can't get in RCI Weeks.


Carolinian said:


> You are spot on with your observation as to the relationship between Points and Weeks. Right now, Points members have access to all Weeks inventory from non-Points resorts, but Weeks members have no access whatsoever to Points inventory unless RCI decides to toss some weeks into the mix. This one-sided arrangement is inherently unfair to Weeks and weeks to be made mutual - either each can access all of the other at a fair rate of exchange or there is a fire wall where each system can only trade within itself.


If you think it unfairly benefits RCI Points, then join RCI Points and it will benefit you.


----------



## Keep Traveling

I agree for the most part but sometimes is much easier and cheaper to use points.  I just booked a 4 bedroom in Egypt for 19,500 points. (raiding weeks).  The same resort in the weeks side required one of my strongest traders aroudn 130k to see.

Overseas - non-europe tend to have good deals in points, so the RTW mind be a good option for this.

KT


----------



## miamidan

Carolinian said:


> For many people, haing to combine m/f's will make that option illusory, especially when RCI pops a new fee for combining fees on members.  However, enough of it will probably happen that it will run knowledgable owners of better weeks straight to SFX.  That is who is getting one of my summer UK weeks now instead of RCI.  The other goes to DAE.



if owners of great weeks are getting high trade power and the ability to pull multiple weeks out of the system why would they run straight to another exchange company where they have no idea how they are valued?

You are absolutely correct combining weeks won't work for many.  I probably will not do it but, it is an option.  For most people knowledge and options are better than ignorance and no options.  I respect your opinion but, believe that there might be people strolling from other exchange companies to check out what they could do in a system that is transparent.

Of course I have been wrong before.


----------



## Carolinian

Most owners of prime weeks that I have known who trade bought prime weeks because that is the type of thing they wanted to trade for.  Since RCI got so involved in rentals, if those owners want a lesser week then the smart thing to do is not to slice and dice their prime week but to just pick up a cheap RCI rental.

As to other exchange companies, while the DAE system can seem like a bit of a grab bag, I have put in a combination of prime weeks and middling weeks and gotten back a combination of prime weeks and middling weeks.  Overall, I am happy.  With SFX, you DO have a pretty good handle on getting like for like for prime weeks as SFX does not take off season weeks nor fair to middling resorts nor destinations they have no demand for.  So it is all prime in and all prime out.  It is SFX and its system that I would expect to be the independent that will appeal most to prime week owners.




miamidan said:


> if owners of great weeks are getting high trade power and the ability to pull multiple weeks out of the system why would they run straight to another exchange company where they have no idea how they are valued?
> 
> You are absolutely correct combining weeks won't work for many.  I probably will not do it but, it is an option.  For most people knowledge and options are better than ignorance and no options.  I respect your opinion but, believe that there might be people strolling from other exchange companies to check out what they could do in a system that is transparent.
> 
> Of course I have been wrong before.


----------



## Carolinian

I have no use for RCI Points or any points system.  If I was at all interested in points, I would have probably bought Hapimag long ago.

It is not just that I ''think'' RCI Points is unfairly benefited by the fraudulent crossover grids established by RCI for raiding Weeks, I have in the past posted numerous specific examples.  Unfortunately, I cannot do that right now as the points book that I was given by a disgruntled RCI Points member who bailed out is thousands of miles away back in the states.




MichaelColey said:


> The posts I'm quoting and responding to are from the Facts thread, but since they're opinion I'm responding here in the Opinion thread.Nope, not concerned.  Points members have always had the ability to "raid weeks".  I'm in RCI Points as well, but I find it much more cost effective to use weeks for weeks rather than points for weeks.  I only use RCI Points for short stays and things I can't get in RCI Weeks.
> If you think it unfairly benefits RCI Points, then join RCI Points and it will benefit you.


----------



## miamidan

Carolinian said:


> Most owners of prime weeks that I have known who trade bought prime weeks because that is the type of thing they wanted to trade for.  Since RCI got so involved in rentals, if those owners want a lesser week then the smart thing to do is not to slice and dice their prime week but to just pick up a cheap RCI rental.
> 
> As to other exchange companies, while the DAE system can seem like a bit of a grab bag, I have put in a combination of prime weeks and middling weeks and gotten back a combination of prime weeks and middling weeks.  Overall, I am happy.  With SFX, you DO have a pretty good handle on getting like for like for prime weeks as SFX does not take off season weeks nor fair to middling resorts nor destinations they have no demand for.  So it is all prime in and all prime out.  It is SFX and its system that I would expect to be the independent that will appeal most to prime week owners.



on your advice i did go to DAE again to see if things had improved and in areas locally in the u.s where i want to go I found nothing that appealed to me.  SFX has been hit or miss with many people on this board some love them some hate them.  I have tried Interval and felt their system was too rigid thus I have stuck with RCI and have done alright in my book.  I am a prime week owner and based on what I assume will happen Monday won't be walking anywhere with my weeks except to RCI.


----------



## Mel

Carolinian said:


> Most owners of prime weeks that I have known who trade bought prime weeks because that is the type of thing they wanted to trade for.  Since RCI got so involved in rentals, if those owners want a lesser week then the smart thing to do is not to slice and dice their prime week but to just pick up a cheap RCI rental.
> 
> As to other exchange companies, while the DAE system can seem like a bit of a grab bag, I have put in a combination of prime weeks and middling weeks and gotten back a combination of prime weeks and middling weeks.  Overall, I am happy.  With SFX, you DO have a pretty good handle on getting like for like for prime weeks as SFX does not take off season weeks nor fair to middling resorts nor destinations they have no demand for.  So it is all prime in and all prime out.  It is SFX and its system that I would expect to be the independent that will appeal most to prime week owners.



Bit isn't what RCI is trying to do akin to what SFX does. only being a bit more open?  SFX only takes the better weeks, and does nothing for low-end owners.  Those low-end owners have no ability to trade through SFX.

RCI is shrpening their trading system, such that only the best of the best will trade directy for each other.  Where 20% of deposits might have qualified for anything in the top 20%, now it will be reduced to something like 5% qualifying for the top 5%.  That can only be good for those top 5%.  The remaining 15% (and ann other owners as well) will have the ability to exchange in too, but will have to make sacrifices. 

This is all about business - RCI wants to keep those top 5%, because they drive the system.  If those 5% leave RCi for SFX (or anyone else), the next 15% may leave with them because they want to exchange into those weeks.  That leaves RCI without its top end, and undermines the whole system.

If RCI retains the top 5%, and those weeks aren't available elsewhere, the next 15% will remain with RCI (again, because they will go where they can get the best trades), and that bolsters the whole system.

You argue that RCI must provide value to the owner of the low-end weeks, but they can't do that without the high end weeks.  If the top 20% depart than the next 20% become the "cream of the crop" within RCI, and they will end up complaining that that can't get equitable trades, as the current to 20% does now.  To maintaing a system where all members are relatively happy, RCI must provide value at both ends, and members must understand that owners of lesser weeks cannot expect a constant boost year after year.  They may pay the same maintenance fees (or more, depending on their resort) as the peak week owners, but whoever bought their week from the developer paid far less for what amounts to a restricted membership, while still owning an equal share of the underlying real estate.


----------



## Carolinian

Most of the best stuff I get at DAE is from requests rather than online, although I have found online and traded for Myrtle Beach 2BR July 4th, Hatteras Island 2BR July, Smugglers Notch 2BR June, Aquamarine Villas 1BR August, Poland beach July, and Croatia beach July.  The most recent DAE sightings I posted over at TS4MS were a 3BR week in Ireland in June 2011 and a week over Christmas 2011 in Tahiti.




miamidan said:


> on your advice i did go to DAE again to see if things had improved and in areas locally in the u.s where i want to go I found nothing that appealed to me.  SFX has been hit or miss with many people on this board some love them some hate them.  I have tried Interval and felt their system was too rigid thus I have stuck with RCI and have done alright in my book.  I am a prime week owner and based on what I assume will happen Monday won't be walking anywhere with my weeks except to RCI.


----------



## Carolinian

The fallacy in your argument is over how RCI provides value to the low end weeks.  You say it is by providing a ''boost'' or trade up year after year.  Not so.  Last minute inventory, with a short shelf life, if distressed and devalued inventory, regardless of what its value may once have been.  Reductions in price of such inventory is common in the leisure travel industry.  The 45 day window is not ''trades up'' but even trades.   If it will help you understand any better, remember that a last minute deposit is highly devalued.  Doesn't it make since that any remaining last minute inventory is similarly devalued?

RCI itself long promoted the 45 day window as offering value to low end weeks, and when developers pushed this in sales they were only parroting what RCI was doing itself in the promotional materials it provided.

Then there are the weeks in oversupply such as much of the year in overbuilt areas.  Again, this is not a trade up.  It is an even trade based on the realities of supply and demand in the market.  A low end week and many weeks in the overbuilt areas have similar supply demand characteristics, so they have an equivalent trade value.

Personally, I don't like the idea of genuine trades up that are substantially different in value, although the impossibility of accurately and fairly calculating value down to a small number point means that I do support the concept of trading within a range or band, one of the great flexibilities of the Weeks system as it has existed.  But the bottom line is that a 45 day window trade or a trade into weeks that are in oversupply by a low end week is simply not a trade up.




Mel said:


> Bit isn't what RCI is trying to do akin to what SFX does. only being a bit more open?  SFX only takes the better weeks, and does nothing for low-end owners.  Those low-end owners have no ability to trade through SFX.
> 
> RCI is shrpening their trading system, such that only the best of the best will trade directy for each other.  Where 20% of deposits might have qualified for anything in the top 20%, now it will be reduced to something like 5% qualifying for the top 5%.  That can only be good for those top 5%.  The remaining 15% (and ann other owners as well) will have the ability to exchange in too, but will have to make sacrifices.
> 
> This is all about business - RCI wants to keep those top 5%, because they drive the system.  If those 5% leave RCi for SFX (or anyone else), the next 15% may leave with them because they want to exchange into those weeks.  That leaves RCI without its top end, and undermines the whole system.
> 
> If RCI retains the top 5%, and those weeks aren't available elsewhere, the next 15% will remain with RCI (again, because they will go where they can get the best trades), and that bolsters the whole system.
> 
> You argue that RCI must provide value to the owner of the low-end weeks, but they can't do that without the high end weeks.  If the top 20% depart than the next 20% become the "cream of the crop" within RCI, and they will end up complaining that that can't get equitable trades, as the current to 20% does now.  To maintaing a system where all members are relatively happy, RCI must provide value at both ends, and members must understand that owners of lesser weeks cannot expect a constant boost year after year.  They may pay the same maintenance fees (or more, depending on their resort) as the peak week owners, but whoever bought their week from the developer paid far less for what amounts to a restricted membership, while still owning an equal share of the underlying real estate.


----------



## Mel

Carolinian said:


> The fallacy in your argument is over how RCI provides value to the low end weeks.  You say it is by providing a ''boost'' or trade up year after year.  Not so.  Last minute inventory, with a short shelf life, if distressed and devalued inventory, regardless of what its value may once have been.  Reductions in price of such inventory is common in the leisure travel industry.  The 45 day window is not ''trades up'' but even trades.   If it will help you understand any better, remember that a last minute deposit is highly devalued.  Doesn't it make since that any remaining last minute inventory is similarly devalued?


By a boost, I'm not talking about the 45 day out trades.  I'm talking about members expecting to get a small boost every time they trade - not large jumps at the last minute.

Further, there has been no indication that the 45-day window or something similar is going away.  


> RCI itself long promoted the 45 day window as offering value to low end weeks, and when developers pushed this in sales they were only parroting what RCI was doing itself in the promotional materials it provided.
> 
> Then there are the weeks in oversupply such as much of the year in overbuilt areas.  Again, this is not a trade up.  It is an even trade based on the realities of supply and demand in the market.  A low end week and many weeks in the overbuilt areas have similar supply demand characteristics, so they have an equivalent trade value.


On the one hand you say you want to preserve the value of the lowest of all weeks, but argue against maintaining any value to good weeks that are simply in oversupply.  But by definition those poor trading weeks are in oversupply as well.  A January week on the beach in New England is not of more demand, even compared to the supply,  than January in Orlando, Williamsburg, or Branson.


> Personally, I don't like the idea of genuine trades up that are substantially different in value, although the impossibility of accurately and fairly calculating value down to a small number point means that I do support the concept of trading within a range or band, one of the great flexibilities of the Weeks system as it has existed.  But the bottom line is that a 45 day window trade or a trade into weeks that are in oversupply by a low end week is simply not a trade up.


OK, so we all agree not to go the rout of a point range with 100 different values (though even points seems to go in increments of 500, so they might as well divide everything by 500 and just use those numbers - top weeks are somewhere in the range of 200,000 points so 400 different values. 

If details we have heard about the new system are accurate, we will be looking at a range of 5-60 points.  Even assuming something could somehow end up with 1 point, that 60 bands of values.  We have further been told that the majority of weeks should center about 20-25 points, allowing for spectacular weeks to get 60 and truly dismal weeks 5.  Given the vast range of available resorts and units, 56 bands doesn't seem unreasonable.  And further, given that the actual credits awarded will vary for each deposit, incremental trades up should still be no problem, at least for those willing to deposit 9 months out.  That "5" should qualify for anything 45 days out, but it should also qualify for a "10" even before that, if it is deposited well in advance.


----------



## Carolinian

The 45 day window has been dying a death of a thousand cuts ever since RCI started diverting much of it to rentals and to Points members (why aren't the Points people given last minute Points inventory instead of mooching off of Weeks?).  In recent years, RCI has been deleting mention of it instead of prominently pushing it as it did for years.  It is like slowly boiling the frog gradually raising the temperature so it will not figure out what is going on instead of dropping it in a pot of hot water to which it will react by jumping out.

56 bands is too nitpicking and no one can accurately nitpick the true exchange value of a timeshare to that narrow of a point. A reasonable number of bands would be much smaller in number.

Again, for comparision you want to point to January in Florida, which is NOT low season there.  I lived for a year on the Florida Gulf Coast, and there were a heck of a lot more tourists there in January than in a lot of other months of the year. So, as usual, you are comparing apples and oranges.  Hurricane season would be low season in Florida.

You want to base decisions are rumors but there are different flavors of the rumors out there.





Mel said:


> By a boost, I'm not talking about the 45 day out trades.  I'm talking about members expecting to get a small boost every time they trade - not large jumps at the last minute.
> 
> Further, there has been no indication that the 45-day window or something similar is going away.
> On the one hand you say you want to preserve the value of the lowest of all weeks, but argue against maintaining any value to good weeks that are simply in oversupply.  But by definition those poor trading weeks are in oversupply as well.  A January week on the beach in New England is not of more demand, even compared to the supply,  than January in Orlando, Williamsburg, or Branson.
> OK, so we all agree not to go the rout of a point range with 100 different values (though even points seems to go in increments of 500, so they might as well divide everything by 500 and just use those numbers - top weeks are somewhere in the range of 200,000 points so 400 different values.
> 
> If details we have heard about the new system are accurate, we will be looking at a range of 5-60 points.  Even assuming something could somehow end up with 1 point, that 60 bands of values.  We have further been told that the majority of weeks should center about 20-25 points, allowing for spectacular weeks to get 60 and truly dismal weeks 5.  Given the vast range of available resorts and units, 56 bands doesn't seem unreasonable.  And further, given that the actual credits awarded will vary for each deposit, incremental trades up should still be no problem, at least for those willing to deposit 9 months out.  That "5" should qualify for anything 45 days out, but it should also qualify for a "10" even before that, if it is deposited well in advance.


----------



## MichaelColey

Carolinian said:


> The 45 day window has been dying a death of a thousand cuts ever since RCI started diverting much of it to rentals and to Points members (why aren't the Points people given last minute Points inventory instead of mooching off of Weeks?).


Simply not true.  As I've pointed out before, there are always close to 1000 units that remain in RCI's inventory a week before check-in.  I would much rather see RCI rent those out or get rid of them in other ways that benefit them, than to see them go unused.

As for Points being able to raid Weeks and not the other way around, that's the way it's *supposed* to be.  Points is the system they're trying to get everyone to upgrade to, so it's supposed to have advantages that Weeks doesn't.  If they let Weeks owners raid points, why would anyone upgrade to Points?


----------



## Bourne

I'll even go out on a limb and make this bold statement. 

RCI Points will be bigger than II in terms of exchanges within two years. It is already the third largest and within 10% of II

Please remember, I am not saying RCI is better than II or RCI Points. All I am saying is that it will numerically be higher.


----------



## miamidan

Carolinian said:


> The 45 day window has been dying a death of a thousand cuts ever since RCI started diverting much of it to rentals and to Points members (why aren't the Points people given last minute Points inventory instead of mooching off of Weeks?).  In recent years, RCI has been deleting mention of it instead of prominently pushing it as it did for years.  It is like slowly boiling the frog gradually raising the temperature so it will not figure out what is going on instead of dropping it in a pot of hot water to which it will react by jumping out.
> 
> 56 bands is too nitpicking and no one can accurately nitpick the true exchange value of a timeshare to that narrow of a point. A reasonable number of bands would be much smaller in number.
> 
> Again, for comparision you want to point to January in Florida, which is NOT low season there.  I lived for a year on the Florida Gulf Coast, and there were a heck of a lot more tourists there in January than in a lot of other months of the year. So, as usual, you are comparing apples and oranges.  Hurricane season would be low season in Florida.
> 
> You want to base decisions are rumors but there are different flavors of the rumors out there.



Carol,

Thanks for that new viewpoint on RCI ponts and weeks it is really enlightening


----------



## Susan2

I have been reading these posts with a great deal of interest.  I have not posted on TUG in a long time, but I can't help putting my two cents in now.  I think that a very important point is being missed:  that is, RCI is finally making its rating system transparent.  

Those who know me at all know that I'm not a cheerleader for RCI.  Nevertheless, I have to applaud this new move, regardless of how it affects my personal trade power.   I also think that trade power is only one issue.  (Frankly, I expect that some people will be happier with their exchanges, some less happy, others more unhappy, and still others less unhappy.)  Again, IMO exchange value is only one issue.  

Only a little more than a year ago, when a few of us met with RCI bigwigs during the negotiations of the Weeks lawsuit, I specifically asked that RCI reveal its rating system -- at least to the extent that II has done for several years.  The response I got at that time led me to believe that it wasn't even a possibility.  And yet look what a mere year has brought!

As I see it, defining and revealing the actual exchange power on a basis that can be compared with other resorts will make it far harder for unscrupulous timeshare salespeople to pawn off a poor week (e.g., week 40 in Orlando) by representing to a naive purchaser that it can be exchanged for any other red week.  

I would estimate that misrepresentation of trading power has consistently been a major (if not *the *major) source of source of dissatisfaction with timeshares by the average consumer (although not your average TUG member).  It has also hurt the entire timeshare industry, by giving the average non-timeshare-owner a negative view of the industry, since they hear mostly from dissatisfied owners.  While these misrepresentations have not been made by RCI, IMO RCI has allowed itself to be used to aid these unscrupulous salespeople, some of whom may be honestly ignorant, but many of whom are willfully ignornant at best.  One of the settlement provisions of the suit, in fact, was that RCI would make some effort toward policing some of these misrepresentations.     

I suspect that had RCI tried to re-designate Orlando in fall as "white" time, there would have been a HUGE outcry (we're talking deafening), both from owners and resorts.  Yet, those of use who are savvy timeshare owners (and that includes virtually everyone on TUG) knows that fall in Orlando (and most, if not all of Florida) is off-season.  

I won't know how the changes will affect my exchanges until the website re-opens, and I am jaundiced enough to suspect that exchanges will look better immediately after the new system is implemented than they will six months or a year from now.  Even so, I am positively tickled about the comparative numerical ratings being assigned deposits.  I see this a a bright light being focused on an area that has been kept in the dark for far too long.  I foresee some big changes in the industry, most of which are long overdue.


----------



## Carolinian

The total number of units, especially at this time of year is meaningless.  The number that matters is the prime or at least middling weeks left.  One would have to do some detailed analysis to come up with those numbers, but those I know who have owned off season for the 45 day trades are giving up on it because the quality of weeks is no longer what it used to be.  RCI is renting them to the general public or opening them up to a lot more people so they get gone.  The fellow owner who nominated me from the floor the first time I was elected to my HOA board owned 5 blue weeks at our resort and a total of 6 at other OBX resorts, all for 45 day trading.  He owned a wholeownership condo on the OBX that he stayed in when he came to the OBX, and the timeshares were just for trading.  He got rid of all of them a few years ago because he could see that the availibility in the 45 day window had gone to the dogs.  He is far from the only person I know who owned low season primarily for the 45 day window who has given up on it.

For many of us who do not like the concept of points, no points system is an ''upgrade''.  To the contrary it is a downgrade.  Stealing our system's inventory through raiding to try to force us into a system we do not want is what in consumer protection law is calling an ''unfair or deceptive business practice''.  There was an excellent article a year or two ago in _Timesharing Today_ about points that mentioned that the RCI points conversion brokers hit a stonewall at most resort after converting a certain percentage as most owners simply had no use for it.  



MichaelColey said:


> Simply not true.  As I've pointed out before, there are always close to 1000 units that remain in RCI's inventory a week before check-in.  I would much rather see RCI rent those out or get rid of them in other ways that benefit them, than to see them go unused.
> 
> As for Points being able to raid Weeks and not the other way around, that's the way it's *supposed* to be.  Points is the system they're trying to get everyone to upgrade to, so it's supposed to have advantages that Weeks doesn't.  If they let Weeks owners raid points, why would anyone upgrade to Points?


----------



## miamidan

Carolinian said:


> The total number of units, especially at this time of year is meaningless.  The number that matters is the prime or at least middling weeks left.  One would have to do some detailed analysis to come up with those numbers, but those I know who have owned off season for the 45 day trades are giving up on it because the quality of weeks is no longer what it used to be.  RCI is renting them to the general public or opening them up to a lot more people so they get gone.  The fellow owner who nominated me from the floor the first time I was elected to my HOA board owned 5 blue weeks at our resort and a total of 6 at other OBX resorts, all for 45 day trading.  He owned a wholeownership condo on the OBX that he stayed in when he came to the OBX, and the timeshares were just for trading.  He got rid of all of them a few years ago because he could see that the availibility in the 45 day window had gone to the dogs.  He is far from the only person I know who owned low season primarily for the 45 day window who has given up on it.
> 
> For many of us who do not like the concept of points, no points system is an ''upgrade''.  To the contrary it is a downgrade.  Stealing our system's inventory through raiding to try to force us into a system we do not want is what in consumer protection law is calling an ''unfair or deceptive business practice''.  There was an excellent article a year or two ago in _Timesharing Today_ about points that mentioned that the RCI points conversion brokers hit a stonewall at most resort after converting a certain percentage as most owners simply had no use for it.




I think it is proven pointless to have our own opinions/thoughts/theories as Carolinian can prove them all wrong through vague analysis, referrals to old publications stories and the memorable bootleg.

just remember all things RCI does is bad, take all weeks to alt exchange companies then we won't have these arguments!


----------



## sandkastle4966

sincerely hoping for a new thread to restart  FACTS.   I appreciate all the work the moderators do on these boards - I wish we could keep to their designations - there are few FACTS in this thread - but a whole lot of OPINIONs and the usual RCI bashing from the same posters.   FACT - there are other options.

Once the system is back online,  I anticipate login issues, system overload, etc.  Looking forwards to hearing FACTS tomorrow/tonite from those that are fortunate enough to get into the system.


----------



## Transit

My opinion of the situation is if my units get good trade values I hang in with RCI if not i'll move them back to II.


----------



## Carolinian

IMHO RCI has muddied the water by continuing to use an outdated color coded season chart that often does not match supply / demand reality.  Supplementing this with a realistic availibility chart as they have done in Europe solves the problem.  Simply expanding that to all resort areas would be a much simpler way to solve the problem.  That way people understand, for example, that even though the Canaries, and especially Tenerife, are ''red all year'' due to the excess supply, they are easy trades.  An owner there then ought to thus understand why he cannot trade a Canary Islands week for London.

Of course, the new regime would not be as onerous if they keep the flexibility of trading within bands or ranges, avoiding an exact number system for the actual trading system, and do not monkey around with values.  If the dramatic swings in trade availibility that some have seen in the last week or so is any indication, then there is a high liklihood of value manipulations, and if so the bad will far outweigh the good overall on the new regime.  Even so, some people may see their own specific circumstances as improved.

One other warning sign is that so many people with connections to the overbuilt areas have gone ga-ga over this system.  At least some of them seem to have seen some numbers.  Given the longstanding chip of the shoulder of many in the overbuilt areas about the ability of blue weeks anywhere to trade in much of the year to their areas, it would seem that these people must be anticipating a manipulation of those numbers for them  to be so gung-ho for this new system.

I guess we will see shortly.




Susan2 said:


> I have been reading these posts with a great deal of interest.  I have not posted on TUG in a long time, but I can't help putting my two cents in now.  I think that a very important point is being missed:  that is, RCI is finally making its rating system transparent.
> 
> Those who know me at all know that I'm not a cheerleader for RCI.  Nevertheless, I have to applaud this new move, regardless of how it affects my personal trade power.   I also think that trade power is only one issue.  (Frankly, I expect that some people will be happier with their exchanges, some less happy, others more unhappy, and still others less unhappy.)  Again, IMO exchange value is only one issue.
> 
> Only a little more than a year ago, when a few of us met with RCI bigwigs during the negotiations of the Weeks lawsuit, I specifically asked that RCI reveal its rating system -- at least to the extent that II has done for several years.  The response I got at that time led me to believe that it wasn't even a possibility.  And yet look what a mere year has brought!
> 
> As I see it, defining and revealing the actual exchange power on a basis that can be compared with other resorts will make it far harder for unscrupulous timeshare salespeople to pawn off a poor week (e.g., week 40 in Orlando) by representing to a naive purchaser that it can be exchanged for any other red week.
> 
> I would estimate that misrepresentation of trading power has consistently been a major (if not *the *major) source of source of dissatisfaction with timeshares by the average consumer (although not your average TUG member).  It has also hurt the entire timeshare industry, by giving the average non-timeshare-owner a negative view of the industry, since they hear mostly from dissatisfied owners.  While these misrepresentations have not been made by RCI, IMO RCI has allowed itself to be used to aid these unscrupulous salespeople, some of whom may be honestly ignorant, but many of whom are willfully ignornant at best.  One of the settlement provisions of the suit, in fact, was that RCI would make some effort toward policing some of these misrepresentations.
> 
> I suspect that had RCI tried to re-designate Orlando in fall as "white" time, there would have been a HUGE outcry (we're talking deafening), both from owners and resorts.  Yet, those of use who are savvy timeshare owners (and that includes virtually everyone on TUG) knows that fall in Orlando (and most, if not all of Florida) is off-season.
> 
> I won't know how the changes will affect my exchanges until the website re-opens, and I am jaundiced enough to suspect that exchanges will look better immediately after the new system is implemented than they will six months or a year from now.  Even so, I am positively tickled about the comparative numerical ratings being assigned deposits.  I see this a a bright light being focused on an area that has been kept in the dark for far too long.  I foresee some big changes in the industry, most of which are long overdue.


----------



## Mel

Carolinian said:


> The 45 day window has been dying a death of a thousand cuts ever since RCI started diverting much of it to rentals and to Points members (why aren't the Points people given last minute Points inventory instead of mooching off of Weeks?).  In recent years, RCI has been deleting mention of it instead of prominently pushing it as it did for years.  It is like slowly boiling the frog gradually raising the temperature so it will not figure out what is going on instead of dropping it in a pot of hot water to which it will react by jumping out.


As Michael has pointed out, the 45 day window is alive and kicking - there is plenty of fodder at 45 days out, not as much 30 days out.  Maybe more people (not just Points members either) using those 45 day exchanges.  Perhaps part of the problem is that it is now visible to anyone wanting a look.  I have seen some real gems during the 45 day window, and wished I could use them - but they disappear as quickly as the appear.  The blue week owners that want them need to search and the wee hours at the 45 day mark, as others have learned to do.

And yes, RCI points members have access to them, just like weeks members.  RCI doesn't discount points deposits - ever - but they also don't discount a "late" deposit, because there is no such thing.  RCI points is a zero sum program.  

Consider the corrolary - a weeks deposit from a resort that is part of the points program, but still has many weeks members.  A points member can only get that exchange by paying the full point value, no matter when the exchange is made, even 2 weeks out.  A weeks member, on the other hand, might need a powerful week to grab it a year out, but less later, and can exchange anything for it at the 45 day window.

While it was a benefit given to RCI Points members, it is also slowly eroded as more resorts have even one member join points.  If a resort wants to block RCI points members from "raiding" the weeks side, all they need do is have at least one member convert to points.  I'm sure most resorts can find one person willing to do so, if it doesn't cost $3000.  Of course, it might be a moot point after this weekend.


> 56 bands is too nitpicking and no one can accurately nitpick the true exchange value of a timeshare to that narrow of a point. A reasonable number of bands would be much smaller in number.


Why is 56 bands too many?  The smaller the number of bands, the larger the pool of weeks that is considered equivalent.  While that sounds great, it hurts those at the top of their bands.  Why deposit that top unit, when you have no chance whatsoever of trading back into something you consider equivalent, because the number of people vying for such weeks is 20 times the number depositeing them?  With a smaller number of bands, it's no wonder people see little difference when they split their lock-off units - the 2BR unit that was at the top of its band splits into a 1BR at the bottom of the same band, and a studio the band below.  Who wouldn't split their units?
If anything 56 bands might not be enough!


> Again, for comparision you want to point to January in Florida, which is NOT low season there.  I lived for a year on the Florida Gulf Coast, and there were a heck of a lot more tourists there in January than in a lot of other months of the year. So, as usual, you are comparing apples and oranges.  Hurricane season would be low season in Florida.


Again, you fail to read what I wrote.  January in ORLANDO, not for Florida in general.  January is about as low season as you can get in Orlando, which is the area you insist is overbuilt.  Hurricane season in Orlando is actually quite popular, since few hurricanes reach the area, the weather is still nice enough to swim, and there are special activies.  As you say, on the Gulf Coast January is very popular because of the Snow Birds.


> You want to base decisions are rumors but there are different flavors of the rumors out there.


And who says your rumors are better than mine?  At least I state which rumors I base my assumptions on.  

OK, you don't like RCI, probably never will.  But we can't go back to the way things were 20 years ago, and I doubt most people would want to.  Many of these changes are things RCI members have asked for over the last 10-20 years.  It might not be what you want as an individual, but you do have the choice to look elsewhere for your exchanges.


----------



## crazyhorse

Susan2 said:


> _Only a little more than a year ago, when a few of us met with RCI bigwigs during the negotiations of the Weeks lawsuit, I specifically asked that RCI reveal its rating system -- at least to the extent that II has done for several years.  The response I got at that time led me to believe that it wasn't even a possibility.  And yet look what a mere year has brought!
> 
> As I see it, defining and revealing the actual exchange power on a basis that can be compared with other resorts will make it far harder for unscrupulous timeshare salespeople to pawn off a poor week (e.g., week 40 in Orlando) by representing to a naive purchaser that it can be exchanged for any other red week.  _
> 
> I have to agree with you Susan, and I remember how much effort people like yourself made in order to take RCI to task regarding the way they ran their business.
> 
> The court result was not quite what we wanted at the time.
> 
> But the negative publicity alone and any trend in lost earnings _*may*_ have pushed RCI into providing a fairer deal to its Weeks Members. :whoopie:
> 
> Which is what we all want!


----------



## "Roger"

sandkastle4966 said:


> sincerely hoping for a new thread to restart  FACTS.   I appreciate all the work the moderators do on these boards - I wish we could keep to their designations - there are few FACTS in this thread - but a whole lot of OPINIONs and the usual RCI bashing from the same posters.   FACT - there are other options.


I feel your pain.  The whole idea of a fact thread was to avoid what happened when Marriott rolled out its new program - people who just wanted to know the facts about the program were faced with ten or twelve pages of discussion to wade through. The idea of having a fact only thread, however, was denounced by one poster as putting a straightjacket on discussion (even though a separate thread was to be made available for discussion). In other words, he felt that opinions needed to be interjected and now we do not have a fact only thread.

The only solution I can think of is to have the moderators create a locked thread in which they post the details as announced and short summaries of any answers to questions that have been discovered.  I can guarantee,  however, that if they do this, they will be declared as exercising a pro-RCI bias.


----------



## "Roger"

Susan2 said:


> ......I would estimate that misrepresentation of trading power has consistently been a major (if not *the *major) source of source of dissatisfaction with timeshares by the average consumer (although not your average TUG member).  It has also hurt the entire timeshare industry, by giving the average non-timeshare-owner a negative view of the industry, since they hear mostly from dissatisfied owners.  While these misrepresentations have not been made by RCI, IMO RCI has allowed itself to be used to aid these unscrupulous salespeople, some of whom may be honestly ignorant, but many of whom are willfully ignornant at best.  One of the settlement provisions of the suit, in fact, was that RCI would make some effort toward policing some of these misrepresentations.     ...I see this a a bright light being focused on an area that has been kept in the dark for far too long.  I foresee some big changes in the industry, most of which are long overdue.


Hear, hear. (I would put the little cheerleading emoticon in, but, as a male poster, it makes me uncomfortable.)

What I would like to see next is pressure on all of the other exchange companies to reveal their trade power ratings, plus automatic dual affiliation.  At that point, people could look around and decide which exchange company best fits their interest and needs, and, offers the most for their own units.  Then, supply and demand would truly be in force (as opposed to a newspeak version of supply and demand that works with hidden prices and everything counts as one).

[For the record: My wishing for a truly open market has led me to be labled as nothing but an RCI cheerleader.  Strange.]


----------



## JudyS

"Roger" said:


> ... The whole idea of a fact thread was to avoid what happened when Marriott rolled out its new program - people who just wanted to know the facts about the program were faced with ten or twelve pages of discussion to wade through. ....
> The only solution I can think of is to have the moderators create a locked thread in which they post the details as announced and short summaries of any answers to questions that have been discovered. ....


I like Roger's suggestion -- a locked thread with a summary of what is known about the new system, as it rolls out tomorrow.  The Fact thread here on TUG is getting full of opinions!  (I have to confess, I just responded to someone's opinions on the Fact thread. I have no self-discipline, I guess.)


----------



## DeniseM

"Roger" said:


> The only solution I can think of is to have the moderators create a locked thread in which they post the details as announced and short summaries of any answers to questions that have been discovered.



I agree - I would appreciate some input on what should be in the thread, but not until we have the facts.  That's exactly what we did on the Starwood forum, when they rolled out their new II program, but I will need help with RCI, since I don't have an RCI Acct. myself.

Thanks!


----------



## crazyhorse

*So you want some stuff.

You go into Ric`s Store, and he has quite a lot of stuff on his shelves.

You see what you would like but you only have 26 tokens and the good stuff costs 30.

So you buy something worth only 24 tokens (you can only buy less than your tokens are worth), and get 2 tokens in change. You also have to pay Ric a fee for him keeping the stuff in his store and letting you have it.

You see what is available for thos 2 tokens. Pretty much nothing.Except that tatty looking left over out of date stuff. Anyway Ric insists you still have to pay a big fee for getting that anyway.

So you pass on that one.

Ric lets you put your left over 2 with your other 24 tokens which you have at home. He charges another fee for this but you now have 26 tokens. 
Brilliant!

I can now get something from the shelf a little higher up, and do so. Great but I still have to pay Ric`s extra fee.

I come out of the shop a happy bunny, but I start to puzzle over what it has cost me and what it cost me last year for the same stuff. Inflation I guess.

I had a quick peep in the window of DAve`s shop next door. It`s a bit small and there doesn`t seem to be much on his shelves. A friend told me though that its a straight swap for tokens. Everything on the shelves cost the same amount. There is no change left over. He doesn`t accept Ric`s counters though, and has his own.

A little bird also told me that DAvE has some more stuff in his back room, costs more but apparantly its half decent.

Perhaps next time?*


----------



## JudyS

*$25 =1 cent (i.e., $25/point is OK for RCI Weeks, like $.01/point is OK for Points)*

It seems to me that one of the biggest questions with the new RCI Weeks system is "How much should one pay in MFs per Exchange Point?"  With RCI Points, the going wisdom here on on TUG has been than 1 cent per RCI Point in annual fees is an OK deal -- not a stellar deal, but a decent deal for a week that can be purchased without too much hassle and expense. 

I propose that the corresponding value for RCI Weeks is $25 per Exchange Point. My reasoning is that most timeshare weeks receive 20 points or less, and many timeshares these days have MFs of $600 or more. So, the typical timeshare owner (non-Tugger) will probably be paying $30 - $50 per Exchange Point. But TUG members know to shop around, and should be able to find timeshares with fees around $25 a point.

There are definitely a number of timeshares with fees in the $20 per point ramge, but they are harder to find. So, $20 per Exchange Point is equivalent to spending around .8 cents per RCI Point. 

Below $20 a point, things start getting tougher. One can fairly easily buy floating SoCal weeks with MFs of about $16 per point (my Aquamarine Villas qualifies) but then one has to compete with other owners to reserve a summer week. (Plus, if you buy anAquamarine Villas week off eBay, you'll likely get stuck with off-season weeks for the first two years, because you've missed the summer booking window for those years.)

There are some SoCal weeks that have even better ratios (my Winners Circle Week 27 1-bedroom is $14 a point), but they are generally expensive to buy.

Christmas Mountain Village UDIs are maybe around $12 a point, but they are both hard to buy and and extra work to use. 

There doesn't seem to be much correspondence between Exchange Point values and RCI Points values, but *on average*, an RCI Exchange Point is worth maybe 2000 - 3000 RCI Points. So, if you're willing to spend 1 cent per RCI Point, that's $20 - $30 per RCI Weeks Exchange Points. This also fits the $25 price point. 

As for folks who own weeks that cost (much) more than $25 per exchange point, you really haven't lost anything with the new system, because RCI already wasn't giving you good value for your deposits. At least now you *know* you aren't getting good value. The best approach may be to trade in a different exchange company.


----------



## JudyS

Update -- on another thread, a Wyndham owner said that their 28k Wyndham point (blue studio) Wyndham visible deposit was worth 15 Exchange Points. If all Wyndham blue studios are worth that much, Wyndham points may be one of the best deals out there for inexpensive Exchange Points.


----------



## Carolinian

Again, using clever time periods - 45 days out from winter season, like January in Orlando compared to January in Cape Cod - are easy to see through.

The blue week owners used to see a lot more of those gems before RCI opened the flood gates so that they have to compete with everyone and his brother.  That is why they are losing interest big time in the value of the 45 days window.  The new exchange regime will mean even more people competing with them for those gems.  The one real advantage to owning a blue week is gone.  

I was never into the 45 day window personally, but many of the blue week owners I know who exchange are.  For myself, I bought a blue week as my second timeshare because there were blue season times I was interested in going to Europe but did not want to waste my summer holiday red week in trading for them if I could help it.  After getting more timeshare knowledge, I learned that a SA week was better for that purpose and got rid of my blue week.

The key for the stability of resorts is that the offseason weeks are the weak link in the resort financial structure.  Anything that makes them less viable therefore attacks resort viaibility.  My years as an HOA board member make me always consider that aspect of things, and I think it is something that many Tuggers, looking only at their own trades, overlook.  If the financial props are kicked out from under our resorts, however, it will impact all of us in higher m/f's.




Mel said:


> As Michael has pointed out, the 45 day window is alive and kicking - there is plenty of fodder at 45 days out, not as much 30 days out.  Maybe more people (not just Points members either) using those 45 day exchanges.  Perhaps part of the problem is that it is now visible to anyone wanting a look.  I have seen some real gems during the 45 day window, and wished I could use them - but they disappear as quickly as the appear.  The blue week owners that want them need to search and the wee hours at the 45 day mark, as others have learned to do.
> 
> And yes, RCI points members have access to them, just like weeks members.  RCI doesn't discount points deposits - ever - but they also don't discount a "late" deposit, because there is no such thing.  RCI points is a zero sum program.
> 
> Consider the corrolary - a weeks deposit from a resort that is part of the points program, but still has many weeks members.  A points member can only get that exchange by paying the full point value, no matter when the exchange is made, even 2 weeks out.  A weeks member, on the other hand, might need a powerful week to grab it a year out, but less later, and can exchange anything for it at the 45 day window.
> 
> While it was a benefit given to RCI Points members, it is also slowly eroded as more resorts have even one member join points.  If a resort wants to block RCI points members from "raiding" the weeks side, all they need do is have at least one member convert to points.  I'm sure most resorts can find one person willing to do so, if it doesn't cost $3000.  Of course, it might be a moot point after this weekend.
> 
> Why is 56 bands too many?  The smaller the number of bands, the larger the pool of weeks that is considered equivalent.  While that sounds great, it hurts those at the top of their bands.  Why deposit that top unit, when you have no chance whatsoever of trading back into something you consider equivalent, because the number of people vying for such weeks is 20 times the number depositeing them?  With a smaller number of bands, it's no wonder people see little difference when they split their lock-off units - the 2BR unit that was at the top of its band splits into a 1BR at the bottom of the same band, and a studio the band below.  Who wouldn't split their units?
> If anything 56 bands might not be enough!
> Again, you fail to read what I wrote.  January in ORLANDO, not for Florida in general.  January is about as low season as you can get in Orlando, which is the area you insist is overbuilt.  Hurricane season in Orlando is actually quite popular, since few hurricanes reach the area, the weather is still nice enough to swim, and there are special activies.  As you say, on the Gulf Coast January is very popular because of the Snow Birds.
> And who says your rumors are better than mine?  At least I state which rumors I base my assumptions on.
> 
> OK, you don't like RCI, probably never will.  But we can't go back to the way things were 20 years ago, and I doubt most people would want to.  Many of these changes are things RCI members have asked for over the last 10-20 years.  It might not be what you want as an individual, but you do have the choice to look elsewhere for your exchanges.


----------



## crazyhorse

There are in my opinion now too many threads discussing the same new RCI weeks program.

The threads are getting in a tangle.

Moderator: Could we have them tidied up please?


----------



## Bourne

Oh there are better deals out there. 

A 4067 swiss army knife that I own comes under 11. The other one is a shade under 7.


----------



## Tommart

*Makes Sense*

JudyS,

I appreciate your calculation, it makes sense to me, and I will use it. 

It's good when MF/trade value = $25 or less.

If exchanging is important, your calculation shows the value of buying prime weeks.

For example, a one-bedroom locked unit in August (week 31) at Woodstone has a $540/2 = $270 annual maintenance fee and has 14 trading value (excluding any early deposit extra credit).  This is $270/14 = $19.21/point.  A good value by your calculation.

The same unit off season has a 4 trading value, but the same MF.  This is $270/4 = $67.50/point.

In my opinion, RCI's new system will increase the demand and purchase price of prime weeks, and lessen the demand (and value) for non-prime weeks.    

The shortcoming of your calculation is that it assumes that people buy mainly to exchange.  Some will be perfectly happy with buying an off-season week at Woodstone for $1, and use the week most years--a $270 vacation.


----------



## sandkastle4966

on the wyn deposit -

It was a visible deposit, the cost "28k" -  I THINK it was an upgraded deposit (on the VIP levels you get upgrades on your off season visibles) - so figure 66-70k "worth".  That is equiv to what I am seeing on my white season Wyn fixed week.

The generics are still trading exactly the same under the old system - no trade value is assigned.  The VC said maybe by 12/31 they will be visible.

Previous posters have said that there have been no visibles avail at all in the past months......with VCs saying none - as they will all be visible "soon".


----------



## Stricky

Well the site is working. After the last update/crash mess I was pleased to even get in. Everything seems to work so far. I opened my search to see everything and was surprised how little is out there. Looking at Disney or the Caribean and there is very little inventory. I think the sightings board is going to be a busy place now.


----------



## JudyS

Tommart said:


> I appreciate your calculation, it makes sense to me, and I will use it....The shortcoming of your calculation is that it assumes that people buy mainly to exchange.  Some will be perfectly happy with buying an off-season week at Woodstone for $1, and use the week most years--a $270 vacation.


Thanks!  Glad you like my analysis!

Definitely, my proposed "$25 per point" applies only when buying to exchange. For that matter, it applies only to exchanging in RCI Weeks. Some resorts trade much better in other systems.


----------



## Tommart

*Second Impressions*

Here's my opinions:

I like the new Weeks system.  Glad I see my trading value.

I'm a little disappointed in having a trading value of 14 for each of my locked units.  Trying to convince myself that each of my weeks is really valued at 28.  Still, I don't have the tigers that many have., e.g. greater than 30.

Also JudyS's value calculation using MF/trading value shows that my Woodstone weeks have a good trading value of around $20.  That makes me feel better.

For most weeks at Woodstone, there's only a 2 point difference between one-bedroom and two-bedroom units.  Seems to be too little of a difference.

The holiday weeks have the greatest trading value--even Christmas and spring break.  Makes sense.  I wish I realized this when I bought my weeks.

Massanutten has many different units.  For example, Regal Vistas and Woodstone are newer and larger than Eagle Trace.  Even Woodstone has deluxe and luxury 2-bedroom units with different purchase price and MFs.  In the summer all have the same trading value.  Does not seem right.  There is a slight difference offseason and for holiday weeks.  For example, Woodstone one-bedroom is 4 offseason, and Eagle Trace is 3.

Likewise, there's some smaller Timeshares in the Virginia mountains that are not as nice as Massanutten, have far less activities, and are not Gold Crown.  In the summer they have similar trading values.  Doesn't seem right to me. I thought "Gold Crown" gave extra trading value.

I got 2 extra points/unit (16 rather than 14) for depositing 9 months early.  Doesn't seem worth it to pay my MF 7 months early to get 2 extra points/unit (4 points total).

Note.  Right now, I can't get back into RCI.COM.  I guess there's a flood of activity world-wide checking out the new system.


----------



## JudyS

Tommart said:


> ...For most weeks at Woodstone, there's only a 2 point difference between one-bedroom and two-bedroom units.  Seems to be too little of a difference...
> Massanutten has many different units.  For example, Regal Vistas and Woodstone are newer and larger than Eagle Trace.  Even Woodstone has deluxe and luxury 2-bedroom units with different purchase price and MFs.  In the summer all have the same trading value.  Does not seem right.  There is a slight difference offseason and for holiday weeks.  For example, Woodstone one-bedroom is 4 offseason, and Eagle Trace is 3.
> 
> Likewise, there's some smaller Timeshares in the Virginia mountains that are not as nice as Massanutten, have far less activities, and are not Gold Crown.  In the summer they have similar trading values.  Doesn't seem right to me. I thought "Gold Crown" gave extra trading value....


Unfortunately, "Gold Crown gives extra trading value" is just a lie TS salesmen say. 

It has been noted before on TUG that RCI seems to care little about unit size and resort quality. This new data bears that out. But, the differences  in trading power between 1-bdrm and 2-bdrm units are even smaller than I would have expected.

Tommart, can you trade your units in SFX or II?  That might be the best approach.


----------



## Tommart

JudyS said:


> Unfortunately, "Gold Crown gives extra trading value" is just a lie TS salesmen say.
> 
> It has been noted before on TUG that RCI seems to care little about unit size and resort quality. This new data bears that out. But, the differences  in trading power between 1-bdrm and 2-bdrm units are even smaller than I would have expected.
> 
> Tommart, can you trade your units in SFX or II?  That might be the best approach.



Judy,
I recognize that it's supply and demand that's driving things, and not newness of the unit, size, or ratings.

Most people come the first time to Massanutten because of the resort and do not know there's a difference between Eagle Trace and Woodstone.  So, both units are easy for RCI to unload during the summer.

Massanutten is overbuilt and that also depresses the exchange value.  The other Virginia mountain resorts are not overbuilt.

One of the six Massanutten HOAs broke away and trades with both RCI and II (Mountainside Villas), but I do not believe Woodstone can use II.  I have never looked into SFX. I will.

Still, I am relatively pleased with RCI--especially the new system.  I'm probably most bothered by their $179 exchange fee.  I pay a $270 MF and then must pay another $179 to exchange (not counting the annual RCI fee.) I'm also bothered that RCI Points members can take our Weeks, but we can't exchange for theirs.  

Tom


----------



## Laurie

At first blush, I like it a lot!

I don't *love* trade values of all my weeks, but don't really dislike any, and I do like one pretty well. 

I'm most surprised to see that some of my past trades, which seemed at least like-for-like if not better, have actually been trades "down" in terms of values - and a few, way down - so in the future if I make similar ones I'll have some spare change - which later on can hopefully use for some of those resorts that in the past year became impossible for me, like MC - or even some 2-for-1's.

There's still a lot I dislike in RCI, especially the theft of so many banked prime weeks for their rental pool within days of deposit. We'll see how it all shakes out...

Edited to add:
With more looking, I like it less. I can see that a specific recent exchange I made would now be out of my reach without combining. 

So they lied when they said trade power isn't changing. What else is new?


----------



## MichaelColey

JudyS said:


> Unfortunately, "Gold Crown gives extra trading value" is just a lie TS salesmen say.


Unfortunately, or fortunately?  I like that it appears to be based on supply and demand rather than rating and week color.  For one resort I looked at, where Red and Blue weeks are adjacent (during a time where I have a hard time seeing why the Red ones should be Red), the adjacent weeks (one Red, one Blue) both get the same trading value.


----------



## MichaelColey

I'm very satisfied at first glance, too.  There are a couple negatives, but the positives far outweigh them to me.


----------



## JudyS

JudyS said:


> Unfortunately, "Gold Crown gives extra trading value" is just a lie TS salesmen say...





MichaelColey said:


> Unfortunately, or fortunately?  I like that it appears to be based on supply and demand rather than rating and week color....


I wasn't clear. I meant that it's unfortunate that salespeople lie about the value of Gold Crown rating. It's not necessarily unfortunate that RCI values supply and demand rather than unit size and resort quality. As it stands, one of the big exchange companies (RCI) cares a lot about supply & demand, while the other (II) cares a lot about quality and unit size.  Having both sorts of exchange systems could give owners valuable flexibility -- if only more resorts were dual-affiliated, or more timeshare salespeople were honest about how well their resorts trade in each system.


----------



## JudyS

MichaelColey said:


> I'm very satisfied at first glance, too.  There are a couple negatives, but the positives far outweigh them to me.


I'm ecstatic! I've found new strategies for some weeks I thought were worthless. I have two weeks sitting on the bargain board, with no one taking them, that now turn out to be very good deals! 

The problem is, I can't tear myself away to get any sleep!  (I've been up since 1 am.)


----------



## Beaglemom3

I called and spoke with Laura, a very nice & informative guide.

For $99 I rolled up 3 weak weeks and ended up with 47 points and can see a whole lot of things that I couldn't before like DVC-Boardwalk and NYC Manhattan Club (although there was the 1-4 rule reminder). I could not see these before unless all the tumblers in the universe lined up during the blue moon.

Also, two of these weeks were expiring and now all 3 have a 2 year window (from today's date) to search with.  Good thing I didn't pay to have them extended as I had planned to. There's something to be said for procrastination.  

This works for me as I now can have 1 or (maybe) 2 quality trades instead of 3 marginal trades.

Works for me !


----------



## elaine

*I do not like it*

I like being able to see what your week is worth and what you need to trade, but I do not think it is fair that dog weeks can be rolled up for $99 and then compete against a top week for the same pool of inventory.  I have one of those (semi) top weeks (38 points). Looking at the overall values, 38 points for a 3 BR GC 4th of July week at the beach seems fair. But, if I do not get a comparable trade next year, b/c the competition pool has now increased to include mud week combos, I will not deposit my beach week in the future.  I bet a lot of higher end weekers will feel the same if they get burned.


----------



## JudyS

elaine said:


> I like being able to see what your week is worth and what you need to trade, but I do not think it is fair that dog weeks can be rolled up for $99 and then compete against a top week for the same pool of inventory.  I have one of those (semi) top weeks (38 points). Looking at the overall values, 38 points for a 3 BR GC 4th of July week at the beach seems fair. But, if I do not get a comparable trade next year, b/c the competition pool has now increased to include mud week combos, I will not deposit my beach week in the future.  I bet a lot of higher end weekers will feel the same if they get burned.


I'm concerned about this, too. However, I think there are a couple factors that will reduce this problem.

First, a lot of RCI members own only one week, and therefore may not want to or be able to combine (other than adding in "change" they have gotten back from other trades.)

Second, many of the RCI members who own multiple low-value weeks will be paying full MFs on those weeks, and will balk at the total cost of a trade-up. (2 MFs of $600 plus $179 trade fee plus $99 combine fee is $1478. You can rent a NICE week for $1478!) 

Third, the new system gives a big incentive for owners of high end weeks to deposit those weeks -- change back. In the past, if someone owned a 60 point week, they almost certainly would end up trading down to a 40, 30, or even lower value week. There were simply so few 50-60 point weeks in the system that getting one where and when you wanted to go was almost impossible. So, owners of high end weeks were always trading down. Now, they can trade their 60 point week for TWO 30 point weeks. This is a much better deal.

So, yes, there may be more competition for the high-end weeks, but that's not certain. We'll have to see how it shakes out.


----------



## Carolinian

elaine said:


> I like being able to see what your week is worth and what you need to trade, but I do not think it is fair that dog weeks can be rolled up for $99 and then compete against a top week for the same pool of inventory.  I have one of those (semi) top weeks (38 points). Looking at the overall values, 38 points for a 3 BR GC 4th of July week at the beach seems fair. But, if I do not get a comparable trade next year, b/c the competition pool has now increased to include mud week combos, I will not deposit my beach week in the future.  I bet a lot of higher end weekers will feel the same if they get burned.



I'll bet SFX is positively chortling with glee over the way RCI is shooting themselves in the foot in driving off the prime week owners.  I am sure SFX will welcome them with open arms.


----------



## bnoble

I'm not too worried either.  For anyone who wants to chase that high-valued week with multiple deposits, there will also be that couple that used to see 1BR and 2BR units at the same resort for their exchange, and took the 2BR "just in case", but will now take the 1BR because it costs less.  Or, someone going to Orlando who decides that they can live with a stay at Vistana rather than Disney because they can also book that MLK ski weekend "up north" with the leftovers---leftovers they didn't have before.

The proof will be in the pudding, but I suspect most owners aren't over-thinking this in the way that TUGgers do.


----------



## Carolinian

Change back is not much of an enticement when it means another exchange fee and probably a combining fee, but most of all that it means accepting a lesser week in trade.




JudyS said:


> I'm concerned about this, too. However, I think there are a couple factors that will reduce this problem.
> 
> First, a lot of RCI members own only one week, and therefore may not want to or be able to combine (other than adding in "change" they have gotten back from other trades.)
> 
> Second, many of the RCI members who own multiple low-value weeks will be paying full MFs on those weeks, and will balk at the total cost of a trade-up. (2 MFs of $600 plus $179 trade fee plus $99 combine fee is $1478. You can rent a NICE week for $1478!)
> 
> Third, the new system gives a big incentive for owners of high end weeks to deposit those weeks -- change back. In the past, if someone owned a 60 point week, they almost certainly would end up trading down to a 40, 30, or even lower value week. There were simply so few 50-60 point weeks in the system that getting one where and when you wanted to go was almost impossible. So, owners of high end weeks were always trading down. Now, they can trade their 60 point week for TWO 30 point weeks. This is a much better deal.
> 
> So, yes, there may be more competition for the high-end weeks, but that's not certain. We'll have to see how it shakes out.


----------



## Carolinian

bnoble said:


> I'm not too worried either.  For anyone who wants to chase that high-valued week with multiple deposits, there will also be that couple that used to see 1BR and 2BR units at the same resort for their exchange, and took the 2BR "just in case", but will now take the 1BR because it costs less.  Or, someone going to Orlando who decides that they can live with a stay at Vistana rather than Disney because they can also book that MLK ski weekend "up north" with the leftovers---leftovers they didn't have before.
> 
> The proof will be in the pudding, but I suspect most owners aren't over-thinking this in the way that TUGgers do.



Most owners will likely look at their own weeks and some points of reference such as places they have traded into in the past and other weeks at their own resort.  Some of those comparisions are going to make them unhappy.


----------



## Bourne

Carolinian said:


> I'll bet SFX is positively chortling with glee over the way RCI is shooting themselves in the foot in driving off the prime week owners.  I am sure SFX will welcome them with open arms.



The opposite. 

The independents are at risk. This change is II's version of ACs but a lot better. 

I have traded with SFX for almost 5 years and always gave them a HGVC Hawaii week. Why. Because I got a similar trade back and bonus weeks. Now, a prospective member knows he is getting "bonus weeks" from RCI at a much cheaper rate. And all the noise about not having fair trades is out of the window. What you see is what you get. 

SFX relies on top tier weeks. Nine times out of 10, owners of these weeks were trading down in RCI. ANd now they have change left over.


----------



## Conan

I'm a classic TUG over-thinker.  But I have to say that despite some quirks and shortcomings here and there, the new RCI Weeks search system is a vast improvement over the former shot-in-the-dark approach.

For the first time you can see exactly what value your deposit will get before you deposit it, and you can scan all of RCI's current availability to see what sort of vacation a given deposit value will get you.

If you don't like what you see, you can take your deposit to one of RCI's competitors.

Well done RCI (gasp!).


----------



## Carolinian

Bourne said:


> The opposite.
> 
> The independents are at risk. This change is II's version of ACs but a lot better.
> 
> I have traded with SFX for almost 5 years and always gave them a HGVC Hawaii week. Why. Because I got a similar trade back and bonus weeks. Now, a prospective member knows he is getting "bonus weeks" from RCI at a much cheaper rate. And all the noise about not having fair trades is out of the window. What you see is what you get.
> 
> SFX relies on top tier weeks. Nine times out of 10, owners of these weeks were trading down in RCI. ANd now they have change left over.



We'll see.  Marriott's imposition of a point system is greatly increasing the interest of their members in SFX.  I suspect this one will have the same impact.


----------



## Mel

Carolinian said:


> Again, using clever time periods - 45 days out from winter season, like January in Orlando compared to January in Cape Cod - are easy to see through.
> 
> The blue week owners used to see a lot more of those gems before RCI opened the flood gates so that they have to compete with everyone and his brother.  That is why they are losing interest big time in the value of the 45 days window.  The new exchange regime will mean even more people competing with them for those gems.  The one real advantage to owning a blue week is gone.
> 
> I was never into the 45 day window personally, but many of the blue week owners I know who exchange are.  For myself, I bought a blue week as my second timeshare because there were blue season times I was interested in going to Europe but did not want to waste my summer holiday red week in trading for them if I could help it.  After getting more timeshare knowledge, I learned that a SA week was better for that purpose and got rid of my blue week.
> 
> The key for the stability of resorts is that the offseason weeks are the weak link in the resort financial structure.  Anything that makes them less viable therefore attacks resort viaibility.  My years as an HOA board member make me always consider that aspect of things, and I think it is something that many Tuggers, looking only at their own trades, overlook.  If the financial props are kicked out from under our resorts, however, it will impact all of us in higher m/f's.



Steve, you'll be happy to know, there is still plenty for your "dog week" owners to trade into - and if they like the off season, they too can get multiple trades!

I pulled up trades for 1-10 credits, and looked only at those in 2012 to find those that might have very low "maximum" trade power.

These are the resorts I found:

0047 Windrifter in NH had studios in January 2012 for 5 credits - those deposits today would get you 8
0226 Forest Geln in NH  in March costs 6 credits, but gets 10 as a deposit  I have yet to find anything with a "maximum trade power" of less than 8, and challenge you to find something lower.

Of the exchanges available right now for check in this month, there are a total of 3 between 15 and 18 credits (a 2BR at the Galleon, a Studio at Royal Regency in France, and a 2BR in Key Largo), 22 for 11-14 credits, and the remaining 3304 are 10 or less.  Someone depositing an 8 has access to the vast majority of what is still in the system.

Even most of the availability in December is 10 credits or less, a few 11's with early December cheacking, and everything else higher checks in Dec 17 or later - so more than 30 days out.

I don't think the weak traders have been hurt that much, as long as they deposit 9 months out for full value.


----------



## miamidan

Carolinian said:


> Change back is not much of an enticement when it means another exchange fee and probably a combining fee, but most of all that it means accepting a lesser week in trade.



uggggggggggggggggghhhhh

now we know if we are trading up or down   big difference over previous years


----------



## Carolinian

I have never been into the 45 day window myself, largely because most of my trades require air arrangements and so need to be much farther in advance.

However, the few dribbles you have found is far below what some of the blue week / 45 day traders have described that they have been used to.  And the fact that some of what you find is now priced above the ''anything in the 45 day window can be had by any deposit'' that was promised to these people in RCI's own promotional films and promotional materials makes it worse.  RCI has been moving the goalposts on these people in a steady series of steps over the past several years.  This one both takes it farther and makes it more obvious to them.

And, again, you are looking at this juncture at December and January - low season many places.

The off season owners are the weak link in timesharing and RCI seems determined to cause it to break.  That adversely impacts all of us.





Mel said:


> Steve, you'll be happy to know, there is still plenty for your "dog week" owners to trade into - and if they like the off season, they too can get multiple trades!
> 
> I pulled up trades for 1-10 credits, and looked only at those in 2012 to find those that might have very low "maximum" trade power.
> 
> These are the resorts I found:
> 
> 0047 Windrifter in NH had studios in January 2012 for 5 credits - those deposits today would get you 8
> 0226 Forest Geln in NH  in March costs 6 credits, but gets 10 as a deposit  I have yet to find anything with a "maximum trade power" of less than 8, and challenge you to find something lower.
> 
> Of the exchanges available right now for check in this month, there are a total of 3 between 15 and 18 credits (a 2BR at the Galleon, a Studio at Royal Regency in France, and a 2BR in Key Largo), 22 for 11-14 credits, and the remaining 3304 are 10 or less.  Someone depositing an 8 has access to the vast majority of what is still in the system.
> 
> Even most of the availability in December is 10 credits or less, a few 11's with early December cheacking, and everything else higher checks in Dec 17 or later - so more than 30 days out.
> 
> I don't think the weak traders have been hurt that much, as long as they deposit 9 months out for full value.


----------



## Carolinian

miamidan said:


> uggggggggggggggggghhhhh
> 
> now we know if we are trading up or down   big difference over previous years



Up or down according to RCI's new numbers racket, AFTER they have moved the goalposts.  What used to be an even trade may now become a ''trade up'' that will require you to come up with more ''points lite''.  THAT is the big difference.


----------



## Faith

*Change Back*

This morning I went in and made a trade that I was happy to get as an equal exchange.  I ended up with a credit of nine points.  Although I haven't had a chance to look at what is out there, I am pleased with getting some points to use for something else.  If I don't combine the nine points of credit with my other week, I haven't lost anything.  I got what I wanted in exchange.

Faith


----------



## "Roger"

Carolinian said:


> Up or down according to RCI's new numbers racket, AFTER they have moved the goalposts.  What used to be an even trade may now become a ''trade up'' that will require you to come up with more ''points lite''.  THAT is the big difference.


This is nothing but innumeracy on Carolinian's part.  It is no more mathematically possible to reduce everyone's trading power than it is to make 2 plus 2 equal 3.  If RCI could do that, then they would truly have magical powers.

The challenge:  Have ten people with TP of 60, ten with 50, ten with 40, etc.  Rearrange the TP for these people so that everyone loses.

[Example:  Reduce everyone who had a TP of 60 down to 10.  Yes, those who had a TP of 60 would lose, but everyone else would gain in that they could now trade into the resorts that had a TP of 60 even up at worst (if they had a TP of 10) and with change to boot in most cases. So this is a failed example of where everyone loses.]


----------



## miamidan

Carolinian said:


> We'll see.  Marriott's imposition of a point system is greatly increasing the interest of their members in SFX.  I suspect this one will have the same impact.



can you direct me towards some releases from sfx or Marriott indicating the shift to them?  You state this as a fact thus there has to be something to support it


----------



## Mel

Carolinian said:


> I have never been into the 45 day window myself, largely because most of my trades require air arrangements and so need to be much farther in advance.
> 
> However, the few dribbles you have found is far below what some of the blue week / 45 day traders have described that they have been used to.  And the fact that some of what you find is now priced above the ''anything in the 45 day window can be had by any deposit'' that was promised to these people in RCI's own promotional films and promotional materials makes it worse.  RCI has been moving the goalposts on these people in a steady series of steps over the past several years.  This one both takes it farther and makes it more obvious to them.
> 
> And, again, you are looking at this juncture at December and January - low season many places.
> 
> The off season owners are the weak link in timesharing and RCI seems determined to cause it to break.  That adversely impacts all of us.


You obviously didn't read what I posted.  The point was to try to find as low a value as possible for "dog week" and see just how much it can trade for in the 45 day window.  Those 8  and 10 point weeks ARE the dog weeks, January and February studios for 2012.  I have yet to see anything with a max value (what you'll get 9 months out) of less than 8.  Thus while those dog weeks might not exchange for everything 45 days out, it should be of note that there are some units with a trade cost of 2, so that 8 credit unit could exchange for up to 4 last-minute units. 

I didn't find "dribbles."  I found that the lowest of weeks can still exchange for almost anything in 30 days out, and is a bit more limited at 45 days out.  I reiterate _there were 3304 possible exchanges available this month for 10 credits or less!  Only 25 for more than 10._That's a pretty good number of choices for the worst of weeks.  I don't think it's unreasonable to limit their exchanges by less than 1%, when they are broadening their options in other ways at the same time.

I challenge you - find something that will get less than 8 credits when deposited at least 9 months out.  Then we can watch the rolling 45 day window, and see what becomes available to owners of the worst-trading weeks.

I suspect this system is less rigid than it appears.  Looking at my 2010 and 2011 weeks from Panama City Beach, the March week is a much better trader My 2010 week deposited 10 months out is worth 33 credits, the 2011 week deposited onl 6 months out is worth 25 (a loss of about 25%), My february weeks are 19 (deposited 6 weeks out as a new purchase), and 20 (deposited 5 months out).  Yet when I look at the calculator for 2012, both weeks are offered 27 credits - high for the February week, and low for the March week.  As someone else surmised, the max trade value might adjust with supply and demand, and then the percentage off for late deposits is based on that number.

I can't get in now, so I can't test any theories.


----------



## miamidan

Carolinian said:


> Up or down according to RCI's new numbers racket, AFTER they have moved the goalposts.  What used to be an even trade may now become a ''trade up'' that will require you to come up with more ''points lite''.  THAT is the big difference.



how terrible would it be to get some change back on a trade that you thought had always been equal and have the choice to utilize that extra trading power or not.  That is moving the goalposts unfairly and it so anti-conumer.  Everyone should move to another exchange company that more fairly makes changes.


----------



## JudyS

Carolinian said:


> Change back is not much of an enticement when it means another exchange fee and probably a combining fee, but most of all that it means accepting a lesser week in trade.


In the past, owners of top-rated (40-60 points) weeks would almost certainly get a lesser week in trade, and *no change back*. Now that they get change back, depositing is a better deal. I didn't say a _perfect _deal -- just a better deal.

This makes owners of high-valued weeks more likely to deposit. My own situation is an example. I own two weeks that are worth 51 points each. I was planning on just renting them, but now that I can "get change", it is very tempting to deposit one or both into RCI. If I don't deposit them, it will because I have enough Exchange Credits in RCI and would rather have rental income instead, not because I think depositing them is a poor deal.

A second example -- there is a particular resort I have been considering buying to deposit into SFX. I have now learned that RCI will give me 60 points for this resort. Now, I _really_ want to buy it -- but for RCI trading, not for trading in SFX. 

A third example: I own several MROP contracts that I was thinking of just turning back in to the resort because the fees have gone up. Now I find that RCI will give as many as 49 points for some of the weeks I can book with my MROPs. I'm now tempted to keep my MROPs and deposit the 49 point weeks into RCI.

For me, the issue deciding how many high-value weeks I give RCI is how many RCI Exchange Credits I'm able to use, not whether RCI is giving me full value or not.


----------



## Carolinian

Setting up a straw man just to knock it down, "Roger"? I am not saying that everyone's trading power is reduced.  I am saying that RCI has moved the goalposts.  They have finagled with the trading power, and of course there will be winners and losers.  The point is they fibbed when they said this would not change trading power.




"Roger" said:


> This is nothing but innumeracy on Carolinian's part.  It is no more mathematically possible to reduce everyone's trading power than it is to make 2 plus 2 equal 3.  If RCI could do that, then they would truly have magical powers.
> 
> The challenge:  Have ten people with TP of 60, ten with 50, ten with 40, etc.  Rearrange the TP for these people so that everyone loses.
> 
> [Example:  Reduce everyone who had a TP of 60 down to 10.  Yes, those who had a TP of 60 would lose, but everyone else would gain in that they could now trade into the resorts that had a TP of 60 even up at worst (if they had a TP of 10) and with change to boot in most cases. So this is a failed example of where everyone loses.]


----------



## Carolinian

You are too clever by half, again.  If 8 is the minimum value out there (and I have seen others who claim to have seen 4), then that is the operative number to look at, *NOT* 10.  Something that requires 9 or 10 points lite is still not an even 45 day trade for someone whose week is valued at 8. So any trades at 9 or 10 are totally irrelevent.

You always want to seem to compare apples and oranges to help pull RCI's chestnuts out of the fire.  How about sticking to apples and apples, and that means 45 day window weeks valued at 8.

And again, raw numbers do absolutely nothing to address the issue of the quality that used to be there in the 45 day window compared to what is there now.  That is particularly true at this time of the year.




Mel said:


> You obviously didn't read what I posted.  The point was to try to find as low a value as possible for "dog week" and see just how much it can trade for in the 45 day window.  Those 8  and 10 point weeks ARE the dog weeks, January and February studios for 2012.  I have yet to see anything with a max value (what you'll get 9 months out) of less than 8.  Thus while those dog weeks might not exchange for everything 45 days out, it should be of note that there are some units with a trade cost of 2, so that 8 credit unit could exchange for up to 4 last-minute units.
> 
> I didn't find "dribbles."  I found that the lowest of weeks can still exchange for almost anything in 30 days out, and is a bit more limited at 45 days out.  I reiterate _there were 3304 possible exchanges available this month for 10 credits or less!  Only 25 for more than 10._That's a pretty good number of choices for the worst of weeks.  I don't think it's unreasonable to limit their exchanges by less than 1%, when they are broadening their options in other ways at the same time.
> 
> I challenge you - find something that will get less than 8 credits when deposited at least 9 months out.  Then we can watch the rolling 45 day window, and see what becomes available to owners of the worst-trading weeks.
> 
> I suspect this system is less rigid than it appears.  Looking at my 2010 and 2011 weeks from Panama City Beach, the March week is a much better trader My 2010 week deposited 10 months out is worth 33 credits, the 2011 week deposited onl 6 months out is worth 25 (a loss of about 25%), My february weeks are 19 (deposited 6 weeks out as a new purchase), and 20 (deposited 5 months out).  Yet when I look at the calculator for 2012, both weeks are offered 27 credits - high for the February week, and low for the March week.  As someone else surmised, the max trade value might adjust with supply and demand, and then the percentage off for late deposits is based on that number.
> 
> I can't get in now, so I can't test any theories.


----------



## Carolinian

miamidan said:


> can you direct me towards some releases from sfx or Marriott indicating the shift to them?  You state this as a fact thus there has to be something to support it



That is based on the considerable discussion on the subject on the SFX board at Timeshare Forums between the SFX rep and Marriott owners.


----------



## miamidan

Carolinian,

I must admit that at first I thought you were wrong and this system might actually benefit me.   But, let me tell you something I just did that proves how ridiculous and consumer unfriendly this new system is.

I had a week expiriing in November and December.  I was able to book a great thanksgiving week and RCI actually gave me trading power back!  The horror of that they must want me to actually make another transaction with them and use inventory well how can I do that when it expires this month.

I also am not travelling next month so now I have this worthless trade credit of 14 that I can't use because I can't travel again this month and 30 trading power that I can't use next month either.

I felt forced to pay $99 to combine those and get two more years to use that combined trading power of 44.  I was so much better in the old system when I would not have gotten change, not gotten a holiday beach week for 6 and would have had to pay individual extension fees for much shorter period of times.   I am with you this system stinks!


----------



## JudyS

Carolinian said:


> If 8 is the minimum value out there (and I have seen others who claim to have seen 4), then that is the operative number to look at...



I don't feel that RCI is obligated to give value to off-season weeks, whether via the 45 day window or any other means. I do want to point out, though, that there are definitely 4-point weeks out there, and not just last minute weeks.

Here's one:
Alhambra at Poinciana (#1496)
1 Bedroom 	4 (4) 	Full 	Sat 03-Dec-2011 	Sat 10-Dec-2011 Exchange Fee	4 

This is a small, older resort in a bedroom community about 45 minutes from Orlando. I think the MFs there are rather high, if I recall correctly, so this week may be one of the worse MFs/exchange fee ratios out there -- something like $150 to get one exchange point!  (By the way, there is a December 24 2011 1-bedroom sitting online for 10 points. I think this would be a nice place to spend Christmas if you want to go to Florida and avoid the crowds.) 

There are AI resorts in Mexico where all the weeks online are worth 7 points or less, regardless of time of year. Yikes!


----------



## JEFF H

The New RCI program seems to be a mixed bag for me so far.
My week 20 2011 full 2-bed Royal Mayan Cancun only gets a 15 value.
The 1-Br with full Kitchen gets 14
2010 white sudwala SA 1-br has 11
2009 late Aug 2-BR sand pebbles  gets 43 as does the 2011 week.
I can't get the deposit calculator to work propelry. It pops up the window and I fill it out but then the window moves to where its cut off at the bottom of my screen. I can't move it up to view the deposit values.
When I try and check sudwala deposit value it says no units available at this resort try another.
This level of frustration is nothing new with RCI so I'm really not surprised.
If I add all my point value I may be getting the same value total as befor but it will cost me more in fees to extract and use that value.
This whole new program was obviously geared toward increasing RCI's revenue. They put a positive spin on it to convince members it was a enhancement.
RCI will now be getting a extra $99 for combining weeks.
Whenever value is leftover it will earn them a extra exchange fee if you can use it. It could earn them a $99 fee if you have to combine it plus a extra exchange fee.  I bet someone at RCI is getting a big bonus for coming up with this revenue enhancement.


----------



## Carolinian

JudyS said:


> I don't feel that RCI is obligated to give value to off-season weeks, whether via the 45 day window or any other means. I do want to point out, though, that there are definitely 4-point weeks out there, and not just last minute weeks.



Well, if they stop doing so, they are sandbagging the HOA's.  When the resorts were sold, RCI provided printed materials and films that among other things promoted the 45 day window as a time trading power restrictions were removed so that the owners of the lesser weeks could have the opportunity to get anything left.  The developers, of course, reinforced this to help sell those weeks.  When the developers left, the HOA's have no sales force to resell those weeks and are left holding the bag for RCI's and the developer's promises.  In this case, one cannot fault the developer, as it was just repeating what RCI was saying.  This leaves RCI with a moral obligation (but of course  not a legal one) to stand behind those promises.  As to whether it is okay for RCI to walk away from its moral obligations, we will just have to disagree, but it is the HOA's, which really means us, that are left holding the bag.


----------



## Carolinian

*Let the bailouts begin!*

The Points Lite numbers are out.  In spite of RCI claiming it would not change trade value, some people have gained while others have been whacked.  Now comes the next step, those who owned to trade and have been whacked bailing out of ownership.  Already, Tuggers on the SA board, one place that definitely took a whacking, are talking of giving their weeks back to their resorts.  As some of the less sophiscated timesharers who don't read online timeshare message boards start to discover what will happen, this can only spread.  The off season owners who start to see any hope of a good trade vanishing are one group.  But with the grid system employed by Points Lite to value weeks, that is not the only point.  Owners of weeks 19-21 on the OBX, for example are likely to be outraged that their weeks trade the same as a week 11, and substantially less than a week 22.  A lot of timesharers think that having a red gold crown means they really have something and many of them will be in for a rude awakening.  

All of this disillusionment will hit just when most resorts are sending out m/f bills, the very worst time possible for HOA's.  RCI's timing could not have been worse.  Thanks a lot, RCI, for creating a big threat to the stability of our HOA's.


----------



## miamidan

Wow you are on fire today are you trying to hit 1000 posts in a day?


----------



## JudyS

Carolinian said:


> Well, if they stop doing so, they are sandbagging the HOA's.  When the resorts were sold, RCI provided printed materials and films that among other things promoted the 45 day window as a time trading power restrictions were removed so that the owners of the lesser weeks could have the opportunity to get anything left.  The developers, of course, reinforced this to help sell those weeks.  When the developers left, the HOA's have no sales force to resell those weeks and are left holding the bag for RCI's and the developer's promises.  In this case, one cannot fault the developer, as it was just repeating what RCI was saying.  This leaves RCI with a moral obligation (but of course  not a legal one) to stand behind those promises.  As to whether it is okay for RCI to walk away from its moral obligations, we will just have to disagree, but it is the HOA's, which really means us, that are left holding the bag.


The basic argument here is that because RCI promoted the 45 day window in the past, they are morally obligated to do so forever, no matter how much vacation patterns change, no matter how better consumers become informed because of the internet, and so forth. We _will _have to agree to disagree on this, because I just don't see it this way. Even if RCI materials promoted the 45 day window, did those materials promise that they would never change or end that window? Most companies in today's economy are ruthless -- why should RCI be obligated to subsidize hundreds of HOAs when most companies won't give an inch to anyone? If a resort isn't viable, it should close and the property be sold to compensate the owners. If the laws make that too hard to accomplish, they should be changed. 

I don't understand the mindset of someone who buys a resort during a season when no one wants to visit, yet expects to trade to a desirable time and place. I really don't understand the mindset of someone who expects to be able to do that forever.


----------



## "Roger"

One of the most persistent questions my wife and I asked when we bought our timeshare was how do we know that the possibilities being presented won't change.  The answer that we were given was interesting.  

_If you can't justify this purchase over the next ten year period, you should not buy it.  I can't guarantee that anything will stay the same so it is important that you feel that you'll get the full value of your purchase in a reasonably short period of time._

Resale value when we are done?

_Make your decision as if it will be zero.  If you are counting on resale value to justify your purchase, you are making a mistake.  We have no idea what the future will hold._

I would have thought if my wife and I were concerned about how conditions in the travel industry might change and _a timeshare salesperson _told us to count on nothing, the members of an HOA board would have been a little bit more cautious than just accepting a set of promotional material as if it were a promise about forever. Of course the future is going to change.


----------



## "Roger"

JEFF H said:


> If I add all my point value I may be getting the same value total as befor but it will cost me more in fees to extract and use that value.
> ...RCI will now be getting a extra $99 for combining weeks.
> Whenever value is leftover it will earn them a extra exchange fee if you can use it. It could earn them a $99 fee if you have to combine it plus a extra exchange fee.  I bet someone at RCI is getting a big bonus for coming up with this revenue enhancement.


I fully agree that RCI is hoping to make more money from this. I always presume that they are trying to make as much money as they can. What I don't get is how you feel that you somehow have lost out (presuming that you accept that you get the same point value total as before) because of the change.

If you trade even (before or after), you end up paying just one exchange fee (before and after).  If you trade down, "before" you simply lost the extra trade value of your unit with no other option.  Yes, you will now have to pay either an extra exchange fee and/or a fee to combine that extra value with something to get another exchange.  But if that upsets you, do nothing and you are no worse off than what you were before.  So you have gained an option that will cost money to exercise, but lost nothing.



JEFF H said:


> ...My week 20 2011 full 2-bed Royal Mayan Cancun only gets a 15 value.
> The 1-Br with full Kitchen gets 14


I have seen several posts report similar numbers and this does puzzle and disappoint me.  One extra point for a two bedroom over a one bedroom????  

In the full blown version of the Points program, one bedrooms normally get about 70% of the number of points as a two bedroom.  In other words, there is a real difference.  (Just so that you know, I am a one bedroom owner and consider this fair.)  This point difference encourages people to think twice about whether they really need a two bedroom unit (versus taking the extra points and using them on another trade).  People don't grab a two bedroom with the attitude "why not, it doesn't cost anything extra."  That helps free up the two bedroom units for the people who really need them.

If the one point difference holds within the new system, that will be disappointing.


----------



## bnoble

> a timeshare salesperson told us to count on nothing


That is one _exceptional_ timeshare salesperson!



> If the one point difference holds within the new system, that will be disappointing.


I agree with this.  However, I also suspect we will see some fairly significant fluctuation now that the values are visible.  That visibility is going to impact exchange behavior, perhaps substantially---in part because people can make more efficient use of their resources, and in part just because price often influences perception.  As those changes are felt in the supply/demand curve, presumably exchange values will be adjusted.


----------



## JudyS

JEFF H said:


> The New RCI program seems to be a mixed bag for me so far.
> My week 20 2011 full 2-bed Royal Mayan Cancun only gets a 15 value.
> The 1-Br with full Kitchen gets 14....





"Roger" said:


> ...I have seen several posts report similar numbers and this does puzzle and disappoint me.  One extra point for a two bedroom over a one bedroom????
> 
> In the full blown version of the Points program, one bedrooms normally get about 70% of the number of points as a two bedroom.  In other words, there is a real difference.  (Just so that you know, I am a one bedroom owner and consider this fair.)  This point difference encourages people to think twice about whether they really need a two bedroom unit (versus taking the extra points and using them on another trade).  People don't grab a two bedroom with the attitude "why not, it doesn't cost anything extra."  That helps free up the two bedroom units for the people who really need them.
> 
> If the one point difference holds within the new system, that will be disappointing.



I agree. I knew that unit size didn't count for much in RCI, but I didn't realize it counted for next to nothing! I hope RCI changes this.

Also, I have been surprised by the low value of late April through early June weeks. (This may be one reason why Jeff's Royal Mayan weeks are so low.) I knew May was off-season just about everywhere in North America, but again, the magnitude surprised me.


----------



## PeelBoy

Carolinian said:


> The Points Lite numbers are out.  In spite of RCI claiming it would not change trade value, some people have gained while others have been whacked.  Now comes the next step, those who owned to trade and have been whacked bailing out of ownership.  Already, Tuggers on the SA board, one place that definitely took a whacking, are talking of giving their weeks back to their resorts.  As some of the less sophiscated timesharers who don't read online timeshare message boards start to discover what will happen, this can only spread.  The off season owners who start to see any hope of a good trade vanishing are one group.  But with the grid system employed by Points Lite to value weeks, that is not the only point.  Owners of weeks 19-21 on the OBX, for example are likely to be outraged that their weeks trade the same as a week 11, and substantially less than a week 22.  A lot of timesharers think that having a red gold crown means they really have something and many of them will be in for a rude awakening.
> 
> All of this disillusionment will hit just when most resorts are sending out m/f bills, the very worst time possible for HOA's.  RCI's timing could not have been worse.  Thanks a lot, RCI, for creating a big threat to the stability of our HOA's.




Do you know how many points an Outer Bank Beach Club II week 15 scores?  Mine is missing a calculator.  My Myrtle Beach scores 39, which I am quite satisfied with, but I am not sure about OBX pink week.

Thus far, I see myself as a "winner".


----------



## Mel

Carolinian said:


> You are too clever by half, again.  If 8 is the minimum value out there (and I have seen others who claim to have seen 4), then that is the operative number to look at, *NOT* 10.  Something that requires 9 or 10 points lite is still not an even 45 day trade for someone whose week is valued at 8. So any trades at 9 or 10 are totally irrelevent.
> 
> You always want to seem to compare apples and oranges to help pull RCI's chestnuts out of the fire.  How about sticking to apples and apples, and that means 45 day window weeks valued at 8.
> 
> And again, raw numbers do absolutely nothing to address the issue of the quality that used to be there in the 45 day window compared to what is there now.  That is particularly true at this time of the year.





JudyS said:


> I don't feel that RCI is obligated to give value to off-season weeks, whether via the 45 day window or any other means. I do want to point out, though, that there are definitely 4-point weeks out there, and not just last minute weeks.
> 
> Here's one:
> Alhambra at Poinciana (#1496)
> 1 Bedroom 	4 (4) 	Full 	Sat 03-Dec-2011 	Sat 10-Dec-2011 Exchange Fee	4
> 
> This is a small, older resort in a bedroom community about 45 minutes from Orlando. I think the MFs there are rather high, if I recall correctly, so this week may be one of the worse MFs/exchange fee ratios out there -- something like $150 to get one exchange point!  (By the way, there is a December 24 2011 1-bedroom sitting online for 10 points. I think this would be a nice place to spend Christmas if you want to go to Florida and avoid the crowds.)
> 
> There are AI resorts in Mexico where all the weeks online are worth 7 points or less, regardless of time of year. Yikes!


In both of these cases, those are the cost to trade IN - not the value RCI is offering for a deposit.  I reiterate, I purposely looked for weeks with low trade cost more than a year out, to identify those that RCI most likely gives poor value as a deposit.  I took those weeks and looked them up in the deposit calculator to see just how much RCI offers for those as a deposit, and the lowest I have seen was 8 points at 2 resorts, and most of those I checked (all deep blue studios) were offered 10 credits or more.

Since I don't have a credit worth 8 points, I cannot run a search for exchanges costing 8 points or less, but RCI is kind enough to show exactly how many exchanges are available for 10 points or less.

Carolinian would like everyone to believe that RCI has values all those last-minute exchanges at 9 or 10 points, out of reach of most deep blue studio owners.  It's just not a fact.

I challenge Steve, and anyone else who believes RCI is shortchanging the owners of those poor traders to find something in the _deposit calculator_ where RCI offers less than 8 points as a maximum trade value.  That's what is significant because owner of those week should be doing their own part to maximize what they can get.  If they choose to wait until 6 months out to deposit, they too will lose trade power.

You found exchanges for 4 points, I found many for 2 points - so as I pointed out that blue studio deposit worth 8 credits could exchange into as many a 4 weeks.  So far having looked at the full listing of US resorts available this month (993 units at 433 resorts) and only was 9 points (a 2BR in Kauai, none 10.  Africa/Middle east has 1 week for 10, everything else is 8 or less.  Europe - everything is 8 or less, aside from the 4 units that are in the 14-16 range in Rome and Paris).  I didn't check the rest of the world - too many pages of resorts.  Perhaps someone with a trade credit of 8 or less can check to see what's really available to those deposits.

Personally, I agree with you, that the lowest of weeks are not entitled to everything at 45 days, but since RCI chooses to provide value for those owners, I think it's appropriate to look at what they're offering in full light - units available for 4 points does not equate to RCI offering only 4 points for those deposits.  The floor for deposits is considerably higher than the floor for an exchange.

Common sense should tell the owners of "deep blue" studio weeks, and others that are worth very little as traders, that they can't have everything.  I think RCI has maintained significant value for them, and at the same time provided more value for those at the top end.


----------



## tschwa2

One of my weeks is a bright blue February beach week in Ocean City MD.  I used it for years enjoying the quiet but cold time.  When children came along, they came too.  But now that they are school age it doesn't work so well. It's a dog in RCI, as it should be but I have been able to trade up to pink (Mid May) time at my own resort (with an exchange fee) if I wanted to.

I now know that my exchange points are 10.  I also know that I can deposit up to 14 days before my week and get an 8.  I can use an internal exchange system to see if any other blue or white weeks are available at my resort that might fit my schedule better and if nothing comes up I can deposit.  I also know that paying my MF in advance won't help so I can wait until December to pay if I want.  

So even with blue weeks its good to know IMHO.

But if this were the only week I owned I would not belong to RCI because of the fees.


----------



## MichaelColey

bnoble said:


> I also suspect we will see some fairly significant fluctuation now that the values are visible. That visibility is going to impact exchange behavior, perhaps substantially---in part because people can make more efficient use of their resources, and in part just because price often influences perception. As those changes are felt in the supply/demand curve, presumably exchange values will be adjusted.


I agree.  It may even lead to better weeks being deposited, as people try to maximize the points they get.


----------



## Mel

JudyS said:


> I agree. I knew that unit size didn't count for much in RCI, but I didn't realize it counted for next to nothing! I hope RCI changes this.
> 
> Also, I have been surprised by the low value of late April through early June weeks. (This may be one reason why Jeff's Royal Mayan weeks are so low.) I knew May was off-season just about everywhere in North America, but again, the magnitude surprised me.


I'm not surprised by these numbers.  Early April is still "spring vacation" time for many school systems, so I would expect it to be higher than late April.  Few schools are out during May, except for Memorial Day, so may will still be relatively low, and Schools are still in session for much of June in some parts of the country - the same can be said for late August.  Some areas return to school mid-August, while many in the Northeast hold off to the week before or week of Labor Day.  Those late August weeks are more expensive than September, but but less than early August (you can see the same thing with Cruise prices too).



PeelBoy said:


> Do you know how many points an Outer Bank Beach Club II week 15 scores?  Mine is missing a calculator.  My Myrtle Beach scores 39, which I am quite satisfied with, but I am not sure about OBX pink week.


If it's a 2BR the 2011 week is worth 16 right now, max 18.  Your 2012 week is worth 21
If it's a 1BR it's worth 14/15 for 2011 and 17 in 2012 (at least if you deposit now)

Incidentally yes, week 20 2BR is worth 22/23 for 2011, and 21 for 2012, so yes it is the same in 2012,  so the same as week 11, but everything deposited more than a year out seems to be overly averaged.  I found the same for Panama City Beach - everything in February and March is rated the same for now.  All the more reason I suspect the max values are actually dynamic.  I've recorded a full year of max values for both of my resorts, and will look again in a few months to see if anything has changed.


----------



## krmlaw

OMG Im so lost in the new system ... 

im having a hard time figuring out how to use it. 

UGH.

and for some reason i cant get into "my account" ongoing searches ....


----------



## JudyS

I posted a week that was over a year away, and cost only 4 points:
_Alhambra at Poinciana (#1496)
1 Bedroom 4 (4) Full Sat 03-Dec-2011 Sat 10-Dec-2011 Exchange Fee 4 _


And Mel said:


Mel said:


> ....I challenge Steve, and anyone else who believes RCI is shortchanging the owners of those poor traders to find something in the _deposit calculator_ where RCI offers less than 8 points as a maximum trade value....


Oh, good catch!  I assumed that because this week was more than 9 months out (it's about 13 months out), then RCI would charge the same number of points to book this week as they give to owners who deposit it. Since RCI charges 4 points to book it and it's 13 months away, I figured 4 points was the maximum owners could get as credit. But I checked the deposit calculator, and you're right -- this week gets twice as many points (8) if its deposited as it costs to book (4). So, RCI is already discounting this week by 50% even though the check-in date is over a year away. 

This shows that RCI really *is* giving extra value to owners of off-season weeks. An owner at this resort could deposit their week, and book two weeks at the same resort, just by paying a $179 exchange fee. 

Actually, it turns out that I own (or at least _have_) some weeks like this. I have some January (very blue) Texas weeks that I get every year as a bonus when I pay the Mfs for my red Texas weeks. I received 9 points for the 2009 weeks and 8 points for the 2010 weeks. There aren't any January weeks sitting online in RCI right now, but judging by the December 2011 weeks, the January 2012 weeks will cost 5 points or less to book.


----------



## JudyS

Mel said:


> I'm not surprised by these numbers.  Early April is still "spring vacation" time for many school systems, so I would expect it to be higher than late April.  Few schools are out during May, except for Memorial Day, so may will still be relatively low, and Schools are still in session for much of June in some parts of the country - the same can be said for late August.  Some areas return to school mid-August, while many in the Northeast hold off to the week before or week of Labor Day.  Those late August weeks are more expensive than September, but but less than early August (you can see the same thing with Cruise prices too).....


I knew May (and late April, and early June) was off-season, but I'm still surprised by *how* off-season. My Week 21 (Memorial Day) red week in Texas receives no more points than my Week 1 (blue) at the same resort, even though it's warm enough to fish, golf, and swim in May (all are available at the resort). Steve reports that May on the OBX gets the same points as February, but I bet it's a LOT nicer there in May. As another example, I just checked the Cove at Yarmouth (Cape Cod), and a June 8 check-in gets 20 points, while a January 6 check-in gets 13 points -- not the same amount, but much closer than I expected. 

Since I originally posted about the low values for May, though, I've realized that these off-season weeks may be receiving more points as deposits than they cost as exchanges -- RCI may be subsidizing the off-season owners. That clearly is the case at my Texas resort.


----------



## Beaglemom3

krmlaw said:


> OMG Im so lost in the new system ...
> 
> im having a hard time figuring out how to use it.
> 
> UGH.
> 
> and for some reason i cant get into "my account" ongoing searches ....



You're not alone. 

I had to talk to a guide who set me straight. She had to walk me to the area above the map to click on so that I could see my deposits. Duh on me.

I was lost, but now am found.


----------



## rickandcindy23

Beaglemom3 said:


> I was lost, but now am found.


Was Blind, but now I see... 

I am having a terrible time with the site, but mostly they seem to have too many users a lot of the day.  I see a lot of great opportunities, even with my blue weeks.  I could easily get used to the system, but we need less people logged in, all at once.  

RCI Points is still taking way too much time.  One area, 30 days at a time.  I thought Points was getting an upgrade too, and I am so disappointed.


----------



## elaine

*school matters!*

school matters! most TS users have kids and kids have school. Place that on a supply/demand curve and there you go. Great weather in a great location doesn't matter for timeshares for the most part if school is in session--some limited contras are SW FL in the winter, etc. 
Just look at Orlando---the week of Christmas and the week of Easter get 50+ points for handful of resorts I checked--I think that is crazy--almost the same points as for slopeside in Vail at Christmas--get real--same demand curve for the beach--I found that Aug 10 is the cut-off in NC. My week 32 for 2011 starts 8/12 and got the same points as week 33 and 34. But next year, it starts 8/5 and gets that same points as all the July weeks. We used to "trade up" my parents' 2 BR Orlando week 51 for a 3 BR GC at the beach in mid-Aug--did it every other year for 8 years. Now I see that was really a trade "down" and we can probably get 2 weeks out of it!


----------



## krmlaw

i love the new deposit calculator


----------



## cory30

60 is as good as it gets from what I can tell.


----------



## cory30

If you can split your 3-bdrm and deposit the 2 bdrm and hotel seperately you are really going to be able to maximize your points.


----------



## krmlaw

i love being able to use left over points - even if it is another exchange fee!


----------



## stevedmatt

MichaelColey said:


> I agree.  It may even lead to better weeks being deposited, as people try to maximize the points they get.



These weeks will still end up in the rental pool IMO. $179 exchange and $99 combine weeks fee still doesn't add up to enough incentive for RCI to not rent the week for $1000+.


----------



## DocPepsi

stevedmatt said:


> These weeks will still end up in the rental pool IMO. $179 exchange and $99 combine weeks fee still doesn't add up to enough incentive for RCI to not rent the week for $1000+.



Maybe I am missing something (newer to online information on Timesharing), but is these units available concurrently for renting and for my trading power?  I've been looking at rentals on and off from the RCI website, and just looking today for example, I didn't really see anything there that I couldn't get for my exchange.  There were alot of resorts with the ID# starting with 'R' - is that what you mean by the rental pool?


----------



## krmlaw

ugh this is awful ... im addicted to searching again ... ugh


----------



## Carolinian

Hmmm! How can RCI say with a straight face that supply and demand has anything to do with their numbers when they give a 3BR in overbuilt Williamsburg a 60 but a 3BR in the hardest place in the world to trade into, central London, a 3BR Allen House only a 53????  Horsehockey!  Allen House and other UK owners should be saying ''Hello SFX!'', ''Hello UKRE!'', or ''Hello DAE!''  The idea of Williamsburg being able to trade into London in similar season and size and get change back is ludicrous!




krmlaw said:


> WOW - i just checked the calculator (after i figured out how to use it)
> 
> if it deposit my summer presidental villas 3 beds - i get 60 points.
> 
> if i deposit the 2 bed - 56
> and the hotel - 39
> 
> thats good right?
> 
> isnt 60 the highest?


----------



## miamidan

Carolinian said:


> Hmmm! How can RCI say with a straight face that supply and demand has anything to do with their numbers when they give a 3BR in overbuilt Williamsburg a 60 but a 3BR in the hardest place in the world to trade into, central London, a 3BR Allen House only a 53????  Horsehockey!  Allen House and other UK owners should be saying ''Hello SFX!'', ''Hello UKRE!'', or ''Hello DAE!''  The idea of Williamsburg being able to trade into London in similar season and size and get change back is ludicrous!



His resort is in Myrtle Beach.....


----------



## beejaybeeohio

*Points, Schmoints*

The resorts I am interested are not showing up as available even when I search for exchange only using the "Show all available RCI vacations" so it's back to the same old issue of why aren't they available.  

Take for example, Carpedium Roma Golf Club- *115* units are available as Extra Vacations with a price range of $870-1530, yet none show up for exchange.  I would be curious to know if any Tugger has recently made a trade for this resort, because I am very skeptical that RCI allows any units from Carpedium Roma into the exchange pool!


----------



## rickandcindy23

krmlaw said:


> OMG Im so lost in the new system ...
> 
> im having a hard time figuring out how to use it.
> 
> UGH.
> 
> and for some reason i cant get into "my account" ongoing searches ....



Me, too, and day after day, still freezes while trying to open my ongoing searches.


----------



## Carolinian

miamidan said:


> His resort is in Myrtle Beach.....



Sorry, I misread his list of resorts.  But still, I looked it up and it is not even oceanfront.  It is not even a walk to the beach location.  It is way out on highway 17.  So still, a non-oceanfront drive-to-the-beach resort should not be pulling higher or even equal value with Allen House.


----------



## krmlaw

i think week you deposit matters


----------



## MichaelColey

krmlaw said:


> and for some reason i cant get into "my account" ongoing searches ....





rickandcindy23 said:


> Me, too, and day after day, still freezes while trying to open my ongoing searches.


Mine did that originally, too. I wanted to cancel a couple ongoing searches so I can combine deposits. I ended up putting some weeks on hold (which cancels the ongoing search) and releasing them as a workaround. Once I did that, I combined and set up a new ongoing search for my combined deposit. From that point on, I was able to get into ongoing searches just fine.

UPDATE: Scratch that.  I just tried to get to my ongoing searches and it times out again.


----------



## Walt

*RCI is Charging more to exchange into my Resort than the credits they give me!*

I sent this email to RCI today.

*I know that you are still fine tuning the Enchancement/Trading Power.

However, I think it is just WRONG that you gave me 24 credit points for each of my 2 weeks in St. Augustine at The Beach Club for the weeks March 20, 2010 and April 3, 2010 and then charge 25 credit points for my March 20, 2010 week and 28 credit points for my April,3, 2010 week for anyone wanting to trade into the Beach Club .*

Walt


----------



## krmlaw

thanks mike - i called rci and they said it was a new problem (ongoing freezes) they were working on. 

and i think that makes NO sense that they are giving you less and charging more!


----------



## DocPepsi

Walt said:


> I sent this email to RCI today.
> 
> *I know that you are still fine tuning the Enchancement/Trading Power.
> 
> However, I think it is just WRONG that you gave me 24 credit points for each of my 2 weeks in St. Augustine at The Beach Club for the weeks March 20, 2010 and April 3, 2010 and then charge 25 credit points for my March 20, 2010 week and 28 credit points for my April,3, 2010 week for anyone wanting to trade into the Beach Club .*
> 
> Walt



I think this is one of those areas where some people are going to benefit, and others will not.  There have been several instances posted here where a person is getting more trade power than the cost to trade.

It makes sense though, your trade power is fixed at the time of deposit.  However, trade value to trade into a resort is going to fluctuate over time based on demand and supply patterns.  Something tells me it was always like this, we just never saw it since we couldn't see the trading power before this week.


----------



## Walt

DocPepsi said:


> I think this is one of those areas where some people are going to benefit, and others will not.  There have been several instances posted here where a person is getting more trade power than the cost to trade.
> 
> *It makes sense though, your trade power is fixed at the time of deposit.  However, trade value to trade into a resort is going to fluctuate over time based on demand and supply patterns. * Something tells me it was always like this, we just never saw it since we couldn't see the trading power before this week.



That could be true, However, the spacebanking happen yesterday for 24 credits and the exchange credit points are 25 and 28 points today.   By the way, the trading power was really 27 points but because the week was less than 180 days out they reduced the credit points to 24 credit points.  Something doesn't add up here.

Walt  

PS.  I guess it does add up.  If I wanted to trade into The Beach Club, at 28 credit points, I would have to combine weeks at a cost of $99.


----------



## london

*New System Changes and Credits*

A couple of years ago, I could trade any red week RCI deposit for Club Regency (Myrtle Beach), back into Club Regency for another red week at Club Regency.

So I could deposit a week 44 (red time) and trade back in for nice summer week (25 to 32) for just the exchange fee. It was an internal trade with RCI.

We did that several times in the last 4 or 5 years.

Now under the new system, my week 44 deposit is 10 credits, and a week in the spring or summer is 20 to 35 or more.

So even trying to trade back into your own resort, will require more credits.

Even though weeks 12 to 44 are all red, they do have have the same values now. Probably a more fair way to exchange.


----------



## Carolinian

What you had was an internal preference.  You would not have gotten a prime red week elsewhere except with a last minute trade or a bulkbanking.

Now if looks like the internal preference is one of the things that is gone.  It was not anything I ever used, myself, but some will mourn its passing I'm sure.




london said:


> A couple of years ago, I could trade any red week RCI deposit for Club Regency (Myrtle Beach), back into Club Regency for another red week at Club Regency.
> 
> So I could deposit a week 44 (red time) and trade back in for nice summer week (25 to 32) for just the exchange fee. It was an internal trade with RCI.
> 
> We did that several times in the last 4 or 5 years.
> 
> Now under the new system, my week 44 deposit is 10 credits, and a week in the spring or summer is 20 to 35 or more.
> 
> So even trying to trade back into your own resort, will require more credits.
> 
> Even though weeks 12 to 44 are all red, they do have have the same values now. Probably a more fair way to exchange.


----------



## ajmace

*Is it broken/*

The home page screen hasn't even got a log-in section now.

Does anyone know what happened?  Are we going back to the old 'unenhanced' system?


----------



## "Roger"

Walt said:


> That could be true, However, the spacebanking happen yesterday for 24 credits and the exchange credit points are 25 and 28 points today. ...


Walt,

I don't know if this is the answer for sure, but you might be running into the magic of the "dynamic" use supply and demand.  (I don't have the phrasing quite right, but it is what Carolinian always touted as one of the BIG plusses of the Weeks system over the Points system.)

The basic idea is that the trading power of your deposit can vary from day to day depending upon momentary fluctuations in supply and demand. There is one report somewhere in this morass of posts where a TUGGER noticed that the value of her unit jumped six points upward from one day to the next.  She called RCI and the VG said that it was no mistake - the value of your deposit will vacillate depending upon the current status of supply and demand.  Apparently you just have to keep watching and decide when the best time to deposit is.  (It is a little bit like watching airline fares.)

I have always contended that RCI should use history to decide on some sort of stable pricing, but Carolinian has mocked this and called it communisitic price fixing.  As far as I am concerned, it is unfair for one person to get high trading power one day and someone with an identical unit to get dramatically lower trading power the next because a bulk spacebank has altered the amount of supply.  Likewise, people should not be penalized for depositing right after maintenence fees are due and supply is greater because everyone else is depositing at that time. Likewise, people can be penalized for depositing a year and a half ahead of check in because demand is low (despite RCI's encouragement to deposit early).

If this is what is causing the fluxuations of what you are seeing (and it has always been part of the Weeks system as implimented by RCI), the one positive thing that can be said is at least now with trading power out in the open,you can see what you will be getting by depositing that day.  Before, all these fluxuations were happening behing a curtain.  Personally, I still think it is a bad system whether out in the open or behind a veil of secrecy.

As mentioned, Carolinian, however, feels otherwise.  (For examplle, he has been recently complaining that the new system appears to depend upon a fixed grid, and, consistent with his prior stated views, that is bad.  So, apparently it is good for RCI to move the goal posts in some instances, but not others.).


----------



## Carolinian

The use of grids where a group of weeks is given the same value tends to indicate that they have turned off the dynamic aspect of valuation on the deposit side with this new system. Grids smack more of the calcified value system of regular Points.  Only watching over time the same resorts on values awarded for deposits will tell for sure, of course.

Some of the insiders have indicated that values on exchanges may be different that those awarded for deposits, and we appear to be seeing this.  Those values still appear to be dynamic.

The fact that in a close period of time, RCI is presenting a significantly different value on the exchange side from the deposit side, however, is indicative of possible foul play.  In the same close time period, values on both sides of the equation should be the same.


----------



## bccash63

WOW--it costs 11 credits to exchange into a 1 br at Vacation Villagage on Parkway for 12/24/11--yet the deposit calculator shows a value of 50 credits for a deposit for that date???  I don't own here or would love to take advantage--Dawn


----------



## krj9999

Walt, same thing has happened to me.

What I'm noticing is that many "prime" weeks, such as Orlando week 51/52, summer Myrtle Beach, etc., are being given deposit trading power *well in excess* of the required credits necessary to currently trade into similar weeks.  The most outrageous example I've seen thus far is Vacation Village @ Parkway where a currently available 1BR, 12/24/11 check-in only requires 11 trading credits but deposit for this unit is valued at 50!

While I can certainly understand RCI wanting to incentivize owners to deposit prime weeks, they do not appear to be applying this equitably or evenly.  My prime week 52 Vegas 2010 unit was valued at 42; the same 2011 deposit is valued at only 27 but requires 28 to trade into.

I will be calling at some point to complain about this.  



Walt said:


> That could be true, However, the spacebanking happen yesterday for 24 credits and the exchange credit points are 25 and 28 points today.   By the way, the trading power was really 27 points but because the week was less than 180 days out they reduced the credit points to 24 credit points.  Something doesn't add up here.
> 
> Walt
> 
> PS.  I guess it does add up.  If I wanted to trade into The Beach Club, at 28 credit points, I would have to combine weeks at a cost of $99.


----------



## Carolinian

bccash63 said:


> WOW--it costs 11 credits to exchange into a 1 br at Vacation Villagage on Parkway for 12/24/11--yet the deposit calculator shows a value of 50 credits for a deposit for that date???  I don't own here or would love to take advantage--Dawn



And that 50 points lite they would give you for that 1BR Vacation Village at Parkway would be only three short of a summer 3BR at Allen House in London!  Vacation Village at Parkway is the resort with the biggest oversupply in the RCI system, while Allen House is in the hardest to get place in the system - central London.  Even if Christmas is high season in Orlando, that number is nothing but corrupt. The fact that they are offered the weeks they already have for exchange at so much less shows that even at Christmas they have an oversupply of this resort.  I am sure other weeks are not as high, but everything at this resort is obvious inflated in value.

Vacation Village at Parkway has long been corruptly overpointed in RCI Points, and it looks like the same in happening in Weeks.  And all the ''RCI Happies'' kept trying to tell us that there was no reason why RCI should have to reveal how they concocted their value numbers?  Grossly excessive values at the biggest oversupply resort in their system says it all.  The numbers racket of Points Lite is definitely corrupt!


----------



## CaliDave

I was messing around with the combining tool and it appears if I combine a few weeks, the trading window is for 2 years from when they are combined.

So if I combine two weeks that expire next Aug, they are good until Nov 2012, but if I combine 2 that expire in 2014, they are still only good until Nov 2012. 

wouldnt I just combine all my weeks and use it as a bank? If everything comes off that one point total?


----------



## bellesgirl

CaliDave said:


> Why wouldnt I just combine all my weeks and use it as a bank? If everything comes off that one point total?



You could do that, and some have suggested that strategy.  But then everything would expire 2 years from the date you combined them (as you noticed).


----------



## bnoble

The other potential downsides of the "single bank" strategy:

* You can only have one ongoing search at a time.  You can put all of your criteria for various vacations into that one search, but would have to re-establish it every time it "hit".

* I vaguely recall reading that "change" is not put into your account until after the "cancel free" period ends (either 24 hours or the end of next day's business; I forget which.)  So, you can't make more than one exchange per day.

You can recombine the leftovers again, as far as we know, and get a new 2 year clock.


----------



## Mel

If you combine everything for a 2-year window, and make an exchange with that combined "deposit," however many points are leftover are still combined, but they show up as a new deposit with a new 2-year window.  I don't think the 2-year window is really a problem because you can keep extending it by using a portion of your points.


----------



## Corky

If you combine all your deposits, will the cost be a one time fee of $99??


----------



## BevL

Corky said:


> If you combine all your deposits, will the cost be a one time fee of $99??



Yes, you can combine multiple weeks - as many as you have - for $99.

I don't think anybody knows for sure if there's a ceiling - say 250 points or something like that.  I've seen some numbers thrown around but have actually had to get some work done today so haven't been around near as much.


----------



## JEFF H

"Roger" said:


> I fully agree that RCI is hoping to make more money from this. I always presume that they are trying to make as much money as they can. What I don't get is how you feel that you somehow have lost out (presuming that you accept that you get the same point value total as before) because of the change.



The reason I feel that way is because atleast one of my weeks looks to have been devalued and can no longer get the trades it use to.
With change back I can combine leftover points from my high point week
with my devalued week and get the same trades I use to befor the switch.
The difference is now I will have to pay a extra RCI tax of $99 to combine and use my value points.
I know the $99 fee will also extend the time to use the combined points and that is good if you need to extend. I just don't think it's fair to require the new fee to use your value points that have not yet expired.


----------



## abdibile

Mel said:


> If you combine everything for a 2-year window, and make an exchange with that combined "deposit," however many points are leftover are still combined, but they show up as a new deposit with a new 2-year window.  I don't think the 2-year window is really a problem because you can keep extending it by using a portion of your points.



Is that really true?

I thought that leftover points expire when the original deposit (or combination) from which they are left over was sheduled to expire?


----------



## shar

*New system... excellent TS worth less?*

Thinking about this new weeks credit system it is apparent that RCI has figured out a way to make more money. Now the people with TS that did not trade as well can combine weeks and get a better unit. This means they are now paying two or more TS fees plus an extra $99 to RCI to have just one week of vacation. The people with excellent trading TS are now required to spacebank far in advance if they want to get something of equal value to that of what they are spacebanking. Yes spacebanking was always a consideration but now more than ever it impacts the value you get especially with "like" trades.

Seems to me that this will make TS worth even less money when people realize they have to use multiple weeks of credit and pay combine fee to get just one week.

They only winners here are those that do not mind paying more to get that week they could not get before, but the rest are losers... especially those who traded internally in their home resort through RCI.

Shar


----------



## vacationhopeful

Again, the old wisdom for many years has been OWN when & where you want to vacation. Exchanging is just a side option done _sometimes_.

Even my RCI Points weeks - where I pay more in MFs than others - gets me exactly where I want to be with its HOME RESORT booking window.


----------



## keepgoing

*Absolutely right.  That's is the goal of a corporation.*

How many time a company would introduce new "features" or "products" that does not help its bottom line?  

With the new system, the dog weeks owner can get two or three of their weeks in exchange for something better (of course for more money: $99 more for RCI + exchange fee), or otherwise these dog weeks would sit unused because they can't find what they want($0 for RCI).

The tiger weeks owner can split up their weeks with multiple exchange (Multiple exchange fee for RCI) or otherwise these tiger weeks would be exchanged one for one (only one exchange fee for RCI).

We have to give credit for RCI being such an innovator on how to increase profit by using the same resources.  

As for us, if they did not altered the exchange value before and after the new change(as they claimed), we are just given more option (to buy) on how to use our TS.  

CT


----------



## Carolinian

But they did alter trade values.  There are numerous examples of that out there now.  Some won and some lost and some stayed the same.

As to two low value weeks to get one trade, it is almost laughable to think many people would be foolish enough to do that.  Take two weeks valued at 8, put together to make 16, which is still just mediocre for trading.  The cost?  Two mainenance fees @ $500, one combination fee @ $99, one exchange fee @ $179, plus one RCI membership fee @$89.  Total $1368 for one mediocre exchange.  Renting is going to be a heck of a lot cheaper.

What RCI will do is drive these owners to bail out, which in turn is going to cause financial heartburn for our HOA's, which in turn is going to drive our m/f's up.  Thanks a whole bunch, RCI!!!




shopfordeal said:


> How many time a company would introduce new "features" or "products" that does not help its bottom line?
> 
> With the new system, the dog weeks owner can get two or three of their weeks in exchange for something better (of course for more money: $99 more for RCI + exchange fee), or otherwise these dog weeks would sit unused because they can't find what they want($0 for RCI).
> 
> The tiger weeks owner can split up their weeks with multiple exchange (Multiple exchange fee for RCI) or otherwise these tiger weeks would be exchanged one for one (only one exchange fee for RCI).
> 
> We have to give credit for RCI being such an innovator on how to increase profit by using the same resources.
> 
> As for us, if they did not altered the exchange value before and after the new change(as they claimed), we are just given more option (to buy) on how to use our TS.
> 
> CT


----------



## MichaelColey

Carolinian said:


> As to two low value weeks to get one trade, it is almost laughable to think many people would be foolish enough to do that. Take two weeks valued at 8, put together to make 16, which is still just mediocre for trading. The cost? Two mainenance fees @ $500, one combination fee @ $99, one exchange fee @ $179, plus one RCI membership fee @$89. Total $1368 for one mediocre exchange. Renting is going to be a heck of a lot cheaper.


I guess that makes me foolish.  I combined a 17 (cost me about $225), a 9 (cost me about $100) and a 10 (cost me about $100) to get a 36.  I'm using the 36 with an ongoing search for a 2BR Animal Kingdom Villas unit.  My total cost for it will be about $800.


----------



## Carolinian

Most folks don't have $100 m/f's.  For the fortunate handful who do, then I agree that it makes sense.




MichaelColey said:


> I guess that makes me foolish.  I combined a 17 (cost me about $225), a 9 (cost me about $100) and a 10 (cost me about $100) to get a 36.  I'm using the 36 with an ongoing search for a 2BR Animal Kingdom Villas unit.  My total cost for it will be about $800.


----------



## miamidan

krj9999 said:


> Walt, same thing has happened to me.
> 
> What I'm noticing is that many "prime" weeks, such as Orlando week 51/52, summer Myrtle Beach, etc., are being given deposit trading power *well in excess* of the required credits necessary to currently trade into similar weeks.  The most outrageous example I've seen thus far is Vacation Village @ Parkway where a currently available 1BR, 12/24/11 check-in only requires 11 trading credits but deposit for this unit is valued at 50!
> 
> While I can certainly understand RCI wanting to incentivize owners to deposit prime weeks, they do not appear to be applying this equitably or evenly.  My prime week 52 Vegas 2010 unit was valued at 42; the same 2011 deposit is valued at only 27 but requires 28 to trade into.
> 
> I will be calling at some point to complain about this.



That does seem rather extreme but, if it is on sale because the dates are getting nearer somewhat makes sense.  if this is happening in the future for dates further out this is alarming


----------



## miamidan

Carolinian said:


> But they did alter trade values.  There are numerous examples of that out there now.  Some won and some lost and some stayed the same.
> 
> As to two low value weeks to get one trade, it is almost laughable to think many people would be foolish enough to do that.  Take two weeks valued at 8, put together to make 16, which is still just mediocre for trading.  The cost?  Two mainenance fees @ $500, one combination fee @ $99, one exchange fee @ $179, plus one RCI membership fee @$89.  Total $1368 for one mediocre exchange.  Renting is going to be a heck of a lot cheaper.
> 
> What RCI will do is drive these owners to bail out, which in turn is going to cause financial heartburn for our HOA's, which in turn is going to drive our m/f's up.  Thanks a whole bunch, RCI!!!



Carolinian,

I thought you had no weeks in with RCI.  I am finding some great stuff for 16.  Not sure what you consider mediocre...


----------



## schiff1997

OK so in my opinion I have too many points vs the amount of vacations I can take.  On hand from 2010 weeks I have 104 assigned trade value that do not expire officially until Dec 2012. I currently have 4 exchanges through RCI for 2011.    This does not take into account my 2011 weeks yet, which could potentially give me another 100 plus trade value again.   I don't know about anyone else but I cannot take that much vacation time off work.   So either I will think about unloading maybe a week or let my family have a couple of great vacations on us  Whats a girl to do?


----------



## MichaelColey

You could also use the points for nicer places, get larger units, or get multiple units and invite friends or family.

You should be able to push that trading power out indefinitely by combining every couple years.


----------



## DocPepsi

Carolinian said:


> But they did alter trade values.  There are numerous examples of that out there now.  Some won and some lost and some stayed the same.
> 
> As to two low value weeks to get one trade, it is almost laughable to think many people would be foolish enough to do that.  Take two weeks valued at 8, put together to make 16, which is still just mediocre for trading.  The cost?  Two mainenance fees @ $500, one combination fee @ $99, one exchange fee @ $179, plus one RCI membership fee @$89.  Total $1368 for one mediocre exchange.  Renting is going to be a heck of a lot cheaper.
> 
> What RCI will do is drive these owners to bail out, which in turn is going to cause financial heartburn for our HOA's, which in turn is going to drive our m/f's up.  Thanks a whole bunch, RCI!!!




I apologize if i'm missing something in the equation here, but if you rent, don't you still have to pay the 2 maintenance fees of $500 of your own ownerships?  Unless you are telling me you don't pay and then hurt your own credit rating?

And if I decide to keep things separate, and take 2 different vacations - i'm left with a lower choice of options, the fact that I'd have to take a second week off work, the expenses associated with taking a vacation (travel costs, food cost, etc...) - and then a second exchange fee substituted for the combination fee.


----------



## Maple_Leaf

*Think about what RCI is trying to do here...*



bccash63 said:


> WOW--it costs 11 credits to exchange into a 1 br at Vacation Villagage on Parkway for 12/24/11--yet the deposit calculator shows a value of 50 credits for a deposit for that date???  I don't own here or would love to take advantage--Dawn



By giving 50 credits for this deposit RCI is obviously trying to attract Xmas deposits at this resort.  By charging 11 credits for an exchange RCI is obviously trying to attract Xmas exchanges at this resort.  So RCI is trying to pump up both the supply of Xmas deposits and the demand for Xmas exchanges at this resort, i.e. pumping up the exchange volume since to increase exchanges you have to increase both the supply and demand for units.


----------



## bccash63

Maple_Leaf said:


> By giving 50 credits for this deposit RCI is obviously trying to attract Xmas deposits at this resort.  By charging 11 credits for an exchange RCI is obviously trying to attract Xmas exchanges at this resort.  So RCI is trying to pump up both the supply of Xmas deposits and the demand for Xmas exchanges at this resort, i.e. pumping up the exchange volume since to increase exchanges you have to increase both the supply and demand for units.



I still don't get it-If an owner wanted to use there own wk 52 in 2011--They could deposit what they own=50 credits and exchange immediately 50-11=39 credits left for only an exchange fee.  That 39 credits could get a nice exchange.  All of this for a maint fee of abot $425.   Wish I could find such a  hole in the system with one of my resorts--Dawn


----------



## elaine

*overweighed--and not fair*

the Orlando resort and, I guess, certain resorts in MB are overweighed on the deposit (say 50-60 points)--yet cost much less to trade into.  And when I looked, such as Dec 24, 2011 for O and July for MB, there are weeks at these resorts sitting in inventory.  
However, a number of other beach resorts show NO INVENTORY at all for July, and, they get exactly the same number of points for deposit as to exchange into---many being in the 32-38 range.  Seem a bit unfair, if you ask me.  And unlike AC in II or other bonus weeks, which had restrictions and did not really hinder most trading higher-end resorts, these points are all equal to others. RCI already lost one my summer NC beach weeks to II a few years ago. I only deposit 1 week at a time to RCI. I got a fair trade (38 >35 in the new system) last year--we'll see about this year.


----------



## b2bailey

*I Agree.*



Stricky said:


> I opened my search to see everything and was surprised how little is out there.



I was excited to use the search to 'see everything' feature. After doing so,  I kind of felt like I was looking at the Wizard of Oz from BEHIND the curtain. All these years I thought 'if only' I had a better unit to exchange I would have so much more to choose from. A bit of a disappointment.

Yet, the prospect of 'grouping' and being able to reserve something I couldn't in the past is appealing. Just not as much to choose from as I had imagined.


----------



## Tommart

*Woodstone Trading Value Adjustment*

My Woodstone week 33 locked two bedroom earns 14 exchange credits for each one-bedroom.  I guess 28 points is OK especially for a MF of $540.  I even got 32 due to credit for 9 month advance deposit.  So each unit is worth 16.

My last three exchanges (which also had advance deposits) selected units that now require 22, 24, and 24 credits.  Two were in Hawaii and one in Orlando.

I must only conclude that Woodstone has been downgraded over the past month because a month ago, I could still exchange for the two Hawaii units. 

I like the new system, but I don't like the recent downward adjustment at Woodstone.  Who knows, it might have occured if RCI kept the old system.

Maybe the demand for summer weeks at Massanutten will increase due to its relatively low exchange value, and the value will be adjusted upward someday.

Well, if you're looking for a bargain Gold Crown summer week, consider Massanutten in Virginia.   

Does anyone else think they were recently downgraded?


----------



## JudyS

Here are a couple of thoughts on the topic of Vacation Village at Parkway for 12/24/2011 receiving 50 points for depositing, but costing 11 points to book:


miamidan said:


> That does seem rather extreme but, if it is on sale because the dates are getting nearer somewhat makes sense.  if this is happening in the future for dates further out this is alarming


If the week was for 2010, a discounted price would make sense, although the deposit value should also be discounted. However, this was for Christmas *2011*. 



Maple_Leaf said:


> By giving 50 credits for this deposit RCI is obviously trying to attract Xmas deposits at this resort.  By charging 11 credits for an exchange RCI is obviously trying to attract Xmas exchanges at this resort.  So RCI is trying to pump up both the supply of Xmas deposits and the demand for Xmas exchanges at this resort, i.e. pumping up the exchange volume since to increase exchanges you have to increase both the supply and demand for units.


I don't follow that at all. Why would Christmas in Orlando need to be discounted, especially by almost 80%? Orlando is packed that time of year.

I see two possibilities here:
1) There are still a few bugs in RCI's system of assigning trade values
--or--
2) RCI has struck a deal with the developers to overvalue these resorts (which seems to be the case in RCI *Points *with VV @ Parkway)


----------



## Carolinian

miamidan said:


> That does seem rather extreme but, if it is on sale because the dates are getting nearer somewhat makes sense.  if this is happening in the future for dates further out this is alarming



The fact that it is availible at this juncture suggests that the original values may be flawed.


----------



## Carolinian

Yes, there seems to be quite a bit in the UK and elsewhere in Europe that has been downgraded.  Also much/most of South Africa.

Kinda answers the question for those who beleived RCI was telling the truth when it claimed it was not going to monkey around with values, doesn't it?




Tommart said:


> My Woodstone week 33 locked two bedroom earns 14 exchange credits for each one-bedroom.  I guess 28 points is OK especially for a MF of $540.  I even got 32 due to credit for 9 month advance deposit.  So each unit is worth 16.
> 
> My last three exchanges (which also had advance deposits) selected units that now require 22, 24, and 24 credits.  Two were in Hawaii and one in Orlando.
> 
> I must only conclude that Woodstone has been downgraded over the past month because a month ago, I could still exchange for the two Hawaii units.
> 
> I like the new system, but I don't like the recent downward adjustment at Woodstone.  Who knows, it might have occured if RCI kept the old system.
> 
> Maybe the demand for summer weeks at Massanutten will increase due to its relatively low exchange value, and the value will be adjusted upward someday.
> 
> Well, if you're looking for a bargain Gold Crown summer week, consider Massanutten in Virginia.
> 
> Does anyone else think they were recently downgraded?


----------



## Carolinian

elaine said:


> the Orlando resort and, I guess, certain resorts in MB are overweighed on the deposit (say 50-60 points)--yet cost much less to trade into.  And when I looked, such as Dec 24, 2011 for O and July for MB, there are weeks at these resorts sitting in inventory.
> However, a number of other beach resorts show NO INVENTORY at all for July, and, they get exactly the same number of points for deposit as to exchange into---many being in the 32-38 range.  Seem a bit unfair, if you ask me.  And unlike AC in II or other bonus weeks, which had restrictions and did not really hinder most trading higher-end resorts, these points are all equal to others. RCI already lost one my summer NC beach weeks to II a few years ago. I only deposit 1 week at a time to RCI. I got a fair trade (38 >35 in the new system) last year--we'll see about this year.



I was only keeping one week at a time in RCI, and when I saw this coming, I grabbed a trade and reduced it to zero weeks.  I am glad I did.  My summer OBX week (now my best RCI week, 49) is going to rental and my two summer UK weeks are going to SFX and DAE.  I used to give at least one summer UK week to RCI but not anymore.

Poking around with the calculator for some of the hardest to get European exchanges, it is clear that Europe got hosed by RCI in their numbers racket.  Of course, South Africa got hosed worse.  I hope that the independent exchange companies are out beating RCI's brains out with the resorts pointing out how RCI is screwing them and asking them to help migrate members to more honest exchange companies.  I hope II is also out using this to grab business from RCI.


----------



## Carolinian

DocPepsi said:


> I apologize if i'm missing something in the equation here, but if you rent, don't you still have to pay the 2 maintenance fees of $500 of your own ownerships?  Unless you are telling me you don't pay and then hurt your own credit rating?
> 
> And if I decide to keep things separate, and take 2 different vacations - i'm left with a lower choice of options, the fact that I'd have to take a second week off work, the expenses associated with taking a vacation (travel costs, food cost, etc...) - and then a second exchange fee substituted for the combination fee.



First, I am not talking about myself.  It has been years since I owned blue weeks.

Second, those people are going to bail out and hurt all of us, so that they can just rent.  Some of them already have screwed up credit and don't care.  Others will use PCC's.  Either way it adds up to fewer m/f's being collected by our resorts.  RCI has not only made it unproductive to own off season weeks but now they are rubbing it in those owners faces.  They are also doing it right at the time HOA's are sending out m/f bills!


----------



## Carolinian

miamidan said:


> Carolinian,
> 
> I thought you had no weeks in with RCI.  I am finding some great stuff for 16.  Not sure what you consider mediocre...



I have to go by what the calculator tells me, which admittedly does not include those on which RCI has cut the price.  But looking at RCI's rental prices, those are usually better than the cost of combining two low end weeks and trading for the same thing.  And cash is the ultimately flexibility.


----------



## Mel

Carolinian said:


> I was only keeping one week at a time in RCI, and when I saw this coming, I grabbed a trade and reduced it to zero weeks.  I am glad I did.  My summer OBX week (now my best RCI week, 49) is going to rental and my two summer UK weeks are going to SFX and DAE.  I used to give at least one summer UK week to RCI but not anymore.
> 
> Poking around with the calculator for some of the hardest to get European exchanges, it is clear that Europe got hosed by RCI in their numbers racket.  Of course, South Africa got hosed worse.  I hope that the independent exchange companies are out beating RCI's brains out with the resorts pointing out how RCI is screwing them and asking them to help migrate members to more honest exchange companies.  I hope II is also out using this to grab business from RCI.


You call these European locations difficult to get, yet you also say an RCI rep told you the European weeks were segregated from the main pool to give European members an advantage.  Perhaps they are hard to get because they are not put in our exchange pool?  Wounds like an artificial reduction in supply.

Remember also that RCI South Africa is an independant entity.  While there may be demand among RCI SA members for those resorts, they do not exchange within our system.  Perhaps RCI Weeks (the rest of the world) has a oversupply of SA weeks because many members deposit those SA weeks, but not as many RCI Weeks members (remember, not members of RCI SA) want to use them.  They only of use if they can be traded back to RCI SA in exchange for week in demand from RCI weeks members.  But does RCI SA have those weeks to supply?  Maybe some, but if they give them all to RCI Weeks, they won't have any left for RCI SA members who wish to vacation outside South Africa.


----------



## Timeshare Von

I am toying around with the system and found that for Ireland 2012, the "exchange planner" tool led me to believe I should be able to get something for the mid 20's TP.  However, in looking at what is there right now for Jan, Feb 2012 (vs Apr/May) that I'm looking at, it's high 20's and into the 30's.

Someone said it may be better "value" to rent . . . and that was the case for me in looking at the same week(s) in the exchange pool AND the rental pool.  I will easily be over $1,000 for a week, if I have to pool to get to 30+ TPs and the comparable rental was $869.


----------



## Carolinian

As to Europe, the problem was making sure there would be enough supply of European timeshares for European RCI members, not the other way round. That is why some European inventory has been held back.  I do not know if that policy changed with Points Lite or not.  Another policy which RCI has had along the same lines was to give European members 2 for 1 credits if they would exchange into North America instead of Europe.

They are hard to get in the European exchange pool, which I have been in for a couple of years, but they were even harder to get in the North American exchange pool.  The better places such as London, southeastern England, the Riviera in summer, etc. is pretty much not existant in either pool, which I can attest to from having looked regularly in both.

You miss a very important point on South Africa.  That is what the RCI rep told a Tugger was not that RCI was looking at SA vs. the rest of the world BUT just SA vs. North America.  That is a huge difference since most of SA's foreign tourism comes from Europe not North America.  That artificially depresses its value.  Even that Tugger had already picked up on the significance of not including Europe in their calculations. 




Mel said:


> You call these European locations difficult to get, yet you also say an RCI rep told you the European weeks were segregated from the main pool to give European members an advantage.  Perhaps they are hard to get because they are not put in our exchange pool?  Wounds like an artificial reduction in supply.
> 
> Remember also that RCI South Africa is an independant entity.  While there may be demand among RCI SA members for those resorts, they do not exchange within our system.  Perhaps RCI Weeks (the rest of the world) has a oversupply of SA weeks because many members deposit those SA weeks, but not as many RCI Weeks members (remember, not members of RCI SA) want to use them.  They only of use if they can be traded back to RCI SA in exchange for week in demand from RCI weeks members.  But does RCI SA have those weeks to supply?  Maybe some, but if they give them all to RCI Weeks, they won't have any left for RCI SA members who wish to vacation outside South Africa.


----------



## Carolinian

Timeshare Von said:


> I am toying around with the system and found that for Ireland 2012, the "exchange planner" tool led me to believe I should be able to get something for the mid 20's TP.  However, in looking at what is there right now for Jan, Feb 2012 (vs Apr/May) that I'm looking at, it's high 20's and into the 30's.
> 
> Someone said it may be better "value" to rent . . . and that was the case for me in looking at the same week(s) in the exchange pool AND the rental pool.  I will easily be over $1,000 for a week, if I have to pool to get to 30+ TPs and the comparable rental was $869.



Welcome to Rental Condominiums International (RCI).  In its press releases, it describes itself as a ''vacation rental and exchange company''.  The order does tell it all!


----------



## Tommart

*Truth Hurts Sometimes*



Carolinian said:


> First, ....
> 
> Second, those people <off week owners> are going to bail out and hurt all of us, so that they can just rent.  Some of them already have screwed up credit and don't care.  Others will use PCC's.  Either way it adds up to fewer m/f's being collected by our resorts.  RCI has not only made it unproductive to own off season weeks but now they are rubbing it in those owners faces.  They are also doing it right at the time HOA's are sending out m/f bills!



I agree that revealing trading credits of off weeks will hurt the sales of these units, and that more owners may bail out.  

But I prefer revealing the truth, rather than keeping owners in the dark.

And hopefully this will reduce the number of people who buy off weeks thinking that they can exchange into a beach summer week anywhere in the world.

Likewise, the value of prime weeks is now highlighted more than ever.  This will likely increase the resale prices for prime weeks and bring some order to resale prices.  Those that bought from the developer, may get more of their money back when they sell.


----------



## dundey

Carolinian said:


> Yes, there seems to be quite a bit in the UK and elsewhere in Europe that has been downgraded.  Also much/most of South Africa.
> 
> Kinda answers the question for those who beleived RCI was telling the truth when it claimed it was not going to monkey around with values, doesn't it?



Anyone that does or did believe that just has not been paying attention over the last several years.


----------



## dundey

Carolinian said:


> I was only keeping one week at a time in RCI, and when I saw this coming, I grabbed a trade and reduced it to zero weeks.  I am glad I did.  My summer OBX week (now my best RCI week, 49) is going to rental and my two summer UK weeks are going to SFX and DAE.  I used to give at least one summer UK week to RCI but not anymore.
> 
> Poking around with the calculator for some of the hardest to get European exchanges, it is clear that Europe got hosed by RCI in their numbers racket.  Of course, South Africa got hosed worse.  I hope that the independent exchange companies are out beating RCI's brains out with the resorts pointing out how RCI is screwing them and asking them to help migrate members to more honest exchange companies.  I hope II is also out using this to grab business from RCI.



Absolutely right about South Africa.  Quality school vacation weeks in peak areas with high demand in that part of the world and Europe are getting extremely low numbers.  
Mel, SA is a VERY popular holiday destination for European travelers, so if the values are as low in the European exchange system (I don't know if they are) it does not make sense.  The good news is that I can still sell these weeks, since the demand in SA is pretty high for peak weeks.

Last night I contacted all of the timeshare boards where I own (in both SA and the US) that are not already dual affiliated and asked them to consider it.
This would at least give us an alternative.

I've also been telling everyone I know to give their VRI weeks to Variety, unless they are happy trading in II.


----------



## Tommart

*Renting is a Viable Option*



Timeshare Von said:


> I am toying around with the system and found that for Ireland 2012, the "exchange planner" tool led me to believe I should be able to get something for the mid 20's TP.  However, in looking at what is there right now for Jan, Feb 2012 (vs Apr/May) that I'm looking at, it's high 20's and into the 30's.
> 
> Someone said it may be better "value" to rent . . . and that was the case for me in looking at the same week(s) in the exchange pool AND the rental pool.  I will easily be over $1,000 for a week, if I have to pool to get to 30+ TPs and the comparable rental was $869.



Yvonne,
I never considered renting through RCI, but have recently learned that it is a viable option.  

Each person's situation is different.  My 2-bedroom has 32 credits and my MF is $540.  So it costs me $720 to exchange for a week up to 32 credits.  Even a $869 + tax rental is viable if I want to keep my credits. 

An exchange to Hawaii with $1400 rentals is a horse of another color.

And for me, it almost makes sense to rent or use bonus weeks for off weeks all the time.  

Earlier this month, I used a bonus week at Daytona Beach.  It cost me $199 plus tax.  It would have cost me $179 plus 8 points, and $135 (one-quarter of my MF) to exchange had the new system been operational.  

The old system was worse, I would have exchanged a 16 credit unit (I have a locked unit) that I paid $270 MF, and $179 to RCI for the Daytona week. 

Tom


----------



## Tommart

Tommart said:


> My Woodstone week 33 locked two bedroom earns 14 exchange credits for each one-bedroom.  I guess 28 points is OK especially for a MF of $540.  I even got 32 due to credit for 9 month advance deposit.  So each unit is worth 16.
> 
> My last three exchanges (which also had advance deposits) selected units that now require 22, 24, and 24 credits.  Two were in Hawaii and one in Orlando.
> 
> I must only conclude that Woodstone has been downgraded over the past month because a month ago, I could still exchange for the two Hawaii units.
> 
> I like the new system, but I don't like the recent downward adjustment at Woodstone.  Who knows, it might have occured if RCI kept the old system.
> 
> Maybe the demand for summer weeks at Massanutten will increase due to its relatively low exchange value, and the value will be adjusted upward someday.
> 
> Well, if you're looking for a bargain Gold Crown summer week, consider Massanutten in Virginia.
> 
> Does anyone else think they were recently downgraded?



To add to my earlier posting, I think that Massanutten having mostly locked units is a factor.  

If each of my locked one-bedrooms formerly had an exchange credit of 24, I would have received 48 credits for a locked 2-bedroom with $540 MF.  This would have been great for me.

If I owned a non-locked two-bedroom and got 4 more points for the second bedroom, I would have received 28 points -- exactly what I receive now when I deposit separately.

RCI has always run out of summer inventory at Massanutten, so I do not believe it's a supply/demand downgrade.


----------



## elaine

*Massunutten is oversupply*

although they run out of units at some point, at 1 year out, and even 9 months out, Massanutten has supply, even in summer. IMHO, the area is not well know to persons outside of the Mid-Atlantic, so there is not a huge demand, such as for Orlando, Myrtle Beach, etc. 
I agree it is a very nice resort, but I have been able to pull Massanutten with my parents' low traders (now getting 12 and 15) for years.  So, those numbers you are getting are probably accurate.  It is just unfortunate when you have an "accurate" trading/deposit number and Orlando get inflated deposit numbers.


----------



## Carolinian

Tommart said:


> I agree that revealing trading credits of off weeks will hurt the sales of these units, and that more owners may bail out.
> 
> But I prefer revealing the truth, rather than keeping owners in the dark.
> 
> And hopefully this will reduce the number of people who buy off weeks thinking that they can exchange into a beach summer week anywhere in the world.
> 
> Likewise, the value of prime weeks is now highlighted more than ever.  This will likely increase the resale prices for prime weeks and bring some order to resale prices.  Those that bought from the developer, may get more of their money back when they sell.



What some do not comprehend is that all of us depend on those low season units remaining somewhat viable, because if the owners bail out, then that throws more of the m/f burden on US and it drives OUR m/f's up.  Even those of us who do not own blue weeks (or in some places it is pink weeks) need to be concerned about policies that lead to large scale bailouts of those owners when our HOA's do not have sales forces to replace them.  In timesharing we are all vulnerable if any part of the system is under attack.  When Crystal deHahn ran RCI, she took a long term and big picture approach as contrasted with Cendant / Wyndham which thinks short term and tunnel vision self interest, and their tunnel vision self interest is going to bite even them in the ass in the long term.

If m/f's go through the roof, then the resort can go into a death spiral as the range of units it is no longer productive to own keeps going farther up the food chain, driving more bailouts, driving even higher m/f's, driving more bailouts, and so on until the resort fails.  We prime week owners look down our nose at the low season owners at our own peril.


----------



## Carolinian

As a member of RCI Europe, I use the European calculator to look at SA resorts and it shows the same low numbers that North American members report.  So being a European RCI member who owns in SA does not help.




dundey said:


> Absolutely right about South Africa.  Quality school vacation weeks in peak areas with high demand in that part of the world and Europe are getting extremely low numbers.
> Mel, SA is a VERY popular holiday destination for European travelers, so if the values are as low in the European exchange system (I don't know if they are) it does not make sense.  The good news is that I can still sell these weeks, since the demand in SA is pretty high for peak weeks.
> 
> Last night I contacted all of the timeshare boards where I own (in both SA and the US) that are not already dual affiliated and asked them to consider it.
> This would at least give us an alternative.
> 
> I've also been telling everyone I know to give their VRI weeks to Variety, unless they are happy trading in II.


----------



## elaine

*I am very concerned about the low season weeks*

That is my #1 concern--low season weeks bailing. Esp. in places that have only 1 high season, a marginal/shoulder season and a dead (winter) season--like NC beaches--andas you go north on the East Coast the seasonal differences are even more extreme. I worry about those Jan/Feb owners. Extra vacations are $200 or so and they sit in inventory.
Having a prime week that is a good trader still makes financial sense for us--but even for prime weeks, the gap is narrowing on the advantages of owning and being tied to a TS. So, I agree, we should all be VERY concerned about the low value traders.


----------



## Tommart

*I Agree*



Carolinian said:


> What some do not comprehend is that all of us depend on those low season units remaining somewhat viable, because if the owners bail out, then that throws more of the m/f burden on US and it drives OUR m/f's up.  Even those of us who do not own blue weeks (or in some places it is pink weeks) need to be concerned about policies that lead to large scale bailouts of those owners when our HOA's do not have sales forces to replace them.  In timesharing we are all vulnerable if any part of the system is under attack.  When Crystal deHahn ran RCI, she took a long term and big picture approach as contrasted with Cendant / Wyndham which thinks short term and tunnel vision self interest, and their tunnel vision self interest is going to bite even them in the ass in the long term.
> 
> If m/f's go through the roof, then the resort can go into a death spiral as the range of units it is no longer productive to own keeps going farther up the food chain, driving more bailouts, driving even higher m/f's, driving more bailouts, and so on until the resort fails.  We prime week owners look down our nose at the low season owners at our own peril.



I agree with what you say, but I do agree that we should hide trading values to try to minimize bailouts.  I also do not expect RCI to inflate trading value of off weeks to help resorts.

Resorts need to help themselves by:

1.  minimizing MF increases without lessening the quality of the resort.
2.  providing an opportunity for distressed owners to return ownership back to the resort--maybe at the cost of one year's MF.
3.  providing value for off weeks, e.g. add winter activities, build or gain access to indoor pools, provide tours, etc.
4.  having a resale program onsite.
5.  If the developer is onsite, the developer should resell weeks on consignment even if they take a 50% commission.


----------



## Tommart

*I Agree*



elaine said:


> although they run out of units at some point, at 1 year out, and even 9 months out, Massanutten has supply, even in summer. IMHO, the area is not well know to persons outside of the Mid-Atlantic, so there is not a huge demand, such as for Orlando, Myrtle Beach, etc.
> I agree it is a very nice resort, but I have been able to pull Massanutten with my parents' low traders (now getting 12 and 15) for years.  So, those numbers you are getting are probably accurate.  It is just unfortunate when you have an "accurate" trading/deposit number and Orlando get inflated deposit numbers.



I agree that Massanutten has a lot on inventory.  There's about 50,000 owners at Massanutten.  Massanutten runs out of summer weeks around February -- at least for Woodstone.

I also don't understand why Eagle Trace gets the same trading value as Woodstone.  Or why other smaller Virginia resorts, e.g. Bayse, have identical trading value as Woodstone.  But these are off topic issues.  

The bottom-line is that RCI exchanges every summer week it gets.  Nothing is left on the table.  Had they continued to give 20+ points for the summer, the inventory would be depleted.

That's not true of fall, winter, and spring weeks.  There is an oversupply the rest of the year and many units are unused.  The trading value of these units may be correct.

However, the best week to own at Massanutten is week 52.  Trading credit is still in the 20's.


----------



## Tommart

*Banding rather than Downgrade*



elaine said:


> although they run out of units at some point, at 1 year out, and even 9 months out, Massanutten has supply, even in summer. IMHO, the area is not well know to persons outside of the Mid-Atlantic, so there is not a huge demand, such as for Orlando, Myrtle Beach, etc.
> I agree it is a very nice resort, but I have been able to pull Massanutten with my parents' low traders (now getting 12 and 15) for years.  So, those numbers you are getting are probably accurate.  It is just unfortunate when you have an "accurate" trading/deposit number and Orlando get inflated deposit numbers.



Prior to Nov. 15, there was a lot of discussion about banding.  For example, maybe all units within 15-20 TP were in a ban and even if your unit had a 15 TP value, you could trade for a 20 TP unit.

No one seemed to know how many bands existed, but some said that the number had recently increased.

For all practical purposes, the band is now 1 TP.  There are 60 bands.

It is possible that my 16 TP units were in a 15-24 TP band.  That's why I could trade for 24 TP weeks just prior to the new system, but can't trade straight up afterwards.  

Maybe Woodstone wasn't downgraded after all.

However, this doesn't explain why the total number of weeks that I had access increased by 6K after the new system was implemented.


----------



## skimble

Carolinian said:


> What some do not comprehend is that all of us depend on those low season units remaining somewhat viable, because if the owners bail out, then that throws more of the m/f burden on US and it drives OUR m/f's up.  Even those of us who do not own blue weeks (or in some places it is pink weeks) need to be concerned about policies that lead to large scale bailouts of those owners when our HOA's do not have sales forces to replace them.  In timesharing we are all vulnerable if any part of the system is under attack.  When Crystal deHahn ran RCI, she took a long term and big picture approach as contrasted with Cendant / Wyndham which thinks short term and tunnel vision self interest, and their tunnel vision self interest is going to bite even them in the ass in the long term.
> 
> If m/f's go through the roof, then the resort can go into a death spiral as the range of units it is no longer productive to own keeps going farther up the food chain, driving more bailouts, driving even higher m/f's, driving more bailouts, and so on until the resort fails.  We prime week owners look down our nose at the low season owners at our own peril.



I fully agree with you.  
I know RCI monitors this site for their quality control purposes-- customer feedback.  And, if you don't take that into consideration when you post, everyone on here should.  
Carolinian-- Floating weeks resorts vary in the way they dole out the week assignments or the weak assignments.  Some have lottery systems, others have an annual rotation of seasons, and there are some that require you to compete with phone calls or personal appearances (I own at one like this.)  On top of this is the politics that favors certain people over others-- giving them prime weeks every year because of their affiliation with the board or management.  THIS system-- floating weeks in all forms, is susceptible to the same low-season owner fallout that you refer to.  
For this reason, I would urge RCI to take all floating weeks, require resorts to do bulk spacebanking, and require owners to bank their weeks through management.  All floating weeks should be designated a flat credit allotment.  Call it Timeshare Socialism if you want.  
There's always been subtle complacency among average owners who deposit and redeem credit for their floating week trade; they never realized that they could get SO much more for booking summer.  Once they become aware of the quantitative difference in value for seasons, there will be a new breed of competition for those golden weeks.


----------



## AFARR

elaine said:


> That is my #1 concern--low season weeks bailing. Esp. in places that have only 1 high season, a marginal/shoulder season and a dead (winter) season--like NC beaches--andas you go north on the East Coast the seasonal differences are even more extreme. I worry about those Jan/Feb owners. Extra vacations are $200 or so and they sit in inventory.
> Having a prime week that is a good trader still makes financial sense for us--but even for prime weeks, the gap is narrowing on the advantages of owning and being tied to a TS. So, I agree, we should all be VERY concerned about the low value traders.



Elaine,

I've got a few OBX weeks...and from prior discussions (here and at the resort..first time back on the OBX in about 10+ years!), the OBX has a lot of 'own to use' owners rather than a lot of 'own for trading' purposes.

My OBBC II, 2 Br, Wk 37 is 23 credits.   My Wk 39 (the one we used this year) at BIS Duck 3 BR...is 21 credits, or if I deposit both sides of the L/O separately (17 and 14) and pay to combine the deposits...it would be 31 credits...that's consistent across the 'pink' weeks...(RCI's down, but I thought it was Wk 15ish to Wk 40ish were considered 'red')...or a fair portion of the year..

So, between 'own to use' ownership and the extended red season on the OBX...a lot of the resorts probably won't have any more issues than they have now.....

But...the places that are 'own to trade', or only have very limited red seasons (or low points across the board) will likely be the ones with the low credit owners bailing out..

AFARR


----------



## Carolinian

I do not expect RCI to inflate value of weeks.  I do expect them to have the honesty and integrity to honor the promises and comes-ons they made about the 45 day window to all of those low season buyers, not dilute its value to them as they have done and keep doing.  One partial solution might be to open the first 5 days of the 45 day window only to 1 week for 1 week trades, and then open it for rentals, change back points lite, 6K RCI Points, etc.

As to your other points:
1.  That may apply if a developer is in control and setting m/f's arbitrarily.  For member controlled HOA's, the m/f is what it is, and you only cut it below that by starving reserves, not a wise long term plan.
2.  Some homeowner run HOA's have been doing that, as it is cheaper than a foreclosure, but with the pressures from both the economy and exchange company shananigans, many of them have had to stop.
3.  Usually this is not something that an HOA has the funding to just up and built something that costs very much.  For many resorts, though, it is a matter of finding own-to-use markets for resales of off season weeks.  Several resorts on the OBX have developed such markets, and I know some in the UK have as well.  But they are not realistic everywhere.
4.  If you mean a bulliten board to post resales, most do that.  Anything beyond that would generally involve too much expense for an HOA.
5.  Many developers already pick up the foreclosures that go through the courthouse.





Tommart said:


> I agree with what you say, but I do agree that we should hide trading values to try to minimize bailouts.  I also do not expect RCI to inflate trading value of off weeks to help resorts.
> 
> Resorts need to help themselves by:
> 
> 1.  minimizing MF increases without lessening the quality of the resort.
> 2.  providing an opportunity for distressed owners to return ownership back to the resort--maybe at the cost of one year's MF.
> 3.  providing value for off weeks, e.g. add winter activities, build or gain access to indoor pools, provide tours, etc.
> 4.  having a resale program onsite.
> 5.  If the developer is onsite, the developer should resell weeks on consignment even if they take a 50% commission.


----------



## Carolinian

Your resort OBBC has also been creative in marketing resales to local residents, who can then use the facilities yearround.  Some UK resorts have done the same with offseason weeks.  Indeed, Wychnor Park was originally marketed by its developer primarily to local people as ''a country club that is also a timeshare''.  Some resorts, however, either do not have the parking or would have issues with amenities getting overcrowded, to do that.




AFARR said:


> Elaine,
> 
> I've got a few OBX weeks...and from prior discussions (here and at the resort..first time back on the OBX in about 10+ years!), the OBX has a lot of 'own to use' owners rather than a lot of 'own for trading' purposes.
> 
> My OBBC II, 2 Br, Wk 37 is 23 credits.   My Wk 39 (the one we used this year) at BIS Duck 3 BR...is 21 credits, or if I deposit both sides of the L/O separately (17 and 14) and pay to combine the deposits...it would be 31 credits...that's consistent across the 'pink' weeks...(RCI's down, but I thought it was Wk 15ish to Wk 40ish were considered 'red')...or a fair portion of the year..
> 
> So, between 'own to use' ownership and the extended red season on the OBX...a lot of the resorts probably won't have any more issues than they have now.....
> 
> But...the places that are 'own to trade', or only have very limited red seasons (or low points across the board) will likely be the ones with the low credit owners bailing out..
> 
> AFARR


----------



## Laurie

Carolinian said:


> What some do not comprehend is that all of us depend on those low season units remaining somewhat viable, because if the owners bail out, then that throws more of the m/f burden on US and it drives OUR m/f's up.  Even those of us who do not own blue weeks (or in some places it is pink weeks) need to be concerned about policies that lead to large scale bailouts of those owners when our HOA's do not have sales forces to replace them.  In timesharing we are all vulnerable if any part of the system is under attack.  When Crystal deHahn ran RCI, she took a long term and big picture approach as contrasted with Cendant / Wyndham which thinks short term and tunnel vision self interest, and their tunnel vision self interest is going to bite even them in the ass in the long term.
> 
> If m/f's go through the roof, then the resort can go into a death spiral as the range of units it is no longer productive to own keeps going farther up the food chain, driving more bailouts, driving even higher m/f's, driving more bailouts, and so on until the resort fails.  We prime week owners look down our nose at the low season owners at our own peril.


As a possible solution, more resorts could offer better bonus programs for off-season owners. 

We retained a pink-week ownership of a Defender Resort at Myrtle Beach for many years, because we got so much off-season bonus time for only paying the cleaning fees. This made it cost-effective (and fun) to drive down last-minute for many 3-night stays, and sometimes 6-nite stays, for almost nothing - like $17/nite. 

We only booked once we knew the weather report, and we could book and cancel up to 24-hrs in advance w/o penalty. Participation in the program was permitted whether or not you banked your week, and we got some decent trades too - but the ownership would have had way less value to us without the bonus perks.

Maybe other resorts have that too, but I don't remember seeing that anywhere on the NC coast, for instance, whereas Defender really promoted this. At one time Defender and SPM were sort of merged, so it applied to both companies' resorts. 

HOA's should be thinking creatively about these programs, now more than ever.

Edited to add: bonus time was avail to us at all Defender (and for a time, SPM) resorts, regardless of home resort.


----------



## Carolinian

Actually, my UK resort also allows owners, including high season owners, to rent HOA inventory in the off and shoulder season very cheaply.  It is more than just cleaning fees, but still a bargain.  I know of a couple of other UK resorts that also do that.

However, HOA's need to sell those weeks, and that should be the real focus.  Identifying groups that will buy them for own to use is the key.  Selling them to local people for whom yearround use of the facilities is the appeal has been one such market for some resorts, but it does not work for everyone.  One OBX resort realized that deep off season corresponded to duck hunting season, and there were a bunch of duck blinds within 2 or 3 miles of the resort, so they have been marketing to duck hunters.  Those folks couldn't care less about how it trades because they have no interest in trading it.

Thinking HOA's when they do mention trading in their resales should emphasize the independent exchange companies which give better value for these weeks, not RCI.




Laurie said:


> As a possible solution, more resorts could offer better bonus programs for off-season owners.
> 
> We retained a pink-week ownership of a Defender Resort at Myrtle Beach for many years, because we got so much off-season bonus time for only paying the cleaning fees. This made it cost-effective (and fun) to drive down last-minute for many 3-night stays, and sometimes 6-nite stays, for almost nothing - like $17/nite.
> 
> We only booked once we knew the weather report, and we could book and cancel up to 24-hrs in advance w/o penalty. Participation in the program was permitted whether or not you banked your week, and we got some decent trades too - but the ownership would have had way less value to us without the bonus perks.
> 
> Maybe other resorts have that too, but I don't remember seeing that anywhere on the NC coast, for instance, whereas Defender really promoted this. At one time Defender and SPM were sort of merged, so it applied to both companies' resorts.
> 
> HOA's should be thinking creatively about these programs, now more than ever.


----------



## Laurie

Carolinian said:


> However, HOA's need to sell those weeks, and that should be the real focus.  Identifying groups that will buy them for own to use is the key.



That's what I meant - that a flexible low-cost bonus program *is* a good but under-utilized strategy to re-sell more off-season weeks to folks within reasonable driving distance, but too far away for day use. 

In fact, Defender's bonus program was exactly how the in-house salesperson at Defender sold this resale week (a virtual foreclosure for low price, but they got their back MF's paid up) to me in the first place back in 1997 - my first TS purchase, which worked out very well for us because of this.

Defender makes a big deal about it, it's all over their printed literature and maybe their website. Other HOA's could take a look at it. Just sayin.'

If other resort management companies had this same program on the NC or SC coast, I'd be more open to owning something non-prime again. I wish SPM had it today, since I'd love bonus time at BIS-Duck.


----------



## stevedmatt

Tommart said:


> Prior to Nov. 15, there was a lot of discussion about banding.  For example, maybe all units within 15-20 TP were in a ban and even if your unit had a 15 TP value, you could trade for a 20 TP unit.
> 
> No one seemed to know how many bands existed, but some said that the number had recently increased.
> 
> For all practical purposes, the band is now 1 TP.  There are 60 bands.
> 
> It is possible that my 16 TP units were in a 15-24 TP band.  That's why I could trade for 24 TP weeks just prior to the new system, but can't trade straight up afterwards.
> 
> Maybe Woodstone wasn't downgraded after all.
> 
> However, this doesn't explain why the total number of weeks that I had access increased by 6K after the new system was implemented.




There was also a theory of a filter where you wouldn't see the real dog resorts unless your resort was in their band. Now you see everything 24 and below.


----------



## timeos2

*Key items for every seasonal area*



Tommart said:


> I agree with what you say, but I do agree that we should hide trading values to try to minimize bailouts.  I also do not expect RCI to inflate trading value of off weeks to help resorts.
> 
> Resorts need to help themselves by:
> 
> 1.  minimizing MF increases without lessening the quality of the resort.
> 2.  providing an opportunity for distressed owners to return ownership back to the resort--maybe at the cost of one year's MF.
> 3.  providing value for off weeks, e.g. add winter activities, build or gain access to indoor pools, provide tours, etc.
> 4.  having a resale program onsite.
> 5.  If the developer is onsite, the developer should resell weeks on consignment even if they take a 50% commission.



What a great post.  Those 5 items are critical to the survival of seasonal resorts (which is the vast majority of all resorts out there).  It is not up to RCI or II or anyone else to derive value out of those slower times but the resort/owners themselves.  Once they do that RCI etc can help with trades and add another possible value to ownership.


----------



## Tommart

Carolinian said:


> ......I do expect them to have the honesty and integrity to honor the promises and comes-ons they made........
> 
> As to your other points:
> 1.  That may apply if a developer is in control and setting m/f's arbitrarily.  For member controlled HOA's, the m/f is what it is, and you only cut it below that by starving reserves, not a wise long term plan.
> 2.  Some homeowner run HOA's have been doing that, as it is cheaper than a foreclosure, but with the pressures from both the economy and exchange company shananigans, many of them have had to stop.
> 3.  Usually this is not something that an HOA has the funding to just up and built something that costs very much.  For many resorts, though, it is a matter of finding own-to-use markets for resales of off season weeks.  Several resorts on the OBX have developed such markets, and I know some in the UK have as well.  But they are not realistic everywhere.
> 4.  If you mean a bulliten board to post resales, most do that.  Anything beyond that would generally involve too much expense for an HOA.
> 5.  Many developers already pick up the foreclosures that go through the courthouse.



I agree that RCI should be honest and live up to promises.

I'm more peeved at developers and their sale practices rather than RCI.

As you know, Massanutten is overbuilt, but the developer keeps selling to first time buyers and continues building.  They sell locked two bedrooms in the summer for about $20K and blue weeks for much less, let's guess $6K.

Rather than build more units, they could market resales on consignment and take 75% commission.  Seems like $15K commission for a summer week or $4500 for non-prime week should be enough income to fund marketing, commission, and profit.  And many owners would be OK selling their summer 2-bedroom for $5K or blue week for $1500.  The developer may be swamped with inventory.

If the developer ran out of resale inventory, they could build some more. But that may be a decade away.

Right now, Woodstone provides no assistance to anyone who wants to sell.  Not even a bulletin board.  Don't want the first time buyer to see resale prices.

In the meantime, Woodstone keeps adding units.  Woodstone almost has 500 units and plans 1,000 more.  And there's five other HOAs at Massanutten.

Still, I am glad I own at Woodstone.  Just wish that I didn't buy from the developer.


----------



## Tommart

*Rentals*



Carolinian said:


> Actually, my UK resort also allows owners, including high season owners, to rent HOA inventory in the off and shoulder season very cheaply.  It is more than just cleaning fees, but still a bargain.  I know of a couple of other UK resorts that also do that..........
> 
> .



Massanutten has a rental program.    

They take your week, charge $25, and "if" it rents, give you 75%.  At times they only rent a weekend and charge accordingly.

I know one person who tried to rent his week 24 unit, and it didn't rent at all.  He lost everything that year, plus $25.

This summer, my wife and I did rent two nights over one weekend, and paid $240.  I bet the owner got about $150.

I'd rather take my RCI TPs than gamble it will be rented out.  Guess for some, they would rather have some money or nothing.


----------



## Mel

up with their own ways to boost the underlying value of their deeds.  While an exchange program is great, and getting extra benefit through that exchange program is wonderful, that's what it is, extra value!

While it is true that some resorts are hogtied by regulations that say they must charge the same maintenance fees to all owners, those same regulations do require all members to have the same usage.  Perhaps some of those HOAs need to have a frank discussion with their members about the "fairness" of their programs, and the implications of a "mass exodus" of owners.  My resort, Tropical Breeze has just such a discussion several years ago when we had to rebuild following hurricane Opal.  around 30% of the weeks were turned back to the HOA, and we filed an amendment to the condo docs underlying every deed.  Some units were eliminated, and the few remaining owners of those units were reassigned other units for the same weeks.  While eliminating units is not a true option, perhaps reducing the number of owners by combining deed would.  Assume you have 100 units in your resort, with 5100 ownership weeks, so each week represents 1/5100 share of the resort.  If you combined usage for the 10 lest valued weeks, giving each blue week owner the right to use 2 units, you reduce the number of deeds by 500 to 4600.  Now each owner owns a larger share of the resort (yes, with a slightly larger maintenance fee), but not moreso than if 500 of those owners simply turn their weeks in. 

Owners of peak weeks see a slight increase in their fees, but a stronger resort.
Owners of poor week who use their weeks can have 2 units to use.
Owners who exchange can deposit two weeks and get a combined deposit credit closer to what the peak week owners have.

The condo docs could be amended to deal with such a change, or the HOA could simply keep ownership of those returned weeks, and simply give the owners of the low weeks the opportunity to use/deposit those weeks.  While some peak week owners might balk at the idea of what amounts to a free giveaway to the other owners, they might be shown that it is still in their own best interest.

This is only one possible solution - if owners get together perhaps each resort can come up with a solution to fit their particular situation.


----------



## AFARR

Carolinian said:


> Your resort OBBC has also been creative in marketing resales to local residents, who can then use the facilities yearround.  Some UK resorts have done the same with offseason weeks.  Indeed, Wychnor Park was originally marketed by its developer primarily to local people as ''a country club that is also a timeshare''.  Some resorts, however, either do not have the parking or would have issues with amenities getting overcrowded, to do that.



Even BIS Duck allows owners 'day use' (I don't know that they are marketing it actively however).   My OBBC II MF bill came and has a resale flyer in it (weeks are about $2-$3k...including a 1 Br Bright red week...I'd be on it if it was a 2 Br at that rate).    Not a bad way to keep the weeks in owners hands (and get MFs rolling in).

AFARR


----------



## Carolinian

Tommart said:


> Massanutten has a rental program.
> 
> They take your week, charge $25, and "if" it rents, give you 75%.  At times they only rent a weekend and charge accordingly.
> 
> I know one person who tried to rent his week 24 unit, and it didn't rent at all.  He lost everything that year, plus $25.
> 
> This summer, my wife and I did rent two nights over one weekend, and paid $240.  I bet the owner got about $150.
> 
> I'd rather take my RCI TPs than gamble it will be rented out.  Guess for some, they would rather have some money or nothing.



The program I was talking about was one that allows members to rent HOA inventory in off season at a cheap rate.  This is not a rental of members' owned weeks, nor can the general public rent those HOA weeks.

Stouts Hill has a program like you refer to, but they are not developer controlled, and the HOA board, made up of homeowners runs that rental program to benefit the members not the HOA.  They seem to be rather successful with it.  A board member told me that it was set up after they started getting too many complaints of members who had been using RCI not getting the exchanges they were used to getting in the past anymore.


----------



## Carolinian

AFARR said:


> Even BIS Duck allows owners 'day use' (I don't know that they are marketing it actively however).   My OBBC II MF bill came and has a resale flyer in it (weeks are about $2-$3k...including a 1 Br Bright red week...I'd be on it if it was a 2 Br at that rate).    Not a bad way to keep the weeks in owners hands (and get MFs rolling in).
> 
> AFARR



Most OBX timeshares have governing documents that permit day use, and most if not all have day use owners.  Indeed, at least one right now has a day use owner who is on its HOA board.  Not all have actively marketed to try to sell to this group due to some having potential to overload facilities.

It would not surprise me at all to see BIS Duck doing exactly the same marketing, as it now has the same management company as OBBC.  It may be a little harder to do that, as Duck is farther from the population center of the county and the turnoff to Duck at Kitty Hawk can be a bottleneck in the summer.  Still, I think there should be good potential there.


----------



## Carolinian

Destruction of a resort and rebuilding is a time you can do things like that, especially when there is a safety valve for those who do not agreed to turn in their deeds and take an insurance payout.  That way, instead of a 30% ''no'' vote, those people just walk.  Absent a major disaster, with an insurance payout, that is just not going to happen in most instances as amending declarations of covenants in a timeshare is an incredibly hard thing to do.

It is much more productive to seek non-exchange markets for those weeks.




Mel said:


> up with their own ways to boost the underlying value of their deeds.  While an exchange program is great, and getting extra benefit through that exchange program is wonderful, that's what it is, extra value!
> 
> While it is true that some resorts are hogtied by regulations that say they must charge the same maintenance fees to all owners, those same regulations do require all members to have the same usage.  Perhaps some of those HOAs need to have a frank discussion with their members about the "fairness" of their programs, and the implications of a "mass exodus" of owners.  My resort, Tropical Breeze has just such a discussion several years ago when we had to rebuild following hurricane Opal.  around 30% of the weeks were turned back to the HOA, and we filed an amendment to the condo docs underlying every deed.  Some units were eliminated, and the few remaining owners of those units were reassigned other units for the same weeks.  While eliminating units is not a true option, perhaps reducing the number of owners by combining deed would.  Assume you have 100 units in your resort, with 5100 ownership weeks, so each week represents 1/5100 share of the resort.  If you combined usage for the 10 lest valued weeks, giving each blue week owner the right to use 2 units, you reduce the number of deeds by 500 to 4600.  Now each owner owns a larger share of the resort (yes, with a slightly larger maintenance fee), but not moreso than if 500 of those owners simply turn their weeks in.
> 
> Owners of peak weeks see a slight increase in their fees, but a stronger resort.
> Owners of poor week who use their weeks can have 2 units to use.
> Owners who exchange can deposit two weeks and get a combined deposit credit closer to what the peak week owners have.
> 
> The condo docs could be amended to deal with such a change, or the HOA could simply keep ownership of those returned weeks, and simply give the owners of the low weeks the opportunity to use/deposit those weeks.  While some peak week owners might balk at the idea of what amounts to a free giveaway to the other owners, they might be shown that it is still in their own best interest.
> 
> This is only one possible solution - if owners get together perhaps each resort can come up with a solution to fit their particular situation.


----------



## JEFF H

vacationhopeful said:


> Again, the old wisdom for many years has been OWN when & where you want to vacation. Exchanging is just a side option done _sometimes_.



That may be good advise but it does not reflect the vacation ownership reality of the last 10 years.
Most people do not want to goto the same place year after year. They want variety and to explore new places.
Thats why almost all timeshares are affiliated with a exchange company.


----------



## elaine

*we bought to use, but our tastes changed*

our week 32 2 BR NC beach week was perfect for us---6 years ago. We bought to use and even told our neighbors that we would be coming every year and would "never" trade it. The place is still great, and the week is at the perfect time, and the beach one of the best. But, we have changed---our kids no longer want to sit and make sand castles, older DD wants more activities, Mom wants  more variety than just the beach, etc.  We have thought about selling or just getting rid of it, as we have more than gotten our money's worth---but it is an excellent trader with II and we can pull Marriotts after the M preference is gone. Same now for another HHI beach week--we have found we can trade for a place that we like even better--got our RCI trade for 2011--I won't deposit anymore with RCI until I see how my 2012 trade comes out next summer.  We still have enough points to get where we want--pretty much an equal trade (38>35)--but now we have to compete with others who got 50-60 points, when we used to "outrank" them.


----------



## Tommart

Mel said:


> up with their own ways to boost the underlying value of their deeds.  While an exchange program is great, and getting extra benefit through that exchange program is wonderful, that's what it is, extra value!
> 
> While it is true that some resorts are hogtied by regulations that say they must charge the same maintenance fees to all owners, those same regulations do require all members to have the same usage.  Perhaps some of those HOAs need to have a frank discussion with their members about the "fairness" of their programs, and the implications of a "mass exodus" of owners......



Your suggestions make sense, but I think it will be impossible to get the votes to change the original purchase agreements.

What puzzles me is the number of units which go unused each year.  I've been in resorts that were "sold" out, but less than 50% of the week's units were occupied. Probably the worst case was a week 49 resort at Breckenridge.  Of the 50-60 units, only about 5 were occupied.

Seems like there should be some way to use these vacant units.  Maybe they could use them as you propose.  Maybe the HOA could rent out units (not through RCI) that will not be used to other resort members who are in good standing with the HOA at a greatly reduced price--lets say one-quarter the MF.  Members could notify the HOA that they don't plan to use the week, knowing any revenue could help reduce future MFs.  Also this gives the owner of a non-prime week the chance to rent a better week for a reduced price. But I would also allow the prime week owner to take advantage.


----------



## crazyhorse

Tommart said:


> Your suggestions make sense, but I think it will be impossible to get the votes to change the original purchase agreements.
> 
> *What puzzles me is the number of units which go unused each year.*  I've been in resorts that were "sold" out, but less than 50% of the week's units were occupied. Probably the worst case was a week 49 resort at Breckenridge.  Of the 50-60 units, only about 5 were occupied.
> 
> Seems like there should be some way to use these vacant units.  Maybe they could use them as you propose.  Maybe the HOA could rent out units (not through RCI) that will not be used to other resort members who are in good standing with the HOA at a greatly reduced price--lets say one-quarter the MF.  Members could notify the HOA that they don't plan to use the week, knowing any revenue could help reduce future MFs.  Also this gives the owner of a non-prime week the chance to rent a better week for a reduced price. But I would also allow the prime week owner to take advantage.



*RCI quote for 2009 that over 600,000 units of inventory not subject to exchange or used for any purpose. * This is more than  one third of their inventory, after exchange and rental.

As you say, seems a waste.  

I don`t know if how many of these "wasted" units were transferred by RCI from deposits over to rental, and then they found they couldn`t rent them out. I know this is not the thread for these comments but it is hoped that with this new system and the "Points" side, that better use is made of these unused units.


----------



## crazyhorse

Link pasted here did not work. Post deleted.


----------



## Mel

crazyhorse said:


> *RCI quote for 2009 that over 600,000 units of inventory not subject to exchange or used for any purpose. * This is more than  one third of their inventory, after exchange and rental.
> 
> As you say, seems a waste.
> 
> I don`t know if how many of these "wasted" units were transferred by RCI from deposits over to rental, and then they found they couldn`t rent them out. I know this is not the thread for these comments but it is hoped that with this new system and the "Points" side, that better use is made of these unused units.



Sounds to me like this is precisely why they are offering "change" when we make exchanges.  It appears RCI has the inventory to absorb any discounts they give when the credits that award for a deposit don't quite match the credits they charge for an exchange, so they can offer a bit of a benefit for those trading down.

The effect of this will be significant:

Member A has always looked for what he thought was the best bang for the buck be seeking the best unit available for an exchange - we have seen this often with people taking the largest unit they qualify for, since it would cost them the same as the smaller unit.  Some will continue to do that, because they don't want to bother with change, but others will see some value in having that change leftover to get an offseason trade. 

While this might produce higher demand for those resorts that look to be a good value but are not as "expensive" as others, and might make them a bit harder to trade in going forward, it also reduces the demand for those bigger/better units, freeing some of them up for those with stellar trade power, as well as those willing to combine their credits.

The biggest problem is that we don't know all the facts at this point, and we won't know the impact the new system will have on the behavior of RCI members.  I suspect a large part of this conversion was to have the ability to encourage certain behaviors.  RCI wants us to deposit weeks and to exchange; if that many weeks go unused, they must find a way to encourage us to use them.  If they still sit empty with a trade value of 2 credits, it becomes clear nobody is interested.


----------



## bellesgirl

Mel said:


> Member A has always looked for what he thought was the best bang for the buck be seeking the best unit available for an exchange - we have seen this often with people taking the largest unit they qualify for, since it would cost them the same as the smaller unit.  Some will continue to do that, because they don't want to bother with change, but others will see some value in having that change leftover to get an offseason trade.



I find myself doing this as I look for a couple of upcoming trips.  Before I always took the biggest and best - why not?  Now I am negotiating with myself saying - I could live with this place and a 1BR.  

I also am open to using an exchange for a shorter period.  If I only need 3 or 4 nights, a unit that costs 5 credits is very attractive.  Cost wise, I could have gone to EV but then I would have to pay more money since I have already paid my maintenance.  This way I just have to pay the exchange fee and mentally allocate a portion of the maintenance I have already spent.  Even if it is a little more than the EV price, I would go that route.


----------



## krmlaw

i too am reevaluating how best to go forward. same thing here - i can live with a one bedroom, not a 2, and have the change to use again. 

for me, im looking at the change as bonus time, not taking into account the MF attached to it. im thinking - the MF went for the 1st unit i exchanged. the left over, well thats just an exchange fee, which is MUCH less than last call or EV


----------



## DocPepsi

Mel said:


> Sounds to me like this is precisely why they are offering "change" when we make exchanges.  It appears RCI has the inventory to absorb any discounts they give when the credits that award for a deposit don't quite match the credits they charge for an exchange, so they can offer a bit of a benefit for those trading down.
> 
> The effect of this will be significant:
> 
> Member A has always looked for what he thought was the best bang for the buck be seeking the best unit available for an exchange - we have seen this often with people taking the largest unit they qualify for, since it would cost them the same as the smaller unit.  Some will continue to do that, because they don't want to bother with change, but others will see some value in having that change leftover to get an offseason trade.
> 
> While this might produce higher demand for those resorts that look to be a good value but are not as "expensive" as others, and might make them a bit harder to trade in going forward, it also reduces the demand for those bigger/better units, freeing some of them up for those with stellar trade power, as well as those willing to combine their credits.
> 
> The biggest problem is that we don't know all the facts at this point, and we won't know the impact the new system will have on the behavior of RCI members.  I suspect a large part of this conversion was to have the ability to encourage certain behaviors.  RCI wants us to deposit weeks and to exchange; if that many weeks go unused, they must find a way to encourage us to use them.  If they still sit empty with a trade value of 2 credits, it becomes clear nobody is interested.



I'm with you here.  Definitely interested to understand RCI's motivation behind all of this.  I mean ultimately, it is to grow profits for shareholders of the Wyndham Worldwide stock obviously.

At least to me, it seems they are trying to drive more business for member exchange.  I can't be a coincidence that all of this happened after all of that information spread about their rental practices.  Maybe this is a way to slow down the rental business, and expand the exchange business in order to rebuild brand satisfaction of members?


----------



## krmlaw

im thinkinig they must have had a lot of weeks dying (no rental/exchange) and now, with change back, people might be exchanging for more weeks, thereby giving Rci more fees for both combining and exchange fees.


----------



## Carol C

DocPepsi said:


> Maybe this is a way to slow down the rental business, and expand the exchange business in order to rebuild brand satisfaction of members?



If TUG is any kind of litmus test, I don't see too much satisfaction in TUG-land thus far. Seems like the Wyndham brand is imploding, imho...just look at all the Wyndham giveaways on eBay.


----------



## Conan

Carol C said:


> I don't see too much satisfaction in TUG-land thus far.


 
Maybe we can put it to a poll or survey. The loudest voices in TUG-land lately are coming from a few very unhappy people.


----------



## avad88

*Not happy yet*



Carol C said:


> If TUG is any kind of litmus test, I don't see too much satisfaction in TUG-land thus far. Seems like the Wyndham brand is imploding, imho...just look at all the Wyndham giveaways on eBay.



After reading TUG threads, the RCI site information and talking at length to a RCI rep, I'm reserving complete judgment, but thus far, I'm NOT a happy camper. 
For the last 8 years, I've been fairly happy with my RCI trades, but now I realize that I've usually traded "up". The new "trading power units" that have been assigned to my OBX June lock outs are not high enough to get trades that I've obtained in the past. When I called to try to understand, the rep gave me the spiel about "combining the units" for $99, but I resent giving RCI that extra money, and a big plus was being able to use 1/2 the yearly MF to reduce the vacation cost. Also, I'm disappointed that the "home resort advantage" has effectively disappeared. 
  I'm considering joining II for one of my resorts and eventually selling the ts that is only with RCI.
BUMMER!:annoyed:
  Did I read that someone is going to combine ALL their units (for the $99)into one large number and draw from that?


----------



## Carolinian

Well, no, you did NOT necessarily ''trade up''.  What happened in that RCI whacked your trading power.  RCI claimed they were not going to do that, which some of the ''RCI Happies'' on these boards swallowed hook, line, and sinker. but the fact is they have made massive adjustments.  Some have gained, some have lost, and others stayed the same.

June might be part of your problem.  While using an exchange mechanism that nitpicks exact numbers to make an exchange, they use grids that often lump dissimilar weeks together for valuation.  On the OBX, for example, all weeks between 11 and 21 inclusive are given the same trading power!  A May week 21 the same as a March week 11?  That is just nuts but it is RCI's new Points Lite.  If you are at the top of one of those valuation grids you are getting screwed on valuation.

Also, the new system has taken away the old flexibility of trading within a band or range.  If the weeks you traded into were, say 5-10% higher, then they probably were within your band in the old system and therefore considered equal trades.  Now they nitpick exact numbers.





avad88 said:


> After reading TUG threads, the RCI site information and talking at length to a RCI rep, I'm reserving complete judgment, but thus far, I'm NOT a happy camper.
> For the last 8 years, I've been fairly happy with my RCI trades, but now I realize that I've usually traded "up". The new "trading power units" that have been assigned to my OBX June lock outs are not high enough to get trades that I've obtained in the past. When I called to try to understand, the rep gave me the spiel about "combining the units" for $99, but I resent giving RCI that extra money, and a big plus was being able to use 1/2 the yearly MF to reduce the vacation cost. Also, I'm disappointed that the "home resort advantage" has effectively disappeared.
> I'm considering joining II for one of my resorts and eventually selling the ts that is only with RCI.
> BUMMER!:annoyed:
> Did I read that someone is going to combine ALL their units (for the $99)into one large number and draw from that?


----------



## DaveNV

Carolinian said:


> which some of the ''RCI Happies'' on these boards swallowed hook, line, and sinker.




Now that's just plain funny.  Love that term.   Power to the sheeple!  :hysterical:

In my not-so-considered-opinion, I don't see how RCI could do this weeks-kinda-equals-points thing and NOT take advantage of some people.  Those who own lesser weeks who have gotten trade-up exchanges over the years were bound to eventually have to pay the piper.  But how do you gauge things now, if a blue week has finally become a blue week?  I appreciate that things now may not be as advantageous as they once were for those people, but is it really anyone's fault?  Not as I see it.  What am I missing?

Dave


----------



## elaine

*hmmmm, what are missing?*

hmmmm, well a 4th of July Gold Crown at HHI gets 32 points both as deposit and trade--ok, seems fair--but them I see that a 2 BR week 51 in Orlando gets 56 points to deposit, but only takes 24-32 points to trade into? What's that about? Something stinky!
So, now those Orlando owners (who used to be behind me in the RCI trading food chain) now come out with 20+ points more than me? Which means they will be competing with me in searches for exchanges. 
And, of course all the good Tug skimming is gone b/c you now have to have the trading power, so no trading a dog during a bulk for nice stuff--but I can live with that--those were not really fair trades in any stratosphere--nice while it lasted. At this point, given our great TUG skimming during bulks, and getting the exact trade we wanted for summer 2011 (prior to the change) I am still OK with RCI--for now.


----------



## tschwa2

krmlaw said:


> i too am reevaluating how best to go forward. same thing here - i can live with a one bedroom, not a 2, and have the change to use again.
> 
> for me, im looking at the change as bonus time, not taking into account the MF attached to it. im thinking - the MF went for the 1st unit i exchanged. the left over, well thats just an exchange fee, which is MUCH less than last call or EV



Unfortunately RCI is really emphasizing the one bedroom deposits with the new program.  My family really needs 2 or 3 bedrooms most of the time and now all members with lockouts are encouraged to deposit 2 one bedrooms or a one bedroom and studio.  If no 2 bedrooms are available, I am looking at 2 exchange fees and more credits to get 2 one bedrooms then I get for my (like) dedicated two bedroom.  On the flip side unless only 2 people are traveling when the difference is 2-4 points between a one and two bedroom at the same location, most families, including smaller families, will opt for the bigger unit if available. If a one bedroom were 1/2 the points or even 2/3 the points of a two bedroom, members would think more about whether or not to take the bigger units.  So it looks like there will be more competition due to the smaller supply for the larger units.


----------



## Tommart

*Good or Bad*



tschwa2 said:


> Unfortunately RCI is really emphasizing the one bedroom deposits with the new program.  My family really needs 2 or 3 bedrooms most of the time and now all members with lockouts are encouraged to deposit 2 one bedrooms or a one bedroom and studio.  If no 2 bedrooms are available, I am looking at 2 exchange fees and more credits to get 2 one bedrooms then I get for my (like) dedicated two bedroom.  On the flip side unless only 2 people are traveling when the difference is 2-4 points between a one and two bedroom at the same location, most families, including smaller families, will opt for the bigger unit if available. If a one bedroom were 1/2 the points or even 2/3 the points of a two bedroom, members would think more about whether or not to take the bigger units.  So it looks like there will be more competition due to the smaller supply for the larger units.



You are correct in that RCI is making it far more desirable to split lockout units.  

However, at my resort (Woodstone) the extra bedroom is only worth 2 more points.  So you can get a two-bedroom for only 2 more TP than a one-bedroom -- a bargain.  

Many resorts 2-bedroom units that are not lockouts, and one-half the units at Woodstone are 4-bedroom lockouts.  Two other HOAs at Massanutten are 100% 4-bedroom lockouts (Summit and Regal Vistas).

So if may not be as bad as you fear.

Tom


----------



## Carolinian

BMWguynw said:


> Now that's just plain funny.  Love that term.   Power to the sheeple!  :hysterical:
> 
> In my not-so-considered-opinion, I don't see how RCI could do this weeks-kinda-equals-points thing and NOT take advantage of some people.  Those who own lesser weeks who have gotten trade-up exchanges over the years were bound to eventually have to pay the piper.  But how do you gauge things now, if a blue week has finally become a blue week?  I appreciate that things now may not be as advantageous as they once were for those people, but is it really anyone's fault?  Not as I see it.  What am I missing?
> 
> Dave



From an HOA standpoint, RCI's policies of crowding the blue week owners out of what they used to have, and many bought on the strengths of RCI's own blandishments, in the 45 day window (not a trade up as last minute inventory in the leisure travel industry is distressed and devalued inventory) is probably the biggest threat to resort financial stability.  Yes that is RCI's fault.  They have sandbagged both the HOA's and the blue week owners.

From an individual member perspective Points Lite also stinks, although some who gain may be okay with it.  Many, however, lost.  Internally trades back into your own resort are now dealt with in a new may, which hurt those who like to do that.  While that doe not impact me as I have never done that, I recognize that many do and therefore it is a big negative of Points Lite.

Some resort areas have been severely whacked, with their trading power significantly reduced, and owners there are understandably upset.  To unfairly reduce that trading power, in at least one area, South Africa, RCI now values their weeks under an entirely different manner than its usual methodology.  That new method is what has artificially reduced trading power.  How many other areas have they put their thumb on the scales either negatively or positively?  This shows the crying need for full transparency of RCI's methodology and supporting data to establish their numbers.  It is clear evidence that RCI is not being honest or fair in the numbers they have set.  A system with published bottom line numbers but a hidden method of setting them is the worst of all worlds as it gives both the incentive and the opportunity to cook the books.

Another area that is manifestly unfair is nitpicking exact numbers for the trading mechanism but using overly broad girds for valuing weeks.  Again this is the worst of both worlds for members.  Nitpicking the exact numbers for the trading mechanism has destroyed the flexibility of trading within a range or band.  Since it is impossible to fairly reduce the value of every timeshare to a nitpicked esact number, the bands were more fair, as weeks with numbers that were relatively close even if not exact are realistically like for like.

The broad grid categories used in the new system for valuation are even worse.  On the OBX, for example they give exactly the same value for a March blue week 11 as a middling red week 21. That is just nuts.  It cheats the week 21 owner and gives a gift to trade up to the week 11 owner.  Who says there is no trading up in Points Lite?  Week 11 owners on the OBX and others like them throughout the system now have institutionalized trading up thanks to RCI's insane grids for setting values.  In the old system a week 21 traded much better than a week 11, as well it should.

Some of the weeks given high values are clearly the result of politicking between developers and RCI.  Vacation Village at Parkway, the resort identified by Bootleg as having the largest oversupply of any resort in the RCI system, and the excessive numbers given for some of its weeks is a good example.  Yet RCI seems to know it is overpointed.  Tuggers have discovered that while RCI gives 50 points lite for a week 51 1BR at VV@P for 2011, if you want to trade into that same week it only takes 11 points lite, and that is for a week over a year off.  RCI clearly knows the real value, but has put its thumb on the scales for the developer.  And when one compares an example like this with the much lower points awarded to resorts with a very high demand and very low supply, on both sides of the Atlantic, it is very clear that considerations other than supply and demand were the main factors in setting so many downright fraudulent numbers.


----------



## abdibile

*HAPPY with the changes*

Am I the only one who is quite happy with the changes?

1) I had always been thinkin that lots of my previous trades had been trade-ups but now when I saw the points values of the weeks I traded into are quite low. This is perhaps kind of arbitrage that weeks I like a lot have low points values. Now I at least am aware of that.

2) My low MF South African weeks get "low" trading value of 15 and 19, but I can exchange into lots of great resorts using these points, so "Low" depends on the perspective. I was always aware that cheap SA weeks do/should not trade for Manhattan Club. 

3) I was suprised to get 39 points for my Easter 2012 Sheraton Vistana Resort week. I always thought Silver crown Orlando would be valued very low in RCI and I would never had deposited it into RCI. But now that I know, I deposited it with RCI instead of II. That week can get me three cool exchanges!

4) I love the ability to combine and get a new 2 year period for my deposits for just one fee. Some of ym weeks would have expired shortly, so this is a big plus and much cheaper that individual extensions if you own several weeks.


----------



## miamidan

Carolinian said:


> From an HOA standpoint, RCI's policies of crowding the blue week owners out of what they used to have, and many bought on the strengths of RCI's own blandishments, in the 45 day window (not a trade up as last minute inventory in the leisure travel industry is distressed and devalued inventory) is probably the biggest threat to resort financial stability.  Yes that is RCI's fault.  They have sandbagged both the HOA's and the blue week owners.
> 
> It seems to me that the new instant exchange is even better than before.  it appears that at 30 days everything is discounted at least 50%.  I have seen prime prime prime weeks available between 2 and 6 points.  In the past we would have used a whole week and now we can get change.  Of course there is another exchange fee if you choose to use that change.
> 
> Carolinian, you are right the off-season weeks are a problem, always have been and always will be.  Places like the Outer Banks, cape cod, and various other areas are dead with virtually nothing to do plus they are regional destinations as well.  Perhaps (and maybe they have) they need to reinvest in themselves such as Myrtle Beach and the Dells did and add indoor water parks and various new tourist options to extend the tourism season.  Although this talk is about timeshare it is really about tourism.
> 
> Let's face it off-season in Orlando is still hopping compared to these other locations.
> 
> The industry has probably matured beyond what anyone ever thought it could when it first started.
> 
> I guess I am an RCI Happy because I do like the disclosure.  My resort will benefit from me paying my maintenance fees well in advance so that i can reserve the best week for exchange.  I like to travel on short notice thus will get more bang for my buck although RCI will get more of my travel wallet due to this.


----------



## Laurie

Carolinian said:


> From an HOA standpoint, RCI's policies of crowding the blue week owners out of what they used to have, and many bought on the strengths of RCI's own blandishments, in the 45 day window (not a trade up as last minute inventory in the leisure travel industry is distressed and devalued inventory) is probably the biggest threat to resort financial stability.  Yes that is RCI's fault.  They have sandbagged both the HOA's and the blue week owners.
> 
> The broad grid categories used in the new system for valuation are even worse.  On the OBX, for example they give exactly the same value for a March blue week 11 as a middling red week 21. That is just nuts.  It cheats the week 21 owner and gives a gift to trade up to the week 11 owner.  Who says there is no trading up in Points Lite?  Week 11 owners on the OBX and others like them throughout the system now have institutionalized trading up thanks to RCI's insane grids for setting values.  In the old system a week 21 traded much better than a week 11, as well it should.



You're contradicting yourself here IMO. You're complaining about the loss of benefits to blue week owners, which would cause them to bail on their ownerships and fees - but here they've been given a reason to hang in, and get ok trades.  

Week 21 would be a nice week to use, and lots of owners'd hang onto those for that reason. 

So this doesn't necessarily sound like a coming hardship for HOA's to me. It might really help their HOA sales of blue winter weeks, and in the OBX I've seen long lists of them.

(Not only that, DAE gives same TP for all weeks, yet you love DAE. How is this worse?)


----------



## sandkastle4966

People that are happy rarely say much,  unhappy people complain the loudest (just look at the other thread).

I am quite happy with the change so far.  

My mediocre trader (white fixed Wyn week) - combined together, now gets me what I want for approximately $120/night - 2 bedrooms with kitchen !  Before I did not get the area that I wanted and had to roll the dice at 45 days.   Still half price of a usual 2 bedroom condo night.


----------



## DocPepsi

Carolinian said:


> From an HOA standpoint, ....... it is very clear that considerations other than supply and demand were the main factors in setting so many downright fraudulent numbers.




Didn't quote your entire post since well, its long.  I'm not sure I agree with your thoughts on the '45 day window' and the average grid concept of weeks.  I'd imagine this has always been that way to a certain extent, and is now put out in the open.  If they had an individual value per week, then those owners of week 11 would be the 'losers' because their power would be weaker.  In any change, there is going to be some winners and losers, yeah?  I think you are just taking the side of whoever lost out on these changes.

I do agree with the statement on Vacation Village (and I guess your more general point of politics coming into play).  I'm sure that was the case when there was this influx of american & european members purchasing South African Timeshare when they had extremely high trading power.  I'd guess maybe RCI had a relationship with a developer there that wanted to grow the timeshare market.  Funny part is, looks as if they corrected the values to what the actual market value of SA timeshare is.  Maybe it was a 10 year contract :rofl: 

I've been to a Vacation Village presentation, and their sales tactics are both impressive, and underhanded.  They are definitely good at what they do, and those not really in the know about the world of timeshare really get hosed.  I wonder if RCI has some sort of '10 year contract' with VV to give them higher value.  Will RCI do to these owners what they did to SA owners:  initially inflate values, only to correct to the truth later on (and sort of drop the anvil?)


----------



## Carolinian

RCI has clearly moved the goalposts.  There are quite a few very high demand, very low supply resorts whose numbers are too low while there are too many whose numbers do not make sense being as high as they are from a supply / demand perspective.  Comparing past trades mainly just shows how they have moved the goalposts.




abdibile said:


> Am I the only one who is quite happy with the changes?
> 
> 1) I had always been thinkin that lots of my previous trades had been trade-ups but now when I saw the points values of the weeks I traded into are quite low. This is perhaps kind of arbitrage that weeks I like a lot have low points values. Now I at least am aware of that.
> 
> 2) My low MF South African weeks get "low" trading value of 15 and 19, but I can exchange into lots of great resorts using these points, so "Low" depends on the perspective. I was always aware that cheap SA weeks do/should not trade for Manhattan Club.
> 
> 3) I was suprised to get 39 points for my Easter 2012 Sheraton Vistana Resort week. I always thought Silver crown Orlando would be valued very low in RCI and I would never had deposited it into RCI. But now that I know, I deposited it with RCI instead of II. That week can get me three cool exchanges!
> 
> 4) I love the ability to combine and get a new 2 year period for my deposits for just one fee. Some of ym weeks would have expired shortly, so this is a big plus and much cheaper that individual extensions if you own several weeks.


----------



## Carolinian

While weeks like 11 and 12 are overvalued, that does not help weeks 1-10 and 48-50.  Weeks 10-12 are spring break and not weeks that HOA's have a lot of to resell.  You are considered that just because late blue is overvalued, all blue is, but in that you are mistaken.




Laurie said:


> You're contradicting yourself here IMO. You're complaining about the loss of benefits to blue week owners, which would cause them to bail on their ownerships and fees - but here they've been given a reason to hang in, and get ok trades.
> 
> Week 21 would be a nice week to use, and lots of owners'd hang onto those for that reason.
> 
> So this doesn't necessarily sound like a coming hardship for HOA's to me. It might really help their HOA sales of blue winter weeks, and in the OBX I've seen long lists of them.
> 
> (Not only that, DAE gives same TP for all weeks, yet you love DAE. How is this worse?)


----------



## Carolinian

My point on winners and losers was that RCI claimed, and their usual supporters on these boards parroted, that there would be no change in numbers, just that they would be made public.  We have seen that this claim was flatly not true.  Those who parroted the claim here on TUG have yet to admit they were wrong.

As to to valuation grids that is very definitely NOT the way it has been in the past.  I checked with an aquaintance who owns a 2BR week 12 and a 1BR week 21 at the same OBX resort, and his week 21 has until now always traded significantly better than the 12.  He was flabbergasted that the 12 now gets more points lite since it is 2BR than the 21.  He now will use the 21 as he feels he would be cheated to give it to RCI.

Someone else who had been to a presentation at VV@Parkway reported that the salesman bragged about the resort's powerful connections with RCI.  I guess that is one time that a salesman's lips were moving and he was not lying!

As to SA, the trading power years ago was set up on some assuptions that overvalued it.  Then in so-called Black Sunday, they applied the same principles as elsewhere in RCI.  I posted that I thought that was only fair even though some lost significant trading power.  One aspect of that was some resorts were doing better than others and some weeks better than others instead of too much averaged together as had been the case.  Some weeks actually gained value after Black Sunday while others lost.  RCI's long ago overvaluing of SA had nothing to do with developers.  It had to do with not being set up to apply the same valuation rules as they did other places.  With Black Sunday, they were suddenly treated like everyone else which was fair.  Now with Points Lite, RCI suddenly went the other way and set up another scheme where South Africa is no longer treated like everyone else but instead put under rules that arbitrarily take value away.  Black Sunday was fair but what they have done this time certainly is not.  Black Sunday did indeed correct values, but this time RCI has arbitrarily set unfair values for South Africa and defrauded its members who own weeks there.  South Africa should have the same value rules as everybody else but now they do not.  Between Black Sunday and the imposition of Points Lite, they did.

But the big thing I look at that reveals how RCI is not following supply and demand in its numbers racket is the valuations at Allen House.  



DocPepsi said:


> Didn't quote your entire post since well, its long.  I'm not sure I agree with your thoughts on the '45 day window' and the average grid concept of weeks.  I'd imagine this has always been that way to a certain extent, and is now put out in the open.  If they had an individual value per week, then those owners of week 11 would be the 'losers' because their power would be weaker.  In any change, there is going to be some winners and losers, yeah?  I think you are just taking the side of whoever lost out on these changes.
> 
> I do agree with the statement on Vacation Village (and I guess your more general point of politics coming into play).  I'm sure that was the case when there was this influx of american & european members purchasing South African Timeshare when they had extremely high trading power.  I'd guess maybe RCI had a relationship with a developer there that wanted to grow the timeshare market.  Funny part is, looks as if they corrected the values to what the actual market value of SA timeshare is.  Maybe it was a 10 year contract :rofl:
> 
> I've been to a Vacation Village presentation, and their sales tactics are both impressive, and underhanded.  They are definitely good at what they do, and those not really in the know about the world of timeshare really get hosed.  I wonder if RCI has some sort of '10 year contract' with VV to give them higher value.  Will RCI do to these owners what they did to SA owners:  initially inflate values, only to correct to the truth later on (and sort of drop the anvil?)


----------



## MichaelColey

abdibile said:


> Am I the only one who is quite happy with the changes?


I'm extremely happy with the changes.  The main person I've seen who isn't happy is Carolinian, and his 59 posts in this thread kind of overpower any other opinions.

Someone else suggested a poll.  Do we have the ability to add a poll here on TUG?  I don't see the option.


----------



## schiff1997

Well I too am happy. I have all my reservations for 2011 in place and 100 plus TP's sitting in my acct that don't expire until Dec 2012 and I still have 2 more  weeks of 2011 to bank one of which is  a 3 bedroom lockout for Christmas in Orlando which I know will give me high TP's for breaking down


----------



## Timeshare Von

Carolinian . . . you were right and I was wrong!

Now does that do it for you so you can stop with the rants?


----------



## DanM

Reasonably happy, because I don't have to deposit a blue week with RCI that gets almost no points lite, but gets an AC and trades well at II; and because combining and extending can give me a shot at a few resorts I wouldn't have seen before.

Reasonably unhappy, because points systems require more work to wring value from than weeks did when I first got into timesharing. I do this for the deals, and if I can't get a disproportionate value it's not worth the maintenance fee and time commitments. Not to start a tangent, but I have always said points are just a different form of money. Why learn and use a new currency unless you make out on the exchange rate?

Near term, it will make a few low maintenance high point timeshares more valuable, but I can't help thinking it will ultimately doom RCI. How will you sell a Marriott or  Starwood fall or spring week with half the points for the same money as summer or winter holiday? Pitch internal exchange. How will you sell a late fall Cape Cod week resale? Pitch VRI internal exchange.


----------



## Conan

Happy because if I trade down from my tiger I can use the change back for a second trade without paying a second year's maintenance.

Happy because the system is much more transparent than it used to be. For example I have a week that I never deposited in RCI because I was sure it was a dog - - if I couldn't use it myself I would try to rent it out at a loss. So now I checked its actual trading power (before depositing it) and find it can pull 100,000 possible vacations (or I can combine it for $99 and pull all 145,000).

Happy because a weeks property of mine that used to give me only a middling amount of RCI Points in points-for-deposit (and a $26 fee) is now giving me a much better number of TP points in RCI Weeks at no extra fee. (So I don't think the term "Points lite" is clever or accurate.)

Happy because no week of mine needs to expire before I can use it, if I remember to roll it forward a year or two by combining it with the change I get back from other bookings ("a year or two" because if I wait too long its TP value will fall as its use date gets closer)

Hoping, anyway, that although the ability to combine points means more people will be competing against me, as a Tugger I'm crazy enough to set up my ongoing search two years in advance.

Does this make me an "RCI parrot" ?


----------



## Carolinian

MichaelColey said:


> I'm extremely happy with the changes.  The main person I've seen who isn't happy is Carolinian, and his 59 posts in this thread kind of overpower any other opinions.
> 
> Someone else suggested a poll.  Do we have the ability to add a poll here on TUG?  I don't see the option.



Obviously you do not read the South Africa board, for instance.

Do you finally want to admit that RCI moved the goalposts, which you were a denier of for a long time?

And of course as someone who owns in overbuilt areas and often vacations in overbuilt areas, your perspective would be different from those of us who like to go to the areas where demand usually significantly exceeds supply.


----------



## Carolinian

Conan said:


> .
> 
> Does this make me an "RCI parrot" ?



I don't know.  I don't remember if you were one of those who kept agreeing that RCI would not change the values, just make the numbers public.  Were you?


----------



## Carolinian

Yvonne, I don't remember you being one who kept claiming that RCI was telling the truth when it said it would not alter the trading power of weeks, only publish the numbers.  If so, you were not one of the handful that kept harping on it.




Timeshare Von said:


> Carolinian . . . you were right and I was wrong!
> 
> Now does that do it for you so you can stop with the rants?


----------



## MichaelColey

Carolinian said:


> Do you finally want to admit that RCI moved the goalposts, which you were a denier of for a long time?


Please find a post where I said RCI would never "move the goalposts".  That's your phrase.  It's not what RCI said.  And it's not what I said.

RCI said that the trading power of existing deposits would not change.  I have no way of knowing what my trading powers were before the upgrade, so I have no way of knowing if they changed or not.  I was able to see MORE units with the same deposits after they came back online, so my assumption is that trading power of existing deposits did not change.

As for the South African deposits, my understanding is that those changed *before* the upgrade.  Perhaps they were artificially inflated from the World Cup and were adjusted down, but I don't see how it has anything to do with the upgrades.


----------



## Conan

Carolinian said:


> I don't know. I don't remember if you were one of those who kept agreeing that RCI would not change the values, just make the numbers public. Were you?


 
I saw the endless argument between you and others in the thread titled "RCI Weeks to offer value transparency" but it looked like a waste of time and I didn't participate.

As much as I favor free speech I'm finally getting around to setting 

Quick Links >> User Control Panel >> Miscellaneous >> Buddy/Ignore List 
to "Ignore Carolinian" 

So please do not bother to reply to this message.


----------



## kwilson

RCI has done nothing for me. I want them to show me my points BEFORE I deposit, or hold my deposit for one week so that I can have it returned if they don't give me the TP I think my resort deserves. I haven't deposited with them in years and I won't until they get honest with me. I'm not holding my breath. 
How many of you would give a car dealer your trade-in if they wouldn't tell you how much money you get for it until after you had signed the purchase contract? That is exactly what RCI is doing to you. When you deposit your week you have signed the contract! Then they tell you what your trade-in is worth.


----------



## BevL

kwilson said:


> RCI has done nothing for me. I want them to show me my points BEFORE I deposit, or hold my deposit for one week so that I can have it returned if they don't give me the TP I think my resort deserves. I haven't deposited with them in years and I won't until they get honest with me. I'm not holding my breath.
> How many of you would give a car dealer your trade-in if they wouldn't tell you how much money you get for it until after you had signed the purchase contract? That is exactly what RCI is doing to you. When you deposit your week you have signed the contract! Then they tell you what your trade-in is worth.



I'm sorry, but why can't you use the deposit calculator to give you the value of your deposit? 

Although some of us may not like the number of points we're getting, at least we can now check before we deposit.  Or am I missing the point of your post?


----------



## krmlaw

yeah i used the deposit calculator and it was great! i deposited and was credited the exact TPs they said it would be.


----------



## tschwa2

Kwilson,
You can't use the mange deposits to find the value if you don't have an RCI membership but if you ask on the sightings board about your resort and the ones you might be interested in trading for I'm sure someone would look up the tp information.


----------



## elaine

*unhappy sorta*

i think Carolinian's pionts are all spot on, IMHO.

Thru 100s of hours on TUG and RCI, we have made RCI work for us for 10+ years, in the end, getting more than we have put in, when you even it all out. But, I agree, very unfair--and I worry very much about survival of TS, in general, and am almost ready to bail out on a few of mine (all prime weeks at top places).

I am unhappy that a 4th of July 3 BR gold crown at HHI at a highly rated resort with ZERO deposits avaiable for trade gets 38 points and that a July 3 BR in MB at a place (IMHO, having stayed there) is lesser quality and lower demand (as deposits are sitting in RCI) gets 60 points and a week 51 in Orlando gets 56 points, but only takes 32ish points to trade into.
On the other hand, I like the transparency---my week 32 NC beach week would have gotten 24 points for 2011 (already deposited with II), but will get 32 points for 2012. I would have never considered depositing with II, but I might now for 2012.
Happy b/c my parents week 51 in Orlando gets 56 points, and I can help myself to their account, and can also combine their 2 dog weeks to get a super trader.
We consider unloading some of our TS (4 weeks), but we are still getting what we want, so it is still working for us. Even after the CHANGE, we could still get what we want (35 points), so I am sticking with RCI, for now.


----------



## beejaybeeohio

*Still don't get it...*

Why is a 2011 deposit valued at 5 points more than the 2012?  (Bushman's Nek).  Ok, I can see that *maybe* the July 1st start date for '11 vs. the 29 June start date in '12 at Peekn'Peak equates to a loss of 3 credits, but come on, it's still over the 4th of July holiday.

Show me the trend data supporting these reductions!  It will be interesting to see what my 2013 FC week is worth in comparison to its' current 37 (same as current P&P).


----------



## tstired

*tstired*

I am not yet a member of RCI;however,would like to know how I can find out the trading value of my fixed week before joining.  The web site did not allow this  and a phone call said that I must  first become a member to find out.  What's up with that?


----------



## kwilson

BevL said:


> I'm sorry, but why can't you use the deposit calculator to give you the value of your deposit?
> 
> Although some of us may not like the number of points we're getting, at least we can now check before we deposit.  Or am I missing the point of your post?



First, I am an RCI member (over 20 years), but it won't let me use the calculator unless I have a deposit, and I won't deposit unless I can use the calculator. Catch 22. 
The deposit calculator screen comes up. But after I enter the resort number it will not allow me to continue.

EDIT #2... What do you know. I tried using a different resort # and it suddenly lets me use the calculator. Must have been doing something wrong. this changes everything.


----------



## Mel

kwilson said:


> First, I am an RCI member (over 20 years), but it won't let me use the calculator unless I have a deposit, and I won't deposit unless I can use the calculator. Catch 22.
> The deposit calculator screen comes up. But after I enter the resort number it will not allow me to continue.


Try clearing your cache and cookies, or use a different browser.  There may be something in your internet options that is preventing you from using it.  I normally use IE, but switched to Chrome when my popup blocker kept the Deposit Calculator from showing up (held the control key while selecting, and that didn't help, tried turning the blocker off... nothing worked).  Having a deposit has nothing to do with using the deposit calculator, though it will prevent you from seeing what is available as an exchange, and the cost of those exchanges.


----------



## AFARR

*I'm not unhappy..*

But that comes from being a new TS owner rather than a long-timer who knows the system...

My OBX weeks:

Wk 37, 2 Br OBBC II...23 credits (already had it deposited for lack of ability to use the 2010 week..24 credits for 2012 deposit)..this is a Gold Crown resort.

My Wk 39 3 Br. L/O BIS Duck week...would be 22 Points (2012 deposit)...but if I split it apart 18 + 15..I'd get 33 credits to use..it's an unrated resort (but with SPM managing it, and with the location...it may go back up some in the future)..

Neither are 60 credit weeks, but they're not 'dogs' either...looks like I can get a fair number of places with itthem (or in combination).   

MFs are $540 and $600 respectively...so not too bad (compared to some places).    

If I had been a long time user with a 'lower' credit week that I had been able to leverage into (what are now showing as) a 'higher' credit week, I'd probably be disappointed.

I do see Carolinian's point (even a few of the above have mentioned similar, even the ones who don't generally agree with him)..there isn't a good, consistent way that RCI judges the 'value' of the weeks....places with high supply, lower demand are getting more credits than places with low supply, higher demand...and RCI undoubtedly does work with the developers much more than the owners when they set values (they have a vested interest in keeping resorts in the RCI system).   

I find myself looking at weeks on Ebay on the OBX...then looking at their trade credit value...(and sneering at some).

However....ALL the above posts pretty much show the conventional wisdom of TUG..."Buy where you are going to use".    Crying about lower trade credits when you own a blue studio week doesn't make too much sense (even if you did get some good trades in the past), but I can see complaining if you have a Bright Red 3 Br. and can only get enough credits to get that blue week....which I don't see happening.     

Just my $0.02.

AFARR


----------



## kwilson

Mel said:


> Try clearing your cache and cookies, or use a different browser.  There may be something in your internet options that is preventing you from using it.  I normally use IE, but switched to Chrome when my popup blocker kept the Deposit Calculator from showing up (held the control key while selecting, and that didn't help, tried turning the blocker off... nothing worked).  Having a deposit has nothing to do with using the deposit calculator, though it will prevent you from seeing what is available as an exchange, and the cost of those exchanges.



Thanks Mel. I don't know what I did but suddenly it is working. 

Kenny


----------



## BevL

kwilson said:


> Thanks Mel. I don't know what I did but suddenly it is working.
> 
> Kenny



Glad to hear it.  And now I understand why you needed someone to check for you on the sightings board - you're not committing to the deposit until you know you can get what you need!!


----------



## Carolinian

What you kept repeating was that RCI had said it would not change trading power, only publicize it, and at least suggested that we should believe that.  Yes, ''moving the goal post'' is my terminology that means the same as what they said.  Your are arguing over something that is a distinction without a difference.  Nice dodge but it doesn't work.

Your shot in the dark on South Africa is so way off base it is almost laughable.  Maybe if you would read that board you might learn something!  Among other things RCI reps have revealed that they use different criteria since Points Lite was imposed to set SA values than they use anywhere else and it artificially devalues SA.




MichaelColey said:


> Please find a post where I said RCI would never "move the goalposts".  That's your phrase.  It's not what RCI said.  And it's not what I said.
> 
> RCI said that the trading power of existing deposits would not change.  I have no way of knowing what my trading powers were before the upgrade, so I have no way of knowing if they changed or not.  I was able to see MORE units with the same deposits after they came back online, so my assumption is that trading power of existing deposits did not change.
> 
> As for the South African deposits, my understanding is that those changed *before* the upgrade.  Perhaps they were artificially inflated from the World Cup and were adjusted down, but I don't see how it has anything to do with the upgrades.


----------



## MichaelColey

Carolinian said:


> What you kept repeating was that RCI had said it would not change trading power, only publicize it, and at least suggested that we should believe that. Yes, ''moving the goal post'' is my terminology that means the same as what they said. Your are arguing over something that is a distinction without a difference. Nice dodge but it doesn't work.


I haven't lost trading power on any of my deposits.  How about you?

I combined three of my deposits, so I can no longer compare what those see, but at the time I combined them they saw about the same number of units (or slightly more) as they did before the upgrade.  For my fourth deposit, it saw 107,744 units on 11/11/10 and sees 114,760 units now.


----------



## miamidan

Carolinian said:


> What you kept repeating was that RCI had said it would not change trading power, only publicize it, and at least suggested that we should believe that.  Yes, ''moving the goal post'' is my terminology that means the same as what they said.  Your are arguing over something that is a distinction without a difference.  Nice dodge but it doesn't work.
> 
> Your shot in the dark on South Africa is so way off base it is almost laughable.  Maybe if you would read that board you might learn something!  Among other things RCI reps have revealed that they use different criteria since Points Lite was imposed to set SA values than they use anywhere else and it artificially devalues SA.



I think the point is that this board is about opinions.  We understand your opinion and we accept it.

We can also have our opinions and you should respect that as well.

I think what many of us are discussing is that it does not appear that trading power was changed.  There are interesting discussions about deposit value and exchange value and how quickly in some areas exchange value gets discounted.

There are interesting discussions on how the trade preference for internals is either gone or not as extreme.

We understand that you love to hate on these boards but, it really is getting boring.

Does anyone have an opinion as to why some very short notice vacations might go for 2 and some for 12.  I regularly watch Florida and it appears that east coast goes for about 5-6 on a week or two notice while Sanibel/Marco when they come up on very short notice are still 12.


----------



## krmlaw

im guessing b/c some areas are still in high demand with low number of units, where others with low last minute TPs are lower in demand with lots of units avail.


----------



## Joe M.

MichaelColey said:


> I haven't lost trading power on any of my deposits.  How about you?



I wrote down the number of available exchanges before the change to the new system. I am finding very little difference now.

2010 SoCal beach studio... TP=27 ... 136k before, 135k now
2011 Socal beach studio...TP=27 ... 140k before, 140k now
2010 SoAfrican 1BR ....... TP=17...107k before, 110k now
2010 SoAfrican studio..... TP=12...74k before, 73k now

I also have a new 2BR Club Regina Select Season (low season) deposit given TP=20 and showing 125k available exchanges. These units have been mediocre traders in past years so I am very pleased with these new results. Count me in as someone liking the changes at RCI.


----------



## bnoble

> I haven't lost trading power on any of my deposits. How about you?


My deposits see roughly the same number of units as before---if anything slightly more (but that seems to be due to an increase in underlying availability.)  When I compare specific areas that I tended to search both before and after, things seem to be roughly the same.

There are situations in which exchanges I've made would have been granted a higher credit value on deposit, but I'm no longer convinced that means that it would have taken a higher credit value to obtain them, based on other deposit vs. exchange comparisons I've made.

There was a DVC revaluation, but that happened on Wednesday the 17th not Monday the 15th (and I've documented that with my suppositions OY.)

So, as near as I can tell, The Change itself was not also accompanied by a wholesale revaluation of what could exchange for what.  That has happened, but it happened on 5/30/09.


----------



## kwilson

*Happy Days Are Here Again*

Thanks to help from Mel and BevL I was able to get the new system working.
I had sworn not to make another deposit until I knew what I was getting.
Well, I now know and it is working out great. I just traded a 1BR Oregon ocean front summer for a 2BR SoCal ocean front wk 50 and have 4 points left over. Whether or not this is a great trade is irrelevant. I got what I really needed in a resort I love.
This is also the trade that RCI refused to give me a few years ago that caused me to cease depositing. 
I am a happy camper!(timesharer?)


----------



## BevL

kwilson said:


> Thanks to help from Mel and BevL I was able to get the new system working.
> I had sworn not to make another deposit until I knew what I was getting.
> Well, I now know and it is working out great. I just traded a 1BR Oregon ocean front summer for a 2BR SoCal ocean front wk 50 and have 4 points left over. Whether or not this is a great trade is irrelevant. I got what I really needed in a resort I love.
> This is also the trade that RCI refused to give me a few years ago that caused me to cease depositing.
> I am a happy camper!(timesharer?)



Glad it worked out for you.


----------



## timeos2

*Well done. Nothing shocking*

It appears overall that the change has been embraced by most RCI Weeks members with a handful that took a bit hit on the reveal of values they may have thought were much higher. I do not see any general re-evaluation of values that Carolinian says happened nor is there any mass exodus of owners due to the change. 

Seems to be a major change in the operation that was reasonably well handled by RCI especially compared to the recent, horribly botched Marriott points fiasco. As expected it is a positive for members to know the values of what they have and what they want for better planning. Also the ability to combine weeks and use "change back" works to members benefit. The possible loss of some previously available upgrades or bands may have occurred but the new possibilities offset that loss. 

The doom and gloom predictions were overblown and this should be a very workable  system going forward.


----------



## Carolinian

MichaelColey said:


> I haven't lost trading power on any of my deposits.  How about you?
> 
> I combined three of my deposits, so I can no longer compare what those see, but at the time I combined them they saw about the same number of units (or slightly more) as they did before the upgrade.  For my fourth deposit, it saw 107,744 units on 11/11/10 and sees 114,760 units now.



I got the heck out of Dodge while I could.  Fortunately I only keep one week at a time in my RCI account and when the spectre of Points Lite first appeared on the horizon I found something to trade it for and zeroed out my account before the downgrade hit.

The key comparision as to whether trading power has gone up, down, or sideways is to look at past even trades and see if they are still even.  My summer OBX week, which I have always used or rented came out OK.  Based on others who have traded similar weeks, it has a points lite number that gets the sort of things they have gotten in the past.  My summer UK weeks got whacked, as seemingly did a lot of UK resorts.  My South African weeks got whacked like all SA weeks.  Now a past trade during a bulkbanking event should be disregarded as should one in the 45 day window, but none of my past trades involved either of those situations.

The other thing I look at is the points lite assigned to very hard to get resorts as against resorts in overbuilt areas or ones with some substantial negative like a resort in a beach area that is way off the beach.  When I scout around those, many of RCI's numbers are absolutely ludicrous.  In fact, in looking at RCI's new numbers racket it reminds me of the way RCI's owner Cendant (now Wyndham) played fast and loose with numbers back in its Enron-type accounting scandal.


----------



## Carolinian

Obviously you have not read the South Africa boards.  South Africa is being treated unfairly by having a different valuation system imposed than any other area and one that does not account for its main demand areas, thereby cheating it of fair trading power.  That is an obvious change, as was the internal exchange arrangement for those who do that.  Then there are cases like JLB over on TS4MS who has been doing the same one for one exchanges for 20 years, and after RCI monkeyed around with trading power, it will now take him 3 weeks to get one smaller week at a lesser resort in the area he has been trading into.  That is one of the biggest whacking on trading power I have seen, and that is with US resorts on both sides.  The UK and other areas in Europe I have looked at also got treated unfairly.

As I said before Points Lite hit, I would evaluate it based on looking at certain very high demand, very low supply resorts vs. certain resorts in overbuilt areas.  RCI has stood supply and demand on its head, as I suspected they would with published numbers.  I can very well see why you and the others who own and promote overbuilt Orlando like this system, but it should also be obvious why those of us whose interests are more in very high demand very low supply areas think it sucks.  Developers, I am sure are happy, but as usual with RCI the term ''sold out resort'' has a sinister double meaning, and that is true on both sides of the Atlantic.

Some of the usual suspects who always support RCI still do not want to take off the rose colored glasses.

You want see the exodus of owners until this gets out to the masses who do not read timeshare BBS's.  I called one owner I knew who had both a week 12 and week 21 on the OBX, and sometimes trades both.  Since RCI now gives the same trading power to both, I asked if they had traded the same in the past (although I already knew the answer) and he said that of course they did not, the week 21 traded significantly better (as it should).  When I told him that under RCI's new regime that his 12 had more TP because it was 2BR and the 21 was only 1BR, he was flabbergasted.  From what he told me, he will just use it from here on, not trade it.  Heck, I wouldn't give it to RCI either at that ripoff rate.




timeos2 said:


> It appears overall that the change has been embraced by most RCI Weeks members with a handful that took a bit hit on the reveal of values they may have thought were much higher. I do not see any general re-evaluation of values that Carolinian says happened nor is there any mass exodus of owners due to the change.
> 
> Seems to be a major change in the operation that was reasonably well handled by RCI especially compared to the recent, horribly botched Marriott points fiasco. As expected it is a positive for members to know the values of what they have and what they want for better planning. Also the ability to combine weeks and use "change back" works to members benefit. The possible loss of some previously available upgrades or bands may have occurred but the new possibilities offset that loss.
> 
> The doom and gloom predictions were overblown and this should be a very workable  system going forward.


----------



## BocaBum99

I have not used RCI for the past couple of years because I think they suck.  I do like the new enhancements and will probably start using them again.


----------



## abbekit

MichaelColey said:


> I haven't lost trading power on any of my deposits.  How about you?



I have lost trading power in my ability to get Hawaii.  All other areas seem about the same.  Took a screen snapshot on 11/8 and saw 148 units in Hawaii (including Kona Hawaiian Resort which I snapped up  for 2012).  Now I see anywhere from 4 to 12 units (all only in the 30 day window).  The Kona week I was able to book by using one week is now available by paying a combine fee and using FOUR weeks (getting back a few points of change).  This would cost me $1000 more than what I got it for before.

Was I getting a great deal before?  YES!   I knew those days were over.  But the cost with the new system is more than renting so it is a real loss of trading power for me.   

Good news is that I can still trade into Hawaii via TPI, DAE or Platinum.   I will use up my RCI deposits on other areas, some that I was never able to get before.  So to excuse the pun, it is a trade off for me.  I will miss my lost trading power for my favorite location (Hawaii) but may find some other areas more available to me by combining deposits.


----------



## miamidan

abbekit said:


> I have lost trading power in my ability to get Hawaii.  All other areas seem about the same.  Took a screen snapshot on 11/8 and saw 148 units in Hawaii (including Kona Hawaiian Resort which I snapped up  for 2012).  Now I see anywhere from 4 to 12 units (all only in the 30 day window).  The Kona week I was able to book by using one week is now available by paying a combine fee and using FOUR weeks (getting back a few points of change).  This would cost me $1000 more than what I got it for before.
> 
> Was I getting a great deal before?  YES!   I knew those days were over.  But the cost with the new system is more than renting so it is a real loss of trading power for me.
> 
> Good news is that I can still trade into Hawaii via TPI, DAE or Platinum.   I will use up my RCI deposits on other areas, some that I was never able to get before.  So to excuse the pun, it is a trade off for me.  I will miss my lost trading power for my favorite location (Hawaii) but may find some other areas more available to me by combining deposits.



by any chance was the kona trade done with internal trade preference?


----------



## abbekit

miamidan said:


> by any chance was the kona trade done with internal trade preference?



Don't have a clue what an internal trade preference is.  My week was purchased so many years ago (in the 1980s by my father) that I don't think any of those plans existed.  

It is not only Wyndham resorts that I no longer see.  I used to see Pahio resorts (pre-Wyndham ownership), Cliffs Club, just about anything in Hawaii except the biggies (Westin, Marriott, Hilton) before the new RCI points-lite.  And I could often see many units in some of the lesser resorts (many of the Oahu timeshares) for any time frame.  Now I only see things in the 30 day window unless I combine weeks.


----------



## Mel

abbekit said:


> I have lost trading power in my ability to get Hawaii.  All other areas seem about the same.  Took a screen snapshot on 11/8 and saw 148 units in Hawaii (including Kona Hawaiian Resort which I snapped up  for 2012).  Now I see anywhere from 4 to 12 units (all only in the 30 day window).  The Kona week I was able to book by using one week is now available by paying a combine fee and using FOUR weeks (getting back a few points of change).  This would cost me $1000 more than what I got it for before.
> 
> Was I getting a great deal before?  YES!   I knew those days were over.  But the cost with the new system is more than renting so it is a real loss of trading power for me.


If you can see pretty much eveything you saw before other than the Hawaii weeks, I wonder if it is not so much a question of your trade power dropping, but of the trade power required for Hawaii increasing?

The ne effect is the same - you not being able to exchange into Hawaii - but the underlying cause is very different.

Most of the complaints seem to be about inefficiencies of the old system that no longer exist.  Some seem to think that just because RCI has allowed certain things to happen in the past, that they must continue to do so.  But that premise gives no incentive for HOAs or developers to improve their resort, nor even to maintain their level of quality.

Saying RCI must allow solid blue studio owners the opportunity to exchange into anything and everything 45 days out, because it's always been that way is like saying RCI must continue to accept deposits from resorts that can't maintain a consistent level of quality (there are a number of resorts that have lost their RCI affiliation over time) because owners bought under that assumption.

Buyer Beware about everything else the salesman tells you, but RCI should be held to anything the salesman promised about RCI, even though the contract spells out that the exchange program is NOT in fact part of what you are buying.  Before the salesman ever gets to the part where he says your blue week can exchange for anything within 45 days, he also promises that red week you chose not to buy could always trade into anything in the system.  Should RCI be bound by that too?


----------



## Timeshare Von

Carolinian said:


> Yvonne, I don't remember you being one who kept claiming that RCI was telling the truth when it said it would not alter the trading power of weeks, only publish the numbers.  If so, you were not one of the handful that kept harping on it.



Nope I probably didn't say that . . . but I did say I was accepting their settlement offer (of trinkets) for the class action suit and I think you said something to the effect about drinking the kool-aid.

In any event, nobody knew anything back then.  All any of us in the peanut gallery "knew" was that things would change in how RCI handled their exchange business model.  Some had opinions of this or that, but none "knew".

Those of us with any history with RCI had experience to tell us that (1) whatever we were told, would probably change and (2) until it was in writing everything was speculation.

I'm not getting real worked up (yet) over the changes because I really do not know how they will affect me.  What I do know is what I already knew, Williamsburg is overbuilt and as a result my ownership has been devalued in terms of what I'm expecting to get in the future.  Sure RCI said (generally speaking) values wouldn't change and now it would appear for me and my ownership, it has . . . but it is not all that unexpected.

I have been fortunate in my 8 or 9 years of owning that resort, to get some great trades through RCI and the internal preference of Wyndham to Wyndham.  I hope that will be continued when they roll out the Wyndham platform, but I'm not holding my breath.

Right now, it matters little as where I want to go in the coming couple or 3 years is not within the Wyndham network.  I do like the ability to combine my ownership TP values for stronger trading power into places that historically I probably didn't have access too.  Ireland is one such destination (as you know from my other Europe posting/thread).

Time will tell . . . and until there has been some time, it's hard to tell.


----------



## Carolinian

Actually the problem is about the corruption of the numbers of the new system that now exist since they have moved the goalposts.

As I said before this thing hit, my analysis was based on looking at the numbers for areas of extremely high demand and very low supply compared to overbuilt or overpointed areas.

On the high side of RCI's numbers, I see such things as (based on posts by others):
- The resort with the highest oversupply in the entire RCI system, as RCI employee Bootleg told us, Vacation Village at Parkway, where for 1BR week 52 RCI is offering 50 points lite, or the other side of the lockoff, 49.  For the whole lockoff, it would total 99 points lite.  Is it really worth that? No, as shown by what RCI will let you trade in for that week for 2011, over a year away - 11 points lite.
- A 3BR summer week in a resort far from the beach in Myrtle Beach at 60 points lite. (yes summer is high season in MB but there are a lot of resorts there and this one is far from the beach).

On the low side at resorts that are often hard to find any time of the year:
- Chateau de Maulmont, France (2 units, most owners use themselves) - summer 2BR week 22 points lite
- Prague, Rezidence Zlatych - 1BR week 24, 30 points lite
- Monaco, Residence le Castel - 1BR week 31 - French Riviera height of season, 27 points lite
- Venice, Perle Veneziene, 2BR week 30, 32 points lite
- Stouts Hill, UK, only resort in Cotwolds, week 19, 2BR, 23 points lite
- Viena, Hotel Deutschmeister, 1BR, week 31, 1BR, 24 points lite
- London, Allen House, 1BR Christmas or Thanksgiving, 34 points lite
- London, Allen House, weeks 27 to 36, 1BR, 45 points lite
- London, Allen House, New Years, 1BR, 39 points lite

Some always want to look down their noses at motel conversions, so lets make that comparision. OBX, Ocean Villas (motel conversion) prime summer 1BR 38 points lite, 2BR 46 points lite.

Looking at some US areas with very limited supply and high demand that are hard to find any time of the year:
- Charleston / Isle of Palms - Isle of Palms Beach Club, 1BR, weeks 32-35, 25 points lite; week 36, 21 points lite
- Savannah / Tybee Island - Tybrisa at the Beach, 2BR, week 29, 28 points lite
(both of those resorts are also oceanfront)

Conclusions:
- Is Points Lite based on supply and demand?  Horsehockey!
- Does Points Lite offer like for like?  Horsehockey!
- Are there definite opportunities for trades up in Points Lite?  Absolutely! If you happen to own the right thing.  Too bad if you own the resorts or resort areas that are screwed.


----------



## Timeshare Von

Carolinian said:


> Conclusions:
> - Is Points Lite based on supply and demand?  Horsehockey!
> - Does Points Lite offer like for like?  Horsehockey!
> - Are there definite opportunities for trades up in Points Lite?  Absolutely! If you happen to own the right thing.  Too bad if you own the resorts or resort areas that are screwed.



And every owner has a right to decide what is acceptable or not for them and their situation(s).  There is no need for you to continue to beat the drum against RCI . . . it's become very boorish behavior.


----------



## AFARR

*Carolinian...*

Have to wonder....

Is the corruption of the new Points Lite/Credits/"Enhanced Weeks" system a new issue, or is it that it has become more visible.    

Prior to this (from reading here, as I'm a new owner and don't have the experience myself)...it sounds like the issues were already present, but could be somewhat glossed over by last minute trades (45 day window) and Home resort/area preferences....with the window and home preference changed (Home to 'first in line, but need the credits' preference).

There's another thread below (by Skimble, I think) about why does XX resort with beach access/views get less points than YY resorts.    

I think we're going to see more and more people finding issues with values over time...maybe RCI will do a slow, gradual change (or a night of the long knives quick change)...

AFARR


----------



## Carolinian

Looking at even trades that people made before in normal trades not involving either the 45 day window or a bulkbanking episode, there were some major shifts in numbers by RCI.  There may have been some anomalies earlier but there seem to be many now that did not exist then. The UK, which is generally high demand and hard to get, has been shortchanged, as has Europe generally.  In the past, RCI used to ringfence a certain amount of European inventory that was only made availible to European members.  I sure hope they are still doing so, as otherwise Europeans will be playing second fiddle to overpointed US owners in some high supply areas.

My own summer UK weeks will continue as they have for 2011 to go to DAE and SFX, whereas I used to give one to RCI.  RCI may actually get my South African weeks, as if I can get in early enough to get the right weeks under the float system I can get 18 points lite each for them, and might even combine them given the low m/f's.  Of course, the problem will still be that many of the people who have underpointed weeks will probably be smart enough not to give them to RCI, so those theoretical trades up might actually be illusory.  It may be worth a shot once, just to see.  Points Lite means that RCI will never again get my prime weeks, but I may roll the dice with my cheap lesser weeks.  Unfortunately for off season non-lockout owners in the US, their m/f's probably mean that it would not be cost effective to combine weeks.  SA weeks like lockouts have low m/f per unit/week, so it may be feasible.

If I were running SFX, I would already have someone on a plane to the UK to use RCI's absurd numbers to go make the case to resorts as to why RCI has cheated their owners, and it is time to come over to SFX.  One London resort already kicked out RCI a few years ago and now uses SFX as its main exchange company.  DAE is already on the ground with an office in the UK, and I suspect they will take advantage of the situation, too.  Side trips to France and Italy would also seem to be in order.





AFARR said:


> Have to wonder....
> 
> Is the corruption of the new Points Lite/Credits/"Enhanced Weeks" system a new issue, or is it that it has become more visible.
> 
> Prior to this (from reading here, as I'm a new owner and don't have the experience myself)...it sounds like the issues were already present, but could be somewhat glossed over by last minute trades (45 day window) and Home resort/area preferences....with the window and home preference changed (Home to 'first in line, but need the credits' preference).
> 
> There's another thread below (by Skimble, I think) about why does XX resort with beach access/views get less points than YY resorts.
> 
> I think we're going to see more and more people finding issues with values over time...maybe RCI will do a slow, gradual change (or a night of the long knives quick change)...
> 
> AFARR


----------



## miamidan

Carolinian said:


> Actually the problem is about the corruption of the numbers of the new system that now exist since they have moved the goalposts.
> 
> As I said before this thing hit, my analysis was based on looking at the numbers for areas of extremely high demand and very low supply compared to overbuilt or overpointed areas.
> 
> On the high side of RCI's numbers, I see such things as (based on posts by others):
> - The resort with the highest oversupply in the entire RCI system, as RCI employee Bootleg told us, Vacation Village at Parkway, where for 1BR week 52 RCI is offering 50 points lite, or the other side of the lockoff, 49.  For the whole lockoff, it would total 99 points lite.  Is it really worth that? No, as shown by what RCI will let you trade in for that week for 2011, over a year away - 11 points lite.
> - A 3BR summer week in a resort far from the beach in Myrtle Beach at 60 points lite. (yes summer is high season in MB but there are a lot of resorts there and this one is far from the beach).
> 
> On the low side at resorts that are often hard to find any time of the year:
> - Chateau de Maulmont, France (2 units, most owners use themselves) - summer 2BR week 22 points lite
> - Prague, Rezidence Zlatych - 1BR week 24, 30 points lite
> - Monaco, Residence le Castel - 1BR week 31 - French Riviera height of season, 27 points lite
> - Venice, Perle Veneziene, 2BR week 30, 32 points lite
> - Stouts Hill, UK, only resort in Cotwolds, week 19, 2BR, 23 points lite
> - Viena, Hotel Deutschmeister, 1BR, week 31, 1BR, 24 points lite
> - London, Allen House, 1BR Christmas or Thanksgiving, 34 points lite
> - London, Allen House, weeks 27 to 36, 1BR, 45 points lite
> - London, Allen House, New Years, 1BR, 39 points lite
> 
> Some always want to look down their noses at motel conversions, so lets make that comparision. OBX, Ocean Villas (motel conversion) prime summer 1BR 38 points lite, 2BR 46 points lite.
> 
> Looking at some US areas with very limited supply and high demand that are hard to find any time of the year:
> - Charleston / Isle of Palms - Isle of Palms Beach Club, 1BR, weeks 32-35, 25 points lite; week 36, 21 points lite
> - Savannah / Tybee Island - Tybrisa at the Beach, 2BR, week 29, 28 points lite
> (both of those resorts are also oceanfront)
> 
> Conclusions:
> - Is Points Lite based on supply and demand?  Horsehockey!
> - Does Points Lite offer like for like?  Horsehockey!
> - Are there definite opportunities for trades up in Points Lite?  Absolutely! If you happen to own the right thing.  Too bad if you own the resorts or resort areas that are screwed.




I would hate to see how intense you would be about this change had you not got the heck out of dodge!


----------



## Carolinian

Getting existing deposits out did not stop this from impacting trading going forward.  

I suspect that many of the most intense defenders of RCI would be much less so if they did not own in overbuilt Orlando, which seems to be really coddled by RCI.


----------



## bnoble

> I would hate to see how intense you would be about this change had you not got the heck out of dodge!


I'm waiting for the day that RCI and Delta enter into a marketing agreement.  That will be something.


----------



## schiff1997

At the present time I am one of those happy with RCI Orlando owners who is reaping the benefits of a high TP Value for 2011.  But you need to remember there are millions of muggle fans all over this world and because of this many are expected to flock to Orlando over the next year.  So  I think you will find that as the excitement of the new Wizarding World of Harry Potter wears down so will the TP value due to possible demand for my Orlando units. I am afraid that only time will tell.


----------



## miamidan

bnoble said:


> I'm waiting for the day that RCI and Delta enter into a marketing agreement.  That will be something.



I can not even imagine!:whoopie:


----------



## timeos2

*volume pays the bills*



schiff1997 said:


> At the present time I am one of those happy with RCI Orlando owners who is reaping the benefits of a high TP Value for 2011.  But you need to remember there are millions of muggle fans all over this world and because of this many are expected to flock to Orlando over the next year.  So  I think you will find that as the excitement of the new Wizarding World of Harry Potter wears down so will the TP value due to possible demand for my Orlando units. I am afraid that only time will tell.



The system will self balance over time as the only way it works is if the demand for the available units comes close to the supply. Now owners get to see what they have and can adjust their actions to best suit their needs. It is better than it was a few weeks ago and going forward should be a viable option for many owners. If it favors one group or punishes another really doesn't matter to me as long as I know what I have and how to use it best. 

It is too bad some cannot see that volume plays a big role in this game and no area beats the shear volume of exchanges Orlando generates for RCI. If they want to maximize that so be it and those of us who prefer Orlando anyway get to reap that benefit. Those who want a once or twice in a lifetime trade to England can figure out how best to obtain that as well. It is clear RCI understands where the money is. It's not from trades to overseas for the majority of owners.


----------



## Laurie

Carolinian said:


> My own summer UK weeks will continue as they have for 2011 to go to DAE and SFX, whereas I used to give one to RCI.  RCI may actually get my South African weeks, as if I can get in early enough to get the right weeks under the float system I can get 18 points lite each for them, and might even combine them given the low m/f's. ..  Points Lite means that RCI will never again get my prime weeks, but I may roll the dice with my cheap lesser weeks.  Unfortunately for off season non-lockout owners in the US, their m/f's probably mean that it would not be cost effective to combine weeks.  SA weeks like lockouts have low m/f per unit/week, so it may be feasible.


Carolinian, from the standpoint of self-interest: why on earth would you give a high m/f week to DAE, when you can get the exact same exchange with a low m/f week??


----------



## Carolinian

Isn't it a bit provincial to forget the fact that RCI has a lot of owners who live in Europe for whom a trip to Florida is a once or twice in a lifetime trade?  And there are some RCI members in the US who are not so provincial that a trade to Europe is a once or twice in a lifetime trade.  When I was living in the US, my trades to Europe were a two or three times a year event. Orlando?  Nice place every now and then, more often than once every 8 to 10 years and I get mouse overload.  Who can get excited over a kitsch Europe at EPCOT when one was traveling to the real thing five times a year or so?

It is clear that RCI at least at one time understood the relative value of European inventory versus North American inventory.  That is why they offered European members 2 for 1 credits if they would exchange into North America instead of back into Europe.  It is also why they have ringfenced some of their better European inventory, making it availible to European members but not North American members.  Now, from some information I have heard, RCI has apparently ended the protections for its European members with this new set of changes.  I suspect that, combined with numbers that do not reflect real supply and demand will end up stampeding a lot of European members away from RCI.

You really don't care about the fairness of the numbers, and perhaps that is because RCI's thumb is on the scales in favor of Orlando, the area where you own.  Another Tugger has posted that Orlando seems to have the biggest discrepancy between high values awarded for deposits versus lower numbers required for a trade in. That shows that RCI is knowingly giving members there more value than the market says they deserve  You say volume does that and RCI is justified.  Well if they play the game that way, in a few years RCI may be a great place to exchange if you want to go to an overbuilt area like Orlando, Branson, Williamsburg, Massanutten, the Canary Islands, Finland, or Hungary, but everyone else will have fled to other exchange companies.

If I owned at Allen House, I would be pressing the HOA board to affiliate with II and SFX and to terminate its relationship with RCI unless RCI immediately gave them reasonable points lite numbers.





timeos2 said:


> The system will self balance over time as the only way it works is if the demand for the available units comes close to the supply. Now owners get to see what they have and can adjust their actions to best suit their needs. It is better than it was a few weeks ago and going forward should be a viable option for many owners. If it favors one group or punishes another really doesn't matter to me as long as I know what I have and how to use it best.
> 
> It is too bad some cannot see that volume plays a big role in this game and no area beats the shear volume of exchanges Orlando generates for RCI. If they want to maximize that so be it and those of us who prefer Orlando anyway get to reap that benefit. Those who want a once or twice in a lifetime trade to England can figure out how best to obtain that as well. It is clear RCI understands where the money is. It's not from trades to overseas for the majority of owners.


----------



## Carolinian

Because 1) I have gotten some great stuff from them,  2) I beleive it doesn't hurt to motivate them a bit more on searches by giving them some good stuff back, and 3) I am not going to give anything that is underpointed by RCI to RCI, period.

Also, I can very easily rent my summer OBX week for a good price, and I have never given that to any exchange company.

Ironically the only weeks I have that I may give to RCI are my devalued SA weeks.  If I can get in early and reserve the right weeks and then combine them (which is only feasible due to low m/f), I could have a 36 point lite trader. Only by getting the right weeks can I get the same trading power I had before or close to it, which I got then with weeks that now have a lot less points lite. The combining fee sticks in my craw, however, and I really don't beleive that a lot of people are going to be depositing those underpointed weeks for me to raid. Even if they did, the way RCI seems to be playing the game, they would probably charge me what they are really worth to trade into them.

The way RCI has monkeyed with its system, it is only my low m/f weeks that I would even consider giving to them.




Laurie said:


> Carolinian, from the standpoint of self-interest: why on earth would you give a high m/f week to DAE, when you can get the exact same exchange with a low m/f week??


----------



## Laurie

Carolinian said:


> Ironically the only weeks I have that I may give to RCI are my devalued SA weeks.  If I can get in early and reserve the right weeks and then combine them (which is only feasible due to low m/f), I could have a 36 point lite trader. Only by getting the right weeks can I get the same trading power I had before or close to it, which I got then with weeks that now have a lot less points lite. The combining fee sticks in my craw, however, and I really don't beleive that a lot of people are going to be depositing those underpointed weeks for me to raid. Even if they did, the way RCI seems to be playing the game, they would probably charge me what they are really worth to trade into them.


Good luck with that strategy, but you'll be competing with all the other owners who now can see the same charts... plus if the past is any indication of the future, values of the exact same SA weeks could fluctuate wildly, so by the time you get your floating week assignment, the trading power numbers may have completely changed. (At least that's my experience w/Dik weeks in the past, and one reason I no longer own there - too inconsistent in the extreme for same week different years, and not because of peak week calendars, nor mass bankings in March, nor any other discernable reason.)


----------



## Carolinian

Laurie said:


> Good luck with that strategy, but you'll be competing with all the other owners who now can see the same charts... plus if the past is any indication of the future, values of the exact same SA weeks could fluctuate wildly, so by the time you get your floating week assignment, the trading power numbers may have completely changed. (At least that's my experience w/Dik weeks in the past, and one reason I no longer own there - too inconsistent in the extreme for same week different years, and not because of peak week calendars, nor mass bankings in March, nor any other discernable reason.)



As I said, I may try it one time to see if it works.  Even with low m/f's, it means a bigger hill to climb in finding a trade that makes sense when one considers two m/f's plus combining fee plus exchange fee but it might.  If it doesn't, I will probably sell one week and use the other with DAE.  RCI will be primarily for rentals until my membership runs out.

On the SA board, someone had talked with an RCI rep who said that since the change, RCI was now assigning values to SA weeks owned by either Americans or non-South Africans (that wasn't clear in the post, but since the value calculator on the RCI Europe page gives me the same numbers as those reported from the North America site, it seems clear it applies to all non-South Africans) in a manner totally different from anywhere else in their system.  Instead of valuing all supply vs all demand, they arbitrarily are basing value numbers on demand from North America against supply from non-SA sources.  What the poster in that thread had immediately picked up on was that this did not include demand from Europe, which happens to be the largest, by far, source of inbound tourists to SA.  If you exclude that demand, the system designed is totally fraudulent and cheats the owners of those weeks.  One wonders what other mechanisms RCI is using to put its thumb on the scales for or against certain areas.  What they did in South Africa shows the crying need for transparency in the way the numbers are set.  Of course the major accounting scandal at RCI's parent, Cendant (now Wyndham) means that I would flatly not trust any numbers coming out of RCI without a lot of supporting data anyway.


----------



## miamidan

Carolinian,

I have no idea what your week is worth in trading power or where you want to go but, I am finding plenty of good stuff at 20 or below and this is for a family that needs 2 bedrooms in summer vacation times.


----------



## "Roger"

*Reflections (properly put onthe Opinion board)*

Loooong post.  I thought I would put my reflections all in one post.  That way anyone who wants to ignore me because I have been labled a RCI Happy can ignore just this single post.  

*Orlando:*  Orlando has been a favorite whipping boy ever since I joined TUG (and not just by a single poster).  From day one, there were declarations that it was overbuilt and easy to get into.  For that reason, don't buy there.  

Overbuilt, maybe, but how well has Orlando done as a trader? Way back, Orlando owners used to post that, despite all the bashing, they got good trades.  TUG trade tests seem to have confirmed that.  There was a 2004 trade test, but the RCI portion did not include an Orlando resort. (The II test included a Vistana and it did well. Actually, there was little difference in any of the resorts that were matched up. No penalty for owning Orlando in II at the time.) Going back to the next previous test - 2003 - generalizing (and people can look at the test themselves - feel free) the Orlando resorts ended up in the middle of the pack, one step down from a grouping (with small differences among them) that was decidedly higher. (Put differently, the Orlando resorts ended up in the second and what would be best described as a middle tier.) 

One shocker from this test (I remember when it was published) was that the Orlando resorts did better than one of the two Shearwater resorts used in the test. One Shearwater unit was at the lower end (marginal differences) of the top tier, which is what people expected; the other was in the _*third*_ tier. There is an easy explanation for this: it was a Dec.1 week. Still, _even an October Orange Lake _(low, low season in Florida - tremendous excess capacity) out performed it.

So, if people are shocked by the numbers that Orlando units are getting, it appears that all that they are learning is what was behind that secret curtain all of the time.  (We are always being told that what was behind that secret curtain was the way things should be.)  What will be interesting is now that this is more out in the open and people won't be trading one for one, what sort of adjustments will be made as true supply and demand kicks in. This will be interesting to watch.

*One vs. Two Bedrooms:*  To me, the real shocker in the published values is how little extra point value is being given for larger units.  In Points, there is a real incentive to try to save some extra points by not taking a bigger unit than you really need.  This helps open up two bedroom units for those who really need them. Not so with the published values. For an extra point or two, why not take a bigger unit? (And also, split your lockout for sure.)  

So is this new?  Hindsight makes me think not.  In the past, whenever someone posted a question about how well just part of their lockout would trade, the responses were always it will trade really well (even for the studio portions).  People reported that the smaller portions brought them trades equivalent to their entire unit so the advice was always "Split, baby, split."

I agree with the critics that this is a terrible feature of the Weeks system.  Hopefully, published values, with supply and demand will lead to change and reform.

*Supply and demand:*  I am honestly puzzled trying to figure out some people's conception of supply and demand.  Under classical economic theory, any company that tries to ignore it will be punished.  Price things too low and it lowers its own profits.  Price things too high and it will be stuck with unsold inventory. This is not something that can be controlled by putting one's thumbs on the scale.  Misprice and you will be punished.

For this to work, however, you have to have published and incrimentally differing prices. If you want to avoid supply and demand and introduce corruption, secret pricing is the way to go.

*Beach vs. near beach:*  For some, being on the beach is the _sine qua non_ (that without which nothing) for timesharing.  _Nothing_ on the beach should be outrankedby  anything off no matter what.  If it is, then something must be amiss in the pricing.

I haven't been to OBX or Myrtle Beach,  but I can't help think about the fact that one of the most desired areas on the East Coast is Hilton Head and few of the resorts there are actually on the beach.  In fact, the most desired of all Hilton Head resorts - Disney - is not.  Apparently, many people are looking for something more out of timesharing than just being able to see the ocean from their window.

*Duck vs Kitty Hawk:*  As mentioned, I have never been to OBX.  Given the constant references, however, I have had to look at some of the claims about it.  Starting about ten years ago, BIS Duck was praised and Kitty Hawk was bashed.  The story has been Duck is desirable because of its location and Kitty Hawk should be receiving lower points because it is located away from the beach.  

First an apology to AFARR.  Duck has been taken over by new management and seems to be on the upswing as some much needed upkeep and repair is occurring.  If you own your own unit and know what you are getting, it appears as if this is rapidly becoming a good place to own.  But what about for outsiders?

First by the numbers:  On RCI directory page, *Duck* has 53 reviews and an overall *2.7* rating.  *Kitty Hawk *has 41 review and an overall *3.9* rating. Hmmm...  Looking at the first two pages (the first eight) of the actual reviews for Duck, five of them mention that the resort is on the upswing.  Three of the reviews, however, give it *one star*.  They mention things like water leaking through the ceiling (that is also in one of the three star reviews), dated appliances and furniture, offensive smells, crumbs in the kitchen drawers and dirty pans.  The bottom line is that if you own or somehow know that you will get a renovated unit, this might be a great place.  But there is a difference between just a lack of amenities and dirt.  As an outsider, would I be willing to take a gamble on a week of my vacation living in a broken down unit?  As one of the reviews titles itself "only if you are desperate" (and for me not even then).

The previous paragraph probably goes a lot further toward explaining the lower point value for Duck than the oft cited thumb on the scales or overemphasizing of amenities.

*Blue weeks:*  Yeah, it is a worry about how those resorts with blue weeks will survive.  But, is the worry soley due to the introduction of point values or the loss of the 45 day grace period for trades?

Starting with the 45 day period, I have to mention that the principle proponent of this argument sold his blue weeks and bought into SA when the 45 day period was still there.  That is fine.  I am sure it made more economic sense to do so.  I just hope he openly told everyone at his resort about his reasons because I am sure that it made economic sense for others to do so.  The bottom line is that there were already economic pressures on the blue weeks before Points came into existence.  

Still, do points lead to the demise of resorts having blue weeks?  Is this the nail in the coffin.  I am a skeptic.  Fairfield, Worldmark, and Bluegreen all existed long before RCI Points, all had points based systems, all have resorts with blue weeks, and their resorts with blue weeks have all managed to survive.  Quite frankly, there is more demand for trading into the blue weeks because of the low price.  That helps bolster their value. So before we cry over the resorts with blue weeks, let us see what actually happens.


----------



## AFARR

*Roger....*

Good post with a lot of thinking points...

I'll address the OBX issue, as I know a little about that area.   I do have high hopes as a new owner for SPM to get BIS Duck back up to higher standards (there is no reason it shouldn't be at least Silver Crown with the available amenities and location).    

I did ask the BIS Duck people about the bad reviews....they get almost 3x as many complaints when the weather is bad....obviously the weather affects most of the OBX at the same time (sort of...the saying there is 'don't like the weather?  wait 15 min. or drive 15 miles').   However with BIS Kitty Hawk not being on the beach...visitors/owners will have to go out to do things rather than stay at the beach (as happens a lot in BIS Duck).   That may cover a few of the issues...and BIS Duck is definitely an older resort.    I'm sure a lot of the complaints are justified...I certainly wouldn't want to check into a dirty unit.   
SPM just took over in January, so a lot of the older reviews were from when the BIS people were running all the resorts...and sinking the money into BIS Kitty Hawk...so things are definitely looking up..

Now on to the points issue....OK, I took 2 other resorts (I don't own)..
BIS Kitty Hawk, using a 2 BR unit (sleeps 6).    Kitty Hawk is a Hospitality resort.   Ratings on RCI are (as you mentioned) 3.8 overall.
Wk 3......10
Wk 27.....47
Wk 37.....22


Then to Sea Scape...also using a 2 Br unit, in a Hospitality resort, also off the beach (but closer to the beach) AND it is associated with a golf course (that a lot of the units view).   The big difference (yes, it is an older resort than KH) is that it is NOT in developer sales anymore.   Ratings on RCI are 3.9 overall.
Wk 3......10
Wk 27....43
Wk 37....20

Not much of a points difference in the way off season...but there is still a substantial (10%) difference in the Red and High/Prime Red weeks.   Same resort rating, same size unit, same off-beach location.    BIS Kitty Hawk dropped from GC to SC to Hospitality....not a good sign for something in developer sales.    


As to Hilton Head island...never been there, but a number of my patients have been...and universally, they are there for the golf rather than the beach (or fishing, or entertainment, etc.).   

I very much agree with the lack of credits for the larger units....my 3 Br L.O. (wk 39) at BIS Duck gets 22 credits for the whole thing, or 18 for the 2 Br. Part and 15 for the 1 Br. Part (with partial kitchen)...not a very big difference across the board....obviously makes more sense to deposit one or both parts of the L/O rather than the whole thing.    And, if I'm in the market for another weeks unit...I'd have to look for another L/O unit just because of that (vs. my Wk 37 OBBC II that gets a max of 24 credits as a non-L/O unit...so I get 75% of that week's credit for depositing the 2  Br. part of the L/O from Duck...for just over 1/2 of the MFs).


AFARR


----------

