# VC told me with high confidence that Cancel/Rebook will be eliminated in April..



## henley1

Today a VC told me that with the rollout of Voyager for which she is receiving training in March for a planned April rollout, that the Cancel Rebook will be eliminated via a waiting list.  I've heard many guesses from VC's over the years, but she sounded certain and specific.  She stated it as fact, not speculation.  Has any one else heard this?


----------



## nicemann

That would be one solution for all the problems they seem to be trying to fix.  Hopefully they will "thaw" all the other unfrozen accounts way before then.


----------



## Sandy VDH

Since I rarely utilize this feature, it is not a big deal for me.  But a league of sales people will have to sing a different tune, and a lot of people who bought expecting that feature will be pissed.  It will impact a lot of renters who count on most of their profit by this approach.

Of course if there is NO wait list then, it will work fine.  At the 60 day mark it should still work fine.

Interesting to see how Wait list rules will spill out.


----------



## nicemann

Sandy VDH said:


> Since I rarely utilize this feature, it is not a big deal for me.  But a league of sales people will have to sing a different tune, and a lot of people who bought expecting that feature will be pissed.  It will impact a lot of renters who count on most of their profit by this approach.
> 
> Of course if there is NO wait list then, it will work fine.  At the 60 day mark it should still work fine.
> 
> Interesting to see how Wait list rules will spill out.



I am sure they will talk it up just don't won't tell the new buyers how long it takes for it to come back into the system and that there could be a big wait list already for the property.


----------



## ilya

henley1 said:


> Today a VC told me that with the rollout of Voyager for which she is receiving training in March for a planned April rollout, that the Cancel Rebook will be eliminated via a waiting list.  I've heard many guesses from VC's over the years, but she sounded certain and specific.  She stated it as fact, not speculation.  Has any one else heard this?



So, will they reimburse us developer owners who purchases for that reason?


----------



## dioxide45

ilya said:


> So, will they reimburse use developer owners who purchases for that reason?


I suspect such a feature wasn't promised in the signed and legal documents?


----------



## John_and_Val

No. Just the slimy sales person talking. It is legal.....you just have to take rule "A" and then take rule "B" to make your own rule "C". And if they take away cancel and rebook, "store" bought VIP is not worth much. I know this would not make resale owners happy but wouldn't it make sense (since Wyndham changes the rules all the time, anyway) to restrict VIP benefits to Wyndham purchased points only? They should make it worth the money. I mean the majority of problems (according to Wyndham) comes from the "mega-renter". The "mega-renter" probably owns a majority of points via resale. Eliminating resale, eliminates mega-renters. Hell, they could feasibly use the "cancel and rebook" as a true benefit for VIP members. So a win - win for all. The person who feels they need to purchase through Wyndham gets, what they feel, is a good "perk" for the price and the resale owner buys at a major discount to use the points for reservations. Want to rent your points? You need to purchase enough resale to make it worth your time and money.......
Doesn't that make sense?????


----------



## wjappraise

John_and_Val said:


> No. Just the slimy sales person talking. It is legal.....you just have to take rule "A" and then take rule "B" to make your own rule "C". And if they take away cancel and rebook, "store" bought VIP is not worth much. I know this would not make resale owners happy but wouldn't it make sense (since Wyndham changes the rules all the time, anyway) to restrict VIP benefits to Wyndham purchased points only? They should make it worth the money. I mean the majority of problems (according to Wyndham) comes from the "mega-renter". The "mega-renter" probably owns a majority of points via resale. Eliminating resale, eliminates mega-renters. Hell, they could feasibly use the "cancel and rebook" as a true benefit for VIP members. So a win - win for all. The person who feels they need to purchase through Wyndham gets, what they feel, is a good "perk" for the price and the resale owner buys at a major discount to use the points for reservations. Want to rent your points? You need to purchase enough resale to make it worth your time and money.......
> Doesn't that make sense?????



You're right.  It does make sense.  Which is why Wyndham won't do it. 



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## John_and_Val

Yeah, instead they are going to piss off every VIP member that was sold on this "amazing benefit"..........Going to be interesting on what is really going to happen.


----------



## CO skier

Going back to the future with this thread may save a lot of re-typing the same discussion.

http://tugbbs.com/forums/index.php?threads/cancel-rebook-process-for-vip-discounts-to-end.207218/


----------



## ronparise

At the last annual meeting Geoff Richards promised that Voyager would be up and running by the next meeting... So April makes sense. At that last meeting I asked Geoff about a wait list... his answer was not this year. I wonder if the suspensions mess is speeding up their plan. 

Heres what I learned in my interviews with Wyndham (around my suspension)  
1) they are serious about enforcing the "Commercial"  use prohibition
2) they are serious about enforcing the "no unfair advantage" rule 
3) they know that cancel/rebook/upgrade gives an unfair advantage to the owners that do it
4) they know that Commercial renters, (or megarenters if you prefer) use the cancel/rebook /upgrade to capture discounts and they know that the discounts are necessary to make a reasonable profit


So whether its this year or next or a wait list or something else Im confident that Wyndham will make some changes to reduce rental activity. I  think introducing a wait list is genius. Instead of introducing new rules, they introduce a new benefit. You can still cancel a reservation, and you can still book available inventory at a discount, But if you cancel something decent there is no doubt the wait list will pick it up


----------



## Richelle

CO skier said:


> Going back to the future with this thread may save a lot of re-typing the same discussion.
> 
> http://tugbbs.com/forums/index.php?threads/cancel-rebook-process-for-vip-discounts-to-end.207218/



That "new reservation system" has been a long time coming. Almost three years?  I'm not saying it's impossible, but it could just be another VC spouting off BS. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## CO skier

Richelle said:


> That "new reservation system" has been a long time coming. Almost three years?  I'm not saying it's impossible, but it could just be another VC spouting off BS.


Exactly my point.  If the training is not until March, how does the VC know anything about what will happen, if Voyager even happens then or ever?

The point is the same as some of the posts in 2013, "There is no reason to panic, now".

I know I will believe it when I see it, and not before.


----------



## John_and_Val

Just had a VC help me on reservations........she knew nothing about getting rid of cancel and rebook and thought maybe sometime in 2017, they will roll out voyager. No one knows the answer!


----------



## Sandy VDH

All I can say is that they have a crap IT department, and I have an IT background.


----------



## bnoble

Sandy VDH said:


> But a league of sales people will have to sing a different tune, and a lot of people who bought expecting that feature will be pissed. It will impact a lot of renters who count on most of their profit by this approach.


Of these folks, Sales will be the least disrupted, as I'm sure they will come up with some other compelling reason to buy.



ilya said:


> So, will they reimburse us developer owners who purchases for that reason?


As noted above: not unless it was promised in the written contract (and it wasn't).

But add me to the "believe it when I see it" camp. They have under-invested in IT human capital more or less forever, and it shows.


----------



## vacationhopeful

The horse for the next 5+ years has already escaped the barn ... *open market renters* ... those who have been renting the discounted reservations (small unit booked for 1/2 the points and then upgraded to a large unit) *will NOT become a full price renter *nor a Wyndham owner. They will seek out AirBnB, motels with free breakfasts and other cheaper options.... or other options like cruising or non-American destinations.

Wyndham will profit from the MegaRenters returning inventory thru Ovations ...  selling those free points (inventory built at years ago) and selling CWA (a membership club .. not deeded real estate ownership). And Wyndham will expand their rental market options ... at almost NO BUILDING costs, no time lag, no weather delay, no new staffing or training budgets costs, no additional inventory ... leading to BIGGER PROFITs. PLUS ... they have the HOA performing maintenance and front desk staff, paying for turnover units to the next guest, refurnishing units every several years and each HOA is the legally responsible entity for lawsuits....plus the resort staff has HIGH turnover... less vacation time, younger staff for health insurance and vacationing costs, parttime staff with no benefits, etc. Corporate Wyndham is cost-plus to the HOAs ... they just bill all their expenses back to the HOA.

I have been around the pools/hot tubs and the Tiki bars at Wyndham resorts for a decade or more. 15-25 years ago (according to promo literature I have seen), Wyndham's target buyers were union employees and blue collar workers. These targeted buyers could not afford a 2nd home, had no interest in going to Europe and had growing vacation entitlements from work. Larger families needed 2 rooms ... but a 7 night timeshare with a kitchen, those numbers worked. Plan ahead, pay monthly, drive to locations, 2bdr with a full kitchen & a living room ... 3 colored TVs ... dishwasher ... onsite pool ... escorted sightseeing (planned by people at the resort). Many times, the coworkers at work brought the same fixed weeks (summer plant shutdown weeks). Doctors, lawyers and the white collar managers ... brought houses at the beach or on the golf .... their secretaries and janitors brought timeshare weeks. Retirees brought the cheaper, upfront cost ... off season or winter weeks. Or at some of the earlier older resorts SOLD only ... a RED WEEK bundled with a BLUE WEEK (resorts such as Shawnee (PA) and Smuggs (VT)).

I attended my very first timeshare presentation in 1975 ... at Shawnee (RCI0001 resort). 2 weeks ... one RED week and one BLUE week - both on ONE DEED. $3750 ... if I remember correctly. That is what and HOW they SOLD that resort. And if you look at eBay .. you will sometimes still find those 2-week deeds.

Am I rich? NO. Why do I own timeshares? Can't afford a "snowbird vacation" home near the beach in South Florida but could buy those "winter beach block" timeshare weeks ... many for chump change. 

Ovations will or has killed off that source of Wyndham weeks on eBay.


----------



## ecwinch

Introduction of the waitlist won't kill cancellation/rebook... just make it harder and/or only useful for off-season/shoulder-season vacationeers.


----------



## vacationhopeful

The original reason for discounted near checkin dates was to get empty units occupied by VIP owners using* LESS points* as a benefit of being a high points owner of developer points.

As for renting timeshare vacation weeks ... 

Yes ... cheap vacation stays will rent. But your client base has no loyalty to either YOU (the owner/renter), the resort chain or resort location. It is totally PRICE to benefit value. And if they have to pay costs on full point value reservations (and other costs like Wyndham has .. reservation transactions, housekeeping credits and guest certificates after the 1 (ONE) Free account GC).... the guest/client will find other cheaper resorts. And if they have A BIG VACATION budget .. Marriott or Sheraton or Starwood or DVC are higher tier places.


----------



## John_and_Val

And now it is a money making cash cow for NON Wyndham, resale point, mega-renters. AGAIN, eliminate VIP Privileges, except points purchased from Wyndham and make one of the perks the cancel/rebook trick. If you want to rent.......buy enough points to cover your cost via resale. And yes, I know in order to be VIP you must have a Wyndham purchased contract.....but the majority of points "commercial" accounts use is resale points


----------



## ronparise

ecwinch said:


> Introduction of the waitlist won't kill cancellation/rebook... just make it harder and/or only useful for off-season/shoulder-season vacationeers.


Exactly. 

the the guys that rent for profit concentrate their efforts at the most popular times and places


----------



## ronparise

John_and_Val said:


> And now it is a money making cash cow for NON Wyndham, resale point, mega-renters. AGAIN, eliminate VIP Privileges, except points purchased from Wyndham and make one of the perks the cancel/rebook trick. If you want to rent.......buy enough points to cover your cost via resale. And yes, I know in order to be VIP you must have a Wyndham purchased contract.....but the majority of points "commercial" accounts use is resale points



Don't fret

I'm sure this will happen. Voyager will give them that capability


----------



## ecwinch

ronparise said:


> Exactly.
> 
> the the guys that rent for profit concentrate their efforts at the most popular times and places



Right. But it will still be a nice upsell to all those baby-boomers who bought 5-15 years ago and now are positioned to travel more. Huge demographic there.


----------



## John_and_Val

Ron, I do not disagree with what you did. Hell, I own resale too. You should be employed by Wyndham for a damn good salary because it seems you know a lot more then them. I am sure you went into whatever meetings, or phone calls and blew the minds of a lot of wyndham people. Kinda bitter/sweet for you....I hope you are satisfied with the outcome and they treated you fair.


----------



## pagosajim

vacationhopeful said:


> Corporate Wyndham is cost-plus to the HOAs ... they just bill all their expenses back to the HOA.


Maybe true for some HOAs, but through direct experience with my HOA (and all others at Pagosa), we pay a fixed percentage of our operating budget to cover the management fee.  As our operating budget grows, so does the overall fee to Wyndham.  Pretty sweet deal for them.


----------



## bnoble

pagosajim said:


> Maybe true for some HOAs, but through direct experience with my HOA (and all others at Pagosa), we pay a fixed percentage of our operating budget to cover the management fee.  As our operating budget grows, so does the overall fee to Wyndham.  Pretty sweet deal for them.


That's a very typical arrangement for management companies.


----------



## vacationhopeful

Yes ... the more HOA money they spend ... the more money they get as managers. Our 5% MF raise, is their 5% management fee increase .. for doing the same job. Compounded every year.


----------



## am1

vacationhopeful said:


> Yes ... the more HOA money they spend ... the more money they get as managers. Our 5% MF raise, is their 5% management fee increase .. for doing the same job. Compounded every year.



Its not like the serving industry where the tip percentage has gone up as well as the cost of the meals/service?


----------



## vacationhopeful

The Wyndham controlled Board of Directors ... decide on refurbishing plans and cycles. Decide on resort managements pay rates (and bonuses). Decide on staffing levels, experiences and resort services. Hire outside contractors. And now our front desk staff is trying to set "Owner Update" appointments .. as they are not Front Desk staff .. but universal agents & setting up appointments for Owner Updates (unless you are on the DO NOT TOUR list). The wolf has the keys to the hen house.

What part of an "owner's update" should be paid for by my MFs? Plain and simply ... It is a Sales spiel. And the front desk staff has been lacking on resort and area knowledge ... twice, I called about my FIXED WEEK (yesterday & today), and both times the only person (different each day) working the front desk told me, that date has not been download by the reservation system YET? Fixed week reservations on NOT on the POINTS reservation system  ...which downloads...


----------



## Roger830

vacationhopeful said:


> The Wyndham controlled Board of Directors ... decide on refurbishing plans and cycles.
> 
> twice, I called about my FIXED WEEK (yesterday & today), and both times the only person (different each day) working the front desk told me, that date has not been download by the reservation system YET? Fixed week reservations on NOT on the POINTS reservation system  ...which downloads...



In January I was talking to a vip in the hot tub at Sea Gardens Ocean Palms. He was there for 6 weeks and was complaining that he had to move to a different unit because members still owned fixed weeks which Wyndham is trying to get back. Poor service and high reserve fees should encourage members to give up those deeds.


----------



## ronparise

Roger830 said:


> In January I was talking to a vip in the hot tub at Sea Gardens Ocean Palms. He was there for 6 weeks and was complaining that he had to move to a different unit because members still owned fixed weeks which Wyndham is trying to get back. Poor service and high reserve fees should encourage members to give up those deeds.




That some of a resort is fixed weeks, dosent (shouldnt) impact points owners  at all.  The fixed weeks are not any part of the points system.


----------



## am1

ronparise said:


> That some of a resort is fixed weeks, dosent impact points owners  at all.  The fixed weeks are not any part of the points system.



In the situation above it does.  Only some weeks have been converted to points or brought into cwa. Making guests that make multiple week stays possibly having to move each week.


----------



## bnoble

Right.  If I've got a fixed-week/fixed-unit deed, that's the unit I expect to occupy during that week. If the week in that unit before is in the Trust, then someone could end up booking those consecutive weeks on points, be put in "my" unit for the first week, and be forced to move during "my" week.


----------



## ronparise

But no one should be in a weeks unit except the owner of that week or their guest

Are you saying that someone might rent from a weeks owner and then rent a second week  from a points owner? 

I know Linda has experience with the resort putting a points owner in a weeks unit. But it shouldn't happen


----------



## am1

ronparise said:


> But no one should be in a weeks unit except the owner of that week or their guest
> 
> Are you saying that someone might rent from a weeks owner and then rent a second week  from a points owner?
> 
> I know Linda has experience with the resort putting a points owner in a weeks unit. But it shouldn't happen


It should not happen but I am sure it does happen time to time.  But I can see a points owner being upset that they are bounced around at the same resort staying in the same unit type.  But that is the baggage that comes with a resort having fixed weeks, converted fixed weeks and cwa.  But no one tells you that on the timeshare tour.


----------



## Roger830

The situation that I was referencing was a vip points owner booking 6 consecutive weeks. He did mention Club Access so I assumed that's what he owned. Being a resale owner, I didn't want to talk about ownership. He had to move because the same unit wasn't available for each week.

It's my understanding, vip can request a specific unit. If he wants unit 1060 for weeks 1-6, but I own week 5 for 1060, he has to select a different unit for that week and move twice.

The problem he has is he doesn't know ahead of time where a 6 week consecutive block will be when he books one week at a time.

If he waits until all units are booked before selecting, then other vip members might have selected unit-weeks that he wanted other than just fixed week owners.

He did go to the update for the $100, perhaps that's where he got the info that Wyndham wanted the fixed week deeds.


----------



## bnoble

ronparise said:


> But no one should be in a weeks unit except the owner of that week or their guest


Let me try with an example. Suppose a resort has two units. 100 and 101. Suppose there are two weeks in the year, A and B.

You own 100-A and 100-B as converted fixed weeks.
Bob owns 101-A as a converted fixed week.
I own 101-B as a fixed-week, fixed unit deed.

Bob reserves week A with his points, and for whatever reason is assigned Unit 100 instead of unit 101.

You rent to a guest who wants to stay for both weeks A and B. Unit 100 already has a guest for week A, so your client is placed in 101 for week A. However, your client cannot stay in 101 for Week B, because that's *my* unit that week. So, your client has to move to 100.


----------



## tschwa2

CWA members certainly would like Wyndham to take back more of the desirable fixed weeks left in the system and add them to CWA.  I am not sure if there are that many other than snowbird south florida, summer Newport and various event weeks throughout the system. There are probably some other prime examples but many of the older resorts aren't the places with the high demand. Wyndham would probably happily take those for free if offered through Ovations but it isn't like they are out trying to actively buy those back from owners. Sales folks tell owners what they want to hear.  If someone complains about having to move from their unit during a multiweek stay at one of these resorts of course Sales is going to say that you should buy more points because Wyndham will be taking back more of these fixed weeks.


----------



## ronparise

I understand all that. in the case of converted fixed weeks they are (or should be held for the owner in the ARP period. And the unconverted fixed week held open until check in.

I'm familiar with the avenue plaza resort in New Orleans. There are floating weeks, converted floating weeks, event weeks, and CWA owned weeks. And there are units that Worldmark owns and there are weeks that Worldmark owns. And to confuse things further some of the studios have 2 queens and some have one king and the occupancy limit is 4 either way (and you can't choose which  ed configuration you get the resort assume gone the room at check in.  It's a hot mess at check in for a busy weekend

 The problem is that any owner stringing together several weeks that  has the unreasonable expectation that he will be able to stay in the same room for his whole  stay will almost always be disappointed. He should consider it a bonus if he can; there is no way he should expect it


----------



## tschwa2

ronparise said:


> The problem is that any owner stringing together several weeks that  has the unreasonable expectation that he will be able to stay in the same room for his whole  stay will almost always be disappointed. He should consider it a bonus if he can; there is no way he should expect it



But Sales promises all sorts of things that we know would be unreasonable to expect.  According to Sales there is no problem or situation that buying more points can't fix.


----------



## bnoble

ronparise said:


> The problem is that any owner stringing together several weeks that has the unreasonable expectation that he will be able to stay in the same room for his whole stay will almost always be disappointed. He should consider it a bonus if he can; there is no way he should expect it


Gotcha. Somehow I was reading your earlier posts the other way. Not sure why, in hindsight.


----------



## BellaWyn

tschwa2 said:


> There are probably some other prime examples but many of the older resorts aren't the places with the high demand. Wyndham would probably happily take those for free if offered through Ovations but it isn't like they are out trying to actively buy those back from owners.


Even the older resorts have some high demand windows.  Fixed week units still remaining in those locations, during those windows, will not be turned back for free. The owners that still have them keep them because they understand their value.  The less desirable weeks in those locations have already been turn back and dumped into CWA. It is of zero concern to those FW owners if a VIP points owner doesn't get a consecutive stay in the same unit because a FW owner wants to use what the own, regardless of whether it's for themselves or a guest.  It will take at least another generation for WYN to wrangle those contracts away from those families.  

The ONLY way for a WYN owner to guarantee a multi-week consecutive stay at a WYN resort.....  Own consecutive weeks in the same unit at that resort.


----------



## am1

BellaWyn said:


> Even the older resorts have some high demand windows.  Fixed week units still remaining in those locations, during those windows, will not be turned back for free. The owners that still have them keep them because they understand their value.  The less desirable weeks in those locations have already been turn back and dumped into CWA. It is of zero concern to those FW owners if a VIP points owner doesn't get a consecutive stay in the same unit because a FW owner wants to use what the own, regardless of whether it's for themselves or a guest.  It will take at least another generation for WYN to wrangle those contracts away from those families.
> 
> The ONLY way for a WYN owner to guarantee a multi-week consecutive stay at a WYN resort.....  Own consecutive weeks in the same unit at that resort.



Fixed week owners do benefit that the dog weeks go into CWA and the maintenance fees are paid by people getting a lot less value then the high demand fixed week owners are.


----------



## BellaWyn

am1 said:


> Fixed week owners do benefit that the dog weeks go into CWA and the maintenance fees are paid by people getting a lot less value then the high demand fixed week owners are.


They absolutely benefit! Another of many reasons those owners know not to convert or "give back" those contracts. And, why they can still be sold for actual $$ in the aftermarket.

Sales people try to convince owners those unconverted weeks are worthless. Of course, sales, lips moving, yadda yadda.


----------



## tschwa2

But then again the problem with the fixed week resorts are they are older, need more cash to keep them up to Wyndham standards and many consider them to be below standard.  They also suffer from the dog week owners who can't afford the high MF and if Wyndham doesn't take them back and pay the MF and they are left to default the MF continue to rise.  Many of these places have enough inventory available (or at least some inventory) to the points owner/renters that you can rent for at, below or just above the MF if you are a little flexible.  From what I've seen at Edisto and New Port, and Pompano, MF are generally above $1000 per week which is ok (but not particularly great) for prime weeks but probably more than half and in some cases 2/3's of the weeks are worth less than that on the rental market.  

They really only have value if you plan to use that particular fixed week (and like the fixed unit) most years.


----------



## BellaWyn

Most of the dog weeks at the older FW locations have already been turned back and dumped into CWA.  That happened in the R.E. downturn when those dogweek owners defaulted on their contracts and the resort HOA's took a hard hit having to deal with all of that defaulted inventory.  Many prime week owners also got pulled into that misfortune. WYN bought them up for pennies from the HOA's and was able to rapidly populate CWA with the weeks.  Ovation is scooping up the rest. 

Let's not confuse those dog weeks with Prime weeks. MF's are going up at almost ALL of the locations, not just the older ones, CWA is no exception.  Wyndham still has to manage those locations to some level of standard even if they are not the newest or shiniest.  Even the high demand locations have a high turn in replacement of furnishings, amenities and maintenance of the property simply because they have more guest traffic happening through those locations.  Their MF's are also still on the rise (within the annual contractual limitations).

Plenty of available inventory can always be found for off-season dates.  Prime dates still have demand. The "worthless" aftermarket FW units that come available are rarely prime.  As am1 stated, a Prime FW MF is going to be the same as the dogweek MF for the same unit, but for prime dates.  And the FW owner only pays the MF's. There are no program fees to pay, no Guest fees to pay, no resort transfer fees to pay if the deed gets updated or sold, and the unit never makes into the points reservation system. 

Would never advocate keeping or owning a dog week FW unit at any location, it's pointless (not a pun). But a PRIME FW unit, definitely.  It's a hassle free, guaranteed useage and can almost always be rented with minimal marketing effort.


----------



## Roger830

On ebay I won a President's week 7, 9th floor at Pompano Sea Gardens Ocean Palms for $78.77. The next highest bidder was only will to pay $77.77. There was at least one other bidder. Plus I got 1 week's current year points. This hoa was built in 1999, definitely not old.

Here's one listed for free here Nov 28, eoy same week 7.
http://www.tugbbs.com/forums/index....oy-week-7-converted-to-140-000-points.248637/

I've often seen it mentioned on tug that dog weeks go into cwa, but I never saw how this information is known. My thinking is cwa isn't accepting all dog weeks, that's a reason mf is jumping. Also, if all dog weeks went to cwa, I would think that cwa mf would have been much higher.


----------



## pagosajim

BellaWyn said:


> Most of the dog weeks at the older FW locations have already been turned back and dumped into CWA.



Note sure what is meant by "most", but we've been running at about 12-15% delinquency for years in one fixed week association in Pagosa.  Guess what type of weeks these are for the most part - yep, the dogs.   I don't see an end anytime soon as the process takes quite a while to foreclose and ultimately get that deed back for inclusion in CWA.  Much of the issue is related to actually finding the owner and communicating options for return of the deed or proceeding with the foreclosure process.  There are a significant number of deeds that are more than 3 years in arrears.


----------



## pagosajim

Roger830 said:


> Also, if all dog weeks went to cwa, I would think that cwa mf would have been much higher.



Remember that these dogs in CWA are balanced out by the high point, low cost weeks dumped into the club from places like Park City and Avon.


----------



## Roger830

pagosajim said:


> Remember that these dogs in CWA are balanced out by the high point, low cost weeks dumped into the club from places like Park City and Avon.



If you play with some numbers, you will see that the fixed dog weeks have low point value and distort the average.

I saw on ebay a Newport Onshore 77,000 points. If you look at the points chart, it's a quiet season 2-bed. The mf is $1468 or $19/1000
At Panama City a quite season 2-bed is 126,000 points x $4.1/1000 = $516 for the week.

$1468 + 516 = $1984 for both weeks
77,000 + 126,000 = 203,000 points for both weeks
$1984 / 203 = $9.77/1000

As you can see, these two resorts average to almost $10/1000, much higher than cwa $5.6/1000.

As you implied, I suspect that they don't even foreclose on many of the dog week. I know this is true at a small fixed week resort that I own.


----------



## BellaWyn

pagosajim said:


> Note sure what is meant by "most", but we've been running at about 12-15% delinquency for years in one fixed week association in Pagosa.  Guess what type of weeks these are for the most part - yep, the dogs.   I don't see an end anytime soon as the process takes quite a while to foreclose and ultimately get that deed back for inclusion in CWA.  Much of the issue is related to actually finding the owner and communicating options for return of the deed or proceeding with the foreclosure process.  There are a significant number of deeds that are more than 3 years in arrears.


To clarify, most that have become available. By available meaning that the HOA has already gone through the hassle and expense of the long tedious process of foreclosure.  WYN doesn't take the financial hit for this, the HOA's do.  A dog week, or any other week, cannot be "sold" back to WYN for CWA until it has clear title. 

Flag ran at a high delinquency rate also in both of their HOAs durng the hardest part of the downturn but their HOAs were fairly agressive in tracking down owners and finalizing forclosures.  State R.E. law may have some influnce on the turnaround time compared to CO.  They also instigated deed take-backs ahead of most other resorts.  Many of the foreclosed Prime weeks sales hung on to and resold as converted weeks, the available dog weeks were sold off in blocks back to WYN for CWA.  But WYN did get some really good prime week units in those blocks.


----------



## ronparise

BellaWyn said:


> Even the older resorts have some high demand windows.  Fixed week units still remaining in those locations, during those windows, will not be turned back for free. The owners that still have them keep them because they understand their value.  The less desirable weeks in those locations have already been turn back and dumped into CWA. It is of zero concern to those FW owners if a VIP points owner doesn't get a consecutive stay in the same unit because a FW owner wants to use what the own, regardless of whether it's for themselves or a





pagosajim said:


> Remember that these dogs in CWA are balanced out by the high point, low cost weeks dumped into the club from places like Park City and Avon.



And resorts like national harbor and Panama City beach


----------



## raygo123

Am I mistaken or did the CWA trust go from 24 to 34 billion points in one year?  I lost last year's budget so I'm working from memory.  

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk


----------



## vacationhopeful

The first YEAR CWA was around ... the one Fixed Week resort (everything there was Fixed Week deeds) with SOME converted by private owners to Wyndham points. I wanted a deed or two to match up with my owned f/w deeds. Seems Wyndham had an agreement that ANY and ALL deeds could ONLY to sold to Wyndham at $1 per deed ... the HOA had to pay/absorb all costs for obtaining that DEED and all costs UNTIL Wyndham 'requested' that particular deed. So if the HOA had 100 deeds, free and clear and NOT GETTING a penny in MFs ... (but may be a few nights' rentals after commissions to Extra Holiday and costs). CWA would pick and choose the deeds, unit size and the actual week number ... when they wanted them to go into CWA. Then and only then, did CWA start to pay the MFs to the HOA.

Just think of it as "A Just in Time" supply chain .. with the HOA paying the costs to acquire, HOLD and sell for $1 to Wyndham Vacation Club ... who was selling a PRIME 1bdr unit with 140,000 point value for $28,000-30,800 retail value.

Nice profit even after paying a commission to the real estate sales staff and recording the deed.


----------



## Braindead

In 2016 CWA was about 29.3 billion. In 2017 CWA has almost 34.2 billion points. A large sizable jump in 1year


----------



## raygo123

Braindead said:


> In 2016 CWA was about 29.3 billion. In 2017 CWA has almost 34.2 billion points. A large sizable jump in 1year


Yes that's what I thought.  Now I wonder if that caused the bigger than usual increase in maintainence fees.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk


----------



## Braindead

What's really amazing maintenance fees went from $150,750,000 to $191,400,000 in 2017 over 25 percent increase in maintenance fee revenues in one year. With that big of an increase in revenues one has to wonder why did they need to raise fees per thousand points?


----------



## whitewater

Braindead said:


> What's really amazing maintenance fees went from $150,750,000 to $191,400,000 in 2017 over 25 percent increase in maintenance fee revenues in one year. With that big of an increase in revenues one has to wonder why did they need to raise fees per thousand points?



reasons for increase could be anyone of the following:


new resorts 
or more people purchasing timeshares
more people paying in at higher cost resorts (larger more costly, more units, etc).  

What may be a better way to unpack would be expense associated with managing in ratio to the MF collected.  It is likely hard to unpack that from SEC filings and share holder reports unless noted in CFO letter to share holders about changes/trends.

That said I'm not an expert in hospitality or timeshares so there are likely other factors or I could be completely off base.  Merely pointing out that there is likely more to it than a straight 25% increase.


----------



## Braindead

Bad debt expense in CWA budget went up 50 percent!! In 2016 it was $3.6 million to $5.4 million for 2017 budget!!


----------



## Braindead

More people purchasing but not paying. High pressure sales weasels are costing all paying owners. I assume they still get their commission and we are left holding the bag to get the contracts back . So they can turnaround and sell them again.


----------



## pagosajim

BellaWyn said:


> WYN doesn't take the financial hit for this, the HOA's do.



Our association (and others at Pagosa as well as other "legacy" resorts) actually have an arrangement with Wyndham whereby they pay the first $2k of foreclosure expenses.  After successful foreclosure, they accept the deed into the CWA trust and we now have a paying customer on the interval.  To date, we have not incurred expenses over the amount covered by the agreement and have successfully processed over 50 deeds over the past 2+ years .


----------



## am1

Yes CWA just needs a few prime weeks at each resort so sales can salt


pagosajim said:


> Our association (and others at Pagosa as well as other "legacy" resorts) actually have an arrangement with Wyndham whereby they pay the first $2k of foreclosure expenses.  After successful foreclosure, they accept the deed into the CWA trust and we now have a paying customer on the interval.  To date, we have not incurred expenses over the amount covered by the agreement and have successfully processed over 50 deeds over the past 2+ years .



Is the difference that at your resort the board is not Wyndham controlled or are the units they are foreclosing on not originally Wyndam units?  What happens when CWA ownership Wyndham controls the board?

I do not see any boards that the are Wyndham controlled going for that.


----------



## tschwa2

pagosajim said:


> Our association (and others at Pagosa as well as other "legacy" resorts) actually have an arrangement with Wyndham whereby they pay the first $2k of foreclosure expenses.  After successful foreclosure, they accept the deed into the CWA trust and we now have a paying customer on the interval.  To date, we have not incurred expenses over the amount covered by the agreement and have successfully processed over 50 deeds over the past 2+ years .


I think your board made one heck of a deal and I am sure other resorts would love to have something similar in place but most seem to have deals that almost exclusively benefit Wyndham at the expense of the HOA.


----------



## pagosajim

am1 said:


> Yes CWA just needs a few prime weeks at each resort so sales can salt
> Is the difference that at your resort the board is not Wyndham controlled or are the units they are foreclosing on not originally Wyndam units?  What happens when CWA ownership Wyndham controls the board?
> 
> I do not see any boards that the are Wyndham controlled going for that.



Board is not Wyndham controlled - all owner members.  All boards at Pagosa (8 separate associations) are fully owner controlled.

The catch to the agreement is having to maintain a regular reserve/replacement schedule to keep the units fresh and at a level of standard acceptable to Wyndham.  

If I remember correctly, we are less than 20% CWA for the association.  I am concerned that some day we could be controlled by Wyndham due to their majority voting block.


----------



## BellaWyn

pagosajim said:


> If I remember correctly, we are less than 20% CWA for the association.  I am concerned that some day we could be controlled by Wyndham due to their majority voting block.



A very valid concern and likely the eventual goal of WYN when they introduced CWA in the first place. WYN likes the WM model but not the control the owners have in that system.  When people buy any WYN contract it is movtivated by just wanting to go on vaction and having enough points in a system to get there.  One doesn't want to to have to worry about the nuances governing those contracts.  As long as it's working, who cares, doesn't effect the individual owner. 

Until it stops working or there is an ugly hiccup and then does effect them..... which is usually too late.

The good news is that there are still a lot of decent hard-working governing boards (like Pagosa) in the deeded locations that are actually trying to protect those owners because they have to deal with the reality of the day-to-day and interface with WYN on the financial side.  But when the owners turn a blind eye, default on contracts, don't vote or turn in their proxies, or don't bother to try to understand the annual financial budget documents, the boards have to do what is best to protect everyone.  Some of that of late means having to sell off deeds to WYN for CWA so MF's can still get paid.

20% is lower than many locations.  Hopefully your boards can drag that out for many years to keep the WYN majority voting block at bay.  Would be interesting to have a table of what the percentages are in the deeded locations across the system.


----------



## raygo123

pagosajim said:


> Board is not Wyndham controlled - all owner members.  All boards at Pagosa (8 separate associations) are fully owner controlled.
> 
> The catch to the agreement is having to maintain a regular reserve/replacement schedule to keep the units fresh and at a level of standard acceptable to Wyndham.
> 
> If I remember correctly, we are less than 20% CWA for the association.  I am concerned that some day we could be controlled by Wyndham due to their majority voting block.


One thing to look at.  Is. What Foxrun has done.  When they left Wyndham, in their HOA they built in the clause that if any unit is turned over to Wyndham by trade in or points purchase that unit has no voting rights, thus keeping the control with the remaining owners.  

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk


----------



## bnoble

How is that possible? It seems you'd have to restrict transfer of voting rights in general, not just to one specific entity.


----------



## raygo123

bnoble said:


> How is that possible? It seems you'd have to restrict transfer of voting rights in general, not just to one specific entity.


All I know is they did it I owned there.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk


----------



## ecwinch

bnoble said:


> How is that possible? It seems you'd have to restrict transfer of voting rights in general, not just to one specific entity.


I'm with you. Stripping off voting rights on the basis of a sale cannot be done unilaterally by a BoD. 

And turning over your deeded week for pts is just assigning your rights to Wyndham.


----------



## tschwa2

I believe they put in a restriction where one person or single entity only gets one vote regardless of how many intervals they own.  At most resort there are very few owners that own more than 3-6 intervals.  So while a few individual might lose some of there voting power it really does protect an independent resort from being taken over by a developer type who wants to install themselves into a management position.  Because of various state laws, I don't think it would work every where.  It might also be difficult to pass such a rule in seasonal snowbird locations where there are many owners who own 6+ weeks and would not want to give up there additional voting power.


----------



## BellaWyn

tschwa2 said:


> I believe they put in a restriction where one person or single entity only gets one vote regardless of how many intervals they own.  At most resort there are very few owners that own more than 3-6 intervals.
> 
> Because of various state laws, I don't think it would work every where.  It might also be difficult to pass such a rule in seasonal snowbird locations where there are many owners who own 6+ weeks and would not want to give up there additional voting power.


We only get a single vote in the UDI property where our deeded points contracts are held.  But in the FW location we get a vote for EACH contract we own.  Every HOA will be different depending on how the property was orginally developed.


----------



## uscav8r

This thread is officially waaaaay off topic! 

Did someone ask about Cancel/rebook going away? LOL


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## raygo123

uscav8r said:


> This thread is officially waaaaay off topic!
> 
> Did someone ask about Cancel/rebook going away? LOL
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Considering there is no such thing as cancel and rebook.  I have never read about it in the directory.  

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk


----------



## uscav8r

raygo123 said:


> Considering there is no such thing as cancel and rebook.  I have never read about it in the directory.
> 
> Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk



It doesn't need to be official to be a valid method. Good to see the topic is back on track. 




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## ronparise

raygo123 said:


> Considering there is no such thing as cancel and rebook.  I have never read about it in the directory.
> 
> Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk



Thats not correct Raygo123

there is a discussion about cancelling reservations in the book, and
there is a discussion about the vip benefit of booking reservations at a discount in the book, and 
there is a discussion about how vip owners can get free up grades in the book

You may be right there is no such thing as cancel and rebook, but there are things called cancel and rebook and upgrade.


----------



## iaminak

ronparise said:


> Thats not correct Raygo123
> 
> there is a discussion about cancelling reservations in the book, and
> there is a discussion about the vip benefit of booking reservations at a discount in the book, and
> there is a discussion about how vip owners can get free up grades in the book
> 
> You may be right there is no such thing as cancel and rebook, but there are things called cancel and rebook and upgrade.




I have to laugh at the title of this thread because I was just at a presentation where the salesman told me with great confidence that cancel and rebook always works and no one ever loses their reservations...  I think they lie so much they can't keep straight which angle they are supposed to be spinning.


----------



## raygo123

ronparise said:


> Thats not correct Raygo123
> 
> there is a discussion about cancelling reservations in the book, and
> there is a discussion about the vip benefit of booking reservations at a discount in the book, and
> there is a discussion about how vip owners can get free up grades in the book
> 
> You may be right there is no such thing as cancel and rebook, but there are things called cancel and rebook and upgrade.


You can call me raygo for short.  The point is how can you do away with something that doesn't exist?  Yes cancel tells you how and when, and then there is the discount window, and upgrades.  But no cancel and rebook policy.  So how can it be done away with?

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk


----------



## DeeDibble

iaminak said:


> I have to laugh at the title of this thread because I was just at a presentation where the salesman told me with great confidence that cancel and rebook always works and no one ever loses their reservations...  I think they lie so much they can't keep straight which angle they are supposed to be spinning.


We attended a presentation this morning and they were talking about cancel rebook - sure would like to know who the VC was that said a waitlist will replace cancel/ rebook in April 2017


----------



## BellaWyn

raygo123 said:


> You can call me raygo for short.  The point is how can you do away with something that doesn't exist?  Yes cancel tells you how and when, and then there is the discount window, and upgrades.  But no cancel and rebook policy.  So how can it be done away with?
> 
> Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk


Did this just become an existential discussion?

Just because there is no policy doesn't mean it doesn't happen or that WYN likes that it happens. Do not confuse Policy with Procedure. WYN is brilliant at skirting their day to day procedures and practices by not including what happens as part of policy.  Procedure doesn't have to be surrounded by the legalese that comes with presenting policy. Can be easily changed with minimal communication to the community.


----------



## Sandy VDH

ronparise said:


> Thats not correct Raygo123
> 
> there is a discussion about cancelling reservations in the book, and
> there is a discussion about the vip benefit of booking reservations at a discount in the book, and
> there is a discussion about how vip owners can get free up grades in the book
> 
> You may be right there is no such thing as cancel and rebook, but there are things called cancel and rebook and upgrade.



Especially if you do them very quickly and in the order outlined.


----------



## raygo123

BellaWyn said:


> Did this just become an existential discussion?
> 
> Just because there is no policy doesn't mean it doesn't happen or that WYN likes that it happens. Do not confuse Policy with Procedure. WYN is brilliant at skirting their day to day procedures and practices by not including what happens as part of policy.  Procedure doesn't have to be surrounded by the legalese that comes with presenting policy. Can be easily changed with minimal communication to the community.


Policy or procedure, neither matters.  You cannot do away with something that doesn't exist.  My point is that other things would have to change in order to eliminate cancel and rebook.  Simply adding a wait list will not change anything unless they do away with the discount window, or change something else.  Wyndham can limit the availability of resorts in prime time, to an extent, but that is not doing away with cancel and rebook.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk


----------



## BellaWyn

Maybe it's the "RE" part of the Booking process they take issue with because it is perceived as a gross mis-use by Mega-renters. Don't agree with that posture but WYN doesn't need me to agree with it in order to find a way to change it. There is change on the horizon. Given their IT has a long history of inefficiency (or under funding) it may not be a simple solution but doesn't mean they won't try.


----------



## raygo123

BellaWyn said:


> Maybe it's the "RE" part of the Booking process they take issue with because it is perceived as a gross mis-use by Mega-renters. Don't agree with that posture but WYN doesn't need me to agree with it in order to find a way to change it. There is change on the horizon. Given their IT has a long history of inefficiency (or under funding) it may not be a simple solution but doesn't mean they won't try.


I hope whatever Wyndham does, they take it slow.  Last August a change was made, and created this mess, because it didn't work it didn't do what Wyndham thought it would.



Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk


----------



## Joe33426

BellaWyn said:


> Maybe it's the "RE" part of the Booking process they take issue with because it is perceived as a gross mis-use by Mega-renters. Don't agree with that posture but WYN doesn't need me to agree with it in order to find a way to change it. There is change on the horizon. Given their IT has a long history of inefficiency (or under funding) it may not be a simple solution but doesn't mean they won't try.



I think you hit the nail on the head.  I think it's the "RE" part too that Wyndham is having the problem.  And the fact that multiple reservations are often used to effect the cancel, rebook, and upgrade strategy.


----------



## wjappraise

raygo123 said:


> I hope whatever Wyndham does, they take it slow.  Last August a change was made, and created this mess, because it didn't work it didn't do what Wyndham thought it would.
> 
> 
> 
> Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk



Amen brother.   Coming from one of the impacted owners, I am very leery of IT changes from the Wyndham corporate arm.  


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## Bigrob

raygo123 said:


> I hope whatever Wyndham does, they take it slow.  Last August a change was made, and created this mess, because it didn't work it didn't do what Wyndham thought it would.



Actually, it was a YEAR ago last August (August 2015) when the change was made to do away with cancelled points, returning points from cancelled reservations to wherever they came from (in theory). In practice that didn't work correctly as many times the points did NOT go back to where they came from (for example, from a credit pool). 

While those issues were obvious almost from day one, there seems to have been a "ticking time bomb" effect that culminated in the suspension of multiple accounts a year later (almost to the day of when the original ill-fated change went in). 

This was what should have been an easy, straightforward implementation of a very basic function. I can only imagine the disasters that lurk upon a more ambitious bit of logic surrounding a waitlist.


----------



## ronparise

Raygo, you may be right.. Im just not willing to make the bet that Wyndham wont do their best to eliminate commercial renting, (whatever that is) and I think that means going after the cancel and  rebook for a discount strategy


----------



## henley1

ronparise said:


> At the last annual meeting Geoff Richards promised that Voyager would be up and running by the next meeting... So April makes sense. At that last meeting I asked Geoff about a wait list... his answer was not this year. I wonder if the suspensions mess is speeding up their plan.
> 
> Heres what I learned in my interviews with Wyndham (around my suspension)
> 1) they are serious about enforcing the "Commercial"  use prohibition
> 2) they are serious about enforcing the "no unfair advantage" rule
> 3) they know that cancel/rebook/upgrade gives an unfair advantage to the owners that do it
> 4) they know that Commercial renters, (or megarenters if you prefer) use the cancel/rebook /upgrade to capture discounts and they know that the discounts are necessary to make a reasonable profit


----------



## henley1

From Ron's quote above...

What is the "Commercial" use prohibition?  I've never heard of that.  I thought Wyn owners were allowed to rent?


----------



## Richelle

henley1 said:


> From Ron's quote above...
> 
> What is the "Commercial" use prohibition?  I've never heard of that.  I thought Wyn owners were allowed to rent?



It's in the "Acknowledgments" section if the contract. Its also on page 394 in the book. 

"The program is for a members own personal use and enjoyment, and not for any commercial purposes"

They do have the option to rent if they use Wyndham's program. I don't think it says they can rent out their reservations. 






Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## ronparise

Richelle said:


> It's in the "Acknowledgments" section if the contract. I cannot recall if it's in the book. View attachment 3111
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk




It is in the book. Page 394


----------



## Jan M.

Richelle said:


> It's in the "Acknowledgments" section if the contract. Its also on page 394 in the book.
> 
> "The program is for a members own personal use and enjoyment, and not for any commercial purposes"
> 
> They do have the option to rent if they use Wyndham's program. I don't think it says they can rent out their reservations.
> 
> View attachment 3111
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk



I always thought that originally the statements in that section were made to protect Fairfield and then Wyndham from any claims the sales people made in effort to make sales. The sales people always tell you that you can rent, make money and all sorts of things; some of which are true and some of which are outright and deliberate lies. These were drawn up before the mega renters and point managers got so big or maybe even before they existed, before Extra Holidays and before Ovation. But of course anything we sign has been drawn up by lawyers and their job is to protect Wyndham for any eventuality.


----------



## Richelle

Jan M. said:


> I always thought that originally the statements in that section were made to protect Fairfield and then Wyndham from any claims the sales people made in effort to make sales. The sales people always tell you that you can rent, make money and all sorts of things; some of which are true and some of which are outright and deliberate lies. These were drawn up before the mega renters and point managers got so big or maybe even before they existed, before Extra Holidays and before Ovation. But of course anything we sign has been drawn up by lawyers and their job is to protect Wyndham for any eventuality.



It's also in the member directory. I would imagine new contracts have that in it. The mega renters bought developer to get VIP, so they probably have the same clauses in their contracts that they had to acknowledge and initial. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## ronparise

Jan M. said:


> I always thought that originally the statements in that section were made to protect Fairfield and then Wyndham from any claims the sales people made in effort to make sales. The sales people always tell you that you can rent, make money and all sorts of things; some of which are true and some of which are outright and deliberate lies. These were drawn up before the mega renters and point managers got so big or maybe even before they existed, before Extra Holidays and before Ovation. But of course anything we sign has been drawn up by lawyers and their job is to protect Wyndham for any eventuality.



I think you are right. I remember signing something that it wasn't supposed of as an investment. And I took that the same way you see it.  To protect Wyndham. I would say "you may not have sold it as an investment, but I bought it as an investment"  if I was to fail in my rental business I understood that it wasn't wyndhams fault

However the disclosures in the back of the directory are more direct and perfectly clear. The product is for personal use, no commercial use allowed

So Wyndham chose to look the other way, or I was able to stay under their radar, or maybe my crystal ball has just started working. But I believe that they are going to get serious about that "no commercial use"  clause in the disclosures

Times; they are a changing


----------



## raygo123

ronparise said:


> I think you are right. I remember signing something that it wasn't supposed of as an investment. And I took that the same way you see it.  To protect Wyndham. I would say "you may not have sold it as an investment, but I bought it as an investment"  if I was to fail in my rental business I understood that it wasn't wyndhams fault
> 
> However the disclosures in the back of the directory are more direct and perfectly clear. The product is for personal use, no commercial use allowed
> 
> So Wyndham chose to look the other way, or I was able to stay under their radar, or maybe my crystal ball has just started working. But I believe that they are going to get serious about that "no commercial use"  clause in the disclosures
> 
> Times; they are a changing


Did I read somewhere that the CEO is stepping in to oversee the transition after the president quit?

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk


----------



## am1

ronparise said:


> I think you are right. I remember signing something that it wasn't supposed of as an investment. And I took that the same way you see it.  To protect Wyndham. I would say "you may not have sold it as an investment, but I bought it as an investment"  if I was to fail in my rental business I understood that it wasn't wyndhams fault
> 
> However the disclosures in the back of the directory are more direct and perfectly clear. The product is for personal use, no commercial use allowed
> 
> So Wyndham chose to look the other way, or I was able to stay under their radar, or maybe my crystal ball has just started working. But I believe that they are going to get serious about that "no commercial use"  clause in the disclosures
> 
> Times; they are a changing



If anyone purchased a Wyndham timeshare because the sales person said it would be good for rentals (regardless of what it says in the directory) then they should be offered full refunds and possibly the appreciation that sales talk about.


----------



## Jan M.

ronparise said:


> I think you are right. I remember signing something that it wasn't supposed of as an investment. And I took that the same way you see it.  To protect Wyndham. I would say "you may not have sold it as an investment, but I bought it as an investment"  if I was to fail in my rental business I understood that it wasn't wyndhams fault
> 
> However the disclosures in the back of the directory are more direct and perfectly clear. The product is for personal use, no commercial use allowed
> 
> So Wyndham chose to look the other way, or I was able to stay under their radar, or maybe my crystal ball has just started working. But I believe that they are going to get serious about that "no commercial use"  clause in the disclosures
> 
> Times; they are a changing



I agree with you. Plus there is always a bigger picture that we may only catch a glimpse of by our pooling of information, conjecture and reading between the lines.

I too think that it is very likely that owners who are primarily commercial renters will find themselves faced with changes that will impact their ability to rent or make it profitable. I think Wyndham intends to do something and has wanted to do it for a few years now. But that they haven't yet leads me to believe there are some considerations/consequences that they haven't yet figured a way around. It doesn't mean that they won't; just that it might take them awhile longer to do it.

Those of us who spent the money to buy a significant number of developer points from Fairfield and/or Wyndham certainly would like to be reassured that Wyndham isn't making changes to the VIP program or other changes that will in effect devalue the worth of our ownership to us. I truly believe that if Wyndham is foolish enough to make changes that comprise the worth of the VIP program in the owners opinion that they might as well cut their sales staff by 90% or even more immediately.

How is Wyndham going to justify owners turning reservations over to Extra Holidays which most certainly can be construed as commercial renting. I would think a good group of attorneys could make a case and might even possibly ask for and be granted an injunction to prohibit Extra Holiday rentals while a suit is ongoing. I have no idea if they would even stand a chance of winning if it actually went to court and realize it would most likely be settled out of court. Wyndham is at a distinct disadvantage right now as they have been getting a lot of unfavorable notice with the public, States attorneys and courts. They also have invested a lot in the Extra Holidays program.

I can't begin to guess at how many hundreds of millions, probably even billions, of points are owned/handled by the mega renters and point managers. Is Wyndham in the financial position of being able to take them all back through Ovations, settlement or default? Perhaps at this time the mega renter/points manager relationship is more symbiotic than Wyndham likes to admit even to themselves. If the market were to be flooded with resales would there be more articles on financial sites and publications questioning Wyndhams stability? Negative publicity, legal and financial, unhappy owners, lower stock prices, etc. all impact sales.

In fact cutting their sales staff to a minimal number of people and perhaps putting them permanently on salary would be my first suggestion to Wyndham. I truly believe they have a good product but the predatory and aggressive salespeople and sales tactics screams that Wyndham thinks so little of the worth of what they are selling that they have to con, coerce, deceive and badger people into buying it. It has become a viscous cycle. The more they drive people away with their sales tactics the more desperate and underhanded the sales people become which in turn drives even more people away. When they do make a sale, people are usually to varying degrees dissatisfied with their purchase when they find out how much of what their sales person told them was lies. And sooner or later they always do find out.

You used the quote: "Times they are a changing." The old leadership has continued to do business as they have always done it instead of adapting and changing with the times. Maybe the new leadership will be smart enough to see what any of us can tell them; what they are doing isn't working! Stop trying variations of the same old thing where nothing truly changes, scrap your sales program entirely and start over with a totally new and different approach to sales. Wyndham doesn't have much to lose and a great deal to gain by doing that because Wyndham is walking a very fine line these days. Unless they make some sweeping changes Wyndham is in very real danger of making the name Wyndham a byword for everything that is wrong with the timeshare industry.


----------



## paxsarah

Jan M. said:


> I too think that it is very likely that owners who are primarily commercial renters will find themselves faced with changes that will impact their ability to rent or make it profitable. I think Wyndham intends to do something and has wanted to do it for a few years now. But that they haven't yet leads me to believe there are some considerations/consequences that they haven't yet figured a way around. It doesn't mean that they won't; just that it might take them awhile longer to do it.



It seems to me that whatever change Wyndham makes to make cancel/rebook/upgrade in its current form untenable for renters is going to need to be backed by some solid IT. The last change they made, which on the surface seems fairly minor - the elimination of cancelled points and putting points from canceled reservations back into the pot they came from - has uncovered some big problems for Wyndham on the IT side. To layer another policy and/or process change on top of that before they fix what's already broken could be a disaster. I guess the question is at what point do they feel they have a good enough handle on what's going on with their IT infrastructure to move forward with making changes? And will they miss the sort of underlying pitfalls that they've run into with the last change, and how bad will those pitfalls be?


----------



## Braindead

Wyndham doesn't need to change the rules!!! Just enforce the rules in place!                                     No VIP benefits for resale points. Hardly any owners have 5 million or more developer points to tie up points on multiple prime reservations to end up with 1 reservation.                                                   No commercial renting. I'm sure there's an exemption for Extra Holidays already in place if you interpret the wording correctly. Wyndham has the authority to use its discretion. If your reservation or points are listed or advertised on a website or through a third party that would be considered commercial by almost any court. Loss or profit doesn't matter. Commercial entities lose money everyday.                     Wyndham has a IT problem to fix. But I also think they are drawing out the audits to see how much business they can pickup at Extra Holidays and get a handle on how much renting was occurring. They were diffidently caught off guard at the amount of commercial renting.                                                    Extra Holidays is a great way to get new sales! If you liked your stay here let me show you how you can save money on your vacations.                                                                                                              Just look at TripAdvisor comments sometime. People comment on renting constantly. I looked up Wyndham Waikiki Beach Walk. Mr. Weng told a client he has thousands of rentals. Shelby Resorts mention several times.                                                                                                                         I truely believe all of us would be surprised at the availability of prime reservations if the current rules were enforced. I don't think even some renters here realize the amount of renting currently.                     I don't know how AM1 and others believe they can defend their actions in court. When they are in clear violations of the rules. Wyndham has sole authority on how to handle the situation. You can't say your not guilty because you did it for years. People break laws for years but when caught you are still guilty.     This may sound harsh but sometimes the truth isn't what you want here


----------



## Richelle

Braindead said:


> Wyndham doesn't need to change the rules!!! Just enforce the rules in place!                                     No VIP benefits for resale points. Hardly any owners have 5 million or more developer points to tie up points on multiple prime reservations to end up with 1 reservation.                                                   No commercial renting. I'm sure there's an exemption for Extra Holidays already in place if you interpret the wording correctly. Wyndham has the authority to use its discretion. If your reservation or points are listed or advertised on a website or through a third party that would be considered commercial by almost any court. Loss or profit doesn't matter. Commercial entities lose money everyday.                     Wyndham has a IT problem to fix. But I also think they are drawing out the audits to see how much business they can pickup at Extra Holidays and get a handle on how much renting was occurring. They were diffidently caught off guard at the amount of commercial renting.                                                    Extra Holidays is a great way to get new sales! If you liked your stay here let me show you how you can save money on your vacations.                                                                                                              Just look at TripAdvisor comments sometime. People comment on renting constantly. I looked up Wyndham Waikiki Beach Walk. Mr. Weng told a client he has thousands of rentals. Shelby Resorts mention several times.                                                                                                                         I truely believe all of us would be surprised at the availability of prime reservations if the current rules were enforced. I don't think even some renters here realize the amount of renting currently.                     I don't know how AM1 and others believe they can defend their actions in court. When they are in clear violations of the rules. Wyndham has sole authority on how to handle the situation. You can't say your not guilty because you did it for years. People break laws for years but when caught you are still guilty.     This may sound harsh but sometimes the truth isn't what you want here



You might be right for the commercial renters, but there are people who are not commercial renters that had their accounts suspended without just cause. In the mean time, they are forced to pay dues on something they cannot use. If Wyndham wants to enforce the no commercial use rule, that's fine, but don't mass suspend a bunch of accounts on a whim. If they detected an issue, they could have done the audit quickly (if they wanted to) without suspending the account. After the audit, if they detected a violation, then suspend the account. It sounds like they did a mass suspension almost all at once. That is not fair to those who did not break the rules. While doing the investigation, they can work on their IT issue.     If the accounts that where violating the rules were suspended, they would have more time to fix the issue. It sounds like this was a shoot first, ask questions later type of thing. If Wyndham wanted to limit their liability, they should not have suspended accounts without doing the audit FIRST. The commercial renters may not have a court case, but the people who didn't break the rules do. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Braindead

Totally agree regarding non rental accounts frozen! Renting has gotten out of control in my opinion because of allowing resale points receiving VIP benefits. I don't know how much everyone reads other forums here but it's a common opinion here to rent. Don't buy anything just rent all your needs. A Disney thread was complaining about rentals on reservation made through RCI exchanges. Maybe Disney got tired of complaints about RCI and that's why they cut back on RCI deposits!


----------



## uscav8r

Braindead said:


> Wyndham doesn't need to change the rules!!! Just enforce the rules in place!                                     No VIP benefits for resale points. Hardly any owners have 5 million or more developer points to tie up points on multiple prime reservations to end up with 1 reservation.                                                   No commercial renting. I'm sure there's an exemption for Extra Holidays already in place if you interpret the wording correctly. Wyndham has the authority to use its discretion. If your reservation or points are listed or advertised on a website or through a third party that would be considered commercial by almost any court. Loss or profit doesn't matter. Commercial entities lose money everyday.                     Wyndham has a IT problem to fix. But I also think they are drawing out the audits to see how much business they can pickup at Extra Holidays and get a handle on how much renting was occurring. They were diffidently caught off guard at the amount of commercial renting.                                                    Extra Holidays is a great way to get new sales! If you liked your stay here let me show you how you can save money on your vacations.                                                                                                              Just look at TripAdvisor comments sometime. People comment on renting constantly. I looked up Wyndham Waikiki Beach Walk. Mr. Weng told a client he has thousands of rentals. Shelby Resorts mention several times.                                                                                                                         I truely believe all of us would be surprised at the availability of prime reservations if the current rules were enforced. I don't think even some renters here realize the amount of renting currently.                     I don't know how AM1 and others believe they can defend their actions in court. When they are in clear violations of the rules. Wyndham has sole authority on how to handle the situation. You can't say your not guilty because you did it for years. People break laws for years but when caught you are still guilty.     This may sound harsh but sometimes the truth isn't what you want here



There are many non-commercial owners who may need to rent a unit from time to time or else lose out on the use of points. If I rent for a small profit, I would submit I am not a commercial enterprise. If I rent my home and conduct a low-level amount of activity, I am not considered a commercial business. 

You need to be really careful on who you define as a commercial enterprise, lest non-megarenters get caught up in this hype. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## ronparise

Braindead said:


> Wyndham doesn't need to change the rules!!! Just enforce the rules in place!                                     No VIP benefits for resale points. Hardly any owners have 5 million or more developer points to tie up points on multiple prime reservations to end up with 1 reservation.                                                   No commercial renting. I'm sure there's an exemption for Extra Holidays already in place if you interpret the wording correctly. Wyndham has the authority to use its discretion. If your reservation or points are listed or advertised on a website or through a third party that would be considered commercial by almost any court. Loss or profit doesn't matter. Commercial entities lose money everyday.                     Wyndham has a IT problem to fix. But I also think they are drawing out the audits to see how much business they can pickup at Extra Holidays and get a handle on how much renting was occurring. They were diffidently caught off guard at the amount of commercial renting.                                                    Extra Holidays is a great way to get new sales! If you liked your stay here let me show you how you can save money on your vacations.                                                                                                              Just look at TripAdvisor comments sometime. People comment on renting constantly. I looked up Wyndham Waikiki Beach Walk. Mr. Weng told a client he has thousands of rentals. Shelby Resorts mention several times.                                                                                                                         I truely believe all of us would be surprised at the availability of prime reservations if the current rules were enforced. I don't think even some renters here realize the amount of renting currently.                     I don't know how AM1 and others believe they can defend their actions in court. When they are in clear violations of the rules. Wyndham has sole authority on how to handle the situation. You can't say your not guilty because you did it for years. People break laws for years but when caught you are still guilty.     This may sound harsh but sometimes the truth isn't what you want here




The problem is that there is no definition of "Commercial Use.   I always considered what I do as a "hobby" and although you are absolutely right that just because you got away with breaking the law for a long time doesnt mean you will be allowed to continue.

 But there is a concept of implied contract to be considered.  Although the parties may not have exchanged words of agreement, their conduct may indicate that an agreement existed.  If a guy owns 25 million points  (enough for over 100 weeks at 250000 points per week )  I think its pretty clear he cant use all these personally. and if The Wyndham title dept continues to process more purchase contracts for this guy, I think by their actions Wyndham has allowed the operattion to grow. And he purchases 100 guest confirmations a year, I think we can agree this is not for personal use.  And if Wyndham employees assist this guy in making the reservations and take his money for the guest confirmations I think we can agree that buy their actions thay have allowed the activity to continue.  And if Wyndham sales people have been assigned to work with guests of owners, and their pitch is: "You can save money over renting by buying from us and owning your own points"; its pretty clear that Wyndham knows exactly whats going on and has allowed the behavior, because it works for them.

My point is that breaking the rules is necessary to the success of a rental operation.  There are no existing that rules if enforced will result in the end to "commercial use" And in fact Wyndham by their actions has allowed commercial renting to flourish.

Wyndham will have to come in the back door to control commercial use by adding benefits like a wait list or  adding costs like by attacking the cancel and rebook strategy. or by going after the players one at a time,  and even then I think the best that they can do is to


Richelle said:


> You might be right for the commercial renters, but there are people who are not commercial renters that had their accounts suspended without just cause. In the mean time, they are forced to pay dues on something they cannot use. If Wyndham wants to enforce the no commercial use rule, that's fine, but don't mass suspend a bunch of accounts on a whim. If they detected an issue, they could have done the audit quickly (if they wanted to) without suspending the account. After the audit, if they detected a violation, then suspend the account. It sounds like they did a mass suspension almost all at once. That is not fair to those who did not break the rules. While doing the investigation, they can work on their IT issue.     If the accounts that where violating the rules were suspended, they would have more time to fix the issue. It sounds like this was a shoot first, ask questions later type of thing. If Wyndham wanted to limit their liability, they should not have suspended accounts without doing the audit FIRST. The commercial renters may not have a court case, but the people who didn't break the rules do.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk




For me the issue is: How do you define commercial renting?
One poster has suggested an ad on Craigslist or soliciting customers with a website, makes one a commercial renter.  I dont think that does it
and once defined, how will it be enforced? and what will the consequences be?  Absent a definition of commercial renting and an enforcement policy, Wyndham is left with "Ill know it when I see it" approach. and their efforts will look like a game of Wack-A-Mole. Every time they get one of us, another will pop up

There are I think just two things that make large scale renting for a profit possible. One is the low price of points on the secondary market, and two is the gold or platinum level discount. So two ways to control large scale commercial renting 1) Get control of the secondary market and 2) limit discounts to VIP eligible points only (or limit discounts to vip owners only; no guests) (or limit the number of guests per account to the number of included guest confirms ie you cant buy more)

Regarding the secondary market.  Do you think I could have amassed 30 million points if I had to pay even half of retail prices (30 million at $100/1000 =  $3 million)  If wyndham started to exercise their first right of refusal on CWA and pay market prices instead of just taking stuff back through Ovation, they could get back everything they ever sold and sell it again at full price.. No more penny a point (or less) purchases on ebay, no more giveaways on TUGG


and regarding discounts and upgrades; The program was meant to get the leftover reservations (the stuff that is available at 60 days before check in) reserved.  It was never meant to  allow anyone to get a three bedroom at Bonnet Creek at Christmas for half the one bedroom price. As has been suggested, just limit discounts and upgrades  to points bought directly from Wyndham


----------



## Braindead

2 wrongs never make it right!! Wyndham can easily argue against your point of helping an owner with points and guest. You could have a lot of employees and use your points as a perk for employees and receive no monetary compensation. Or as one has posted church groups, traveling teams or competitions. It isn't Wyndham responsibility to know what every reservation is for. It is their responsibility to respond when a violation is exposed.


----------



## Jan M.

Braindead said:


> Hardly any owners have 5 million or more developer points to tie up points on multiple prime reservations to end up with 1 reservation





Braindead said:


> I truly believe all of us would be surprised at the availability of prime reservations if the current rules were enforced. I don't think even some renters here realize the amount of renting currently.



When I said in my post "I can't begin to guess at how many hundreds of millions, probably even* billions*, of points are owned/handled by the mega renters and point managers" I thought some of you reading it might think I was exaggerating. Braindead's input and a number that another person gave me made it very clear that easily at least a billion or more points in reservations being rented out is no exaggeration at all. Then add to that the number of rentals owners do through Extra Holidays and the number of rentals Wyndham itself does and we've just added another billion or more points in rentals.

Braindead is right. I'm the one who said billions and finding out that the figure isn't far fetched at all leaves me surprised, no make that shocked, by the amount of renting!

The one thing that just sticks in my craw is that Wyndham can rent out the reservations owners make through Extra Holidays and get around their own rules for commercial renting. It really bothers me that they make special rules for themselves when they want to do something. The long standing contract wording says no commercial renting but Wyndham sees how they can get a piece of the action and says but commercial renting through us is now okay. The Extra Holidays program is pure genius for Wyndham with the ridiculously high percentage they take and also keeping for their own use any nights left when not all of the reservation sells. I believe that prior to Extra Holidays points managers were virtually unheard of by all but a very few owners. But the point managing business really took off when so many owners started looking for a better and less risky option than Extra Holidays. And having the sales people use Extra Holidays to entice people to buy more points than they know they would likely be able to use every year promoted the idea of renting to every single owner. The number of rentals through the little guy owner, the mega renters, the point managers and Extra Holidays has increased exponentially since Extra Holidays debuted. In my opinion they created this situation.

Again Braindead is correct. Wyndham getting their IT issues corrected/improved so the system can differentiate between developer and resale points in VIP owners accounts would make a huge difference.

If Wyndham were to cut their percentage of what they get through Extra Holidays or offer discounted rates for owners who list with them more frequently that would discourage individual renting and the need for point managers. But it still creates a market and competition for the bigger units and prime reservations with owners booking them for profit rather than personal use. *It would clean up the rental problem overnight* if Wyndham were to ban *any and all renting, even their own*, for prime dates/weeks like Christmas, Easter, Fourth of July, Thanksgiving and special events like Mardi Gras, race week at Ocean Walk, etc. until it gets within 30 days of check in. Get caught renting any of those reservations farther out and you would forfeit the ability to make any guest reservations for 6 months or even a year. That would allow any owner who wanted a reservation to have ample opportunity to get it. They could also severely restrict the number of reservations any owner could make for the same prime dates to a maximum of say 2 or 3. There are ways to deal with the problem that would actually benefit the owners instead of doing something that is a joke and ends up hurting the owners even more.


----------



## Braindead

The problem with shutting down Extra Holidays is what do you do with contracts taken back via Ovation. Our HOA or Club need the maintenance fees.


----------



## Braindead

Had never heard of Shelby Resorts before. As usual searched and found them. Looks like they specialize at 4 of Wyndham's Resorts and only Wyndham Resorts ( I wonder why).Of course they have rentals available when and where I want to go. Guess I will have to wait for the 15 day mark to see if they cancel any. Extra Holidays piss people off but finding available units at sites like Shelby Resorts sets me off 10 times more


----------



## am1

Why does a deeded ownership need to have any restrictions on renting at all?


----------



## Braindead

am1 said:


> Why does a deeded ownership need to have any restrictions on renting at all?


If it's a fixed week absolutely no restriction. Points is a whole different animal!!


----------



## raygo123

I was wondering the same thing.  Foxrun converted to points is a prime example.  It also trades through II.  And Variety 

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk


----------



## Jan M.

Braindead said:


> The problem with shutting down Extra Holidays is what do you do with contracts taken back via Ovation. Our HOA or Club need the maintenance fees.



Shutting down Extra Holidays will never happen. Wyndham would still have and try to sell all the reservations made with the points they hold. Owner rentals 30 days out isn't realistic when I think about it. 45 days out would give 30 days to sell until that 15 day window reservations can be cancelled with no penalty. This would give all owners ample access to all reservations but only if Wyndham wouldn't take as big of a percentage of any unbooked reservations at the popular resorts to sell for themselves prior to that 45 day window. 

7-10 years ago people tended to book most of their vacations much further out than they are doing now. With the growing popularity of PTO, personal time off, and people having more flexibility, their usage has changed. Also a huge number of us owners who bought when we were younger are now retired and can go anytime we want. We love the freedom of being able to book and go without months of planning. Those reservations within that 60 day window aren't the orphan reservations they were in the past. Ron P. said times are changing and I said Wyndham needs to change with the the times too. Wyndham taking a big percentage of unbooked inventory at the popular resorts 60 days out wasn't as big a deal 7-10 years ago as it is now. 

Contracts taken back through Ovation have no bearing on the maintenance fee for the resorts. Wyndham has taken over those contracts and is responsible for the maintenance fees. The only time the resorts are left on the hook for maintenance fees are when owners stop paying and the resorts foreclose on their deeds.


----------



## Braindead

Pretty simple to me. You own a fixed week -month-year-your house it's yours. Points can be used anytime anywhere by hundreds of thousands of owners trying to get that same week and some try to gain an unfair advantage!! Are you really trying to justify that's fair and get it at half price to top it all off !!!!


----------



## am1

Braindead said:


> If it's a fixed week absolutely no restriction. Points is a whole different animal!!



Why?  It is equal opportunity for everyone.  That is what is fair not equal results.


----------



## ronparise

am1 said:


> Why does a deeded ownership need to have any restrictions on renting at all?



Deeded ownerships don't 

However, Most of what do and I bet most of what you do isn't "deeded ownership". I own at one resort and use my points to reserve at another. That's no different than RCI (ie an exchange) and at RCI rentals are not allowed

We already know Wyndham sees deeded ownership as something different than exchanges done through the Fairshare trust. The 10 night limit does not apply to ARP reservations because they are made with a deeded ownership

So I suppose using that same logic, Wyndham could prohibit renting reservations  except ARP reservations because they are made with deeded ownerships


----------



## vacationhopeful

Another reason for Wyndham to convert all CWP owners to CWA? Eliminate owner rentals?


----------



## am1

ronparise said:


> Deeded ownerships don't
> 
> However, Most of what do and I bet most of what you do isn't "deeded ownership". I own at one resort and use my points to reserve at another. That's no different than RCI (ie an exchange) and at RCI rentals are not allowed
> 
> We already know Wyndham sees deeded ownership as something different than exchanges done through the Fairshare trust. The 10 night limit does not apply to ARP reservations because they are made with a deeded ownership
> 
> So I suppose using that same logic, Wyndham could prohibit renting reservations  except ARP reservations because they are made with deeded ownerships




I guess they could do that but takes away from being in a points system where at 10 months points are points.  

Wyndham should worry about the things they have already dropped the ball on instead of trying to come up with more things they can mismanage.


----------



## ronparise

am1 said:


> I guess they could do that but takes away from being in a points system where at 10 months points are points.
> 
> Wyndham should worry about the things they have already dropped the ball on instead of trying to come up with more things they can mismanage.



exactly, at ten months points are points.. The exception to the 10 night limit is for ARP reservations  Im suggesting they could do the same thing with rentals, Ie allow them for ARP reservations, but not for reservations at 10 months

And regarding CWA . ARP reservations can be made with CWA points and you can have more than ten of these at the same time and place... Im suggestion the same thing could be done with rentals.  If Wyndham did such a ting, the mega renters would load up on CWA


----------



## am1

ronparise said:


> exactly, at ten months points are points.. The exception to the 10 night limit is for ARP reservations  Im suggesting they could do the same thing with rentals, Ie allow them for ARP reservations, but not for reservations at 10 months
> 
> And regarding CWA . ARP reservations can be made with CWA points and you can have more than ten of these at the same time and place... Im suggestion the same thing could be done with rentals.  If Wyndham did such a ting, the mega renters would load up on CWA



And who pay Wyndham to (mis)manage that for us?  I do not want my program fees going towards that.   Also I would like to be compensated by sales who told me that rentals would never be a problem.


----------



## Sandi Bo

ronparise said:


> exactly, at ten months points are points.. The exception to the 10 night limit is for ARP reservations  Im suggesting they could do the same thing with rentals, Ie allow them for ARP reservations, but not for reservations at 10 months
> 
> And regarding CWA . ARP reservations can be made with CWA points and you can have more than ten of these at the same time and place... Im suggestion the same thing could be done with rentals.  If Wyndham did such a ting, the mega renters would load up on CWA



Keep in mind that enforcing the 10 night limit requires manual processing.  The system has yet to support this rule.  The system allows you to book more than 10 nights. It's an overnight (at least) auditing process that trigger the cancelling and hand slapping when the limit is exceeded. Whatever they do - they lack the systems to support the processes effectively and consistently. Can you imagine them trying to implement some of the thing being tossed around here?


----------



## Jan M.

am1 said:


> I would like to be compensated by sales who told me that rentals would never be a problem.



In other circumstances when an employee speaks as a representative of the company, the company can be bound by what they say but Wyndham has managed to not to be held accountable for what their sales people say. Wyndham sales people and their managers too make these statements as SOP exactly as they are coached by their managers and district managers to do. So it can't even be considered an isolated incident or the words of an untrained employee.

The case that we all heard about with the former Wyndham sales associated being awarded $20m by the courts is an extremely big deal because the Wyndham sales associates and management were openly exposed for their sales tactics, lies and targeting the elderly.

As to your being compensated, as we say at our house: your chances are slim to none and Slim just left town.


----------



## iaminak

vacationhopeful said:


> Another reason for Wyndham to convert all CWP owners to CWA? Eliminate owner rentals?



How would that eliminate renting??


----------



## iaminak

am1 said:


> Also I would like to be compensated by sales who told me that rentals would never be a problem.



Good luck pursuing that.  I made a complaint after a developer purchase because I was lied to about bonus weeks and how they could be used.  I considered this a major selling point and part of why I ended up buying as it was supposed to be 4 weeks worth.  Long story short, it took months and in the end - even though I had text messages from the salesman proving how he blatantly lied about the extra weeks - Wyndham said if it wasn't in the contract, they couldn't (or I guess didnt have to and weren't willing to) do anything about it.  They just said they would talk to the salesman to make sure it didn't happen again.  My guess is they just told him not to put his lies in a text message again!  

I was also told last week by a salesman that cancel/rebook always works and you never lose your reservation.  Think they would honor that if I had bought again and then lost a reservation?!?  Exactly.


----------



## Jan M.

Sandi Bo said:


> Can you imagine them trying to implement some of the thing being tossed around here?



I really thought my suggestion that absolutely no reservations be accepted into Extra Holidays prior to 45 days before check in was something that could easily be done. Also the suggestion that an owner caught renting stays prior to that would lose the ability to add guest names to any of their reservations for 6 months to a year. You wouldn't dare advertise or rent to anyone you didn't know in case they were a Wyndham secret shopper. And you would have to worry that one of your renters might inadvertently let something slip. Could mega renters afford to sit on millions of points in reservations hoping to sell them when it gets to within 45 days of check in? If you got caught and had to pay the maintenance fees on millions of points but couldn't add guest names to any of your reservations for 6 months to a year, how soon would you be out of business. 

Also strictly enforced limits of 2 or 3 reservations for the same prime dates/weeks like Christmas, Easter, Fourth of July, Thanksgiving and special events like Mardi Gras, race week at Ocean Walk, etc. should be doable. Especially if you risk losing all of your reservations if you exceed the limit. I think it could easily be done on the resort level if Wyndham can't get their act together to get their system to do it.

Whatever Wyndham does it needs to be so restrictive that people can't find a way around it or it becomes a joke like the other attempts they've made.


----------



## am1

Why?????



Jan M. said:


> I really thought my suggestion that absolutely no reservations be accepted into Extra Holidays prior to 45 days before check in was something that could easily be done. Also the suggestion that an owner caught renting stays prior to that would lose the ability to add guest names to any of their reservations for 6 months to a year. You wouldn't dare advertise or rent to anyone you didn't know in case they were a Wyndham secret shopper. And you would have to worry that one of your renters might inadvertently let something slip. Could mega renters afford to sit on millions of points in reservations hoping to sell them when it gets to within 45 days of check in? If you got caught and had to pay the maintenance fees on millions of points but couldn't add guest names to any of your reservations for 6 months to a year, how soon would you be out of business.
> 
> Also strictly enforced limits of 2 or 3 reservations for the same prime dates/weeks like Christmas, Easter, Fourth of July, Thanksgiving and special events like Mardi Gras, race week at Ocean Walk, etc. should be doable. Especially if you risk losing all of your reservations if you exceed the limit. I think it could easily be done on the resort level if Wyndham can't get their act together to get their system to do it.
> 
> Whatever Wyndham does it needs to be so restrictive that people can't find a way around it or it becomes a joke like the other attempts they've made.


----------



## Sandi Bo

Jan M. said:


> I really thought my suggestion that absolutely no reservations be accepted into Extra Holidays prior to 45 days before check in was something that could easily be done. Also the suggestion that an owner caught renting stays prior to that would lose the ability to add guest names to any of their reservations for 6 months to a year. You wouldn't dare advertise or rent to anyone you didn't know in case they were a Wyndham secret shopper. And you would have to worry that one of your renters might inadvertently let something slip. Could mega renters afford to sit on millions of points in reservations hoping to sell them when it gets to within 45 days of check in? If you got caught and had to pay the maintenance fees on millions of points but couldn't add guest names to any of your reservations for 6 months to a year, how soon would you be out of business.
> 
> Also strictly enforced limits of 2 or 3 reservations for the same prime dates/weeks like Christmas, Easter, Fourth of July, Thanksgiving and special events like Mardi Gras, race week at Ocean Walk, etc. should be doable. Especially if you risk losing all of your reservations if you exceed the limit. I think it could easily be done on the resort level if Wyndham can't get their act together to get their system to do it.
> 
> Whatever Wyndham does it needs to be so restrictive that people can't find a way around it or it becomes a joke like the other attempts they've made.



I'm not saying they aren't good ideas.  But it's more manual processes because the Wyndham systems can't support what they need to.  More manual processes means more inconsistencies.  

I always thought the use year alignments followed by elimination of cancelled points were implemented in part to make things simpler for IT (to program).  Yet we continue to see system issues. Those 2 things should have made programming easier (and we've seen what happened there).


----------



## Richelle

I hear a lot about how this process or that process cannot be done because the Wyndham system cannot handle it. I beg to differ. If they had the right developers and software engineers, they could do pretty much anything that is being suggested here. If they are using an off the shelf system (as opposed to a home grown system), then it would make things more difficult because they cannot modify the base product. However, they can still do it, if they have the right people to plan it out and develop the processes needed to do the tracking of points, keeping track of reservations made by an owner, enforcing regulations, automated auditing, etc. The real problem is time. The time it takes to write and test the processes can take awhile depending on how complicated it is. It's possible they are doing just that. Creating and testing. However, that does it give them the right to restrict what people can do with their points. If they want to enforce the rules, great. Create the processes that force the rules rather then holding people's accounts hostage. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Sandi Bo

I got involved (started managing my Dad's account) 6 years ago now.  At that time they were talking about the new system that was coming (Voyager).  And still we wait...    

Yes, it's doable - but Wyndham doesn't seem to have the right people designing, coding, or testing. I'm still not convinced they understand and recognize the issues.


----------



## Richelle

Sandi Bo said:


> I got involved (started managing my Dad's account) 6 years ago now.  At that time they were talking about the new system that was coming (Voyager).  And still we wait...
> 
> Yes, it's doable - but Wyndham doesn't seem to have the right people designing, coding, or testing. I'm still not convinced they understand and recognize the issues.



I wonder if anyone from Wyndham actually watches these forums.  The sales people seem to know about this site.  I'm sure plenty of people at Wyndham do, but I don't know if there is an active "spy" from Wyndham monitoring any of these forums.  


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## uscav8r

Braindead said:


> Pretty simple to me. You own a fixed week -month-year-your house it's yours. Points can be used anytime anywhere by hundreds of thousands of owners trying to get that same week and some try to gain an unfair advantage!! Are you really trying to justify that's fair and get it at half price to top it all off !!!!



Sorry, bud. I have "deeded" points. I am not a megarenter, but your assertion that I have an unfair advantage (BTW I M only a Silver VIP) is absolutely ludicrous. Go find another red herring to catch. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Richelle

Braindead said:


> Pretty simple to me. You own a fixed week -month-year-your house it's yours. Points can be used anytime anywhere by hundreds of thousands of owners trying to get that same week and some try to gain an unfair advantage!! Are you really trying to justify that's fair and get it at half price to top it all off !!!!



Wyndham has 900k owners. I highly doubt 100k of them are trying to get Christmas at Bonnet or Daytona bike week. "Unfair advantage" is a vague term that can mean any number of things. For example, Set aside the cancel rebook process for a second. Pretend it's not possible to do that. Is a VIP getting discounted points an unfair advantage?  One could consider it to be unfair because you can get more out of your points then I can. We could both book the same one bedroom for 200k, but since you get a 25% discount right off the bat for being silver, you only pay 150k points, plus, you get upgraded to a one bedroom presidential because it happens to be available. So we both booked the same room, at the same time, but the VIP got a savings in points that they can use for another vacation. Some might consider that unfair. It's all about perception.  Some may think the VIP program is unfair because people who have money get the privileges that people with less money don't get. I personally believe if you used your hard earned money to pay for VIP, you should get the discounts. However, not everyone sees things the same way. Unfortunately what you or I think is an "unfair advantage" is irrelevant. Wyndham is the one who gets to decide what is an "unfair advantage". If we disagree with them, our only recourse would be a lengthy court battle that Wyndham would likely win because their pockets are deeper then ours. 

Do I think it's fair to book up multiple rooms to gain a profit when other family's want that same room?  My gut says it's not fair. However, Wyndham allowed it for a very long time. They were the ones who could have put a stop to it long ago, but they allowed it to continue. Since mega renters were not being stopped, they continued their practices. You could be mad at the mega renters for their practices, but ultimately Wyndham is to blame. They knew commercial renting was happening and they had the power to stop it, but they didn't. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## nicemann

Richelle said:


> I wonder if anyone from Wyndham actually watches these forums.  The sales people seem to know about this site.  I'm sure plenty of people at Wyndham do, but I don't know if there is an active "spy" from Wyndham monitoring any of these forums.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk



They were be dumb not to have someone reading the forum.  It would help them know opinions of their business and issues like this that are becoming more and more a problem.  I know if I was a major stock holder I would be using boards like this to help make monitor my investment.  

On a side note....hopefully the new head of Wyndham will find a new head of IT and they will be able to finally get a team to fix this mess.


----------



## am1

nicemann said:


> They were be dumb not to have someone reading the forum.  It would help them know opinions of their business and issues like this that are becoming more and more a problem.  I know if I was a major stock holder I would be using boards like this to help make monitor my investment.
> 
> On a side note....hopefully the new head of Wyndham will find a new head of IT and they will be able to finally get a team to fix this mess.



Especially with all the good info some owners felt the need to reveal on here over the years to make them look smart.


----------



## Sandi Bo

am1 said:


> Especially with all the good info some owners felt the need to reveal on here over the years to make them look smart.



I suggested to Wyndham that they have some of us who understand how things should work and have an IT background help them figure out what the system issues are, define how things should work (so the system supports the processes) , and help test things to make sure they get it fixed right. I think we could put together the ultimate team with some of the folks here on TUG. And they said... thanks, but, they already have a lot of smart people working on this.

I don't think they think things through when they do implement changes. They short sightedly make changes thinking they are fixing things but create bigger issues down the road.  Just one example - no more split use years - no more rolling points.  Oops -- 10's of millions (billions?) of the amassed points (as well as so many more owners with Dec use years) all expiring Dec 2016?  I'm not saying don't stop it... but manage it better. Wyndham allowed (undeniably marketed split use years and the ability to roll) and was fully aware of the system glitch/feature. Therefore when they put a stop to it they needed to fully understand the repercussions of that action.   

I think they like to think they are smarter than us and don't need our help.


----------



## iaminak

Sandi Bo said:


> I think they like to think they are smarter than us and don't need our help.



I don't think they think they are smarter, they just don't care.  Like too many businesses, they don't care enough about existing owners/customers, the focus is solely on getting new ones.


----------



## Roger830

Perhaps management is of the opinion that the best programmer is the one that is the lowest cost.

They could have a 20 year old system and nobody left that thoroughly understands the it.


----------



## Braindead

uscav8r said:


> Sorry, bud. I have "deeded" points. I am not a megarenter, but your assertion that I have an unfair advantage (BTW I M only a Silver VIP) is absolutely ludicrous. Go find another red herring to catch.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Wow do you have a guilty conscious!!! AM1 asked a question and I answered it. I didn't say all VIP have an unfair advantage. Did you not see the word some. Ron has even admitted he had an unfair advantage at times. Some use bots or other programs. The 10 unit limit is a joke. Some have access to multiple accounts and still tie up 50 plus units and need only 10. And yes they still get Christmas for half price!!! Most discounts are received on resale points. So don't  tell me how they paid the big bucks for the privilege either!!!!


----------



## bogey21

Sandi Bo said:


> Do I think it's fair to book up multiple rooms to gain a profit when other family's want that same room?  My gut says it's not fair. *However, Wyndham allowed it for a very long time. They were the ones who could have put a stop to it long ago, but they allowed it to continue.* Since mega renters were not being stopped, they continued their practices. You could be mad at the mega renters for their practices, but *ultimately Wyndham is to blame*. They knew commercial renting was happening and *they had the power to stop it, but they didn't.*



So true.

George


----------



## Joe33426

Roger830 said:


> Perhaps management is of the opinion that the best programmer is the one that is the lowest cost.
> 
> They could have a 20 year old system and nobody left that thoroughly understands the it.



See, this is what I don't understand.  Isn't the cost of the computer system a cost of the trust?  So, in other words, the cost of the computer system is part of our program fee.  Sounds like a breach of Wyndham's fiduciary responsibility to the trust.  Shouldn't someone have been auditing the # of points the program issued and seen that a bilizzon extra points were generated?


----------



## Sandi Bo

Joe33426 said:


> See, this is what I don't understand.  Isn't the cost of the computer system a cost of the trust?  So, in other words, the cost of the computer system is part of our program fee.  Sounds like a breach of Wyndham's fiduciary responsibility to the trust.  Shouldn't someone have been auditing the # of points the program issued and seen that a bilizzon extra points were generated?



Exactly! I may be corrected again, but why doesn't Wyndham need to adhere to Sarbanes Oxley - ensuring reliable, auditable, and tested systems and officers of the company are held responsible (thank you Enron, et al)?  If this were money, they would be.  My understanding is the airline points programs are SOX compliant.


----------



## vacationhopeful

My personal opinion:
There are TUG members here who have 20+ years of IT experience. Wyndham system is a MAINFRAME system ... most likely an IBM/IMS application from the before late-1980's era. (Needing to run overnight processing or weekend system updates).

Now how many application programmers or systems support people with 15+ years of experience are still "walking & talking" and still working as coders - who are NOT DROOLING as we enter 2017? 

Plus, add into the equation, Wyndham is a management has a HEAVY presence of MARKETiING TYPES. Start talking computers, operation systems (upgrades), migrating over and 2 year conversion projects ... the bosses eyes roll into the back of their heads and when the estimate for the dollar amount gets set down in a memo/executive meeting .... the answer is NO or find a cheaper way ... then deadlines are missed, staffing is impossible ... etc.

Yes, there are most likely NEWER options for big computer system projects ... but Wyndham is not a techno culture. Their chain of command is from SALES & MARKETING... great picture books (member directories), fancy offices, country club & golf events, yearly meetings. 

And the independent corporate auditors ... from a large accounting firm .... the ones who certify the ANNUAL REPORT ... maybe they need to start getting some complaints in written form both emails & USPS mail from timeshare owners. 

Think how much the independent accountants will light a fire under Wyndham?


----------



## Richelle

Sandi Bo said:


> Exactly! I may be corrected again, but why doesn't Wyndham need to adhere to Sarbanes Oxley - ensuring reliable, auditable, and tested systems and officers of the company are held responsible (thank you Enron, et al)?  If this were money, they would be.  My understanding is the airline points programs are SOX compliant.



If it's treated like currency it should be.  Airline miles can be used in place of dollars. For example, if a flight cost $99 one way, I can use 5,000 points for that flight. If it's $100, it would cost me 10,000 points. You can say the same is true for the points we spend on a hotel room. However, they are not points that are accrued through spending money. Like airline miles or credit card points. In other words, there if no, it you spend $100, you get 100 points with Wyndham except their rewards program. We get an allotment of points every year. One could argue that paying maintenance fees is how we "earn" the points but they are not accrued like credit card or airline miles. I'm not a lawyer, so I cannot tell you what the law is. However, if there is a way for Wyndham to skirt the law or bend it to it's benefit, they will. If SOX does not specify timeshare points, it could be argued that they are not required to track them. I believe they should be treating them just like they would any currency since it affects their bottom line if people are getting hotel rooms with points they should not have. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Jan M.

vacationhopeful said:


> My personal opinion:
> There are TUG members here who have 20+ years of IT experience. Wyndham system is a MAINFRAME system ... most likely an IBM/IMS application from the before late-1980's era. (Needing to run overnight processing or weekend system updates).
> 
> Now how many application programmers or systems support people with 15+ years of experience are still "walking & talking" and still working as coders - who are NOT DROOLING as we enter 2017?
> 
> Plus, add into the equation, Wyndham is a management has a HEAVY presence of MARKETiING TYPES. Start talking computers, operation systems (upgrades), migrating over and 2 year conversion projects ... the bosses eyes roll into the back of their heads and when the estimate for the dollar amount gets set down in a memo/executive meeting .... the answer is NO or find a cheaper way ... then deadlines are missed, staffing is impossible ... etc.
> 
> Yes, there are most likely NEWER options for big computer system projects ... but Wyndham is not a techno culture. Their chain of command is from SALES & MARKETING... great picture books (member directories), fancy offices, country club & golf events, yearly meetings.
> 
> And the independent corporate auditors ... from a large accounting firm .... the ones who certify the ANNUAL REPORT ... maybe they need to start getting some complaints in written form both emails & USPS mail from timeshare owners.
> 
> Think how much the independent accountants will light a fire under Wyndham?



*This is the absolute best assessment of the current situation that I have seen!*

Wyndham has been so focused on sales and other ways to make money that they relegated IT to low priority and now they are paying the piper for it.

I've seen first hand what happens when the parts of companies that consider themselves the "money makers" in the company are allowed to determine how the company is run. They convince the owners/executives/boards that other parts of the company that they describe as the "money takers" aren't important, should be cut, eliminated or relegated to the lowest priority in the company. It doesn't end well.


----------



## Richelle

Jan M. said:


> *This is the absolute best assessment of the current situation that I have seen!*
> 
> Wyndham has been so focused on sales and other ways to make money that they relegated IT to low priority and now they are paying the piper for it.
> 
> I've seen first hand what happens when the parts of companies that consider themselves the "money makers" in the company are allowed to determine how the company is run. They convince the owners/executives/boards that other parts of the company that they describe as the "money takers" aren't important, should be cut, eliminated or relegated to the lowest priority in the company. It doesn't end well.



Sadly, I have seen more then a few companies fall prey to that line of thinking. A lot of companies though, see IT as an asset, because they save more money then they cost when they are run well. Companies who do not keep up with technology cannot hope to compete with those that do in the long run. We'll have to wait to see if Wyndham has an bruises when all is said and done. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Braindead

No matter how one tries to justify or twist cancel rebook - cancel upgrade - commercial renting. A VIP didn't purchase that benefit. If you or you collude to create your discount and or upgrade that is manipulation or abuse or unfair advantage take your pick. Two of the benefits a VIP paid for is if you see a unit inside the discount window you may book it at a discount and or at the appropriate time receive an upgrade as long as you don't create it. Should be called book cancel. If a bank employee sells you on the idea you can rob the bank and not get caught. Then you buy into their plan and rob the bank with the employees help . Are you still guilty when caught? Is the bank liable? If you don't know the answer good luck. When you purchased your house did you believe everything the agent said ? Probably not. That's why you have inspection - survey- due diligence period ( recession period ). Wyndham just needs to enforce the rules!! If your caught the punishment needs to be severe. Lose one year of points and GC. I believe all of us would be surprised how often VIPs would still get discounts and upgrades if the current rules matter!! VIP may even become more appealing and increase sales. The number one complaint Wyndham gets from owners is probably availability of units. On an earlier note our HOA in Vegas doesn't allow renting either and yes they are deeded single family homes worth 500k plus. The truth can be harsh!!


----------



## ronparise

Changed my mind.  No comment


----------



## tschwa2

Braindead said:


> No matter how one tries to justify or twist cancel rebook - cancel upgrade - commercial renting. A VIP didn't purchase that benefit. If you or you collude to create your discount and or upgrade that is manipulation or abuse or unfair advantage take your pick. Two of the benefits a VIP paid for is if you see a unit inside the discount window you may book it at a discount and or at the appropriate time receive an upgrade as long as you don't create it. Should be called book cancel. *If a bank employee sells you on the idea you can rob the bank and not get caught. Then you buy into their plan and rob the bank with the employees help . Are you still guilty when caught?* Is the bank liable? If you don't know the answer good luck. When you purchased your house did you believe everything the agent said ? Probably not. That's why you have inspection - survey- due diligence period ( recession period ). Wyndham just needs to enforce the rules!! If your caught the punishment needs to be severe. Lose one year of points and GC. I believe all of us would be surprised how often VIPs would still get discounts and upgrades if the current rules matter!! VIP may even become more appealing and increase sales. *The number one complaint Wyndham gets from owners is probably availability of units.* On an earlier note our HOA in Vegas doesn't allow renting either and yes they are deeded single family homes worth 500k plus. The truth can be harsh!!


 My 2 cents about this post.  
First Robbing the bank at the employees suggestions isn't a valid argument.  Clearly there are multiple codified rules that prohibit robbing the bank.  Coupon fraud is probably a better example.  And because of coupon fraud grocery stores and retailers have rules that they can limit the number of purchases and returns on items in which coupons were used and can ban individuals from using coupons at all.  Wyndham needs to make the clear rule that rebooking inventory  that was previously booked and held and then released within lets say the last 30 days are not eligible to be rebooked with a discount.  It can be re-instated or rebooked by a agent using the full points but not with a discount.    If a new reservation is made adjusting the dates so only some of the days overlap the cancelled dates, the new dates can get the discount but the previously booked and released dates can not.  The same with an upgrade.   If you release a larger unit it can not be used to upgrade into.  Hilton has something called Open Season where you can book discounted stays with cash.  You can have the same inventory booked with points and cash but you can't cancel a points reservation to open up inventory for the cash stay.   If you cancel a points reservation less than 30 days before the discount window opens up (or during the discount window) you can not book using the discount.  

   At the same time there would have to be rules preventing owners from using a points management company (whose only purpose is commercial renting) and if an account is found to managed this way all reservations for the next 12 months are immediately subject to cancellation without refund.    There would also have to be restrictions in place restricting multiple accounts with some or all of the same owner/members or at least link those accounts so the provisions to get around the rebook with a discount are excluded.   First the rules need to be 100% clear and then they could be subject to random manual cancelling until Wyndham finds a way to make the system automated.  

Second, I think the number one complaint from owners is the pressure and lies, half truths and deceptions that are a part of every sales/owners update.  It starts from the pressure and misrepresentation of the meeting as an update to hear about new programs/resorts or to survey the guest about the stay.  It includes deception about the time the meeting will take (unless you take a really active role in keeping them to their time), to the costs involved, etc, etc, etc.   


I don't have a problem with the rental claim as long as that stops now or is clear that while occasional renting is allowed commercial renting is not. Wyndham also has to decide and define better what it considers commercial renting.  True Wyndham allowed it in the past but that doesn't mean it has to allow it forever, even if someone bought to rent.  Rules can change and as long as they bought and were told the rules at the time then I don't think Wyndham is going to be held liable to return the cost of the purchase as am1 would like.  I read the decision from one of the Marriott cases where some owners felt like they should receive damages from Marriott because the Destination program makes exchanges harder and tanked the resale value of the weeks program.  Marriott also modified the brokered resale and rental programs that the owners claimed was the main reason why they purchased.  The judge ruled in that case that Marriott could change their programs and what they sold at the time was accurate so no damages were owed to the owners.


----------



## wjappraise

Braindead said:


> No matter how one tries to justify or twist cancel rebook - cancel upgrade - commercial renting. A VIP didn't purchase that benefit. If you or you collude to create your discount and or upgrade that is manipulation or abuse or unfair advantage take your pick. Two of the benefits a VIP paid for is if you see a unit inside the discount window you may book it at a discount and or at the appropriate time receive an upgrade as long as you don't create it. Should be called book cancel. If a bank employee sells you on the idea you can rob the bank and not get caught. Then you buy into their plan and rob the bank with the employees help . Are you still guilty when caught? Is the bank liable? If you don't know the answer good luck. When you purchased your house did you believe everything the agent said ? Probably not. That's why you have inspection - survey- due diligence period ( recession period ). Wyndham just needs to enforce the rules!! If your caught the punishment needs to be severe. Lose one year of points and GC. I believe all of us would be surprised how often VIPs would still get discounts and upgrades if the current rules matter!! VIP may even become more appealing and increase sales. The number one complaint Wyndham gets from owners is probably availability of units. On an earlier note our HOA in Vegas doesn't allow renting either and yes they are deeded single family homes worth 500k plus. The truth can be harsh!!



Mama said . . . . "Life is like a box of chocolates."   


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## uscav8r

Braindead said:


> Wow do you have a guilty conscious!!! AM1 asked a question and I answered it. I didn't say all VIP have an unfair advantage. Did you not see the word some. Ron has even admitted he had an unfair advantage at times. Some use bots or other programs. The 10 unit limit is a joke. Some have access to multiple accounts and still tie up 50 plus units and need only 10. And yes they still get Christmas for half price!!! Most discounts are received on resale points. So don't  tell me how they paid the big bucks for the privilege either!!!!



Guilty conscience? Whatever led you to that glorious leap in logic?

On the other hand, I will certainly call out half-cocked ideas meant to target so-called megarenting that I see will directly affect a much wider swath of owners who are but innocent bystanders. 

Hiding behind the term "some" does not make the desired outcome any less subject to unintended consequences. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Braindead

I hope Wyndham leaves the VIP benefits and rules alone. They don't need to create more problems they can't fix. Simply start enforcing current rules. No need to take away anything from any owner or implement any new rules on any owner


----------



## uscav8r

Braindead said:


> I hope Wyndham leaves the VIP benefits and rules alone. They don't to create more problems they can't fix. Simply start enforcing current rules. No need to take away anything from any owner or implement any new rules on any owner



Well, on this we can agree! :smile:


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## uscav8r

Braindead said:


> I hope Wyndham leaves the VIP benefits and rules alone. They don't to create more problems they can't fix. Simply start enforcing current rules. No need to take away anything from any owner or implement any new rules on any owner



Well, on this we can agree! :smile:

But I would like some clarification on what constitutes commercial renting. To me, it should be tied to a threshold of revenue or perhaps of units rented, below which any owner (or perhaps account) is not considered commercial. 




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## am1

iaminak said:


> I don't think they think they are smarter, they just don't care.  Like too many businesses, they don't care enough about existing owners/customers, the focus is solely on getting new ones.


Sorry I meant the smarter comment towards others owners who felt the need to post a lot of info here.  Towards no one specifically but a few people in general.  Lose lips sink ships. 

I would never accuse anyone at Wyndham of that.  

I never used a bot or other system other then searching on my own.  In that regard there is not secret.


----------



## Braindead

My opinion it is not renting when you allow family or friends to use your points at cost. The second you ask to make a profit that crosses the line to me. No need to post ads to family and friends. Just my humble opinion


----------



## frankf3

This...



tschwa2 said:


> Wyndham needs to make the clear rule that rebooking inventory  that was previously booked and held and then released within lets say the last 30 days are not eligible to be rebooked with a discount.



If you accept the premise that the purpose of the VIP discount program is to grant VIP's the valuable benefit of booking "available inventory" within their discount window (and not to allow VIP's to manufacture inventory within the discount window), then this is a simple solution.

Any inventory cancelled within 65 days of check in is not available to be booked with a points discount (by anyone) nor to be used for upgrade for a 10 day period.   IF the inventory isn't booked using full points, once 10 days passes, any VIP can book that inventory at a discount or obtain that unit as an upgrade if applicable.


----------



## ecwinch

frankf3 said:


> This...
> 
> 
> 
> If you accept the premise that the purpose of the VIP discount program is to grant VIP's the valuable benefit of booking "available inventory" within their discount window (and not to allow VIP's to manufacture inventory within the discount window), then this is a simple solution.
> 
> Any inventory cancelled within 65 days of check in is not available to be booked with a points discount (by anyone) nor to be used for upgrade for a 10 day period.   IF the inventory isn't booked using full points, once 10 days passes, any VIP can book that inventory at a discount or obtain that unit as an upgrade if applicable.



There are a multude of ways that Wyndham could kill the best sales incentive they have.


----------



## Dill

Personally I am in favor of just making developer points eligible for VIP benefits. Keep the resale points separate. I have seen manufacturers do a very good job of handling lot and piece control in their inventory systems even on ancient AS400 systems. This can't be that much different. But I inherited developer points I am sure people who shelled out their hard earned money to be able to all their points the same as developer points would rightfully disagree with me.


----------



## Jan M.

wjappraise said:


> Mama said . . . . "Life is like a box of chocolates."



......You never know what you're going to get. How about: Be careful what you ask for, you just might get it.

Can any of you think of a single problem we've discussed in this thread and the suspended accounts thread that isn't ultimately Wyndham's fault? Can any of you think of anything they've done, that actually worked, to fix any of these problems?

I'm not disputing the need for some changes or even what those changes should be. I just cringe when I think of who will be making those changes. Will the Wyndham "powers that be" ever make the hard choices that will probably temporarily impact their bottom line to do what is needed to make the changes that will actually benefit the bulk of the owners and improve the whole program? Under the right leadership it could happen. I've listed in previous posts the ways this current leadership is bringing the company to it's knees. So another important thing to consider is with so many problems will the leadership listen and act or will it be just another instance where as vacationhopeful said in her post: "the bosses eyes roll into the back of their heads and when the estimate for the dollar amount gets set down in a memo/executive meeting .... the answer is NO or find a cheaper way"?


----------



## am1

I think commercial means something a lot different then adding guest names to reservations. 

Who is going to force any of these crazy ideas proposed?  

How could owners use extra holidays but private rentals are not allowed?  

In some situations a regular owner cover their costs is more then what I am renting the unit for.  But thanks for your opinion on what you think should be allowed.


----------



## Braindead

Would someone please explain to me when a unit is made available on any website for money (even here) how that wouldn't be considered commercial renting.


----------



## uscav8r

Braindead said:


> Would someone please explain to me when a unit is made available on any website for money (even here) how that wouldn't be considered commercial renting.



I can rent out my house for a tidy sum. But that does not make me a commercial landlord. Tax-wise, a commercial business needs to file Schedule C, but passive loss activities (such as home rental) is on Schedule E. Of course, the latter is subject to limitations on losses, so that "regular" people can only offset up to $25,000 of regular income (i.e., salary) per year with passive losses. Real Estate agents fall into a different category, defined mostly by the annual time and effort employed in such an enterprise. 

This could be translated to the situation under discussion as numbers of rentals per year or total income from rentals. 

I certainly would not tie the threshold to "profit" or total rent for each transaction. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## ecwinch

Pretty simple to define commercial renting - 

advertising
refilling inventory available for sale or willing to fill customer requests for bookings
ratio of guest usage to owner usage


----------



## am1

Why even the need to define it?  Wyndham has promoted it for as long as I have been involved.  Encouraged it.


----------



## Braindead

If people are honest on how they file their taxes and are renting out units they should be filing a schedule C . The IRS isn't going to come after anyone letting family or friends use points at no profit. Again I don't put them in the rental business and I highly doubt the IRS will either


----------



## uscav8r

ecwinch said:


> Pretty simple to define commercial renting -
> 
> advertising
> refilling inventory available for sale or willing to fill customer requests for bookings
> ratio of guest usage to owner usage



The guest to owner usage ratio is problematic.  How does Wyndham determine the difference between a paying guest and a non-paying one?

"Refilling" inventory seems to be a typo... unless I just completely missed your concept. 

And how does Wyndham enforce the advertising discriminator? They'd have to hire new people to scour the web for ads. Or at least hire IT folks, but isn't the lack of quality IT what begat much of this conversation in the first place? And Wyndham does not seem to be the type of organization to increase their costs of doing business. 



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Braindead

Wyndham wouldn't need to scour and watch there's enough eyes out hear . DVC owners complained to RCI and Disney when they seen units available for rent on a website. The person was trying to rent a unit they received through an RCI exchange which you can't do either


----------



## ecwinch

uscav8r said:


> The guest to owner usage ratio is problematic.  How does Wyndham determine the difference between a paying guest and a non-paying one?
> 
> "Refilling" inventory seems to be a typo... unless I just completely missed your concept.
> 
> And how does Wyndham enforce the advertising discriminator? They'd have to hire new people to scour the web for ads. Or at least hire IT folks, but isn't the lack of quality IT what begat much of this conversation in the first place? And Wyndham does not seem to be the type of organization to increase their costs of doing business.
> 
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk



A three-pronged test, where meeting any two of the criteria is considered commercial activity.

So the club does not need to try to determine the difference between a paying guest or non-paying one. But a pattern of of say - 95% guest usage - when combined with one of the other two criteria would be considered commercial renting.

And a commercial business typically refills inventory. In this case, an example might be offering the same resort every year during the same period.

A three-pronged test might not eliminate commercial renting, but would certainly constrain it.

And as they say - perfect is the enemy of the good. A good solution is all we need.


----------



## raygo123

It's real easy people, commercial is whatever Wyndham says it is.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk


----------



## BellaWyn

Braindead said:


> DVC owners complained to RCI and Disney when they seen units available for rent on a website. The person was trying to rent a unit they received through an RCI exchange which you can't do either


And yet they still do.  Neither DVC nor Disney has been able to fully arrest this activity.


----------



## BellaWyn

Sandi Bo said:


> I'm not saying don't stop it... *but manage it better.* .........  when they put a stop to it they needed to fully understand the repercussions of that action.  *<-Stacking the Dominoes then knowing how they will fall has never been their forte.*


WYN has yet to rise to the challenge of effectively managing what is already in the current system and has a history of making what *"was"* worse every time they make a change.  Whatever the planned rule changes are that we (ALL WYNDHAM OWNERS) face on the horizon rest assured that it will benefit primarily WYN in its eventuality.

All of the various scenarios for possible changes discussed in the most recent posts come with IF / THEN statements, which create further convolutions for people who do the coding.  Too many exceptions that cannot be automated means adding human interface to interpret those exceptions.  Humans don't all translate the information the same (as well reflected in this thread and many other historical anecdotal evidences).  Which means there could be exceptions, upon exceptions, upon exceptions.  It's not a solution.

We can speculate and thrash through it all we want but in the end.....



raygo123 said:


> It's real easy people ...... [it] is whatever Wyndham says it is.



.... THIS!

We need to hang on and all go on vacation before we can't anymore.  *Does anyone really believe that WYN is going to improve the existing system to benefit the owners?  
*
Smoke & mirrors.


----------



## uscav8r

raygo123 said:


> It's real easy people, commercial is whatever Wyndham says it is.
> 
> Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk



Except for the fact that they haven't defined it. Therein lies the rub, and why so much banter has occurred on this topic. 

I'm sure they troll these boards, so any owner opinions may end up being "used" against us eventually. 

Hard-line anything-for-even-a-minor-profit-is-commercial stances will hurt more than just the megarenters, namely owners who need to use up points or who otherwise cannot vacation. Wyndham already took away one recourse for people in such situations when they banned owner-to-owner point transfers.

But as BellaWyn says, potential changes are often less about helping the ownership at large and more likely are aimed at helping Wyndham. 

That said, if you can't rent out a unit, or exercise your VIP benefits, there goes a few sales pitch points. And Wyndham is all about the sale. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## uscav8r

ecwinch said:


> A three-pronged test, where meeting any two of the criteria is considered commercial activity.
> 
> So the club does not need to try to determine the difference between a paying guest or non-paying one. But a pattern of of say - 95% guest usage - when combined with one of the other two criteria would be considered commercial renting.
> 
> And a commercial business typically refills inventory. In this case, an example might be offering the same resort every year during the same period.
> 
> A three-pronged test might not eliminate commercial renting, but would certainly constrain it.
> 
> And as they say - perfect is the enemy of the good. A good solution is all we need.



Got it. I still think an activity threshold is needed. Being a military member who moves  on a regular basis, I don't want to be penalized for getting caught by your test for a given year just because I am deployed or I moved away from the Wyndham sphere. That is why I fight tooth and nail to protect my rights to occasional rentals as I see fit. 

When I lived on the West Coast, I hardly got to use my Wyndham, for which I spent a pretty penny back in the day to get VIP. When I lived overseas, I couldn't use Wyndham at all. Now that I am on the East Coast, it is much different. Anyone who says I was a commercial renter for the years I was unable to use Wyndham and happened to rent a couple units is smoking some serious dope. 

I can't transfer my points for cash (and Extra Holidays with its 40% commission is a joke) so personal rentals are my only avenue to stay in my ownership during the lean vacation years. If you lump me in with Ron or am1 with their millions of points of rental activity, though, you've got a fight on your hands (as you well know, Eric  :smile: )


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Braindead

If Wyndham trolls here and listens to the majority they will straighten out the points problem nothing else. You can't differentiate!! Either you can post ads and megarenters have websites or not. Commercial is commercial no matter how big or small. Renting will continue to get bigger and bigger. I have been on the phone when the call center opens for three weeks in a row and not get a single upper unit of any size at Waikiki Beach Walk using ARP at 13 months. You will end up with fewer owners and more units rented out. More and more units held to the 15 day mark trying to rent. There's another thing going on not talked about. Call it cancel rebook - rebook smaller unit till 15 day mark. It's going to get a lot worse if renting isn't curtailed.


----------



## Roger830

Braindead said:


> I have been on the phone when the call center opens for three weeks in a row and not get a single upper unit of any size at Waikiki Beach Walk using ARP at 13 months.



I noticed in the past that the upper levels seem to be Sunday checkin.

I just checked October and there are uppers for Sunday checkin, I know that this doesn't help for Jan/Feb.

Are you using cwa arp?


----------



## Braindead

No. As far as I know there is no CWA ownership at Waikiki Beach Walk. I tried Friday, Saturday and Sunday to no avail.  It's going get harder for VIP to get the benefits they paid for as renting gets bigger!


----------



## Braindead

Megarenters could have a VC making reservations for them before they answer any phone calls first thing in the morning. In the last 30 days I have put 12 days straight together in a 2 bd upper unit. I can camp out on the computer and do it 45 days out but can't do it using ARP. I would rather use ARP than check every 5 minutes for days


----------



## Roger830

So someone like Weng must be getting weeks, then making shorter reservations out of them. The problem you have besides searching is consuming rt's.

Weng isn't doing Wyndham any favors. On TripAdvisor someone complained that he canceled their reservation and told them that Wyndham had taken their unit out of service. Possibly a cancel/rebook gone bad.

On second thought, he might be doing Wyndham the favor of sending them prospects.


----------



## raygo123

Braindead said:


> Megarenters could have a VC making reservations for them before they answer any phone calls first thing in the morning. In the last 30 days I have put 12 days straight together in a 2 bd upper unit. I can camp out on the computer and do it 45 days out but can't do it using ARP. I would rather use ARP than check every 5 minutes for days


It is nonsense to think that a VC is booking for a mega renter.  And how many units at Waikiki are deeded?  How many are CWA?

If Wyndham would do half the stuff mentioned here, it would be a bigger mess.
Making a reservation will always be a challenge.  Water seeks it's own level.  

A wait list, if I was a mega renter, I would flood it with every contract I own at the most popular resorts.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk


----------



## nicemann

raygo123 said:


> It is nonsense to think that a VC is booking for a mega renter.  And how many units at Waikiki are deeded?  How many are CWA?
> 
> If Wyndham would do half the stuff mentioned here, it would be a bigger mess.
> Making a reservation will always be a challenge.  Water seeks it's own level.
> 
> A wait list, if I was a mega renter, I would flood it with every contract I own at the most popular resorts.



Yeah I am sure some mega renters have 30 or more contracts.  Guess that would be a way to ensure they have the first crack at anything on the wait list.


----------



## Roger830

Waikiki Beach Walk is a new resort, no deeded weeks.


----------



## ronparise

uscav8r said:


> Well, on this we can agree! :smile:
> 
> But I would like some clarification on what constitutes commercial renting. To me, it should be tied to a threshold of revenue or perhaps of units rented, below which any owner (or perhaps account) is not considered commercial.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


That's the problem . There is no definition of commercial use.




Braindead said:


> Would someone please explain to me when a unit is made available on any website for money (even here) how that wouldn't be considered commercial renting.



It could be but what makes you think advertising on a website is the only marketing a commercial renter might do

And who is going to monitor every website for these ads

I don't deny that I did a fair amount of rentals for profit but I got to the point that I did very little advertising.  So how ya gonna catch someone like me?


Braindead said:


> Megarenters could have a VC making reservations for them before they answer any phone calls first thing in the morning. In the last 30 days I have put 12 days straight together in a 2 bd upper unit. I can camp out on the computer and do it 45 days out but can't do it using ARP. I would rather use ARP than check every 5 minutes for days





nicemann said:


> Yeah I am sure some mega renters have 30 or more contracts.  Guess that would be a way to ensure they have the first crack at anything on the wait list.




I was down to 90 contracts when my accounts were suspended


----------



## nicemann

ronparise said:


> I was down to 90 contracts when my accounts were suspended



Wow, okay maybe my 30 number was way off.  I am sure you are not the largest mega renter that was/is out there.


----------



## ronparise

heres what I think

Wyndham doesn't give a damn about renting , commercial or otherwise. What they care about is a happy and satisfied ownerbase.  They don't like complaints

And the big complaint is a lack of availability.  Anything they do, they will say is to increase availability

But as we all know there is no way to increase availability. putting the mega renters out of business doesn't change a thing unless they retire some points. Otherwise it's the same number of points chasing the same number of reservations

What putting megarenters out of business will do is give Wyndham an answer to the complaints.  It will let them say they are doing something


----------



## Richelle

ronparise said:


> heres what I think
> 
> Wyndham doesn't give a damn about renting , commercial or otherwise. What they care about is a happy and satisfied ownerbase.  They don't like complaints
> 
> And the big complaint is a lack of availability.  Anything they do, they will say is to increase availability
> 
> But as we all know there is no way to increase availability. putting the mega renters out of business doesn't change a thing unless they retire some points. Otherwise it's the same number of points chasing the same number of reservations
> 
> What putting megarenters out of business will however give Wyndham and answer to the complaints.  It will let them say they are doing something



If they wanted to look like they were doing something, wouldn't it be easier and cheaper to put in another "rule" that they do not intend to enforce? There is no way for the average owners to prove that they are not enforcing it, unless they are the ones getting away with breaking said rule.   The average owner can only assume they are enforcing the new rule, so it looks like Wyndham is doing something about lack of availability.  


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Braindead

raygo123 said:


> It is nonsense to think that a VC is booking for a mega renter.  And how many units at Waikiki are deeded?  How many are CWA?
> 
> If Wyndham would do half the stuff mentioned here, it would be a bigger mess.
> Making a reservation will always be a challenge.  Water seeks it's own level.
> 
> A wait list, if I was a mega renter, I would flood it with every contract I own at the most popular resorts.
> 
> Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk


.                                                                               I recall reading right here on Tug that's exactly what happened. An owner was getting inside help with prime reservations. It might not of been Wyndham but it was one of the big companies. Of coarse they got caught. I also recall post about Wyndham reservations going poof gone and owners not getting them back.


----------



## raygo123

Braindead said:


> .                                                                               I recall reading right here on Tug that's exactly what happened. An owner was getting inside help with prime reservations. It might not of been Wyndham but it was one of the big companies. Of coarse they got caught. I also recall post about Wyndham reservations going poof gone and owners not getting them back.


That's the whole point, it is not permitted, and there were consiquences.   

Yes wyndham permitted cancel and rebook, but tell me, how could they enforce it?  Without someone physically looking at each transaction,  they could not.  What they could control, they did.  VC can no longer help you with cancel and rebook.  "In a previous post"
It was mentioned that this mess might have been caused by someone calling in with a points problem.  That's what a good member does.  

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk


----------



## Ty1on

raygo123 said:


> That's the whole point, it is not permitted, and there were consiquences.
> 
> Yes wyndham permitted cancel and rebook, but tell me, how could they enforce it?  Without someone physically looking at each transaction,  they could not.  What they could control, they did.  VC can no longer help you with cancel and rebook.  "In a previous post"
> It was mentioned that this mess might have been caused by someone calling in with a points problem.  That's what a good member does.
> 
> Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk



Wyndham will still permit cancel/rebook after waitlist is implemented.  However, you may only rebook what there is no waitlist for


----------



## Braindead

raygo123 said:


> It was mentioned that this mess might have been caused by someone calling in with a points problem.  That's what a good member does.
> 
> Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk


A good member doesn't manipulate-abuse- collude or do commercial renting either according to current rules. Cancel rebook can easily be controlled as another poster reported what Hilton does in a similar program.You said it was nonsense to think an owner could get inside help and then admit it happened.


----------



## wjappraise

Braindead said:


> A good member doesn't manipulate-abuse- collude or do commercial renting either according to current rules. Cancel rebook can easily be controlled as another poster reported what Hilton does in a similar program.You said it was nonsense to think an owner could get inside help and then admit it happened.



I am trying to figure out what your approach or concern is.  You asked for a definition of "commercial use" of the Wyndham account and were given an excellent description of what it is and what it is not by several members including uscav8r, ecwinch, raygo123, and others.  Yet, you seem to ignore this entirely, and hold to your preconceived ideas, defying all logic and reason.  Are you truly wanting to know what "commercial use" constitutes, or are you simply wanting to "troll" other users?  If you are simply trolling, please stop.


----------



## Jan M.

Back in late August or early to mid September another owner and I noticed Wyndham beta testing blocking the owner who cancelled a reservation from rebooking it. Sorry but I don't know how long the block lasted but if it was a good reservation someone else grabbed that's for sure. The test only for lasted for a day or maybe part of the day and they tested it again maybe a week later. If you search back through the threads I know people posted about it wondering what was going on.

Either they haven't got it figured out yet or it will be part of that Voyager program they have been talking about for years and vowed to release before the next annual meeting. They might have to push back the annual meeting, LOL!

If they can set up search parameters like they did to identify the owners they froze it seems possible to me that they could do something similar to identify owners meeting certain criteria that would indicate they are commercial renting or other things and flag the owner's account for manual review. It doesn't seem that hard to do or time consuming to do the reviews to me but I'm no computer expert.


----------



## uscav8r

raygo123 said:


> A wait list, if I was a mega renter, I would flood it with every contract I own at the most popular resorts.


BINGO!



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Ty1on

uscav8r said:


> BINGO!
> 
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk



And if wait list could only be fulfilled at full point cost?


----------



## wjappraise

Ty1on said:


> And if wait list could only be fulfilled at full point cost?



That would be a shrewd move.  However, it would require tons of IT code, so you can figure Wyndham will not devote resources to that potential solution.


----------



## uscav8r

Ty1on said:


> And if wait list could only be fulfilled at full point cost?



So what? Discounts are nice, but are not always needed to make a profit. I'd be waitlisting as much as I could and recycling them to get under the 60-day threshold. That is, if I were a megarenter. 

Anything can be gamed to a certain extent. As Ron likes to say, those operations that can adapt will survive or thrive; those that don't go out of business. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Ty1on

uscav8r said:


> So what? Discounts are nice, but are not always needed to make a profit. I'd be waitlisting as much as I could and recycling them to get under the 60-day threshold. That is, if I were a megarenter.
> 
> Anything can be gamed to a certain extent. As Ron likes to say, those operations that can adapt will survive or thrive; those that don't go out of business.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk



A megarenter that would flood the waitlist would simply book up on Day 1 if there were no points discount.  Again, if you recycle them to get under the 60 day threshold, it goes to next on waitlist.  If you've reached the end of the waitlist, then there is no harm in the 50% discount because everyone who wanted to pay full value for that reservation had an opportunity to do so.


----------



## Braindead

wjappraise said:


> I am trying to figure out what your approach or concern is.  You asked for a definition of "commercial use" of the Wyndham account and were given an excellent description of what it is and what it is not by several members including uscav8r, ecwinch, raygo123, and others.  Yet, you seem to ignore this entirely, and hold to your preconceived ideas, defying all logic and reason.  Are you truly wanting to know what "commercial use" constitutes, or are you simply wanting to "troll" other users?  If you are simply trolling, please stop.


Not trolling. I'll try this example. It doesn't matter if your a mom and pop corner hardware store or Home Depot or you are sitting at home selling the items online you are a commercial business . It's seems to me some say stop X from renting but let me. I don't get that way of thinking. Commercial renting is commercial whether you do 6 or 6,000. I don't want to see rules put in place that stop family and friends from vacationing together. Any group need to be able to vacation together. If Wyndham doesn't come up with some rational decisions all will be hurt. Things can't continue down the path we are currently taking. Rules are no different than laws if you aren't willing to enforce them throw them out.


----------



## uscav8r

Braindead said:


> Not trolling. I'll try this example. It doesn't matter if your a mom and pop corner hardware store or Home Depot or you are sitting at home selling the items online you are a commercial business . It's seems to me some say stop X from renting but let me. I don't get that way of thinking. Commercial renting is commercial whether you do 6 or 6,000. I don't want to see rules put in place that stop family and friends from vacationing together. Any group need to be able to vacation together. If Wyndham doesn't come up with some rational decisions all will be hurt. Things can't continue down the path we are currently taking. Rules are no different than laws if you aren't willing to enforce them throw them out.



I guess my home rental versus commercial enterprise example flew over your head. The handle is apt. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## ronparise

Worldmark doesn't offer discounts but they do have something called bonus time (you can pay cash for a reservationand the cost works out to be slightly less than a reservations made with credits)

The computer prevents a person from canceling a credits reservation and rebooking it as a bonus time reservation. Worldmark also has a waitlist but there is a limit of just 4 waitlist requests that can be placed

My point is that Wyndham already knows how to do these things

I'm really confident the new voyager system will be rolled out in just a few months. I would bet Wyndham is counting on the new system to fix all their problems. (I'm also betting that there will be a whole host of new problems)

I would also bet that something was added to voyager at the last minute to go after the mega  renter issue

But here's the thin. This whole suspensions thing has nothing to do with rentals. That some mega renters were impacted was a happy coincidence for Wyndham. It gave them something to hang them with.  I believe the language in the book is there to use  when they have a problem with one owner or another. Its like the government getting Al Capone on tax evasion charges.  The real problem was murder, booze, prostitution, bribery etc etc. but they didn't get him on those crimes. They got him on tax evasion



It's gonna be the same thing with Wyndham. The "crime" is one thing, but they will use the commercial use ban, or unfair advantage thing to  when they can't prove the thing that really upsets them (or maybe the thing isn't a violation of anything at all. They are just pissed off)

How else do you explain that some megarenters have been able to go back to work but others, not so much

By the way. I'm speaking "in code" because all I can really say is that Wyndham and I have resolved our differences


----------



## vacationhopeful

Braindead said:


> <snip>. I don't want to see rules put in place that stop family and friends from vacationing together. <snip>



*You must be far richer than most of the general population*. I have friends and family who would love to travel with me ... yet you believe I can pay for PRIME vacation weeks for 5+ other families? *IF* I pay for the MFs for 6 units... add 5 guest certificates with 5 different LAST NAME from 4 different states for the Christmas/New Year's Week in South Florida. That would sure look like a bunch of high price rentals to most people. 

I could cite Daytona Race/Bike Week(s), Mardi Grais weeks, July 4th at the beach (Pompano or Myrtle Beach, Daytona or Atlantic City resorts), NYC stays, summer vacation weeks anywheres, etc. The waterparks ... a kids birthday party with nieces, nephews, school best friends ... how many units used? Sorry ... there are just too much usage of the resorts by extended groups of family & friends. Or wait, are they renting units to the general public with an internet ad?


----------



## Joe33426

ronparise said:


> But as we all know there is no way to increase availability. putting the mega renters out of business doesn't change a thing unless they retire some points. Otherwise it's the same number of points chasing the same number of reservations
> 
> What putting megarenters out of business will do is give Wyndham an answer to the complaints.  It will let them say they are doing something



I know you've made this assertion on numerous occasions, and I'm certainly not trying to pick a fight with you, but can you honestly say with a straight face that you've never affected the availability of inventory during Madri Gras at La Belle Maison or Avenue Plaza?


----------



## vacationhopeful

Joe33426 said:


> I know you've made this assertion on numerous occasions, and I'm certainly not trying to pick a fight with you, but can you honestly say with a straight face that you've never affected the availability of inventory during Madri Gras at La Belle Maison or Avenue Plaza?



Picked a poor example ...
Avenue Plaza was sold as Event Weeks for Mardi Gras (and several other events). Most Event Week owners did not/have not converted to points.
La Belle Maison is at least 35% CWA ... the all is fair system for the 8AM phone fight to book.

Better example would be Royal Vista for Easter or Spring Break weeks ... all UDI.


----------



## Braindead

I posted earlier family and friends don't need to find you from a website or third party's. I'm all for you recouping your cost from family and friends. That's why I say I don't want to see new rules!! If Wyndham sees something and wants to ask some questions fine. I agree with many here Wyndham employees are very good and understanding and would find you are not a renter. Honestly does anyone hear really believe if you own a decent amount of points and in a lot of cases you would be traveling with the group that Wyndham would have a problem with you


----------



## Joe33426

vacationhopeful said:


> Picked a poor example ...
> Avenue Plaza was sold as Event Weeks for Mardi Gras (and several other events). Most Event Week owners did not/have not converted to points.
> La Belle Maison is at least 35% CWA ... the all is fair system for the 8AM phone fight to book.
> 
> Better example would be Royal Vista for Easter or Spring Break weeks ... all UDI.



Okay, but what if you're reserving larger units with the sole intent of cancelling and then upgrading from a studio.


----------



## Braindead

I agree with Ron. Wyndham would do nothing unless they start getting complaints on what you are doing. You could do all you want with family- friends or travel as a group and see no inquiry at all


----------



## ronparise

Joe33426 said:


> I know you've made this assertion on numerous occasions, and I'm certainly not trying to pick a fight with you, but can you honestly say with a straight face that you've never affected the availability of inventory during Madri Gras at La Belle Maison or Avenue Plaza?



Yes that's exactly what I'm saying

And Mardi Gras at labelle Is a good example because everything is booked within a few minutes after 7 am 13 months in advance

There are  140 units at labelle Maison. And there is a certain number of symbolic points assigned to the owners there. And neither of those numbers changes  whether I make reservations with my labell points or someone else does  it's the same number of points chasing the same number of reservations

Jan 9 will be a good test because I won't be involved. I bet they all get booked for 2018 just as quick as the last few years


----------



## Braindead

Owners are screaming at Wyndham because they're sick and tired of not being able to get a reservation and seeing that same reservation for rent everywhere else.


----------



## ronparise

Joe33426 said:


> Okay, but what if you're reserving larger units with the sole intent of cancelling and then upgrading from a studio.



no difference  whether I end up paying full price or half price there are only 140 units at la Belle and a certain number of points to reserve them with at 13 months


----------



## Joe33426

ronparise said:


> Yes that's exactly what I'm saying
> 
> And Mardi Gras at labelle Is a good example because everything is booked within a few minutes after 7 am 13 months in advance
> 
> There are  140 units at labelle Maison. And there is a certain number of symbolic points assigned to the owners there. And neither of those numbers changes  whether I make reservations with my labell points or someone else does  it's the same number of points chasing the same number of reservations
> 
> Jan 9 will be a good test because I won't be involved. I bet they all get booked for 2018 just as quick as the last few years



I own there and don't chase that reservation.  So if just 1/2 the points you have denominated there were owned by owners like me, then there would be more availability, right?


----------



## ronparise

Braindead said:


> Owners are screaming at Wyndham because they're sick and tired of not being able to get a reservation and seeing that same reservation for rent everywhere else.



That's exactly right. And they are making the leap of logic that the can't get the reservation because of those rentals. But that would be wrong.  Whether I get those reservations and advertise them or some one else gets them. The popular reservations are all booked   Taking mega renters out of the picture just means someone else will get those reservations and most owners will miss out


----------



## Ty1on

ronparise said:


> Yes that's exactly what I'm saying
> 
> And Mardi Gras at labelle Is a good example because everything is booked within a few minutes after 7 am 13 months in advance
> 
> There are  140 units at labelle Maison. And there is a certain number of symbolic points assigned to the owners there. And neither of those numbers changes  whether I make reservations with my labell points or someone else does  it's the same number of points chasing the same number of reservations
> 
> Jan 9 will be a good test because I won't be involved. I bet they all get booked for 2018 just as quick as the last few years



You are dead right in the facts you present here.  This is an opinion and one I disagree with.  

If you reserve 10 units for Mardi Gras, and rent it out, there are 10 non-owners staying there to your profit and at the expense of 10 owners never seeing the reservation.  Cancel-Rebook adds insult to injury, because you take half the rack points and apply them to reserving another 5 units somewhere else, to your profit and at the expense of 5 owners never seeing the reservation. Yes, everyone with ARP can take their shot, but if you as a mega-owner have built a relationship with a VC, it helps put you in line in front of others.  If that weren't the case, you couldn't be as successful as you are.


----------



## ronparise

Joe33426 said:


> I own there and don't chase that reservation.  So if just 1/2 the points you have denominated there were owned by owners like me, then there would be more availability, right?


No
there would still be only 140 units available at 8 am 13 months in advance

Just because you don't chase that reservation (and I won't this year) doesn't change the fact that only 140 are available


----------



## Braindead

You are taking from owners and renting to outsiders creating more demand for units.


----------



## Jan M.

We've talked about different things Wyndham could do to curtail renting and questioned the ability of IT to do it. We've questioned why Wyndham hasn't done something before now as the mega renters/points managers have become an increasing thorn in their sides over the last 5-6 years. So the big question may be is the reason Wyndham hasn't acted on this already is that they know that legally they cannot win?

We've largely ignored the legal aspect. We do know that Wyndham has a phenomenal number of ongoing lawsuits when compared to other timeshare systems. Can they really afford more exposure in the media, risk the States attorneys and judges taking a hard line with them a them, more legal fees and settlements? The mega renters/point managers are exactly the type of people who have the means and motivation to sue and their suits won't be the little guy boohoo Wyndham screwed me lawsuits that usually don't stand a chance. Let's take a look at who is likely to be a mega renter/points manager. He or she isn't your little guy small point owner who doesn't know anything about what is going on with Wyndham or even care to know; he takes his vacations and goes about his life. The mega renter/points manager is smart about how the Wyndham system works and using it, is business savvy, has a very nice income at stake, has invested a lot of time and money in building their rental business.

When the mega renter/point manager files suit they are going to ask Wyndham to define commercial renting with specific parameters. They will demand that Wyndham show that there is a difference between casual renting and commercial renting and posit that any renting is a commercial transaction. Since Wyndham is the biggest commercial renter of all they will have to defend how it is okay for them to do it but not anyone else. Because we are Wyndham and we say it is okay doesn't mean the courts will see it that way. Wyndham will have to demonstrate how they can reliably identify and prevent commercial renting or it becomes an attack on and harassment of just certain owners. I'm sure there are other aspects I haven't thought of that attorneys will. Or that Wyndham's attorneys haven't considered.


----------



## Joe33426

ronparise said:


> No
> there would still be only 140 units available at 8 am 13 months in advance
> 
> Just because you don't chase that reservation (and I won't this year) doesn't chance the fact that only 140 are available



The supply is the supply and is fixed as you mentioned, but you have a direct effect on the demand if you're not going to be making a bunch of reservations for Mardi Gras.  Every reservations you don't make is a reservation that is probably going to go to an owner that is going to use that week for personal use....


----------



## uscav8r

Braindead said:


> Owners are screaming at Wyndham because they're sick and tired of not being able to get a reservation and seeing that same reservation for rent everywhere else.



What are you talking about? I've gotten at least 90% of what I've ever wanted, many of it during event weeks, and I don't do anything to "game" the system. I am just up and online early. 

You sound like you are in WorldMark, but that system has different rules (such as being able to book more than 7 consecutive days, which you cannot do in Wyndham) that can lead to manipulation. 

Oh, and I STILL get my WorldMark bookings without any surreptitious methods. 

There is only one rule to live by in the points timeshare world: the early bird gets the worm. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Braindead

Ron has had probably the most direct communication with Wyndham here. Scroll back up a few post and Ron says I'm exactly right


----------



## ronparise

Braindead said:


> You are taking from owners and renting to outsiders creating more demand for units.



so we agree, supply doesnt change. which is all Ive been talking about.   I dont think demand does either, I see it a lot like the lottery. If i dont buy a ticket one week, your chances of winning are certainly increased.... but not by much.  In the case of Mardi Gras the demand is so much greater than the supply, that taking me out wont improve your chances by much

This is he point in the argument when my opposition usually says, but I dont mind not getting a unit as long as its another owner that beat me too it... first of all...bull shit.. and secondly I am another owner.  and if I own 10 times as many points as you do, I should have ten times the chance of success

I want to be clear, I know that if I wasnt making 10 reservations to rent, there would be 10 other owners that could get one of these reservations, and Im not arguing that one owner should be allowed to reserve that many. All Im saying is that taking me out wont change availability. (the supply side) These will still be difficult reservations. and there will still be people that complain when they dont get one.


----------



## uscav8r

Braindead said:


> Ron has had probably the most direct communication with Wyndham here. Scroll back up a few post and Ron says I'm exactly right


And those owners who scream about lack of availability at 3, 6, even 9 months have no right to do so. They have no one to blame but themselves IMO. 

Ron also alludes to fact that Wyndham wants to look like the good guys by doing SOMETHING. He also says he doesn't see availability changing much. 

Any other Ron-isms you want to cherry-pick because a word bite or two fit your narrative?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Joe33426

ronparise said:


> I want to be clear, I know that if I wasnt making 10 reservations to rent, there would be 10 other owners that could get one of these reservations, and Im not arguing that one owner should be allowed to reserve that many. All Im saying is that taking me out wont change availability. (the supply side) These will still be difficult reservations. and there will still be people that complain when they dont get one.



Yes, there will still be owners complaining that they can't get a Madri Gras reservation, but taking you out of the equation will increase the likelihood (however remote) that an owner will be able to get at Mardi Gras week for personal use.  And I'm sure you were making more than 10 Mardi Gras reservations...


----------



## Braindead

I do think Ron has the best handle on what Wyndham is dealing with or going to do regarding renting and cancel rebook due to his communication with them


----------



## uscav8r

ronparise said:


> If I own 10 times as many points as you do, I should have ten times the chance of success.


Correction, at the opening bell you have an EQUAL chance to book a room as anyone else. For that one reservation. Once done with that one, you have an EQUAL chance as anyone else online at that time to make the next booking. Etc etc.

So statistically speaking you don't have 10x the chances of getting a booking as me 1/10th the points if we are online at the same time. (Unless, of course, you enlist 9 assistants to help you out with simultaneous logins.)

All you have is the ability to get 10 total rooms to my 1 due to your sheer volume of points... as long as 9 other owners don't beat you to it first. 

Now when I was on the West Coast and you were in Florida, you might have 10x the chance I would of being awake at the opening bell, but that is a different issue entirely. :smile:


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## ronparise

Ty1on said:


> You are dead right in the facts you present here.  This is an opinion and one I disagree with.
> 
> If you reserve 10 units for Mardi Gras, and rent it out, there are 10 non-owners staying there to your profit and at the expense of 10 owners never seeing the reservation.  Cancel-Rebook adds insult to injury, because you take half the rack points and apply them to reserving another 5 units somewhere else, to your profit and at the expense of 5 owners never seeing the reservation. Yes, everyone with ARP can take their shot, but if you as a mega-owner have built a relationship with a VC, it helps put you in line in front of others.  If that weren't the case, you couldn't be as successful as you are.



so my facts are correct but you reduce my conclusion to an opinion... and I know about opinions. just like ass holes, everyone has one.. Perhaps my logic is flawed , but thats not your argument

You said that my profit is at the expense of some other owner(s)) .. Its not  That I was able to make 10 reservations with my 2 million points and you got none  is no different than some other owner getting one reservation with his 200000 points and you getting  none.. in both cases neither of us took anything from you or any other owner, we got  our reservations because we had the points and we got there first

Or are you saying it would be ok if I lost money?


Again Im not trying to justify renting.. In this case all im saying is my profit didnt come at your expense.


----------



## raygo123

Jan M. said:


> We've talked about different things Wyndham could do to curtail renting and questioned the ability of IT to do it. We've questioned why Wyndham hasn't done something before now as the mega renters/points managers have become an increasing thorn in their sides over the last 5-6 years. So the big question may be is the reason Wyndham hasn't acted on this already is that they know that legally they cannot win?
> 
> We've largely ignored the legal aspect. We do know that Wyndham has a phenomenal number of ongoing lawsuits when compared to other timeshare systems. Can they really afford more exposure in the media, risk the States attorneys and judges taking a hard line with them a them, more legal fees and settlements? The mega renters/point managers are exactly the type of people who have the means and motivation to sue and their suits won't be the little guy boohoo Wyndham screwed me lawsuits that usually don't stand a chance. Lets take a look at who is likely to be a mega renter/points manager. He or she isn't your little guy small point owner who doesn't know anything about what is going on with Wyndham or even care to know; he takes his vacations and goes about his life. The mega renter/points manager is smart about how the Wyndham system works and using it, is business savvy, has a very nice income at stake, has invested a lot of time and money in building their rental business.
> 
> When the mega renter/point manager files suit they are going to ask Wyndham to define commercial renting with specific parameters. They will demand that Wyndham show that there is a difference between casual renting and commercial renting and posit that any renting is a commercial transaction. Since Wyndham is the biggest commercial renter of all they will have to defend how it is okay for them to do it but not anyone else. Because we are Wyndham and we say it is okay doesn't mean the courts will see it that way. Wyndham will have to demonstrate how they can reliably identify and prevent commercial renting or it becomes an attack on and harassment of just certain owners. I'm sure there are other aspects I haven't thought of that attorneys will. Or that Wyndham's attorneys haven't considered.


This reminds me of the time I was sitting on the golden gate bridge dangling my feet in the water.

What. If Wyndham says they are merely facilitating the owners wishes to make use of thier week and hopefully cover their MFs

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk


----------



## ronparise

Joe33426 said:


> Yes, there will still be owners complaining that they can't get a Madri Gras reservation, but taking you out of the equation will increase the likelihood (however remote) that an owner will be able to get at Mardi Gras week for personal use.  And I'm sure you were making more than 10 Mardi Gras reservations...



I think I got 17 at La Belle Maison,and 10 at Avenue plaza (at 10 months) and 30  Worldmark and 4 with my fixed weeks.  but I didnt take them from anyone, and I didnt game the system.. I called in like everyone else or (logged in) and made my reservations just like I put on my sox... one at a time

and this year Ill get none.. enjoy your vacation


----------



## uscav8r

raygo123 said:


> This reminds me of the time I was sitting on the golden gate bridge dangling my feet in the water.
> 
> What. If Wyndham says they are merely facilitating the owners wishes to make use of thier week and hopefully cover their MFs
> 
> Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk



I would say, why do I need the middleman? I can do just fine on my own. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## ronparise

uscav8r said:


> Correction, at the opening bell you have an EQUAL chance to book a room as anyone else. For that one reservation. Once done with that one, you have an EQUAL chance as anyone else online at that time to make the next booking. Etc etc.
> 
> So statistically speaking you don't have 10x the chances of getting a booking as me 1/10th the points if we are online at the same time. (Unless, of course, you enlist 9 assistants to help you out with simultaneous logins.)
> 
> All you have is the ability to get 10 total rooms to my 1 due to your sheer volume of points... as long as 9 other owners don't beat you to it first.
> 
> Now when I was on the West Coast and you were in Florida, you might have 10x the chance I would of being awake at the opening bell, but that is a different issue entirely. :smile:
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk



thats right... I said I should have 10 times the chances, but I dont,   Our chances are  equal.. as Ive said in the past , The only way I can get multiple reservations is because no one else wants one. (at the same time)


----------



## raygo123

uscav8r said:


> I would say, why do I need the middleman? I can do just fine on my own.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Apparently, those that use Wyndham cannot!

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk


----------



## Braindead

. This rental deal plays on owners mentally. If you don't get a reservation and see no available units you can accept that. In your mind the no vacancy is lit. But then you see that unit available elsewhere but can't get it as a deeded owner but any Tom Dick or Harry can rent it the alarm bells go off . Then to rub salt in the wound he can rent cheaper than what it cost you in maintenance fees to of had it for yourself. Now your furious and screaming at Wyndham how can that be!!!


----------



## Richelle

ronparise said:


> I think I got 17 at La Belle Maison,and 10 at Avenue plaza (at 10 months) and 30  Worldmark and 4 with my fixed weeks.  but I didnt take them from anyone, and I didnt game the system.. I called in like everyone else or (logged in) and made my reservations just like I put on my sox... one at a time
> 
> *and this year Ill get none*.. enjoy your vacation



Are you giving more away then your NDA allows?


----------



## Richelle

ronparise said:


> so my facts are correct but you reduce my conclusion to an opinion... and I know about opinions. just like ass holes, everyone has one.. Perhaps my logic is flawed , but thats not your argument
> 
> You said that my profit is at the expense of some other owner(s)) .. Its not  That I was able to make 10 reservations with my 2 million points and you got none  is no different than some other owner getting one reservation with his 200000 points and you getting  none.. in both cases neither of us took anything from you or any other owner, we got  our reservations because we had the points and we got there first
> 
> Or are you saying it would be ok if I lost money?
> 
> 
> Again Im not trying to justify renting.. In this case all im saying is my profit didnt come at your expense.



I agree with that you are saying.  140 rooms is not a lot for a high demand week.  Even if you take out the mega renters, the demand will still be higher then the supply.  This year, are we going to hear, "Wow!  I finally got Madri Gras this year!" or "They took out the mega renters and I STILL did not get Mardi Gras".  I think we will hear more of the latter BECAUSE the demand is higher then the supply.


----------



## am1

A few owners are booking units that I would have liked to book since August but I am still having to pay the maintenance fees.  Instead of being booked at 7:00.25 am maybe they last to 7:01 am. 

Hopefully Wyndham and its shareholders are willing to come out of pocket and offer adequate compensation for the last 6 months of being denied my ownership rights.


----------



## Ty1on

ronparise said:


> so my facts are correct but you reduce my conclusion to an opinion... and I know about opinions. just like ass holes, everyone has one.. Perhaps my logic is flawed , but thats not your argument
> 
> You said that my profit is at the expense of some other owner(s)) .. Its not  That I was able to make 10 reservations with my 2 million points and you got none  is no different than some other owner getting one reservation with his 200000 points and you getting  none.. in both cases neither of us took anything from you or any other owner, we got  our reservations because we had the points and we got there first
> 
> Or are you saying it would be ok if I lost money?
> 
> 
> Again Im not trying to justify renting.. In this case all im saying is my profit didnt come at your expense.



A fact is that you book multiple reservations for highly sought periods and rent them.  An opinion is that this doesn't harm other owners.  My opinion is that it does.  As was stated above more eloquently than I could, you create additional demand (Wyndham doesn't book units at ARP for rental purposes) by taking a product meant for owners and renting it to non-owners.  The first 10 owners that are turned away for that accommodation because it is booked up are directly impacted by your business.


----------



## Richelle

am1 said:


> A few owners are booking units that I would have liked to book since August but I am still having to pay the maintenance fees.  Instead of being booked at 7:00.25 am maybe they last to 7:01 am.
> 
> Hopefully Wyndham and its shareholders are willing to come out of pocket and offer adequate compensation for the last 6 months of being denied my ownership rights.



Good luck with that. I doubt Wyndham will offer any compensation for anyone, regardless of whether the owner is innocent or not.


----------



## am1

Richelle said:


> Good luck with that. I doubt Wyndham will offer any compensation for anyone, regardless of whether the owner is innocent or not.




Well then as I have stated before it will get messy.


----------



## Richelle

Ty1on said:


> A fact is that you book multiple reservations for highly sought periods and rent them.  An opinion is that this doesn't harm other owners.  My opinion is that it does.  As was stated above more eloquently than I could, you create additional demand (Wyndham doesn't book units at ARP for rental purposes) by taking a product meant for owners and renting it to non-owners.  The first 10 owners that are turned away for that accommodation because it is booked up are directly impacted by your business.



I might be wrong, but I think Ron's point is, that even if they take out the mega renters, you will not see a difference in the availability of sought after weeks because the demand is higher then the supply. If the mega renters are not getting the rooms, then some of the 5000 owners vying for 140 reservations do.  Yes, it's better that owners actually get to book that room.  I would prefer an owner get the room, and not a mega renter.  However, aside from that, I don't think it will have a great impact overall.  I am not trying to justify renting. I am just saying that the mega renters are not the main reason for the availability issues.  The main reason is the lack of supply for the demand.  Unless they want to spend millions of dollars to add more rooms to resorts, there will always be availability issues for high demand times. Thus, there will always be people complaining about availability.


----------



## Richelle

am1 said:


> Well then as I have stated before it will get messy.



Make sure you post the court transcripts then.  We'll be eagerly awaiting with bated breath.


----------



## ronparise

Ty1on said:


> A fact is that you book multiple reservations for highly sought periods and rent them.  An opinion is that this doesn't harm other owners.  My opinion is that it does.  As was stated above more eloquently than I could, you create additional demand (Wyndham doesn't book units at ARP for rental purposes) by taking a product meant for owners and renting it to non-owners.  The first 10 owners that are turned away for that accommodation because it is booked up are directly impacted by your business.




So you take me out and now 140 owners get their reservation. Would you say that they took the reservations from the next 140 owners that wanted one?

Of course not. And I didn't take anything from anybody either.


----------



## am1

ronparise said:


> So you take me out and now 140 owners get their reservation. Would you say that they took the reservations from the next 140 owners that wanted one?
> 
> Of course not. And I didn't take anything from anybody either.



Everyone has the opportunity to book what they want.  It will not be possible to get rid of all people who rent.  If it is not 1 person booking 20 units it will be 10 people booking two units each to rent.


----------



## ronparise

Richelle said:


> I might be wrong, but I think Ron's point is, that even if they take out the mega renters, you will not see a difference in the availability of sought after weeks because the demand is higher then the supply. If the mega renters are not getting the rooms, then some of the 5000 owners vying for 140 reservations do.  Yes, it's better that owners actually get to book that room.  I would prefer an owner get the room, and not a mega renter.  However, aside from that, I don't think it will have a great impact overall.  I am not trying to justify renting. I am just saying that the mega renters are not the main reason for the availability issues.  The main reason is the lack of supply for the demand.  Unless they want to spend millions of dollars to add more rooms to resorts, there will always be availability issues for high demand times. Thus, there will always be people complaining about availability.



Thanks 

I know no one least of all Wyndham likes that some of us have been able to make a buck from our ownership. 

My point is that money wasn't made at the expense of any other owner. And Every other owner had the same chance at those reservations

And as you say my point is nothing will change regarding availability 

I'm not trying to justify renting  and I'm not justifying what I did  and yes 50 more Wyndham and Worldmark owners will get a 2018 Mardi Gras rereservation
than  got 2017 reservations

I don't accept as fact  that those 50 owners will get their reservations at the expense of any  other owners


----------



## ronparise

am1 said:


> Everyone has the opportunity to book what they want.  It will not be possible to get rid of all people who rent.  If it is not 1 person booking 20 units it will be 10 people booking two units each to rent.




Good point


----------



## Ty1on

ronparise said:


> So you take me out and now 140 owners get their reservation. Would you say that they took the reservations from the next 140 owners that wanted one?
> 
> Of course not. And I didn't take anything from anybody either.



For the record, I'm not down on you.....I think Wyndham's own salespeople created this monster.


----------



## raygo123

am1 said:


> Everyone has the opportunity to book what they want.  It will not be possible to get rid of all people who rent.  If it is not 1 person booking 20 units it will be 10 people booking two units each to rent.


I said the same thing when Wyndham in August 2015 (got it right that time) that the next other renter that could never get the resort before, will now grab them up, etc.etc.

I am still wondering if Wyndham s also attempting to get the rental price up as well as the resale price.  Wyndham's fee, someone said 40% , can only go down if owners can at least get their MFS back.  That's more a possibility.  Does anyone know who runs that?  Wyndham Corp, timeshare division, or our trust managed by Wyndham?

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk


----------



## OutSkiing

ronparise said:


> So you take me out and now 140 owners get their reservation. Would you say that they took the reservations from the next 140 owners that wanted one?
> 
> Of course not. And I didn't take anything from anybody either.



I am not disagreeing with renting but did think of another analogy that supports the idea that renting takes away from other owners.  In my neighborhood, the school district has a lottery to choose kids who get to go to district funded pre-school for the year prior to kindergarden.  Most kids don't make it in and their parents sometimes end up paying high fees to send them to private preschool.

Imagine if somehow some kid from OUTSIDE the school district got into our pre-school?  That kid probably would have negligible impact on all the other kids getting in .. but it would still be branded as totally unfair. It would be on the evening news. A renter getting into a high demand resort ahead of an owner is kind of like the kid from outside the school district getting the classroom seat.  Worse yet what if 10 kids from outside the district got in the classroom.

Bob


----------



## raygo123

OutSkiing said:


> I am not disagreeing with renting but did think of another analogy that supports the idea that renting takes away from other owners.  In my neighborhood, the school district has a lottery to choose kids who get to go to district funded pre-school for the year prior to kindergarden.  Most kids don't make it in and their parents sometimes end up paying high fees to send them to private preschool.
> 
> Imagine if somehow some kid from OUTSIDE the school district got into our pre-school?  That kid probably would have negligible impact on all the other kids getting in .. but it would still be branded as totally unfair. It would be on the evening news. A renter getting into a high demand resort ahead of an owner is kind of like the kid from outside the school district getting the classroom seat.  Worse yet what if 10 kids from outside the district got in the classroom.
> 
> Bob


Like the gumball machine, you turn the crank and hope it works.  As your gumball comes down the shoot you look up to see the half full globe of gumballs move as they made their way closer to the shoot.  You hear the clinck against the shoot door, your hoping for a red one, blue again 

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk


----------



## Don40

Ron, you are assuming wyndham is not putting their hands in the perverbial cookie jar, they got rid of you and are now stealing those units for their rental business.  I bet most of the high demand stuff never gets to the owners anyway because at 13 months and 1 day the computer gurus at wyndham mysteriously steal all the goodies they want and leave the scraps for the lowly owners to fight over.  Why do you think they cannot fix the computer system with something as simple as accounting for points.  By the way these points represent dollars and they are so cavalier with them they mysteriously created millions of point out of thin air are we all that gullable to believe this was in error, total BS.  They knew what they were doing, I beg to differ that this was accidental, wyndham has been doing this for themselves for years the accident is a few owners got a windfall and they are upset.   Crooks get mad when they steal and others outsmart them for the stolen loot.  Corporate wyndham are all timeshare sales people the lowest of the low scumb, who lie, steal, cheat to get a sale.  This company has a history of massive corporate fraud and it continues and will continue.  HFS, Cendant, now wyndham all crooked. Sorry for the rant, we should all be upset at wyndham, not any owner who purchased points or deeds we are the sheep in this scenario getting fleeced.


----------



## BellaWyn

Owners renting their TS usage has been around since the beginning of the TS industry.  Doesn't matter what system or resort or where the ownership resides, *most* owners rent primarily to cover the MF's when they cannot use what they own in any given year.  "Mega-renters" have also existed, just not on the same scale as they do today.  Back in the day owners were still able to create networks and there were some willing to "help" other owners get some of their MF's back through renting to personal or business contacts for a percentage of the rental.  Renting is not unique to ONLY the WYN system. Regardless of how the rules are written or re-constructed, renting, on some scale or another, is NOT going to go away.  For deeded product, the owner can do whatever they want with the useage. 

Everyone needs to *read*, again, *what Ron is saying* here and then* understand what he cannot say overtly.*



ronparise said:


> Wyndham doesn't give a damn about renting , commercial or otherwise. What they care about is a happy and satisfied ownerbase.  They don't like complaints.
> 
> And the big complaint is a lack of availability.  Anything they do, *they will say* is to increase availability.



*This is a statement about WYN's ability create an illusion*, which we know they excel at doing.  If they wanted an endlessly happy ownership base then they would first arrest the practice of unethical sales (point made by Jan in earlier post).  There are more owner complaints about unethical sales, as evidenced by real, existing lawsuits, then owners complaining about availability.



ronparise said:


> But as we all know there is no way to increase availability. Putting the mega-renters out of business doesn't change a thing unless they retire some points. Otherwise it's the same number of points chasing the same number of reservations.
> 
> What putting mega-renters out of business will do is give Wyndham an answer to the complaints. It *will let them say *they are doing something.



Again, smoke & mirrors by WYN.  A well stated point here by Ron.

Add to this Jan's excellent posting about WYN having to navigate the legality specific to what qualifies as "commercial" given that* WYN is still the single largest owner in the system.*

Now, consider what is really being said in this post in relation to how much WYN might actually care about owners renting:



ronparise said:


> It is my belief that what they really don't like is that some folks have figured out how to profit from renting Wyndham timeshares; *profit that they consider to be rightfully theirs.* They know that the only thing that make large scale commercial renting work is the cancel and rebook trick, so I think they will do something to control it... what, I don't know.



Cancel & RE-book may get harder with whatever the upcoming changes may or may not be coming.  But renting is never going to be fully arrested.  Legally Wyndham will never be able to tell an owner with deeded product that they can no longer make independent decisions specific to that deed, which includes being able to rent it or use it.

For those of you arguing that renting is unethical or a mis-use of the system, get over it.  There will never be a hard & fast definition of what qualifies as "commerical" unless a court of law pushes WYN into it.  They leave the language in the "rules" for their own convenience and to twist the knife when it suits them. * WYN is an owner, they rent what they own just like other owners.* 

Is it for profit and/or to cover the expense of the MF's? Or both.

Chew on that reality........


----------



## bnoble

am1 said:


> Well then as I have stated before it will get messy.


As the old Maelstrom ride put it at Epcot: "You are not the first to pass this way, nor shall you be the last."


----------



## Braindead

Mega renters do have an impact. Let's say Ron calls he has 3 accounts he books 30 rooms in 5 minutes. Individual owners call by the time another VC gets to her 2 call Ron already took 30. You want to make it level Ron needs to call in 30 times. I have read 30 to 40 percent of ownership doesn't get used on the average year. Ron stretches his points to even 125 percent if his points are in the hands of average owners that usage would be 75 percent at best. Renters concentrate points to high demands times at a rate a lot higher than the average owner. Not picking on you Ron I could have picked a point manager with 100 accounts. I'm not looking to pick any fights just try to bring another perspective in. If I buy the house next door for my parents then when they pass I decide to rent instead of selling. The house across the street from me is a rental also but that owner rents 100 houses we are both in the rental business. I'm afraid any changes are only going to hurt that gold or smaller owners. Anything short of than curtailing renting and stop VIP treatment of resale points is only going to the average owner. Point managers (Winpoint for example) getting 1-3 million points from 100 plus clients won't even blink an eye.


----------



## paxsarah

Joe33426 said:


> The supply is the supply and is fixed as you mentioned, but *you have a direct effect on the demand* if you're not going to be making a bunch of reservations for Mardi Gras.  Every reservations you don't make is a reservation that is probably going to go to an owner that is going to use that week for personal use....



I'm pretty sure that even with Ron's prime marketing skills, that he has zero effect on the demand for accommodations during Mardi Gras. It is always going to vastly outstrip supply. The legitimacy of who occupies that unit (owner vs. renter vs. family member vs. guest) is a value judgement that has nothing to do with supply and demand.


----------



## paxsarah

OutSkiing said:


> I am not disagreeing with renting but did think of another analogy that supports the idea that renting takes away from other owners.  In my neighborhood, the school district has a lottery to choose kids who get to go to district funded pre-school for the year prior to kindergarden.  Most kids don't make it in and their parents sometimes end up paying high fees to send them to private preschool.
> 
> Imagine if somehow some kid from OUTSIDE the school district got into our pre-school?  That kid probably would have negligible impact on all the other kids getting in .. but it would still be branded as totally unfair. It would be on the evening news. A renter getting into a high demand resort ahead of an owner is kind of like the kid from outside the school district getting the classroom seat.  Worse yet what if 10 kids from outside the district got in the classroom.
> 
> Bob



In my school district, that would be fraud. Here's another analogy. My YMCA lets you bring a non-member friend  to work out for a day for a nominal fee. I bring my friend, pay the fee, and we take the last lane in the lap pool. A member shows up and has to wait to use a lane, or it's an hour before close and a lane never opens up and that member never gets to swim. My guest was there with me legitimately. Maybe the member should have showed up earlier if they wanted to be sure they could get their laps in.


----------



## bnoble

How is it that every single Wyndham thread becomes the same conversation we have over and over within just a few days?


----------



## ronparise

Richelle said:


> Are you giving more away then your NDA allows?


I didn't even say there is a NDA.   And all I said here is that I won't be making any 2018 reservations. I didn't say why


OutSkiing said:


> I am not disagreeing with renting but did think of another analogy that supports the idea that renting takes away from other owners.  In my neighborhood, the school district has a lottery to choose kids who get to go to district funded pre-school for the year prior to kindergarden.  Most kids don't make it in and their parents sometimes end up paying high fees to send them to private preschool.
> 
> Imagine if somehow some kid from OUTSIDE the school district got into our pre-school?  That kid probably would have negligible impact on all the other kids getting in .. but it would still be branded as totally unfair. It would be on the evening news. A renter getting into a high demand resort ahead of an owner is kind of like the kid from outside the school district getting the classroom seat.  Worse yet what if 10 kids from outside the district got in the classroom.
> 
> Bob



Not a good analogy bob

In the  case of Wyndham rentals, a Wyndham owner (me) makes a reservation and then assigns his reservation to the outsider

A better analogy would be a kid in the school district winning a spot and then selling that spot to someone from outside the district

My point is that the reservation I rent is first, my reservation,  and our club allows me to send a guest in my place.

 Whether it's my daughter, or someone I meet on Craig's list i can assign my reservation to someone else


----------



## Richelle

ronparise said:


> I didn't even say there is a NDA.   And all I said here is that I won't be making any 2018 reservations. I didn't say why



I know you didn't, but when you kept saying you and Wyndham resolved your differences, but didn't say what those differences are, it was implied that you were not allowed to give details for some reason. In fact, I was not the only one who mentioned NDA. An NDA was the most logical, but it could be something else keeping you from talking. Maybe another written agreement.   I'm. It asking for details. I was just making a joke. 



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## ronparise

Braindead said:


> Mega renters do have an impact. Let's say Ron calls he has 3 accounts he books 30 rooms in 5 minutes. Individual owners call by the time another VC gets to her 2 call Ron already took 30. You want to make it level Ron needs to call in 30 times. I have read 30 to 40 percent of ownership doesn't get used on the average year. Ron stretches his points to even 125 percent if his points are in the hands of average owners that usage would be 75 percent at best. Renters concentrate points to high demands times at a rate a lot higher than the average owner. Not picking on you Ron I could have picked a point manager with 100 accounts. I'm not looking to pick any fights just try to bring another perspective in. If I buy the house next door for my parents then when they pass I decide to rent instead of selling. The house across the street from me is a rental also but that owner rents 100 houses we are both in the rental business. I'm afraid any changes are only going to hurt that gold or smaller owners. Anything short of than curtailing renting and stop VIP treatment of resale points is only going to the average owner. Point managers (Winpoint for example) getting 1-3 million points from 100 plus clients won't even blink an eye.



I don't take any of this personally. So don't worry about that

When I call in for ARP reservations the call I get has to make the reservations one at a time and the other vcs can make reservations at the same time. So in the case of la Belle Maison if 140 of us call at the same time (and if there are 140 vcs of equal skill) we will all get that first reservation and when the vc  I'm talking to tries to make a second reservation for me, they will all be gone

Where I can get an advantage is if I have several accounts and several employees making calls. That's not my business, but I'm sure there are some that do that


----------



## BellaWyn

bnoble said:


> How is it that every single Wyndham thread becomes the same conversation we have over and over within just a few days?


Because apparently, no matter how hard we keep beating it, the dang horse just won't die!


----------



## ronparise

Richelle said:


> I know you didn't, but when you kept saying you and Wyndham resolved your differences, but didn't say what those differences are, it was implied that you were not allowed to give details for some reason. In fact, I was not the only one who mentioned NDA. An NDA was the most logical, but it could be something else keeping you from talking. Maybe another written agreement.   I'm. It asking for details. I was just making a joke.
> 
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk




I understand and I was responding in kind


----------



## Joe33426

paxsarah said:


> I'm pretty sure that even with Ron's prime marketing skills, that he has zero effect on the demand for accommodations during Mardi Gras. It is always going to vastly outstrip supply. The legitimacy of who occupies that unit (owner vs. renter vs. family member vs. guest) is a value judgement that has nothing to do with supply and demand.



Okay, maybe it's not demand, how about *availability*?  Would that word better describe the situation than demand?  Because...



ronparise said:


> ... 50 more Wyndham and Worldmark owners will get a 2018 Mardi Gras rereservation than  got 2017 reservations...



I'm sure those 50 owners will be happy to get that reservation.  Something has changed between 2017 and 2018, what should we call it?


----------



## ronparise

Ty1on said:


> A fact is that you book multiple reservations for highly sought periods and rent them.  An opinion is that this doesn't harm other owners.  My opinion is that it does.  As was stated above more eloquently than I could, you create additional demand (Wyndham doesn't book units at ARP for rental purposes) by taking a product meant for owners and renting it to non-owners.  The first 10 owners that are turned away for that accommodation because it is booked up are directly impacted by your business.



Yes I make reservations and it's true that I don't harm other owners at least no more than those other owners harm me

Is there an impact? Sure
But I see no difference in impact (or harm) to the rest of the owner base, between  an owner with 2 million la Belle points (me)  trying for 10 reservations and  10 owners with 200000 points,  each trying for one reservation


----------



## BellaWyn

Braindead said:


> Anything short of than curtailing renting and stop VIP treatment of resale points is only going to the average owner.


Dude! You really need to get your head around the concept that WYN cannot legally tell an owner that they cannot rent what they own.  It's deeded property!  In your own example if you bought a house and decided to rent it, that's YOUR decision to do that.  Unless there is some rigid zoning laws attached to the deeded property that prohibit renting then there is nothing to stop you from renting that house.  Doesn't matter if you are in the "business" to do it for 1 or 100. Still your property, still your decision.  The neighbor, who hates renters, doesn't get to make that decision for you just because he whines about it.

I get that you are throwing out alternative perspectives here but renting is a way of life with timeshare, whether it be the individual owner, the mega-renter, the *Developer, Property Manager or HOA* that offers up the rental. It's hospitality! That's what hospitality is all about.  Short-term, transient, RENTALS.  Go have a coversation with Hilton or Marriott and have them explain to you why you cannot book their high season products at the price you want.  There are thousand of other travelrs that got to the booking window in front of you.  It's a simple equation of supply and demand. 

And Wyndham, the BIGGEST renter in the group, is NOT going to "curtail" themselves.


----------



## ronparise

Joe33426 said:


> Okay, maybe it's not demand, how about *availability*?  Would that word better describe the situation than demand?  Because...
> 
> 
> 
> I'm sure those 50 owners will be happy to get that reservation.  Something has changed between 2017 and 2018, what should we call it?




Retirement perhaps

Actually what's happening is one avenue plaza event week, 400000 Worldmark credits, 2 million la Belle points and several million other Wyndham points will not be used to compete for Mardi Gras reservations this year

They will be back in use next year I'm sure


----------



## vacationhopeful

I rent apartments ... and I do not rent to everyone who calls me. Yes, they might have GREEN money (to move in). Yes, they might have a job ... last week or this week. Yes, they might have a kid or 5 kids. Yes, they might think their pet is just outstanding. Yes, they might sign a lease and pay a security deposit.

But a good share of applicants ... have issues. Most think 1980 prices should be what I get as rent. Most think a 6 month old is not a breathing human for the state's fire department's head count code. Most pit bull owners think their dog won't bite, but my insurance company has a list of "NFW pets". As for signing a lease ... no one thinks _THAT SECTION_ should apply to them.

And so, the eviction judge usually tells them different ... and court room has an armed sheriff's officer to protect the court staff. And the sheriff's special officer (no gun) likes calling for the local police (with guns) to enforce the Superior Court judge's ruling when an eviction is executed at the rental unit.

So *the short version* of the above is: Wyndham Rules. Their rules, their game; they write rules, they clarify the meaning of the rules, they enforce the rules and they change the meaning of the rules ... As Wyndham's management sees fit. Each and every day AND maybe, different at each resort.

*Your choice* is to dump your ownership, pay the fees but don't use or live with their rules & changes.


----------



## SmithOp

Joe33426 said:


> I'm sure those 50 owners will be happy to get that reservation.  Something has changed between 2017 and 2018, what should we call it?



The Nixon effect.

You won't have Nixon to kick around anymore, because, gentlemen, this is my last press conference. 
Richard M. Nixon




Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## ronparise

Braindead said:


> Mega renters do have an impact. Let's say Ron calls he has 3 accounts he books 30 rooms in 5 minutes. Individual owners call by the time another VC gets to her 2 call Ron already took 30. You want to make it level Ron needs to call in 30 times. I have read 30 to 40 percent of ownership doesn't get used on the average year. Ron stretches his points to even 125 percent if his points are in the hands of average owners that usage would be 75 percent at best. Renters concentrate points to high demands times at a rate a lot higher than the average owner. Not picking on you Ron I could have picked a point manager with 100 accounts. I'm not looking to pick any fights just try to bring another perspective in. If I buy the house next door for my parents then when they pass I decide to rent instead of selling. The house across the street from me is a rental also but that owner rents 100 houses we are both in the rental business. I'm afraid any changes are only going to hurt that gold or smaller owners. Anything short of than curtailing renting and stop VIP treatment of resale points is only going to the average owner. Point managers (Winpoint for example) getting 1-3 million points from 100 plus clients won't even blink an eye.




Your conclusions are based on a bad assumption.  The fact is that the vc I'm talking to can't make 30 reservations in 5 minutes. They are working with the same system that every other vc uses and they have to make one reservation at a time.  While my vc is making my first reservation every other vc working that day is making a reservation for someone else

So if we assume just 10 vcs are working and we assume I get in on the first round of calls and I want 20 reservations. ... I get one and the other vcs do 9 for other owners.  Then I get my second and the other vcs do 9 more. By the time I get 14 the other vcs have done 126 (9x14) and the place is fully booked

Now assume 20 vcs  on duty. I might get 6 or 7 before the place is fully booked

That I have over the last several years gotten more than 6 tells me that a lot of folks that say they want one of these reservations don't work at it as hard as I do. I mean they are still sleeping or at work or feeding the kids when my wife and I are both up and dialing in on two phones


----------



## Richelle

Can someone tell me how they are able to make 20 reservations (or more) during a high demand time, when they can only make one reservation at a time?  I know I've heard some say that other utilize bots, but I thought they have measures in place to make it so that bots cannot make reservations.  I'm sure there is probably a way around the bot, but I am not sure how.  I'm not looking to make that many reservations.  I don't have enough points to accomplish more then one or two weeks worth of reservations.  I thought maybe they had multiple people logged in at the same time  I just cannot figure out how they do it, and I am curious.


----------



## iaminak

bnoble said:


> How is it that every single Wyndham thread becomes the same conversation we have over and over within just a few days?



I'm wondering the same.  Can we just agree to disagree about what a rental is and if it is right or wrong?!?  I come here to learn about how to best use my membership and updates/changes Wyndham is making that will impact me - and I've learned a ton over the years, for which I am very grateful.  Speculating what Wyndham is doing or not doing is one thing - and I do think it is helpful even though no one knows for sure because each persons experience with Wyndham, whether it be the VC or salespeople, is helpful and interesting. 

Arguing about rentals and cancel/rebook is neither helpful or interesting anymore...  :/


----------



## Richelle

This is what I get, if I try to make multiple reservations at the same time from two different login sessions.

*Multiple Reservations Error*
_We apologize, but it appears that you are logged in to the web site in another internet browser session. For your security, when making a reservation or adding a guest, you may only be logged into a single internet browser session. Please log out of all internet browsers and log back in to a single browser to search availability and complete your reservation.

We regret any inconvenience this may cause. If you continue to experience difficulties in completing your reservation, please call a Vacation Planning Counselor at 1-866-921-5144.

Thank you and we look forward to getting you on your next vacation!_


----------



## am1

Richelle said:


> Can someone tell me how they are able to make 20 reservations (or more) during a high demand time, when they can only make one reservation at a time?  I know I've heard some say that other utilize bots, but I thought they have measures in place to make it so that bots cannot make reservations.  I'm sure there is probably a way around the bot, but I am not sure how.  I'm not looking to make that many reservations.  I don't have enough points to accomplish more then one or two weeks worth of reservations.  I thought maybe they had multiple people logged in at the same time  I just cannot figure out how they do it, and I am curious.



Just have to be good and years of experience does not hurt.


----------



## wjappraise

Richelle said:


> Can someone tell me how they are able to make 20 reservations (or more) during a high demand time, when they can only make one reservation at a time?  I know I've heard some say that other utilize bots, but I thought they have measures in place to make it so that bots cannot make reservations.  I'm sure there is probably a way around the bot, but I am not sure how.  I'm not looking to make that many reservations.  I don't have enough points to accomplish more then one or two weeks worth of reservations.  I thought maybe they had multiple people logged in at the same time  I just cannot figure out how they do it, and I am curious.



You would need at least two accounts to make that many reservations.


----------



## wjappraise

ronparise said:


> Your conclusions are based on a bad assumption.



You are wasting your time and energy, Ron, with attempting to reason with this member.  He is not wanting a dialog, he is trolling you.


----------



## Richelle

am1 said:


> Just have to be good and years of experience does not hurt.



So if I wanted to book three rooms at a high demand resort, do you have any ideas on how to increase my odds of getting those three rooms?  I know I should be on the phone at 8am EST, but is there anything else I can do?  I am probably going to be on hold, so I will probably try to book online while I am waiting.   Of course, if I am not able to book a room at that resort online, is the VC able to do anything?  Don't they see the same inventory I do online?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Ty1on

Richelle said:


> This is what I get, if I try to make multiple reservations at the same time from two different login sessions.
> 
> *Multiple Reservations Error*
> _We apologize, but it appears that you are logged in to the web site in another internet browser session. For your security, when making a reservation or adding a guest, you may only be logged into a single internet browser session. Please log out of all internet browsers and log back in to a single browser to search availability and complete your reservation.
> 
> We regret any inconvenience this may cause. If you continue to experience difficulties in completing your reservation, please call a Vacation Planning Counselor at 1-866-921-5144.
> 
> Thank you and we look forward to getting you on your next vacation!_



Firstly, we're talking about reservations at ARP, which must be done over the phone with a VC.


----------



## Richelle

Ty1on said:


> Firstly, we're talking about reservations at ARP, which must be done over the phone with a VC.



Good point. Forgot about that. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## ronparise

Richelle said:


> So if I wanted to book three rooms at a high demand resort, do you have any ideas on how to increase my odds of getting those three rooms?  I know I should be on the phone at 8am EST, but is there anything else I can do?  I am probably going to be on hold, so I will probably try to book online while I am waiting.   Of course, if I am not able to book a room at that resort online, is the VC able to do anything?  Don't they see the same inventory I do online?
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk



ARP  call at 8am (east coast time) 13 months in advance
otherwise go online at 7 am (east coast time 10 months in advance


----------



## ronparise

Richelle said:


> Can someone tell me how they are able to make 20 reservations (or more) during a high demand time, when they can only make one reservation at a time?  I know I've heard some say that other utilize bots, but I thought they have measures in place to make it so that bots cannot make reservations.  I'm sure there is probably a way around the bot, but I am not sure how.  I'm not looking to make that many reservations.  I don't have enough points to accomplish more then one or two weeks worth of reservations.  I thought maybe they had multiple people logged in at the same time  I just cannot figure out how they do it, and I am curious.



For ARP reservations you have to call in. The VC can only do one at a time.   So the only way to get more than one reservation if if  there are more available rooms than requests.  Ive been saying the only way to get multiple reservations is if there is less demand than supply at that moment... ie nobody else wants one. 

its also possible to have several accounts and several people calling in.  I dont do that. When my wife and I are calling at the same time, when one gets through the other hangs up. 

At 10 months just be online at 7 am and be quick.  or as you suggest multiple accounts and people calling in

The bots are used to look for cancellations. not to make the reservation at 13 months


----------



## ronparise

wjappraise said:


> You are wasting your time and energy, Ron, with attempting to reason with this member.  He is not wanting a dialog, he is trolling you.




I got nothing but time now


----------



## ronparise

Richelle said:


> Can someone tell me how they are able to make 20 reservations (or more) during a high demand time, when they can only make one reservation at a time?  I know I've heard some say that other utilize bots, but I thought they have measures in place to make it so that bots cannot make reservations.  I'm sure there is probably a way around the bot, but I am not sure how.  I'm not looking to make that many reservations.  I don't have enough points to accomplish more then one or two weeks worth of reservations.  I thought maybe they had multiple people logged in at the same time  I just cannot figure out how they do it, and I am curious.




Tough to do as has been said, which is why I bought points deeded at La Belle Maison, CWA points (good at La Belle Maison and Avenue Plaza) as well as event weeks at Avenue Plaza and Worldmark credits (worldmark has 63 rooms at Avenue Plaza).  I also learned that some wyndham units at Avenue Plaza units are not released until the 10 month mark.  I also live on the computer (no bots) searching for cancellations from 60 days to check in

 I had 60 reservations for mardi gras 2016. I rented the last one in the lobby of La Belle Maison on the Saturday before Mardi Gras (it was my room, I took his money, gave him the key, alerted the desk, and drove to Destin where I found a room at one of the Wyndoms there.


----------



## ronparise

iaminak said:


> I'm wondering the same.  Can we just agree to disagree about what a rental is and if it is right or wrong?!?  I come here to learn about how to best use my membership and updates/changes Wyndham is making that will impact me - and I've learned a ton over the years, for which I am very grateful.  Speculating what Wyndham is doing or not doing is one thing - and I do think it is helpful even though no one knows for sure because each persons experience with Wyndham, whether it be the VC or salespeople, is helpful and interesting.
> 
> Arguing about rentals and cancel/rebook is neither helpful or interesting anymore...  :/



except thats the topic of this thread...


----------



## ronparise

SmithOp said:


> The Nixon effect.
> 
> You won't have Nixon to kick around anymore, because, gentlemen, this is my last press conference.
> Richard M. Nixon
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk




but nixon didnt go away did he


----------



## Richelle

ronparise said:


> Tough to do as has been said, which is why I bought points deeded at La Belle Maison, CWA points (good at La Belle Maison and Avenue Plaza) as well as event weeks at Avenue Plaza and Worldmark credits (worldmark has 63 rooms at Avenue Plaza).  I also learned that some wyndham units at Avenue Plaza units are not released until the 10 month mark.  I also live on the computer (no bots) searching for cancellations from 60 days to check in
> 
> I had 60 reservations for mardi gras 2016. I rented the last one in the lobby of La Belle Maison on the Saturday before Mardi Gras (it was my room, I took his money, gave him the key, alerted the desk, and drove to Destin where I found a room at one of the Wyndoms there.



Thanks Ron!  Some very good advice. Hopefully Reunion won't be booked up at the 10 month mark. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## iaminak

ronparise said:


> except thats the topic of this thread...



yes and no...  the thread was about the cancel/rebook and upgrades possibly going away, not about the ethics of renting.  Personally, I have no issue with what you do, Ron, and with your knowledge of Wyndham because of what you do, we've all benefited when there is something we need or are trying to figure out.  I'm with the ones who are taking the "early bird gets the worm" approach.  I plan my vacations 10-13 months out, I call when they open and I've never not gotten the reservation I want.


----------



## BellaWyn

vacationhopeful said:


> I rent apartments ... and I do not rent to everyone who calls me. Yes, they might have GREEN money (to move in). Yes, they might have a job ... last week or this week. Yes, they might have a kid or 5 kids. Yes, they might think their pet is just outstanding. Yes, they might sign a lease and pay a security deposit.
> 
> But a good share of applicants ... have issues. Most think 1980 prices should be what I get as rent. Most think a 6 month old is not a breathing human for the state's fire department's head count code. Most pit bull owners think their dog won't bite, but my insurance company has a list of "NFW pets". As for signing a lease ... no one thinks _THAT SECTION_ should apply to them.
> 
> And so, the eviction judge usually tells them different ... and court room has an armed sheriff's officer to protect the court staff. And the sheriff's special officer (no gun) likes calling for the local police (with guns) to enforce the Superior Court judge's ruling when an eviction is executed at the rental unit.
> 
> So *the short version* of the above is: Wyndham Rules. Their rules, their game; they write rules, they clarify the meaning of the rules, they enforce the rules and they change the meaning of the rules ... As Wyndham's management sees fit. Each and every day AND maybe, different at each resort.
> 
> *Your choice* is to dump your ownership, pay the fees but don't use or live with their rules & changes.


Agree with this specific to points. They may or they may not attempt to shift up how they reconstruct the language in the rental policy.   It's the existing inconsistency of "written rule" vs what's being allowed in practice, not only by owners but by WYN's own rental programs using points that they, as owners, are using to make rental reservations. 

Do you think WYN will be able to tell you not to put a guest in your fixed week units?  Any speculation if the rule changes will apply to those?


----------



## Braindead

BellaWyn said:


> Dude! You really need to get your head around the concept that WYN cannot legally tell an owner that they cannot rent what they own.  It's deeded property!  In your own example if you bought a house and decided to rent it, that's YOUR decision to do that.  Unless there is some rigid zoning laws attached to the deeded property that prohibit renting then there is nothing to stop you from renting that house.  Doesn't matter if you are in the "business" to do it for 1 or 100. Still your property, still your decision.


Are you saying that all HOAs and there rules are worthless across the country as long as you own deeded property. I posted our HOA here in Vegas has a no renting rule and they are all deeded single family homes. I get my reservations to and have never complained to Wyndham. But I do understand why some would. If your talking about my earlier post I did end up getting what I wanted within 45 days of check in and canceling my 2nd choice a few blocks away that I made months ago. Regarding my ARP post I did still make my reservation for lower units but yes I went 0 for 9 on upper units at 13 months and on the phone when the call center opens. Like Ron I don't take this personally. I do try to understand all sides of an issue


----------



## Ty1on

Braindead said:


> Are you saying that all HOAs and there rules are worthless across the country as long as you own deeded property. I posted our HOA here in Vegas has a no renting rule and they are all deeded single family homes. I get my reservations to and have never complained to Wyndham. But I do understand why some would. If your talking about my earlier post I did end up getting what I wanted within 45 days of check in and canceling my 2nd choice a few blocks away that I made months ago. Regarding my ARP post I did still make my reservation for lower units but yes I went 0 for 9 on upper units at 13 months and on the phone when the call center opens. Like Ron I don't take this personally. I do try to understand all sides of an issue



The "no renting" rule is explicitly spelled out in the CC&Rs of your HOA.  I'm not sure that's the case with Club Wyndham and most resort deeds.


----------



## BellaWyn

Ty1on said:


> The "no renting" rule is explicitly spelled out in the CC&Rs of your HOA.  I'm not sure that's the case with Club Wyndham and most resort deeds.


Right, I think that's why they language the documentation as a "guest" confirmation, regardless of how the guest got there.  Whatever the "side deal" is between owner and guest needs to stay between owner/guest.  Sadly, too many guests like being able to shout to the world at what a good deal they got, which is a head trip for other owners. 

Wonder if a gag-order clause can be written into a rental agreement.    Probably could but that's just words on a paper -- who would try to police that?


----------



## BellaWyn

Braindead said:


> Are you saying that all HOAs and there rules are worthless across the country as long as you own deeded property. I posted our HOA here in Vegas has a no renting rule and they are all deeded single family homes. I get my reservations to and have never complained to Wyndham. But I do understand why some would. If your talking about my earlier post I did end up getting what I wanted within 45 days of check in and canceling my 2nd choice a few blocks away that I made months ago. Regarding my ARP post I did still make my reservation for lower units but yes I went 0 for 9 on upper units at 13 months and on the phone when the call center opens. Like Ron I don't take this personally. I do try to understand all sides of an issue



We're talking about WYNDHAM ownerships here.  Doesn't really matter what specific HOA's CC&R's outside of Wyndham dictate for the purposes of this discussion.  Using one to explain the other makes no sense. Residential R.E. vs Hospitality R.E. -- rules are different. 

YOU brought up the example of renting a residential property across the street from the guy that rents 100 residential properties.  My point was that it doesn't matter whether it's a business entity or individual.  If it can be done, and there are no CC&R or zoning laws to prohibit, then no one gets to make that decision other than the OWNER of the property.  See Ty1on's comment above.


----------



## bogey21

BellaWyn said:


> Dude! You really need to get your head around the concept that WYN cannot legally tell an owner that they cannot rent what they own.  It's deeded property!



What if one owns Points?  Seems to me that rights that attach to deeded Fixed Weeks may be different from ownership of Points.

Geoge


----------



## ecwinch

Exactly what Geoge said. Yes - you have an unfettered right to rent your deeded week. 

But you agreed to the rules of Club Wyndham - which can be changed by them anytime - when you assigned your week to Club Wyndham in exchange for points.


----------



## ecwinch

ronparise said:


> so we agree, supply doesnt change. which is all Ive been talking about.   I dont think demand does either, I see it a lot like the lottery. If i dont buy a ticket one week, your chances of winning are certainly increased.... but not by much.  In the case of Mardi Gras the demand is so much greater than the supply, that taking me out wont improve your chances by much
> 
> This is he point in the argument when my opposition usually says, but I dont mind not getting a unit as long as its another owner that beat me too it... first of all...bull shit.. and secondly I am another owner.  and if I own 10 times as many points as you do, I should have ten times the chance of success



This a jedi-mind trick that Ron has been trying to pull on me for years.

The force is strong in that one. But not strong enough.


----------



## Braindead

ronparise said:


> Your conclusions are based on a bad assumption.  The fact is that the vc I'm talking to can't make 30 reservations in 5 minutes. They are working with the same system that every other vc uses and they have to make one reservation at a time.  While my vc is making my first reservation every other vc working that day is making a reservation for someone else


Agree one reservation at a time. My point was you and I call in my reservation and your first one are made at the same time. Your VC continues making your reservation. My VC tells me what reservation they made ask if there anything else and we say our goodbyes and hang up. Then they answer the next  call and get name -confirm - get longed into that account. They are now ready to make their second reservation while yours made atleast has your first 10 or more throw your wife in now you 20 and tied up another VC. Nothing personal to anyone if I was a mega renter I would do the same thing. My point of all of this. If nothing changes after all this owners have two choices. 1. Start renting and work your way up. 2 Call Ovation. I don't care if Wyndham gives me platinum with my resale points. Why own if I don't rent just PM or ad here rentals wanted. I see no point in owning if they let renting run wild. Make money or get out


----------



## uscav8r

Braindead said:


> Agree one reservation at a time. My point was you and I call in my reservation and your first one are made at the same time. Your VC continues making your reservation. My VC tells me what reservation they made ask if there anything else and we say our goodbyes and hang up. Then they answer the next  call and get name -confirm - get longed into that account. They are now ready to make their second reservation while yours made atleast has your first 10 or more throw your wife in now you 20 and tied up another VC. Nothing personal to anyone if I was a mega renter I would do the same thing. My point of all of this. If nothing changes after all this owners have two choices. 1. Start renting and work your way up. 2 Call Ovation. I don't care if Wyndham gives me platinum with my resale points. Why own if I don't rent just PM or ad here rentals wanted. I see no point in owning if they let renting run wild. Make money or get out


There's a third choice: use what you have and beat the megarenters at their own game.

While this thread mentions ARP and the call center, I've never had to make an ARP booking. I am dutifully online at 0700 EST to get what I need when the resort demand warrants such an approach. 

 The other choices are defeatist and imply an owner has no control over his/her destiny. 



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Braindead

I apologize never meant to strike a raw nerve with. Just owners
like us will be the ones harmed just trying to enjoy their ownership. As Ron told me on another topic we will be ones harmed by collateral damage


----------



## ronparise

Braindead said:


> Agree one reservation at a time. My point was you and I call in my reservation and your first one are made at the same time. Your VC continues making your reservation. My VC tells me what reservation they made ask if there anything else and we say our goodbyes and hang up. Then they answer the next  call and get name -confirm - get longed into that account. They are now ready to make their second reservation while yours made atleast has your first 10 or more throw your wife in now you 20 and tied up another VC. Nothing personal to anyone if I was a mega renter I would do the same thing. My point of all of this. If nothing changes after all this owners have two choices. 1. Start renting and work your way up. 2 Call Ovation. I don't care if Wyndham gives me platinum with my resale points. Why own if I don't rent just PM or ad here rentals wanted. I see no point in owning if they let renting run wild. Make money or get out



ok Ill grant you , once they get started 1 and a half to one or maybe two to one.. My wife isnt involved except to just dial the phone. so new numbers but Ill change some assumptions.. lets assume 20 vcs are on the job..  so by the time I make 2 , 19 are made by other owners, and when I have 4 38 and at my 8, 76 others  and at my  16, 152 

152 plus 16 = 168... and there are only 140 units at La Belle Maison

This assumes only 20 vcs working at 8 am... i think there are a lot more

the way I see it is that if there are over 140 La Belle Maison owners that want a Mardi Gras reservation, the most I can get will be 16.  That I have gotten more tells me that the others arent interested. and if you want to assume 3 to 1, Ill assume 50 vcs working  and Ill be done at less than ten reservations

Thats the thing with arguments If I can make the  assumptions, Im gonna win

We do agree on one thing, as long as rentals continue without limits,  and as long as the megarenters can get their discounts, It makes no sense to own... I came to that conclusion 4 years ago when I decided to "go big or go home"  and I went to 5 platinum accounts and 30 million points. You should take some consolation in the fact that wyndham doesnt like it, and they are going to do something about it...It may be what the op suggests in this thread,... an end to cancel and rebook, and it may be something else. 

Wyndham tried to control renting some years ago and it didnt work... I think they will get it right this time.


----------



## BellaWyn

bogey21 said:


> What if one owns Points?  Seems to me that rights that attach to deeded Fixed Weeks may be different from ownership of Points.
> Geoge



*Yep, agree with both of these.  *



ecwinch said:


> Exactly what Geoge said. Yes - you have an unfettered right to rent your deeded week.
> 
> But you agreed to the rules of Club Wyndham - which can be changed by them anytime - when you assigned your week to Club Wyndham in exchange for points.



But I also think that WYN has *intentionally *muddied the waters by the lack of clear explanation of who, how, what and when points can be exchanged for a reservation and then assigned to a guest.  CWA may be more easily managed in this respect because the properties (deeds) are owned by WYN and they "let" owners buy an annual allotment of points in exchange for use of those properties.  CWP still has underlying weeks of real property.

At what point, and how, can they reconstruct the rules to tell owners they can no longer invite guests to visit the resorts, regardless of whether it is a gift to the guest or whether some valuable consideration was exchanged between guest and owner.  What construct of language would they have to come up with to curtail this activity in it's entirety? Can they construct the language in a way that exempts themselves, as owners, from the same activity while enforcing the opposite on all of the other points based owners?  Or will WYN continue to keep the language just grey enough to enforce when it suits but relax the regulation when is serves their own financial gain?

Simple answer is that they don't need to, they've already done it and that's what we are currently living with - why would they need recolor to a different shade of gray what is already gray in the first place?  The lack of clarity is entirely engineered.


----------



## ronparise

uscav8r said:


> There's a third choice: use what you have and beat the megarenters at their own game.
> 
> While this thread mentions ARP and the call center, I've never had to make an ARP booking. I am dutifully online at 0700 EST to get what I need when the resort demand warrants such an approach.
> 
> The other choices are defeatist and imply an owner has no control over his/her destiny.
> 
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk



and to add to your chances of getting that "special"  vacation be flexible.. If you cant get LaBelle Maison for Mardi Gras take Avenue Plaza, if you cant get a 3 bedroom get a 2 and a 1. If you cant get Bonnet Creek, take Reunion or Star Island


----------



## BellaWyn

Braindead said:


> I apologize never meant to strike a raw nerve with. Just owners
> like us will be the ones harmed just trying to enjoy their ownership. As Ron told me on another topic *we will be ones harmed by collateral damage*



That has been a repeating mantra by more than just Ron since before the suspensions began.


----------



## am1

Also not all reservations come available on the same day.  So maybe only 46 a day for la belle maison.


----------



## raygo123

ecwinch said:


> This a jedi-mind trick that Ron has been trying to pull on me for years.
> 
> The force is strong in that one. But not strong enough.


Demand is inversely proportional to supply.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk


----------



## ronparise

am1 said:


> Also not all reservations come available on the same day.  So maybe only 46 a day for la belle maison.[/QUOT



not true Adam

At La Belle Maison (at 13 months), reservations can be 3, 4, or 7 nights and must check in or check out on a Friday, so everything comes available on Fridays

Mardi Gras 2018 is Tuesday Feb 13, and I have found the big weekend (for rentals) to be the weekend before Mardi Gras Tuesday
so the reservations you want are either 3, 4 or 7  nights checking in Feb 9 and all of them will open for reservation Jan 9, 2017..


Mardi Gras is a month long celebration and there are some fine parades in the prior weeks, but they dont sell out at 13 months


----------



## SmithOp

ronparise said:


> but nixon didnt go away did he



As I hope you don't go away, I have valued your opinions and advice.  They won't have you to blame now that you are divested, an amazing timeshare road you traveled.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## ronparise

SmithOp said:


> As I hope you don't go away, I have valued your opinions and advice.  They won't have you to blame now that you are divested, an amazing timeshare road you traveled.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk




I think I could right a book. "How I Built a Time Machine"


----------



## OutSkiing

I second that opinion .. I hope Ron does not go away.  I think we've all benefited greatly by what he has learned and shared.  Ron has been a wonderful guide.

Bob


----------



## bnoble

uscav8r said:


> I've never had to make an ARP booking. I am dutifully online at 0700 EST to get what I need when the resort demand warrants such an approach.


Me too. Probably my best example was a 2BR at OTA for Easter Week/Cherry Blossom Festival.


----------



## Sandi Bo

bnoble said:


> Me too. Probably my best example was a 2BR at OTA for Easter Week/Cherry Blossom Festival.



Me either.  Gotta plan ahead for some of those things.  Do your homework and be prepared. And stop blaming stuff on mega renters.

My guess is that most of your average owners don't gets rooms because they don't understand the rules/situations and can't compete with more savvy users of the products.

With ARP and calling precisely at 7am on the day reservations open for the dates needed surely an owner would get pretty much any time they want. That's been my experience.  So people complaining about availability just don't fly with me.

If people are listening to sales people for advice on how to book high demand rooms - then likely they aren't getting the best advice they could.  Do you think a sales person says set your alarm to be sure you are up and on the phone, have your speed dial programmed and be ready to go.  Know exactly what you want and don't chit chat with the VC.  And hope you get a good experienced VC - and then you'll get your room.

In the five years I've been doing Wyndham there's a hand full of times I haven't found what we needed for family vacations (that's often reunions with 5 or so rooms) or last minute reservations for one or two rooms.  If I'm booking last minute it's very unlikely I'll find what I want the first time I check - but I keep checking and check when I think my odds are best. My sister likes to stay at Bentley Brook over Christmas or New Years (it's somewhat local for her but with her very active kids she doesn't know her schedule til a month or so before checkin); they've stayed in New Orleans over New Years when Ohio State was in the Nat'l championship; stayed in Pompano beach for Christmas; my brother likes bike week at Daytona, son-in-law's family went to the final four in New Orleans (that was 2 rooms); Dad's significant other likes the cherry blossoms in DC. For family reunions we stayed in a presidential unit at Ocean Walk in August.  I can go on and on.  If I want something I do my homework.  Do I need to use my ARP - can I catch something last minute? When exactly do I need to call for the ARP (one year I was a day later for a date I needed - my bad). 

I don't have an in at Wyndham. No insider connection. No favorite VC on the speed dial. I don't run bots. I do check inventory a lot. I do plan ahead when it's something I need to and can plan for. I'm also realistic about my expectations.  Some flexibility may be required. No - we are not having a family reunion at Ocean Walk during the Daytona 500 - but we will be there in August - all 20-30 some of us.

I also suspect there are a lot more Wyndham inspired issues around availability than they would like owners to believe. Do you think they tell owners complaining about availability that they overbooked November at Bonnet Creek because they mismanaged the remodeling of Towers 1 and 2? So poorly that they had to cancel confirmed reservations (if my memory serves me right the day of checkin for some people)?

Fast forward to Christmas week at Bonnet Creek.  No doubt Wyndham was playing with inventory for Christmas week.  All cancellations were held back by Wyndham. Then 1 and 2 bedrooms flooded in less than 2 weeks before checkin.  3 and 4 bedrooms were still held back.  On Dec 30th they released rooms for Dec 24th checkin.  A VC confirmed - I could tell the 30th was there and asking a VC they confirmed my suspicions. Rooms sat empty Christmas week - a 4 BR Presidential and some 3 bedroom units. And then again, multiple units became available for Dec 30th checkin (nice last minute NYE reservations for somebody). 100% Wyndham playing with the inventory - had to be.

Nor do we really know what inventory Wyndham is taking for Extra Holidays, why we see stuff on groupon, etc.

Whose fault is it you aren't finding rooms you want? The finger may point back to you and/or Wyndham. Maybe it's time to quit focusing on the megarenter and cancel/rebook. How about a little more transparency from Wyndham and a little less games?  And do your homework for those times that are really important to you.[/QUOTE]


----------



## wjappraise

bnoble said:


> Me too. Probably my best example was a 2BR at OTA for Easter Week/Cherry Blossom Festival.



Same here, the ARP bookings have always worked for me.  That is one reason I was disappointed with my frozen account that did not allow me to use ARP when I needed it.

I believe this thread has morphed into a cul-de-sac discussion about the impact that rentals have on typical owners.  From my vantage point, they have no impact if I use my ARP, or dutifully make a reservation at the ten-month window for my desired vacations at non-home resorts.  The only visible impact I see that renters impact availability is during the summer months at Glacier Canyon in Wisconsin Dells.  Some members here on TUG specialize in renting out those prime weeks, and likely they gather a bunch of the inventory.  However, there are still units available if you have ARP, or if you are online at 7:00 am sharp, ten months out.  Even if there were no mega renters accumulating prime weeks at Glacier Canyon, that inventory would be gobbled up by whomever would hold those ownerships.  My point is, as owners, we need to plan our vacations 10-13 months out, or rely on last minute availability (less than 15 days) for a spur-of-the-moment vacation.  It is the middle area between 15 days and 10 months (let's go to south Florida for spring break!) that is simply not a viable option for ANY timeshare company or owner.  In that respect, the "commercial" renters that some here have demonized, are actually a valuable resource for finding a great vacation at a reasonable price.

I use my ownership for my planned vacations.  I use TUG and Redweek to find accommodations for my spur of the moment desired vacations.  As others have stated here, this is a very positive aspect of TUG, and we should be adaptable to twists and turns of our ownership.  TUG has been around a lot longer than I have owned my timeshare holdings, and from what I understand, it has always had great deals for vacation stays.  Had I found it prior to purchase, I definitely would not have bought retail, and probably would not have bought resale.  I would have just rented from the members here who have found a way to cover all or part of their maintenance fees.

Our first timeshare presentation (purchase) was timed well, from the developer's viewpoint.  We traveled to Florida to see my aged mother-in-law as well as my wife's sister and brother-in-law.  They had us stay with them in their spare bedroom.  We found out the first night that the spare bedroom also doubled as the "cat room" where the oversized litter box was available through a pet door from the hallway into the closet.  Apparently each of the six cats had enjoyed a wonderful Thanksgiving dinner that day and spent all night back and forth to the litter box.  The aroma was choking, and always preceded by scratching sounds that announced the impending wave of eye watering miasma.  That next day we had our presentation at Fairfield Orlando at the first building of Bonnet Creek.  We stayed for three nights as part of the presentation promotion.  SOLD!!

So for the past 12 years, when we have traveled numerous times each year to see my mother-in-law (she passed away peacefully this past spring) we have enjoyed staying at fantastic accommodations that do not involve litterboxes.  Most of the time, she was able to stay with us at Bonnet Creek.  While there are frustrations involved with this ownership, the product is great.  And TUG forums are helpful. . . even when some posters choose to defy reason and logic.  My point is, as others have expressed here, rather than snipe at one another about their use of their ownership, let us appreciate what we do have and be supportive of those owners who are truly having difficulties (at least helpful if telling an owner something he or she does not want to hear but needs to hear), not just rambling irritations about the evils of renting.  As one of the impacted owners of the frozen accounts, I cannot tell you how much your posts, your Private Messages, even your phone calls to me have meant to keep my spirits up through this horrible never-ending "adventure." 

Thank you.


----------



## Braindead

I was looking at it from a business perspective. I don't know how you justify owning in the current situation. No assessments. No fees. Never pay for a point you don't need. You can exit your ownership at little or no charge . That could change at any time. I see no sense in buying into something like Wynnpoint either you get nothing different than renting from someone here with no upfront cost. The old saying don't let your emotions get in the way of making a good business decision or deal. I'm not saying that is happening here but that is how I came to my conclusion. I just don't see how you save squat today and have all the risk of ownership currently


----------



## wjappraise

Braindead said:


> I was looking at it from a business perspective. I don't know how you justify owning in the current situation. No assessments. No fees. Never pay for a point you don't need. You can exit your ownership at little or no charge . That could change at any time. I see no sense in buying into something like Wynnpoint either you get nothing different than renting from someone here with no upfront cost. The old saying don't let your emotions get in the way of making a good business decision or deal. I'm not saying that is happening here but that is how I came to my conclusion. I just don't see how you save squat today and have all the risk of ownership currently



See my post just before yours for an example of how an owner can justify owning.  

Or perhaps understand the underlying concept that "if I had to do it all over again, I would rent, not buy" does not mean all is lost now that I am an owner.  It simply means that the dynamics have changed, or at least the knowledge gained over the past 12 years would alter 2017 Wesley to make a different decision than 2005 Wesley.  As I choose to live in the present, I accept the prior decisions I have made and look to make the best of those situations.  And I do not blame others for my discontentment with a product I purchased.


----------



## Braindead

Agree with you on all. It hasn't come across correctly in my posts. I also put Wyndham 100 percent at fault. Other owners 0. I don't blame anyone for doing what Wyndham has allowed them to do and have said if I was in any owners shoes I would do the same thing. That doesn't mean I don't think changes need to be made without changing the rules or new ones just look at current ones


----------



## BellaWyn

wjappraise said:


> My point is, as others have expressed here, *rather than snipe at one another about their use of their ownership, let us appreciate what we do have and be supportive of those owners who are truly having difficulties, not just irritations about the evils of renting.*  As one of the impacted owners of the frozen accounts, I cannot tell you how much your posts, your Private Messages, even your phone calls to me have meant to keep my spirits up through this horrible never-ending "adventure."
> Thank you.


*Ditto*


----------



## BellaWyn

Braindead said:


> *I was looking at it from a business perspective.*


Thread is about "Cancel & Rebook being eliminated" not "Examine use of ownership as a business."



Braindead said:


> *I don't know how you justify owning in the current situation.*



*Why?  *Why does any owner need to *"justify"* their ownership to anyone, be it here or anywhere else, in the current climate or historical climate?  Just because you cannot figure it out still doesn't require anyone to present justification of ownership.  There is no accountability requirement here in TUG specific to TS ownership.   Good behavior and following posting rules perhaps, but not specific to having to explain why any of us own what we own to anyone.

Go back and read ALL of post #302.  Beautifully stated SandiBo.


----------



## CO skier

BellaWyn said:


> Thread is about "Cancel & Rebook being eliminated" not "Examine use of ownership as a business."


This thread was turned into yet another "ownership as a business" within the first page when the usual members posted about their rental businesses.


----------



## Ty1on

CO skier said:


> This thread was turned into yet another "ownership as a business" within the first page when the usual members posted about their rental businesses.



This is an astute observation.


----------



## ronparise

BellaWyn said:


> Thread is about "Cancel & Rebook being eliminated" not "Examine use of ownership as a business."



These topics are so connected that it's impossible to talk about one without talking about the other. Especially if you examine the question; why would wyndham want to end the practice of cancel and rebook? Or what will be the effect of cancel and rebook?

And if you answer the question the way I do .... it's to end or at least restrict commercial use of the product? It brings you to the next question. Why restrict commercial renting?

Or perhaps you come at this from another direction and that is to assume commercial renting is bad for the club.  Then the obvious question is how do you suggest Wyndham control it. My answer would be to stop the practice of cancel and rebook for the discount

So either way you look at it a discussion of cancel and rebook has to lead to a discussion of commercial renting


----------



## Sandi Bo

Good points, however... Ron, I recall you stating you didn't need cancel/rebook.  That your Mardi Gras booked full boat was profitable in and of itself and you wouldn't chance cancel/rebook on them.   (That's always been a (not met) goal of mine - ties in to my goal of spending minimal time at the keyboard).

I think some renting (call it commercial, off-setting maintenance, whatever you like) is necessary.  There are a lot owners who do not use their points, rooms would go empty (where would sales get their next mark)?  I suspect it's gotten out of hand and Wyndham need to reign it in a bit.

Is it as simple as Wyndham getting a handle on managing the points correctly (fix their system)?  Accurate accounting tracking VIP eligible points and only allowing VIP benefits to apply to the VIP eligible points.  Does the rest then take care of itself?


----------



## raygo123

Sandi Bo said:


> Good points, however... Ron, I recall you stating you didn't need cancel/rebook.  That your Mardi Gras booked full boat was profitable in and of itself and you wouldn't chance cancel/rebook on them.   (That's always been a (not met) goal of mine - ties in to my goal of spending minimal time at the keyboard).
> 
> I think some renting (call it commercial, off-setting maintenance, whatever you like) is necessary.  There are a lot owners who do not use their points, rooms would go empty (where would sales get their next mark)?  I suspect it's gotten out of hand and Wyndham need to reign it in a bit.
> 
> It is a simple as Wyndham getting a handle on managing the points correctly (fix their system)?  Accurate accounting tracking VIP eligible points and only allowing VIP benefits to apply to the VIP eligible points.  Does the rest then take care of itself?


I agree. No benifits for resale.  I would add to that  credit pool points.  

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk


----------



## ronparise

Sandi Bo said:


> Good points, however... Ron, I recall you stating you didn't need cancel/rebook.  That your Mardi Gras booked full boat was profitable in and of itself and you wouldn't chance cancel/rebook on them.   (That's always been a (not met) goal of mine - ties in to my goal of spending minimal time at the keyboard).
> 
> I think some renting (call it commercial, off-setting maintenance, whatever you like) is necessary.  There are a lot owners who do not use their points, rooms would go empty (where would sales get their next mark)?  I suspect it's gotten out of hand and Wyndham need to reign it in a bit.
> 
> It is a simple as Wyndham getting a handle on managing the points correctly (fix their system)?  Accurate accounting tracking VIP eligible points and only allowing VIP benefits to apply to the VIP eligible points.  Does the rest then take care of itself?



I did say that and it makes sense when talking about Mardi Gras and other high value reservations. But you can't build a big business with just these high value reservations

However  there's a lot more being rented than just these high value reservations. Enter cancel rebook

I think you are right. Limit discounts to VIP eligible points and the number of reservations that are canceled and rebooked goes way down and along with that so does commercial renting


----------



## Braindead

BellaWyn said:


> There is no accountability requirement here in TUG specific to TS ownership.   Good behavior and following posting rules perhaps, but not specific to having to explain why any of us own what we own to anyone.


Got it. I need to follow the rules here but who cares about Wyndham's rules. You don't have to threaten to kick me out. I can see myself out the door. Special Thanks to Ron and others!!! Good Bye


----------



## Ty1on

Braindead said:


> Got it. I need to follow the rules here but who cares about Wyndham's rules. You don't have to threaten to kick me out. I can see myself out the door. Special Thanks to Ron and others!!! Good Bye



No need to be so sensitive!  Relax.


----------



## uscav8r

raygo123 said:


> I agree. No benifits for resale.  I would add to that  credit pool points.
> 
> Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk



Resale is debatable. To include the credit pool in such a policy is... well... a steaming pile of    .


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## raygo123

uscav8r said:


> Resale is debatable. To include the credit pool in such a policy is... well... a steaming pile of    .
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Why?  The credit pool is a source of inflated points returned from cancel and rebook.  It's my understanding that once you use ARP points and cancel, they can no longer be used for ARP.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk


----------



## Ty1on

raygo123 said:


> Why?  The credit pool is a source of inflated points returned from cancel and rebook.
> 
> Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk


 That was posited as a theory, but we don't really know.....


----------



## raygo123

Ty1on said:


> That was posited as a theory, but we don't really know.....


At this point, isn't this whole Post a theory?

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk


----------



## uscav8r

raygo123 said:


> Why?  The credit pool is a source of inflated points returned from cancel and rebook.  It's my understanding that once you use ARP points and cancel, they can no longer be used for ARP.
> 
> Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk


The credit pool has nothing to do with ARP. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## raygo123

uscav8r said:


> The credit pool has nothing to do with ARP.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


My bad, what I meant was if once you have used current use year points for ARP, you cannot use them for ARP again.  So should be the credit pool points should not be able to be used for VIP benifits, cancel and rebook.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk


----------



## Richelle

Braindead said:


> I was looking at it from a business perspective. I don't know how you justify owning in the current situation. No assessments. No fees. Never pay for a point you don't need. You can exit your ownership at little or no charge . That could change at any time. I see no sense in buying into something like Wynnpoint either you get nothing different than renting from someone here with no upfront cost. The old saying don't let your emotions get in the way of making a good business decision or deal. I'm not saying that is happening here but that is how I came to my conclusion. I just don't see how you save squat today and have all the risk of ownership currently



I'm just curious...Do you own?  I am on Tapatalk so I cannot see your profile. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## uscav8r

raygo123 said:


> My bad, what I meant was if once you have used current use year points for ARP, you cannot use them for ARP again.  So should be the credit pool points should not be able to be used for VIP benifits, cancel and rebook.
> 
> Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk


I know you are posting from you phone, so prose will not be expected, but it is hard to understand what you just wrote about the credit pool. 

I don't see why the credit pool should be banned from VIP benefits. That makes no sense since everyone can credit pool. Why should VIPs lose their benefits if they credit pool? This seems a lot like a solution in search of a problem.  

In any case, I don't see stripping VIP benefits
From the credit pool happening as it would further undermine the VIP sales message. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## ronparise

uscav8r said:


> I know you are posting from you phone, so prose will not be expected, but it is hard to understand what you just wrote about the credit pool.
> 
> I don't see why the credit pool should be banned from VIP benefits. That makes no sense since everyone can credit pool. Why should VIPs lose their benefits if they credit pool? This seems a lot like a solution in search of a problem.
> 
> In any case, I don't see stripping VIP ben fits
> From the credit pool happening as it would further undermine the VIP sales message.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk



I think what hes suggesting is that reservations made with pooled points dont get the VIP discount.  Just like reservations made with pooled points cant be used for ARP


----------



## uscav8r

ronparise said:


> I think what hes suggesting is that reservations made with pooled points dont get the VIP discount.  Just like reservations made with pooled points cant be used for ARP



I figured that's what he's trying to say. I'm just saying I think there is no legitimate reason for that idea to be enacted. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## ronparise

uscav8r said:


> I figured that's what he's trying to say. I'm just saying I think there is no legitimate reason for that idea to be enacted.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk



It would be just another thorn in the side of the guys that do large scale commercial renting. Nothing they couldnt work around


----------



## raygo123

ronparise said:


> It would be just another thorn in the side of the guys that do large scale commercial renting. Nothing they couldnt work around


Thanks for clarifying that.  Exactly.  What I thought it would do is whittle down the credit pool, there would not be that possible second and third turnover for the year.  The net would be about a 25% if enforced.  Just thinking.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk


----------



## uscav8r

raygo123 said:


> Thanks for clarifying that.  Exactly.  What I thought it would do is whittle down the credit pool, there would not be that possible second and third turnover for the year.  The net would be about a 25% if enforced.  Just thinking.
> 
> Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk



And damaging every non-megarenter VIP while you are at it. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## am1

Does all this directly relate back to Wyndham getting rid of cancelled points?  Which led to a lot of owners credit pooling what were once cancelled points?  Who made this decision and how did they not forsee this happening?


----------



## ronparise

uscav8r said:


> And damaging every non-megarenter VIP while you are at it.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


If the non mega renter VIP is gaining an unfair advantage using the same tricks the mega renters use they will be treated just like the negarenters


----------



## Ty1on

ronparise said:


> If the non mega renter VIP is gaining an unfair advantage using the same tricks the mega renters use they will be treated just like the negarenters



This seems to be the case with the account freezes from what I've read here.


----------



## uscav8r

ronparise said:


> If the non mega renter VIP is gaining an unfair advantage using the same tricks the mega renters use they will be treated just like the negarenters





Ty1on said:


> This seems to be the case with the account freezes from what I've read here.



Ron, define, very specifically, the unfair advantage the credit pool is providing to the overall booking situation. And make sure that you cage it in terms of what owners (VIP or otherwise) are doing to screw everyone else.

I am not talking about pooling/stripping/selling. Nor am I talking about getting the use of extra points because of some IT glitch. Or even about the IT system's apparent lack of proper accounting for points/credits when bookings are made/cancelled. None of the latter two issues are unfair due to me simply being a VIP. 

if some non-renting VIP is doing something outside of policy, then sure they'll get frozen out too. 

But raygo123 is talking about implementing a NEW policy. He is advocating that credit pool points should not get the VIP discount or benefits, which further erodes the value of what I paid dearly for.  No one can say how this policy rights a wrong being attributed to VIP owners writ large. Ergo, solution looking for a problem. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Roger830

If Wyndham was serious about curbing renting, they would limit the reservations that an account could make at 13 months. If only two reservations could be made, that would free up lines for others.

Wyndham needs the fresh meat brought in by big renters. They probably don't like the low price some are charging, so they need to implement policies to raise the price. 

I just did a search on ebay for *Florida Jan* rentals. There were *144* rentals and *Wyndham Florida Jan* was *101* rentals. Over 2/3 were Wyndham. To corporate, situations such as this indicate that the units are being obtained far below market value.


----------



## am1

Roger830 said:


> If Wyndham was serious about curbing renting, they would limit the reservations that an account could make at 13 months. If only two reservations could be made, that would free up lines for others.
> 
> Wyndham needs the fresh meat brought in by big renters. They probably don't like the low price some are charging, so they need to implement policies to raise the price.
> 
> I just did a search on ebay for *Florida Jan* rentals. There were *144* rentals and *Wyndham Florida Jan* was *101* rentals. Over 2/3 were Wyndham. To corporate, situations such as this indicate that the units are being obtained far below market value.



Wyndham cannot limit how many reservations are made in the arp window.


----------



## Roger830

am1 said:


> Wyndham cannot limit how many reservations are made in the arp window.



Perhaps not, but I would think that they could limit how many reservations could be made per call between 8-9AM. 

With Voyager coming on line it's mute, arp will be done online in April.

Just whipping that dead horse again, morning exercise before checking out.


----------



## ronparise

uscav8r said:


> Ron, define, very specifically, the unfair advantage the credit pool is providing to the overall booking situation. And make sure that you cage it in terms of what owners (VIP or otherwise) are doing to screw everyone else.
> 
> I am not talking about pooling/stripping/selling. Nor am I talking about getting the use of extra points because of some IT glitch. Or even about the IT system's apparent lack of proper accounting for points/credits when bookings are made/cancelled. None of the latter two issues are unfair due to me simply being a VIP.
> 
> if some non-renting VIP is doing something outside of policy, then sure they'll get frozen out too.
> 
> But raygo123 is talking about implementing a NEW policy. He is advocating that credit pool points should not get the VIP discount or benefits, which further erodes the value of what I paid dearly for.  No one can say how this policy rights a wrong being attributed to VIP owners writ large. Ergo, solution looking for a problem.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk



I think (and so does Wyndham,) the VIP discount program was designed to get heads in beds during the most unpopular times at the most unpopular resorts. The idea was to get us to use at least some of our points to reserve the junk, leaving more of the good stuff available for everyone else. It was never meant to help anyone make multiple reservations at the best times at the best resorts at a discount. But by using the cancel/rebook strategy we have been able to do just that

in the past, in Jan 1017, with 2 million 2018 points. I could  make 10 mardi gras reservations for Feb 2018, Then in Dec 2017  I could cancel and rebook and generate 5 million cancelled points that had to be used by Dec 2018. I could use those cancelled points to make 5 reservations for Christmas at Bonnet Creek.(another high value reservation)  then in October, I could cancel and rebook generating 500k points. that expire at the end of the year  There not much that can be done with these left over points on such short notice, so they would either be used to exchange for maintenance fee dollars or be dumped into RCI

But look what I did.  With only 1 million VIP eligible points  I got ten high value reservation at a discount.  and I got 5 more high value reservations. To be fair I should not have been able to get any discounts on these high value reservations and I should have been limited to just 10 at full price  (10 reservations at 200000 points uses up all my 2 million points)

Enter the new cancellation rules: Now I can do those first 10  mardi gras reservations, cancel and rebook and the cancelled points go back to be called regular use year points and I put them in the credit pool (3 year expiration) and I make those 5 christmas reservations. I cancel and rebook them and the cancelled points go to the credit pool and I can make another two high value reservations which I cancel and rebook to generate more cancelled points into the pool which I use to make one more high value discounted reservation

So now using the cancel/rebook strategy, in conjunction with the credit pool  i can use my 1 million VIP eligible points with another million non vip points to make 18 high value reservations to rent. 

Is that fair?  some folks would say no


Now let me tell you another strategy using the credit pool.

1)Buy contracts worth 20 million points for $40000 
2) put all 3 years points into the credit pool 
3) make reservations with all 60 million points and rent them out, (at an average of 100000 points each and $600 rent thats $360000)
4) pay mf for a year (about $120000)
5) lather/ rinse/ repeat

$360000 income less $40000 purchase price less $120000 mf = $200000. is that profit?  or might you  call it an unfair advantage?


----------



## uscav8r

ronparise said:


> I think (and so does Wyndham,) the VIP discount program was designed to get heads in beds during the most unpopular times at the most unpopular resorts. The idea was to get us to use at least some of our points to reserve the junk, leaving more of the good stuff available for everyone else. It was never meant to help anyone make multiple reservations at the best times at the best resorts at a discount. But by using the cancel/rebook strategy we have been able to do just that
> 
> in the past, in Jan 1017, with 2 million 2018 points. I could  make 10 mardi gras reservations for Feb 2018, Then in Dec 2017  I could cancel and rebook and generate 5 million cancelled points that had to be used by Dec 2018. I could use those cancelled points to make 5 reservations for Christmas at Bonnet Creek.(another high value reservation)  then in October, I could cancel and rebook generating 500k points. that expire at the end of the year  There not much that can be done with these left over points on such short notice, so they would either be used to exchange for maintenance fee dollars or be dumped into RCI
> 
> But look what I did.  With only 1 million VIP eligible points  I got ten high value reservation at a discount.  and I got 5 more high value reservations. To be fair I should not have been able to get any discounts on these high value reservations and I should have been limited to just 10 at full price  (10 reservations at 200000 points uses up all my 2 million points)
> 
> Enter the new cancellation rules: Now I can do those first 10  mardi gras reservations, cancel and rebook and the cancelled points go back to be called regular use year points and I put them in the credit pool (3 year expiration) and I make those 5 christmas reservations. I cancel and rebook them and the cancelled points go to the credit pool and I can make another two high value reservations which I cancel and rebook to generate more cancelled points into the pool which I use to make one more high value discounted reservation
> 
> So now using the cancel/rebook strategy, in conjunction with the credit pool  i can use my 1 million VIP eligible points with another million non vip points to make 18 high value reservations to rent.
> 
> Is that fair?  some folks would say no
> 
> 
> Now let me tell you another strategy using the credit pool.
> 
> 1)Buy contracts worth 20 million points for $40000
> 2) put all 3 years points into the credit pool
> 3) make reservations with all 60 million points and rent them out, (at an average of 100000 points each and $600 rent thats $360000)
> 4) pay mf for a year (about $120000)
> 5) lather/ rinse/ repeat
> 
> $360000 income less $40000 purchase price less $120000 mf = $200000. is that profit?  or might you  call it an unfair advantage?


Except that the credit pool in itself has NOTHING to do with discount manipulation or cancel rebook or any VIP benefits for that matter. It is the cancel/rebook method that creates the supposed "problem." 

The false assumption of raygo123's idea is that the credit pool is used exclusively to exacerbate the cancel/rebook scenario. The problem is, this is not the only situation at play. 

For instance, I just cancelled a Bentley Brook ski week. But then I booked Smugglers Notch with a discount and upgrade. All using pooled credits. 

Raygo123's short-sighted credit pool idea would prevent me from doing so. And to what end? There was plenty of availability at Smuggs (beds in heads at less popular times as you say). So who am I hurting?

I swear, people need to put more thought into the consequences of these half-baked ideas before spewing nonsense. 




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## ronparise

uscav8r said:


> Ron, define, very specifically, the unfair advantage the credit pool is providing to the overall booking situation. And make sure that you cage it in terms of what owners (VIP or otherwise) are doing to screw everyone else.
> 
> I am not talking about pooling/stripping/selling. Nor am I talking about getting the use of extra points because of some IT glitch. Or even about the IT system's apparent lack of proper accounting for points/credits when bookings are made/cancelled. None of the latter two issues are unfair due to me simply being a VIP.
> 
> if some non-renting VIP is doing something outside of policy, then sure they'll get frozen out too.
> 
> But raygo123 is talking about implementing a NEW policy. He is advocating that credit pool points should not get the VIP discount or benefits, which further erodes the value of what I paid dearly for.  No one can say how this policy rights a wrong being attributed to VIP owners writ large. Ergo, solution looking for a problem.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk




this whole mess is a solution looking for a problem

There really is a problem with wyndhams systems generating extra points. But in trying to figure out the extent of that problem I think Wyndham finally realized the extent of their mega renter "problem" It doesnt matter that I dont think its a problem. Wyndham does, and so does Raygo and some other owners

I think they are, and will be, using the ban on commercial use and unfair advantage to attack the mega renters. whether that's fair or not is an open question. I dont think it is,  but I do know I dont have the time or money or heart, to argue my case. 

Bottom line is I cant define a problem here, but that dosent matter. Wyndham says there's a problem and they will try to solve it


----------



## raygo123

ronparise said:


> I think (and so does Wyndham,) the VIP discount program was designed to get heads in beds during the most unpopular times at the most unpopular resorts. The idea was to get us to use at least some of our points to reserve the junk, leaving more of the good stuff available for everyone else. It was never meant to help anyone make multiple reservations at the best times at the best resorts at a discount. But by using the cancel/rebook strategy we have been able to do just that
> 
> in the past, in Jan 1017, with 2 million 2018 points. I could  make 10 mardi gras reservations for Feb 2018, Then in Dec 2017  I could cancel and rebook and generate 5 million cancelled points that had to be used by Dec 2018. I could use those cancelled points to make 5 reservations for Christmas at Bonnet Creek.(another high value reservation)  then in October, I could cancel and rebook generating 500k points. that expire at the end of the year  There not much that can be done with these left over points on such short notice, so they would either be used to exchange for maintenance fee dollars or be dumped into RCI
> 
> But look what I did.  With only 1 million VIP eligible points  I got ten high value reservation at a discount.  and I got 5 more high value reservations. To be fair I should not have been able to get any discounts on these high value reservations and I should have been limited to just 10 at full price  (10 reservations at 200000 points uses up all my 2 million points)
> 
> Enter the new cancellation rules: Now I can do those first 10  mardi gras reservations, cancel and rebook and the cancelled points go back to be called regular use year points and I put them in the credit pool (3 year expiration) and I make those 5 christmas reservations. I cancel and rebook them and the cancelled points go to the credit pool and I can make another two high value reservations which I cancel and rebook to generate more cancelled points into the pool which I use to make one more high value discounted reservation
> 
> So now using the cancel/rebook strategy, in conjunction with the credit pool  i can use my 1 million VIP eligible points with another million non vip points to make 18 high value reservations to rent.
> 
> Is that fair?  some folks would say no
> 
> 
> Now let me tell you another strategy using the credit pool.
> 
> 1)Buy contracts worth 20 million points for $40000
> 2) put all 3 years points into the credit pool
> 3) make reservations with all 60 million points and rent them out, (at an average of 100000 points each and $600 rent thats $360000)
> 4) pay mf for a year (about $120000)
> 5) lather/ rinse/ repeat
> 
> $360000 income less $40000 purchase price less $120000 mf = $200000. is that profit?  or might you  call it an unfair advantage?


Ron, that is a great explanation.  As far as hurting the VIP owner, it would depend on what part of benifits we are talking about.  If one if talking about lowering the value of your points, yes.  You can no longer get the 50% discount on your credit pool points.  Thus decreasing the total available for cancel and rebook.  Points that have already been discounted by 50% will now have to make full point value rebook. What  it will do is increase my opportunity to book a high value reservation.  This is especially true now that wyndham is making you use the points that expire first.  Am1 sometimes less is more, it depends on what side of the equation you are on.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk


----------



## ronparise

uscav8r said:


> Except that the credit pool in itself has NOTHING to do with discount manipulation or cancel rebook or any VIP benefits for that matter. It is the cancel/rebook method that creates the supposed "problem."
> 
> The false assumption of raygo123's idea is that the credit pool is used exclusively to exacerbate the cancel/rebook scenario. The problem is, this is not the only situation at play.
> 
> For instance, I just cancelled a Bentley Brook ski week. But then I booked Smugglers Notch with a discount and upgrade. All using pooled credits.
> 
> Raygo123's short-sighted credit pool idea would prevent me from doing so. And to what end? There was plenty of availability at Smuggs (beds in heads at less popular times as you say). So who am I hurting?
> 
> I swear, people need to put more thought into the consequences of these half-baked ideas before spewing nonsense.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk




The way the credit pool is supposed to work now allows more cancel and rebookings than before. 
Wyndham cant do anything directly to stop cancel and rebook After all its just 2 routine transactions done one after the other. They have to take indirect actions to control it. and a change to the credit pool could be one of those actions

I think their solution is already developed and waiting to be implemented, and that is to limit vip benefits to just the VIP eligible points


----------



## paxsarah

uscav8r said:


> Except that the credit pool in itself has NOTHING to do with discount manipulation or cancel rebook or any VIP benefits for that matter. It is the cancel/rebook method that creates the supposed "problem."
> 
> The false assumption of raygo123's idea is that the credit pool is used exclusively to exacerbate the cancel/rebook scenario. The problem is, this is not the only situation at play.
> 
> For instance, I just cancelled a Bentley Brook ski week. But then I booked Smugglers Notch with a discount and upgrade. All using pooled credits.
> 
> Raygo123's short-sighted credit pool idea would prevent me from doing so. And to what end? There was plenty of availability at Smuggs (beds in heads at less popular times as you say). So who am I hurting?
> 
> I swear, people need to put more thought into the consequences of these half-baked ideas before spewing nonsense.



Exactly my thought. A proposal to prevent credit pooled points from accessing VIP discounts and upgrades would prevent a regular VIP owner from pooling their unused points (a smart thing to do, and in no way manipulating the system) and then later deciding to book a trip inside the discount window at a location with availability in the off-season (say, Myrtle Beach at spring break) - exactly the purpose of for these discounts' existence. It might thwart the comparatively few megarenters from booking reservations, but it would also thwart many VIPs from using their points in exactly the spirit the current rules intend. If, as has been posited here, Wyndham wants to make a change as much to provide the _impression_ that they are cracking down on renters and increasing availability for regular owners (whether or not it actually does so), this would be the worst possible way to do it.

Edit: I guess what I'm saying is that this change as propsed wouldn't just prevent the pool-book-cancel-rebook-upgrade scenario. It would also prevent pool-book-upgrade for VIP owners for personal use.


----------



## uscav8r

raygo123 said:


> Ron, that is a great explanation.  As far as hurting the VIP owner, it would depend on what part of benifits we are talking about.  If one if talking about lowering the value of your points, yes.  You can no longer get the 50% discount on your credit pool points.  Thus decreasing the total available for cancel and rebook.  Points that have already been discounted by 50% will now have to make full point value rebook. What  it will do is increase my opportunity to book a high value reservation.  This is especially true now that wyndham is making you use the points that expire first.  Am1 sometimes less is more, it depends on what side of the equation you are on.
> 
> Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk



So in other words you want to kill my flexibility as a "regular" VIP owner who just wanted to change vacation locations. Your approach smacks of class/VIP envy. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## ronparise

raygo123 said:


> Ron, that is a great explanation.  As far as hurting the VIP owner, it would depend on what part of benifits we are talking about.  If one if talking about lowering the value of your points, yes.  You can no longer get the 50% discount on your credit pool points.  Thus decreasing the total available for cancel and rebook.  Points that have already been discounted by 50% will now have to make full point value rebook. What  it will do is increase my opportunity to book a high value reservation.  This is especially true now that wyndham is making you use the points that expire first.  Am1 sometimes less is more, it depends on what side of the equation you are on.
> 
> Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk




To be clear doing this to the credit pool wont make a bit of difference as long as i can own just a million points that qualify me for VIP and I get VIP benefits on the other 20 or 30 million points I own.


----------



## raygo123

ronparise said:


> To be clear doing this to the credit pool wont make a bit of difference as long as i can own just a million points that qualify me for VIP and I get VIP benefits on the other 20 or 30 million points I own.


No Ron, it would be in addition to resale points not getting VIP benifits.  Both.  Otherwise your right.  Yes it IS all about me.  I will take getting what I want when I want over an extra discount.  As far as that smugglers reservation, that's life in the big city.  First, if you have done cancel rebook, your credit pool points are already discounted.  If you cancelled another reservation made with current use year points, you will still be able to use those points for a discount.  No foul no harm.  

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk


----------



## paxsarah

ronparise said:


> I think their solution is already developed and waiting to be implemented, and that is to limit vip benefits to just the VIP eligible points



This makes the most sense to me, both in terms of its simplicity and getting to the root of what Wyndham may perceive as the problem. Added resale points to VIP accounts getting VIP benefits has really been a loophole within the system, and arguably is not something Wyndham ever intended, but didn't have a means to track or prevent. And in theory, if they're improving their programming to the point that ARP will be able to be booked online, which should drill down to tracking points by the contract of origin, this change would also be based on contract and should be able to piggyback off of the same upgrades.

Should. I'm not confident that they're able to implement it without incident based on what's going on now, but on paper it should work.


----------



## ronparise

The subject of this thread is 
VC told me with high confidence that Cancel/Rebook will be eliminated in April.

Lets assume  its true.  (I believe, by the way, that this is just one change of several, all designed to curtail commercial use and insure a level playing field (no unfair advantage) when it comes to making reservations

Now I want to  ask the questions; why are they doing this?  and will it work?.. I think not 

and heres a situation that I think, makes my case

Worldmark owners can make reservations 13 months in advance of check in. and for red season must make 7 day reservation.   Mardi Gras Tuesday is Feb 13 next year so  today is the day to make a 7 day reservation that includes the weekend before Mardi Gras Tuesday  (very popular and a great rental)  and Mardi Gras Tuesday itself (also very popular)

In the past several years I have been able to make 35 of the available 63 reservations.  This upsets a lot of owners and I have learned it upsets Wyndham as well. Their thinking is that if they could do something about the megarenter problem (in this case me) availability would improve

Something happened (remember Wyndham and I "have satisfactorily resolved our differences") and I made no worldmark mardi gras reservations this year

So did availability improve?  No of course not. There are still only 63 available reservations. did demand go down? No there are still a lot more owners that want these reservations, among them some of my former competitors.   The reservations system opened this morning at 6am pacific time and within a minute or so, everything is gone.  So nothing changed

I think the same think will happen in Club Wyndham. As long as the approach is to make things more difficult or more expensive for the mega renters, they will adapt and continue to rent. And for every one that cant adapt and drops out, there will be others to take their place


So Raygo, make all the suggestions you want to change the rules, It aint gonna make a bit of difference.


----------



## uscav8r

raygo123 said:


> No Ron, it would be in addition to resale points not getting VIP benifits.  Both.  Otherwise your right.  Yes it IS all about me.  I will take getting what I want when I want over an extra discount.  As far as that smugglers reservation, that's life in the big city.  First, if you have done cancel rebook, your credit pool points are already discounted.  If you cancelled another reservation made with current use year points, you will still be able to use those points for a discount.  No foul no harm.
> 
> Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk



What are you talking about, "already have done a cancel/rebook and gotten a discount"??? I cancelled one thing (booked at full fare BTW) to book a totally different place. 

When did I ever say I cancelled a discounted reservation?

The credit pool does not "automatically" give anyone a discount. 

Credits are not fishes and loaves. You don't "make" something out of nothing (except for when the IT system doesn't work). The top line number of credits will always be same. 

And how is this any different from using regular Use Year points? I can certainly cancel one of those and make a discounted booking elsewhere. If one is "unfair," logically the other is also unfair. 

If anything, the more "unfair" situation involves regular Use Year and ARP to get out in front of everyone else, which are then cancelled and rebooked.  FWIW, I don't begrudge anyone with ARP their benefits. 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## am1

paxsarah said:


> This makes the most sense to me, both in terms of its simplicity and getting to the root of what Wyndham may perceive as the problem. Added resale points to VIP accounts getting VIP benefits has really been a loophole within the system, and arguably is not something Wyndham ever intended, but didn't have a means to track or prevent. And in theory, if they're improving their programming to the point that ARP will be able to be booked online, which should drill down to tracking points by the contract of origin, this change would also be based on contract and should be able to piggyback off of the same upgrades.
> 
> Should. I'm not confident that they're able to implement it without incident based on what's going on now, but on paper it should work.



Actually it was promoted by sales.  And a way to sell points to resale owners.


----------



## ronparise

paxsarah said:


> This makes the most sense to me, both in terms of its simplicity and getting to the root of what Wyndham may perceive as the problem. Added resale points to VIP accounts getting VIP benefits has really been a loophole within the system, and arguably is not something Wyndham ever intended, but didn't have a means to track or prevent. And in theory, if they're improving their programming to the point that ARP will be able to be booked online, which should drill down to tracking points by the contract of origin, this change would also be based on contract and should be able to piggyback off of the same upgrades.
> 
> Should. I'm not confident that they're able to implement it without incident based on what's going on now, but on paper it should work.




The bigger problem is it wont solve a thing.. in fact it may make things worse, ie more rentals.  If I cant get a discount my profit is cut substantially. what do you think my response will be?

If I was making 500 reservations a year at a $500 profit ($250000)  and now Im reduced to just $250.  Ill shift my focus to the really high value reservations and do twice as many as many of them.  Or Ill get out and 10 smaller boutique operations will take my place.


----------



## paxsarah

am1 said:


> Actually it was promoted by sales.  And a way to sell points to resale owners.



I mean, most of the time we refer to sales as a bunch of liars. In this case, I'd still argue that it still wasn't intended as a feature, it was just a consequence of the inadequacy of Wyndham's IT systems. Sales will jump on anything to make sales.



ronparise said:


> The bigger problem is it wont solve a thing.. in fact it may make things worse, ie more rentals.  If I cant get a discount my profit is cut substantially. what do you think my response will be?
> 
> If I was making 500 reservations a year at a $500 profit ($250000)  and now Im reduced to just $250.  Ill shift my focus to the really high value reservations and do twice as many as many of them.  Or Ill get out and 10 smaller boutique operations will take my place.



Well, I guess I don't really have an opinion on whether there's a real problem and whether it can be solved. I'm not VIP, I make ARP reservations when I need to at 13 months, I get online when I need to at 10 months, and I pretty much research availability for the vacations I want to book. The most convincing thing I've seen is your suggestion is that most of what Wyndham is trying to solve is based on optics. Limiting VIP benefits to what most owners would perceive as legitimately purchased VIP points would seem to be giving them what they want, and doesn't remove any codified/written/official VIP benefits from other owners. I completely agree that there will still be the same number of points chasing a limited number of high-demand reservations. It doesn't change the number of points in the system.


----------



## CO skier

ronparise said:


> The bigger problem is it wont solve a thing.. in fact it may make things worse, ie more rentals.  If I cant get a discount my profit is cut substantially. what do you think my response will be?
> 
> If I was making 500 reservations a year at a $500 profit ($250000)  and now Im reduced to just $250.  Ill shift my focus to the really high value reservations and do twice as many as many of them.  Or Ill get out and 10 smaller boutique operations will take my place.


That is not what happened in WorldMark when a loophole was closed this time last year.  More owner families are reportedly claiming reservations at 13 months.  Some of those reservations must be from what were previously booked by megarenters.

Availability did not increase, rentals still happen, but somehow more owners and fewer renters are staying in WorldMark units in 2017.  If something were to change the ability to cancel/rebook/upgrade 13 month reservations, the same may occur in Club Wyndham.  Many rentals that are profitable using cancel/rebook/upgrade are not profitable at full fare, but there are owner families who would be happy to claim these reservations at full point costs.  It is a zero sum game, so Wyndham's goal may be to influence the owner:renter occupancy ratio in favor of owner families.


----------



## uscav8r

CO skier said:


> That is not what happened in WorldMark when a loophole was closed this time last year.  More owner families are reportedly claiming reservations at 13 months.  Some of those reservations must be from what were previously booked by megarenters.
> 
> Availability did not increase, rentals still happen, but somehow more owners and fewer renters are staying in WorldMark units in 2017.  If something were to change the ability to cancel/rebook/upgrade 13 month reservations, the same may occur in Club Wyndham.  Many rentals that are profitable using cancel/rebook/upgrade are not profitable at full fare, but there are owner families who would be happy to claim these reservations at full point costs.  It is a zero sum game, so Wyndham's goal may be to influence the owner:renter occupancy ratio in favor of owner families.



I could MAYBE support a cancel/rebook/upgrade restriction on ARP bookings, but not on SRP/ERP ones. The bookkeeping for this would be immensely easier to accomplish and sort out retail from resale as the credit pool never comes into play.  

ARP bookings would easily be able to be tagged as upgrade eligible or not as well. 

If megarenters still need the discounts to be profitable, they can fight for the discountable/upgradeable 10-month bookings, or be stuck with a lower return on ARP bookings. They can still try to rent ARP bookings, but it will be their choice to take that risk.

But let's look at the non-renter VIP. Does this hurt too much them as well? Or does this look like a reasonable compromise that is feasible (i.e., not complicated) to implement? 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## frankf3

ronparise said:


> I think (and so does Wyndham,) the VIP discount program was designed to get heads in beds during the most unpopular times at the most unpopular resorts. The idea was to get us to use at least some of our points to reserve the junk, leaving more of the good stuff available for everyone else. It was never meant to help anyone make multiple reservations at the best times at the best resorts at a discount. But by using the cancel/rebook strategy we have been able to do just that
> 
> in the past, in Jan 1017, with 2 million 2018 points. I could  make 10 mardi gras reservations for Feb 2018, Then in Dec 2017  I could cancel and rebook and generate 5 million cancelled points that had to be used by Dec 2018. I could use those cancelled points to make 5 reservations for Christmas at Bonnet Creek.(another high value reservation)  then in October, I could cancel and rebook generating 500k points. that expire at the end of the year  There not much that can be done with these left over points on such short notice, so they would either be used to exchange for maintenance fee dollars or be dumped into RCI
> 
> But look what I did.  With only 1 million VIP eligible points  I got ten high value reservation at a discount.  and I got 5 more high value reservations. To be fair I should not have been able to get any discounts on these high value reservations and I should have been limited to just 10 at full price  (10 reservations at 200000 points uses up all my 2 million points)
> 
> Enter the new cancellation rules: Now I can do those first 10  mardi gras reservations, cancel and rebook and the cancelled points go back to be called regular use year points and I put them in the credit pool (3 year expiration) and I make those 5 christmas reservations. I cancel and rebook them and the cancelled points go to the credit pool and I can make another two high value reservations which I cancel and rebook to generate more cancelled points into the pool which I use to make one more high value discounted reservation
> 
> So now using the cancel/rebook strategy, in conjunction with the credit pool  i can use my 1 million VIP eligible points with another million non vip points to make 18 high value reservations to rent.
> 
> Is that fair?  some folks would say no
> 
> 
> Now let me tell you another strategy using the credit pool.
> 
> 1)Buy contracts worth 20 million points for $40000
> 2) put all 3 years points into the credit pool
> 3) make reservations with all 60 million points and rent them out, (at an average of 100000 points each and $600 rent thats $360000)
> 4) pay mf for a year (about $120000)
> 5) lather/ rinse/ repeat
> 
> $360000 income less $40000 purchase price less $120000 mf = $200000. is that profit?  or might you  call it an unfair advantage?




I agree with this, there's a LOT to say about the poor implementation of functions in Wyndham's systems, but just focusing on whether cancel / rebook is valid or not, here's a simplified way to look at it.

Cancel / rebook is a work around to achieve a reservation at the discount point level, right?   Was Wyndham's intent to give VIP's discounts on remaining (perhaps as Ron states sometimes "less desirable") inventory or to provide discounts to VIPs on ALL of their reservations?   If the latter, why didn't Wyndham just say "if you buy up to the Platinum VIP level you get a 50% points discount on all reservations"?   Cancel / rebook is an abuse of the system and of VIP benefits because it provides a benefit that was never intended.   If Wyndham's intent was to provide a discount points benefit on any reservation, even high demand, why make their best customers jump through hoops to get that benefit?

Cancel / rebook can be curtailed by tagging cancelled inventory as ineligible to be booked at any discount for a certain period or by implementation of a wait list (or probably numerous other methods).  I don't like the wait list, but I do think Wyndham should be clear on how their program is intended to work, then implement the system processes to manage that.   

Note, I'm only a small resale points owner, no knock at all from me toward any TUG members who use the system the way it works.  And I get it clearly that sales promoted cancel / rebook.   Wyndham could solve this fairly easily by investing a bit more and focusing more on their systems, the problem is 100% with Wyndham and their excessive focus on sales (and lack of attention to operations and IT).


----------



## ronparise

CO skier said:


> That is not what happened in WorldMark when a loophole was closed this time last year.  More owner families are reportedly claiming reservations at 13 months.  Some of those reservations must be from what were previously booked by megarenters.
> 
> Availability did not increase, rentals still happen, but somehow more owners and fewer renters are staying in WorldMark units in 2017.  If something were to change the ability to cancel/rebook/upgrade 13 month reservations, the same may occur in Club Wyndham.  Many rentals that are profitable using cancel/rebook/upgrade are not profitable at full fare, but there are owner families who would be happy to claim these reservations at full point costs.  It is a zero sum game, so Wyndham's goal may be to influence the owner:renter occupancy ratio in favor of owner families.




I think thats exactly right; The goal is to increase the number of reservations made by one group of owners over another group of owners. and to increase  ratio of owners staying in units vs.  non owners.  but its not happening

You dont see an increase in owners vs renters, You see more availability at 13 months, but you dont know who is getting those reservations. It could be the megarenters are still getting the same number, but instead of one guy getting 10 reservations it might be that 5 guys are getting 2 each

and whether its renters or regular owners getting the reservations, they are still gone within a few minutes and most owners dont get one

In my New Orleans example  the 35 reservations  I used to get might be  going to other owners, but  Im pretty sure most of them went to other mega renters (I know half of them did)

and since the change you mentioned, we have seen the development of another strategy using the wait list to control all the 3 bedrooms at west yellowstone all summer.


----------



## CO skier

uscav8r said:


> I could MAYBE support a cancel/rebook/upgrade restriction on ARP bookings, but not on SRP/ERP ones. The bookkeeping for this would be immensely easier to accomplish and sort out retail from resale as the credit pool never comes into play.
> 
> ARP bookings would easily be able to be tagged as upgrade eligible or not as well.
> 
> If megarenters still need the discounts to be profitable, they can fight for the discountable/upgradeable 10-month bookings, or be stuck with a lower return on ARP bookings. They can still try to rent ARP bookings, but it will be their choice to take that risk.
> 
> But let's look at the non-renter VIP. Does this hurt too much them as well? Or does this look like a reasonable compromise that is feasible (i.e., not complicated) to implement?
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Maybe we will know some of the answers by the end of April, or maybe the speculations will continue for years.


----------



## CO skier

ronparise said:


> I think thats exactly right; The goal is to increase the number of reservations made by one group of owners over another group of owners. and to increase  ratio of owners staying in units vs.  non owners.  but its not happening
> 
> You dont see an increase in owners vs renters, You see more availability at 13 months, but you dont know who is getting those reservations. It could be the megarenters are still getting the same number, but instead of one guy getting 10 reservations it might be that 5 guys are getting 2 each
> 
> and whether its renters or regular owners getting the reservations, they are still gone within a few minutes and most owners dont get one
> 
> In my New Orleans example  the 35 reservations  I used to get might be  going to other owners, but  Im pretty sure most of them went to other mega renters (I know half of them did)
> 
> and since the change you mentioned, we have seen the development of another strategy using the wait list to control all the 3 bedrooms at west yellowstone all summer.


For what it is worth, this is how Wyndham is reporting the results of the change, "Tom Kumma mentioned that hold times in the call center had increased due to explanation of the new grouped reservation rules. He reported that owners are reporting more availability and there has been an overall positive reception to grouped guideline change."


So it is not all upside, and I am sure the owners, including megarenters, who are impacted by the change do not have a positive reception to the Board of Directors taking the punch bowl away.

It does represent that anything is possible when it comes to rule modifications.

I am sure that most of the owners who snagged their Hawaii reservation for 2017, after trying unsuccessfully for years, have no idea why it was possible this year.  They just know things have changed for the better.


----------



## uscav8r

CO skier said:


> Maybe we will know some of the answers by the end of April, or maybe the speculations will continue for years.


Yes, this is all speculation. But at the very least, when an idea is floated, I want Wyndham to be be fully aware of the backlash to certain issues (assuming they troll these boards). Think of it as free market research. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## CO skier

uscav8r said:


> Ues, this is all speculation. But at the very least, when an idea is floated, I want Wyndham to be be fully aware of the backlash to certain issues (assuming they troll these boards). Think of it as free market research.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


The WorldMark Grouped Reservation change was an idea out of left field.


----------



## Sandi Bo

ronparise said:


> The bigger problem is it wont solve a thing.. in fact it may make things worse, ie more rentals.  If I cant get a discount my profit is cut substantially. what do you think my response will be?
> 
> If I was making 500 reservations a year at a $500 profit ($250000)  and now Im reduced to just $250.  Ill shift my focus to the really high value reservations and do twice as many as many of them.  Or Ill get out and 10 smaller boutique operations will take my place.



But don't you need WAY more points to do so?  

I would think any renter (mega or onesie-twosie) is already going after those really high value reservations (10 per account or as many points as they have available to use).


----------



## uscav8r

CO skier said:


> The WorldMark Grouped Reservation change was an idea out of left field.



But recall that how it was eventually implemented was different from how it was described when first announced. The "speculation" about how it would work as announced probably had no small part in influencing how it was implemented. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Jan M.

ronparise said:


> in the past, in Jan 1017, with 2 million 2018 points. I could make 10 mardi gras reservations for Feb 2018, Then in Dec 2017 I could cancel and rebook and generate 5 million cancelled points that had to be used by Dec 2018



Ron, am I understanding this correctly? Due to Wyndham's defective IT system and their failure to accurately track and account for all the points in the system that what had been 2 million points when you cancelled and rebooked came back as 5 millions points? Was this something that happened more than once on your account or a one time fluke?

Wake up and smell the coffee here people! The *only* real problem is Wyndham. They have failed to maintain an accurate accounting system and have also failed to enforce their own program rules. Epically failed!

Be very careful what you wish for, you just might get it. With the exception of not allowing VIP benefits on resale deeds, a*nything* else Wyndham does to restrict a certain group of owners will have far reaching consequences for you and every other owner. To quote Bella Wyn who consistently makes knowledgeable and astute posts, "Smoke and mirrors." If some of you think that you will actually end up benefitting from anything else they might do, then as others have said more politely than I am going to, YOU ARE SOME NEW KIND OF FOOL!

Just think about the situation that led up to some owners accounts being frozen. One of those owners just recently posted that points came back into his account that shouldn't have, again. What are the chances that this is an isolated incident and isn't still happening in other owners accounts who aren't frozen and under the microscope? In one more week it will be six months and Wyndham still can't fix the system.

What has Wyndham *ever* done that actually succeeded in making the situation better? Nothing or this thread wouldn't exist. And yet *you* are willing to *trust THEM* to make changes that will affect *every single owner. *Instead of coming up with things intended to hamstring other owners you should be demanding that Wyndham just do what they are entrusted to do in the first place, maintain an accurate accounting system and enforce the current program rules. If Wyndham can actually and finally do that, your situation would be improved as others have pointed out. *Trusting Wyndham with any more changes would be about as smart as giving your 8 year old your life savings, your credit card and the money from your paycheck with no ability to dictate, restrict or have any control of him or the money, then dropping him off at Toys r Us with no supervision and expecting him to only spend the $20 grandma gave him for his birthday. *


----------



## ronparise

Jan M. said:


> Ron, am I understanding this correctly? Due to Wyndham's defective IT system and their failure to accurately track and account for all the points in the system that what had been 2 million points when you cancelled and rebooked came back as 5 millions points? Was this something that happened more than once on your account or a one time fluke?
> 
> Wake up and smell the coffee here people! The *only* real problem is Wyndham. They have failed to maintain an accurate accounting system and have also failed to enforce their own program rules. Epically failed!
> 
> Be very careful what you wish for, you just might get it. With the exception of not allowing VIP benefits on resale deeds, a*nything* else Wyndham does to restrict a certain group of owners will have far reaching consequences for you and every other owner. To quote Bella Wyn who consistently makes knowledgeable and astute posts, "Smoke and mirrors." If some of you think that you will actually end up benefitting from anything else they might do, then as others have said more politely than I am going to, YOU ARE SOME NEW KIND OF FOOL!
> 
> Just think about the situation that led up to some owners accounts being frozen. One of those owners just recently posted that points came back into his account that shouldn't have, again. What are the chances that this is an isolated incident and isn't still happening in other owners accounts who aren't frozen and under the microscope? In one more week it will be six months and Wyndham still can't fix the system.
> 
> What has Wyndham *ever* done that actually succeeded in making the situation better? Nothing or this thread wouldn't exist. And yet *you* are willing to *trust THEM* to make changes that will affect *every single owner. *Instead of coming up with things intended to hamstring other owners you should be demanding that Wyndham just do what they are entrusted to do in the first place, maintain an accurate accounting system and enforce the current program rules. If Wyndham can actually and finally do that, your situation would be improved as others have pointed out. *Trusting Wyndham with any more changes would be about as smart as giving your 8 year old your life savings, your credit card and the money from your paycheck with no ability to dictate, restrict or have any control of him or the money, then dropping him off at Toys r Us with no supervision and expecting him to only spend the $20 grandma gave him for his birthday. *



no that should have been cancel and rebook and 1 million points come back  , enough for 5 reservations

The point I was trying to make is that 2 million points in a platinum account could be used to make 20  high value reservations.   Half of those rightfully should go to other owners. This is clearly an abuse of the system, or said another way. "...unfair advantage"


----------



## raygo123

uscav8r said:


> What are you talking about, "already have done a cancel/rebook and gotten a discount"??? I cancelled one thing (booked at full fare BTW) to book a totally different place.
> 
> When did I ever say I cancelled a discounted reservation?
> 
> The credit pool does not "automatically" give anyone a discount.
> 
> Credits are not fishes and loaves. You don't "make" something out of nothing (except for when the IT system doesn't work). The top line number of credits will always be same.
> 
> And how is this any different from using regular Use Year points? I can certainly cancel one of those and make a discounted booking elsewhere. If one is "unfair," logically the other is also unfair.
> 
> If anything, the more "unfair" situation involves regular Use Year and ARP to get out in front of everyone else, which are then cancelled and rebooked.  FWIW, I don't begrudge anyone with ARP their benefits.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


So you have never cancelled and re-booked?  The points In your credit pool were placed in the pool as regular use year points and none of those points came back at any level of discount?  Or did you receive a discount on all or most of the points in your credit pool that you used to book smugglers?

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk


----------



## uscav8r

raygo123 said:


> So you have never cancelled and re-booked?  The points In your credit pool were placed in the pool as regular use year points and none of those points came back at any level of discount?  Or did you receive a discount on all or most of the points in your credit pool that you used to book smugglers?
> 
> Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk



I stated very plainly the situation I just went through several posts back. 

The fact that I credit pooled at all did not mean I suddenly ended up with more points than I pooled. 

I don't know if you understand the credit pool or have ever used it. I have, and I'm not cheating anyone out of anything. If I credit pool 300k of RUY points, I have 300k in pool credits. It's as simple as that. 

I can certainly cancel/rebook something using RUY points. I get RUY points back and I can use those however I see fit. Again, it doesn't matter whether something was booked with RUY or PC, the outcome is  exactly the same. So to call out the credit pool for VIP denial is ludicrous. 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## uscav8r

Duplicate 




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## raygo123

ronparise said:


> The subject of this thread is
> VC told me with high confidence that Cancel/Rebook will be eliminated in April.
> 
> Lets assume  its true.  (I believe, by the way, that this is just one change of several, all designed to curtail commercial use and insure a level playing field (no unfair advantage) when it comes to making reservations
> 
> Now I want to  ask the questions; why are they doing this?  and will it work?.. I think not
> 
> and heres a situation that I think, makes my case
> 
> Worldmark owners can make reservations 13 months in advance of check in. and for red season must make 7 day reservation.   Mardi Gras Tuesday is Feb 13 next year so  today is the day to make a 7 day reservation that includes the weekend before Mardi Gras Tuesday  (very popular and a great rental)  and Mardi Gras Tuesday itself (also very popular)
> 
> In the past several years I have been able to make 35 of the available 63 reservations.  This upsets a lot of owners and I have learned it upsets Wyndham as well. Their thinking is that if they could do something about the megarenter problem (in this case me) availability would improve
> 
> Something happened (remember Wyndham and I "have satisfactorily resolved our differences") and I made no worldmark mardi gras reservations this year
> 
> So did availability improve?  No of course not. There are still only 63 available reservations. did demand go down? No there are still a lot more owners that want these reservations, among them some of my former competitors.   The reservations system opened this morning at 6am pacific time and within a minute or so, everything is gone.  So nothing changed
> 
> I think the same think will happen in Club Wyndham. As long as the approach is to make things more difficult or more expensive for the mega renters, they will adapt and continue to rent. And for every one that cant adapt and drops out, there will be others to take their place
> 
> 
> So Raygo, make all the suggestions you want to change the rules, It aint gonna make a bit of difference.


Yes Ron, the amount of availability will always be the same unless more resorts are added.  But, as you yourself has suggested the only way to increase availability is for wyndham to retire points, decrease demand.
That is exactly what stopping credit pool points from receiving the discount.  As you have shown, you can multiply your points with cancel and rebook, and by the credit pool.  This will happen to everyone.  Now, 1,000,000 points turns into 500,000 points booked, and 500,000 left over.  And you also as part of that first booking have 1,000,000 points worth of reservations.  Now you do it again. 500,000 worth of reservations for 250,000 points and now you take the remaining 250,000 and credit pool.  The following year you start with 1,250,000 points.  You do the same thing, book 1,000,000 points. This time you use your credit pool points plus 250,000 regular use year points.  You now have 750,000 regular use year points left.  You now make 750,000 points of bookings and cancel and rebook.  Then credit pool 375,000 points.

You have taken 1,000,000 points and have increased them to 1,375,000 points.

Have you taken away availability, of course not.  What you have done is decrease supply by a multiple.  An arithmetic progression.
Tajen to the 3rd year it starts to become geometric.  You have created your own supply.  Now, the credit pool points do not receive the discount.  You cancel and rebook the first time, and get 500,000 back.  You do it again with the remaining 500,000 points and get 250,000 points back.  You can credit pool now, or book the 250,000 points again.
The following year, those credit pool points have no multiple due to the fact that you must use them at full value.  So that the 125,000 points that would have been created do not exist.  Supply has been reduced by 50%.  More the following year.  
Under the current situation it's no wonder you credit pool all your points, why not for cancel and rebook you are still receiving VIP benifits on all your points!  I bet you don't credit pool those Marti GRA points. 

It's a red herring, you loose credit pool VIP, that will burst even your bubble.  

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk


----------



## uscav8r

Heck why not just get rid of VIP benefits for Regular Use Year points too. I mean, it's practically the same thing as getting rid of them for the credit pool. Instead of an extra two years of life, RUY have ARP. 

Better yet, raygo123, maybe Wyndham should kill all VIP benefits. That's what your logic amounts to, so why hold back?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## ronparise

raygo123 said:


> Yes Ron, the amount of availability will always be the same unless more resorts are added.  But, as you yourself has suggested the only way to increase availability is for wyndham to retire points, decrease demand.
> That is exactly what stopping credit pool points from receiving the discount.  As you have shown, you can multiply your points with cancel and rebook, and by the credit pool.  This will happen to everyone.  Now, 1,000,000 points turns into 500,000 points booked, and 500,000 left over.  And you also as part of that first booking have 1,000,000 points worth of reservations.  Now you do it again. 500,000 worth of reservations for 250,000 points and now you take the remaining 250,000 and credit pool.  The following year you start with 1,250,000 points.  You do the same thing, book 1,000,000 points. This time you use your credit pool points plus 250,000 regular use year points.  You now have 750,000 regular use year points left.  You now make 750,000 points of bookings and cancel and rebook.  Then credit pool 375,000 points.
> 
> You have taken 1,000,000 points and have increased them to 1,375,000 points.
> 
> Have you taken away availability, of course not.  What you have done is decrease supply by a multiple.  An arithmetic progression.
> Tajen to the 3rd year it starts to become geometric.  You have created your own supply.  Now, the credit pool points do not receive the discount.  You cancel and rebook the first time, and get 500,000 back.  You do it again with the remaining 500,000 points and get 250,000 points back.  You can credit pool now, or book the 250,000 points again.
> The following year, those credit pool points have no multiple due to the fact that you must use them at full value.  So that the 125,000 points that would have been created do not exist.  Supply has been reduced by 50%.  More the following year.
> Under the current situation it's no wonder you credit pool all your points, why not for cancel and rebook you are still receiving VIP benifits on all your points!  I bet you don't credit pool those Marti GRA points.
> 
> It's a red herring, you loose credit pool VIP, that will burst even your bubble.
> 
> Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk



what you are describing is cancel and rebook, not the credit pool.  and you have it wrong.. I cant create points and there is no increase in points, a million points always stays a million points.   If I use 1 million points to book and cancel and rebook over and over again until all the points are in discounted high value reservations.  and then I cancel all those reservations I still only have a million points... You cant grow points doing this... and the credit pool dosent manufacture points either.

The unfair advantage is that in doing this i can get high value reservations at a discount. or said another way, I can get twice the high value reservations Im entitled to.     Discounts are supposed to be available only for the junk.


----------



## raygo123

uscav8r said:


> I stated very plainly the situation I just went through several posts back.
> 
> The fact that I credit pooled at all did not mean I suddenly ended up with more points than I pooled.
> 
> I don't know if you understand the credit pool or have ever used it. I have, and I'm not cheating anyone out of anything. If I credit pool 300k of RUY points, I have 300k in pool credits. It's as simple as that.
> 
> I can certainly cancel/rebook something using RUY points. I get RUY points back and I can use those however I see fit. Again, it doesn't matter whether something was booked with RUY or PC, the outcome is  exactly the same. So to call out the credit pool for VIP denial is ludicrous.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Oh, I understand it, it seems you're the one that doesn't.  If you started with 1,000,000 points and only did one reservation for 250,000 points, and cancelled and re-booked it, you end up with an additional 125,000 points.  So you credit pool them.  Now here comes smugglers.  You ,now, can book a 250,000 point reservation with that 125,000 points.  You have just reduced the supply.  And have increased your point value to 1,250,000 points.  

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk


----------



## raygo123

ronparise said:


> what you are describing is cancel and rebook, not the credit pool.  and you have it wrong.. I cant create points and there is no increase in points, a million points always stays a million points.   If I use 1 million points to book and cancel and rebook over and over again until all the points are in discounted high value reservations.  and then I cancel all those reservations I still only have a million points... You cant grow points doing this... and the credit pool dosent manufacture points either.
> 
> The unfair advantage is that in doing this i can get high value reservations at a discount. or said another way, I can get twice the high value reservations Im entitled to.     Discounts are supposed to be available only for the junk.


You know as well as I do that it may not create points, but gives you the ability to use them more that once or twice.  You say yourself you can turn 1,000,000 points into 5 or 10 reservations worth say 20,000,000 points.  If not creating point, certainly creating reservations and reducing supply.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk


----------



## ronparise

Raygo, My strategy was not dependent on VIP or the discounts that come with it,  so no..you arent gonna burst my bubble by restricting VIP benefits. 

All I need is a source for cheap points. So whats gonna take me out is Ovation. Have you noticed there are  only two pages of Wyndham listings on ebay and most of them are either fixed weeks or Worldmark


----------



## Jan M.

raygo123 said:


> It's a red herring, you loose credit pool VIP, that will burst even your bubble.



*Do you understand that what you are suggesting is just not going to happen? Forget about justifying it with the math or any other arguments. They are a pointless waste of time and you delude yourself by engaging in them because they are irrelevant.*

Wyndham is in the business of selling. VIP benefits are the carrot to get people to buy and keep buying more from them. If the VIP benefits become so restricted that their worth is drastically diminished then there is no incentive for people like me and many others, who were in many people's opinion dumb or uninformed enough to buy developer points, to buy from Wyndham. Do you know of *any* company that knowingly and deliberately puts themselves in a position of making it significantly harder to sell their product? A product that costs them no small amount of money to hold in inventory? With a board of directors and stockholders to whom they are accountable?

Do you remember reading in the other posts how many lawsuits Wyndham is currently involved in and how that compares to other timeshare companies? And that doesn't include people like Ron who are or were in negotiations with them that didn't reach the lawsuit stage. Do you seriously think even for a minute that if Wyndham starts placing too many restrictions and further reduces the VIP benefits that the vast majority of VIP owners won't join a lawsuit? And furthermore do you not understand that Wyndham is very well aware of that? The person whose job title is general counsel is one of their executives.


----------



## uscav8r

raygo123 said:


> Oh, I understand it, it seems you're the one that doesn't.  ... And have increased your point value to 1,250,000 points.
> 
> Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk





raygo123 said:


> You know as well as I do that it may not create points, ...
> 
> Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk


You chide me for not understanding, and yet the last phrase of your previous post and the first sentence of the next are completely CONTRADICTORY. 

Either VIPs are manufacturing points/credits or they are not. You cannot argue it both ways. 

The only thing I don't understand is your supposed logic and your obsession with the credit pool. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## uscav8r

raygo123 said:


> Oh, I understand it, it seems you're the one that doesn't.  If you started with 1,000,000 points and only did one reservation for 250,000 points, and cancelled and re-booked it, you end up with an additional 125,000 points.  So you credit pool them.  Now here comes smugglers.  You ,now, can book a 250,000 point reservation with that 125,000 points.  You have just reduced the supply.  And have increased your point value to 1,250,000 points.
> 
> Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk



And another thing, soapbox guy, I did not cancel rebook. I cancelled (a fully booked resort no less) and used those points/credits elsewhere (a wide open resort), independent of the booking I cancelled. My cancellation did not get me any extra points than what I booked for. I then had available credits to then book what was legitimately offer d at a discount. This is no different than if I never made the original booking. 

Chew on that, cuz you've been missing out on it for the entire day. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## outofthewoodwork

I have been here a long time and do a lot of reading and very little posting but...I believe the problem is with the system. Not the IT system (while there is sure to be problems there), not the VIP system, not the cancel and rebook system or _______________ system.  The problem is with the timeshare point system. The flexibility of the point system that Wyndham (originally Fairfield) developed was successful because of the flexibility that was given for the owner to reserve different weeks regardless of season and regardless of location.  It is the reason that most of us bought into the system and why we like the system.  However, the flexibility is exactly what leads to the ability of people to use the system to meet their needs.  For some people it is to visit various locations with their families and for some the flexibility allows them to amass large number of points and rent them for a profit.

I really do not think you can have it both ways.  You can't have your flexibility to use as you see fit and limit the flexibility for other groups.  The system is setup for the flexibility and so that is what it will be. So I agree with Ron, it doesn't matter what Wyndham does because someone will discover a way to use it to accomplish their purpose, whatever that may be.  It is just the nature of the beast (the system.)  

BTW I am just a resale owner, use my points for my family, not frozen and not VIP.  I have been an owner since the FF days and have been an avid reader of the old Yahoo group all the way until now with TUG.  I have seen many changes made by Wyndham that have affected me in different ways and no doubt this will affect me as well.  However, no doubt I will adapt as I have in the past just as the megarenter will as well. 

JMHO


----------



## raygo123

uscav8r said:


> You chide me for not understanding, and yet the last phrase of your previous post and the first sentence of the next are completely CONTRADICTORY.
> 
> Either VIPs are manufacturing points/credits or they are not. You cannot argue it both ways.
> 
> The only thing I don't understand is your supposed logic and your obsession with the credit pool.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Did you increase your point value?  Yes. Did you create points? No. You snipped what you needed to make a point, by doing that you took supply out of the system.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk


----------



## raygo123

uscav8r said:


> And another thing, soapbox guy, I did not cancel rebook. I cancelled (a fully booked resort no less) and used those points/credits elsewhere (a wide open resort), independent of the booking I cancelled. My cancellation did not get me any extra points than what I booked for. I then had available credits to then book what was legitimately offer d at a discount. This is no different than if I never made the original booking.
> 
> Chew on that, cuz you've been missing out on it for the entire day.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


I apologise, I did not realize that you don't cancel and rebook.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk


----------



## paxsarah

raygo123 said:


> by doing that you took supply out of the system.



Every time someone books a reservation they take supply out of the system.


----------



## uscav8r

raygo123 said:


> I apologise, I did not realize that you don't cancel and rebook.
> 
> Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk


Accepted, but that is the issue with your idea to kill VIP benefits for pooled credits. You seem to think the pool is used exclusively to support cancel/rebook and it is not. The pool is only a way to extend the life of credits at the cost of giving up ARP and a nominal fee. Nothing more, nothing less. That is why I will fight tooth-and-nail against any notion similar to yours; there is no basis for such a restriction. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## CO skier

uscav8r said:


> Accepted, but that is the issue with your idea to kill VIP benefits for pooled credits. You seem to think the pool is used exclusively to support cancel/rebook and it is not. The pool is only a way to extend the life of credits at the cost of giving up ARP and a nominal fee. Nothing more, nothing less. That is why I will fight tooth-and-nail against any notion similar to yours; there is no basis for such a restriction.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


The credit pool is nothing more than an internal exchange program just like RCI, except there is no exchange fee, just the credit pool deposit fee.

Do VIP benefits transfer along with RCI deposits?

No?  There is no reason other than the largesse of Wyndham that VIP benefits transfer with credit pool points, and that largesse may end at any time.  That would be something out of left field.


----------



## ronparise

CO skier said:


> The credit pool is nothing more than an internal exchange program just like RCI, except there is no exchange fee, just the credit pool deposit fee.
> 
> Do VIP benefits transfer along with RCI deposits?
> 
> No?  There is no reason other than the largesse of Wyndham that VIP benefits transfer with credit pool points, and that largesse may end at any time.  That would be something out of left field.



There is a difference. When I deposit my points to RCI I am exchanging for a reservation in another timeshare system. Its not Wyndham telling me I cant have a discount, its that other system

When I deposit into the credit pool Im staying within the same system and I think its reasonable that my benefits remain intact, Wyndham can of course take benefits from VIP owners whenever they care to but I dont think they will. There are too many other ways to correct  their mistakes and our abuses that caused all the excess points in some of our accounts, and to limit commercial renting without taking benefits away. I think that they are likely to  do something with cancel and rebook, and perhaps stop extending VIP benefits to points purchased on the secondary market


----------



## CO skier

ronparise said:


> When I deposit my points to RCI I am exchanging for a reservation in another timeshare system. Its not Wyndham telling me I cant have a discount, its that other system
> 
> When I deposit into the credit pool Im staying within the same system and I think its reasonable that my benefits remain intact, Wyndham can of course take benefits from VIP owners whenever they care to but I dont think they will.


What about the in-between system -- Club Pass?  That is Wyndham telling VIP owners their benefits do not transfer to another Wyndham system.

I agree, when it comes to the Club Wyndham credit pool, that it is unlikely Wyndham would take benefits from VIP owners, but Wyndham does hold all the cards when it comes to any VIP benefits, and to Raygo's point, the credit pool is no exception, because it is not a deeded right.

Who knows what might play out of left field?


----------



## OutSkiing

ronparise said:


> Now let me tell you another strategy using the credit pool.
> 
> 1)Buy contracts worth 20 million points for $40000
> 2) put all 3 years points into the credit pool
> 3) make reservations with all 60 million points and rent them out, (at an average of 100000 points each and $600 rent thats $360000)
> 4) pay mf for a year (about $120000)
> 5) lather/ rinse/ repeat
> 
> $360000 income less $40000 purchase price less $120000 mf = $200000. is that profit?  or might you  call it an unfair advantage?


I have never rented out reservations but I do try to follow the process. I cannot understand the value of burning through all 3 years of credit pooled points to generate revenue in the first year. In your example above wouldn't you still owe $120000 of maintenance fees in each of the next two years? In those future years, the only available revenue from those points would be from 20 million points pooled from the leading year which using the above numbers would be break even.  There would always be a 2 year 'liability' of maintenance fees owed.

Bob


----------



## Joe33426

OutSkiing said:


> I have never rented out reservations but I do try to follow the process. I cannot understand the value of burning through all 3 years of credit pooled points to generate revenue in the first year. In your example above wouldn't you still owe $120000 of maintenance fees in each of the next two years? In those future years, the only available revenue from those points would be from 20 million points pooled from the leading year which using the above numbers would be break even.  *There would always be a 2 year 'liability' of maintenance fees owed.*
> 
> Bob



Unless the stripped contracts are sold.   But I'm not sure if there is a market for stripped contacts.  The other alternative I see is just keep buying more and more contracts and keep pooling and pooling.  That sounds like a ponzi scheme that will eventually collapse under the crushing debt of maintenance fees.  Because in the scenario provided there really isn't a $200,000 profit if the unpaid fees for year 2 and 3 are considered.  If maintenance fees are $120,000 per year then the loss is $40,000.


----------



## uscav8r

CO skier said:


> The credit pool is nothing more than an internal exchange program just like RCI, except there is no exchange fee, just the credit pool deposit fee.
> 
> Do VIP benefits transfer along with RCI deposits?
> 
> No?  There is no reason other than the largesse of Wyndham that VIP benefits transfer with credit pool points, and that largesse may end at any time.  That would be something out of left field.


I concur with what Ron said but will add this. The entire Club Wyndham Plus points setup is an "internal exchange program." Technically speaking the credit pool is a subset of CWP. They spend the same. They use housekeeping credits the same. They get VIP discounts the same. Cancelled bookings are treated the same. 

If one internal program is unfit for VIP benefits because of cancel/rebook, then the other is as well. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Joe33426

outofthewoodwork said:


> I have been here a long time and do a lot of reading and very little posting but...I believe the problem is with the system. Not the IT system (while there is sure to be problems there), not the VIP system, not the cancel and rebook system or _______________ system.  The problem is with the timeshare point system. The flexibility of the point system that Wyndham (originally Fairfield) developed was successful because of the flexibility that was given for the owner to reserve different weeks regardless of season and regardless of location.  It is the reason that most of us bought into the system and why we like the system.  However, the flexibility is exactly what leads to the ability of people to use the system to meet their needs.  For some people it is to visit various locations with their families and for some the flexibility allows them to amass large number of points and rent them for a profit.



I think you've hit the nail on the head.  I think some of the IT issues with the reservation system is due to the complexity of the Wyndham Points system.  There a lot going on with use years, cancelled points, pooling, ARP, and perhaps the programmers really just don't have a full understanding of all the rules. 

Just recently I've been contemplating a Marriott purchase and have been doing a little research.  One thing I came across is that I think owners have separate accounts for developer purchases versus resale contracts in some instances.    I was thinking what a simple solution for Wyndham.  From a computing standpoint, I could see that segregating points in the same account would be tough with all the rules, but why not just set up separate accounts for accounts that are eligible for VIP benefits and those contracts that are not.  . I'm probably missing something.  At first thought, I'm thinking about the minimum program fee, but there are probably other things too.


----------



## wjappraise

Joe33426 said:


> Unless the stripped contracts are sold.   But I'm not sure if there is a market for stripped contacts.  The other alternative I see is just keep buying more and more contracts and keep pooling and pooling.  That sounds like a ponzi scheme that will eventually collapse under the crushing debt of maintenance fees.  Because in the scenario provided there really isn't a $200,000 profit if the unpaid fees for year 2 and 3 are considered.  If maintenance fees are $120,000 per year then the loss is $40,000.



You nailed it!   The process leads, not to diminished inventory that raygo is claiming, but to current deficit spending.  The only way out would be to sell the stripped contracts.  And if the buyer was Wyndham, and they resold the contracts with points, BOOM, 40 million points out of thin air. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Ron2

Joe33426 said:


> I think you've hit the nail on the head.  I think some of the IT issues with the reservation system is due to the complexity of the Wyndham Points system.  There a lot going on with use years, cancelled points, pooling, ARP, and perhaps the programmers really just don't have a full understanding of all the rules.
> 
> Just recently I've been contemplating a Marriott purchase and have been doing a little research.  One thing I came across is that I think owners have separate accounts for developer purchases versus resale contracts in some instances.    I was thinking what a simple solution for Wyndham.  From a computing standpoint, I could see that segregating points in the same account would be tough with all the rules, but why not just set up separate accounts for accounts that are eligible for VIP benefits and those contracts that are not.  . I'm probably missing something.  At first thought, I'm thinking about the minimum program fee, but there are probably other things too.



 I've often wondered why Wyndham doesn't put resale contracts into a different account than retail purchased contracts. It would solve many of the problems being discussed here.


----------



## uscav8r

wjappraise said:


> You nailed it!   The process leads, not to diminished inventory that raygo is claiming, but to current deficit spending.  The only way out would be to sell the stripped contracts.  And if the buyer was Wyndham, and they resold the contracts with points, BOOM, 40 million points out of thin air.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk



The points reload is tied to the contract. If Wyndham reloaded stripped contracts they picked up through Ovation, that would be illegal. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Sandi Bo

wjappraise said:


> You nailed it!   The process leads, not to diminished inventory that raygo is claiming, but to current deficit spending.  The only way out would be to sell the stripped contracts.  And if the buyer was Wyndham, and they resold the contracts with points, BOOM, 40 million points out of thin air.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk



And wouldn't you think that would put them out of compliance with the trust (and maybe why they are not so happy about this). Prior to Ovations these contracts may have been sold to another party.  But in that case someone was on the hook for paying maintenance.  If Wyndham is reselling stripped contracts (and we don't know that) - double shame on them.

Another question I have - related to Ovations -- the Ovations program will take back contracts for developer purchased points and offer the relinquishing owner 2 years of use (2 years worth of points) - a parting bonus if you will.  If Wyndham is reselling those contracts prior to 2 years after they are relinquished -- aren't they in essence manufacturing even more points as well?

Update (I see Chris's comments about this post) -- None of this should be happening (reselling of the Ovations contracts if they are stripped).


----------



## ronparise

CO skier said:


> What about the in-between system -- Club Pass?  That is Wyndham telling VIP owners their benefits do not transfer to another Wyndham system.
> 
> I agree, when it comes to the Club Wyndham credit pool, that it is unlikely Wyndham would take benefits from VIP owners, but Wyndham does hold all the cards when it comes to any VIP benefits, and to Raygo's point, the credit pool is no exception, because it is not a deeded right.
> 
> Who knows what might play out of left field?




Wyndham and worldmark are two different timeshare systems  just like Wyndham and Marriott or Worldmark and Vacation Village.  My Wyndham ownership use rights are held by a trust, and my points are symbolic of that ownership.    My worldmark credits come from somewhere else. The only thing they have in common is the same manager and developer


Regarding deeded rights the Fairfield Trust, which is the Wyndham points system that we call Cub Wyndham Plus is itself, not a deeded right, so its not only VIP benefits, that can be changed at any time, its everything even down to the basic of basic benefits we get as a club member, the ability to use the points we have that are symbolic of our ownership at one resort to make a reservation at another


----------



## ronparise

OutSkiing said:


> I have never rented out reservations but I do try to follow the process. I cannot understand the value of burning through all 3 years of credit pooled points to generate revenue in the first year. In your example above wouldn't you still owe $120000 of maintenance fees in each of the next two years? In those future years, the only available revenue from those points would be from 20 million points pooled from the leading year which using the above numbers would be break even.  There would always be a 2 year 'liability' of maintenance fees owed.
> 
> Bob




I think you understand just fine.   

but what if I chose not to be liable for those 2 years of fees and just walked away..  

as my daddy used to say, if I owe the bank a million dollars the bank has a problem, not me


----------



## ronparise

Joe33426 said:


> Unless the stripped contracts are sold.   But I'm not sure if there is a market for stripped contacts.  The other alternative I see is just keep buying more and more contracts and keep pooling and pooling.  That sounds like a ponzi scheme that will eventually collapse under the crushing debt of maintenance fees.  Because in the scenario provided there really isn't a $200,000 profit if the unpaid fees for year 2 and 3 are considered.  If maintenance fees are $120,000 per year then the loss is $40,000.




exactly right, its not profit we are talking about.. its cash flow. Real Estate investors know what Im talking about.  They work for a positive cash flow but then apply depreciation and declare a loss to the IRS.   as long as they hold the property everything works and even if they sell, as long as they re invest (1031 exchange) they can delay paying taxes.  But if they sell out and take the money the IRS is there looking to recapture the depreciation

And you are right there is no market for stripped contracts.  the only way to make this work is to keep growing. I was buying 20 million points a year and turning most of the the points over to points managers. (I kept enough to be the go to guy for New Orleans)  The points managers paid me a little (very little) more than my maintenance fees.(about .30 cents per 1000 points)  So my cash flow was a lot on a little and a little on a lot and as you suggest very little profit.

folks asked me what was my exit plan; and my answer was...Im 70 years old...Im gonna die and it will be Wyndhams problem... It didnt work out quite like that (Im not dead yet) Wyndham chose not to wait and they are  addressing  the problem now  Actually Aug 23 2016 is when they decided to start the process


----------



## ronparise

Joe33426 said:


> I think you've hit the nail on the head.  I think some of the IT issues with the reservation system is due to the complexity of the Wyndham Points system.  There a lot going on with use years, cancelled points, pooling, ARP, and perhaps the programmers really just don't have a full understanding of all the rules.
> 
> Just recently I've been contemplating a Marriott purchase and have been doing a little research.  One thing I came across is that I think owners have separate accounts for developer purchases versus resale contracts in some instances.    I was thinking what a simple solution for Wyndham.  From a computing standpoint, I could see that segregating points in the same account would be tough with all the rules, but why not just set up separate accounts for accounts that are eligible for VIP benefits and those contracts that are not.  . I'm probably missing something.  At first thought, I'm thinking about the minimum program fee, but there are probably other things too.


that would work just fine and they know how to do it.  at least they are doing it with Worldmark  There they keep separate accountings in the same account


----------



## ronparise

wjappraise said:


> You nailed it!   The process leads, not to diminished inventory that raygo is claiming, but to current deficit spending.  The only way out would be to sell the stripped contracts.  And if the buyer was Wyndham, and they resold the contracts with points, BOOM, 40 million points out of thin air.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk




the only reason I brought up this use (abuse, some would say) of the credit pool is to say that Raygo is onto something when he suggests that changes might be coming to the credit pool. I dont think they will strip VIP benefits from credit pooled points, but they may put limits on the number of points than can be borrowed from the pool. ie limit its use to the way its presented in the book


----------



## ronparise

Sandi Bo said:


> And wouldn't you think that would put them out of compliance with the trust (and maybe why they are not so happy about this). Prior to Ovations these contracts may have been sold to another party.  But in that case someone was on the hook for paying maintenance.  If Wyndham is reselling stripped contracts (and we don't know that) - double shame on them.
> 
> Another question I have - related to Ovations -- the Ovations program will take back contracts for developer purchased points and offer the relinquishing owner 2 years of use (2 years worth of points) - a parting bonus if you will.  If Wyndham is reselling those contracts prior to 2 years after they are relinquished -- aren't they in essence manufacturing even more points as well?
> 
> Update (I see Chris's comments about this post) -- None of this should be happening (reselling of the Ovations contracts if they are stripped).




even if Wyndham is taking back contracts stripped of points through Ovation, and even if they were to pay for stripped contracts, And if they were to hold these contracts and pay the maintenance fees for the 2 or 3 years it would take for the contracts to become whole again ....its a good deal for Wyndham

lets use some hypothetical numbers..   Wyndhams target for cost of goods sold is about 16% (then 60% marketing and 24% profit) so take a condo that is allocated 250000 points per week (13,000,000 points per year) and they are selling points for lets say $180/1000.  That means that they are bringing in over 2 million dollars for that condo...  So they  can pay $300000 and stay within their 16% goal

so what if they were to buy back inventory instead of developing it and lets say they want to stay within that 16% cost of goods sold number.. .   

And the  question is: How much can they pay for  stripped contracts?  

Assume an average maintenance fee rate of $ 6/1000.
Pay the fees on a million points for 3 years  $18000 
Pay the stripper $10000 per 1000 stripped points

total cost $28000

Sell the million points for $180000

Cost of goods sold is under 16%  and everyone is happy


----------



## DeeDibble

Jan M. said:


> *Do you understand that what you are suggesting is just not going to happen? Forget about justifying it with the math or any other arguments. They are a pointless waste of time and you delude yourself by engaging in them because they are irrelevant.*
> 
> Wyndham is in the business of selling. VIP benefits are the carrot to get people to buy and keep buying more from them. If the VIP benefits become so restricted that their worth is drastically diminished then there is no incentive for people like me and many others, who were in many people's opinion dumb or uninformed enough to buy developer points, to buy from Wyndham. Do you know of *any* company that knowingly and deliberately puts themselves in a position of making it significantly harder to sell their product? A product that costs them no small amount of money to hold in inventory? With a board of directors and stockholders to whom they are accountable?
> 
> Do you remember reading in the other posts how many lawsuits Wyndham is currently involved in and how that compares to other timeshare companies? And that doesn't include people like Ron who are or were in negotiations with them that didn't reach the lawsuit stage. Do you seriously think even for a minute that if Wyndham starts placing too many restrictions and further reduces the VIP benefits that the vast majority of VIP owners won't join a lawsuit? And furthermore do you not understand that Wyndham is very well aware of that? The person whose job title is general counsel is one of their executives.


I completely agree with you on this one....we are in Florida right now and I have been talking to other owners about the rumored Waitlist replacing Cancel/Rebook.  Everyone was OUTRAGED by the idea because every single person has " bought up" because the sales pitch included the ability to cancel and rebook.   I think Wyndham knows a lot of people could potentially "walk" and quit paying their maintenance fees of which would hinder the individual resorts.  I talk to Wyndam Vacation Counselors all the time.  I have asked several of them about this and not one of them heard about it.  I find it interesting that there is only one of them has spoke about it. I also find it interesting that the person that originated this discussion has not responded to any of the comments.  Could that person be an agitator?  Could that person be a Wyndham "spy" looking for reaction for Wyndham?  When April comes: we will see


----------



## ronparise

DeeDibble said:


> I completely agree with you on this one....we are in Florida right now and I have been talking to other owners about the rumored Waitlist replacing Cancel/Rebook.  Everyone was OUTRAGED by the idea because every single person has " bought up" because the sales pitch included the ability to cancel and rebook.   I think Wyndham knows a lot of people could potentially "walk" and quit paying their maintenance fees of which would hinder the individual resorts.  I talk to Wyndam Vacation Counselors all the time.  I have asked several of them about this and not one of them heard about it.  I find it interesting that there is only one of them has spoke about it. I also find it interesting that the person that originated this discussion has not responded to any of the comments.  Could that person be an agitator?  Could that person be a Wyndham "spy" looking for reaction for Wyndham?  When April comes: we will see




I was at the last annual meeting and saw one angry owner upset that recently when he cancelled  reservations they didnt come back to available inventory.  Like the folks you are talking to he believed he was entitled to a discount on every one of his wyndham vacations...

Sorry that just aint true. The discounts are intended for the stuff left over at 60 days, not the popular reservations made months and months before. That they were taught how to take advantage of a loophole by a salesman to create their own inventory at 60 days is not important. 

Wyndham will measure the good that they think will come by removing a big chunk of megarenter profits against the complaints of a few owners that use the cancel and rebook trick for their own vacations and then they will do what they think they have to do.


----------



## Ty1on

uscav8r said:


> Accepted, but that is the issue with your idea to kill VIP benefits for pooled credits. You seem to think the pool is used exclusively to support cancel/rebook and it is not. The pool is only a way to extend the life of credits at the cost of giving up ARP and a nominal fee. Nothing more, nothing less. That is why I will fight tooth-and-nail against any notion similar to yours; there is no basis for such a restriction.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk



And not to pile on Ray, but small owners like me benefit from pooling far more than your Ron Parises of the world.  I couldn't book decent reservations without pooling to get enough points.


----------



## uscav8r

Sandi Bo said:


> And wouldn't you think that would put them out of compliance with the trust (and maybe why they are not so happy about this). Prior to Ovations these contracts may have been sold to another party.  But in that case someone was on the hook for paying maintenance.  If Wyndham is reselling stripped contracts (and we don't know that) - double shame on them.
> 
> Another question I have - related to Ovations -- the Ovations program will take back contracts for developer purchased points and offer the relinquishing owner 2 years of use (2 years worth of points) - a parting bonus if you will.  If Wyndham is reselling those contracts prior to 2 years after they are relinquished -- aren't they in essence manufacturing even more points as well?
> 
> Update (I see Chris's comments about this post) -- None of this should be happening (reselling of the Ovations contracts if they are stripped).


Wyndham probably has enough unsold points that have never been sold that they could absorb the stripped contracts, or to give a retail purchaser 2 years of account usage for Ovation, but they need to properly account for the maintenance fee liabilities. It would seem that they also would not want to do both at the same time. So the easy fix is to reject any stripped contracts from being accept d into Ovation, which it appears Wyndham has done. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## raygo123

Ty1on said:


> And not to pile on Ray, but small owners like me benefit from pooling far more than your Ron Parises of the world.  I couldn't book decent reservations without pooling to get enough points.


I have no idea why you feel I want to do away with the credit pool.  I have 98,000 points in the pool as well.  We had to cancel a vacation and credit pooled the points.  I understand that people have small contracts and combine 2 yrs for a better vacation.  Or even did a cancel and rebook and deposited into the credit pool, then combined with their other points for a nice vacation.  One rule change was proposed, to limit the discount on those points, that's it.  It only affected VIP owners.  And then only those looking for a discount when using credit pool points.it was an example of what could be done.  And as far as I'm concerned, I don't want to see it either.  But it it would be effective coupled with a ban on  resale points having VIP benifits.  A theory.  

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk


----------



## CO skier

Ty1on said:


> And not to pile on Ray, but small owners like me benefit from pooling far more than your Ron Parises of the world.  I couldn't book decent reservations without pooling to get enough points.



I do not think Raygo is suggesting eliminating the Credit Pool – just limiting VIP benefits to the Regular Use Year in the same way Advance Reservation Priority is limited.


If cancel/rebook is eliminated (somehow) and Credit Pool points do not carry VIP benefits, that would be a one-two punch for large megarenters such as WinPoint VIP.

Layer on restricting VIP benefits to Developer purchased points, and much of the megarenter business is curtailed; owners take their families on vacation using the availability.

These changes are less radical than the Use Year Alignment and less onerous on the entire membership than the elimination of owner-to-owner points transfers.

VIPs still have all their benefits, they just have to use the qualifying points in the Regular Use Year.

Rentals will still happen, but more owners and fewer renters are staying in Wyndham units. That seems about the fairest compromise, if as it seems, Wyndham is targeting megarenters.


----------



## paxsarah

CO skier said:


> Do VIP benefits transfer along with RCI deposits?



This is a tangent to the main discussion, but yes, for Gold and Platinum. According the Wyndham website, VIPs get an upgrade to the next larger unit size on all value and quiet demand deposits. I don't know the details because I'm not VIP, but I know I've seen owners mention it on these forums. I believe it requires calling in to a VC and sometimes it takes more than one attempt to find a VC that knows the process.


----------



## bnoble

ronparise said:


> even if Wyndham is taking back contracts stripped of points through Ovation, and even if they were to pay for stripped contracts, And if they were to hold these contracts and pay the maintenance fees for the 2 or 3 years it would take for the contracts to become whole again ....its a good deal for Wyndham


Not quite, because they tie up that capital for two years. Yes, the cost of goods is low, but the payoff horizon is much longer than e.g WAAM.


----------



## ronparise

bnoble said:


> Not quite, because they tie up that capital for two years. Yes, the cost of goods is low, but the payoff horizon is much longer than e.g WAAM.


No question the "just in time" development like at Desert Blue and Clearwater is better for them. And ovation that gets them inventory for nothing is good too

My point is that even if some slick dealer sneaks a stripped contract back to them it's not a disaster. They still do ok


----------



## bnoble

Sure. Not a disaster, but not something they'd do on purpose. At least, not anymore. ;-)


----------



## Jan M.

Every person I see posting who wants to see the VIP benefits reduced is not a VIP owner. Envy, greed, haters gotta hate, wanting something you aren't willing to pay for? Yes, yes and yes. You want to take, STEAL, something from VIP owners to enrich yourselves. You can deny it all you want or ply your biased arguments to justify your way of thinking but in the end you are still a thief.

Another thing that makes your motives seem suspect is, as several other owners posted, they manage to get the reservations they want using their ARP for the big vacations and checking to see what is available within the last 60 days for the more last minute/impromptu stays. And again as several people pointed out the only way to use your ARP is to call in and do them one at a time, competing with every other owner on the line with every VC for reservations at every single resort in the system.
*
I believe that you have been pursuing your line of thinking because you truly don't realize how much you will actually benefit if Wyndham would just do what they were supposed to do from day one.*

Now if you want to see VIP benefits given only on developer points, not on resale, just like it has always said in the directory, then there isn't a single one of us VIP owners who can argue with that. Even those who will suffer and won't be happy about it know they can't argue when it happens. This has always been Wyndham's responsibility to enforce, which they have not done, and is the one of two things you can completely and legitimately claim is unfair and hurts the other owners. This is how the mega renters prospered and grew and would be a death blow to all but a very, very few who might actually own enough developer bought points to be a mega renter.

The second of the two things you can completely and legitimately claim is actually three things that I'm lumping into one issue because as a result of them when added up it is no exaggeration to say that, as Ron helped us figure out, there was probably in excess of a BILLION points in just one year used to make reservations that we all could have had. No one will argue if you want to see Wyndham do due diligence on all contracts that are resold to prevent stripping, to maintain an accurate accounting system for all points, and to get their IT issues fixed so there are no glitches or loopholes in the system putting points in owners account that they don't own. There is no question that this has hurt all of the rest us except the owners who benefitted from it. Again Wyndham's responsibility which they did not fulfill.

So please, instead of making yourself look very bad and turning this into a class warfare issue, quit suggesting Wyndham make changes that aren't going to do you or anybody else one bit of good in the end as Ron and others who do know what they are talking about have stated repeatedly. Instead get on board with DEMANDING that Wyndham do what they were entrusted to do from the start which is exactly what you and every other owner is entitled to and would actually benefit you and the vast majority of other owners too.


----------



## am1

OutSkiing said:


> I have never rented out reservations but I do try to follow the process. I cannot understand the value of burning through all 3 years of credit pooled points to generate revenue in the first year. In your example above wouldn't you still owe $120000 of maintenance fees in each of the next two years? In those future years, the only available revenue from those points would be from 20 million points pooled from the leading year which using the above numbers would be break even.  There would always be a 2 year 'liability' of maintenance fees owed.
> 
> Bob



I guess until there is until there is not.  I financed my purchases by transferring the 3 years worth of points to other owners who at the time were paying more then mfs. 

In this situation my guess is that is part of how both parties were able to walk away happy or whatever it is being called.


----------



## am1

Allowing resale points to get VIP benefits after enough retail is purchased, the credit pool and being able to rent reservations are very good sales tools for Wyndham.  Getting rid of them would cost Wyndham more then they would save.  What draws money is what matters.


----------



## raygo123

Jan M. said:


> Every person I see posting who wants to see the VIP benefits reduced is not a VIP owner. Envy, greed, haters gotta hate, wanting something you aren't willing to pay for? Yes, yes and yes. You want to take, STEAL, something from VIP owners to enrich yourselves. Isn't that what the Communists did? You can deny it all you want or ply your biased arguments to justify your way of thinking but in the end you are still a thief.
> 
> Another thing that makes your motives seem suspect is, as several other owners posted, they manage to get the reservations they want using their ARP for the big vacations and checking to see what is available within the last 60 days for the more last minute/impromptu stays. And again as several people pointed out the only way to use your ARP is to call in and do them one at a time, competing with every other owner on the line with every VC for reservations at every single resort in the system.
> *
> I believe that you have been pursuing your line of thinking because you truly don't realize how much you will actually benefit if Wyndham would just do what they were supposed to do from day one.*
> 
> Now if you want to see VIP benefits given only on developer points, not on resale, just like it has always said in the directory, then there isn't a single one of us VIP owners who can argue with that. Even those who will suffer and won't be happy about it know they can't argue when it happens. This has always been Wyndham's responsibility to enforce, which they have not done, and is the one of two things you can completely and legitimately claim is unfair and hurts the other owners. This is how the mega renters prospered and grew and would be a death blow to all but a very, very few who might actually own enough developer bought points to be a mega renter.
> 
> The second of the two things you can completely and legitimately claim is actually three things that I'm lumping into one issue because as a result of them when added up it is no exaggeration to say that, as Ron helped us figure out, there was probably in excess of a BILLION points in just one year used to make reservations that we all could have had. No one will argue if you want to see Wyndham do due diligence on all contracts that are resold to prevent stripping, to maintain an accurate accounting system for all points, and to get their IT issues fixed so there are no glitches or loopholes in the system putting points in owners account that they don't own. There is no question that this has hurt all of the rest us except the owners who benefitted from it. Again Wyndham's responsibility which they did not fulfill.
> 
> So please, instead of making yourself look very bad and turning this into a class warfare issue, quit suggesting Wyndham make changes that aren't going to do you or anybody else one bit of good in the end as Ron and others who do know what they are talking about have stated repeatedly. Instead get on board with DEMANDING that Wyndham do what they were entrusted to do from the start which is exactly what you and every other owner is entitled to and would actually benefit you and the vast majority of other owners too.


Glad your not talking about me!

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk


----------



## bnoble

Jan M. said:


> Isn't that what the Communists did?


Godwin's Law can't be far behind.


----------



## Jan M.

raygo123 said:


> Glad your not talking about me!



Well that is up to you to decide. If you want to throw all VIP owners under the bus for changes that you "think" will benefit you, then you are part of the problem. If you want what benefits the vast number of owners, except the few who will find themselves impacted should Wyndham finally do what they should have been doing from day one, then you are part of the solution. Anything else creates divisiveness and directs attention away from Wyndham. I'm sure they absolutely love people helping them out with that.

No VIP on resale as stated in the directory, a full and accurate accounting of points and an IT system that works, without the glitches and loopholes. If you truly understood the scope of these issues and how much they impact you, you would be outraged and focusing your attention on suggestions that would help the vast number of owners.


----------



## raygo123

Jan M. said:


> Well that is up to you to decide. If you want to throw all VIP owners under the bus for changes that you "think" will benefit you, then you are part of the problem. If you want what benefits the vast number of owners, except the few who will find themselves impacted should Wyndham finally do what they should have been doing from day one, then you are part of the solution. Anything else creates divisiveness and directs attention away from Wyndham. I'm sure they absolutely love people helping them out with that.
> 
> No VIP on resale as stated in the directory, a full and accurate accounting of points and an IT system that works, without the glitches and loopholes. If you truly understood the scope of these issues and how much they impact you, you would be outraged and focusing your attention on suggestions that would help the vast number of owners.


That be both of us.  Im just not paranoid that big brother is watching.  

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk


----------



## ronparise

raygo123 said:


> That be both of us.  Im just not paranoid that big brother is watching.
> 
> Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk



I assure you big brother is watching


----------



## raygo123

ronparise said:


> I assure you big brother is watching


Your probably right. And I agree with you wyndham is going to separate by contract developer points or resale points.  Didn't someone mention that Worldmark has the ability?   Really how much more can they do?  Wyndham has figured out that change is hard!  Then they can test it for a year.  It was really an initial shock the first time I went to cancel and rebook and the VC said she could not help.  All that would be Major 


PS: and get it to work.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk


----------



## Jan M.

raygo123 said:


> That be both of us.  Im just not paranoid that big brother is watching.
> 
> Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk



If people didn't post things that made others feel the need to correct or point them in the right direction, there is an awful lot of information and knowledge that wouldn't be shared. I've been on both ends. Sometimes when I didn't get something right and people posted correcting me, someone else thought the same thing that I did and had more questions about it that got answered. So it all serves a purpose. I wouldn't be wasting my time on you if I didn't see you as person who is capable of critical thinking, like the math you did for example. Not everyone can break something down like you did to take a closer look at it. I do hope you will add your thoughts on the issues that I mentioned in my posts, expand upon them, make your conjectures on them. Informed and knowledgeable owners are Wyndham's worst nightmare. They have invested a lot of time and money into keeping us in the dark.


----------



## Don40

Jan Great Post, Wyndham's TS model is to get the uninformed to make an impulse buy of $20k to $100k.  They don't want their purchasers to do research or learn about the system, until after the recission period, if ever. A good number of owners remain in the dark, never really understanding what they have bought, or even how to use their purchase. This is where the lack of points accounting took root, because in Wyndham eyes there were millions if not billions of unused point every year, up until now. Look they made it out of 2016, no change and non on the horizon to address their total failure to account for points which are real dollars $$$.  Wyndham too likes to remain in the dark, if we all pretend there is no problem there is no problem.


----------



## Roger830

ronparise said:


> I assure you big brother is watching



The only reason that anyone at Wyndham would be reading here is if someone has trouble sleeping at night.

This is deja vu all over again.


----------



## Joe33426

Jan M. said:


> Every person I see posting who wants to see the VIP benefits reduced is not a VIP owner. Envy, greed, haters gotta hate, wanting something you aren't willing to pay for? Yes, yes and yes. You want to take, STEAL, something from VIP owners to enrich yourselves. You can deny it all you want or ply your biased arguments to justify your way of thinking but in the end you are still a thief.
> 
> Another thing that makes your motives seem suspect is, as several other owners posted, they manage to get the reservations they want using their ARP for the big vacations and checking to see what is available within the last 60 days for the more last minute/impromptu stays. And again as several people pointed out the only way to use your ARP is to call in and do them one at a time, competing with every other owner on the line with every VC for reservations at every single resort in the system.
> *
> I believe that you have been pursuing your line of thinking because you truly don't realize how much you will actually benefit if Wyndham would just do what they were supposed to do from day one.*
> 
> Now if you want to see VIP benefits given only on developer points, not on resale, just like it has always said in the directory, then there isn't a single one of us VIP owners who can argue with that. Even those who will suffer and won't be happy about it know they can't argue when it happens. This has always been Wyndham's responsibility to enforce, which they have not done, and is the one of two things you can completely and legitimately claim is unfair and hurts the other owners. This is how the mega renters prospered and grew and would be a death blow to all but a very, very few who might actually own enough developer bought points to be a mega renter.
> 
> The second of the two things you can completely and legitimately claim is actually three things that I'm lumping into one issue because as a result of them when added up it is no exaggeration to say that, as Ron helped us figure out, there was probably in excess of a BILLION points in just one year used to make reservations that we all could have had. No one will argue if you want to see Wyndham do due diligence on all contracts that are resold to prevent stripping, to maintain an accurate accounting system for all points, and to get their IT issues fixed so there are no glitches or loopholes in the system putting points in owners account that they don't own. There is no question that this has hurt all of the rest us except the owners who benefitted from it. Again Wyndham's responsibility which they did not fulfill.
> 
> So please, instead of making yourself look very bad and turning this into a class warfare issue, quit suggesting Wyndham make changes that aren't going to do you or anybody else one bit of good in the end as Ron and others who do know what they are talking about have stated repeatedly. Instead get on board with DEMANDING that Wyndham do what they were entrusted to do from the start which is exactly what you and every other owner is entitled to and would actually benefit you and the vast majority of other owners too.



Excellent post... If Wyndham would just enforce the rules that are in place and fix the IT system everything would be great and nothing would have to be changed.   Wyndham is entrusted with managing the trust and (in my opinion) the extra points debacle clearly shows that they don't have a good grasp of the total points in the system and accounting for same.  What is an owner to do?  Go up against a corporate behemoth that clearly doesn't mind litigation?  Demand that they do their job correctly? 

I would never deny VIPs the benefits that they were sold.   If someone paid for those benefits, and didn't game the system, then more power to them.  Don't strip VIPs of those rights, just enforce the rules.


----------



## ronparise

Roger830 said:


> The only reason that anyone at Wyndham would be reading here is if someone has trouble sleeping at night.
> 
> This is deja vu all over again.



not true, Ive met the person assigned the task of monitoring the Worldmark forums, Im not sure if any one person at Club Wyndham is assigned to follow the forums but and several folks at Wyndham from VCs to vice presidents have commented to me on my posts here. I have used TUG to communicate with Wyndham for the 6 years ive owned Wyndham


----------



## ronparise

Joe33426 said:


> Excellent post... If Wyndham would just enforce the rules that are in place and fix the IT system everything would be great and nothing would have to be changed.   Wyndham is entrusted with managing the trust and (in my opinion) the extra points debacle clearly shows that they don't have a good grasp of the total points in the system and accounting for same.  What is an owner to do?  Go up against a corporate behemoth that clearly doesn't mind litigation?  Demand that they do their job correctly?
> 
> I would never deny VIPs the benefits that they were sold.   If someone paid for those benefits, and didn't game the system, then more power to them.  Don't strip VIPs of those rights, just enforce the rules.




The problem is that lots of VIPs feel entitled to a benefits that wasnt  sold to them. Many VIPs believe that they are entitled to discounts on every reservation. We all know  they are gaming the system when they cancel and rebook for the discount... but they dont think so


----------



## Roger830

ronparise said:


> I have used TUG to communicate with Wyndham for the 6 years ive owned Wyndham



I noticed your new tone here, kinda sounds like a wannabe sales weasel.


----------



## Sandy VDH

Wyndham does monitor these boards, don't kid yourself.  How do you think they figure out how we are all gaming the system.  LOL.


----------



## Ty1on

ronparise said:


> The problem is that lots of VIPs feel entitled to a benefits that wasnt  sold to them. Many VIPs believe that they are entitled to discounts on every reservation. We all know  they are gaming the system when they cancel and rebook for the discount... but they dont think so



Gaming the system, yes.  But shouldn't the onus be on Wyndham to close the loophole (which it sounds like they are finally attempting to do)?  Also, for how many years did salesmen coach victims errrr buyers into gaming the system?


----------



## Roger830

Sandy VDH said:


> Wyndham does monitor these boards, don't kid yourself.  How do you think they figure out how we are all gaming the system.  LOL.



They probably didn't care if members were gaming the system for cancel/rebook and upgrades for their own use. It seems that their main concern is the salvaging of points with multiple use years or selling contracts stripped of points. It simply went to an extreme with multiple members renting units at very low prices, thus hurting contract sales and Wyndham rental business.

My first stay in a Wyndham resort was a January 2-bed week in Pompano purchased on ebay for $649. I had subsequent rentals from the same seller and the guest certificates all had different owner names booked at a 50% discount in points. I bought a fixed week in Pompano and some points because I knew that couldn't last.


----------



## wjappraise

Ty1on said:


> Gaming the system, yes.  But shouldn't the onus be on Wyndham to close the loophole (which it sounds like they are finally attempting to do)?  Also, for how many years did salesmen coach victims errrr buyers into gaming the system?



EVERY trick I have used is one I have learned, not from TUG, but from sales people.  From booking a single bedroom unit and a two bedroom unit and waiting for the 60 day window to not just cancel/rebook, but to cancel/rebook/upgrade, to purchasing alternate use year contracts to push points forward, to phoning in to have a VC do the cancel/rebook has been showed to me by a sales person.  So, I am not sure that "gaming the system" is the most accurate moniker.  Perhaps, "using the sales-taught tricks."  I know it does not roll of the tongue well, but you get my point.


----------



## CO skier

Ty1on said:


> Gaming the system, yes.  But shouldn't the onus be on Wyndham to close the loophole (which it sounds like they are finally attempting to do)?  Also, for how many years did salesmen coach victims errrr buyers into gaming the system?



It was exactly the same thing with the loophole in WorldMark, but the loophole was closed.


Everyone knows the cliché about timeshare salespeople and their moving lips. Yet when they tell us something we _want_ to hear, they are held to some standard of truthfulness and accountability.

The attorneys in the Sirmon case tried (literally, as in court case) the "But the salesman sold me …" argument. The court was not impressed (extract below) as it relates to breach of contract. Decades of experience and litigation have made for some ironclad merger clauses.


"When the parole evidence rule applies, oral representations must be excluded when considering a claim for breach of contract.

Here, the parties not only reduced their agreements to writing, they also explicitly agreed that the writings would be the complete agreement and that oral representations would not have any contractual effect. The following provision is exemplary of the type of merger clauses included throughout the contract documents:

This agreement supersedes any and all understandings and agreements between You and Us, and You and We mutually agree that this Agreement represents the entire Agreement between You and Us, and any representation or inducement which is not set forth in this Agreement shall be of no force and/or effect. This Agreement may only be amended or modified by an instrument in writing between the parties.

(Doc. 132-7 at 50 ¶ 17.)

This and other similar provisions clearly provide that oral representations will not be honored. These merger clauses trigger application of the parole evidence rule to preclude oral representations from being considered in a claim for breach of contract. _See Envtl. Sys., Inc. v. Rexham Corp._, 624 So. 2d 1379 (Ala. 1993) (noting that while merger clauses may not be exercised to exclude evidence relating to a fraud claim, they may be used to invoke the parole evidence rule for contract claims)_. _Thus, the Court will be restricted to the written agreements when evaluating Plaintiffs’ breach of contract claim.


Because the oral representations are excluded by the parole evidence rule, Plaintiffs must identify a written contract term that has been violated."


----------



## wjappraise

CO skier said:


> Everyone knows the cliché about timeshare salespeople and their moving lips. Yet when they tell us something we _want_ to hear, they are held to some standard of truthfulness and accountability.
> Because the oral representations are excluded by the parole evidence rule, Plaintiffs must identify a written contract term that has been violated."



Good points.  And, as always, Wyndham is free to do what they want with their product.  That does not change the fact that Wyndham sales is not operating in a void, and certainly management is aware of the promises/tactics used and has given at least tacit approval of such.  I believe the term is "institutional control."


----------



## raygo123

Roger830 said:


> I noticed your new tone here, kinda sounds like a wannabe sales weasel.


Eeewwww!    

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk
Why not, your mother wears army Boots


----------



## Sandy VDH

I call it gaming, why, because to me it is all a game we are playing.  Some of use just play better, some of us take advantage of rules or a combination of rules, but it is a game with a cost and a reward.  TUGgers as a whole like their rewards with less cost involved.  Who cares what moniker "I" use, it is just IMHO anyway.


----------



## Sandy VDH

wjappraise said:


> EVERY trick I have used is one I have learned, not from TUG, but from sales people.



since I don't go to sales presentations I guess I get my tricks second hand.


----------



## ecwinch

ronparise said:


> not true, Ive met the person assigned the task of monitoring the Worldmark forums, Im not sure if any one person at Club Wyndham is assigned to follow the forums but and several folks at Wyndham from VCs to vice presidents have commented to me on my posts here. I have used TUG to communicate with Wyndham for the 6 years ive owned Wyndham



Ditto. I've attended a WM BoD meeting and had my Facebook posts acknowledged by the same.


----------



## lcml11

ronparise said:


> At the last annual meeting Geoff Richards promised that Voyager would be up and running by the next meeting... So April makes sense. At that last meeting I asked Geoff about a wait list... his answer was not this year. I wonder if the suspensions mess is speeding up their plan.
> 
> Heres what I learned in my interviews with Wyndham (around my suspension)
> 1) they are serious about enforcing the "Commercial"  use prohibition
> 2) they are serious about enforcing the "no unfair advantage" rule
> 3) they know that cancel/rebook/upgrade gives an unfair advantage to the owners that do it
> 4) they know that Commercial renters, (or megarenters if you prefer) use the cancel/rebook /upgrade to capture discounts and they know that the discounts are necessary to make a reasonable profit
> 
> 
> So whether its this year or next or a wait list or something else Im confident that Wyndham will make some changes to reduce rental activity. I  think introducing a wait list is genius. Instead of introducing new rules, they introduce a new benefit. You can still cancel a reservation, and you can still book available inventory at a discount, But if you cancel something decent there is no doubt the wait list will pick it up



Is the suspension situations working themselves out?


----------



## wjappraise

lcml11 said:


> Is the suspension situations working themselves out?



Nope.   Still waiting.   


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## lcml11

wjappraise said:


> Nope.   Still waiting.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Thanks


----------



## ronparise

I have an agreement and I can say "the parties have satisfactorly resolved their differences" but the execution of that resolution is not yet complete


----------



## lcml11

ronparise said:


> I have an agreement and I can say "the parties have satisfactorly resolved their differences" but the execution of that resolution is not yet complete



Thanks for the update


----------



## ilya

henley1 said:


> Today a VC told me that with the rollout of Voyager for which she is receiving training in March for a planned April rollout, that the Cancel Rebook will be eliminated via a waiting list.  I've heard many guesses from VC's over the years, but she sounded certain and specific.  She stated it as fact, not speculation.  Has any one else heard this?



Has anyone had any problems with cancel and rebook either from calling in or cancel and rebook online? Just trying to see if this  statement  became reality.


----------



## tschwa2

I have heard a month or two delay.  The rumor going around is that the oldest eligible platinum reservation would get an automatic upgrade to the cancelled unit.  If no eligible platinum than oldest gold.  It may not effect the smaller units so much but it would also put those that rebooked with a discount at the back of the line to receive an upgrade into the larger units.


----------



## OutSkiing

wjappraise said:


> EVERY trick I have used is one I have learned, not from TUG, but from sales people.  From booking a single bedroom unit and a two bedroom unit and waiting for the 60 day window to not just cancel/rebook, but to cancel/rebook/upgrade, ...  to phoning in to have a VC do the cancel/rebook has been showed to me by a sales person.  So, I am not sure that "gaming the system" is the most accurate moniker.


I even think a lot of things are planned out to benefit VIP members doing cancel/rebook/upgrade.  Notice that after a cancel/rebook your new reservation number is not available yet but lo and behold your upgrade button sure is! And some 'point pricey' resorts seem custom made for this .. how many reservations are really booked and kept at full point value at Shearwater in Kuai? Don't forget (as a salesman once told me) that non VIP members benefit from getting the canceled rooms last minute after a VIP member cancels their double booked rooms.  I think the best strategy would be for Wyndham to curtail 'mega renting' through enforcement of existing non-rental clauses in agreements. (I'm assuming such a clause exists based on other threads) If they can do this, everything would be perfectly fine as it is.

Bob


----------



## ronparise

No there's is no non-rental clause. What there is is a "no commercial use" clause and a "no unfair advantage" clause

The problem enforcing these two clauses is that the terms "commercial" and "unfair advantage" are not defined

It is my opinion that Wyndham wants to control renting for two reasons 1) to manage complaints and 2) improve sales. There is nothing worse for a salesman than a prospect that is renting a 300000 point condo for under $1000a week. That's less than mf and he didn't have to pay $50000 to own the points. And then there's the guy that paid $50000 that meets my guest and learns he renting from someone like me at under a thousand a week)

The history of wyndhams anti renter activity has been to create some new rules that they hope will decrease rental activity for all renters and to put certain specific megarenters (the really big guys) out of business. Read the 70 page thread on the suspensions to see what's happening now

But through it all the smaller megarenters are left alone to do what they do


----------



## wjappraise

OutSkiing said:


> I even think a lot of things are planned out to benefit VIP members doing cancel/rebook/upgrade.  Notice that after a cancel/rebook your new reservation number is not available yet but lo and behold your upgrade button sure is! And some 'point pricey' resorts seem custom made for this .. how many reservations are really booked and kept at full point value at Shearwater in Kuai? Don't forget (as a salesman once told me) that non VIP members benefit from getting the canceled rooms last minute after a VIP member cancels their double booked rooms.  I think the best strategy would be for Wyndham to curtail 'mega renting' through enforcement of existing non-rental clauses in agreements. (I'm assuming such a clause exists based on other threads) If they can do this, everything would be perfectly fine as it is.
> 
> Bob



That is an interesting take Bob.  The only problem is that for a decade or more Wyndham has actively marketed the rental aspect to current owners to get them to buy more. That's what they did with me and I progressively bought more and more until I reached PR VIP.  The sales staff sniffed out my real estate background coupled with holding rental properties and applied that to Wyndham points.  And for the most part it has worked for me. I mostly provide rooms for my family and friends (large family on both sides).  I do offer some units on Redweek or here, but only a handful a year.  So, it is a good situation for me and for Wyndham.  Or it was until the issues of last years debacle with excess points got my account suspended and totally soured me on the lack of integrity and fairness from Wyndham. 

But I digress.   My point is that unilaterally ending rentals will usher in a whole new wave of legal problems for wyndham that will make the excess points fiasco look tame in comparison. 


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## am1

Not possible for their computer system to upgrade the a plainum owners reservation automatically.  For a few reasons but 1 IT could not program it, 2 not everyone would want an upgrade, 3 inside 45 days to check in gold and platinum have the same upgrade rights are just a few reasons why that would not work.


----------



## OutSkiing

wjappraise said:


> My point is that unilaterally ending rentals will usher in a whole new wave of legal problems for wyndham that will make the excess points fiasco look tame in comparison.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


I agree unilaterally ending rentals would be a problem .. there is benefit to both Wyndham and owners in some renting .. could see doing some myself after our big trip to Hawaii next year if we consistently end up with too many points.  It may be a matter of quantity. 

Maybe some limit to guest certificates .. limiting the number that can be changed after initial reservation is made.  

Bob


----------



## OutSkiing

ronparise said:


> No there's is no non-rental clause. What there is is a "no commercial use" clause and a "no unfair advantage" clause
> 
> The problem enforcing these two clauses is that the terms "commercial" and "unfair advantage" are not defined
> 
> Read the 70 page thread on the suspensions to see what's happening now


 Wyndham is willing to risk reputational and financial damage by being as  arrogant as they have been during the suspention fiasco.  

It seems like defining 'commertial use' could be done by limiting the number of guest certificates allowed to an arbitrary number.  

Bob


----------



## comicbookman

OutSkiing said:


> Wyndham is willing to risk reputational and financial damage by being as  arrogant as they have been during the suspention fiasco.
> 
> It seems like defining 'commertial use' could be done by limiting the number of guest certificates allowed to an arbitrary number.
> 
> Bob



It seems to me that the difference between personal rentals (those to just use up left over points) and Commercial rental would be the profit motive.  So they could define commercial rental as any rental that nets more than X percent over the cost of the points used.  Go with the assumption that all rentals are commercial unless the owner proves otherwise (submitting a some type of form).  When requesting a GC, you would need to declare that it is not a rental, or if it is, file the additional form.  That way anyone lying would be committing fraud.  Problem solved for Wyndham.


----------



## vacationhopeful

Please ... renting is a commercial activity just by the nature that an entity paid someone monies in exchange for staying there. Whether it is once a year or 16 times a month, a thing of value was given up for something else. It is not about being the neighbor down the street or a person off Craigslist ... it is because a thing of value was given up for a consideration.

In an exchange, monies paid is for the use of the exchange system ... not for the week being used. And the agreements the exchange companies HOLD with the resorts' management, allow the exchange companies, for some intervals, to be rented. And the exchange companies would be paying taxes on that income.

If I give a week to my sister or my boyfriend's daughter, I am giving a gift ... which would require a GUEST CERTIFICATE or guest letter. If my neighbor asks me if they can use my week, I would expect some form of consideration (ie mowing and mulching my yard this summer) ... that might pass the resort's 'sniff' test as a non-commercial transaction ... but the IRS would/could claim it was not.

Yes, I know some families are LARGE ... I have 10 first cousins and 4 siblings. And at my age, my siblings have children out of college and are married ... forming their family units. I fear any day now, I will be a GREAT AUNT and am STILL not collecting Social Security ... but still working full time .


----------



## ronparise

comicbookman said:


> It seems to me that the difference between personal rentals (those to just use up left over points) and Commercial rental would be the profit motive.  So they could define commercial rental as any rental that nets more than X percent over the cost of the points used.  Go with the assumption that all rentals are commercial unless the owner proves otherwise (submitting a some type of form).  When requesting a GC, you would need to declare that it is not a rental, or if it is, file the additional form.  That way anyone lying would be committing fraud.  Problem solved for Wyndham.



when I started renting "commercially" I figured out real quick, that this was not a get rich quick scheme..  There arent enough special events weeks or weekends where you can really make a killing (2 or 3 x mf) and there is extreme competition for them. so the number any one owner can get is limited. And then wyndham introduced the 10 nightly limit rule to limit things even more.  do the math, 10 mardi gras reservations, even if I can rent them for tripple my mf, still nets only about $1000 profit.. and $10000 dosent make all the work, worthwhile. 

So to make a go of this commercial rental thing you have to make a ton of reservations at pretty slim margins.  I had one mega renter advise me that her target was $200 per reservation

My point is that as long as Im allowed to make something over my cost, (as you put it "any rental that nets more than X percent over the cost of the points used") Ill be happy


Remember too, that the biggest mega renters dont own everything that they rent.  They work for a lot of small owners that are just trying to get their fees paid... and Wyndham isnt messing with them.  neither are they  messing with the points managers


----------



## comicbookman

ronparise said:


> when I started renting "commercially" I figured out real quick, that this was not a get rich quick scheme..  There arent enough special events weeks or weekends where you can really make a killing (2 or 3 x mf) and there is extreme competition for them. so the number any one owner can get is limited. And then wyndham introduced the 10 nightly limit rule to limit things even more.  do the math, 10 mardi gras reservations, even if I can rent them for tripple my mf, still nets only about $1000 profit.. and $10000 dosent make all the work, worthwhile.
> 
> So to make a go of this commercial rental thing you have to make a ton of reservations at pretty slim margins.  I had one mega renter advise me that her target was $200 per reservation
> 
> My point is that as long as Im allowed to make something over my cost, (as you put it "any rental that nets more than X percent over the cost of the points used") Ill be happy
> 
> 
> Remember too, that the biggest mega renters dont own everything that they rent.  They work for a lot of small owners that are just trying to get their fees paid... and Wyndham isnt messing with them.  neither are they  messing with the points managers



I don't disagree with anything you said.  I was just trying to define commercial.  That is why I picked "X" instead of an actual number.  I leave it up to experts to determine the most useful value for X.  It could be as low as 1% or even 0.


----------



## ronparise

comicbookman said:


> I don't disagree with anything you said.  I was just trying to define commercial.  That is why I picked "X" instead of an actual number.  I leave it up to experts to determine the most useful value for X.  It could be as low as 1% or even 0.




It dosent matter whether you define "commercial. or whether some self described expert defines "commercial" or whether Wyndham does it. It will have to be enforced. And I dont see  your 'percentage over cost' rule to be an enforceable thing . But my bigger point is that the folks that give their points to a points manager are not making anything, So they can never be accused of doing what they do for commercial purposes.

If Wyndham wants to go after renting, i think their best shot is to squeeze the profits out of it and the best way to do that is to limit  VIP benefits to VIP eligible points,


----------



## comicbookman

ronparise said:


> It dosent matter whether you define "commercial. or whether some self described expert defines "commercial" or whether Wyndham does it. It will have to be enforced. And I dont see  your 'percentage over cost' rule to be an enforceable thing . But my bigger point is that the folks that give their points to a points manager are not making anything, So they can never be accused of doing what they do for commercial purposes.
> 
> If Wyndham wants to go after renting, i think their best shot is to squeeze the profits out of it and the best way to do that is to limit  VIP benefits to VIP eligible points,



I agree that would be the best way.  I was simply looking for alternatives.


----------



## ronparise

comicbookman said:


> I agree that would be the best way.  I was simply looking for alternatives.



The bigger question is, does Wyndham really want to go after renting... I dont think so. and I go to the way they are handling the suspensions as my evidence. They did go after some  megarenters that got suspended, but renting was a side issue. The real issue was something else altogether. And there were some suspended megarenters  that went right back to renting, while the issue that caused the suspensions is still being worked on. 

In my negotiations with Wyndham I wasted a great deal of time, arguing that Wyndham (all the way up the chain of command) knew what I was doing (vis a vis renting) and had always allowed it. I even brought up the fact that Wyndham actually created the first mega renters, during the great recession, so that they would have someone to sell to and so that they could keep the resorts full and have even more folks that they could sell to

My arguments were completely unnecessary as they didnt care about the renting.. the issue was something else altogether.


----------



## ilya

So, I am assuming that there has not been any recent problem  with  owners doing the cancel/rebook and upgrade. Anyone experience reservations not coming, losing reservation?  Is it better to call in or do it online? In other words, will VC do it with out hesitation?


----------



## happyhopian

am1 said:


> Wyndham cannot limit how many reservations are made in the arp window.


they can't limit how many reservations are made in the ARP window but they can tell us when points no longer get VIP discounts (ie credit pool, paid for points). I think they can do anything they want. If you have two owners on the account you get two ARP at the same location on the same date, period. I'm not saying I want this. I'm just saying they can do it just as much as they can change VIP benefits.


----------



## happyhopian

CO skier said:


> That is not what happened in WorldMark when a loophole was closed this time last year.  More owner families are reportedly claiming reservations at 13 months.  Some of those reservations must be from what were previously booked by megarenters.
> 
> Availability did not increase, rentals still happen, but somehow more owners and fewer renters are staying in WorldMark units in 2017.  If something were to change the ability to cancel/rebook/upgrade 13 month reservations, the same may occur in Club Wyndham.  Many rentals that are profitable using cancel/rebook/upgrade are not profitable at full fare, but there are owner families who would be happy to claim these reservations at full point costs.  It is a zero sum game, so Wyndham's goal may be to influence the owner:renter occupancy ratio in favor of owner families.



Why would they want to do this? Wyndham doesn't care about owners, they want buyers.


----------



## happyhopian

ilya said:


> Has anyone had any problems with cancel and rebook either from calling in or cancel and rebook online? Just trying to see if this  statement  became reality.


No I've been tearing away at it. As a matter of fact, the return time has been changed from random, over 10 minutes to exactly 20 seconds since at least november. If they are planning to get rid of this they have certainly opened the flood gates for usage in the instant.


----------



## happyhopian

Folks - I like where Ron is going with the 'not going after renter thing.' In fact I'm betting that Wyndham doesn't fix anything and they don't go after renters. I had dinner with a very high up Wyndham person. Had nothing to do with my ownership and in fact preceed my ownership of a few years back. While at dinner with others he shared with us the greatest expense and greatest asset in the time share business. Anyone want to take a guess....he called them pots. He said these are potential buyers. Everyone else calls them leads. He talked for 15 minutes about the history of the timeshare industry going to back to the harassing phone calls, vacation vouchers in the mail, free cruises and things I never experienced.

I share all of this to say - managing rentals and the trust make N O MONEY for wyndham. It is a revenue source for sure, but it is not a profit. They do it to maintain control of the product. WHY - because they can control the environment where their leads (pots) are generated. This was a dinner conversation that I have reflected back on many times because every time one of these threads comes up I ask myself - Wyndham is paying NOTHING for all these NEW people who come to their resorts that other people like Ron and AM1 are persuading through economies of scale and supply demand --- something NO ONE in the timeshare business has been able to do every - without giving things away.

I hear all of the arguments, and underneath those arguments I hear wishful thinking on many people's parts that they can get more value (or the true value) out of their ownership but be honest -- wyndham ONLY makes profits on sales. Everything else is a cost center focused on generating leads, controlling the environment and making very profitable sales.

I'll be prepared to eat my hat but as long as Wyndham's numbers are climbing and their cost flat or lower - I don't see them changing the model that is clearly working well for them (according to the last two annual reports). But I enjoy reading and working the conspiracy theories just as much as everyone else and yes I work the system to death. Not just cancel / rebook, but upgrades as well. I'm an expert at booking a 3br at BC for less than $700 a week. When the train stops I'll downsize and look back with fond memories or I'll adjust to the economy and realize a big mac isn't a dollar any more


----------



## happyhopian

ronparise said:


> when I started renting "commercially" I figured out real quick, that this was not a get rich quick scheme..  There arent enough special events weeks or weekends where you can really make a killing (2 or 3 x mf) and there is extreme competition
> 
> Remember too, that the biggest mega renters dont own everything that they rent.  They work for a lot of small owners that are just trying to get their fees paid... and Wyndham isnt messing with them.  neither are they  messing with the points managers



Right ron. The only people they are messing with are the ones who were front loading three years of points through credit pools to use in one year, cancel, then re use the difference creating a 6:1 use in 1 year for which their inventory couldn't handle and lead to balance issues in the trust. Funny that  WINVIP has no issues.

Don't get me wrong. I don't fault you I APPLAUD YOU and like I might do one day, you are making your deal to move on.


----------



## happyhopian

ronparise said:


> It dosent matter whether you define "commercial. or whether some self described expert defines "commercial" or whether Wyndham does it. It will have to be enforced. And I dont see  your 'percentage over cost' rule to be an enforceable thing . But my bigger point is that the folks that give their points to a points manager are not making anything, So they can never be accused of doing what they do for commercial purposes.
> 
> If Wyndham wants to go after renting, i think their best shot is to squeeze the profits out of it and the best way to do that is to limit  VIP benefits to VIP eligible points,



Ron under case law, anything NOT for personal use is for commercial use. If you don't trust this one ask another lawyer.


----------



## ronparise

happyhopian said:


> Right ron. The only people they are messing with are the ones who were front loading three years of points through credit pools to use in one year, cancel, then re use the difference creating a 6:1 use in 1 year for which their inventory couldn't handle and lead to balance issues in the trust. Funny that  WINVIP has no issues.
> 
> Don't get me wrong. I don't fault you I APPLAUD YOU and like I might do one day, you are making your deal to move on.




no thats not right... cancel and rebook does not multiply points. 

1) If I start with a million and  make ten 100000 point reservations my account will have no points available and 1 million points in reservations. 
2) then 60 days ahead of check in I cancel and rebook at the 50% discount Ill have 500000 points in reservations and 500000 points available
3) the I make five 100000 point reservations and Ill have no points available and 1 million in reservations. 
No matter what I do I cant multiply points with the cancel and rebook trick

even if I credit pool there is no multiplication of points. If I start the year with a 1 million point account Ill have 1 million points  that expire in 2017, 1 million points that expire in 2018 and 1 million that expire in 2019  or a total of three million points on my points status page.  Sure I can credit pool everything and make all my reservation for some week in 2017, but I can only use those 3 million points, there is no way the credit pool multiplies anything.. and as long as I pay my maintenance fees in 2017, 2018 and 2019, wyndham has no problem with me

I didnt have any trouble with wyndham doing what I outlined above. My problem (or rather Wyndhams problem with me) was for something altogether different, When my accounts were suspended I had over 90 million points in reservations and I owned contracts with an annual allocation of 10 million.  Try to explain that one...  As I have said before we have come to a satisfactory resolution of our differences.

Dont even think you know what I did to make that happen, but it wasnt  aggressive use of the credit pool and the suspension  had nothing to do with rentals
And you clearly dont know about Winpoint VIP either, 


I agree commercial means commerce, and implies an exchange of some sort. and you dont have to make a profit.   But Im convinced Wyndham isnt going after commercial renters directly. To do that they would have to ask every guest whether they paid someone for their reservation.. I dont think that will happen. I think they will do it just as they have in the past by invoking new rules or adding new features to the club to chip away at the profits. and since most of the profit is in use of the cancel rebook trick to get the VIP discounts;  I think thats their next target

we'll see in August, or whenever they finally unveil Voyager


----------



## Avislo

ronparise said:


> no thats not right... cancel and rebook does not multiply points.
> 
> 1) If I start with a million and  make ten 100000 point reservations my account will have no points available and 1 million points in reservations.
> 2) then 60 days ahead of check in I cancel and rebook at the 50% discount Ill have 500000 points in reservations and 500000 points available
> 3) the I make five 100000 point reservations and Ill have no points available and 1 million in reservations.
> No matter what I do I cant multiply points with the cancel and rebook trick
> 
> even if I credit pool there is no multiplication of points. If I start the year with a 1 million point account Ill have 1 million points  that expire in 2017, 1 million points that expire in 2018 and 1 million that expire in 2019  or a total of three million points on my points status page.  Sure I can credit pool everything and make all my reservation for some week in 2017, but I can only use those 3 million points, there is no way the credit pool multiplies anything.. and as long as I pay my maintenance fees in 2017, 2018 and 2019, wyndham has no problem with me
> 
> I didnt have any trouble with wyndham doing what I outlined above. My problem (or rather Wyndhams problem with me) was for something altogether different, When my accounts were suspended I had over 90 million points in reservations and I owned contracts with an annual allocation of 10 million.  Try to explain that one...  As I have said before we have come to a satisfactory resolution of our differences.
> 
> Dont even think you know what I did to make that happen, but it wasnt  aggressive use of the credit pool and the suspension  had nothing to do with rentals
> And you clearly dont know about Winpoint VIP either,
> 
> 
> I agree commercial means commerce, and implies an exchange of some sort. and you dont have to make a profit.   But Im convinced Wyndham isnt going after commercial renters directly. To do that they would have to ask every guest whether they paid someone for their reservation.. I dont think that will happen. I think they will do it just as they have in the past by invoking new rules or adding new features to the club to chip away at the profits. and since most of the profit is in use of the cancel rebook trick to get the VIP discounts;  I think thats their next target
> 
> we'll see in August, or whenever they finally unveil Voyager



The point of the poster was missed.  He was not talking about the extra points problem.  He was discussing the use of the credit pool to bring points forward within the existing rules.  As the poster points out, this creates more demand in the year of use and I will take his word on the ratio cited.  Your example of 10 million authorized points received generating 90 million points to be used for the account is entirely different and has a significantly higher ratio.


----------



## ronparise

happyhopian said:


> Folks - I like where Ron is going with the 'not going after renter thing.' In fact I'm betting that Wyndham doesn't fix anything and they don't go after renters. I had dinner with a very high up Wyndham person. Had nothing to do with my ownership and in fact preceed my ownership of a few years back. While at dinner with others he shared with us the greatest expense and greatest asset in the time share business. Anyone want to take a guess....he called them pots. He said these are potential buyers. Everyone else calls them leads. He talked for 15 minutes about the history of the timeshare industry going to back to the harassing phone calls, vacation vouchers in the mail, free cruises and things I never experienced.
> 
> I share all of this to say - managing rentals and the trust make N O MONEY for wyndham. It is a revenue source for sure, but it is not a profit. They do it to maintain control of the product. WHY - because they can control the environment where their leads (pots) are generated. This was a dinner conversation that I have reflected back on many times because every time one of these threads comes up I ask myself - Wyndham is paying NOTHING for all these NEW people who come to their resorts that other people like Ron and AM1 are persuading through economies of scale and supply demand --- something NO ONE in the timeshare business has been able to do every - without giving things away.
> 
> I hear all of the arguments, and underneath those arguments I hear wishful thinking on many people's parts that they can get more value (or the true value) out of their ownership but be honest -- wyndham ONLY makes profits on sales. Everything else is a cost center focused on generating leads, controlling the environment and making very profitable sales.
> 
> I'll be prepared to eat my hat but as long as Wyndham's numbers are climbing and their cost flat or lower - I don't see them changing the model that is clearly working well for them (according to the last two annual reports). But I enjoy reading and working the conspiracy theories just as much as everyone else and yes I work the system to death. Not just cancel / rebook, but upgrades as well. I'm an expert at booking a 3br at BC for less than $700 a week. When the train stops I'll downsize and look back with fond memories or I'll adjust to the economy and realize a big mac isn't a dollar any more



heres why they are going to continue to go after rentals... my rentals affect their sales>> Imagine Joe Timeshare Owner is sharing a hottub with one of my guests.. Joe is sharing his good fortune and tells my guest how happy he is.  He just bought 1 million points and is now a Platinum VIP and it only cost him $150,000. His vacations from here on out will be at half price,  just $100 a night, (at least thats what the salesman said)  Imagine how he feels when my guy busts his balloon telling him that  he rents from me on a regular basis at less than $100 a night, and never spent a penny to buy anything... and then gives him my number....  If the guy calls me, hes gonna rescind and Im gonna get a new customer... wyndham dosent like that

The other source of complaints are the folks that try and try every year to get a mardi gras reservation. (or any hard to get reservation)  Finally they get one and as they ride the elevator from their room to the lobby they meet folks that rent from me. I had one of my guest tell me last year that practically everyone he met at Avenue Plaza was a guest of mine.. Im sure he was exaggerating I only had 50 guests last year, but Im sure that generated some complaints from owners that couldnt get a reservation

we mega renters get blamed for other owners inability to get a hard to get reservation...we make a lot of owners unhappy... and wyndham cant upsell an unhappy owner.

They gotta at least make a show of going after the magarenters.


----------



## ronparise

Avislo said:


> The point of the poster was missed.  He was not talking about the extra points problem.  He was discussing the use of the credit pool to bring points forward within the existing rules.  As the poster points out, this creates more demand in the year of use and I will take his word on the ratio cited.  Your example of 10 million authorized points received generating 90 million points to be used for the account is entirely different and has a significantly higher ratio.




It dosent create extra demand. If I put 2018 points into the pool and make reservations for 2017. the points used are actually someone elses deposited 2017 points

read the book, there is a warning that the pool may run out of points for a certain year


----------



## Avislo

ronparise said:


> It dosent create extra demand. If I put 2018 points into the pool and make reservations for 2017. the points used are actually someone elses deposited 2017 points
> 
> read the book, there is a warning that the pool may run out of points for a certain year



The Avenue Plaza example during Marti Gras is a great one to illustrate the point.  The Wyndham Club Plus members that lose out on a reservation due to a few people taking up reservations for that time period could believe that the mega-renters using that process would increase demand, especially if some of the mega-renters were using extra points in addition to the Credit Pool points.


----------



## OutSkiing

happyhopian said:


> Why would they want to do this? Wyndham doesn't care about owners, they want buyers.


High customer satisfaction creates repeat business. We on this site tend to view Wyndham as callus toward owners but they are not so stupid as to disregard this fundamental rule of nature.  Wyndham themselves point out that a high percentage of their sales come from repeat buyers. So they do have a vested interest in making owners happy as well as bringing in the new 'pots' through rental guests.

I agree their best bet to keep owners happy while reducing rentals from amassed accounts is to limit VIP discount / upgrade benefits to qualified VIP contracts.  After that would be to somehow a limit guest certificates but that is not as clean.

Bob


----------



## paxsarah

Avislo said:


> The Avenue Plaza example during Marti Gras is a great one to illustrate the point.  The Wyndham Club Plus members that lose out on a reservation due to a few people taking up reservations for that time period could believe that the mega-renters using that process would increase demand, especially if some of the mega-renters were using extra points in addition to the Credit Pool points.



I don't even know what you're talking about here. I'm pretty sure all of the Mardi Gras reservations at Avenue Plaza are taken during ARP, which don't allow for credit pool points, let alone "extra" points (whatever that is). If someone loses out on a reservation, they weren't on the phone at 13 months out exactly. Even if the mega-renters were taken out of the picture, those reservations will be gone at 13 months. The people that lost out on a reservation "could believe" anything, but the truth is that those reservations are available to the people who own the right points and are on the phone at the right time.


----------



## ronparise

paxsarah said:


> I don't even know what you're talking about here. I'm pretty sure all of the Mardi Gras reservations at Avenue Plaza are taken during ARP, which don't allow for credit pool points, let alone "extra" points (whatever that is). If someone loses out on a reservation, they weren't on the phone at 13 months out exactly. Even if the mega-renters were taken out of the picture, those reservations will be gone at 13 months. The people that lost out on a reservation "could believe" anything, but the truth is that those reservations are available to the people who own the right points and are on the phone at the right time.



Not exactly true at avenue plaza. Mostly true but not completely true, I don't know why but there are always a few reservations to be had at 10 months. 
 But you are right on the mark  for the most popular reservations at most resorts.  The good stuff is gone at 13 months.

Buy right and reserve early for the best shot at the most popular reservations. Miss on either of these two requirements and you won't get your reservation and it dosent matter whether there are megarenters or not

My point is that none of that matters to the guy that paid $15000 for 105000 points that wants what he wants when he wants it. He hears that someone is making a killing renting "his" reservation at "his" resort and he's pissed. And Wyndham needs happy owners

That's why Wyndham has to at least make a show of restricting rentals

The question is what will they do. And will it make a difference


----------



## happyhopian

ronparise said:


> The bigger question is, does Wyndham really want to go after renting... I dont think so. and I go to the way they are handling the suspensions as my evidence. They did go after some  megarenters that got suspended, but renting was a side issue. The real issue was something else altogether. And there were some suspended megarenters  that went right back to renting, while the issue that caused the suspensions is still being worked on.
> 
> In my negotiations with Wyndham I wasted a great deal of time, arguing that Wyndham (all the way up the chain of command) knew what I was doing (vis a vis renting) and had always allowed it. I even brought up the fact that Wyndham actually created the first mega renters, during the great recession, so that they would have someone to sell to and so that they could keep the resorts full and have even more folks that they could sell to
> 
> My arguments were completely unnecessary as they didnt care about the renting.. the issue was something else altogether.





ronparise said:


> no thats not right... cancel and rebook does not multiply points.
> 
> 1) If I start with a million and  make ten 100000 point reservations my account will have no points available and 1 million points in reservations.
> 2) then 60 days ahead of check in I cancel and rebook at the 50% discount Ill have 500000 points in reservations and 500000 points available
> 3) the I make five 100000 point reservations and Ill have no points available and 1 million in reservations.
> No matter what I do I cant multiply points with the cancel and rebook trick
> 
> even if I credit pool there is no multiplication of points. If I start the year with a 1 million point account Ill have 1 million points  that expire in 2017, 1 million points that expire in 2018 and 1 million that expire in 2019  or a total of three million points on my points status page.  Sure I can credit pool everything and make all my reservation for some week in 2017, but I can only use those 3 million points, there is no way the credit pool multiplies anything.. and as long as I pay my maintenance fees in 2017, 2018 and 2019, wyndham has no problem with me
> 
> I didnt have any trouble with wyndham doing what I outlined above. My problem (or rather Wyndhams problem with me) was for something altogether different, When my accounts were suspended I had over 90 million points in reservations and I owned contracts with an annual allocation of 10 million.  Try to explain that one...  As I have said before we have come to a satisfactory resolution of our differences.
> 
> Dont even think you know what I did to make that happen, but it wasnt  aggressive use of the credit pool and the suspension  had nothing to do with rentals
> And you clearly dont know about Winpoint VIP either,
> 
> 
> I agree commercial means commerce, and implies an exchange of some sort. and you dont have to make a profit.   But Im convinced Wyndham isnt going after commercial renters directly. To do that they would have to ask every guest whether they paid someone for their reservation.. I dont think that will happen. I think they will do it just as they have in the past by invoking new rules or adding new features to the club to chip away at the profits. and since most of the profit is in use of the cancel rebook trick to get the VIP discounts;  I think thats their next target
> 
> we'll see in August, or whenever they finally unveil Voyager


I did not say multiply points. I said reservations. When a 100k week becomes a 50k week you get two weeks out of inventory not one and when you do it twice you triple the impact. I'm not sure I can get my math to 6 but I was trying to make a point.


----------



## happyhopian

ronparise said:


> Not exactly true at avenue plaza. Mostly true but not completely true, I don't know why but there are always a few reservations to be had at 10 months.
> But you are right on the mark  for the most popular reservations at most resorts.  The good stuff is gone at 13 months.
> 
> Buy right and reserve early for the best shot at the most popular reservations. Miss on either of these two requirements and you won't get your reservation and it dosent matter whether there are megarenters or not
> 
> My point is that none of that matters to the guy that paid $15000 for 105000 points that wants what he wants when he wants it. He hears that someone is making a killing renting "his" reservation at "his" resort and he's pissed. And Wyndham needs happy owners
> 
> That's why Wyndham has to at least make a show of restricting rentals
> 
> The question is what will they do. And will it make a difference


And the guy I met at the gym last week was pissed when he learned that I got a better deal on my tahoe than he did. Do you think the dealer is going to level that playing field? neither will Wyndham. Let's see what happens in August but they are not going to shoot the goose that lays the golden egg...regardless of how many of Ron's guest they meet in the elevator. I cannot tell you how many thousands of people I have seen treck in and out of sales in Bonnet Creek which everyone agrees (or should agree) is more than 50% rentals.


----------



## Avislo

paxsarah said:


> I don't even know what you're talking about here. I'm pretty sure all of the Mardi Gras reservations at Avenue Plaza are taken during ARP, which don't allow for credit pool points, let alone "extra" points (whatever that is). If someone loses out on a reservation, they weren't on the phone at 13 months out exactly. Even if the mega-renters were taken out of the picture, those reservations will be gone at 13 months. The people that lost out on a reservation "could believe" anything, but the truth is that those reservations are available to the people who own the right points and are on the phone at the right time.



Extra points are points that got into a person's account that maintenance fees were not paid for by the account owner (one person believes the Fairfield Trust takes the hit.)  Some people who where smarter than the average bears figured out a way or ways to maximize their chances of getting these points.  In the example being discussed, 10 million points would be paid for and 80 million points would be extra points.


----------



## Campbell Vaughn

What do y'all mean, the right points? If I buy 600,000 WCA points... what makes points the "right" points.


----------



## ronparise

happyhopian said:


> I did not say multiply points. I said reservations. When a 100k week becomes a 50k week you get two weeks out of inventory not one and when you do it twice you triple the impact. I'm not sure I can get my math to 6 but I was trying to make a point.



I guess Avislo was right , I missed your point

You are absolutely right we are able to multiply reservatios and that does have an effect on availabiity , but thats not what the suspensions went after. The suspensions were focused on points.

And I  think that the wyndham folks working with us suspendees were shocked to seek just how many "extra" reservations we generated within the rules using  the cancel and rebook trick. And they didnt like it.   Thats why I and so positive that they will do something to stop it 

and further,  I think they will use the "no unfair advantage rule" and not the "no commercial use rule"


----------



## ronparise

Avislo said:


> Extra points are points that got into a person's account that maintenance fees were not paid for by the account owner (one person believes the Fairfield Trust takes the hit.)  Some people who where smarter than the average bears figured out a way or ways to maximize their chances of getting these points.  In the example being discussed, 10 million points would be paid for and 80 million points would be extra points.



Once again, you dont know what you are talking about.  In my case and in the case of some other fairly big owners I know, the maintenance fees on the "extra" points were paid (or would have been paid except for the suspensions)


----------



## paxsarah

Campbell Vaughn said:


> What do y'all mean, the right points? If I buy 600,000 WCA points... what makes points the "right" points.



In this conversation, I meant points that are eligible for ARP at the location you want at a high-demand time. CWA points have ARP at a wide range of resorts, and although there are ongoing discussions of exactly how much inventory that may comprise at each resort, that amount of inventory is gradually growing. Or you could buy at the specific resort you know you will want to visit in high season year after year. At most resorts and in most seasons, 10 months in advance (when points are points) you can usually get the reservation you're looking for, but for a few high-demand locations and/or seasons, you will need the "right" points to book 13 months in advance.


----------



## Avislo

ronparise said:


> Once again, you dont know what you are talking about.  In my case and in the case of some other fairly big owners I know, the maintenance fees on the "extra" points were paid (or would have been paid except for the suspensions)



One person who knows at least a thing or two about Wyndham and the suspended points problems equated manufactured points, extra points, and stolen points together in describing the problem.


----------



## ronparise

Avislo said:


> One person who knows at least a thing or two about Wyndham and the suspended points problems equated manufactured points, extra points, and stolen points together in describing the problem.



As we have discussed in the past, Points are Points. What Wyndham saw is more points in some accounts than you would expect. They suspended these accounts and then began to figure out how the "extra" points got there. In fact this was the first question they asked me when we first started talking

I really believe that they had no idea. They didn't know whether I had developed a scheme to make or manufacture points, or whether I had someone on the inside to put points in my account perhaps by transferring  them from someone else's account (stolen points) All they knew is that I had far too many points   I call them "extra" points

They asked and I told them what I did. and then suggested that their systems were all f'ed up and would sometimes double credit points when reservations were cancelled. 

fepending on my mood and the point I want to make, I call them  extra points or stolen points or manufactured points or just points, because after all that's what they are

I believe, from wyndhams point of view, the issue is whether the fees for these points are paid or will be paid or not


----------



## ecwinch

ronparise said:


> The other source of complaints are the folks that try and try every year to get a mardi gras reservation. (or any hard to get reservation)  Finally they get one and as they ride the elevator from their room to the lobby they meet folks that rent from me. I had one of my guest tell me last year that practically everyone he met at Avenue Plaza was a guest of mine.. Im sure he was exaggerating I only had 50 guests last year, but Im sure that generated some complaints from owners that couldnt get a reservation
> 
> we mega renters get blamed for other owners inability to get a hard to get reservation...we make a lot of owners unhappy... and wyndham cant upsell an unhappy owner.



Here is my causation theory ... just a little different than yours ... but probably the same result.

You know Wyndham (Pete Hernandez and others) monitor social media.
You know the angst your rental activity causes in those circles. Particularly on the WM FB group.


----------



## ronparise

I know quite well that Wyndham monitors these forums The method to my madness here and on wmowners has been to provoke them into taking their best shot at a set of rules to control renting. Then having done what they are going to do I would be free to develop a strategy to work within those new rules. Or move on to greener pastures


----------



## Avislo

ronparise said:


> I know quite well that Wyndham monitors these forums The method to my madness here and on wmowners has been to provoke them into taking their best shot at a set of rules to control renting. Then having done what they are going to do I would be free to develop a strategy to work within those new rules. Or move on to greener pastures



Maybe there might be a different method than engaging in a pattern and practice of behavior to provoke someone into doing what you want.  

I do not doubt for a second your MO has generated many re-actions from Wyndham.


----------



## ronparise

I wasnt trying to provoke them into doing what I want. I want  them to do what they want. I want the clubs policy toward renting (whatever it is) to be clearly stated. My thinking is that if I know what the policy is, I can build a business that complies. 

What I can't deal with is waiting for then to drop a hammer on me for I don't know what.


----------



## antjmar

ronparise said:


> Not exactly true at avenue plaza. Mostly true but not completely true, I don't know why but there are always a few reservations to be had at 10 months.


Perhaps the converted fixed week owners that dont reserve the week?


----------



## Avislo

ronparise said:


> I wasnt trying to provoke them into doing what I want. I want  them to do what they want. I want the clubs policy toward renting (whatever it is) to be clearly stated. My thinking is that if I know what the policy is, I can build a business that complies.
> 
> What I can't deal with is waiting for then to drop a hammer on me for I don't know what.



That may be mission impossible on the 1st count, the second count who knows, not likely since they settled with you.

As a number of posters are aware, the current Fairfield Trust is made of a lot of different property interests.  The terms vary widely on a multitude of issues.  I think Wyndham does have limits on restricting rental activities.  The biggest has been mentioned in older threads pertaining to their own rental activities and specifically Extra Holidays.  Wyndham uses the ownership base of the Fairfield trust to generate income from rentals of their units and/or rental activities of others pertaining to those units.  Hurting Wyndham's rental activities under its various groups has to be dealt with (not likely) before rental prohibitions can go forward.  

As far as cancel then re-book goes, I do not think automatic upgrades and this system collide to the extent that it will make any real difference to over 95 percent of owners.


----------



## Avislo

If automatic upgrades, in fact, roles out this would be a great feature for people renting Wyndham Vacation Resorts timeshares.  It would give this group of people a ability to say that their rental can be upgraded to a larger unit if one becomes available.  This would help them compete with groups like Extra Holidays.


----------



## nicemann

Avislo said:


> If automatic upgrades, in fact, roles out this would be a great feature for people renting Wyndham Vacation Resorts timeshares.  It would give this group of people a ability to say that their rental can be upgraded to a larger unit if one becomes available.  This would help them compete with groups like Extra Holidays.



I would hate to tell a renter that when the chances would be pretty small. I have rented a few times and the reason I do is because a two bedroom rental from someone with platinum VIP is usually a lot cheaper then anything else I can find. That is only if they get the free upgrade to a 2 bedroom. If not I probably would look at RCI rentals instead due to the prices, especially during their sales.


----------



## wed100105

I lost a 3 bedroom presidential reserve for Glacier Canyon two nights starting May 30 today. I had two screens open and was clicking upgrade from a smaller unit's confirmation. I clicked for twenty minutes, and never saw it come back into the system.


----------



## happyhopian

wed100105 said:


> I lost a 3 bedroom presidential reserve for Glacier Canyon two nights starting May 30 today. I had two screens open and was clicking upgrade from a smaller unit's confirmation. I clicked for twenty minutes, and never saw it come back into the system.



I can guarantee you that this was an overbooked status. I never do a c/b on a personal use and important reservation unless:
1. there are other units available in the same week (even single night).
2. I can find the same or similar unit for rent on ebay.
3. I book something in the same week, cancel it and check the time to come back. 

I do this on every one I do and I haven't lost a unit in over a year. Won't say it's fool proof and it might not matter at all in a few months according to others


----------



## wed100105

Interesting. I was ok losing the reservation, but of course I didn't really want to. I have a couple units for friends this summer that I won't be canceling/rebooking. I try to reserve a couple extras when possible. Unfortunately this time I lost the gamble.


----------



## am1

Avislo said:


> If automatic upgrades, in fact, roles out this would be a great feature for people renting Wyndham Vacation Resorts timeshares.  It would give this group of people a ability to say that their rental can be upgraded to a larger unit if one becomes available.  This would help them compete with groups like Extra Holidays.



Not at all.  Would be horrible in every way.  Any one renting reservations wants to get paid for rooms the can get upgraded.  

There is also the case when a renter wants a 2 bedroom deluxe to match their reservations before or after the rental they purchased from you.  Not a 3 bedroom deluxe, presidential or 4 bedroom.


----------

