# Word on RCI rentals seems to be reaching more timesharers



## Carolinian (Feb 7, 2006)

Yesterday evening, I stopped in to the KFC at Whalebone Junction in Nags Head for dinner and ran into a former Bodie Island Beach Club HOA Board member and another BIBC owner who were down for the court hearings on the attempted hostile takeover of their resort by a developer.  We chatted a bit about that and their expected return to testify when the hearings resume on Thursday.

Then I inquired what they were doing in timesharing with BIBC closed down until things get resolved.  Both own summer weeks, which they used at the resort, and were anxious to be able to use them again.  One owned a BIBC week 52 (white) for trading and the other owned at another resort for trading.

The former Board member, who could no longer trade his BIBC week 52, had joined a vacation club where he paid $299 to join and $99 a year dues and could then rent weeks for maintenace fee levels or less.  He said it was all RCI weeks, and seemed to include the 45 day inventory.  The other had discovered another rental site with RCI inventory.

Since these were longtime timesharers whose home resort was in limbo, I did something I would not with an non-timesharer.  I let them know about Sky Auction as another rental source.

Neither of these people participate in online t/s mesage boards or subscribe to t/s publications, yet both had managed to stumble across RCI rental sites.  I found that interesting.


----------



## mdmbdumont (Feb 8, 2006)

Carolinian said:
			
		

> Neither of these people participate in online t/s mesage boards or subscribe to t/s publications, yet both had managed to stumble across RCI rental sites.  I found that interesting.



ME TOO


----------



## mdmbdumont (Feb 8, 2006)

I got the end of an ad on WCVB-TV from Boston this morning about vacation rentals via their channel or website.  It almost sounded like another RCI rental outlet, but so far I have not found the right link on their homepage.  I will try to figure out the source of their rentals tonight at home.


----------



## BocaBum99 (Feb 8, 2006)

But no where nearly as fast as the word is spreading that the "World is Flat"

I just did a google search on "RCI Rentals" vs. "Flat Earth Society"

"RCI rentals" had 1970 results.  "Flat Earth Society" had 306,000 results.

So, there are 155 times more information being reported on the earth being flat vs. rentals at RCI.  This should give us a perspective on how important the topic of RCI rentals is to the world at large.


----------



## short (Feb 8, 2006)

*RCI holiday network franchise oppertunity*

Boca,

Look out "Flat Earth Society".  RCI rentals is coming on fast.  I cannot find the website now but I ran into the franchise site a few weeks ago.  As I recall the cost was somewhere around $15,000.

Maybe we should pool our money here on Tug and buy a franchise.

We could call it TUG Travel.
Or
Flat Earth Society Travel
Get them while they are Hot Travel.
If you can't beat them join them Travel.

How about Snap Travel.  Ops that ones taken.

Short


----------



## Carolinian (Feb 8, 2006)

A fellow timesharer who was at an ARDA meeting last year said there was a lot of consternation among folks there about RCI's shopping these things around.  They apparently come with software to plug into RCI's database.

RCI seems more interested in rentals than exchanges.





			
				short said:
			
		

> Boca,
> 
> Look out "Flat Earth Society".  RCI rentals is coming on fast.  I cannot find the website now but I ran into the franchise site a few weeks ago.  As I recall the cost was somewhere around $15,000.
> 
> ...


----------



## Lee B (Feb 8, 2006)

*Let's Add Costco to the List*

I just went to costco.com to look for a rental car.  Before I got to the cars, I saw "Condo Rentals Weekly" or something.  Sure enough, lots of familiar resort names.


----------



## JeffV (Feb 8, 2006)

And really high prices.  Makes timesharing even more appealing.


			
				Lee B said:
			
		

> I just went to costco.com to look for a rental car.  Before I got to the cars, I saw "Condo Rentals Weekly" or something.  Sure enough, lots of familiar resort names.


----------



## RonaldCol (Feb 10, 2006)

JeffV said:
			
		

> And really high prices.  Makes timesharing even more appealing.



Generally, you will find garbage weeks of timeshares are rented below maintenance and high demand weeks are rented out at higher than maintenance fees.

The issue should really be: is RCI renting out high demand weeks below maintainance fees?


----------



## timeos2 (Feb 10, 2006)

*Take what you can get*



			
				RonaldCol said:
			
		

> Generally, you will find garbage weeks of timeshares are rented below maintenance and high demand weeks are rented out at higher than maintenance fees.
> 
> The issue should really be: is RCI renting out high demand weeks below maintainance fees?


Why would they? They aren't in the business to leave money on the table. If you see resorts renting for less that the annual fee it's because thats the rate they (who ever is renting - not just RCI) feel the market will accept. Just because a maintenance fee is high at any given resort doesn't mean that is the rental market price. Hopefully the fee is less but in reality it may be more if thats the market.  Unlike weeks trades the value isn't one for one. In rentals the real market speaks and sets the going rate. Too low and the inventory flies away in a few minutes - too high and it just sits until expiration. Renters have to be knowledgeable to set the price at the right point. The annual fee doesn't matter to renters as they shop.


----------



## ramsark (Feb 10, 2006)

*What would happen if FCI denies exchange but you find rental is available through...*

What would happen if you wanted a certain RCI resort... then RCI tell you there was no availability for exchange...then you find this same resort has availability for RCI rental of the same unit size and time frame you want to exchange?  Is the inventory of resort designated rental/exchange at some point each year.  I don't mind RCI renting out "unused" inventory...but really seems unfair that rental customers would have priority over TS owners.  BUT, we pay each year whether we get what we want or not.   Newbie question...and this may be exactly why everyone is so upset about the rentals.  I welcome comment.
Thanks!
Jim


----------



## timeos2 (Feb 10, 2006)

*If you don't have the value you don't get the time*

Ramsark - The situation you describe should mean that the week you deposited isn't at least as valuable as the week you desire so, although it is in the pool, you don't have the trade power to claim it. Thus it goes to the rental pool if no other equal request was made. In points that doesn't happen if you have enough points you get the time. That is far too simplified but that is the bottom line. 

The logical next question is what IS the trade power of your deposit? No one knows and thats the main problem with weeks.  It is secret and you have to take their word for the fact that you missed out and rental won. Some see that as a good thing (the secret nature of the value). I don't.  That why I prefer a points system where I know what I have and what it can get.  Simple and easy to use.


----------



## ramsark (Feb 10, 2006)

*I have 2BR RED...FF 315,000 PT...Royal Sea Cliff-Hawaii*

I have 2BR Red...VIP FF 315,000 points...Home resort is FF Hawaii Royal Sea Cliff.  I guess I will have to see what trade power this really has...bought at developer prices and of course, was told trade power will be very high.  I assume this would be true because of location and floating week, so I do have high expections...but as you say...I may never really know until I do an exchange...  
Thanks for the response!
Jim


----------



## Carolinian (Feb 10, 2006)

RCI can easily feed its rental business from both Weeks and Points.  RCI employees confirm that exchange deposits of high demand weeks that have nothing to do with any of the extraneous items RCI provides these days are being put directly into the rental pool.

There are issues of concern with both off season and high season rentals.

High season rentals mean exchangers have less of the high demand inventory to trade into.  This hurts the exchange system.

Low season rentals flood the market and drive already marginal prices further downward.  This discourages people from owning these weeks to exchange and undermines resort finances as these people bail out.

Remember that, especially in overbuilt areas, ''red'' weeks can also be low season.  On the flip side, there are also some blue weeks that can be middling popular.  Color codes do not come close to telling the full story of potential impact on resorts.

Points really doen't help resorts either.  Points salesmen don't use the ''buy two weeks, pay two m/f's and traide into one'' argument that sometimes appears on these boards because they have learned that that dog doesn't hunt.  They sell off season points weeks on the basis of 9000 point crossover trades into the 45 day window of the Weeks system, something that is also being seriously undermined by RCI's rental activities.  Those weeks are now going more and more into the rental pot instead of for exchanges.


----------



## Carolinian (Feb 10, 2006)

RonaldCol said:
			
		

> The issue should really be: is RCI renting out high demand weeks below maintainance fees?



If they are renting high demand weeks that belong in the exchange system, this is a problem for exchangers no matter what they rent them for.

If they are flooding the market with lower demand weeks, this threatens resort's finances, and ultimately comes home to roost with their members who end up paying higher m/f's to make up for those who bail out to take advantage of cheaper rentals.


----------



## Lee B (Feb 10, 2006)

ramsark said:
			
		

> What would happen if you wanted a certain RCI resort... then RCI tell you there was no availability for exchange...then you find this same resort has availability for RCI rental of the same unit size and time frame you want to exchange?  Is the inventory of resort designated rental/exchange at some point each year.  I don't mind RCI renting out "unused" inventory...but really seems unfair that rental customers would have priority over TS owners.  BUT, we pay each year whether we get what we want or not.   Newbie question...and this may be exactly why everyone is so upset about the rentals.  I welcome comment.
> Thanks!
> Jim



RCI is funny about what they offer exchange requesters.  If the deposit you made for the request is a much nicer place than the requested one, the RCI person will not see availability for you.  Another person who deposited a plainer resort could get it though.  RCI is tougher about trading down than trading up.  These days, though, they aren't offering as many trades up as they used to.  So if your deposit didn't qualify for size, season or something else, they may turn you down too.

If nobody "qualifies" for an interval, they will offer it using other means, including Extra Vacations, Last Call and external rental.

Also, owner associations and developers may ask RCI to find renters for vacant units.  Those would never be offered to an exchange requester unless they told RCI to allow it.


----------



## getreal (Feb 11, 2006)

*RCI rental - follow the money*



			
				Lee B said:
			
		

> Also, owner associations and developers may ask RCI to find renters for vacant units.  *Those would never be offered to an exchange requester unless they told RCI to allow it.*



Lee, I bolded part of your statement, where you mention that some weeks are rentals only and cannot be exchanged.   Do you *know* this, or are you *guessing*?   Do you know if the HOA cares what RCI does with a vacant week?

Watergate taught me the phrase *"follow the money"*.  Hence I am curious how the rental revenue is divided.  Do you have details about this?

Until I saw your posting, I assumed that RCI keeps all of the rental revenue.  I assumed they were taking weeks from the exchange pool and renting them out, because they are greedy and rentals bring in more money than the $149 exchange fee.


----------



## Aldo (Feb 11, 2006)

timeos2 said:
			
		

> Ramsark - The situation you describe should mean that the week you deposited isn't at least as valuable as the week you desire so, although it is in the pool, you don't have the trade power to claim it. Thus it goes to the rental pool if no other equal request was made. In points that doesn't happen if you have enough points you get the time. That is far too simplified but that is the bottom line.
> 
> The logical next question is what IS the trade power of your deposit? No one knows and thats the main problem with weeks.  It is secret and you have to take their word for the fact that you missed out and rental won.




Absolute baloney.  Use your common sense.  How can the relative trade power or value of any particular resort be determined in an environment where many of the deposit weeks are simply skimmed out of the system and rented out?


----------



## timeos2 (Feb 11, 2006)

*Unknown shifting sands*



			
				Aldo said:
			
		

> Absolute baloney.  Use your common sense.  How can the relative trade power or value of any particular resort be determined in an environment where many of the deposit weeks are simply skimmed out of the system and rented out?


I'm far from a believer in the system used to detirmine what is excess inventory. But if you choose to deposit in weeks you are accepting the fact that there is a ranking procedure and historical guidelines that tells the exchange company what will get claimed by qualifying weeks and what won't that is continuously changing like sand in a windstorm.  If you don't believe that system works don't use it!   Being secret we have no way to know if it's fairly applied consistantly or used to the advantage of the exchange broker. It is what they say happens so take it or leave it.

Common sense tells me that given the chance to manipulate the process in secret somehow it will magically come out with valuable excess that is available to rent to the advantage of the broker.  And that seems to be happening.  Call me a skeptic but I prefer a system with the values clearly exposed to the users.


----------



## Carolinian (Feb 11, 2006)

From reports by RCI insiders, they are simply snatching deposits of desirable weeks and putting them in the rental pool.  That can happen just as easily in either Weeks or Points.  Points supporters have a false sense of security if they think it can't happen equally in both systems.  RCI rentals are a clear and present danger to the future of exchanging.





			
				timeos2 said:
			
		

> I'm far from a believer in the system used to detirmine what is excess inventory. But if you choose to deposit in weeks you are accepting the fact that there is a ranking procedure and historical guidelines that tells the exchange company what will get claimed by qualifying weeks and what won't that is continuously changing like sand in a windstorm.  If you don't believe that system works don't use it!   Being secret we have no way to know if it's fairly applied consistantly or used to the advantage of the exchange broker. It is what they say happens so take it or leave it.
> 
> Common sense tells me that given the chance to manipulate the process in secret somehow it will magically come out with valuable excess that is available to rent to the advantage of the broker.  And that seems to be happening.  Call me a skeptic but I prefer a system with the values clearly exposed to the users.


----------



## RonaldCol (Feb 13, 2006)

timeos2 said:
			
		

> Why would they? They aren't in the business to leave money on the table. If you see resorts renting for less that the annual fee it's because thats the rate they (who ever is renting - not just RCI) feel the market will accept. Just because a maintenance fee is high at any given resort doesn't mean that is the rental market price. Hopefully the fee is less but in reality it may be more if thats the market.  Unlike weeks trades the value isn't one for one. In rentals the real market speaks and sets the going rate. Too low and the inventory flies away in a few minutes - too high and it just sits until expiration. Renters have to be knowledgeable to set the price at the right point. The annual fee doesn't matter to renters as they shop.


*********************
Originally Posted by RonaldCol
Generally, you will find garbage weeks of timeshares are rented below maintenance and high demand weeks are rented out at higher than maintenance fees.

The issue should really be: is RCI renting out high demand weeks below maintainance fees?
*********************

John, you responded to my posting with, I believe, a slight misunderstanding. I wrote "... is RCI renting out high demand weeks below maintenance fees?"

I used the word "high demand" week, not "high maintenance fees week".

I've noticed that resorts that are in Hawaii, compared to resorts that are in the middle of nowhere, both with near-identical maintenance fees, will find their way to the RCI rental pool much quicker for well over their maintenance fees. The no-where, low demand timeshare weeks, will find their path of least resistance going to the public rental pool first at below their maintenance fees, but above some sort of internal RCI magic profit number. These no-where weeks might be routed to last call in RCI first to give RCI members a false shot at a timeshar resort.


----------



## Walt (Feb 13, 2006)

*I Don't See How Renting helps the Points Owners more than the Weeks Onwers.*



			
				timeos2 said:
			
		

> Common sense tells me that given the chance to manipulate the process in secret somehow it will magically come out with valuable excess that is available to rent to the advantage of the broker.  And that seems to be happening.  Call me a skeptic but I prefer a system with the values clearly exposed to the users.



I don't see how renting is an advantage to either the Points owners or the Weeks owners.  All renting does is to put less weeks in either the Week's and/or Point's Pools.

The one thing that the Points System does is allow RCI to conceal the renting of Owner's Weeks.

Walt


----------



## "Roger" (Feb 13, 2006)

Walt said:
			
		

> ...The one thing that the Points System does is allow RCI to conceal the renting of Owner's Weeks.
> 
> Walt



I'm confused.  How did Points help "conceal" renting Embassy units?  The Maui Embassy is in *Weeks* not in Points. 

In fact, I think you have it backwards.  As a Points owner, if I put 70,000 points in, I am going to get 70,000 of points back.  There is no such guarantee in Weeks.  If RCI (or II) were to get the average Weeks owner to trade down, this would "conceal" the fact that they are taking some of the top deposits (the Embassy Maui?) and renting them.

[Please note:  I am not saying anything about what actually happened.  But, it is Weeks, with its curtain of secrecy, that would allow "skimming."]


----------



## Walt (Feb 13, 2006)

*Read my post again and tell me what you think about Madge's Answer.*



			
				Roger said:
			
		

> I'm confused.  How did Points help "conceal" renting Embassy units?  The Maui Embassy is in *Weeks* not in Points.
> 
> In fact, I think you have it backwards.  As a Points owner, if I put 70,000 points in, I am going to get 70,000 of points back.  There is no such guarantee in Weeks.  If RCI (or II) were to get the average Weeks owner to trade down, this would "conceal" the fact that they are taking some of the top deposits (the Embassy Maui?) and renting them.
> 
> [Please note:  I am not saying anything about what actually happened.  But, it is Weeks, with its curtain of secrecy, that would allow "skimming."]




Roger,

Please read this post again.  Tell me what you thing about Madge's answer.  Also please tell me what advantage does Points Owners have because RCI is renting Owner's Weeks?

http://www.tugbbs.com/forums/showthread.php?t=12717&highlight=Walt

*Walt,

The units offered in Extra Vacations (or a vendor such as SnapTravel) may not always be the specific units that were deposited for non-exchange transactions. For example, the member who requests a cruise exchange may be using a deposited week that was long ago assigned to another RCI member. When this is the case, an equivalent unit is taken in place of that member's deposited unit. Equivalence here is based on our standard Trading Power guidelines.

I responded to this question here as well.
__________________
~ Madge  * 

What is equal to Hawaii in March, April, and May?  

RCI is using the Points as a reason to justify renting of Owner's Weeks.

Walt  

PS

I still find Madge's Answer Unbelievable.  I also believe that my ASK RCI thread proves that RCI is renting out Owner's Weeks.


----------



## "Roger" (Feb 13, 2006)

I don't see anything in Madge's response that refers to these cruises being taken by Points members.  RCI offers cruises to Weeks members.  That is why she only mentions cruises and not any of the other things Points members can trade their points for.

In the end, Points members can back what they put in, point for point.  If skimming occurs, Weeks is what makes it possible.  There is nothing in the Weeks system that guarantees that RCI/II have to give back the same value that the owners put in.  

(I said this before, but back in '96, my wife said that RCI had every incentive to get people to trade down so that they could use the top units for profit.  That was before Points even existed.  Her whole attitude toward time sharing changed when we joined Points.  She now feels we are getting back the full value of our timeshare.)


----------



## Walt (Feb 13, 2006)

Roger said:
			
		

> I don't see anything in Madge's response that refers to these cruises being taken by Points members.  RCI offers cruises to Weeks members.  That is why she only mentions cruises and not any of the other things Points members can trade their points for.
> 
> In the end, Points members can back what they put in, point for point.  If skimming occurs, Weeks is what makes it possible.  There is nothing in the Weeks system that guarantees that RCI/II have to give back the same value that the owners put in.
> 
> (I said this before, but back in '96, my wife said that RCI had every incentive to get people to trade down so that they could use the top units for profit.  That was before Points even existed.  Her whole attitude toward time sharing changed when we joined Points.  She now feels we are getting back the full value of our timeshare.)



Do you really believe that ALL of the Maui Embassy weeks were Cruises Weeks?

Walt


----------



## "Roger" (Feb 13, 2006)

No.  I also don't believe that a single one of them came out of the Points system.  (This is not a Points resort.) If skimming does occur, it is Weeks that enables it.


----------



## BocaBum99 (Feb 13, 2006)

Walt said:
			
		

> I don't see how renting is an advantage to either the Points owners or the Weeks owners.  All renting does is to put less weeks in either the Week's and/or Point's Pools.
> 
> The one thing that the Points System does is allow RCI to conceal the renting of Owner's Weeks.
> 
> Walt



There is an advantage to points that doesn't exist in weeks.  You are given points for your deposit every year.  You can use it for an exchange of another week.  Or, you can use it for other goods and services.  Many people I know take their points and convert them into Disney tickets.  So, rather than have their week go usused and unexchanged, they get Disney tickets that appreciate in value.

The big problem with weeks exchanging is how many people who get nothing for their deposit.


----------



## Walt (Feb 13, 2006)

*Is it really a problem?*



			
				BocaBum99 said:
			
		

> There is an advantage to points that doesn't exist in weeks.  You are given points for your deposit every year.  You can use it for an exchange of another week.  Or, you can use it for other goods and services.  Many people I know take their points and convert them into Disney tickets.  So, rather than have their week go usused and unexchanged, they get Disney tickets that appreciate in value.
> 
> The big problem with weeks exchanging is how many people who get nothing for their deposit.



I don't have the answer.  But is it really a problem?  In over 20 years of Exchanging, I have always used my weeks.

Walt


----------



## Carolinian (Feb 13, 2006)

Roger said:
			
		

> In the end, Points members can back what they put in, point for point.  If skimming occurs, Weeks is what makes it possible.  There is nothing in the Weeks system that guarantees that RCI/II have to give back the same value that the owners put in.




There is no guarantee of getting the same value out of Points either, because the numbers are skewed to significantly overpoint some weeks, like resorts still in developer sales, and underpoint others, like sold our resorts in prime locations.  Indeed the term ''sold our resort'' has a sinister double meaning in the corrupt world of RCI Points.  Also due to the overaveraging problem which is endemic to Points, if you own in the higher range of a group of weeks that is averaged together, you are guaranteed not to get anything close to full value of what you put in back.  Ditto if you happen to own week 46, because in the years it is Thanksgiving, RCI Points is not flexible enough to recognize that (Weeks is!!!) and you get hosed instead of getting the Thanksgiving bump.


----------



## Carolinian (Feb 13, 2006)

I would call this a disadvantage as it serves to water down the core function of timeshare exchanging to offer unrelated frills.  To get the inventory of those frills, they rent out timeshare inventory, often including t/s exchange deposits not directly related to those getting the frills.  All of this undermines the core business.

I want an exchange company that does its core business correctly, and to heck with the extraneous frills!





			
				BocaBum99 said:
			
		

> There is an advantage to points that doesn't exist in weeks.  You are given points for your deposit every year.  You can use it for an exchange of another week.  Or, you can use it for other goods and services.  Many people I know take their points and convert them into Disney tickets.  So, rather than have their week go usused and unexchanged, they get Disney tickets that appreciate in value.
> 
> The big problem with weeks exchanging is how many people who get nothing for their deposit.


----------



## Walt (Feb 13, 2006)

*Help Me understand Madge's Statement!*



			
				Roger said:
			
		

> No.  I also don't believe that a single one of them came out of the Points system.  (This is not a Points resort.) If skimming does occur, it is Weeks that enables it.



Roger, 

Is Madge saying that RCI can take a week from the Weeks Pool to rent in order to cover the cost of a Cruise of a Points Partner transaction? 

As I understand Points, RCI will spacebank your week 10 months out.  And your Points account will be credit with X number of points.  Then 8 months out you use your points on a Cruise.  But my that time your week is gone.  Someone made an exchange for your week.  Where does RCI get a week to Rent?  Does this allow RCI to take the Maui Embassy weeks for rentals?  And my question to Madge was, "Since there were many, many Hawaii Resorts and weeks for Rent, but nothing for weeks Exchanges.  What is equal to Hawaii in March, April, and May?  Madge would not answer this question.  This is why I said, "The one thing that the Points System does is allow RCI to conceal the renting of Owner's Weeks."

Walt   

______________________________________________________________

From my post to Madge:

"When members exchange their weeks for cruises or use Points Partners transactions, RCI rents space to cover the costs of those services. Since those members deposited inventory with RCI Weeks or RCI Points, but aren't taking a corresponding vacation back out, RCI has rental "credits" based on what the members deposited.* These credits may or may not be redeemed in the form of the same units that were deposited.  * 

For example, a member who took a cruise exchange may have deposited his week a year prior and it would already have been assigned to someone for exchange. In that case, *we would use something comparable * to his unit for the rental credit. Comparability is based on the same guidelines as Trading Power. Or, we might use something that would provide similar rental value, but would be less scarce in the exchange program. That way, the unit in higher demand for exchanges would be kept in the exchange system."

Madge


----------



## JeffV (Feb 13, 2006)

You are certainly entitled to your opinion but that doesn't necessarily make it the choice of everyone.  Many like to have options and those are greatly reduced by forcing a week for a week, especially when you have no idea of what your week will get since the Weeks system operates completely in the dark. 
I also don't give much credence to your "RCI employee" quotes.  If they had such hard facts, all they have to do is blow the whistle on RCI and collect big time.  So far I haven't seen this happen.


			
				Carolinian said:
			
		

> I want an exchange company that does its core business correctly, and to heck with the extraneous frills!


----------



## Carolinian (Feb 13, 2006)

JeffV said:
			
		

> You are certainly entitled to your opinion but that doesn't necessarily make it the choice of everyone.  Many like to have options and those are greatly reduced by forcing a week for a week, especially when you have no idea of what your week will get since the Weeks system operates completely in the dark.
> I also don't give much credence to your "RCI employee" quotes.  If they had such hard facts, all they have to do is blow the whistle on RCI and collect big time.  So far I haven't seen this happen.



Anon at TimeshareTalk certainly has access to RCI's computers.  The site owner checked out his bonafides by asking specific questions which anon was able to anwer correctly.  He had to be what he says he is to do that.


----------



## BocaBum99 (Feb 13, 2006)

Walt said:
			
		

> I don't have the answer.  But is it really a problem?  In over 20 years of Exchanging, I have always used my weeks.
> 
> Walt



Walt,

Where do you think all of the extra vacations and last call weeks come from?   They are primarily owner deposits that were never exchanged.  For every week that ends up as an extra vacation or last call, either someone didn't get an exchange or RCI found an alternate to deposit like from a developer.  With developers and RCI renting weeks now.  Those most likely don't exist much anymore.  So, there are lots of depositers who get nothing in return.


----------



## "Roger" (Feb 13, 2006)

Carolinian said:
			
		

> ....Ditto if you happen to own week 46, because in the years it is Thanksgiving, *RCI Points is not flexible enough * to recognize that (Weeks is!!!) and you get hosed instead of getting the Thanksgiving bump.


For the record, here is how the Weeks handles Thanksgiving.  You own a week near Thanksgiving.  Some years your week is worthless (November is perhaps the lowest month of the year for travel).  Other years, it is worth a considerable amount of trading power (although, it is to RCI's/II's advantage at get you to trade down so they can skim).  So, in the "flexible" Weeks system, it is feast or fathom.

In the Points system, you buy "Thanksgiving week."  So, if you deposit your week, it is worth a great number of points, no matter what week Thanksgiving actually falls upon in a given year.  (You buy a consistently steady product.)  You are not left to the whims of the calandar.  People trading in, likewise will pay higher values if they actually travel on Thanksgiving week; lower if they take an off week.

Carolinian prefers the feast or famine approach.  I personally don't.  That is nothing more than a difference of opinion.  Fair enough.  But, to say Points is *not* "flexible" *because* they can *ADJUST* so that someone has a consistent Point value is absurd.  That is nothing more than saying black is white.


----------



## timeos2 (Feb 13, 2006)

*Averaging isn't a bad thing*

Roger - All points systems average over time periods to avoid peaks and valleys.

You have the right to and get the value for a time period such as June to August at one rate, September to November another, December another, etc.  No one period is singled out to get get a bonus (such as Thanksgiving) but many owners get the average value of the time that includes Thanksgiving. If they decide to reserve that specific use time they will pay more than they got for it unless it is their home resort. Thats OK because that premium helps keep demand in line with supply. It is very simple to understand and if someone wants a higher pointed period they know going in that they have to have at least that many points to get it. They can rent, borrow or combine points to reach the number needed. 

In weeks the one owner that happens to have that week gets the full benefit and those that fell just a hair short of "trade value", whatever that is, get nothing.  They have no chance to adjust that value except to go back in time and deposit earlier or use a different week if they have rights to one. Saying points doesn't adjust or isn't based on demand values is simply an incorrect statement. Some may prefer the method weeks uses in secret to do the same thing but I doubt many see it as a benefit.  And it certainly isn't flexible.  

There are a few winners in weeks if they happen to own a valuable week. There are many winners in points because they get the choice of all use times and get to decide when and where they want to use the value they own. I can understand why a few weeks owners would prefer the old way but most owners will understand and probably do better with points.  It doesn't bother me a bit that weeks is fading away as it simply isn't right for the job.


----------



## Carolinian (Feb 13, 2006)

What I am saying is that an owner should get the correct credit for what he owns.  A week 46 owner should be not cheated of the Thanksgiving bump when his week is actually Thanksgiving, and that is exactly what the inflexibility of the Points exchange mechanism does.  Why should a week 47 owner get something that does not rightfully belong to them, the Thanksgiving bump, while the week 46 owner, who it really belongs to gets ripped off?





			
				Roger said:
			
		

> For the record, here is how the Weeks handles Thanksgiving.  You own a week near Thanksgiving.  Some years your week is worthless (November is perhaps the lowest month of the year for travel).  Other years, it is worth a considerable amount of trading power (although, it is to RCI's/II's advantage at get you to trade down so they can skim).  So, in the "flexible" Weeks system, it is feast or fathom.
> 
> In the Points system, you buy "Thanksgiving week."  So, if you deposit your week, it is worth a great number of points, no matter what week Thanksgiving actually falls upon in a given year.  (You buy a consistently steady product.)  You are not left to the whims of the calandar.  People trading in, likewise will pay higher values if they actually travel on Thanksgiving week; lower if they take an off week.
> 
> Carolinian prefers the feast or famine approach.  I personally don't.  That is nothing more than a difference of opinion.  Fair enough.  But, to say Points is *not* "flexible" *because* they can *ADJUST* so that someone has a consistent Point value is absurd.  That is nothing more than saying black is white.


----------



## Carolinian (Feb 13, 2006)

You had better go back and check your points book!  Week 47 is given higher point totals in RCI Points many places, including the OBX.  For the OBX, it is on the same grid as the second tier of red weeks, although it is ''blue'' on the ancient color code charts.

Where averaging really overpoints some and underpoints others is in the spring and fall, where the desirability of weeks gradually declines or rises.  Saying week 33 in mid-August and week 43 in late October have the same value on the OBX, for example is just nuts.  The 33 has significantly higher demand over supply, rents for significantly more, and sells for significantly more.

But if you really want to see overaveraging gone nuts, see the Points generic crossover girds.  They say a New Years week in the Caribbean is worth the same as a hurricane season week in the Caribbean.  RCI must have had a heavy dose of ganga when they came up with that one!




			
				timeos2 said:
			
		

> Roger - All points systems average over time periods to avoid peaks and valleys.
> 
> You have the right to and get the value for a time period such as June to August at one rate, September to November another, December another, etc.  No one period is singled out to get get a bonus (such as Thanksgiving) but many owners get the average value of the time that includes Thanksgiving. If they decide to reserve that specific use time they will pay more than they got for it unless it is their home resort. Thats OK because that premium helps keep demand in line with supply. It is very simple to understand and if someone wants a higher pointed period they know going in that they have to have at least that many points to get it. They can rent, borrow or combine points to reach the number needed.
> 
> ...


----------



## timeos2 (Feb 13, 2006)

*Most points resorts aren't fixed weeks so no one "owns"  a use time*



			
				Carolinian said:
			
		

> What I am saying is that an owner should get the correct credit for what he owns.  A week 46 owner should be not cheated of the Thanksgiving bump when his week is actually Thanksgiving, and that is exactly what the inflexibility of the Points exchange mechanism does.  Why should a week 47 owner get something that does not rightfully belong to them, the Thanksgiving bump, while the week 46 owner, who it really belongs to gets ripped off?


You make it sound so sinister.  If that owner wants to use the week he deposited with points at his home resort he CAN get it without the premium.  But he won't get the "extra" points in his account in most cases since when he shops his points is isn't locked into that single use period or that resort.  Points avergae values to smooth over the assignment and use of points. It is up to the owner of those points - not some unknown enitity in a secret room - to decide how to use them to maximize the value to that owner.

By now we know we'll never see eye to eye on this. Unfortunately when I see points based system being tarred with unfair "problems" they don't have I feel the need to respond.


----------



## Carolinian (Feb 14, 2006)

He is still being denied his proper trade value in this collectivist policy of points.  An owner of week 46 should in any fair and honest system get his full trade value when Thanksgiving falls during his week. Points is simply not a fair and honest system.

From what I see in eastern North Carolina, the few Points resorts here are predominantly fixed week resorts not floating weeks.  I don't know if anyone has run the numbers for the whole system.




			
				timeos2 said:
			
		

> You make it sound so sinister.  If that owner wants to use the week he deposited with points at his home resort he CAN get it without the premium.  But he won't get the "extra" points in his account in most cases since when he shops his points is isn't locked into that single use period or that resort.  Points avergae values to smooth over the assignment and use of points. It is up to the owner of those points - not some unknown enitity in a secret room - to decide how to use them to maximize the value to that owner.
> 
> By now we know we'll never see eye to eye on this. Unfortunately when I see points based system being tarred with unfair "problems" they don't have I feel the need to respond.


----------



## CMF (Feb 14, 2006)

*Cendant PR News Release*

Cendant Reports 

" Hospitality Services     (Consisting of the Company's franchised lodging brands, hotel management, timeshare exchange and vacation rental businesses)

                                  2005        2004    % change
    Revenue   $  361      $  324       11%
    EBITDA     $   80      $   83       (4%)

    Revenue increased primarily due to growth in our lodging and RCI timeshare exchange businesses.  The largest contributor to revenue growth was the inclusion of approximately $30 million of revenue associated with the acquisition of Wyndham International, of which approximately $25 million had no impact on EBITDA because it related to reimbursable expenses.  Lodging revenue was also positively impacted by an 11% improvement in RevPAR, excluding Wyndham and Ramada International.  *Revenue from RCI  increased 8% primarily as a result of increased rental activity and RCI points transaction volume.  Partially offsetting these revenue increases was a decline at our European Vacation Rental business, which experienced slow booking patterns in the soft European travel marketplace.  EBITDA was negatively impacted primarily by a previously announced $16 million charge incurred to combine the operations of RCI and the Vacation Rental Group to form the Vacation Network Group.*"


Just in case this might be of interest to anyone.

Charles


----------



## "Roger" (Feb 14, 2006)

Carolinian said:
			
		

> What I am saying is that an owner should get the correct credit for what he owns.  A week 46 owner should be not cheated of the Thanksgiving bump when his week is actually Thanksgiving, and that is exactly what the inflexibility of the Points exchange mechanism does.  Why should a week 47 owner get something that does not rightfully belong to them, the Thanksgiving bump, while the week 46 owner, who it really belongs to gets ripped off?



There is absolutely nothing about points per se that would NOT allow it to be set up according to your _preference_ (and that is all that it is).  They could have let the number of points for weeks 46 and 47 go up and down depending upon where Thanksgiving fell a particular year.  In fact, they do do that when you trade _into_ a resort.  (So, don't tell me that the published guide makes that impossible.  Balony!)

Then, why didn't they set it up so that someone who owns one or the other of those two weeks have their allotted number of points go wildly up and down depending on the calandar year.  They made a marketing decision that your preference would be less popular than just assigning one of the two weeks as Thanksgiving and letting its point value remain stable.  People either buy a week that has high value every year or one that does not.  If they don't want the low value week, then they don't have to buy it.

So, within Points, RCI had several options on how to set up point values for Thanksgiving.  They chose one of them.  That does not indicate that points systems are "inflexible."  The fact that RCI had options to chose from would, if anything, indicate "flexibility" not inflexibility.  

(For the record, when Points owners talk about "flexibity" they are referring to the options that they, as owners, have.  Thus, RCI having choices is not what they mean by the points system being more flexible.  Likewise, the fact that the trading power of weeks 46 and 46 swing wildly within the Weeks system would not be what they mean by flexibility.) 

Finally, your original claim was also that allowing people to buy Thanksgiving week (regardless or where it occurred) created excess inventory within Points.  ?????


----------



## "Roger" (Feb 14, 2006)

Thanks, Charles.

Also of interest is the next section immediately after your quote.  Cendant's 
"Timeshare" business (this is Worldmark and Fairfield) easily had more revenue and higher profits than the "Hospitality" section (which includes RCI, their hotel holdings, their rental units which include several European rental companies that rent caravan spaces, country cottages, and camp sites).  That tells you where the big bucks in timesharing really lie -- the developers are the one's making the real money.


----------



## JLB (Feb 14, 2006)

I have not read anything except the OP.

Since it mentions Association board members, my comment is that not all Associations care about this issue.  I'm not sure how many would and how many wouldn't.  

In my case for our home resort, they don't care what the exchange companies do.  They are glad to have them as it enhances the resort.  In fact, they were rather perturbed with me for bringing it up.

Sorta like here sometimes.


----------



## reddiablosv (Feb 15, 2006)

RonaldCol said:
			
		

> Generally, you will find garbage weeks of timeshares are rented below maintenance and high demand weeks are rented out at higher than maintenance fees.
> 
> The issue should really be: is RCI renting out high demand weeks below maintainance fees?



I rented the last two weeks of summer at EVR PP Point for $629/wk from Snaptravel with my Amex discount.  Is this below MF?  Are these high demand weeks? Ben


----------

