# RCI did re-evaluate 200,000 deposits to their system and adjusted accordingly--ZAP!



## rickandcindy23 (Jun 15, 2009)

This information came from Carole Ablett in customer service.  

She told me my weeks had more trading power, both for Val Chatelle and Foxrun, than they should have, before the enhancement, and that is the reason for the adjustment.  It was originally a mistake, and now they have corrected that error.  

So basically I could see everything before, but now I see very little of what I could see before as far as DVC and Hawaii are concerned.  I can no longer see Anaheim's Dolphin's Cove, except for a couple of 1 bedrooms. Also, I cannot see as many larger units and must settle for one bedrooms, even though our weeks are all 2+ bedrooms.  

She couldn't explain why there is nothing in North Carolina available in their system for summer of 2010, Foxrun, nor could she explain the same season for Val Chatelle having no deposits.  There isn't anything for summer 2010 for either resort.  She looked at Foxrun to see if it was internal exchanges and discovered it wasn't, people are exchanging into Foxrun from many other areas. 

At least someone told me the truth, now I just need to concentrate on getting vacations lined up for all of my weeks, catching the spacebanks as they appear online, and then I will be done with RCI for good, except for points.  

And to think I was considering giving them my SDO and SBP.  I would have to be out of my mind.


----------



## suzanne (Jun 15, 2009)

is is what I see right now using a GC Studio for 4 Christmas Week in Reno, NV. Hope this helps.

Suzanne


Enlarge Images     
Foxrun Townhouses (#4305)  
Be the first to write a review  
180 Herman Wilson Road 
Lake Lure, NC  28746 
USA 
828/625-0097 
www.8664myvacation.com 


MAP RESORT  

If the resort requires a mandatory all-inclusive fee, then such fee, depending on the resort and season, may cover meals, drinks, tours transportation, resort activities, resort amenities, services and facilities and is required to be prepaid at or before check-in. If the resort makes available an optional all-inclusive package for an additional fee, then such fee, depending on resort and season, may cover meals, drinks, tours, transportation, resort activities, resort amenities, services and facilities. A Member may not be able to purchase food or drink at the resort if he/she chooses not to pay the optional fee. Fees, terms and conditions of packages covered by an all-inclusive fee are determined solely by the resort, and are subject to change at any time.   Please wait while we retrieve your results...  



      Available Units  
  Resort Details  
  Area Attractions  
  Transportation  
  Reviews  

Available Units 


How you got here 
Location 
USA  |  Carolinas and the Southeast  |  North Carolina  

Narrow Your Search 
 Check-In Month  
November 2009  [4]  
December 2009  [8]  
January 2010  [2]  
February 2010  [1]  
March 2010  [1]  
April 2010  [1]  
September 2010  [1]  
October 2010  [2]  
December 2010  [1]  

 Check-In Day of the Week  



 Units that meet your criteria Total Units Available: 21 
   Unit Type Max Occup
(Privacy) Kitchen Check-In Date Check-Out Date Price 
  2 BR 6 (6) Full 13-Nov-2009 20-Nov-2009 Exchange Fee Only 
  2 BR 6 (6) Full 14-Nov-2009 21-Nov-2009 Exchange Fee Only 
  2 BR 6 (6) Full 27-Nov-2009 04-Dec-2009 Exchange Fee Only 
  2 BR 6 (6) Full 28-Nov-2009 05-Dec-2009 Exchange Fee Only 
  2 BR 6 (6) Full 04-Dec-2009 11-Dec-2009 Exchange Fee Only 
  2 BR 6 (6) Full 05-Dec-2009 12-Dec-2009 Exchange Fee Only 
  2 BR 6 (6) Full 11-Dec-2009 18-Dec-2009 Exchange Fee Only 
  2 BR 6 (6) Full 12-Dec-2009 19-Dec-2009 Exchange Fee Only 
  2 BR 6 (6) Full 18-Dec-2009 25-Dec-2009 Exchange Fee Only 
  2 BR 6 (6) Full 19-Dec-2009 26-Dec-2009 Exchange Fee Only 
  2 BR 6 (6) Full 25-Dec-2009 01-Jan-2010 Exchange Fee Only 
  2 BR 6 (6) Full 26-Dec-2009 02-Jan-2010 Exchange Fee Only 
  2 BR 6 (6) Full 02-Jan-2010 09-Jan-2010 Exchange Fee Only 
  2 BR 6 (6) Full 22-Jan-2010 29-Jan-2010 Exchange Fee Only 
  2 BR 6 (6) Full 06-Feb-2010 13-Feb-2010 Exchange Fee Only 
  2 BR 6 (6) Full 12-Mar-2010 19-Mar-2010 Exchange Fee Only 
  2 BR 6 (6) Full 09-Apr-2010 16-Apr-2010 Exchange Fee Only 
  2 BR 6 (6) Full 04-Sep-2010 11-Sep-2010 Exchange Fee Only 
  2 BR 6 (6) Full 02-Oct-2010 09-Oct-2010 Exchange Fee Only 
  2 BR 6 (6) Full 08-Oct-2010 15-Oct-2010 Exchange Fee Only 
  2 BR 6 (6) Full 18-Dec-2010 25-Dec-2010 Exchange Fee Only 

 Val Chatelle III (#5160)  
Be the first to write a review  
109 Alpine Drive 
Frisco, CO  80435 
USA 
970/468-8363 


MAP RESORT  

If the resort requires a mandatory all-inclusive fee, then such fee, depending on the resort and season, may cover meals, drinks, tours transportation, resort activities, resort amenities, services and facilities and is required to be prepaid at or before check-in. If the resort makes available an optional all-inclusive package for an additional fee, then such fee, depending on resort and season, may cover meals, drinks, tours, transportation, resort activities, resort amenities, services and facilities. A Member may not be able to purchase food or drink at the resort if he/she chooses not to pay the optional fee. Fees, terms and conditions of packages covered by an all-inclusive fee are determined solely by the resort, and are subject to change at any time.   Please wait while we retrieve your results...  



      Available Units  
  Resort Details  
  Area Attractions  
  Transportation  
  Reviews  

Available Units 


How you got here 
Location 
USA  |  Rocky Mountains  

Narrow Your Search 
 Check-In Month  
October 2009  [2]  
November 2009  [1]  
April 2011  [1]  



 Units that meet your criteria Total Units Available: 4 
   Unit Type Max Occup
(Privacy) Kitchen Check-In Date Check-Out Date Price 
  2 BR 8 (6) Full 02-Oct-2009 09-Oct-2009 Exchange Fee Only 
  2 BR 8 (6) Full 23-Oct-2009 30-Oct-2009 Exchange Fee Only 
  2 BR 8 (6) Full 13-Nov-2009 20-Nov-2009 Exchange Fee Only 
  2 BR 8 (6) Full 22-Apr-2011 29-Apr-2011 Exchange Fee Only


----------



## cr4909 (Jun 15, 2009)

Not to defend RCI, or anything, because their handling of the situation was atrocious.  However, it's all just a shell game anyway.  We're all taking a certain amount of risk in attempting to exchange a deposit that we will not use.  Originally when I bought my SA week it couldn't pull much, so that's why I've always used it for PFD.  Then when the new "search the world" GUI came out, I tried it and discovered I could pull everything, even DVC.  Now, that it has been adjusted, it is still ok, but not as good as I like it, so it goes back to PFD.  That is, until the RCI gods decide that PFD is no longer an option.

Although you may not like it, RCI is still probably the best option in many cases if you wish to exchange.  The solution, of course, is to only buy where you'll go, or go to one of the mini-programs where you still have to deal with the quirks and whims of the developers, but on a smaller scale.

Hope you were able to make some DVC exchanges while your weeks had the elevated trading power.


----------



## lgreenspan (Jun 15, 2009)

I am done with RCI. If the current exchanges is what I have to deal with. I currently have 4 weeks deposited. NO more deposits ever.


----------



## steved2psi (Jun 15, 2009)

*Boo! Hiss!*

I deposited my 2010 week based on the strength of my 2009 week.  (week 26 2br Twin Rivers).  My deposited week is gone so the demand for that week must have been pretty good.  It appears that RCI has arbitrarily reassigned value and I do not buy their "reassignment" explanation.  Do we Tuggers want to contact the law firm that won the other RCI class action lawsuit and see if we have grounds for another class action?  I will be happy to take the lead.


----------



## rickandcindy23 (Jun 15, 2009)

lgreenspan said:


> I am done with RCI. If the current exchanges is what I have to deal with. I currently have 4 weeks deposited. NO more deposits ever.



I am hoping more people will feel this way. 

We did get DVC exchanges, that is good.  But now that they are mostly gone, I am kinda bummed about it.  But mostly it's Hawaii!   

We still have an RCI points account, and one of our weeks will get us enough points to make it worthwhile, and I can get Disney that way, if I choose to get Disney.  I still have a sister whose 50th birthday is coming up in February, and she was counting on a great gift from big sis, a week at Shearwater for her birthday week, or the week before.  I am going to keep that ongoing search active, just in case RCI comes through for me.


----------



## bnoble (Jun 15, 2009)

This is even more evidence in support the working theory I've had for a good week or two now---there was a brief period when the "search the world" interface was first deployed when trade power computations were _dumbed down_ into only a handful of levels to improve response time on the website. 

Now, we're seeing a return to the pre-search-the-world days of many many many trade power levels.  Some folks have reported drops in trade power, others have reported increases.  Just like Black Sunday, which was the last time this happened.

It serves as a useful though painful reminder: nothing is _ever_ certain in an exchange system.  Trade power can change.  Point values can change.  The only thing you know is that you own what you own, period.  This reinforces the cautions that appear on TUG all the time---don't buy to exchange, and certainly don't buy with the expectation of making a very specific exchange.  

And, even though it is good advice, that doesn't mean that I always follow it.



> Do we Tuggers want to contact the law firm that won the other RCI class action lawsuit and see if we have grounds for another class action?


I don't.  The only thing the last round accomplished was that some lawyers got paid, RCI got legal blessing for their business model, and we got a few very minor things thrown our way.  Why throw good money after bad?


----------



## rickandcindy23 (Jun 15, 2009)

But Brian, I was always able to get lots of Hawaii with Val Chatelle before the November system upgrade.  They have devalued my week, when it always had high trading power.  

I read my first sentence and it sounds whiny.


----------



## urple2 (Jun 15, 2009)

you gotta see what those already weak Wyndham point deposits see now...

They will definately see a whole lot less deposits from me.


----------



## dougp26364 (Jun 15, 2009)

steved2psi said:


> I deposited my 2010 week based on the strength of my 2009 week.  (week 26 2br Twin Rivers).  My deposited week is gone so the demand for that week must have been pretty good.  It appears that RCI has arbitrarily reassigned value and I do not buy their "reassignment" explanation.  Do we Tuggers want to contact the law firm that won the other RCI class action lawsuit and see if we have grounds for another class action?  I will be happy to take the lead.




If you watched the last class action laswuit, then you KNOW they don't really work. It took forever to push through and the results sucked. Speak with your feet. Drop you RCI membership, quit giving them your weeks and use one of the independent exchange systems like SFX, TPI or Redweek if you must exchange.

I feel that we're fortunate in that, of the two weeks we own with RCI, one we purchased strictly to use and the other has it's own internal exchange system that works very well for us. Our personal membership with RCI is gone and, if HGVC gave us the option to opt-out of their corporate membership with RCI and save that money, I'd do that as well. 

The simple solution to bring RCI to it's knee's much faster than any class action could do is to stop using them and cancel memberships. Otherwise, RCI will just continue to do as it pleases with the weeks the YOU own.


----------



## Jon77 (Jun 15, 2009)

bnoble said:


> It serves as a useful though painful reminder: nothing is _ever_ certain in an exchange system.  Trade power can change.  Point values can change.  The only thing you know is that you own what you own, period.  This reinforces the cautions that appear on TUG all the time---don't buy to exchange, and certainly don't buy with the expectation of making a very specific exchange.



Well put! That reminded me of something I have been telling people over the years when they have asked me what is important in buying a timeshare.  I have told them a couple of guidelines.

1. Where you own is more important than where you want to exchange to. 

2. Don't buy anywhere that you would not be content returning to in the future.


----------



## dougp26364 (Jun 15, 2009)

bnoble said:


> This is even more evidence in support the working theory I've had for a good week or two now---there was a brief period when the "search the world" interface was first deployed when trade power computations were _dumbed down_ into only a handful of levels to improve response time on the website.
> 
> Now, we're seeing a return to the pre-search-the-world days of many many many trade power levels.  Some folks have reported drops in trade power, others have reported increases.  Just like Black Sunday, which was the last time this happened.
> 
> ...




I'll second the sentiment about buying what you like and where you want to exchange and add that, right now, owning a week that's in a good internal exhcange system doesn't hurt.

Over the years, we've purchased 4 Las Vegas timeshares. Each one was just a little nicer that the one before and, eventually those first two purchases became exchange only weeks. When we had the opportunity to put those weeks into an internal exchange system, we jumped at the opportunity. Not because I just had money to burn but, to protect the exchange value in a vacation town that was quickly becoming over populated with timeshare weeks. I could see trade value going down on those weeks to a point where the MF's might not make sense with keeping them. 

Yes change does happen and values can go down. But it's usually a slow process over several years as the resort becomes older and newer, more desirable, units become available in the same general area. RCI seems to just arbitrarily change the rules mid-game AFTER they have your weeks and have them rented out.


----------



## bnoble (Jun 15, 2009)

> I was always able to get lots of Hawaii with Val Chatelle before the November system upgrade.


And you might still again---I think HI suffered from the same problem DVC did for a week or two there.  It's not that _you_ can't see them so much as _no one_ can.  I suspect that during the glitchy period, a lot of those weeks got snapped up by people who normally couldn't see them.  DVC has near-weekly deposits of 40-50 units, and it has already recovered (though of course I can no longer see all of them.)  HI might take longer, and you might not see all of those, either, but I think it is likely to get better.

That said, your point is well-taken.  It may not just be a return to many many levels. It may also have included a re-valuation that changes things.  If you assume that the re-valuation was not done maliciously, it might have even been the "fair" thing to do.  In my own case, I have a nice week on deposit, but is it _really_ in the same league as summer oceanfront?  In all honesty, probably not.  

But, it is a week I'd be happy to use myself, and I can drive to it in a single day easily.  So far, everything I own falls into this category.  And, this upheaval reminds me that this is a Very Good Thing.


----------



## Steve (Jun 15, 2009)

I certainly can sympathize with the frustration of having a week lose a lot of its trade power.  However, I'm not sure I can understand the logic that says that a summer week at Foxrun, Twin Rivers, or even Val Chatelle should be entitled to enchange into the creme of the crop of the RCI system...ie, Disney Resorts, Pahio at the Shearwater, etc.  These don't seem to be "like for like" exchanges to me...and while it is wonderful to get them...I don't think they should be considered an entitlement.  

I also struggle with the logic that because someone exchanged into your week at Twin Rivers or Foxrun (or wherever), therefore your week is obviously high demand and you should be able to trade into a far superior resort such as Disney.  We don't know what resorts people are using to exchange into Twin Rivers or Foxrun or Val Chatelle, but I somehow doubt that most of them are using Disney weeks or Pahio at the Shearwater.  It might well be people trading from resorts in Iowa or New Bern, NC.  In fact, I think that this is far more likely.    

So, to answer the question of a lawsuit against RCI because a week at Twin Rivers (that was probably acquired for free) doesn't pull the top of the line resorts...count me out.  I don't believe those sorts of exchanges are an entitlement, and I don't think a court would rule that they are.  RCI never promised you those types of exchanges.  If you're not happy with RCI, drop your membership.  If you don't want to actually stay at Twin Rivers or Foxrun or Val Chatelle, then sell your weeks.  (I've taken my own advice, by the way.  I used to own two weeks at Foxrun, and I have sold both of them.) 

It really does reduce a lot of stress...and prevent a lot of frustration...to buy where you want to vacation.  It may cost a bit more in monetary terms, but it is richly rewarding in terms of peace of mind and vacation enjoyment.  Then you really are entitled to vacation where and when you want.  That's a very nice feeling.

Steve


----------



## rickandcindy23 (Jun 15, 2009)

Val Chatelle is a Silver Crown resort in Summit County, Colorado.  Shearwater was ALWAYS an exchange I could see with Val Chatelle, since 2006, and so was Bali Hai, so I guess I don't get what you are saying.  2010 summer in Summit County is hard to get right now, and that is what I deposited.

I actually own two Shearwater weeks.  I own Bali Hai.  I don't own in Orlando, but I do own Wyndham points.  I can go where I want with my ownerships, but I have had great luck with exchanging, until now.


----------



## AKE (Jun 15, 2009)

Trading power should move up and down with the demand for the resort.  Just because a resort pulled lots prior to the upgrade and now is pulling less doesn't mean that there is a mistake in the RCI algorithm - maybe the algorithm was incorrect before and now it has been corrected (so be glad that you got the great trades when you did).


----------



## Steve (Jun 16, 2009)

rickandcindy23 said:


> Val Chatelle is a Silver Crown resort in Summit County, Colorado.  Shearwater was ALWAYS an exchange I could see with Val Chatelle, since 2006, and so was Bali Hai, so I guess I don't get what you are saying.  2010 summer in Summit County is hard to get right now, and that is what I deposited.



While Val Chatelle may be a Silver Crown resort, and summer 2010 weeks may be hard to get right now in Summit County, it's just not in the same league as Pahio at the Shearwater or Disney...not in terms of resort quality, amenities, nor location.  Those are not "like for like" exchanges.  If you owned at Hyatt's Grand Aspen (for example, I realize it trades in II) and couldn't exchange into quality resorts in Hawaii or Disney resorts, then I think you would have a more valid complaint.

The fact that you were able to exchange for a particular resort(s) a few years in a row doesn't mean you are *entitled* to do so forever more.  Much has changed with RCI over the past 30+ years, and more changes are yet to come.  Few businesses stay static as the markets change around them.

With the amount of stress you have dealing with the exchange companies, Cindy, I think it's worth considering selling your Colorado and Foxrun weeks and buying more in Hawaii and Orlando.  It's really nice owning where you love to vacation.

Steve


----------



## jamstew (Jun 16, 2009)

bnoble said:


> But, it is a week I'd be happy to use myself, and I can drive to it in a single day easily.  So far, everything I own falls into this category.  And, this upheaval reminds me that this is a Very Good Thing.



I also own a resort (2BR summer lakefront on Lake Hamilton in Hot Springs) that I've been happy to use for about half of the 25 years we've had it, but when we exchanged, we were *always* able to get summer 2BR  beachfront Gulf, Yucatan & Puerto Vallarta, or the Rockies. We *always* got nice resorts, not spectacular but nice. Now I can't even get an old Florida motel conversion on the northern Gulf coast in anything other than a studio or a 1BR at not-so-great properties for the next two years. I'm not even looking for summer, snowbird season or a holiday. Of course RCI is happy to rent me a 2BR, and that's just wrong. 

Had I known I was going to lose the ability to get a fair exchange, my resort could have rented my weeks for at least enough to cover maintenance fees. Now all four deposits are essentially useless to me. I'll find a nice rental, and it *won't* be through RCI.  

I can see every Wyndham on the planet _except_ Bonnet Creek, which is the one place I want to stay in Orlando because it has a shuttle to Disney and I can't drive after dark. It's absolutely ridiculous. I don't know what I'm going to do yet, but I'm done with RCI.  (I need a smilie with steam coming out of my ears)


----------



## jamstew (Jun 16, 2009)

AKE said:


> Trading power should move up and down with the demand for the resort.  Just because a resort pulled lots prior to the upgrade and now is pulling less doesn't mean that there is a mistake in the RCI algorithm - maybe the algorithm was incorrect before and now it has been corrected (so be glad that you got the great trades when you did).



Well, if the algorithm was incorrect in my case, it had been incorrect for 25 years. I'm in the same situation as Cindy except that I'm not even looking for especially upscale exchanges. I can't get squat, let alone "like for like."


----------



## Egret1986 (Jun 16, 2009)

*I have to agree with what you said, Steve, because that's what I've been thinking*



Steve said:


> I certainly can sympathize with the frustration of having a week lose a lot of its trade power.  However, I'm not sure I can understand the logic that says that a summer week at Foxrun, Twin Rivers, or even Val Chatelle should be entitled to enchange into the creme of the crop of the RCI system...ie, Disney Resorts, Pahio at the Shearwater, etc.  These don't seem to be "like for like" exchanges to me...and while it is wonderful to get them...I don't think they should be considered an entitlement.
> 
> I also struggle with the logic that because someone exchanged into your week at Twin Rivers or Foxrun (or wherever), therefore your week is obviously high demand and you should be able to trade into a far superior resort such as Disney.  We don't know what resorts people are using to exchange into Twin Rivers or Foxrun or Val Chatelle, but I somehow doubt that most of them are using Disney weeks or Pahio at the Shearwater.  It might well be people trading from resorts in Iowa or New Bern, NC.  In fact, I think that this is far more likely.
> 
> ...



I believe some folks have gotten things in the past and now have a sense of entitlement.  I also agree that I don't understand why folks are up in arms when they aren't getting DVC and the likes with their "as you said" probably free weeks.

I've refrained from commenting because it's evident that there is a lot of stress and anger based on changes that have taken place at RCI.  

You have given good advice (as has been given on TUG many times before).  If you aren't happy now that your trading power has been realigned more to like-for-like exchange power and you don't like the quality of resorts that are similar to what you own, then you need to get out of RCI, sell what you own and buy what you like.

Think how the folks feel that have these high quality resorts and can't exchange like-for-like and can only get downgrades, which probably happens alot.  Many I am sure have gotten fed up and quit depositing these units with RCI.  So now there are less of these high quality resorts.  Shouldn't these be available (through trade power) to the folks who have the high quality resorts instead of folks who have resorts that are much lower quality and less desired?  This is not to say anything negative about what anyone owns; only that you should acknowledge that what you own and what you want are not comparable exchanges.

In 25+ years of RCI membership, I have always felt (except once) that I got at least the same quality and desirability as what I was exchanging, but almost always I have felt that I got upgrades either to a nicer resort, a better season or a more demanded area.  It's a great thing and I've loved it, but how can I expect that?  It's a gift to me, not an entitlement. :whoopie: 

Maybe that's why I'm calm and at peace right now with the changes going on at RCI.  If things no longer make me happy at RCI, then I'll cancel my membership and move on instead of crying, belly-aching, trying to start protests, form movements, harrassing employees and the like to try to break them down to do what best serves me.  It isn't going to happen, so why take years off my life by stressing and throwing fits trying to change something that I have no control over.  Better to make the changes that I can have control over to ultimately fit my needs.

Best wishes to all!


----------



## T_R_Oglodyte (Jun 16, 2009)

We allowed our RCI membership to lapse several years ago - when our paid up time expired we didn't renew.

I reached that decision for a couple of reasons.  The primary reason was because we just didn't see that much value coming back from RCI.  Total costs were increasing too fast, and RCI was simply no longer competitive with other exchange companies for meeting our needs.  In addition, we were adjusting out portfolio to make use of mini-systems for so that we wouldn't need to depend on exchanges for most of our traveling needs.

The second reason - and it's somewhat related to the first - is that it was obvious that exchangers are really not RCI's primary customers.  RCI's fealty first and foremost is to developers.  RCI is success is much more closely tied to developers selling RCI memberships as part of the sales process than it is tied to satisfying the exchangers who are it's current members.

In most cases once someone joins RCI because of the membership sold with their purchase, that person does not shop around for an exchange company. If they exchange, they use RCI, and RCI doesn't really have to do very much to keep that person's business.


----------



## Carolinian (Jun 16, 2009)

rickandcindy23 said:


> But Brian, I was always able to get lots of Hawaii with Val Chatelle before the November system upgrade.  They have devalued my week, when it always had high trading power.
> 
> I read my first sentence and it sounds whiny.



You are on the board at Val Chatelle.  This ''adjustement'' should be communicated to members, and at the same time that you announce that the resort is dual affiliatiating with II, and listing all of the independent exchange companies that your members can use.  If the resort has been hosed by RCI on trading power, the HOA board should not take it lying down!


----------



## Carolinian (Jun 16, 2009)

It is more than just individuals fighting back by switching exchange companies.

Resorts that have been victims need to fight back by dual affiliating with II, educating their members about independent exchange companies,  and letting their members know that their own resort has been hosed by RCI.

If you think these ''enhancements'' were geared at making things fairer for members, then I have a timeshare week on a certain bridge in NY I would like to sell you.  They changes are undoubtedly intended to manipulate trading power to create more ''excess'' inventory, especially among the better weeks, for RCI to rent out.  Follow the money.  This is all about RCI rentals.




Egret1986 said:


> I believe some folks have gotten things in the past and now have a sense of entitlement.  I also agree that I don't understand why folks are up in arms when they aren't getting DVC and the likes with their "as you said" probably free weeks.
> 
> I've refrained from commenting because it's evident that there is a lot of stress and anger based on changes that have taken place at RCI.
> 
> ...


----------



## Carolinian (Jun 16, 2009)

Welcome to Rental Condominiums International!

This change ("upgrade" is a laugh!) is all about rentals, that is shoveling more of them to RCI, and about hosing the exchange members.  RCI should be ashamed of themselves.




jamstew said:


> I also own a resort (2BR summer lakefront on Lake Hamilton in Hot Springs) that I've been happy to use for about half of the 25 years we've had it, but when we exchanged, we were *always* able to get summer 2BR  beachfront Gulf, Yucatan & Puerto Vallarta, or the Rockies. We *always* got nice resorts, not spectacular but nice. Now I can't even get an old Florida motel conversion on the northern Gulf coast in anything other than a studio or a 1BR at not-so-great properties for the next two years. I'm not even looking for summer, snowbird season or a holiday. Of course RCI is happy to rent me a 2BR, and that's just wrong.
> 
> Had I known I was going to lose the ability to get a fair exchange, my resort could have rented my weeks for at least enough to cover maintenance fees. Now all four deposits are essentially useless to me. I'll find a nice rental, and it *won't* be through RCI.
> 
> I can see every Wyndham on the planet _except_ Bonnet Creek, which is the one place I want to stay in Orlando because it has a shuttle to Disney and I can't drive after dark. It's absolutely ridiculous. I don't know what I'm going to do yet, but I'm done with RCI.  (I need a smilie with steam coming out of my ears)


----------



## Carolinian (Jun 16, 2009)

Like for like has to do with supply and demand.  I like frills, too, and they are indeed one of the drivers of demand.  But supply is the other side of the equation, and Orlando is one of the most overbuilt places for timeshare on the planet.  The only other places that may be close are Branson and the Canary Islands.





Steve said:


> While Val Chatelle may be a Silver Crown resort, and summer 2010 weeks may be hard to get right now in Summit County, it's just not in the same league as Pahio at the Shearwater or Disney...not in terms of resort quality, amenities, nor location.  Those are not "like for like" exchanges.  If you owned at Hyatt's Grand Aspen (for example, I realize it trades in II) and couldn't exchange into quality resorts in Hawaii or Disney resorts, then I think you would have a more valid complaint.
> 
> The fact that you were able to exchange for a particular resort(s) a few years in a row doesn't mean you are *entitled* to do so forever more.  Much has changed with RCI over the past 30+ years, and more changes are yet to come.  Few businesses stay static as the markets change around them.
> 
> ...


----------



## steved2psi (Jun 16, 2009)

*Here is why I feel a little ticked off*

Maybe others consider my attitude as a sense of entitlement, but that is not how I view it.  I certainly dont expect my Suites at Fall Creek to pull DVC or numerous Hawaii, they never did or probably never will.  I don't recall how many they pulled BE (before enhancement), but they look close.  I deposited my 2010 Twin Rivers week in good faith based on what my 2009 week pulled (Christmas DVC).  What I paid for Twin Rivers does not factor into the equation, since most Tuggers get their weeks for pennies on the dollar.  The supply of Twin Rivers was showing only 4 weeks, while supply may be less due to resort size, my point was supply/demand should drive value (as quality even more so).

I would like to get a reasonable explanation as to why my week was devalued.  Was it silver crown vs gold, value of week in the RCI rental pool, etc?  It's like buying an item for $10, then seeing your credit card statement saying $15 and getting the explanation that the price was wrong, too bad, it should have always been $15.  

As to dropping RCI, my 2009 and 2010 weeks are deposited and my membership fees are paid up through 2010 as well.

Look at RCI's parent company 10-Q financials, exchange revenue and membership revenue way down.  While it may be the economy, they don't seem to care about making their customers happy.

My desire (entitlement?) is to restore the trading power of my 2010 week.  I am perfectly happy to have 2011 and beyond to stand on it's own.


----------



## BocaBum99 (Jun 16, 2009)

I'll offer a slightly different point of view.  I would continue to use RCI if a person believes that what they are pulling has more value than what they are putting in using whatever metric is important to them.

However, I would EXPECT over time that if what you deposit is likely to RENT for LESS than what you want to exchange for, then in the future, your trading power will be reduced.  Conversely, if what you deposit is likely to RENT for MORE than what you want to exchange into, then your trading power is likely to increase over time.


----------



## gmarine (Jun 16, 2009)

steved2psi said:


> Maybe others consider my attitude as a sense of entitlement, but that is not how I view it.  I certainly dont expect my Suites at Fall Creek to pull DVC or numerous Hawaii, they never did or probably never will.  I don't recall how many they pulled BE (before enhancement), but they look close.  I deposited my 2010 Twin Rivers week in good faith based on what my 2009 week pulled (Christmas DVC).  What I paid for Twin Rivers does not factor into the equation, since most Tuggers get their weeks for pennies on the dollar.  The supply of Twin Rivers was showing only 4 weeks, while supply may be less due to resort size, my point was supply/demand should drive value (as quality even more so).
> 
> I would like to get a reasonable explanation as to why my week was devalued.  Was it silver crown vs gold, value of week in the RCI rental pool, etc?  It's like buying an item for $10, then seeing your credit card statement saying $15 and getting the explanation that the price was wrong, too bad, it should have always been $15.
> 
> ...





Unfortunately trading power can and will change from year to year. I'm sure this is detailed in RCI Membership Terms and Conditions.  Because your unit pulled DVC last year it does not mean it will pull it this year. Trading power can sometimes vary drastically from year to year based on higher or lower anticipated demand.

FYI, I'm not defending RCI. I'm a member but not a fan.


----------



## tombo (Jun 16, 2009)

Everyone who has a silver crown week on the ocean in February that used to pull Disney and Hawaii but can no longer see them please cancel RCI! All the ski resorts during October feel free to show your disdain also. That will show RCI that owning a week that you can own for FREE should allow you to trade for anything you want including weeks that sell resale for $10,000 to $25,000 and have MF's of $1000 or more. How could RCI not understand that summer in a silver crown snow skiing resort should trade for Gold Crown top rated resorts at the number one year round destinations like Orlando and Hawaii. RCI has lost their mind. I know if I owned a DVC I would gladly trade my week every year to stay in a silver crown in the mountains. As a Disney owner I would feel even better about my exchange when I checked in and was given a flyer telling me that they were giving weeks away for FREE at the mountain resort I traded my Disney week for. It's funny but you never get those "get your weeks for free" flyers when you check in at DVC. I guess Disney just doesn't know how to market their product......

Once everyone with silver crown off season weeks quits RCI in protest, RCI will find themselves running short on those valuable February beach weeks and they will be overun with those undesirable Hawaii and DVC weeks. Without those powerful October Ski resort weeks their business will suffer. Remaining RCI members will be mad when all they can see is summer beach weeks, winter ski weeks, but few  off season silver crown and hospitality resorts. It will be the death blow for RCI and you can do it by quitting and taking your valuable off season ,non top rated resorts, and going to another exchange company!!

Seriously for every one of these silver crown weeks the complainers here deposit that none of us want to exchange for, they exchange FOR a week many of us do want. For years people bought cheap South African weeks they had no intention of using because they were cheap and had cheap MF's with good trading power. RCI finally devalued those.  I am glad that RCI updates trade value from time to time.

Please quit RCI because the trades you are contributing to RCI are weeks most of us (including yourselves) don't want to stay at, but the trades you get are reducing the available weeks we actually want to use. Once you have left RCI the weeks you take with you won't be missed by many of us TUGGERS, but the weeks you would have exchanged for will be more numerous and easier to exchange for. Everyone will be happy.


----------



## timeos2 (Jun 16, 2009)

*It has always been a big risk. Why do it?*



Steve said:


> It really does reduce a lot of stress...and prevent a lot of frustration...to buy where you want to vacation.  It may cost a bit more in monetary terms, but it is richly rewarding in terms of peace of mind and vacation enjoyment.  Then you really are entitled to vacation where and when you want.  That's a very nice feeling.
> 
> Steve



There is a recurring theme here. For years a large group of us at TUG have urged people to buy where they want to go, buy places you can drive to and never depend on trade to be the primary reason for ownership.  There is nothing wrong with trading but you have to realize it is dynamic in nature - there are zero guarantees what any week is "worth" or what you'll find in trade.  By owning either a week at a resort you enjoy OR, if you prefer different places every trip, an ownership in a large multiresort system then you've covered the majority of your use. Now the occasional trade can be easily worked in. If you own something you enjoy then chances are others will want to enjoy it too - that's trade power.   

One of the biggest mistakes in timeshare is buying to trade. While a few have done it successfully for most it is a path to frustration and disappointment. And even if it worked yesterday you have no promise it will work today. Buy where / what you enjy and eliminate one of the major downfalls of and costs of timeshare - third party trades.


----------



## Lisa P (Jun 16, 2009)

urple2 said:


> you gotta see what those already weak Wyndham point deposits see now...
> 
> They will definately see a whole lot less deposits from me.


???    ???  What weak Wyndham points deposits?  Are you able to look online with them yet?  It's supposed to happen this summer and I'm VERY interested in seeing what they pull.



dougp26364 said:


> ...use one of the independent exchange systems like SFX, TPI or Redweek if you must exchange.


I'm thinking of depositing our VRI week with VRI*ety, since I've seen their online availability improve.  We're not huge II fans either so we're interested in looking to the smaller companies too.


----------



## Lisa P (Jun 16, 2009)

Egret1986 said:


> I believe some folks have gotten things in the past and now have a sense of entitlement.


Maybe.  But there's a difference between entitlement and the anger felt after dashed expectations that were set by someone else who failed to deliver.  RCI has been saying for a long time that trade power is set at deposit.

So for me, if I make a new deposit and it doesn't exchange as well as an identical past deposit, I'd figure the trade power of that week had diminished since the last time I'd deposited it.  I can live with that just fine.  It happened when we used to own in SA.  It's happened over time with our Wyndham deposits.  Just the way things go, not a big deal.

However, when a specific deposit sees plentiful available inventory for months and then suddenly, the inventory is _still apparently available_ but not to _that deposit_ (except perhaps as rentals), then that's a failure to meet the company's professed policy and procedure for assigning trade power.  That is worth talking about.



Egret1986 said:


> ...almost always I have felt that I got upgrades either to a nicer resort, a better season or a more demanded area.  It's a great thing and I've loved it, but how can I expect that? ..... Maybe that's why I'm calm and at peace right now with the changes going on at RCI.


I feel this way as well - to a point.  Guess it's fortunate that I only have one deposit sitting in RCI at present.  If I had a half dozen, I'd probably stress a little more while planning some trips to overbuilt areas or offseason travel to use them up.  We don't usually travel _on exchanges_ in primetime and shoulder seasons suit us.

On the upside, this readjustment of trade power seems to give a little more value to award status or quality rating.  That's been needed, IMO, in RCI.



BocaBum99 said:


> I would EXPECT over time that if what you deposit is likely to RENT for LESS than what you want to exchange for, then in the future, your trading power will be reduced.  Conversely, if what you deposit is likely to RENT for MORE than what you want to exchange into, then your trading power is likely to increase over time.


Interesting idea to consider.


----------



## rickandcindy23 (Jun 16, 2009)

A Silver Crown along the Florida coast in February is hardly the dregs of the timeshare world, Tombo.  That is snowbird season, so not a good example.  

I do get what you are all saying, I really do, and that is why I am going to leave RCI. 

People buy in systems like Hyatt to trade into high quality resorts, I get that, but I am not likely to get a Hyatt week with RCI.  HGVC has that 1-in-4, which makes it easy for a lower value week to get a 2 bedroom during low season in Orlando.  I can take great advantage of that and will do consecutive weeks to use it to the max.  Same with Summer Bay, Orange Lake, and then my weeks in RCI will be gone.  Fortunately, we love Orlando.  I would never buy there because rentals through RCI are too cheap to even consider buying.  

By the way, do you think RCI should also reduce the weeks available in summer at an average Cape Cod resort?  What about Island Park Village (Yellowstone), Jackson Hole, or the average southern California resorts, which are all in high demand for summer, but aren't Gold Crowns?  They have good trading power and very low supply.  

I hope you aren't saying that, because that would be the opposite of what RCI says constitutes high trading power.  

By the way, no one is taking weeks away from Gold Crown exchangers.  The Hiltons on Oahu were there for weeks before they were all taken.  If you put in an ongoing request, I am sure a Gold Crown will get those way before Island Park Village has a crack at them.


----------



## rickandcindy23 (Jun 16, 2009)

I forgot to add a few things Carole told me:

1) Much of RCI's inventory is being held back right now, for whatever reason.  She said inventory added over the next few weeks will raise the numbers of available weeks to everyone.  

2) RCI purposefully changed the additions of inventory to their system to occur many times throughout the day, rather than at one particular time of day.  She said some of us had figured out when the deposits were made to the system, which was an unfair advantage.  Oh, boo hoo to those who hadn't figured out that 1:00 a.m. Eastern Time was RCI's update time.  

3) She also made a big deal of some of us taking advantage of large bulk bankings.  Guilty as charged.


----------



## Carolinian (Jun 16, 2009)

gmarine said:


> Unfortunately trading power can and will change from year to year. I'm sure this is detailed in RCI Membership Terms and Conditions.  Because your unit pulled DVC last year it does not mean it will pull it this year. Trading power can sometimes vary drastically from year to year based on higher or lower anticipated demand.
> 
> FYI, I'm not defending RCI. I'm a member but not a fan.



Trade power SHOULD adjust for ever changing supply and demand factors.  A vast change in trading power, however, indicates that something is wrong, especially when it impacts lots of weeks.


----------



## Carolinian (Jun 16, 2009)

Trading power is based on supply and demand, not bells and whistles.  There are desirable areas with nice resorts, like Orlando or Williamsburg or the Canary Islands which are simply overbuilt with timeshare.  Supply way outstrips demand, even though there is very substantial demand.  The supply / demand curve is much more favorable for a resort like Tybrisa or Isle of Palms Beach Club, small resorts in highly desirable locations with no  competition.  The resort that is probably head and shoulders above all others in the RCI system is Allen House in London.  Crown ratings are indeed one driver of the demand factors but are only a small part of the supply / demand equation.




tombo said:


> Everyone who has a silver crown week on the ocean in February that used to pull Disney and Hawaii but can no longer see them please cancel RCI! All the ski resorts during October feel free to show your disdain also. That will show RCI that owning a week that you can own for FREE should allow you to trade for anything you want including weeks that sell resale for $10,000 to $25,000 and have MF's of $1000 or more. How could RCI not understand that summer in a silver crown snow skiing resort should trade for Gold Crown top rated resorts at the number one year round destinations like Orlando and Hawaii. RCI has lost their mind. I know if I owned a DVC I would gladly trade my week every year to stay in a silver crown in the mountains. As a Disney owner I would feel even better about my exchange when I checked in and was given a flyer telling me that they were giving weeks away for FREE at the mountain resort I traded my Disney week for. It's funny but you never get those "get your weeks for free" flyers when you check in at DVC. I guess Disney just doesn't know how to market their product......
> 
> Once everyone with silver crown off season weeks quits RCI in protest, RCI will find themselves running short on those valuable February beach weeks and they will be overun with those undesirable Hawaii and DVC weeks. Without those powerful October Ski resort weeks their business will suffer. Remaining RCI members will be mad when all they can see is summer beach weeks, winter ski weeks, but few  off season silver crown and hospitality resorts. It will be the death blow for RCI and you can do it by quitting and taking your valuable off season ,non top rated resorts, and going to another exchange company!!
> 
> ...


----------



## Carolinian (Jun 16, 2009)

rickandcindy23 said:


> I forgot to add a few things Carole told me:
> 
> 1) Much of RCI's inventory is being held back right now, for whatever reason.
> 
> 2



Probably to cherry pick it for their rental inventory.


----------



## thinze3 (Jun 16, 2009)

T_R_Oglodyte said:


> We allowed our RCI membership to lapse several years ago - when our paid up time expired we didn't renew.
> 
> I reached that decision for a couple of reasons.  The primary reason was because we just didn't see that much value coming back from RCI.  Total costs were increasing too fast, and RCI was simply no longer competitive with other exchange companies for meeting our needs.  In addition, we were adjusting out portfolio to make use of mini-systems for so that we wouldn't need to depend on exchanges for most of our traveling needs.
> 
> ...



I did the exact thing a few short years ago. I could not pull anything with my 3BR Christie Lodge ski week. I switched over to II and have been happy to date. I found myself always on the phone and arguing with RCI.  

With II I traded:
CL for a my home Florida Marriott and then traded my Marriott for a 2BR Marriott in Hawaii.
Used the Christie lodge bonus week for 2BR Marriott in Las Vegas.
CL for a 3BR week 52 in Utah this year.
Used the CL bonus week for a 2BR Marriott in Ft Lauderdale.

With RCI the trades were good in the very early years and then it became more & more difficult to get anything good in a timely manner. Finally got a 2BR in Galveston with my last week before it expired. It was very frustrating to see all those rental weeks with RCI, but nothing good to trade for.

RCI


----------



## T_R_Oglodyte (Jun 16, 2009)

thinze3 said:


> I did the exact thing a few short years ago. I could not pull anything with my 3BR Christie Lodge ski week. I switched over to II and have been happy to date. I found myself always on the phone and arguing with RCI.
> 
> With II I traded:
> CL for a my home Florida Marriott and then traded my Marriott for a 2BR Marriott in Hawaii.
> ...



We were still getting good trades with RCI.  Trade power for us was never an issue.  The biggest factor was that costs at RCI were increasingly significantly faster than inflation,  and were no longer a minor "bite" in the overall program.  We realized we could put the money we were spending on RCI into a mini-system that had resorts where we wanted to go, have a far easier time getting reservations in the places we wanted to visit, be able to downgrade when convenient for more time or more space, get "change back" when making unequal exchanges, save "unused change" to the next year, and be able to borrow from future years if a special situation arose.

I mean, it was pretty much of a no-brainer decision.  Then for those occasions when we still wanted to do exchanges (mostly into Hawaii and Mexico) the independent exchange companies were at least as easy to use, less costly, and provided far better value (such as the SFX 3-for-1 offers).

*****

I confess that I smile a bit when I see people thinking that owners are customers of RCI.  It's no wonder people get frustrated with RCI if they have that opinion.

As I stated above, the true customers of RCI are developers.  RCI primary mission is to make it possible for developers to sell timeshares to purchasers.  That is RCI's goose that lays golden eggs.

Once an owner realizes and accepts that owners are of only secondary importance to RCI, they should be able to shed the feeling that RCI should care about owners concerns and problems.  At that point I would think the frustration level would go down.


----------



## jancpa (Jun 16, 2009)

If "like for like" exchanges were stressed at RCI developer timeshare presentations many of us would not be timeshare owners today.  It is the lure of exotic foreign resorts for my one week off season Florida timeshare that hooked most of us in the first place.  We all have been spoiled by getting "more bang for the buck."  But isn't that the American way.  RCI has fostered this and is just as much to blame.


----------



## BocaBum99 (Jun 16, 2009)

timeos2 said:


> There is a recurring theme here. For years a large group of us at TUG have urged people to buy where they want to go, buy places you can drive to and never depend on trade to be the primary reason for ownership.  There is nothing wrong with trading but you have to realize it is dynamic in nature - there are zero guarantees what any week is "worth" or what you'll find in trade.  By owning either a week at a resort you enjoy OR, if you prefer different places every trip, an ownership in a large multiresort system then you've covered the majority of your use. Now the occasional trade can be easily worked in. If you own something you enjoy then chances are others will want to enjoy it too - that's trade power.
> 
> One of the biggest mistakes in timeshare is buying to trade. While a few have done it successfully for most it is a path to frustration and disappointment. And even if it worked yesterday you have no promise it will work today. Buy where / what you enjy and eliminate one of the major downfalls of and costs of timeshare - third party trades.



Why do people go deep sea fishing when they can get a swordfish dinner at any good seafood restaurant for 1/1000th of the effort and cost?  The answer to that question is the same for those who play the exchange game and play it well.


----------



## rickandcindy23 (Jun 16, 2009)

Steve, right as usual.  

I am now past the state of shock, and now moving into the period of acceptance.   

Plus, I have a lot going for me. 1) RCI Points will still get Shearwater.  2) RCI is still doing PFD, but who knows how/when that will change.  3) Points will still get DVC, especially at 10 months out, with no problem.  4) And no 1-in-4 rules in points.  

The same vacations will just cost more.


----------



## BocaBum99 (Jun 16, 2009)

jancpa said:


> If "like for like" exchanges were stressed at RCI developer timeshare presentations many of us would not be timeshare owners today.  It is the lure of exotic foreign resorts for my one week off season Florida timeshare that hooked most of us in the first place.  We all have been spoiled by getting "more bang for the buck."  But isn't that the American way.  RCI has fostered this and is just as much to blame.



If everyone expected a trade up, then the system is a ponzi scheme.  For everyone who trades up, someone else trades down.

The key to timeshare exchange is finding out who is depositing free weeks and why.  For years, even decades, resort developers gave free developer weeks for exchange companies to deposit so that they could get new sales prospects to the resorts.  

Now, I think the biggest change is due to the fact that this inventory is now being rented instead of deposited.  The end result is the same for the resort developer.   But, there is a material impact to the exchange company depositers.

I don't buy into conspiracy theories.  I just believe that the industry is evolving the way it should.  I actually don't think RCI is smart enough to do have the things we come up with on this message board.  What we see is just a natural result of RCI trying to manage its business and react to circumstances it faces.


----------



## gmarine (Jun 16, 2009)

Carolinian said:


> Trade power SHOULD adjust for ever changing supply and demand factors.  A vast change in trading power, however, indicates that something is wrong, especially when it impacts lots of weeks.



Your absolutely right. One thing I overlooked is that this trade power adjustment occurred after units were deposited. As Cindy said, that shouldnt happen. 

Trade power changes from year to year should be expected but you should never see a change in trade power after a unit is deposited which is what appears to have happened here.


----------



## jancpa (Jun 16, 2009)

Don't drug dealers sometimes give away some of their inventory to "hook" their prey?


----------



## rickandcindy23 (Jun 16, 2009)

jancpa said:


> Don't drug dealers sometimes give away some of their inventory to "hook" their prey?



Yes, I think so.  :rofl:


----------



## ecwinch (Jun 16, 2009)

BocaBum99 said:


> If everyone expected a trade up, then the system is a ponzi scheme.  For everyone who trades up, someone else trades down.
> 
> The key to timeshare exchange is finding out who is depositing free weeks and why.  For years, even decades, resort developers gave free developer weeks for exchange companies to deposit so that they could get new sales prospects to the resorts.
> 
> ...



Except for the RCI class action, I would agree with you. But if as a developer I made a "bulk" space-bank, and then learned that RCI was "renting" out the best weeks I deposited, why not just cut out the middleman. So the demise is only hastened by their short-sighted business practices.


----------



## theo (Jun 16, 2009)

*Not there yet...*



bnoble said:


> The only thing the last round accomplished was that some lawyers got paid, RCI got legal blessing for their business model, and we got a few very minor things thrown our way.



While I would certainly agree that another class action lawsuit against RCI would be another exercise in futility, I would respectfully point out that:

1.  *No* plaintiff lawyers have been paid yet in Murillo vs. RCI. 
They've identified their "tab", but have not yet actually been paid.

2. The "fairness hearing" for the prposed settlement was held just the other day in Newark, NJ (it might even be today, in fact). The proposed settlement has not yet been formally accepted or approved by the Court. It my hope (...probably more accurately labelled a pipe dream?) that the complete farce of the proposed settlement will be summarily rejected by the Court.

Hope springs eternal....


----------



## BocaBum99 (Jun 16, 2009)

ecwinch said:


> Except for the RCI class action, I would agree with you. But if as a developer I made a "bulk" space-bank, and then learned that RCI was "renting" out the best weeks I deposited, why not just cut out the middleman. So the demise is only hastened by their short-sighted business practices.



I used to be in your camp, but their so-called short sighted business practices have lasted over 40 years.  Not very short in duration.


----------



## rickandcindy23 (Jun 16, 2009)

Boca, it really seems unfair to devalue weeks that are already deposited and have pulled the great stuff until now.  They always said that trading power was determined at deposit and that wasn't supposed to change.  Now they have a new policy, AND IT IS ALL NEW, and does that seem right to anyone with weeks caught in this situation?  No way.  

Here is their *new* policy, added to the FAQ part of the Help section:

What is Trading Power?  
Trading Power - The value assigned by RCI to Inventory upon a Member's Deposit and used by RCI when attempting to fulfill an Exchange Request. Trading Power may vary from deposit to deposit, *since inventory is re-evaluated by RCI from time to time*. *Trading Power changes over time and is based on: *The demand, supply, classification grouping, and utilization of the Deposited Vacation Time, and the Affiliated Resort and geographic region associated with the Deposited Vacation Time.
The seasonal designation of the Deposited Vacation Time.
The size and type of the unit Deposited (i.e., number of bedrooms, kitchen type and Maximum/Private Occupancy of the physical unit).
The Comment Card Scores of the Affiliated Resort. RCI Comment Cards are solicited by RCI from Members as a means to gather information on each Affiliated Resort participating in the RCI Weeks Exchange Program.
The date of Deposit and the start date of the Deposited Vacation Time


----------



## T_R_Oglodyte (Jun 16, 2009)

ecwinch said:


> Except for the RCI class action, I would agree with you. But if as a developer I made a "bulk" space-bank, and then learned that RCI was "renting" out the best weeks I deposited, why not just cut out the middleman. So the demise is only hastened by their short-sighted business practices.



In addition to Boca's comments ....

First, many developers do run their own rental programs.  They also market inventory through sites such as Expedia and Travelocity.  Nevertheless, they still have more inventory than they can move through those channels, so RCI is another outlet.  

Note also that developers do the same thing with some of the independent exchange companies as well.  

Second, as noted before, the developers and RCI need each other.  They have every interest in scratching each others backs.  If RCI wants inventory to put into rental pools, then that is simply part of the price the developer pays to have a relationship with RCI.  

As Jim noted, this has been going on for over 40 years, so it seems as if this is a pretty stable business model.

***

I think the more difficult component of the developer/RCI relationship is the situation that Wyndham is both a developer and an exchange company.  If I were a developer, I think I would feel skittish about being dependent on an exchange company that is owned by someone who is a direct competitor.


----------



## tombo (Jun 16, 2009)

rickandcindy23 said:


> A Silver Crown along the Florida coast in February is hardly the dregs of the timeshare world, Tombo.  That is snowbird season, so not a good example.
> 
> 
> By the way, do you think RCI should also reduce the weeks available in summer at an average Cape Cod resort?  What about Island Park Village (Yellowstone), Jackson Hole, or the average southern California resorts, which are all in high demand for summer, but aren't Gold Crowns?  They have good trading power and very low supply.
> ...



I said a February ocean week, you assumed it to be a Florida week, but for the most part the statement is still valid. A North Carolina week on the ocean in February is not very valuable and even in Florida I will see 30 times more winter weeks on RCI than summer weeks. In fact I am currently looking at a Wyndham in Panama City and I can currently see 74 weeks available. There is not a single week available in March, April, May, June, July, August, September,or October in 2009 or 2010. That means that all 74 weeks available in the next two years are available in November, December, January, and February (21 of the weeks are February). The only real demand for winter weeks is in south Florida and the keys. You can get all of the winter weeks you want in Daytona, Tampa, and the panhandle with the weakest trader you own. I only do the beach in the continental US during the May through early October months, so 5000 winter ocean fronT weeks are useless to me and I wouldn't go if it was free and didn't cost me a trade. Looking at all the Florida winter ocean front weeks availalble on RCI and the limited availability of summer weeks there is obviously a huge difference in the demand for summer and winter weeks on the beach.

An average summer cape cod week would beat a slow season gold crown at many locations and beat some top resorts in areas like Branson and Orlando with regards to demand IMO. Low supply absolutelly makes up for low resort designations. If I can EASILY trade into 20 resorts which are all of high quality like in Vegas or Orlando I would consider those to be of lower value than a nice silver crown in an area that is very limited in accomodations where I almost never see availability. I would expect that I would need to deposit a good trader to get one of those. A prime season ski week is also something that is hard to get at a resort near the slopes so I would expect it to see more trades than a week at the same resort for October.

Like I said anyone who thinks they are being mistreated can simply quit RCI. I know that virtually every trade I have made has been as good as what I traded and many were better than I deposited. Of course I check almost daily when there is a place or time I am looking to travel and jump on them as soon as they are available.  I know that many here have also made trades where what they traded wasn't worth near what they got. That is great, but if it continues to operate that way the people depositing those great trades we all love to get will quit RCI because they never get good weeks before they are gone. 

If the choice is that RCI is going to make people depositing weak trades who are accustomed to trading for better than they deposited mad and losing some of them as members, or making people who deposit great weeks mad because they can never trade for anything comparable, I say RCI should keep the people depositing the trades we all want to get happy.


----------



## Carol C (Jun 16, 2009)

urple2 said:


> you gotta see what those already weak Wyndham point deposits see now...
> 
> They will definately see a whole lot less deposits from me.



Are you saying that the visible Wyn deposits "see' way less now than pre-"readjustment"? How many Wyn deposits have you made and exchanged with, to date? I only did one...pre-adjustment of trading power...and it was good, but I lucked out with a nice VC on the phone.  

As for the alternatives, I don't own any t/s that SFX would want (since they mostly like 1-2 br, and I mostly have studios or use resort system pts systems). I never have gotten into RCI Points. I have gotten junkers for exchanges via TPI and thankfully only have one more deposit with them (would not use them again, frankly...way too much trouble). FWIW RCI still seems to work for me...and in this economy when not so many people are vacationing, it seems the RCI VCs are more "helpful". So I'll be sticking with RCI (and also Interval where I own & exchange a low maint fee Marriott).


----------



## urple2 (Jun 16, 2009)

Carol C said:


> Are you saying that the visible Wyn deposits "see' way less now than pre-"readjustment"? How many Wyn deposits have you made and exchanged with, to date? I only did one...pre-adjustment of trading power...and it was good, but I lucked out with a nice VC on the phone.
> 
> As for the alternatives, I don't own any t/s that SFX would want (since they mostly like 1-2 br, and I mostly have studios or use resort system pts systems). I never have gotten into RCI Points. I have gotten junkers for exchanges via TPI and thankfully only have one more deposit with them (would not use them again, frankly...way too much trouble). FWIW RCI still seems to work for me...and in this economy when not so many people are vacationing, it seems the RCI VCs are more "helpful". So I'll be sticking with RCI (and also Interval where I own & exchange a low maint fee Marriott).



To date I have exchanged 25 times with these points( preadjustment). I have lost approx 25,000 units..(since adjustment).More noticibly many of the silver/gold & 2bedrooms are gone. All the hawaii, pacific coast,HGVC(NV,FL) are mostly gone. The quality seems to have taken the big hit. The search goes on...


----------



## bnoble (Jun 16, 2009)

> But if as a developer I made a "bulk" space-bank, and then learned that RCI was "renting" out the best weeks I deposited, why not just cut out the middleman.


Because it takes a lot of time and money in advertising and infrastructure to build up a reliable rental channel.

Also, it appears that resorts _can_ negotiate to have RCI rent on their behalf.  There are some rental-only resorts (like Ginn) and some that have both exchange and rental activity (DVC)---in both cases, the rental prices appear to be set by the resort, because they are way out of whack with the prices that RCI sets.



> While I would certainly agree that another class action lawsuit against RCI would be another exercise in futility, I would respectfully point out ...


Technically, you are correct.  Operationally, once it gets to this point, it's pretty much a done deal unless the judge goes off the reservation.


----------



## Egret1986 (Jun 16, 2009)

*That is unfair and to have been fair, the new policy should have taken...*



rickandcindy23 said:


> Boca, it really seems unfair to devalue weeks that are already deposited and have pulled the great stuff until now.  They always said that trading power was determined at deposit and that wasn't supposed to change.  Now they have a new policy, AND IT IS ALL NEW, and does that seem right to anyone with weeks caught in this situation?  No way.
> 
> Here is their *new* policy, added to the FAQ part of the Help section:
> 
> ...



...effect on deposits made after the new policy was instituted and left the deposits made prior to the policy change with the same trade power (since you are unable to withdraw your deposited weeks back out). 

Very unfair indeed.  They've broken your stride, Cindy; but you'll be back up to speed in a new direction in no time, making things work for you.


----------



## rickandcindy23 (Jun 16, 2009)

Egret1986 said:


> ...effect on deposits made after the new policy was instituted and left the deposits made prior to the policy change with the same trade power (since you are unable to withdraw your deposited weeks back out).
> 
> Very unfair indeed.  They've broken your stride, Cindy; but you'll be back up to speed in a new direction in no time, making things work for you.




Yes, I will be okay.  TUG has helped me considerably over the last 4+ years.  I feel badly for those who are going to be hurt by this that have no alternatives.


----------



## tschwa2 (Jun 16, 2009)

*If RCI is trying to get rid of the dogs they are not doing a good job.*



tombo said:


> Once everyone with silver crown off season weeks quits RCI in protest, RCI will find themselves running short on those valuable February beach weeks and they will be overun with those undesirable Hawaii and DVC weeks. Without those powerful October Ski resort weeks their business will suffer. Remaining RCI members will be mad when all they can see is summer beach weeks, winter ski weeks, but few  off season silver crown and hospitality resorts. It will be the death blow for RCI and you can do it by quitting and taking your valuable off season ,non top rated resorts, and going to another exchange company!!
> 
> Please quit RCI because the trades you are contributing to RCI are weeks most of us (including yourselves) don't want to stay at, but the trades you get are reducing the available weeks we actually want to use. Once you have left RCI the weeks you take with you won't be missed by many of us TUGGERS, but the weeks you would have exchanged for will be more numerous and easier to exchange for. Everyone will be happy.



Funny thing about the "enhancement", my very blue mid Atlantic beach resort's trading power increased by from about 79,000-83,000 to 93,000-96,000.  I guess RCI is really hoping to get their hands on my week.


----------



## tombo (Jun 16, 2009)

tschwa2 said:


> Funny thing about the "enhancement", my very blue mid Atlantic beach resort's trading power increased by from about 79,000-83,000 to 93,000-96,000.  I guess RCI is really hoping to get their hands on my week.



I have a Silver Crown one bed room winter week in Destin which is currently showing 148,145 available weeks.

Holiday Beach Resort-Destin (#1109)  01-Dec-2008 to 31-Dec-2011  [148,145]   Available to Exchange  

I assume I can see that many weeks because it is a Christmas week. The reason I deposited it was because I couldn't rent it last year and got no renters interested in the first 6 months this year, so I deposited it 6 months in advance. I was glad to give it to RCI because I am not interested in going there in the winter and I only bought it because I thought Christmas week would be a good renter. So far I was wrong and so far it is for sale and hasn't sold. 

On the other hand my summer weeks in Destin (2), Panama City (3), and Orange Beach all rented last year and all have rented this year (although a little slower than last year). I don't know what kind of trading power they have because I have never deposited one of those prime weeks. I have always rented them or used them myself. 

I do have one summer 2009 beach  week left I am holding to use myself, but I might have to rent it due to work conflicts. It will be a last minute rental and if it doesn't rent I will deposit it exactly 14 days in advance and it will still pull over 122,000 available weeks like a week I deposited 14 days in advance last summer currently shows. This resort has gone from gold crown to silver crown to no rating at all over the last 4 years and yet it still will pull 122,849 available weeks when deposited 14 days in advance.

Ocean Beach Club (#1271)  01-Aug-2007 to 31-Aug-2010  [122,849]   Available to Exchange 


So last minute deposited (exactly 14 days in advance) summer beach weeks are worth 122,000 plus and winter weeks deposited well in advance (at least 6 months in advance because winter is still a long way off) are worth 93,000 to 96,000. That is exactly the point I have been trying to make. Summer beach weeks should be and are more valuable than off season weeks, even when deposited the last day RCI allows. Thanks for helping me prove my point.

BTW, I can see a few Disney's with the 148,145 available weeks but none with the 122,849. That too is as it should be. Depositing 14 days in advance should kill some of the trading value.


----------



## Conan (Jun 16, 2009)

urple2 said:


> To date I have exchanged 25 times with these points( preadjustment). I have lost approx 25,000 units..(since adjustment).More noticibly many of the silver/gold & 2bedrooms are gone. All the hawaii, pacific coast,HGVC(NV,FL) are mostly gone. The quality seems to have taken the big hit. The search goes on...



I suppose you're seeing the change with a visible deposit?  Any idea how much a generic 70K or 105K has lost power?


----------



## T_R_Oglodyte (Jun 16, 2009)

I'm curious about what seems to me to be a simplistic extrapolation from number of possible to trade power.

I always thought trade power included a component of which particular resorts and weeks a deposit is able to pull.  I had in mind that the very strongest traders would be high demand week from a high VEP rated resort in a relatively scarce area.  Further given the high VEP rating and the application of the VEP filter, the number of total available exchanges might be less.

That was why, when we previously did the on-line trade tests, we made sure to include some exchange requests that were among the most difficult trades.

Did something change so that  now we're sure that trade power equates with total number of weeks offered?


----------



## rickandcindy23 (Jun 16, 2009)

RCI changed their site this past November to total number of weeks offered for 2 years from today's date.  It's very easy to see trading power with total number.  You no longer have to search an area 20 weeks at a time.  I wish I could go back to those times, because I occasionally got something great, even with my blue weeks in that system.  

Two of my former supertrader weeks see 148,000+ in the morning. Two see about 137,000 weeks, and one of them only sees 128,000 weeks.  

My blue weeks see 117,000 weeks.  That isn't bad for blue weeks, but still it's all garbage.  That is how many last-minute and undesirable weeks there are in RCI.


----------



## Egret1986 (Jun 16, 2009)

*Amen, Tombo!*



tombo said:


> Everyone who has a silver crown week on the ocean in February that used to pull Disney and Hawaii but can no longer see them please cancel RCI! All the ski resorts during October feel free to show your disdain also. That will show RCI that owning a week that you can own for FREE should allow you to trade for anything you want including weeks that sell resale for $10,000 to $25,000 and have MF's of $1000 or more. How could RCI not understand that summer in a silver crown snow skiing resort should trade for Gold Crown top rated resorts at the number one year round destinations like Orlando and Hawaii. RCI has lost their mind. I know if I owned a DVC I would gladly trade my week every year to stay in a silver crown in the mountains. As a Disney owner I would feel even better about my exchange when I checked in and was given a flyer telling me that they were giving weeks away for FREE at the mountain resort I traded my Disney week for. It's funny but you never get those "get your weeks for free" flyers when you check in at DVC. I guess Disney just doesn't know how to market their product......
> 
> Once everyone with silver crown off season weeks quits RCI in protest, RCI will find themselves running short on those valuable February beach weeks and they will be overun with those undesirable Hawaii and DVC weeks. Without those powerful October Ski resort weeks their business will suffer. Remaining RCI members will be mad when all they can see is summer beach weeks, winter ski weeks, but few  off season silver crown and hospitality resorts. It will be the death blow for RCI and you can do it by quitting and taking your valuable off season ,non top rated resorts, and going to another exchange company!!
> 
> ...



Some still don't get it.  A previous poster commented that it doesn't matter what they paid for their timeshare because that's a moot point because that week got them DVC before.

As you have so eloquently pointed out (in your own special way), you ain't gonna find a free or low priced DVC anywhere.  There are many resorts like that.  

It's been great buying cheap weeks with low maintenace fees that trade for these awesome resorts that many of us could never afford with maintenance fees that are beyond our budgets.  Be happy that you were able to get them in the past.  Change is hard.  But change is inevitable.


----------



## Egret1986 (Jun 16, 2009)

*Thanks, Tombo, for this reminder!*



tombo said:


> I do have one summer 2009 beach  week left I am holding to use myself, but I might have to rent it due to work conflicts. It will be a last minute rental and if it doesn't rent I will deposit it exactly 14 days in advance and it will still pull over 122,000 available weeks like a week I deposited 14 days in advance last summer currently shows. This resort has gone from gold crown to silver crown to no rating at all over the last 4 years and yet it still will pull 122,849 available weeks when deposited 14 days in advance.
> 
> Ocean Beach Club (#1271)  01-Aug-2007 to 31-Aug-2010  [122,849]   Available to Exchange
> 
> ...



I have a Wk 29 Gulf week that I can't use this year because I already had an exchange to PCB when I purchased it.  I was going to go ahead and deposit it before the 30 day mark.  I forgot that it's 14 days before check-in that you can still make a late deposit.  That gives me another two weeks to rent it, which I would rather do.  I've been having great luck with my rentals that are 2-3 weeks from check-in, as opposed to rentals a ways out.  

THANKS!!! for the reminder!


----------



## 5finny (Jun 16, 2009)

*Are we surprised*

The Snake 
Johnny Rivers 
On her way to work one morning 
Down a path alongside the lake 
A tender-hearted woman 
Saw a poor half-frozen snake 
His pretty coloured skin had been 
All frosted with the dew 
"Oh faith" she cried. "I'll take you in 
And I'll take care of you." 

"Take me in, tender woman. 
Take me in, for Heaven's sake. 
Take me in, tender woman," 
Sighed the snake 

Now she wrapped him up all cosy 
In a comforter of silk 
And then laid him by the fireside 
With some honey and some milk 
She hurried home from work that night 
As soon as she arrived 
She found that pretty snake she'd 
Taken in had been revived 

"Take me in, tender woman. 
Take me in, for Heaven's sake. 
Take me in, tender woman." 
Sighed the snake 

She clutched him to her bosom 
"You're so beautiful," she cried 
"But if I hadn't brought you in 
By now you might have died." 
Well she stroked his pretty skin again 
And then kissed and held him tight 
But, instead of saying "Thanks" 
The snake gave her a vicious bite 

"Take me in, tender woman. 
Take me in, for Heaven's sake. 
Take me in, tender woman." 
Sighed the snake 

"I saved you," cried that woman 
"And you've bitten me, but why? 
You know your bite is poisonous 
And now I'm gonna die!" 
"Hah, shut up, silly woman," 
Said that reptile, with a grin 
"You knew darned well I was a snake, 
Before you took me in." 

"Aw, take me in, tender woman. 
Take me in, for Heaven's sake. 
Take me in, tender woman." 
Sighed the snake 
Sighed the snake 
Sighed the snake 
"Aw, you better take me in, tender woman," 
Sighed the snake


----------



## T_R_Oglodyte (Jun 16, 2009)

rickandcindy23 said:


> RCI changed their site this past November to total number of weeks offered for 2 years from today's date.  It's very easy to see trading power with total number.  You no longer have to search an area 20 weeks at a time.  I wish I could go back to those times, because I occasionally got something great, even with my blue weeks in that system.



I understand that.  But unless I'm missing something, VEP filtering should result in the absolute strongest traders seeing fewer total weeks.  That's because the VEP filter will prevent matches with lots of weeks that don't have a comparable VEP.

The highest numbers of total week should occur with weeks in which the VEP filter is positioned near the middle of the range, where the week can't reach some resorts at the top end, but that loss is more than compensated for in total number by expanding the number of matches at the bottom end of the VEP scale.


----------



## rickandcindy23 (Jun 16, 2009)

Are you sure you are not an owl, instead of an egret, because you are very wise!   I agree, and I also agree with Tombo, and Boca, and Steve, and everyone else who is posting here.  

I have had great fortune, and now it's done. So as I keep watching for good stuff for our future vacations, this potpourri of great stuff will be a distant memory.  I am okay with it, but I am also looking for better ways to accomplish what I want.  

I always have those Sheratons, 3 of them, two are lockouts, and all three are the prized seasons.  I could try them, since others are reporting great luck with there 1 bedrooms in getting Disney 2 bedrooms.  Or maybe I should just stick with II and enjoy my favorite resorts in that system.  :rofl: That IS what they were purchased for, because we want to travel to the resorts those weeks will see in the preference period.  

My mood is better because in the grand scheme of things, this is pretty minor.  I have so much to be thankful for, and RCI wasn't even in the top 25 before this, so why should it affect me in such a way?  I let this bother me way too much, for way too long.  I am still going to get the best resorts in Orlando with my weeks, and I can always do some last-minute trips to places within 1,000 miles of here, and we can drive.  

I hope everyone who is reading this thread is feeling better by now.  And I hope your resorts are dual-affiliated, too. 



Egret1986 said:


> Some still don't get it.  A previous poster commented that it doesn't matter what they paid for their timeshare because that's a moot point because that week got them DVC before.
> 
> As you have so eloquently pointed out (in your own special way), you ain't gonna find a free or low priced DVC anywhere.  There are many resorts like that.
> 
> It's been great buying cheap weeks with low maintenace fees that trade for these awesome resorts that many of us could never afford with maintenance fees that are beyond our budgets.  Be happy that you were able to get them in the past.  Change is hard.  But change is inevitable.


----------



## rickandcindy23 (Jun 16, 2009)

I don't know, Steve.  I must have always had a high VEP because I could see the high quality resorts, ALWAYS, even the Hiltons on the islands, whenever they were posted on TUG and 4MS in sightings/ exchange opportunities.  I always saw everything, and now I cannot.  My blue weeks at the same resort could see so many Paniolo Greens, Maui Lea at Maui Hill, Kona Hawaiian Village, and some of the other island resorts, but those weeks couldn't ever see Shearwater, unless it was last minute.  Then when they upgraded the site in November, my blue weeks saw not one Hawaii week, not ever, unless it was 3 weeks from check-in.   

But I could also always see the lesser resorts, too, with my summer weeks, so maybe mind was an in-between VEP.  I don't think it was ever like II, where the lesser resorts are kept from higher quality resort searches.  I could be wrong; I am probably wrong.


----------



## Egret1986 (Jun 16, 2009)

*I'm glad you're feeling better and also hope others are as well!*



rickandcindy23 said:


> My mood is better because in the grand scheme of things, this is pretty minor.  I have so much to be thankful for, and RCI wasn't even in the top 25 before this, so why should it affect me in such a way?  I let this bother me way too much, for way too long.  I am still going to get the best resorts in Orlando with my weeks, and I can always do some last-minute trips to places within 1,000 miles of here, and we can drive.
> 
> I hope everyone who is reading this thread is feeling better by now.  And I hope your resorts are dual-affiliated, too.



Change is hard, once you get used to something.  I find that I eventually adapt and I'm good when it comes around.  Sometimes that change is for the better.  It might take awhile to realize it.

I really am glad to hear you're adjusting to this new RCI chapter because in the grand scheme of things, it's not life-changing.  A pain; yes!  An adjustment; yes!  

We, as TUGGERS, will find a new method for our madness!!!!


----------



## mlsmn (Jun 16, 2009)

A post I put up on my website yesterday June 15

*RCI (timeshare company) has a BIG Problem*

A few weeks ago they revamped their computer system.

A glitch sent the trading power on a downward spiral. It has never been fixed correctly.
Our experience was seeing Disney Vacation Clubs, winter Florida weeks and various Hilton Timeshares at 6 PM and POOF at 7 PM they were not available. The availability of units in the weeks system  went from 116,000 at 6PM to 92,000 to 76,000 at 7PM and  to 72,000 the next morning.

Someone we know had deposits that could pull a lot of resorts  in Hawaii - not anymore.

From the internet -here are some comments

“after a relatively decent operating session yesterday our dear friends at RCI had yet another weekly scheduled maintenance window.
We all feel that something is not right with trade power and “missing” weeks that we know were there and are not. I guess they tried to fix things and we are back to watching the grass grow and timing out.

Oh well. I can’t say that I’m surprised.
So folks any bets on WHEN they’ll get this thing working this week?”

and
“keep being told that these RCI weeks are not available and that if anyone sees these weeks in “exchange only”, it is an error and the transaction system will not allow the unit to be booked. When I pressed the issue, I was hung up on”

and another
“Down again, as far as I can tell (4:45 eastern). Earlier today, I could login to weeks, but as soon as I did it put up an error message and kicked me out. Points login worked, but any searches returned immediately with no results. Now, I can’t login to either.

This is one of the more grandiose self-inflicted wounds I’ve seen on the web. One wonders what testing they did before release.”

*RCI members are upset and for good reason. We’ve been told that trading power has seen set been at deposit but now based on info below that changed.

I’ve spoken on the phone to 4 vacation counselors and 3 tech people no one can explain. And by the way many owners following this have seen the missing weeks show up on RCI’s rental web site.

To be fair to owners if there is a lowering or raising of trading power it should only lower  or raise future deposits not current deposits.

I now have doubts about depositing my timeshares weeks in RCI. All of them have dual affiliation in Interval International and I can also use independents like TPI, DAE and SFI.
*
—————

A few days ago we asked RCI for a comment-  see below -It’s their standard script that I’ve heard before.

RCI comment

“We appreciate your comments regarding the recent changes to RCI.com, including your concerns about the number of available units displayed
for each deposited week. The amount of trading power required to confirm an available unit is constantly evaluated to reflect the most up-to-date
supply and demand of each area and resort. The number of available unit  types showing is indicative of the trading power of your deposit.
RCI determines the number of units available for any one deposit based
on the following criteria:
The length of time between the date your vacation week is deposited and the start date of that week.
The supply, demand and utilization of your week at your resort.
The supply of and demand for all weeks in your resort’s geographic region.
The season, or time division, of the week you deposit.
The occupancy and type of your unit.
The comment cards completed by RCI members.

During the most recent upgrade of our website, a number of deposits had Trading Power adjusted inappropriately. These deposits have since been
set at their correct Trading Power, to ensure value for value exchanges for all members.


----------



## tombo (Jun 16, 2009)

rickandcindy23 said:


> Are you sure you are not an owl, instead of an egret, because you are very wise!   I agree, and I also agree with Tombo, and Boca, and Steve, and everyone else who is posting here.
> 
> I have had great fortune, and now it's done. So as I keep watching for good stuff for our future vacations, this potpourri of great stuff will be a distant memory.  I am okay with it, but I am also looking for better ways to accomplish what I want.
> 
> .




You probably better than anyone has maximized your trades through RCI through the years. I am sure that under the new system that you will find the days and times that they deposit the best inventory and you will own those trades. I am just saying that just because we could trade weak weeks for great weeks by constantly watching RCI through the years didn't ever mean that it would last forever. Now the trades available seem closer matched to the trades deposited.  That is the most equitable way to operate RCI IMO.

I will gladly change to a better mouse trap when one is available, but after trying to rent my weeks for 6  months I am happy to be able to deposit them at 14 days out rather than lose them totally. I have no weeks that I own to trade. I deposit weeks that I can't use or that didn't rent at the last minute and in the following 2 years I can use the weeks that would have been useless otherwise. Those deposits have gotten me numerous long weekends that I used for a quick get away and several really nice weeks. Without RCI they would have been lost since I couldn't rent them or use them myself. I  don't expect for a last minute deposit to get prime weeks at top resorts, but occasionally they do. When they don't I still get good trades for something I would have totally lost.

RCI is working well for me and I never expected to deposit my weeks I couldn't rent or use last minute and trade for Disney or HGVC. What is surprising to me is that sometimes I can actually trade for those.  

If ya'll quit RCI and find a better system please tell us the details. Until then I don't think that RCI is perfect, but at the moment it is the best game in town.


----------



## Mel (Jun 16, 2009)

ecwinch said:


> But if as a developer I made a "bulk" space-bank, and then learned that RCI was "renting" out the best weeks I deposited, why not just cut out the middleman. So the demise is only hastened by their short-sighted business practices.



Developers make bulk deposits for two reasons:

1 - they are bulk banking weeks for their members.  In this case, the developer doesn't really care what happens to those weeks.  They are in the system, their members get credit for a deposit, and the developer is happy.

2 - they are bulk banking developer-owned weeks.  In this case, the developer is still selling a significant amount of inventory.  It is not in their best interest for these units to be occupied by somebody who already owns "enough" timeshare.  They need sales prospects, and people who rent (either because they don't own, or don't own enough) make better prospects.  If the weeks you own are capable of trading into my resort, why would you want to buy at my resort?  If you _can't_ trade in, but want to stay regularly, you are a good sales prospect.  That's what the developer cares about.


----------



## tombo (Jun 16, 2009)

Egret1986 said:


> I have a Wk 29 Gulf week that I can't use this year because I already had an exchange to PCB when I purchased it.  I was going to go ahead and deposit it before the 30 day mark.  I forgot that it's 14 days before check-in that you can still make a late deposit.  That gives me another two weeks to rent it, which I would rather do.  I've been having great luck with my rentals that are 2-3 weeks from check-in, as opposed to rentals a ways out.
> 
> THANKS!!! for the reminder!



This year I have had several weeks that didin't rent until the very last minute. It seems like some people are waiting to make sure that they still have jobs before booking vacation weeks. Waiting until 14 days before check-in to deposit with RCI is great for owners trying to rent their weeks. If it is still for rent at 14 days deposit it. Whatever it trades for in the next 2 years beats the heck out of the nothing you would have gotten if you hadn't deposited it with RCI at all.  

You are very welcome. We all get new ideas and reminders here on TUG if we peruse the threads, no matter how long we have been playing the timeshare game.


----------



## T_R_Oglodyte (Jun 16, 2009)

Mel said:


> Developers make bulk deposits for two reasons:
> 
> 1 - they are bulk banking weeks for their members.  In this case, the developer doesn't really care what happens to those weeks.  They are in the system, their members get credit for a deposit, and the developer is happy.
> 
> 2 - they are bulk banking developer-owned weeks.  In this case, the developer is still selling a significant amount of inventory.  It is not in their best interest for these units to be occupied by somebody who already owns "enough" timeshare.  They need sales prospects, and people who rent (either because they don't own, or don't own enough) make better prospects.  If the weeks you own are capable of trading into my resort, why would you want to buy at my resort?  If you _can't_ trade in, but want to stay regularly, you are a good sales prospect.  That's what the developer cares about.



I recall seeing past statements, by developers, that they believe that exchangers make the best sales prospects.  That's because:

exchangers are "pre-qualified"; if someone already owns a timeshare the chances are good that their income levels and overall reliability are up to snuff for another purchase.
exchangers are already sold on the concept of timeshare.  The sales staff has fewer situations in which they first have to sell the concept of timesharing before they can begin to sell a unit at that particular resort.
Those factors have been cited for why developers like to place inventory with exchange companies as opposed to the general rental market.  

To cut off the argument about why buy when I can exchange in using a cheap week, developers put pressure on exchange companies to be more selective about the deposits that can be used to trade into the resort.  If the developer has even a modicum of influence with RCI, RCI will knuckle under and chop off exchanges it might otherwise make.  A good example came when Manhattan Club leaned on RCI to not allow people to trade into MC with South African weeks and other "low-end" weeks.

*****

I'm sure that given those constraints, RCI's natural response would be to direct inventory toward the rental pool.  After all, if RCI accepts a constraint that reduces the number of exchanges it would otherwise, while still accepting the same amount of inventory, the difference has to go somewhere.


----------



## bnoble (Jun 16, 2009)

> I had in mind that the very strongest traders would be high demand week from a high VEP rated resort in a relatively scarce area. Further given the high VEP rating and the application of the VEP filter, the number of total available exchanges might be less.


My sense is that before The Recent Unpleasantness, VEP was a relatively  weak filter.  That may have changed, I don't know.


----------



## T_R_Oglodyte (Jun 16, 2009)

bnoble said:


> My sense is that before The Recent Unpleasantness, VEP was a relatively  weak filter.  That may have changed, I don't know.


When RCI partiicipated here in the Ask RCI thread, VEP filtering was often a heated topic.  It most often came into play when owners of high VEP resorts were excluded from exchanges into rather ordinary resorts in high demand locations.  For example, I recall it was very difficult for a Hyatt owner to exchange into most European resorts in the summertime even though units might be available.  

RCI was quite adamant about the continued existence and application of the filter, even in situations in which the owner asked for a waiver and agreed not to complain about the unit.

I don't think it was at all a weak filter.  When it came into play it had significant effects (generally limiting downward movement) and was quite strictly applied.


----------



## rickandcindy23 (Jun 16, 2009)

I think Brian is saying that from November's update to this Recent Unpleasantness, there was very little quality filtering happening.  We could only see 5 trading power levels during our trading test.  Now I have that many in my account alone, maybe even one or two more. :rofl: Only my twin blue weeks, same resort, same check-in date, pull exactly the same.  The rest are pulling different numbers altogether.  It's odd.


----------



## ausman (Jun 16, 2009)

Agree entirely in that summary by TR.

The one VEP issue that sticks in my mind is the Nantuckett Island resort that had dust bunnies but an owner of much "better" timeshares who wanted to trade in had great difficulty in doing so. 

There is a trade test thread going somewhere and someone, not me, suggested including something so as to test the VEP issue now.


----------



## bnoble (Jun 16, 2009)

> I think Brian is saying that from November's update to this Recent Unpleasantness, there was very little quality filtering happening.


Precisely.  Comparing top-trade-power deposits at a variety of quality levels, the total number of units that an unrated resort could see was only a smidge higher (maybe 1%) than your typical gold crown frou-frou place.

Now, if the one you really want is in that 1% then you're pretty much screwed unless you can talk a VC into waiving it.  But, in absolute terms, it was not a huge impact.  That's the sense in which the filter was "weak"---it didn't remove a huge number of options.

Now that there are a bazillion different trade power levels, the comparison is a lot harder to make.  Just as trade power was signifcantly refined, VEP might have been as well.


----------



## Carolinian (Jun 17, 2009)

The issues in trading power are 1) supply and 2) demand.  Quality is merely one of drivers, with others, of demand.

How much someone paid for a resort has ABSOLUTELY nothing to do with trade power.  If it did the poor smuck who paid develper prices for a deep off season week in an overbuilt area would have more trading power than the savvy buyer of a resale on eBay during a market downturn in prime season in an UNDERbuilt and desirable area.  It just doesn't work that way.

Similarly how much someone pays in maintenance fees has nothing to do with trading power.  If it did, someone owning at a mismanaged resort that is trying to play catchup for years of not building reserves would have more trading power than someone at a well managed resort who is paying reasonable m/f's.  It would also mean that trading power would flucuate with the currency exchange markets and the dollar strengthening against the pound would bring down UK trading power compared to US resorts.  It just doesn't work that way.

It is all down to supply and demand.





Egret1986 said:


> Some still don't get it.  A previous poster commented that it doesn't matter what they paid for their timeshare because that's a moot point because that week got them DVC before.
> 
> As you have so eloquently pointed out (in your own special way), you ain't gonna find a free or low priced DVC anywhere.  There are many resorts like that.
> 
> It's been great buying cheap weeks with low maintenace fees that trade for these awesome resorts that many of us could never afford with maintenance fees that are beyond our budgets.  Be happy that you were able to get them in the past.  Change is hard.  But change is inevitable.


----------



## Carolinian (Jun 17, 2009)

rickandcindy23 said:


> Yes, I will be okay.  TUG has helped me considerably over the last 4+ years.  I feel badly for those who are going to be hurt by this that have no alternatives.



I hope that you will be working to provide owners at Twin Rivers, where you are on the board with alternatives.  I know you had to deal with pushback from the management company last time you tried, but now that RCI has royally screwed over members at your resort, it is time to try again, isn't it?


----------



## Carolinian (Jun 17, 2009)

Mel said:


> Developers make bulk deposits for two reasons:
> 
> 1 - they are bulk banking weeks for their members.  In this case, the developer doesn't really care what happens to those weeks.  They are in the system, their members get credit for a deposit, and the developer is happy.
> 
> 2 - they are bulk banking developer-owned weeks.  In this case, the developer is still selling a significant amount of inventory.  It is not in their best interest for these units to be occupied by somebody who already owns "enough" timeshare.  They need sales prospects, and people who rent (either because they don't own, or don't own enough) make better prospects.  If the weeks you own are capable of trading into my resort, why would you want to buy at my resort?  If you _can't_ trade in, but want to stay regularly, you are a good sales prospect.  That's what the developer cares about.




Cheap rentals, however, are shooting themselves in the foot.  When people compare what they rented for with what the developer is asking for purchase price and m/f, they laugh and walk away.  A number of my friends have done the cheap rental thing and that is EXACTLY what they did on their timeshare tours.


----------



## Carolinian (Jun 17, 2009)

jancpa said:


> If "like for like" exchanges were stressed at RCI developer timeshare presentations many of us would not be timeshare owners today.  It is the lure of exotic foreign resorts for my one week off season Florida timeshare that hooked most of us in the first place.  We all have been spoiled by getting "more bang for the buck."  But isn't that the American way.  RCI has fostered this and is just as much to blame.



''Like for like'', which really means similar supply / demand curves, exists in all parts of the world.  If you want overbuilt areas in Europe, look to the Canary Islands, Hungary, and Spain.  For the Caribberan look to Dominican Republic and Sint Maarten. For Asia, look to India.


----------



## logan115 (Jun 17, 2009)

Silly question, so I apologize in advance as I know very little outside of DVC and even less about trading/exchanging.  I recently bought into DVC (resale - at least I knew that much) and given that a lot of folks are no long seeing DVC it got me to thinking, does this mean that hypothetically I (as a DVC owner) would be seeing more/better options if I were to trade/exchange thru RCI ?

I know that historically the best use of DVC is to use it at the DVC resorts, the cruises aren't that great of a deal when factoring in the number of points needed vs paying cash (plus we're not really "cruisers" anyway), and that renting your points and then using that cash to pay for lodging has been a better deal than exchanging your points/week into II or RCI.

I bought DVC because despite the fact that there are tons of less expensive (and potentially nicer) TS available in Orlando, I really wanted to be guaranteed of staying onsite (yep - I've "inhaled" too much of the pixie dust over the years) and felt that DVC was the best way to go.  I also do not have a massive amount of points, but basically enough to cover our trips (we go about twice every three years) and don't really see myself in the position of trading out very often.  But I also like to have an idea of what my options are, and was hoping some of the TS gurus here could help.

Thanks,

Chris


----------



## tombo (Jun 17, 2009)

Carolinian said:


> How much someone paid for a resort has ABSOLUTELY nothing to do with trade power.
> 
> It is all down to supply and demand.



What the individual paid for a week doesn't have anything to do with trade power.  However supply and demand does rule both RCI demand and average resale prices. The only reason I mentioned price is because typically the highest demand areas and resorts bring the highest resale prices. You will probably never find a Platinum Marriott week at a high demand location for less than $5000. You will be hard pressed to find resale Disney's for less than $10,000. Hiltons etc all command higher resale prices because these are the places people want to vacation and these are also the trades everyone is looking for. The demand drives supply down and raises the prices. That same demand makes them the hard to get trades because the demand quickly depletes the limited RCI inventory.

There are weeks sold for $1 at high demand resorts in high demand locations which have (rightfully so) strong trading power. Those buyers are very savvy, but I feel that those cheap tiger trader sales are a small percent of the resales of high demand weeks.  On average I would say that the tiger traders command a considerably higher resale price than those weeks with low trade power. I never factor retail prices into any equation because they are irrelevant with regards to what a week is actually worth.

It is all down to supply and demand. A resort which has great demand typically leads to lower supply and thus higher resale prices. That same high demand/low supply resort should also translate into higher trading power with RCI if they are rating resorts correctly.


----------



## rickandcindy23 (Jun 17, 2009)

Carolinian said:


> I hope that you will be working to provide owners at Twin Rivers, where you are on the board with alternatives.  I know you had to deal with pushback from the management company last time you tried, but now that RCI has royally screwed over members at your resort, it is time to try again, isn't it?



We left that management company last month and chose Alderwood, the new management company for Inn at Silvercreek.  I like the communication so far, and I really feel that the board is now the "boss" and the management company actually does as we ask.  It's a nice feeling.  

We dual-affiliated with RCI from II, and it was a good thing for our resort and our owners.  

Did you see the article in the NY Times, which is somewhat about our resort, and it has both our and George Marine and his wife's pictures:

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/12/greathomesanddestinations/12Timeshares.html


----------



## bnoble (Jun 17, 2009)

> does this mean that hypothetically I (as a DVC owner) would be seeing more/better options if I were to trade/exchange thru RCI


I suspect that you were already able to see everything on "the approved list", unless Disney is incapable of negotiating.

While I'm happy that DVC owners continue to deposit units (because I don't mind staying there when I can) you are right to assume that this is almost certainly a poor use of your points.  You will almost always be better off renting out your points, and using the proceeds to book the non-DVC lodging you desire.



> I bought DVC because despite the fact that there are tons of less expensive (and potentially nicer) TS available in Orlando, I really wanted to be guaranteed of staying onsite


This is a great reason to buy---and that's what you should use them for: onsite stays *in Orlando*.  Even coastal FL and HHI have better, cheaper options vs. the Disney resorts, and I suspect the same will be true in HI.  What's more, I'm not sold on the advantages of the Grand Californian at DL vs. some of the other walking-distance options there on a dollar-for-dollar basis, even owning at the DVC there.


----------



## logan115 (Jun 17, 2009)

bnoble said:


> I suspect that you were already able to see everything on "the approved list", unless Disney is incapable of negotiating.
> 
> While I'm happy that DVC owners continue to deposit units (because I don't mind staying there when I can) you are right to assume that this is almost certainly a poor use of your points.  You will almost always be better off renting out your points, and using the proceeds to book the non-DVC lodging you desire.
> 
> ...




Thanks Brian, appreciate the feedback.  I don't really have any intention of using DVC for non-DVC stays as it doesn't seem to be the best option - but it always feels better when someone more knowledgeable validates it.  And agree about GCV - even with the new incentives, the point requirements to stay there are insane, and I suspect that's part of the reason that it's not selling as well as expected.

Chris

Chris


----------



## JulieAB (Jun 17, 2009)

bnoble said:


> What's more, I'm not sold on the advantages of the Grand Californian at DL vs. some of the other walking-distance options there on a dollar-for-dollar basis, even owning at the DVC there.



I agree.  I had considered buying DVC earlier this year, just enough points to do WDW every 5 years or so and then figured I could use the points other years at GC since we go to Disneyland a couple times a year.  But after I saw the required points!   We just closed on a 2 bedroom at Dolphin's Cove instead (off ebay). :whoopie:  Though the view of the units into CA looked cool when we there a couple weeks ago, I'm not sure I'd fully appreciate it.  I think people are less likely to spend time in their room when going to DLR than they do in WDW, so it seems the accomodations and need for park transportation is much less.
So I'll enjoy trading in occasionally through RCI for the meantime, and if GC ever makes it into RCI, I'll give those a try once too. Otherwise, I'm a satisfied DC owner.


----------



## Lisa P (Jun 17, 2009)

logan115 said:


> ...given that a lot of folks are no long seeing DVC it got me to thinking, does this mean that hypothetically I (as a DVC owner) would be seeing more/better options if I were to trade/exchange thru RCI ? ....don't really see myself in the position of trading out very often.  But I also like to have an idea of what my options are


Chris, from your description of your DVC points purchase and usage expectations, you'll no doubt be a happy member.    Congrats on a well-thought-out resale purchase.

As for RCI, it's still not really clear that they're finished setting up their newer exchange model.  By the time that you may want to make an exchange search, RCI's procedures may have changed some more. 

DVC may or may not even be using RCI as their external exchange company at that time.

And the DVC limited list of exchange options is likely to change somewhat, regardless of their selected exchange company.

So knowing your "options" now for a hypothetical future date may be more frustrating in the long run, than helpful to you.  I'd suggest that you look at it more seriously when you want to get a second ownership for non-DVC vacations or when you're ready to actually begin planning an exchange using DVC.  HTH.


----------



## logan115 (Jun 17, 2009)

Lisa P said:


> Chris, from your description of your DVC points purchase and usage expectations, you'll no doubt be a happy member.    Congrats on a well-thought-out resale purchase.
> 
> As for RCI, it's still not really clear that they're finished setting up their newer exchange model.  By the time that you may want to make an exchange search, RCI's procedures may have changed some more.
> 
> ...



Thanks Lisa -

And apologies for temporarily sending this thread in a different direction.

The TS bug has officially bitten me, now begins the search for something to compliment DVC that's within driving distance of Chicago for our non-Disney years.  Thought it was hard enough choosing a home resort with DVC, but I think that will pale in comparison to learning about HGVC, Marriot, SVO, Wyndham  before making any other purchases.


----------



## Carolinian (Jun 17, 2009)

T_R_Oglodyte said:


> When RCI partiicipated here in the Ask RCI thread, VEP filtering was often a heated topic.  It most often came into play when owners of high VEP resorts were excluded from exchanges into rather ordinary resorts in high demand locations.  For example, I recall it was very difficult for a Hyatt owner to exchange into most European resorts in the summertime even though units might be available.
> 
> RCI was quite adamant about the continued existence and application of the filter, even in situations in which the owner asked for a waiver and agreed not to complain about the unit.
> 
> I don't think it was at all a weak filter.  When it came into play it had significant effects (generally limiting downward movement) and was quite strictly applied.



That is why for RCI, I have always felt it best to own a Silver Crown, which likely would have a VEP that would get you both upward and downward as far as you needed to go.


----------



## Carolinian (Jun 17, 2009)

Since there are a number of very nice resorts in Orlando that are a dime a dozen, I never understood why some people were so starry eyed over Disney resorts.  The one time I was offered a Disney resort as an exchange was by DAE at HHI.  I looked on a map and saw it was a drive-to-the-beach situation and instead took an unrated resort from RCI from which I could walk to the beach.

Resale prices on eBay do not tell the whole story for any resort area.  I know in looking at the Land Transfer Taxes Approved section of the Dare County website, I find that they are way off base for what most OBX timeshares, especially summer weeks are changing hands for between individuals.  You might be surprised at how many compete with the Marriott and Disney prices you cite, and I suspect that is likely true other places as well.

As to demand, there are nice areas that are simply overbuilt with timeshare and so supply outstrips demand.  Orlando, the Canary Islands, and Williamsburg come to mind.  In the Caribbean, Sint Maarten is the closest to being overbuilt.

For some areas there are interesting comparisions that can be made from the availibility tables in the European version of the RCI Directory, where availibility is broken down monthly for various resort regions into four categories from good (4) to limited (1).  For Florida, seven months are rated at 3 or 4, while five months are rated at 1 or 2.  In comparision in South Africa, all twelve months are rated a 1 or 2.  Thus as a region, South Africa has less supply relative to demand than Florida, and consequently it is not at all surprising that SA would fare well in a system based on supply and demand.





tombo said:


> What the individual paid for a week doesn't have anything to do with trade power.  However supply and demand does rule both RCI demand and average resale prices. The only reason I mentioned price is because typically the highest demand areas and resorts bring the highest resale prices. You will probably never find a Platinum Marriott week at a high demand location for less than $5000. You will be hard pressed to find resale Disney's for less than $10,000. Hiltons etc all command higher resale prices because these are the places people want to vacation and these are also the trades everyone is looking for. The demand drives supply down and raises the prices. That same demand makes them the hard to get trades because the demand quickly depletes the limited RCI inventory.
> 
> There are weeks sold for $1 at high demand resorts in high demand locations which have (rightfully so) strong trading power. Those buyers are very savvy, but I feel that those cheap tiger trader sales are a small percent of the resales of high demand weeks.  On average I would say that the tiger traders command a considerably higher resale price than those weeks with low trade power. I never factor retail prices into any equation because they are irrelevant with regards to what a week is actually worth.
> 
> It is all down to supply and demand. A resort which has great demand typically leads to lower supply and thus higher resale prices. That same high demand/low supply resort should also translate into higher trading power with RCI if they are rating resorts correctly.


----------



## rickandcindy23 (Jun 17, 2009)

Carolinian said:


> That is why for RCI, I have always felt it best to own a Silver Crown, which likely would have a VEP that would get you both upward and downward as far as you needed to go.



I hope I mentioned that Val Chatelle is Silver Crown, but our prime summer weeks, 26 and 27, were hit hard by this "enhancement."  I don't think Twin Rivers is nearly as nice, and it certainly isn't Silver Crown, but it is trading better than Val Chatelle.  I think our VEP was lowered!


----------



## tombo (Jun 17, 2009)

Carolinian said:


> That is why for RCI, I have always felt it best to own a Silver Crown, which likely would have a VEP that would get you both upward and downward as far as you needed to go.




Are all gold crown resorts influenced by VEP or just some like Disney and HGVC?

I personally would rather them let me see everything available than limiting lesser weeks in my best interest if I deposit a gold crown week. I think they should put stars by approved resorts with regards to VEP and have in the explanation where you hit confirm if a resort was not reccommended and didn't have similar ratings to your deposit. You could acknowledge that you are trading for this week anyway even though warned not to. Let the depositing member have any available weeks to choose from, not just the weeks RCI thinks owners would be happy with.


----------



## bnoble (Jun 17, 2009)

> Since there are a number of very nice resorts in Orlando that are a dime a dozen, I never understood why some people were so starry eyed over Disney resorts.


If you are in Orlando primarily to visit the Mouse and his theme parks, the Disney resorts offer some perks and conveniences (and in some cases, locations) that are hard to beat.

If that's not why you are in Orlando, then there's not much reason to favor them over any other, with perhaps the exception of Animal Kingdom Villas and their savannah view units.  Those are pretty much unique.


----------



## T_R_Oglodyte (Jun 17, 2009)

tombo said:


> Are all gold crown resorts influenced by VEP or just some like Disney and HGVC?
> 
> I personally would rather them let me see everything available than limiting lesser weeks in my best interest if I deposit a gold crown week. I think they should put stars by approved resorts with regards to VEP and have in the explanation where you hit confirm if a resort was not reccommended and didn't have similar ratings to your deposit. You could acknowledge that you are trading for this week anyway even though warned not to. Let the depositing member have any available weeks to choose from, not just the weeks RCI thinks owners would be happy with.


Back in the day when RCI was participating in the Ask RCI forum, Madge was quite emphatic that RCI had tried that and it didn't work.  According to her, no matter how much they advised people that they were trading into a lower quality and getting exchangers to acknowledge that they were trading down, RCI would still receive significant blowback from exchangers upset with accommodations, calling RCI on the 24-hour emergency line demanding better accommodations, or otherwise demanding compensation for getting such an unequal exchange.

The discussions on this point were quite heated and quite pointed, and RCI repeatedly said, in essence, "Been there.  Done that. Doesn't work."


----------



## timeos2 (Jun 17, 2009)

*No change I can see*

After the big shakeup in values, as known only by third party extrapolation of inexact values from unknown sources within RCI, all I can say is I am just as happy today with my resorts as I was three weeks ago before the change. Why? Because none of them are planned to be placed with RCI for trade unless for some reason we decide not to use or rent them this year. If we do then we will either take extremely low values of Wyndham points (28,000) to get multiple deposits that invariably get us larger units and more selections than we can ever use.  Or we will use the "request first" feature of Wyndham Points to be sure we have the resort/time we want before we commit the points to RCI. For our non-Wyndhams we don't plan to deposit them into RCI Weeks but may, if we don't use or rent them, have them converted to RCI Points through the points for deposit program. Again we know before we even make that deposit what theyare worth and what that translates to in trade value. Easy. And it hasn't changed. 

So any changes made to the internal workings/ values by RCI have ZERO impact on my perceived value of our ownerships.  We planned to use them or rent them and nothing RCI does impacts that. In fact if the changes they made means less lower quality / lesser time resort units can be traded up for better times / quality that actually helps us as all we ever want is a fair and equal trade in kind. The likelihood of that goes up if the trade ups are reduced. It is a very comfortable spot to be in and, as always, makes us appreciate even more the quality and locations of the resorts we own as we will be there to enjoy it. I have no trouble with RCI's exercising the very rules you accept when you deposit although I do wish they would reduce early renting of units in favor of allowing true trades for members as that should be their focus. If I feel they aren't doing a good job or I can't get the trades I want I'll simply stop even my limited deposits. Clean and simple. No hand wringing or lawsuits required. There are plenty of other exchange companies I can use if I need to.  Life is too short to depend on the undependable or to always be wishing for tough to impossible trade ups to be happy. We bought what we liked and we'll sell it when/if it no longer works. Easy.  What RCI does really doesn't matter to me until they fail to deliver a fair, like for like trade when I request one.


----------



## DaveNV (Jun 17, 2009)

I've been reading this thread with great interest, and I have a question:  Are the lowered numbers of exchangeable weeks being reflected since RCI's changes took effect resulting in ONLY lesser-quality resorts coming up that weren't there before?  Or are the missing weeks only the higher-quality weeks that were seen before this, that maybe shouldn't have been so readily seen?  Will exchangers be forced to accept only equal-quality weeks in exchange?  (I currently have nothing on deposit, so can't check for myself.)

I ask because just a few weeks ago I exchanged a tiny, so-so Waikiki studio week for a 2br at the Grand Mayan in Cancun.  I'm sure my VEP is crap, and wonder if in the future I'll be able to get nicer places like this.  I've used this same week for similar exchanges elsewhere, but wonder hat the future holds.

Dave


----------



## bnoble (Jun 17, 2009)

VEP, as I understand it, is only a downward filter.  In other words, it prevents you from exchanging a "better" resort into a "much lesser" resort, regardless of supply and demand, because such a trade is likely to be viewed as inequal, and not in favor of the RCI customer.  But, there is no _quality-based_ mechanism in RCI that prevents owners from exchanging "much lesser" resorts for "much better" ones, provided that the deposit has a comparable (or better) supply/demand curve than the exchanged-for week.

(In contrast, I believe that Interval _does_ have such an upward quality filter.)

Most of the noticeable changes discussed here were a refinement of trade power, which reflects supply and demand.  Before the Recent Unpleasantness, deposits were lumped into a very small number of trade power levels (A, B, C, D, E).  An "A" deposit could see anything.  A "B" deposit could only see B or lower deposits, and so on.  Since the Recent Unpleasantness, it appears that deposits have been re-arranged into more levels (A, A-, B+, B, B-, etc.)   As a result of this refinement, some deposits are seeing fewer "in-demand" weeks, but others appear to be seeing more.


----------



## Carolinian (Jun 17, 2009)

Supply / Demand is a very different thing than ''quality''.  Quality is merely one driver of demand, nothing more.  If someone opened a very basic resort in a high demand tourist location like say St. Barths or Prague which has little or no timeshare, every week there would undoubtedly rank higher on the supply/demand curve than the most luxurious unit in an overbuilt place like Orlando or the Canary Islands.




BMWguynw said:


> I've been reading this thread with great interest, and I have a question:  Are the lowered numbers of exchangeable weeks being reflected since RCI's changes took effect resulting in ONLY lesser-quality resorts coming up that weren't there before?  Or are the missing weeks only the higher-quality weeks that were seen before this, that maybe shouldn't have been so readily seen?  Will exchangers be forced to accept only equal-quality weeks in exchange?  (I currently have nothing on deposit, so can't check for myself.)
> 
> I ask because just a few weeks ago I exchanged a tiny, so-so Waikiki studio week for a 2br at the Grand Mayan in Cancun.  I'm sure my VEP is crap, and wonder if in the future I'll be able to get nicer places like this.  I've used this same week for similar exchanges elsewhere, but wonder hat the future holds.
> 
> Dave


----------



## T_R_Oglodyte (Jun 17, 2009)

bnoble said:


> VEP, as I understand it, is only a downward filter.  In other words, it prevents you from exchanging a "better" resort into a "much lesser" resort, regardless of supply and demand, because such a trade is likely to be viewed as inequal, and not in favor of the RCI customer.  But, there is no _quality-based_ mechanism in RCI that prevents owners from exchanging "much lesser" resorts for "much better" ones, provided that the deposit has a comparable (or better) supply/demand curve than the exchanged-for week.
> 
> (In contrast, I believe that Interval _does_ have such an upward quality filter.)
> 
> Most of the noticeable changes discussed here were a refinement of trade power, which reflects supply and demand.  Before the Recent Unpleasantness, deposits were lumped into a very small number of trade power levels (A, B, C, D, E).  An "A" deposit could see anything.  A "B" deposit could only see B or lower deposits, and so on.  Since the Recent Unpleasantness, it appears that deposits have been re-arranged into more levels (A, A-, B+, B, B-, etc.)   As a result of this refinement, some deposits are seeing fewer "in-demand" weeks, but others appear to be seeing more.


No - IIRC VEP applied both upward and downward, though I believe upward VEP filters were relaxed as check-in date approached.

In an attempt to forestall some inevitable confusion, *VEP has nothing to do with supply and demand or with trade power*.  It only relates to the quality of the resort experience.  You can have the bluest blue week in the most overbuilt and low demand area of the world, but if the comment cards are positive about the resort, the staff, the unit, etc., that week will have a high VEP.  Further, the VEP filter would prevent you from using that week to trade into a resort in Orlando in early December if that resort did not have a comparable VEP.

With the VEP filter, the worst unit to own for exchanging would be a high VEP resort with low trade power.  Such a unit would only be able to trade into other low trade power units, but even that population would be limited to only other high VEP resorts.  For example, you might not be able to exchange into a many destinations outside the US even during off season - when you had sufficient trade - because the VEP filter would screen out the units.


----------



## bnoble (Jun 17, 2009)

You are correct.  I had mis-remembered this thread:

http://www.tug1.net/tugbbs1/Forum23/HTML/001733.html

in which Madge stated that the upward filter is off for Points-trading-to-Weeks.  By implication, that means that there _is_ an upward filter for Weeks.


----------



## Carolinian (Jun 17, 2009)

VEP also does not really cover what most Tuggers would call ''quality''.  The categories used for VEP and for award status are 1) resort hospitality, 2) housekeeping, 3) check-in / check-out, 4) unit maintenance, 5) resort maintenance.  Until about 5 or so years ago, the Unit Quality category was also used, but was deleted from these calculations at that time.

Indeed, if one looks at the criteria for award status, bells and whistles are not even necessary.  Personally, I have traded into some standard resorts that were superior to some GC resorts I have stayed at.


----------



## jamstew (Jun 17, 2009)

rickandcindy23 said:


> I hope I mentioned that Val Chatelle is Silver Crown, but our prime summer weeks, 26 and 27, were hit hard by this "enhancement."  I don't think Twin Rivers is nearly as nice, and it certainly isn't Silver Crown, but it is trading better than Val Chatelle.  I think our VEP was lowered!



I'm not sure I mentioned that Sunbay is Silver Crown as well. My week 31 was devalued to the point of being useless for what I need.


----------



## Lisa P (Jun 17, 2009)

With some increase in folks moving their Weeks deposits over to "Points For Deposit," I wonder if another re-evaluation of the RCI Points charts is far behind.


----------



## bnoble (Jun 17, 2009)

It's a game of cat-and-mouse.  Savvy owners are always looking for the best possible value for what they own.  Eventually, as more and more people figure out these paths of least resistance, they fall out of balance and lose power.  But, a new path will always take its place.  You just have to adapt and adjust.


----------



## Carolinian (Jun 18, 2009)

Lisa P said:


> With some increase in folks moving their Weeks deposits over to "Points For Deposit," I wonder if another re-evaluation of the RCI Points charts is far behind.



Given the overaveraging of values on the grids, using a prime week for that purpose would just be foolish.  Using a week at the lower edge of one of their bands would be making out like a bandit.  I suspect most folks can figure this out and PFD gets them a lot more marginal weeks than prime weeks.

i think the rental pool is the more obvious answer, especially when you see all of the prime inventory in it.


----------



## rickandcindy23 (Mar 14, 2011)

I know this is an old thread, but I just want everyone to know that trading power was restored to Val Chatelle this past November.  I can see *all* of the Disney, because my summer weeks are worth 25 points.  I couldn't see any after the upgrade of 5/2009.  

RCI denied that the big downgrade happened and said only a few more trading levels were added, and it shouldn't have done much to our trading power.  It did.  I had to take weeks in the off-season at more generic resorts with my weeks.  Well, I took Grand Beach, but it was off-season (great resort).  

So RCI made a huge mistake by devaluing Val Chatelle summer, and they corrected it just before the November upgrade.  I deposit my weeks way in advance now.  :rofl: 

Foxrun still has really poor values, and I don't know why.  I have been questioning RCI about that, but I have sold all but two, so I am at the point where RCI gets only what they value, and II gets everything else.  II also loves my Blue Ridge Village.  We had an assessment at BRV this year, and you would think I would be upset (assessment was the same as MF's).  But it's such an awesome trader, I don't mind at all.  

Cheers! :whoopie:


----------



## Ricci (Mar 14, 2011)

rickandcindy23 said:


> I know this is an old thread, but I just want everyone to know that trading power was restored to Val Chatelle this past November.  I can see *all* of the Disney, because my summer weeks are worth 25 points.  I couldn't see any after the upgrade of 5/2009.
> 
> RCI denied that the big downgrade happened and said only a few more trading levels were added, and it shouldn't have done much to our trading power.  It did.  I had to take weeks in the off-season at more generic resorts with my weeks.  Well, I took Grand Beach, but it was off-season (great resort).
> 
> ...



We own at Grand Beach I, three bedroom.....and I agree, it is a great resort!  Glad you enjoyed it!


----------



## Carolinian (Mar 15, 2011)

Lisa P said:


> With some increase in folks moving their Weeks deposits over to "Points For Deposit," I wonder if another re-evaluation of the RCI Points charts is far behind.



Looks like you called that one correctly!


----------



## Carolinian (Mar 15, 2011)

II has always valued Foxrun more highly than RCI.  That is the place to deposit it.  Good thing they are dual affiliated.  All resorts should seek to dual affiliate.




rickandcindy23 said:


> I know this is an old thread, but I just want everyone to know that trading power was restored to Val Chatelle this past November.  I can see *all* of the Disney, because my summer weeks are worth 25 points.  I couldn't see any after the upgrade of 5/2009.
> 
> RCI denied that the big downgrade happened and said only a few more trading levels were added, and it shouldn't have done much to our trading power.  It did.  I had to take weeks in the off-season at more generic resorts with my weeks.  Well, I took Grand Beach, but it was off-season (great resort).
> 
> ...


----------



## BevL (Mar 15, 2011)

Carolinian said:


> II has always valued Foxrun more highly than RCI.  That is the place to deposit it.  Good thing they are dual affiliated.  All resorts should seek to dual affiliate.



I don't always agree with you - but that's okay, right?   Definitely agree with you on this one.  I've never considered depositing my week 16 with RCI.


----------

