# WEEKS owners - FACTS/QUESTIONS - new RCI Program



## DeniseM

I am going to be very strict about this thread.  
*
Please keep is short, sweet and factual.* 

This will be the thread where people can ask questions and get info.

Please post your opinions, debates, and analysis in the "Opinions Thread."

Thanks!


----------



## DeniseM

click here -> *Understanding the upcoming changes to your membership.*


----------



## anne1125

I'm sure this is a question that has been answered but I can't find it.

When is RCI making the change?

Thanks,
Anne


----------



## timeos2

*November 15*



anne1125 said:


> I'm sure this is a question that has been answered but I can't find it.
> 
> When is RCI making the change?
> 
> Thanks,
> Anne



Everything we've heard is a 11/15/10 roll out.


----------



## crazyhorse

The link to Inside RCI explaining the new weeks exchange procedure was apparantly emailed by RCI to some (not all) of its members.

I found the link on another forum- posted by someone there.

RCI has not (in my mind) removed this subfile from its official "inside RCI" website, but either they have removed the click- on link to it, or the link was never here to begin with (or the link has failed).

Until we hear otherwise from RCI we must assume that the link above which gives a brief description of the new week exchange system is valid. More detail will follow in two weeks if RCI can manage to get its website runnung smoothly.

There has been much comment elsewhere regarding the possible number of bands to be used.
Talk has been of only one  band encompassing  all the weeks inventory in every possible week of exchange.throughout the year.
There has also been speculation of a multitude of bands, up to 50 plus.

I look forward to the 15th November (or so) to see the facts and the rest of the details.


----------



## Goofyhobbie

*What RCI said about the Enhancements in Endless Vacation Magazine*

In early October you may have received a copy of Endless Vacation magazine from RCI.

The text which follows is attributed to Endless Vacation magazine, Winter 2010 Edition Pages 74 and 75:



> *ENHANCEMENTS TO YOUR WEEKS MEMBERSHIP COMING SOON *​
> *Here's the scoop!* ​
> Throughout the past two years, we've launched many new features to make your vacation planning easier and more fun.
> Later this year, we're unveiling more exciting changes that will give you even greater flexibility and more choices.
> It's what you've been asking for, so be on the lookout!
> 
> a  *good*   thing
> 
> gets even
> 
> *better!*
> 
> To be sure you're ready to take advantage of these exciting new enhancements:
> 
> 1.  Deposit your week(s).
> 
> 2.   Ensure your membership is paid up to date.
> 
> 3.  Make sure you have paid your maintenance fee at your home resort.
> 
> *RCI SERVES UP SOME CHANGES*​
> Trading Power *
> 
> Deposit Trading Power will still be determined in the same way, but now you will be able to see what that number is. Soon you'll be able to see all available weeks for Exchange vacations, and compare the trading power of those weeks to your Deposit Trading Power.
> 
> Deposit Credits​
> If you confirm an Exchange with a lower trading power than your deposited week, you'll get a Deposit Credit for the remaining trading power you didn't use, which will appear as a new Deposit on your account for you to use however you like. Combine it with another Deposit or use it on its own to look for and book another vacation! **
> 
> Combine Deposited Weeks
> 
> If you want to trade up to an Exchange with a trading power higher than that of any of your Deposits, you can combine two or more of your weeks and their trading power, giving you access to vacations that you might not have been able to book in the past.​
> * For additional information on trading power, please see the Terms and Conditions of Weeks Subscribing Membership available at rci.com.
> 
> ** These vacations are limited. Destinations and travel times are subject to availability and confirmed on a first come, first served basis. Offer includes only accomodations and specifically excludes travel costs and other expenses that may be incurred. Taxes, additional fees and charges may apply. All-inclusive resorts may charge a mandatory all-inclusive fee. Promotional discounts and offers may not apply to all properties. Other restrictions may apply. Offer void where prohibited by law. CST: 204655-50. Registeration as a seller of travel does not constitute approval by the State of California. Fla. Seller of Travel Reg. No. ST-26552.*
> 
> Nevada Seller of Travel Registration No. 2002-0793.*
> Washington Seller of Travel Reg. No. 602357907


----------



## krmlaw

Ok, I kinda like the left over trading power concept ... 

I have some tigers, and from what I read if Im exchanging into something less I will have left over power that I may be able to trade again.

Right?


----------



## timeos2

krmlaw said:


> Ok, I kinda like the left over trading power concept ...
> 
> I have some tigers, and from what I read if Im exchanging into something less I will have left over power that I may be able to trade again.
> 
> Right?



Correct. If there are a few left over claws or incisors you don't simply lose them but will have an option to reconnect them to other deposits or leftovers (at a price - and a critical unknown right now as to how they will charge to rehook those credits) to obtain another trade.  That, and the ability to combine two or more low value weeks into one, may be among the best features of the newly revised program.  The other is the simple ability to know what you hold in value and the values needed to get what you want.


----------



## crazyhorse

The answer is yes, but the unresolved question is (until RCI answers this) is how much "change"  you will have following a transaction.

If RCI keep to bands with say 5 whole "lite points" between the bands, you could get 5 or 10 or 15 etc exact number of "lite points" left over from your exchange with a lesser resort. You would have these points which you could use against another week (or combine as RCI infers).

On the other hand, it has been mooted that RCI may adopt more, but narrower bands, these being separated by a single number.

Now say your tiger is worth 58 points, you will have change over when you exchange into a 56 point resort, but this change is worth only 2 "lite points". 

As you wouldn`t be able to get anything for these 2 points, such a system would be less useful to you than the coarse 5 point model. It would also mean practically *every exchange* that was made by members would result in "change" left over and in my opinion would be a little crazy.

But don`t discount either.

:hysterical:


----------



## MichaelColey

And don't forget that we'll also have the ability to SEE everything out there, even if we don't have enough trading value for it.  That will really help us know if it's worthwhile to deposit a tiger or combine a couple lesser deposits.


----------



## CaliDave

I wonder how many credits it will take for last minute inventory? Anyone see anything regarding this?  I would be nice if I have a good trader and can get multiple last minute weeks out it.


----------



## MichaelColey

It is presumed that last minute inventory will require TP of 5, but we won't know for sure until it rolls out.


----------



## krmlaw

when is roll out?


----------



## MichaelColey

They're supposed to take RCI.com down on 11/12 and reopen it with the new system in place on 11/15.


----------



## rwpeterson

*1 - in - x rule*

Will this change eliminate the 1- in- x rule that currently exists in the weeks program?


----------



## learnalot

rwpeterson said:


> Will this change eliminate the 1- in- x rule that currently exists in the weeks program?



I wouldn't think so.  Those rules are set by the resort, not by RCI.  The resorts want you to be able to exchange in there once, so they can try and get you to buy there.  They don't want it to be easy for you to return without buying from them.


----------



## abbekit

MichaelColey said:


> And don't forget that we'll also have the ability to SEE everything out there, even if we don't have enough trading value for it.  That will really help us know if it's worthwhile to deposit a tiger or combine a couple lesser deposits.



This is my favorite aspect of the new program.  I'm now locked out of many places that I used to get since RCI devalued my timeshare.  At least now I might have the ability to trade into something rather than waste my week and have to rent.


----------



## Carolinian

krmlaw said:


> Ok, I kinda like the left over trading power concept ...
> 
> I have some tigers, and from what I read if Im exchanging into something less I will have left over power that I may be able to trade again.
> 
> Right?



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


----------



## Carolinian

Yes and No.  RCI and the resort (actually usually the developer) jointly make the 1 in ? rule.  If you use a different exchange company into that resort, it does not apply.




learnalot said:


> I wouldn't think so.  Those rules are set by the resort, not by RCI.  The resorts want you to be able to exchange in there once, so they can try and get you to buy there.  They don't want it to be easy for you to return without buying from them.


----------



## Carolinian

Here is a question I asked elsewhere that can have a big impact on the economic stability of our resorts and therefore our maintenance fees:

http://www.timeshareforums.com/foru...ts-lite-disrupt-45-day-window.html#post410585


----------



## Happytravels

Carolinian said:


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



I was wondering this same thing..........if say I had some change back..RCI is going to want ANOTHER exchange fee for me to use my change back...???


----------



## MichaelColey

Happytravels said:


> I was wondering this same thing..........if say I had some change back..RCI is going to want ANOTHER exchange fee for me to use my change back...???


Yes, you'll pay an exchange fee for every exchange.  If you're able to make multiple exchanges from one deposit (because you get change back), you'll pay multiple exchange fees.


----------



## learnalot

Carolinian said:


> Yes and No.  RCI and the resort (actually usually the developer) jointly make the 1 in ? rule.  If you use a different exchange company into that resort, it does not apply.



Right.  I know.  But the question was asking about whether the new RCI system would eliminate the 1 in x rule, which implies they were asking specifically about RCI.  The answer to that question is no, I would not think it will impact the 1 in x rule between RCI and the resorts where such a rule exists.  However, as Carolinian points out, you can often skirt this limitation by trading into the desired resort using a different exchange company each time (if any other exchange companies have access to the inventory).


----------



## krmlaw

i would expect to pay another exchange fee if i was going to use the leftovers.


----------



## rapmarks

ARe weeks already spacebanked going to be switched to the new system?


----------



## crazyhorse

"_ARe weeks already spacebanked going to be switched to the new system?"
_
Yes.

RCI could not hope to manage two systems for weeks exchange at the same time.

What is slightly puzzling is why RCI don`t clear the air and say* precisely* how the new system will operate.

If they are not going to lose out by releasing the data before it switches on, why are they allowing speculation to be created as to its possible benefits or drawbacks?

Such speculation would tend to make members more nervous about making deposits now, rather than later.


----------



## Stricky

I logged in today and saw no information or notices about the change on my weeks page. I read the link provided in this thread but it seems to be odd that they would make such big changes without some advanced warning of a change over date. Are we sure the 15th is the date or could this be another 6 months out?


----------



## rapmarks

How about a week that has an ongoing search attached to it?  what happens with that?


----------



## beejaybeeohio

*Pre-existing Condition?*



rapmarks said:


> How about a week that has an ongoing search attached to it?  what happens with that?



I've got the same question, Rapmarks.  Will we be 'grandfathered' so that the new fees associated with upgrades are waived?  Will we be matched sooner with the new system? I have a feeling that RCI was holding back on matches til after 11/15.

I suspect the days of snagging a larger unit via random or ongoing searching will be gone.  If RCI's pricing isn't exorbitant, I'm ok with paying a bit extra but I fear we'll be gouged.


----------



## Dave599

rapmarks said:


> How about a week that has an ongoing search attached to it?  what happens with that?



Your kind of missing the point here, the underlying system by which rci runs is not changing all they are doing is showing you a numerical value for your trading power it was always there before you just couldn't see it, it will have no effect on on going searches (barring the fact you will now be able to see you haven't got a prayer in getting what your searching for.......) it also will make no difference in banking now or later the trading power is just being reveled (except for date of deposit differences) and there giving some added features (combining weeks, credits back etc).........Bottom line the numbers or some kind of numbers have always been in the system, they don't have to add numbers they have always been there..... all there doing is showing them to you......

Dave


----------



## krmlaw

thats what i was thinking too ... nothing is changing as far as i can tell, but im my opinion getting better. you will be able to see everything with the possibility of extra left over for another exchange ...


----------



## Carolinian

How many times has RCI sworn that they haven't monkeyed with the exchange system (5/30, Black Sunday . . .) when it has been very clear that they in fact have?  Now they expect us to believe that tired old line, yet again?


----------



## DeniseM

A gentle reminder - please post opinions in the other thread set up for that purpose.


----------



## MichaelColey

Downtime and rollout announced on RCI.com:

"*Due to new product and service enhancements being made over the upcoming weekend, RCI.com will be unavailable to process transactions from 12:01am Eastern Standard Time Friday, November 12th through 11:59pm Eastern Standard Time Sunday, November 14th.*"


----------



## Steve@BWV

*2 questions*

Is there any information regarding depositing a lock-off?  Will a 2-bedroom lock-off always equal twice the value of two 1-bedrooms?  I wonder what this would do to inventory.  Perhaps an increase of 2-bedrooms in the system since there will no longer be a need to split the lock out.

The second question is what is the affect on Club memberships such as DVC, if any?   

Thanks!


----------



## bnoble

For the first part, we don't know.

I doubt it will change the dedicated portal systems with fixed crossover grids (HGVC, DVC, and I think WM), because they already were "outside" the normal trade power computation mechanism.


----------



## bellesgirl

*Ongoing search*

Regarding new ongoing search requests entered after Nov. 15:  Trading down would not be an issue but how would you trade up and combine deposits? Do you have to combine first or would RCI let you use the total of all your deposits to do the search?  Once a match is made you could decide whether it was worth that number and release or confirm.


----------



## "Roger"

Steve@BWV said:


> Is there any information regarding depositing a lock-off?  Will a 2-bedroom lock-off always equal twice the value of two 1-bedrooms?  ...


This is not a definitive answer as to how it will work in the new system, but this is how it works within the existing Points system.

In general, a one bedroom is worth about 70% the value of a two-bedroom at the same resort.  The one bedroom portion of a lockout gets about the same value as one bedrooms units at nearby resorts.  (There can be complicating factors making comparisons a bit iffy, but this seems right.)  A two bedroom lockout (or a three bedroom lockout) _always_ gets the same value as the point value of the individual portions of the lockout added together.

So, using a set of numbers purely for the sake of illustration, if two bedroom units in an area are getting about 43,000 points, one bedrooms would be getting about 30,000.  So, if someone owned a two-bedroom lockout, they could deposit the units separately and get 30,000 points each, or, deposit the entire unit and get 60,000 points.


----------



## MichaelColey

That's similar to how it works with RCI Points For Deposit, too.  For instance, at one of my resorts a 1BR is 39.5k, a 2BR is 52.5k or a 3BR is 68k.  If I split my 3BR lockout (which I do), I get 92k instead of 68k.


----------



## krmlaw

GREAT - we have a 3 bed, and would like to split still and do a 2 bed and 1 bed.


----------



## rickandcindy23

I talked to someone at RCI, who relieved my anxieties about the system with one sentence:
"Trading power is different from trading value."  

So if your week is valued at 10 or 15, you may still see weeks available that the owner received more points, like 20 or 25.  So your deposit may see and be able to book into some weeks without adding any points.  You will see "this much" inventory, and some may have higher values that the owner got, but your week of lesser value can still get.  So the values might be different as a deposit vs. exchange.   

Does that make sense?  

80% of the inventory will be at 20, so if you get 40 points for a week, you can get two weeks.   Orlando most any time shouldn't be more than 20 points.  So two off-season Orlando for one good deposit, that sounds good to me.


----------



## krmlaw

ive been getting so stressed about this ... but ive decided not to worry til i see what happens. im thinking my 3 bedroom summer myrtle beach week will still pull great trades.


----------



## bnoble

> "Trading power is different from trading value."


Wow.

Okay, that's pretty interesting, and (I admit) a little surprising.  It's also a *dis-incentive* to combine in some situations.  I await Monday and our new RCI Overlords with anticipation!


----------



## Carolinian

While the final translation of ''RCI Speak'' will have to await their roll out, the most obvious interpretation of what they told you is that trading within bands would appear to be preserved, which is a far better situation than an exact number system.




rickandcindy23 said:


> I talked to someone at RCI, who relieved my anxieties about the system with one sentence:
> "Trading power is different from trading value."
> 
> So if your week is valued at 10 or 15, you may still see weeks available that the owner received more points, like 20 or 25.  So your deposit may see and be able to book into some weeks without adding any points.  You will see "this much" inventory, and some may have higher values that the owner got, but your week of lesser value can still get.  So the values might be different as a deposit vs. exchange.
> 
> Does that make sense?
> 
> 80% of the inventory will be at 20, so if you get 40 points for a week, you can get two weeks.   Orlando most any time shouldn't be more than 20 points.  So two off-season Orlando for one good deposit, that sounds good to me.


----------



## crazyhorse

*Rci Shutdown*

*In case some of you don`t receive this notice from RCI, I have received this email. Note that the shutdown applies to the call centre as well as the online facility.*

_"RCI will be temporarily closed for business over this coming weekend, as we launch more exciting new benefits for our RCI Weeks members.

We will be implementing enhancements to the RCI Weeks program which will bring you more value, improved flexibility and greater transparency.

In order to do this, we need to make upgrades to our technology systems that will require RCI.com and our call centre to be closed temporarily over the weekend to minimise any possible disruption to the service we provide to you.

Our call centre will be closed on the following days;

Friday 12th November 2010
Saturday 13th November 2010

Also, RCI.com will be unavailable between the following times:

From: 5:00am - Friday 12th November 2010
To: 5:00am - Monday 15th November

Should you have an immediate need, please try to complete this before the above dates. This will enable us to service your request as efficiently as possible. When we re-open, we are expecting to see higher than usual volume in our call centre as well as RCI.com."
_


----------



## Steve@BWV

"Roger" said:


> So, using a set of numbers purely for the sake of illustration, if two bedroom units in an area are getting about 43,000 points, one bedrooms would be getting about 30,000.  So, if someone owned a two-bedroom lockout, they could deposit the units separately and get 30,000 points each, or, deposit the entire unit and get 60,000 points.



If I understand correctly and if RCI maintains the same values as they have claimed, it will no longer benefit me to deposit my my lock-off as a single unit.  Michael was able to increase his value by nearly 50%.  If I can recombine those values post deposit I will be able to book a week never before available to me. 

This seems too good to be true unless there is really a ~50% greater value to the split unit.


----------



## "Roger"

Michael's comment completely confused me.  He said that what I described is the same as what happens within Points for Deposit and then gave numbers that did not match what I had just described.

Within Points itself (I am not talking about Points for Deposit), _you get the same number of points whether you deposit your unit as a whole or the individual parts separately._  This will be more than what you get for similar sized units at nearby resorts that are not lockouts. That is because RCI gives you the full value of the separate units.  

Points for deposit is an entirely different animal entirely.  I actually agreed with Carolinian that the PFD charts are very crude.  All GC's in a wide area get the same number of points regardless of differences in location, quality, number of bathrooms, size of kitchens; no bonus for lockouts; etc.  I always said that I would accept charts that were resort specific. I would guess that with the changeover that is coming.


----------



## Mel

"Roger" said:


> This is not a definitive answer as to how it will work in the new system, but this is how it works within the existing Points system.
> 
> In general, a one bedroom is worth about 70% the value of a two-bedroom at the same resort.  The one bedroom portion of a lockout gets about the same value as one bedrooms units at nearby resorts.  (There can be complicating factors making comparisons a bit iffy, but this seems right.)  A two bedroom lockout (or a three bedroom lockout) _always_ gets the same value as the point value of the individual portions of the lockout added together.
> 
> So, using a set of numbers purely for the sake of illustration, if two bedroom units in an area are getting about 43,000 points, one bedrooms would be getting about 30,000.  So, if someone owned a two-bedroom lockout, they could deposit the units separately and get 30,000 points each, or, deposit the entire unit and get 60,000 points.



But Roger, that's assuming that a 2BR lockout splits into to full 1BR units.  While there are a few areas where that is the case, many 2BR lockouts split into a 1BR unit and a Studio, and would not qualify for the equivalent of two 1BR.  Of those units where a 2BR lockout converts to two 1BR units, the resulting 2BR unit is often huge - bigger than a typical regular 2BR unit.  I would expect such a unit to be worth more.

Now that we're moving to the new system, perhap RCI will assign values in such a way that two sides add up to the same credits as the individual sides added together.  We will know soon enough.



rickandcindy23 said:


> I talked to someone at RCI, who relieved my anxieties about the system with one sentence:
> "Trading power is different from trading value."
> 
> So if your week is valued at 10 or 15, you may still see weeks available that the owner received more points, like 20 or 25.  So your deposit may see and be able to book into some weeks without adding any points.  You will see "this much" inventory, and some may have higher values that the owner got, but your week of lesser value can still get.  So the values might be different as a deposit vs. exchange.
> 
> Does that make sense?
> 
> 80% of the inventory will be at 20, so if you get 40 points for a week, you can get two weeks.   Orlando most any time shouldn't be more than 20 points.  So two off-season Orlando for one good deposit, that sounds good to me.


This makes complete sense

Perhaps your week has a "trading value" of 15, and you deposit it more than 9 months out, so you get your full 15 points.  You want to go exchange into a week with a "trading value" of 25.  If you try to book that week a full year out, it would cost 25 credits, and the member who deposited it would have recieved 25 credits.  We don't know the exact percentages, but we know closer than 9 months out, the credits give go down, and I would expect the cost to go down too - so say at 6 months there is a reduction of 40%, and that member is given 15 credits of "trade power" on his week with a "trade value" of 25.  You are now able to book that same unit for 15 credits.

This might also explain how bulk banking has worked in the past, assuming there is another factor based on the number of weeks already on deposit from your resort.

In other words, if there is an oversupply of one resort with a high "trading value" compared to a neighbor resort, the resulting "trading power" at the first resort may end up lower, providing an incentive for people to exchange in and reduce that oversupply.


----------



## MichaelColey

"Roger" said:


> Michael's comment completely confused me. He said that what I described is the same as what happens within Points for Deposit and then gave numbers that did not match what I had just described.
> 
> Within Points itself (I am not talking about Points for Deposit), _you get the same number of points whether you deposit your unit as a whole or the individual parts separately._ This will be more than what you get for similar sized units at nearby resorts that are not lockouts. That is because RCI gives you the full value of the separate units.


I read back through your post and I see both similarities and difference between RCI Points and PFD.  You pointed out that with RCI Points a 1BR is worth about 70% of a 2BR.  That matches pretty close to PFD values.  The difference is that PFD doesn't differentiate between lockouts and reguar units, while RCI Points does.  To get maximum value out of a lockout with PFD, you *must* split it.

Based on what I've seen about trading values within RCI Weeks, and taking RCI at their word about trading values not changing, I would excpect the new system to more closely resemble PFD values.  Conventional wisdom says that the trading value in RCI Weeks between a 1BR, 2BR and 3BR is not much different.  I know when I split and deposit my lockouts, my 1BR and 2BR sides typically just see 10k difference (115k vs. 125k, 125k vs. 135k, and 135k vs. 145k is what I've seen, depending on the resort and week).  Looking at which deposits can see 2BR units vs. 3BR units, I think the difference there is minimal as well.  So splitting is definitely better right now in RCI Weeks and should continue to be.


----------



## jjking42

Hopefully this will cut down on lock off deposits
We always want 2 bedroom units and only own 2 bedroom units.

We often find units where we want to go but always one bedrooms. lack of two bedroom units has always bothered me. Its the worst with Marriott in II.

If the points values are the same more two bedroom units should get deposited. Because you can still get two weeks of vacation with the bigger point value and you want have to pay lock off fees.


----------



## timeos2

jjking42 said:


> Hopefully this will cut down on lock off deposits
> We always want 2 bedroom units and only own 2 bedroom units.
> 
> We often find units where we want to go but always one bedrooms. lack of two bedroom units has always bothered me. Its the worst with Marriott in II.
> 
> If the points values are the same more two bedroom units should get deposited. Because you can still get two weeks of vacation with the bigger point value and you want have to pay lock off fees.




100% agreement on this! The idea of timeshare was always larger, full units rather than small limited studios/basic hotel rooms.  We expect two bedroom or larger (or at the very least a true 1 bedroom and full features) within the restrictions of a given area. The trend, as you point out especially bad with II/Marriott, to split an otherwise great resort/unit into tiny, limited feature units does not meet what we put in or expect to get out. Because of that renting, where again you can tweak things down to the exact unit/view/size/date/etc AND save money over many trades, becomes much me attractive.  Hopefully by putting the value out there regardless of how it is "split" we can get back to what timeshare is supposed to be.


----------



## DocPepsi

*WEEKS owners - OPINIONS - new RCI Program*

Wouldn't the 'Trade Value' and 'Trade Power' in aggregate have to basically be equal?  Otherwise, there would be a huge imbalance in terms of equity correct?

I mean if you treat this as a free-market economy, if you give people more Money (Trade Power) than the value of the goods (Trade Value) then the entire economic system is at a fault.


----------



## Dunk

I know this is supposed to happen this weekend....but my SA week which I have had on deposit for a year or so, just dropped from seeing 140,000 available exchanges to 42,000. I can no longer see any DVC or Manhatten Club,
Houses at Summer Bay, Bay Club......I could see them all yesterday.

I now only see 3 resorts in Hawaii....

This sucks


----------



## bellesgirl

My numbers are changing too but in a different way.  A unit that was stronger now shows less availability than a previously weaker unit.  Not huge differences, but still peculiar.  Monday should be interesting.


----------



## Liz Wolf-Spada

What if we have no current weeks deposited with RCI? How will this help us to decide where to get the best trades for our weeks?
Liz


----------



## miamidan

i really want to book some vacations but, am waiting til monday.  Want to see if there is other stuff out there have not been seeing or if there is potential "change back" opportunities!


----------



## famy27

Does anyone know what will happen with generic Wyndham deposits?  I have several right now (and no visibles...grr), so I can't search anything at all.  I am hoping that as of Monday, I'll see the value of the 28,0000 and 70,000 point studio weeks and will be able to search accordingly.  Or will generics still not be searchable?


----------



## bailey

What would you pay if you had to use 2 weeks in order to get the exchange?  2 exchange fees or one?


----------



## dundey

Dunk said:


> I know this is supposed to happen this weekend....but my SA week which I have had on deposit for a year or so, just dropped from seeing 140,000 available exchanges to 42,000. I can no longer see any DVC or Manhatten Club,
> Houses at Summer Bay, Bay Club......I could see them all yesterday.
> 
> I now only see 3 resorts in Hawaii....
> 
> This sucks



Was that a 2010 - world cup time deposit?  If so, I've seen the same thing.
My 2010 Glenmore Sands week was seeing 132,000 the last time I checked on Tuesday and is now at 68,000.  Lower than my Lehigh Resort Club July week, which has NEVER been the case.
This is not making me happy.


----------



## MichaelColey

RCI.com login is down for the ugprade, but they have a couple videos up to tell people about the changes.  Nothing new, except this one gem:






This is a new Deposit Calculator.  From what I can read on the screen, you can select any resort and either a unit number or room type and week number or check-in date and see the trading power that the deposit would get.


----------



## ajmace

*RCi.com down now - does it reopen 5am Monday in England?*

I am looking forward to checking that I am still able to do the same exchanges as I was yesterday.  This is the assurance given by RCI that trading power remains the same but you will now be able to see it.

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


----------



## crazyhorse

Yes that`s what the email from RCI told me. I live in England. 

quote:

*Our call centre will be closed on the following days;

Friday 12th November 2010
Saturday 13th November 2010

Also, RCI.com will be unavailable between the following times:

From: 5:00am - Friday 12th November 2010
To: 5:00am - Monday 15th November*

If we get up early we can see it before our American cousins, but not before our friends in Australia. If you know someone over there they could give us a link to click on for their site which might give us a head start.
Or just select the country at the top of the RCI website perhaps?

Don`t take all of this as a fact!!


----------



## bnoble

> Does anyone know what will happen with generic Wyndham deposits?


Not conclusively.  At least one person was told that "pre-change" deposits will still be treated as special cases (i.e. not visible, must call), but that "post-change" deposits will (a) always be visible but (b) have different crossover point values.  Several people were told that Wyndham would send us something "this week" with the details, but here we are on Friday and I don't know of anyone who has gotten anything.

So given the notorious unreliability of the phone reps, I think we'll just have to wait and see what happens on Monday.


----------



## Tommart

*RCI Points Video*



MichaelColey said:


> RCI.com login is down for the ugprade, but they have a couple videos up to tell people about the changes.  Nothing new, except this one gem: <a new Deposit Calculator.>......



Well I watched the two videos--one for Weeks and one for Points programs.  I didn't realize that there was also a change involving the Points program.

I agree I learned nothing significant in watching the Weeks video.

I then watched the Points video.  I'm not a Points member so I don't fully understand it.  I watched 2-3 minutes of hype with no content on current changes.  Then the video dedicated about 5 seconds to this weekend's change.  *RCI will make it easier for Points members to search for Weeks units.*

If RCI is making it easier for Points members to select Weeks deposits, it concerns me if they do not make it easier for Weeks members to select Points deposits.  This is a potential negative of this weekend's change.

Watch the Points Video on RCI.com.  Do you have the same concern?

Tom


----------



## Carolinian

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



Tommart said:


> Well I watched the two videos--one for Weeks and one for Points programs.  I didn't realize that there was also a change involving the Points program.
> 
> I agree I learned nothing significant in watching the Weeks video.
> 
> I then watched the Points video.  I'm not a Points member so I don't fully understand it.  I watched 2-3 minutes of hype with no content on current changes.  Then the video dedicated about 5 seconds to this weekend's change.  *RCI will make it easier for Points members to search for Weeks units.*
> 
> If RCI is making it easier for Points members to select Weeks deposits, it concerns me if they do not make it easier for Weeks members to select Points deposits.  This is a potential negative of this weekend's change.
> 
> Watch the Points Video on RCI.com.  Do you have the same concern?
> 
> Tom


----------



## miamidan

Carolina,

I am a weeks member and on the surface it appears that what you say is right.  They can cross over into "our" system but, I can't imagine there is not a reconciliation between the two systems.  South Beach resort in Myrtle beach and Crown Park in Gatlinburg were sold only as points.  There was never a week owner sold there yet I regularly saw that on weeks.  Lake Geneva in Wisconsin was the same way.

Also if I remmeber correctly the 'crossover" grids were updated several years ago to demand a much higher number of points to access the weeks inventory.

just trying to be like Fox News "Fair and balanced"


----------



## MichaelColey

It looks like the Fee Schedule has been updated.  The fee to combine will be $99, either online or over the phone.


----------



## JudyS

MichaelColey said:


> It looks like the Fee Schedule has been updated.  The fee to combine will be $99, either online or over the phone.


Good catch! Let's hope we only have to pay one combining charge, no matter how many weeks one is combining (i.e., it one combines a 5 point and a 10 point and another 5 point, let's hope that's one combining $99 fee, not $198 in combining fees.)


----------



## Carolinian

Does anyone know why they are charging Canadians higher fees?  When the loony was 70 or 80% of the USD that made sense.  When they are virtually at par it does not.




MichaelColey said:


> It looks like the Fee Schedule has been updated.  The fee to combine will be $99, either online or over the phone.


----------



## Carolinian

They claim to have a reconciliation method but are very evasive about it. Direct questions on the subject on the old Ask Madge (RCI Rep) section on TUG were evaded or ignored.  However there was an unofficial RCI person who posted as Anon on a European timeshare board.  He was what he said he was because the site owner did not want to allow him to post saying he worked for RCI unless he could show evidence of it.  The site owner tested Anon by asking a series of very specific questions about his own RCI account that could only have been answered by someone with access to RCI's computers and Anon came back with all the right answers.  In any event, when Anon was asked how they swapped weeks between the systems, he said they usually did not replace weeks taken out of the Weeks system for Points members with anything.  What you are seeing might be developer deposits or they might be something that RCI had too much of and shifted to a place where they could offload it.





miamidan said:


> Carolina,
> 
> I am a weeks member and on the surface it appears that what you say is right.  They can cross over into "our" system but, I can't imagine there is not a reconciliation between the two systems.  South Beach resort in Myrtle beach and Crown Park in Gatlinburg were sold only as points.  There was never a week owner sold there yet I regularly saw that on weeks.  Lake Geneva in Wisconsin was the same way.
> 
> Also if I remmeber correctly the 'crossover" grids were updated several years ago to demand a much higher number of points to access the weeks inventory.
> 
> just trying to be like Fox News "Fair and balanced"


----------



## "Roger"

Carolinian said:


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


What Carolinian fails to mention is that this same arrangement exists for all of the hotel and mini-systems with all of the exchange companies.  Is Marriott (Hyatt) going to give II members the same access to their inventory as owners(or put up a fire wall preventing anyone in II from having access to any of the Marriott or Hyatt inventory)?  Should ther be no more access for RCI members to Disney, Hyatt, VRI? Would Carolinian militate for a firewall between Haspimag and DAE?

Fortunately, none of this is going to happen.


----------



## jjmanthei05

Carolinian said:


> Does anyone know why they are charging Canadians higher fees?  When the loony was 70 or 80% of the USD that made since.  When they are virtually at par it does not.



Because RCI hates Canadians?  

Jason


----------



## BevL

Carolinian said:


> Does anyone know why they are charging Canadians higher fees?  When the loony was 70 or 80% of the USD that made since.  When they are virtually at par it does not.



That's been a common complaint from when I opened my account over 10 years ago.

When "Madge" was on the boards, the question was posed and we got RCI doublespeak about market conditions and that there are many factors that weigh in, blah, blah, blah.

Basically that's how it is, always has been and will continue to be.


----------



## Bourne

MichaelColey said:


> It looks like the Fee Schedule has been updated.  The fee to combine will be $99, either online or over the phone.



If you go through the whole points video, it seems the search capability for points is being upgraded to kinda match weeks


And thou shalth read the whole thread before posting... this info was already posted by Tommart


----------



## johnstp

I'm as confused as I've ever been.  

If I'm an RCI Points member, does this have any impact on me?  Points are Points, right?  My "trading power" is basically determined by the number of Points I own, yes?

My head hurts.


----------



## MichaelColey

Bourne said:


> If you go through the whole points video, it seems the search capability for points is being upgraded to kinda match weeks


I just watched the video again, and it looks like the RCI Weeks search within RCI Points is being updated.  Unfortunately, I think we're stuck with the same restrictive search as before for RCI Points reservations.


----------



## miamidan

economies of scale?  number of members vs. operating costs?

just a guess


----------



## matbec

Carolinian said:


> Does anyone know why they are charging Canadians higher fees?  When the loony was 70 or 80% of the USD that made since.  When they are virtually at par it does not.



According to the fine print at the bottom of the Fee Schedule, it says:

"**These services for RCI subscribing members residing in Canada are provided by RCI Canada ULC. The listed fees for Canadian members include GST/HST as applicable to such member’s Province of residence. The GST/HST rate for each Canadian Province, effective July 1, 2010 is as follows: BC – 12%; ON, NB and NF – 13%; NS – 15%; All other Provinces and Territories – 5%."​
Not that I'm necessarily buying it. Since the GST/HST rates are different for each province, that would mean that someone in Alberta would be paying a higher rate for the pre-tax exchange fee than someone in BC.


----------



## Carolinian

Please get your facts straight, 'Roger''.

The same arrangement does *not* exist for all mini-systems and exchange companies.

In many of the mini-systems, the member reserves a specific week with his points, then deposits that specific week into the exchange company.  The other members of that exchange company then have access to all of those specific weeks deposited.  This is really not at all different from the exchange company perspective from an owner of a fixed week depositing that fixed week into the exchange system or a floating week owner reserving a week and depositing that specific week.

Some exchange companies go one better.  With some floating week systems and mini-systems, instead of reserving a week and depositing it with DAE, some of those systems allow their members to deposit their points entitlement or floating week entitlement with DAE.  DAE can then have even more leeway to fill its members requests by accessing inventory the same way a member of the mini-system or floating week resort could.  I have made three trades this way into mini-systems with DAE myself.  I put in a request for Seasons at Knocktopher Abbey in Ireland for April to September. DAE called and told me that they had had a deposit from the Seasons mini-system and in checking on Seasons availibility at that resort, any week in April, May, June, or July was availible in 2BR, and asked me to take my pick. I also did two similar trades with DAE into the Club La Costa mini-system for the French Riviera in July and a UK canalboat in July.  DAE had the Club La Costa points deposits and just had to check CLC's availibility.

There was another benefit to trading into a mini-system this way.  In my trade on the French Riviera, when we checked in the couple ahead of us were RCI exchangers and we heard the girl at the desk run down about a hundred euros of extra fees they were being charged.  We expected the same, but as DAE exchangers, we were treated as CLC members and not charged any of those fees except the metered electricity.

It would certainly be a big improvement if RCI changed its relationship between Points and Weeks so that either 1) Points members reserved a particular week, deposited it into Weeks and then used whatever trading power that week possessed in the Weeks system, or 2) Points members deposited their points to the Weeks system when they traded in, and Weeks members then had access via those points to all inventory in the Points system. Of course there would have to be a fair system of valuation both directions.

''Roger'', I know you are a huge fan of both points and RCI from your past posts, but I really wish you would get your facts straight.

By the way, you might remember Seasons.  They were the mini-system that jumped very early after the advent of RCI Points and RCI's rental program from RCI to II, and fired a withering broadside at RCI in their newsletter, detailing how both of these moves by RCI screwed their members.  It is unfortunate that that issue of the Seasons newsletter rotated off of their newsletter page on their website.  It was great to occaisionally put up a link to it, as it really spelled out the problems with the new RCI.






"Roger" said:


> What Carolinian fails to mention is that this same arrangement exists for all of the hotel and mini-systems with all of the exchange companies.  Is Marriott (Hyatt) going to give II members the same access to their inventory as owners(or put up a fire wall preventing anyone in II from having access to any of the Marriott or Hyatt inventory)?  Should ther be no more access for RCI members to Disney, Hyatt, VRI? Would Carolinian militate for a firewall between Haspimag and DAE?
> 
> Fortunately, none of this is going to happen.


----------



## miamidan

When did the Seasons leave?  Wasn't that about 10 years ago?  Would Disney have switched if RCI were so unfair?  I am really confused.  Carolinian you obviously know your history and the business but, you quote things that happened years ago.  You mentioned Cendant in a post the other day when did they disband?


----------



## Carolinian

Wyndham is, of course, the successor of Cendant.  Same wine in a new bottle.

I would have to look up the year Seasons left but I don't believe, off the top of my head, that it was quite that long ago.  Not long afterward, Fairfield (now Wyndham) and Trendwest/Worldmark also left RCI for II. Cendant only brought those two back to RCI by buying the companies.  The issues raised by Seasons are, in any event, still valid today as RCI's malpractices from that time have continued.

Developers like Disney don't necessarily always look for whats in the best interests of their members in such affiliations.  They look at what deal they can do with an exchange company that is in the best interests of the developer.  Yes, headaches for a developer caused by exchange company changes can be a reason for a switch, but an exchange company may offer some other enticement to the developer to try to make them live with that headache.





miamidan said:


> When did the Seasons leave?  Wasn't that about 10 years ago?  Would Disney have switched if RCI were so unfair?  I am really confused.  Carolinian you obviously know your history and the business but, you quote things that happened years ago.  You mentioned Cendant in a post the other day when did they disband?


----------



## "Roger"

Carolinian said:


> Please get your facts straight, 'Roger''.
> 
> The same arrangement does *not* exist for all mini-systems and exchange companies.
> ....


Please take a look at the quote in my post.  Your complaint was that Points members had full access to any inventory that is found in the RCI Weeks system, but going the other way the access is limited to just what is put into the Weeks system by Points.  I stand behind my post.  This is a common relationship that is true throughout the mini-systems and RCI, II, DAE.

(If you want to discuss this further, please post your response in the opinion page.  Thank you in advance.)


----------



## Carolinian

What you are choosing to overlook is the fact that there is a *HUGE* difference between what a member puts into the exchange system and what RCI might or might not put into Weeks.  RCI's official representatives duck the question about what they put back to replace the mooched weeks, and an RCI employee has said they actually put nothing back.

And of course, the relationship between DAE and a number of mini-systems *DOES* give full access to the inventory of the mini-system.

So, your contention is just purely and simply wrong.




"Roger" said:


> Please take a look at the quote in my post.  Your complaint was that Points members had full access to any inventory that is found in the RCI Weeks system, but going the other way the access is limited to just what is put into the Weeks system by Points.  I stand behind my post.  This is a common relationship that is true throughout the mini-systems and RCI, II, DAE.
> 
> (If you want to discuss this further, please post your response in the opinion page.  Thank you in advance.)


----------



## miamidan

Carol,

We get it.  Ask RCI has not been staffed for what 5 years?  Anon had access to the systems but, was he a vacation counselor with vast access to member/inventory details or a back office person who performed complex revenue management details?

Again we get it you don't have trust with RCI.  I don't trust Citibank due to what I consider predatory lending practices.

You have some awesome information to share I just wish more of it were more relevant froma timeliness perspective or from a factual rather than speculative measure.

I called and spoke to my resort about timing notification.  They advised they were notified sometime early in the spring from a conceptual standpoint and a detailed value perspective in mid-summer.  Additionally they advised there were e-learning platforms and regional training seminars all for a non branded, small resort with no affiliation to large management companies.  they indicated they thought this was similar to other resorts as well.  I own in the u.s. in case that is relevant.


----------



## Carolinian

Dandy,

RCI has been even less communicative in that 5 years.  That was the only time there was a place where they purported to answer questions.  Do you suggest that they have gotten more communicative and actually answered that question since then?  Horsehockey!  While Anon had access to RCI's computers, I do not know what his job title was, not that it matters.

I do not know how your resort would have any knowledge whatsoever about what info was shared with other resorts, but I have spoken with HOA leaders or resort managers at several resorts on both sides of the Atlantic which were totally left in the dark by RCI on all of this for many months while other resorts were being told about it and in some detail.



miamidan said:


> Carol,
> 
> We get it.  Ask RCI has not been staffed for what 5 years?  Anon had access to the systems but, was he a vacation counselor with vast access to member/inventory details or a back office person who performed complex revenue management details?
> 
> Again we get it you don't have trust with RCI.  I don't trust Citibank due to what I consider predatory lending practices.
> 
> You have some awesome information to share I just wish more of it were more relevant froma timeliness perspective or from a factual rather than speculative measure.
> 
> I called and spoke to my resort about timing notification.  They advised they were notified sometime early in the spring from a conceptual standpoint and a detailed value perspective in mid-summer.  Additionally they advised there were e-learning platforms and regional training seminars all for a non branded, small resort with no affiliation to large management companies.  they indicated they thought this was similar to other resorts as well.  I own in the u.s. in case that is relevant.


----------



## miamidan

Carol,

I like the new nickname.  I think we can agree to disagree.  My resort said they went to a training session where there were 50 or so attendees from other resorts and that there was a training session done.  They also said they did some things online etc.  I did not get a detailed report card or get into more detail.

You obviously have a much better read on the industry than I or many others on this board ever will.  Thanks for your contributions and as I have said before you have a great deal of knowledge.

Maybe they just told the resorts the same day they notified us about the website outage.  It is not as if resort staff might be in need of training etc.

Again you are probably right.  RCI did this in a blackhole and did not talk to anyone except the big guys.

In all these posts noone else has posted frustrations from their resort it is only you who claim this was done in the dark.


----------



## Carolinian

You seem to forget the only resort manager who has posted on this issue, who said his resort was not notified by RCI.

Why a resort needs a heads up is so that they can deal with the angry members who hear about this right when the resorts are sending out their m/f bills.  I cannot think of a worse time of the year for resorts for RCI to be doing this.



miamidan said:


> Carol,
> 
> I like the new nickname.  I think we can agree to disagree.  My resort said they went to a training session where there were 50 or so attendees from other resorts and that there was a training session done.  They also said they did some things online etc.  I did not get a detailed report card or get into more detail.
> 
> You obviously have a much better read on the industry than I or many others on this board ever will.  Thanks for your contributions and as I have said before you have a great deal of knowledge.
> 
> Maybe they just told the resorts the same day they notified us about the website outage.  It is not as if resort staff might be in need of training etc.
> 
> Again you are probably right.  RCI did this in a blackhole and did not talk to anyone except the big guys.
> 
> In all these posts noone else has posted frustrations from their resort it is only you who claim this was done in the dark.


----------



## skimble

*The new RCI... the picture gets clearer.  Still wondering about some things though..*

The new enhancements will give you more control over your vacation planning experience. In addition to the opportunity to exchange your vacation time for another vacation week, you will also have the flexibility to:

Know the Deposit Trading Power of your Week: RCI members often wonder how RCI determines what exchange vacations their Deposit will be able to trade into. Now, you’ll be able to see the trading power value of your deposited week. You’ll see how your trading power changes based on when you deposit, and after depositing, you’ll be able to see how your deposit's trading power compares to the trading power of all available exchange vacations.
See ALL Available Inventory: When searching for an Exchange you will be able to choose to see only the inventory that is equal to or less than the trading power value of your deposited week or all available weeks in the system. By choosing to see all available inventory you’ll even be able to see exchange vacations that require more trading power than that of your available Deposits.





Get More Vacation Options with Deposit Credits: Upon exchanging your vacation time, you’ll receive a Deposit Credit for any remaining Deposit Trading Power. That means if you trade down for an Exchange vacation with lower trading power than your Deposit has, you’ll receive a Deposit Credit, for the difference between the Deposit Trading Power and Exchange Trading Power, posted to your account to use by the travel thru date of the original Deposit.




You can use this credit in two ways:

Exchange it for another vacation: You can use your Deposit Credit to book a second vacation of equal or lesser value than the credit**. So essentially, you can get two vacations using one week!
Combine it with another Deposit:You can combine your Deposit Credit with another week that you have deposited to increase the trading power of that deposit. With higher Deposit Trading Power you can trade up into an Exchange vacation requiring more trading power than that of your original Deposit, giving you more Exchange options than you had before!





(I liked this description from another website.)  

Are we going to be able to find out our trade value before we deposit?


----------



## skimble

Is RCI going to offer us the ability to purchase extra credits in case we are short?  I think I know RCI well enough... to already know my answer.


----------



## bnoble

> Are we going to be able to find out our trade value before we deposit?


The Weeks Video suggests that we will---and will be able to check not just for our deposits, but things into which we wish to exchange.

(note: Flash required)
http://rci.bgtpartners.com/rcivideo...l?promo=TMB06NAENUSWWksEnhmtNovDuring11122010
The discussion appears about 45 seconds into the video.


----------



## skimble

skimble said:


> The new enhancements will give you more control over your vacation planning experience. In addition to the opportunity to exchange your vacation time for another vacation week, you will also have the flexibility to:
> 
> Know the Deposit Trading Power of your Week: RCI members often wonder how RCI determines what exchange vacations their Deposit will be able to trade into. Now, you’ll be able to see the trading power value of your deposited week. You’ll see how your trading power changes based on when you deposit, and after depositing, you’ll be able to see how your deposit's trading power compares to the trading power of all available exchange vacations.
> See ALL Available Inventory: When searching for an Exchange you will be able to choose to see only the inventory that is equal to or less than the trading power value of your deposited week or all available weeks in the system. By choosing to see all available inventory you’ll even be able to see exchange vacations that require more trading power than that of your available Deposits.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Get More Vacation Options with Deposit Credits: Upon exchanging your vacation time, you’ll receive a Deposit Credit for any remaining Deposit Trading Power. That means if you trade down for an Exchange vacation with lower trading power than your Deposit has, you’ll receive a Deposit Credit, for the difference between the Deposit Trading Power and Exchange Trading Power, posted to your account to use by the travel thru date of the original Deposit.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You can use this credit in two ways:
> 
> Exchange it for another vacation: You can use your Deposit Credit to book a second vacation of equal or lesser value than the credit**. So essentially, you can get two vacations using one week!
> Combine it with another Deposit:You can combine your Deposit Credit with another week that you have deposited to increase the trading power of that deposit. With higher Deposit Trading Power you can trade up into an Exchange vacation requiring more trading power than that of your original Deposit, giving you more Exchange options than you had before!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> (I liked this description from another website.)
> 
> Are we going to be able to find out our trade value before we deposit?



The reason I posted this separately was because it's concise, explains the heart of the new Weeks program without all complex debate.  Sometimes people want to log in to TUG and get a straight-forward answer to the simple stuff without all the inner workings or RCI and their communication with HOAs and management.  
The question at the end was to promote discussion, but again it goes to the heart of the new program-- the simple FAQ's.
I would urge you to repost this as it's own thread.


----------



## itisme

*TP Value of a deposit = TP Value needed to exchange in to the same week ?*

What I am still not clear is whether  a trading power of a deposit will be same as the trading power required to pull that same deposit.

Say I deposit Resort X, Week 52, more than 9 months out. I am assigned 20 points.  When another member wants to exchange into this same week (Resort X, Week 52) will he/she be needing 20 points to exchange into (other than for last call)?

I was under the impression the answer is No. But I am not sure now.


----------



## crazyhorse

*Skimble:*

Denise *had* placed the link for this RCI cartoon at the top of this thread on page 1. 

http://app.rci.com/landing/InsideRCI/memenhancements/index.html?promo=VANN

It doesn`t seem to have made it to the head of the "Opinions" thread though.


----------



## Mel

Since this is the thread for FACTS, not the OPINIONS, perhaps a recap:

1) Many resorts were informed about what was happening within RCI's weeks program.  Some of those resorts were large resorts, or part of large resort systems, others were small resorts.

2) Some resorts apparently were not informed.  Those that we know of are smaller resorts, not affiliated with large resort groups.

3) This change is happening now, in mid-November, 1-3 months before exchange fees are due at many resorts.

4) Come Monday morning, we will all know the value of our weeks relative to all other weeks.  There will be a calculator with which we can request the current value of not only our own weeks, but the weeks we would like in exchange.  

5) Those RCI members who are either happy about the changes, or don't care, will continue to pay their maintenance fees on time.

6) Those RCI members who are not happy with the changes might get upset, and choose not to pay their maintenance fees.  If and when that happens, our HOAs will finally have to face what they should have faced 20 years ago - the fact that some weeks are not worth the maintenance fees on their own, and the HOA needs to find a way to either reduce or eliminate those fees, or provide some other value to those weeks.



itisme said:


> What I am still not clear is whether  a trading power of a deposit will be same as the trading power required to pull that same deposit.
> 
> Say I deposit Resort X, Week 52, more than 9 months out. I am assigned 20 points.  When another member wants to exchange into this same week (Resort X, Week 52) will he/she be needing 20 points to exchange into (other than for last call)?
> 
> I was under the impression the answer is No. But I am not sure now.


In the video under the RCI Weeks link, it briefly shows a single screen where it appears we will be able to input a resort, unit size and check-in date (or week) and see the trade power - not just the trade power of our own week.  If that is in real time, then it is showing us, right now, what it would take to trade in.  Thus if you are assigned 20 credits today when you deposit your week, I would also need to spend 20 credits to get it as an exchange today.  2 months from now, I might not have to pay 20 credits - I would pay whatever the going "price" is for that exchange, and if you waited 2 months, you would get the same number of credits.

In essence, that means to get a 60 point exchange, 9 months out (or whenever they are offering full credits) you will need 60 credits.  But as time goes on, the value of that deposit will slowly decrease, and someone might be able to take it at 50 credits.  The assumption is that a person with 60 credits who wanted it would already have taken it, and they have given those people plenty of opportunity to snag it for full price.  If nobody wants it for 50 credits, at some point it might be reduced to 40 credits, and so on, until the 45-day window when it is reduced to 5 credits.

If you have 60 credits, you can reserve the week a year out, knowing you have what you want.  Or you can wait and try to get it for 50 credits, but risk someone else grabbing it before you - kind of like a reverse auction.


----------



## JudyS

Mel said:


> Since this is the thread for FACTS, not the OPINIONS, perhaps a recap:....
> 6) Those RCI members who are not happy with the changes might get upset, and choose not to pay their maintenance fees.  If and when that happens, our HOAs will finally have to face what they should have faced 20 years ago - the fact that some weeks are not worth the maintenance fees on their own, and the HOA needs to find a way to either reduce or eliminate those fees, or provide some other value to those weeks.....
> 
> 
> In essence, that means to get a 60 point exchange, 9 months out (or whenever they are offering full credits) you will need 60 credits.  But as time goes on, the value of that deposit will slowly decrease, and someone might be able to take it at 50 credits. ....


These comments sound like opinions, or at least speculation, to me, rather than established facts. 

Has RCI said that the "price" of a week will decline between 9 months and 45 days out? Unless RCI has said this in writing, I very much doubt it will work this way. Instead, I bet if someone deposits their week at, say, 4 months out, it will cost the full number of exchange points to reserve that week, even though the owner of the week didn't get full value when they deposited it. That's how RCI Points works -- if I deposit a week I own at less than 120 days out, I don't get full points. But, it generally costs full points to reserve that week, even right before check-in.  

As for owners of low-valued weeks getting angry and walking away from their ownerships, that might happen, but there are other possibilities. Those owners might go to other exchange companies, for example. Or, if it's really true that trade value will stay the same, then those owners may be happy because they can get Gold Crown resorts off-season in Orlando, same as before.


----------



## miamidan

maybe i am just naive but, after a recent lawsuit and a major change such as this I can not imagine RCI not notifying every resort.  I can imagine every resort not responding or thinking that this is an upsell for points.  RCI is owned by a big company and I can only assumem they have a lot of lawyers that ensure things are done by the book......  That is speculation but, as a fact was stated above that they did not contact all I feel safe putting it here..


----------



## Mel

JudyS said:


> These comments sound like opinions, or at least speculation, to me, rather than established facts.
> 
> Has RCI said that the "price" of a week will decline between 9 months and 45 days out? Unless RCI has said this in writing, I very much doubt it will work this way. Instead, I bet if someone deposits their week at, say, 4 months out, it will cost the full number of exchange points to reserve that week, even though the owner of the week didn't get full value when they deposited it. That's how RCI Points works -- if I deposit a week I own at less than 120 days out, I don't get full points. But, it generally costs full points to reserve that week, even right before check-in.


The picture RCI shows in their video suggests that at any given time you can look up both the "maximum trade value" and the "current trade value" of any given week.  We know trade value goes down for deposits as we get closer to use.  We also know that trade value required for a given exchange fluctuates over time - it goes down significantly with bulk banking.  What we don't know is whether the trade power for those specific deposits goes down, or temporarily decreases for all similar deposits.  It would make sense to apply to all such deposits, or sightings might only include the most recently deposited weeks.

Given that they are only showing one calculator, and knowing the value only of what you have to deposit, and what is already in the exchange pool would only be partialy useful, it looks like that value at any given time applies to inventory both going in and coming out.


> As for owners of low-valued weeks getting angry and walking away from their ownerships, that might happen, but there are other possibilities. Those owners might go to other exchange companies, for example. Or, if it's really true that trade value will stay the same, then those owners may be happy because they can get Gold Crown resorts off-season in Orlando, same as before.


  I posted that in response to Steve - those owners _might_ choose to walk away if they are unhappy enough.  His premise is that all owners need to worry about their happiness, for the health of their own resorts - and that RCI has a responsibility to keep them happy.

We will know in a little less than 4 hours


----------



## MuranoJo

Mel said:


> In essence, that means to get a 60 point exchange, 9 months out (or whenever they are offering full credits) you will need 60 credits.  But as time goes on, the value of that deposit will slowly decrease, and someone might be able to take it at 50 credits.  The assumption is that a person with 60 credits who wanted it would already have taken it, and they have given those people plenty of opportunity to snag it for full price.  If nobody wants it for 50 credits, at some point it might be reduced to 40 credits, and so on, until the 45-day window when it is reduced to 5 credits.



Mel,
As I recall, the lawsuit legitimized RCI's ability to pull deposits out of the exchange pool & rent or whatever if not taken within 30 days.  Have you heard or read anything about that with this new system?  I suspect they will still excercise this.


----------



## cpnuser

*Short dated weeks on RCI points*

I search for alot of the short dated weeks with my  points.  I can't find them now, since RCI has had 3 days to change everything.  Can anybody tell me in a few simple steps how to search for the short dated weeks?  I'd appreciate it.  Thanks.


----------



## Carolinian

*One plus - availibility tables for all areas now*

One plus for the new RCI regime is that they now have made similar availibility tables as have been provided in the European version of the RCI Directory availible for all resort areas, split into 4 categories, but divided a bit different than by month.  They also have an average of trading power needed for each segment.

Orlando is shown with high availibility all year, but experience would indicate some seasons would be different.  South Africa does show a variance but in flipping through the regions in the country it would appear that all time periods in all SA regions are in the two lowest categoies of availibility.  The Outer Banks shows to be in the second lowest category all year long, which does not make sense as the summer months should be lower and the dead of winter (weeks 48-50 and 1-6) should be the highest availibility level.

Lots of the average trading power numbers also did not make sense, such as the Charleston, SC area being lower than the Outer Banks.  Charleston is one of the highest demand compared to supply areas in the US.  The London numbers, particularly April and May also made no sense at all.

Since I have no RCI deposits I cannot check on availiibility although I did try to use their trading power calculator but it is broken.  There is no way to enter the week number, although it would take all of the other information.


----------



## sandkastle4966

7 am EST - I am successfully (and quite easily in RCI.COM).

What I have seen:

Calculator is there (and quite sophisticated) - using an Aruba resort, February, 3 bedroom - got a "60".  You can select your actual room number ! and it is correct !   

My "tigers" which I always felt go me "the best" are showing 38.

Appears "60" is the max, for those really, really difficult trades (who deposits a February 3 bedroom on the Aruba beach?) 

In searching, you can select "all" or just inventory available.

So far, speed, accessability is fine.  

They did NOT adjust the search engine to allow you to select all options thru drop down, and THEN hit the database.  (still stupid on their part - they are wasting computer/IO cycles).  but so far so good.

Adjustment schedule is posted - 276+ days is 100% of trading power !


There are deposits "eligible to combined" and some "not eligible".  

QUESTION:  what makes it ineligible?  haven't figured that out yet?


----------



## JudyS

sandkastle4966 said:


> ...
> There are deposits "eligible to combined" and some "not eligible".
> 
> QUESTION:  what makes it ineligible?  haven't figured that out yet?


Ineligible to combine weeks seem to include weeks that are used for ongoing searches, or to hold an exchange, or that are "special" weeks that exist only in RCI's computers (like 1+1 bonus weeks.) So far, Wyndham invisible deposits are also ineligible to combine.


----------



## Carolinian

Using the European site, I cannot get the calculator to work.  It will accept all of the information except the week number.

My search only shows rental prices, but actually some rather good ones!  But then I don't have anything on deposit.

The 276 days is going to mean many will not deposit until then.  Why have to pay m/f's ahead of time if you don't get any benefit from it?  This will mean problems for those wanting to get their ff tickets at the 330 day mark so the seats don't disappear, but the timeshare deposits may not be in yet for that period in the place they want to go.  It will also mean some less interest income for resorts, which got that benefit from people depositing early to get better trading power.  IMHO this is a very negative change all the way around.




sandkastle4966 said:


> 7 am EST - I am successfully (and quite easily in RCI.COM).
> 
> What I have seen:
> 
> Calculator is there (and quite sophisticated) - using an Aruba resort, February, 3 bedroom - got a "60".  You can select your actual room number ! and it is correct !
> 
> My "tigers" which I always felt go me "the best" are showing 38.
> 
> Appears "60" is the max, for those really, really difficult trades (who deposits a February 3 bedroom on the Aruba beach?)
> 
> In searching, you can select "all" or just inventory available.
> 
> So far, speed, accessability is fine.
> 
> They did NOT adjust the search engine to allow you to select all options thru drop down, and THEN hit the database.  (still stupid on their part - they are wasting computer/IO cycles).  but so far so good.
> 
> Adjustment schedule is posted - 276+ days is 100% of trading power !
> 
> 
> There are deposits "eligible to combined" and some "not eligible".
> 
> QUESTION:  what makes it ineligible?  haven't figured that out yet?


----------



## sandkastle4966

7 am EST - I am successfully (and quite easily in RCI.COM).

What I have seen:

Calculator is there (and quite sophisticated) - using an Aruba resort, February, 3 bedroom - got a "60".  You can select your actual room number ! and it is correct !   

My "tigers" which I always felt go me "the best" are showing 38.

Appears "60" is the max, for those really, really difficult trades (who deposits a February 3 bedroom on the Aruba beach?) 

In searching, you can select "all" or just inventory available.

This is the most interesting information IMHO:  a drop down of all avail. by trade power:
(total units is 144,660  -   I added the % and is approximate - which is why it doesn't add up)

Trade Power  
1 - 10   [62599]      -  42%
11 - 14   [29756]     - 20%
15 - 18   [27197]     - 18%
19 - 23   [17605]     -  12% 
24 - 32   [7077]       -  5%
33 +   [422]            -     .3%




So far, speed, accessability is fine.  

They did NOT adjust the search engine to allow you to select all options thru drop down, and THEN hit the database.  (still stupid on their part - they are wasting computer/IO cycles).  but so far so good.

Adjustment schedule is posted - 276+ days is 100% of trading power !


A data point of just one:

Power required to get a specific ski week in 2012 - "38".  The deposit for that exact week/resort/size, etc - just don't know a room number - "36".

Perhaps there should be a tread in the members section on specific findings and differences?



There are deposits "eligible to combined" and some "not eligible".  

QUESTION:  what makes it ineligible?  haven't figured that out yet?


----------



## Conan

*Not functional with Google Chrome*

I had to switch back from Google Chrome to Internet Explorer to get proper functionality (I didn't try Firefox).  The toggle between view-all and view-your-deposits doesn't work in Chrome.

Overall I'm very impressed -- for once RCI has gotten something right!


----------



## AFARR

*OK, I tried this AM (their calculator) and got:*

My BIS Duck (Outer Banks)...Wk 39, 3Br Lock Off:

If I deposit it as the whole thing...I get 21 points (credits?).   If I deposit it as the A side and the B side, I get 31 Points (17 + 14).

Just for grins...if I owned week 30 (late July..high/prime season there) in the same unit...47 Points or 38 + 31 (total of 69)!!.

My 2 Br. Outer Banks Beach Club II Wk 37 shows as 23 points max trade value...and my deposit is showing as the same (despite only depositing it 4 months before the use date for the 2010 week).


Not all the way up to the 60 points mentioned as the max, but not down at the bottom either...and it looks like I could split my week and get some deals.   


Looks like it does help to own a lock-off...much better value to deposit separately.

My 2 Br. (A side) on the BIS Duck (wk 39...still red season, but definitely 'pink' after labor day, unrated resort)..shows as 17 points, vs. the also 'pink' wk. 37 2 Br OBBC II at 23 points (which is a gold crown rated resort)...so that shows some of the weighting towards the Resort status.    Sea Scape (same week 37 or 39...I checked all the numbers using both weeks to make sure there were no drastic changes)..shows as a 19 (Hospitality resort).   

So, there is some weighting for Hospitality/Silver or Gold Crown.

AFARR


----------



## Carolinian

Weighting on resort status is a big negative for their valuation system as it is an almost irrelevent factor.  On the OBX, the highest demand resorts are OBBC I and II (GC and SC) and right behind it BIS-Duck (standard).  Those are the resorts that should have roughly equal numbers at the top end.  The lowest demand resorts (because they are off the beach) are BIS-Kitty Hawk (former GC, now Hospitality) and Seascape.  If they are basing this on supply and demand, as they should, the beachfront resorts should be on top and the off the beach resorts lower.




AFARR said:


> My BIS Duck (Outer Banks)...Wk 39, 3Br Lock Off:
> 
> If I deposit it as the whole thing...I get 21 points (credits?).   If I deposit it as the A side and the B side, I get 31 Points (17 + 14).
> 
> Just for grins...if I owned week 30 (late July..high/prime season there) in the same unit...47 Points or 38 + 31 (total of 69)!!.
> 
> My 2 Br. Outer Banks Beach Club II Wk 37 shows as 23 points max trade value...and my deposit is showing as the same (despite only depositing it 4 months before the use date for the 2010 week).
> 
> 
> Not all the way up to the 60 points mentioned as the max, but not down at the bottom either...and it looks like I could split my week and get some deals.
> 
> 
> Looks like it does help to own a lock-off...much better value to deposit separately.
> 
> My 2 Br. (A side) on the BIS Duck (wk 39...still red season, but definitely 'pink' after labor day, unrated resort)..shows as 17 points, vs. the also 'pink' wk. 37 2 Br OBBC II at 23 points (which is a gold crown rated resort)...so that shows some of the weighting towards the Resort status.    Sea Scape (same week 37 or 39...I checked all the numbers using both weeks to make sure there were no drastic changes)..shows as a 19 (Hospitality resort).
> 
> So, there is some weighting for Hospitality/Silver or Gold Crown.
> 
> AFARR


----------



## Carolinian

Correction - The Availibility tables do seem to be by month, as there are 12 numbers.  It is just that the graph with the numbers does not match up with the bar with the months above it!


----------



## crazyhorse

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

The threads are getting in a tangle.

Moderator: Could we have them tidied up please?

:


----------



## sandkastle4966

Crazyhorse - just start with page 5 in this thread - everything up to now has been rumor (a lot seems to be accurate), and a whole lot of opinions on how awful RCI is.  as of 1 am monday, nov 15 (page 5) - should be fact based, althought there are already opinions being stated.  I personally will be trying to state what I see (FACT). 

There is a separate OPINIONs thread.


----------



## sandkastle4966

i have confirmations that I made Pre-change that are greater value for a lesser trade (58 for a 35).  Now that I can see that I had 2 deposits that combined to make "enough",  I called RCI.

per the VC:

There is no more "reconfirms".  The "button" doesn't exist.

If I cancel the trade, (and hope to get "it" back),  the "58 week" stays under the OLD SYSTEM, and doesn't become a "58".  

(I noticed that the ineligble weeks were tied to ongoing searches).

Wyndham deposits have NO CHANGE.  they do not have a "trade value" and cannot be combined at this point in time.


----------



## MichaelColey

Carolinian said:


> The 276 days is going to mean many will not deposit until then. Why have to pay m/f's ahead of time if you don't get any benefit from it?


That's the "9 months" that it's always been.  One advantage of doing it even earlier than that is to ensure that you can choose to deposit the week that gives you the best trading value (at resorts where you can tell them which week to deposit).



sandkastle4966 said:


> This is the most interesting information IMHO: a drop down of all avail. by trade power:
> (total units is 144,660 - I added the % and is approximate - which is why it doesn't add up)
> 
> Trade Power
> 1 - 10 [62599] - 42%
> 11 - 14 [29756] - 20%
> 15 - 18 [27197] - 18%
> 19 - 23 [17605] - 12%
> 24 - 32 [7077] - 5%
> 33 + [422] - .3%


I found that most interesting, too.  Your 33+ is probably just 33-38 (the ones you can see).  If you open it up to all, I was able to see 526 units 33+.

The resorts with units available from 50-60 can be counted on one hand.  I'm sure there are much more that would earn 50-60, but very few available.

With only 526 units from 33-60, that explains why so many people appeared to have "tigers".  Someone with a 32 could still see 144,234 units while someone with a 60 would see 144,760.  While the second has almost double the trading power, they would see almost the exact same inventory.  And someone with a 23 would still see 135k units.

I suspect that we've had 60 bands for quite a while (probably since 5/31/09), but just didn't realize it.


----------



## krj9999

*RCI Snagging Trading Power*

So I check my deposit value for a Dec. 2011 week via the calculator; then I check available units for the same date and size.  Lo and behold, it takes one additional trading power point/credit beyond the value they will provide me to trade back into the same unit.

Anyone else noticing this?


----------



## Conan

Mods, please forgive this repetition of my post in the other exchange thread:

*Guys, you know RCI is reading everything we write - - nothing wrong with that, but it's not our job to point RCI towards ratings that we think need lowering or exchange costs we think need to be raised. LOOSE LIPS SINK SHIPS!*


----------



## DocPepsi

I have to say that so far, I am very pleased/impressed with what information they are making available.

The exchange planner is fantastic, I can find out the exact number of units available in a given month, and the average TP down to a pretty low level of detail (Kona Hawaii for example).

Also, this was interesting:  http://www.rci.com/RCI/RCIW/RCIW_index?body=RCIW_Program_Activity&selYear=2009

Not sure if everyone saw that.

I'm interested to see if that deposit calculator can be accessed by those who are not RCI members.  Maybe folks that have left for other places can now see what their ownerships are truly worth?  Also, this must be awful for any timeshare companies still in sales!  I remember going to a timeshare presentation for Vacation Village at Parkway, and them selling the whole 'Red Week, Gold Crown, we are the best value'.  Well proof is out there now, not even close to the best!

 :whoopie:


----------



## Stricky

I am interested in how the left over points show up after an exchange. If any exchanges today please post where you see your extra points show up. For example you book a 17 using your 20. Where are the 3 extra now?


----------



## chewie

Any idea what KCR II 1br and 2br are pullling?  Some II people really want to know.


----------



## MichaelColey

*New RCI Weeks: What's Missing?*

So far, I see two things we've lost:

1) *Exchange Priority.*  For one of my deposits, I had exchange priority into the same resort group.  My lower value deposit was able to see stuff that a higher trading value deposit couldn't see.  That's no longer the case.  Hopefully this is just a temporary oversight.

2) *Trading Value Disregarded at 45 Days.*  The worst blue week studio could exchange into anything that was still available at 45 days.  This appears to no longer be the case.  All of my deposits used to be able to see essentially the same inventory within 45 days, but now the lower traders don't see the best units (and even my best trader doesn't see everything).  Trading values appear to drop at 90 days, 30 days and 14 days.  This is actually a more fair way to do things, IMHO.


----------



## PClapham

*Way to pre-try a deposit for rci?*

Has there been any discussion of this?  My ideal would be to try a deposit to see how much it would be worth before committing that deposit to rci.

Thanks
Anita


----------



## rhonda

The "Manage Your Deposits" tab offers a "Deposit Calculator."  While the calculator isn't yet working for me ... it seems to promise a forecast of your trade power before you make the decision to deposit.


EDITED TO ADD:
Deposit Calculator now working for Firefox 3.6.12 on Mac OS X 10.5.8.  Not yet working on Safari; yes, I can see it using IE on my PC.


----------



## Conan

All you have to do is go to the "Manage Your Deposits" tab, click on the "Deposit Calculator" button on the right side, and type in the name of the property you want to test (to RCI's credit, you can test any property that trades in RCI - - it's not limited to properties you've previously told them you own).

[Try it using MS Internet Explorer if you're having trouble getting the button to work on the browser you otherwise use]


----------



## JudyS

krj9999 said:


> So I check my deposit value for a Dec. 2011 week via the calculator; then I check available units for the same date and size.  Lo and behold, it takes one additional trading power point/credit beyond the value they will provide me to trade back into the same unit.
> 
> Anyone else noticing this?


This brings up a point that Mel and I were debating last night. RCI only gives partial credit for late deposits (later than 9 months.) Does this mean that they will charge a discounted price when booking weeks less than 9 months out, but more than 45 days out? (RCI had already stated that weeks with less than 45 days before check-in would be discounted.) Mel thought there would be discounts from 9 months to 45 days out, and I thought there wouldn't be.

I have been looking into this, and it seems that RCI *sometimes* gives a discounted price if you book a week from 9 months to 45 days before check-in, but it depends on whether they expect to have surplus weeks or not. For example, Sheraton Vistana has big discounts for most spring 2011 weeks (generally about 11 points for a 2-bedroom) versus spring 2012 (about 22 points for a 2-bedroom.) However, Easter week 2011 at Sheraton Vistana costs almost as much as Easter Week 2012. A similar pattern can be found at Vacation Village at Parkway, with discounts for spring 2011, but not for Easter. Both of these are huge resorts that may fill up at Easter but not during the other spring weeks.

On the other hand, there seems to be little or no discounts at the Manhattan Club. Winter 2011 costs about the same as winter 2012. Similarly, Winners Circle (San Diego) is charging the same for spring 2011 as for spring 2012. Presumably, RCI has no trouble filling these resorts, so it doesn't feel a need to discount weeks there more than 45 days out. 

It should be noted that RCI *Points* doesn't discount starting 4 months out, even though owners don't get full Points value unless they deposit before then. So, it doesn't surprise me that some weeks owners will get only partial credit, yet RCI will charge full price for their weeks. I actually don't mind -- a lot of units deposited into RCI sit empty even though their owners received a trade. RCI has to make up that "breakage" from sonewhere.


----------



## northwoodsgal

How does this make sense regarding my Jackson Hole Towncenter week 36?  

If I deposit my 2011 week 276+ days out, I will receive 33 points.  

However, my currently deposited week, which was deposited one week shy of a year (350+ days out) is being given only 27 points. 

Of course, now I can't see online units that were available last week.


----------



## Mel

Carolinian said:


> One plus for the new RCI regime is that they now have made similar availibility tables as have been provided in the European version of the RCI Directory availible for all resort areas, split into 4 categories, but divided a bit different than by month.  They also have an average of trading power needed for each segment.
> 
> Orlando is shown with high availibility all year, but experience would indicate some seasons would be different.  South Africa does show a variance but in flipping through the regions in the country it would appear that all time periods in all SA regions are in the two lowest categoies of availibility.  The Outer Banks shows to be in the second lowest category all year long, which does not make sense as the summer months should be lower and the dead of winter (weeks 48-50 and 1-6) should be the highest availibility level.


These graphs are based on availability, not supply and demand - and not by percentages, but but the number of units available.  As such, Orlando will by definition be high avaialability at all times, and and area with few resorts (like CT with only two very small resorts) will always have low availability.


> Lots of the average trading power numbers also did not make sense, such as the Charleston, SC area being lower than the Outer Banks.  Charleston is one of the highest demand compared to supply areas in the US.  The London numbers, particularly April and May also made no sense at all.
> 
> Since I have no RCI deposits I cannot check on availiibility although I did try to use their trading power calculator but it is broken.  There is no way to enter the week number, although it would take all of the other information.


Those trading power numbers may have been "actual" trading power when the trade was made, rather than maximum or what you get if you deposit more than 9 months out.  Thus it would be a more true reflection of the real cost of exchanging in.  We don't know what percentage of RCI members pay their maintenance fees early, but we always see a spike in availability after the beginning of the year (when most fees are due, and many members make their deposits).  It that is the case, trade power required to trade in will be lower.


Conan said:


> I had to switch back from Google Chrome to Internet Explorer to get proper functionality (I didn't try Firefox).  The toggle between view-all and view-your-deposits doesn't work in Chrome.


I had to switch from IE to Chrome - couldn't open the calculator with IE, probably something about my popup settings.


Carolinian said:


> Weighting on resort status is a big negative for their valuation system as it is an almost irrelevent factor.  On the OBX, the highest demand resorts are OBBC I and II (GC and SC) and right behind it BIS-Duck (standard).  Those are the resorts that should have roughly equal numbers at the top end.  The lowest demand resorts (because they are off the beach) are BIS-Kitty Hawk (former GC, now Hospitality) and Seascape.  If they are basing this on supply and demand, as they should, the beachfront resorts should be on top and the off the beach resorts lower.


When I looked at availability on the outer banks this morning, Duck had many more units available than Kitty Hawk, suggesting that it is not in fact more popular.

Duck currently has 244 units available - with a trade power range of 3-23, 132 of them are 2BR or better.  Kitty Hawk has 110 units available, TP 4-36, 33 of them 2BR or larger (and includes a few 4BR units).  While there are Thanksgiving units available at Duck, there are none at Kitty Hawk.


krj9999 said:


> So I check my deposit value for a Dec. 2011 week via the calculator; then I check available units for the same date and size.  Lo and behold, it takes one additional trading power point/credit beyond the value they will provide me to trade back into the same unit.


That's unusual, almost everything I have checked in less than what RCI will give for a deposit.  But I did notice a handful of strange situations:

Christmas week (more than 30 days out, less than 45) at a couple of resorts.  #3660 in Leads SD, 30 credits to check into a studio on Dec 17, but only 14 credits (18 max) if you deposit it today.  30 Credits for a 1BR at #1965 in Portugal checking in on Dec 19 or 26th, 30 credits to exchange in, only 12 (15 max) to deposit today.  Very strange indeed.

What resort & week do you own, maybe someone else can verify


MichaelColey said:


> So far, I see two things we've lost:
> 
> 1) *Exchange Priority.*  For one of my deposits, I had exchange priority into the same resort group.  My lower value deposit was able to see stuff that a higher trading value deposit couldn't see.  That's no longer the case.  Hopefully this is just a temporary oversight.
> 
> 2) *Trading Value Disregarded at 45 Days.*  The worst blue week studio could exchange into anything that was still available at 45 days.  This appears to no longer be the case.  All of my deposits used to be able to see essentially the same inventory within 45 days, but now the lower traders don't see the best units (and even my best trader doesn't see everything).  Trading values appear to drop at 90 days, 30 days and 14 days.  This is actually a more fair way to do things, IMHO.



The deposit trading power drops at those dates, but look closely at a few areas, and you will see something entirely different.

Take one of Carolinian's "favorites" for example, Vacation Village at Parkway:

Just looking at 2BR units, you can trade in now for 7 credits... or in mid-May of 2011 for the same 7 credits.  It will cost you 18 credits the first 2 weeks of August (and presumably all of July except there are 2BR units available), then back down to 7 credits except Thanksgiving (16 credits) or Christmas (18) or New Year (16).  Then 12 Credits or more from January 2012 on.

Those drops for deposit amounts don't seem to correlate with the cost of exchanges which drop quicker in some cases, though there are also some units that are not dropping so fast.


----------



## AFARR

*Mel...*



> Duck currently has 244 units available - with a trade power range of 3-23, 132 of them are 2BR or better. Kitty Hawk has 110 units available, TP 4-36, 33 of them 2BR or larger (and includes a few 4BR units). While there are Thanksgiving units available at Duck, there are none at Kitty Hawk.



Couple of thoughts on Duck vs. Kitty Hawk.  Duck is fully built, KH is not.   Most weeks I see in resale are for points at Kitty Hawk (it is more recently constructed, and probably got hit harder for sales of points than Duck), most resales at BIS Duck are weeks (there are some points conversions).

I don't (yet) have an RCI Points account...but to get a better comparison, you'd probably have to look at both Points listings and Weeks Listings for both resorts and total them that way.

Carolinian is correct on the preferences...(BIS Duck and OBBC I & II) are more desirable (to those that know the area) than Sea Scape or BIS Kitty Hawk.   I have stayed in SS before....and had no complaints, but would much rather stay at one of the other places..

AFARR


----------



## Carolinian

AFARR said:


> Couple of thoughts on Duck vs. Kitty Hawk.  Duck is fully built, KH is not.   Most weeks I see in resale are for points at Kitty Hawk (it is more recently constructed, and probably got hit harder for sales of points than Duck), most resales at BIS Duck are weeks (there are some points conversions).
> 
> I don't (yet) have an RCI Points account...but to get a better comparison, you'd probably have to look at both Points listings and Weeks Listings for both resorts and total them that way.
> 
> Carolinian is correct on the preferences...(BIS Duck and OBBC I & II) are more desirable (to those that know the area) than Sea Scape or BIS Kitty Hawk.   I have stayed in SS before....and had no complaints, but would much rather stay at one of the other places..
> 
> AFARR



Much of BIS-Kitty Hawk has been originally sold as points as opposed to weeks.  You on spot on with that observation.  Most Duck owners were smart enough not to fall for the conversion racket.  It was sold out before the spectre of RCI Points even appeared.

Ask the local rental / resale timeshare broker this question and she will quickly tell you that no one will rent BIS-Kitty Hawk or Seascape when they can rent any of the oceanfront resorts instead, even with BIS-Kitty Hawk and Seascape priced $100 less than the oceanfront resorts.  She will also tell you that the most in demand resorts are first OBCC I and II, followed by BIS-Duck.


----------



## Laurie

northwoodsgal said:


> How does this make sense regarding my Jackson Hole Towncenter week 36?
> 
> If I deposit my 2011 week 276+ days out, I will receive 33 points.
> 
> However, my currently deposited week, which was deposited one week shy of a year (350+ days out) is being given only 27 points.
> 
> Of course, now I can't see online units that were available last week.


They said they weren't changing trade power values, but they lied, and they have. 

I've noticed this on a few searches I did, looking at recently-confirmed exchanges made with a specific resort. If I wanted another exchange into same resort, same season, future year, using same week at same spacebanked resort (different year but likewise deposited over a year in advance for full credit), I couldn't do it anymore - they're now assigned higher values than my week, so are out of reach for me in the future (without combining w/another deposit and paying extra $$).

Of course there's another explanation about the units you can no longer see - they might have gone into the rental pool, have you checked?


----------



## Carolinian

Mel said:


> These graphs are based on availability, not supply and demand - and not by percentages, but but the number of units available.  As such, Orlando will by definition be high avaialability at all times, and and area with few resorts (like CT with only two very small resorts) will always have low availability.
> .



Well, no!  These tables are merely an expansion of the tables that have been there for a while in the European version of the directory.  The descriptions of the categories were shortened in the last issue, but have in the past contained references to both ''supply'' and ''demand'' in the category descriptions, so clearly ''availibility'' as common sense would dictate anyway, encompasses both ''supply'' and ''demand''.

Nice try!  But it doesn't flush if you have been familiar with these tables all along!


----------



## Carolinian

I have gone back and done the same thing with my confirmed exchanges.  Some would still work but some would not.  RCI clearly moved the goal posts, and you are absolutely right that they lied.  But then, with the new RCI what would you expect?




Laurie said:


> They said they weren't changing trade power values, but they lied, and they have.
> 
> I've noticed this on a few searches I did, looking at recently-confirmed exchanges made with a specific resort. If I wanted another exchange into same resort, same season, future year, using same week at same spacebanked resort (different year but likewise deposited over a year in advance for full credit), I couldn't do it anymore - they're now assigned higher values than my week, so are out of reach for me in the future (without combining w/another deposit and paying extra $$).
> 
> Of course there's another explanation about the units you can no longer see - they might have gone into the rental pool, have you checked?


----------



## beejaybeeohio

northwoodsgal said:


> How does this make sense regarding my Jackson Hole Towncenter week 36?
> 
> If I deposit my 2011 week 276+ days out, I will receive 33 points.
> 
> However, my currently deposited week, which was deposited one week shy of a year (350+ days out) is being given only 27 points.
> 
> Of course, now I can't see online units that were available last week.



My PnP week26 currently deposited yields 37 points.  However, the value for the same week available for future deposit is valued at 34 Both weeks are over the 4th of July holiday, so why the discrepancy?  

Laurie & Carolinian, methinks you speak the truth about being lied to!


----------



## AFARR

Carolinian said:


> Snip.... Most Duck owners were smart enough not to fall for the conversion racket.  It was sold out before the spectre of RCI Points even appeared.
> 
> Snip....



In talking to the Duck people, a LOT of owners use there rather than trade...trading is more 'occasional' rather than commonplace for any given unit.  Kind of pointless to convert at $x000...when you're going to use anyway.

Thus decreasing Supply/increasing Demand.

AFARR


----------



## bnoble

> My PnP week26 currently deposited yields 37 points. However, the value for the same week available for future deposit is valued at 34 Both weeks are over the 4th of July holiday, so why the discrepancy?


Trade values do fluctuate year over year, based on how the prior year's exchanges go.  It's not at all uncommon to see somewhat different results from the same interval deposited with the same lead time but out of different years.


----------



## Beaglemom3

My Allen House week seems to have the lessened value for 2011 as it's less than 9 months v. the 2012 which is expected.

1 bedroom Allen House Week 20 (May) 2011  = 41  pts.


1 bedroom Allen House Week 20 (May) 2011  =   47 points.


----------



## Bourne

bnoble said:


> Trade values do fluctuate year over year, based on how the prior year's exchanges go.  It's not at all uncommon to see somewhat different results from the same interval deposited with the same lead time but out of different years.



Correct. Here is an example between me and Michael. 

Same resort, same week but I have a 22 rating and he as 17. Reason being, July 4 was presumably the "hottest" week. Once multiple weeks got depositsed, subsequent deposits  kept dropping in value. Even today, week 26 has a higher value than week 27 temporarily because week 27 has more supply.


----------



## jlwquilter

Bourne said:


> Correct. Here is an example between me and Michael.
> 
> Same resort, same week but I have a 22 rating and he as 17. Reason being, July 4 was presumably the "hottest" week. Once multiple weeks got depositsed, subsequent deposits  kept dropping in value. Even today, week 26 has a higher value than week 27 temporarily because week 27 has more supply.



And that might be the answer to "why should I deposit more than 9 months out if trade power isn't effected?". Trade power WILL be efffected due to supply and demand interaction. You still get "100%" but the specific number that you get 100% of will/may change.


----------



## Carolinian

AFARR said:


> In talking to the Duck people, a LOT of owners use there rather than trade...trading is more 'occasional' rather than commonplace for any given unit.  Kind of pointless to convert at $x000...when you're going to use anyway.
> 
> Thus decreasing Supply/increasing Demand.
> 
> AFARR



Exchangers are indeed the minority at the OBX resorts I am most familiar with, and thet is particularly true in the summer.


----------



## Carolinian

Bourne said:


> Correct. Here is an example between me and Michael.
> 
> Same resort, same week but I have a 22 rating and he as 17. Reason being, July 4 was presumably the "hottest" week. Once multiple weeks got depositsed, subsequent deposits  kept dropping in value. Even today, week 26 has a higher value than week 27 temporarily because week 27 has more supply.



However, when I go week by week through a specific resort, I see clearly that these numbers are NOT computed on a week by week basis.  They are valued in bands and valuation bands (a different issue than trading bands) mean overaveraging, just like in RCI Points and even more so in the crossover grids.  For example in the new Points Lite, on the OBX, one of those valuation bands, in which every week is assigned exactly the same value is weeks 11 to 21 inclusive.  Now a week 21 on the OBX is substantially more desirable than a blue week 11.  Yet RCI's Points Lite (''Weeks'') assigns them and even week in between exactly the same value.  The weeks at the junctions of those bands also are disjointed as to value.  Is a week 25 really worth 80% more than a week 24, while week 24 and 23 are worth the same thing?  Horsehockey!  

Tuggers can run through your own resorts to find the valuation bands there.


----------



## Carolinian

jlwquilter said:


> And that might be the answer to "why should I deposit more than 9 months out if trade power isn't effected?". Trade power WILL be efffected due to supply and demand interaction. You still get "100%" but the specific number that you get 100% of will/may change.



While RCI does not present this in a table format, one can take the value calculator for any resort area and compile the stratified valuation tables for that area, with each week in each value band having exactly the same value.  This has the look and feel of the calcified valuations of RCI Points, not the dynamic values we have been used to in RCI Weeks.  So, I would not be expecting any ongoing interaction of supply and demand in the future.  Like their other Points program, these numbers have every appearance of being rigged and frozen.


----------



## DocPepsi

Carolinian said:


> However, when I go week by week through a specific resort, I see clearly that these numbers are NOT computed on a week by week basis.  They are valued in bands and valuation bands (a different issue than trading bands) mean overaveraging, just like in RCI Points and even more so in the crossover grids.  For example in the new Points Lite, on the OBX, one of those valuation bands, in which every week is assigned exactly the same value is weeks 11 to 21 inclusive.  Now a week 21 on the OBX is substantially more desirable than a blue week 11.  Yet RCI's Points Lite (''Weeks'') assigns them and even week in between exactly the same value.  The weeks at the junctions of those bands also are disjointed as to value.  Is a week 25 really worth 80% more than a week 24, while week 24 and 23 are worth the same thing?  Horsehockey!
> 
> Tuggers can run through your own resorts to find the valuation bands there.



Is there a link to this Points Lite information?  That is terrible that the bands are that wide!!!  That is a pretty horrific error in judgement.


----------



## Carolinian

DocPepsi said:


> Is there a link to this Points Lite information?  That is terrible that the bands are that wide!!!  That is a pretty horrific error in judgement.



They cleverly have not published it in table format.  You have to take the value calculator and go week by week within a resort.  I then compared a few resorts in the same area to see if the same pattern held.  It did.


----------



## dundey

I looked at my resorts earlier, now I'm getting a "Too many users" error message.

One of my current deposits was missing but the 3 SA deposits that I have are all listed as 11.  This is interesting since others have quoted anywhere from 8's and 9's up to 20 for different SA deposits.  While I do not own silver or gold crown, both my SA weeks are rated as PEAK and are in school vacation (in SA) time, and have always traded very well.  

There was no difference between resorts (Knysna Chalets and Glenmore Sands), or the 2010 and 2011 Glenmore weeks on deposit (both were deposited more than 9 months in advance).  I do plan on questioning RCI about this but I'm sure I'll just get the typical response.

I may be getting rid of these weeks in the future, or join RCI SA once my current account expires.

My "available weeks to deposit" are Lehigh Acres in FL, which is a red July 4th week and Fairway Forest in NC, a blue early December week.  I have always deposited and traded Fairway through II, since I'm able to get MUCH better trades.  In fact I've been able to get decent 2BR resorts in NH/VT in ski season with it the last 2 years.  In RCI it was always my poorest trader by far!  Now it is rated as a 15.
The Lehigh week, by comparison is rated at 12.  Go figure!!  Lehigh is also dual affiliated, but I typically traded through RCI since I could get decent trades with the VRI preference, and it did not trade well at all in II.  Perhaps I'll use it for a Variety deposit next year - they are giving a bonus week for it.

I'll have to think about my blue week, it seems now to be more on par with II.  There is a lot to think about going forward!!  The other weeks I own are all used at the resort and never deposited for trade. But at least now I can see what they are potentially worth if I register them with RCI.   

I'm not really sure what all this means for me personally going forward, but on the surface it appears that I am now worse off, at least from a trading perspective.


----------



## timbuktu

How can RCI possibly say trading power has not changed ???
I used to trade 4th of July Peregrine townhomes for MC.  One week for one week.plus MC fees at checkout.

Now it takes 2 weeks combined, plus 2 maintenance fees, plus fee to combine weeks. plus exchange fees. plus MC fees at checkout.  I can rent for less.   
When I point this out to the "guide"  she says 'You will always have access. I had access before too.
I think when my membership ends so will I.
Member since 1979.


----------



## Carolinian

timbuktu said:


> How can RCI possibly say trading power has not changed ???
> I used to trade 4th of July Peregrine townhomes for MC.  One week for one week.plus MC fees at checkout.
> 
> Now it takes 2 weeks combined, plus 2 maintenance fees, plus fee to combine weeks. plus exchange fees. plus MC fees at checkout.  I can rent for less.
> When I point this out to the "guide"  she says 'You will always have access. I had access before too.
> I think when my membership ends so will I.
> Member since 1979.



Unfortunately that is exactly what we realists were saying that RCI was going to do.  It is what they always do, or at least since the Cendant takeover. anyway.


----------



## krj9999

What they have said is trading power of your existing deposit has not changed.  It is what it is.  But they have re-evaluated trading power for each resort and each week, which means that what you are CURRENTLY able to trade INTO has changed, since values for other resorts changed.  Or a FUTURE deposit may have considerably different trading power from an EXISTING deposit, for the same resort and same week.




timbuktu said:


> How can RCI possibly say trading power has not changed ???


----------



## Carolinian

krj9999 said:


> What they have said is trading power of your existing deposit has not changed.  It is what it is.  But they have re-evaluated trading power for each resort and each week, which means that what you are CURRENTLY able to trade INTO has changed, since values for other resorts changed.  Or a FUTURE deposit may have considerably different trading power from an EXISTING deposit, for the same resort and same week.



I think the technical term for RCI's semantics is ''double talk''


----------



## bankr63

*A few observations...*

So far I like what I see.

I captured my TP on the two weeks I currently have on deposit.  Last week they could see 120K (1BR) and 127K (2BR).  Today I can see 127 and 133 respectively, so I actually see a slight increase, albeit probably related to time of day, and day of week.

I finally have an answer to how valuable splitting my 3BR lockoff is.  I used the TP Calculator with the same unit/week and got a TP of 30 for the 3BR and a TP of 27 and 24 when that same unit is split.  So if I take my splits, pay the C$116 fee  to put them back together, I get an overall TP of 51.  That (of course) is not the way I would do it.  I have been checking TP for other desirable resorts, and I really only need a small top up to get in those, so a cheap trade and then the change back applied to the other unit will get me some pretty smart trades.

I do like how the calculator works - I can find the TP of any resort in the system for any week.  Of course availability is never guaranteed!

I also found out that Sheraton Vistana has the same TP for any 2BR in a given week regardless of section, age, or refurbishment.  

This may be a game changer for me in how I book vacations.  I just wish I could change back from the one trade I already have confirmed for 2012 - apparently I left about 5 TP on the table 

Okay, I've logged out of RCI now, so one more of you should be able to get on...:rofl:


----------



## krj9999

I have a 2010 week I deposited last year that has a deposit value of 42.

I had recently deposited same week for 2011, which only has a deposit value of 27 (looks like it got caught in the "banding").   




Carolinian said:


> I think the technical term for RCI's semantics is ''double talk''


----------



## frank808

Would anyone mind finding out the TP for Kona Coast 2 1br and 2br in summer months?  Also would like to know about Paniolo Greens 2br what would the best week be and TP for that week.  Thanks in advance for your help.


----------



## lolibeachgirl

*deposit calculator issue*

I have tried using the deposit calculator in both IE and Firefox, it will allow me to enter info for the resort, unit size and kitchen, but it will not let me use the calendar or the drop down boxes for interval/year.  

I wanted to search for a 2011 week and a 2012 week, both before they are deposited, so I do not have unit#....

Both systems do not have pop-up blockers enabled, so I am (still) unable to see what my units are worth before actually depositing them. 

Can anyone tell me if there's something I can do to make this calculator work correctly? 

As an aside, the Oct 2011 Myrtle Beach Plantation Resort red studio that the ex has had in there for over a year was able to pull up 27 units at 14 resorts (all within 45 days) whereas on Thursday before the change, this same unit was pulling only 11 units at 4-5 resorts (also all within 45 days).   The search was for Hawaii.  Much more variety and availability than it had before the change.  (It's valued at a 12).


----------



## Mel

lolibeachgirl said:


> I have tried using the deposit calculator in both IE and Firefox, it will allow me to enter info for the resort, unit size and kitchen, but it will not let me use the calendar or the drop down boxes for interval/year.
> 
> I wanted to search for a 2011 week and a 2012 week, both before they are deposited, so I do not have unit#....
> 
> Both systems do not have pop-up blockers enabled, so I am (still) unable to see what my units are worth before actually depositing them.
> 
> Can anyone tell me if there's something I can do to make this calculator work correctly?
> 
> As an aside, the Oct 2011 Myrtle Beach Plantation Resort red studio that the ex has had in there for over a year was able to pull up 27 units at 14 resorts (all within 45 days) whereas on Thursday before the change, this same unit was pulling only 11 units at 4-5 resorts (also all within 45 days).   The search was for Hawaii.  Much more variety and availability than it had before the change.  (It's valued at a 12).



When using the calculator, if you select the "I know my unit size"box, and select every things else, you need to select a unit number before you can select a week and year.  It doesn't seem to matter what unit # you use - it will give you a list of acceptable unit numbers, just choose one. 

I suppose it could make a slight difference at some resorts if certain specific units are larger, but I doubt it.


----------



## cpnuser

*Moved post*

Could you please tell me where my post was moved to.  Thank you.


----------



## dundey

krj9999 said:


> What they have said is trading power of your existing deposit has not changed.  It is what it is.  But they have re-evaluated trading power for each resort and each week, which means that what you are CURRENTLY able to trade INTO has changed, since values for other resorts changed.  Or a FUTURE deposit may have considerably different trading power from an EXISTING deposit, for the same resort and same week.



They (RCI) lied pure and simple, no doubt what so ever.
I had a 2010 deposit that was pulling 140,000 resorts and now sees 65,000.
Case closed.  

This resort saw almost everything available, certainly not the case now.

RCI website is still buggy even at 2AM EST.


----------



## sfwilshire

Mel said:


> It doesn't seem to matter what unit # you use - it will give you a list of acceptable unit numbers, just choose one.
> 
> I suppose it could make a slight difference at some resorts if certain specific units are larger, but I doubt it.



I did notice that the system seems to have some knowledge of the check-in day of particular unit numbers. I tried to change the date on my reserved unit to see if I was one or two days late for the 90 day deposit point and it wouldn't let me. It knew the unit was a Friday check-in.

Sheila


----------



## beejaybeeohio

*OnGoing Search Issues*

I have an ongoing search for generic WA inland and WA coastal.  This is visible when I click on the ongoing search tab.  It is overridden with that revolving circle and statement, "please wait while we retrieve your results..."

What is not shown is the individual resorts I have added for a different location and time period!!  

Anyone having similar results if you have an ongoing search in place?


----------



## bankr63

cpnuser said:


> Could you please tell me where my post was moved to.  Thank you.



#105 on page 5 of this thread?


----------



## MichaelColey

*It does look like we were able to trade up previously.*

I went back through some of my confirmed exchanges to check to see how my pre-upgrade trades had been.  Although I can only see what the trading powers for the intervals are now, not what trading power my deposit had and what trading power the exchanged unit was when I did the exchange, I think it's safe to assume that they wouldn't have changed all that much.  All of these were fairly recent.

In one, I appear to have traded down (20->17).  I'm actually okay with this one, because I traded within the same resort, going from a 1BR in a peak season to a 3BR in an off season.  For all the others, I appear to have traded up, sometimes substantially (27->29, 25->29, 23->29, 19->29, 23->29 and 13->17).  The 19->29 was exchanging from a 1BR in Branson with a partial kitchen on a holiday week to a 2BR DVC unit during Spring Break.

I think this clearly shows that we WERE able to trade up before, where now it takes combining to trade up.

While trading up for free is nice (and I certainly took advantage of it), I think I prefer the way it is now.  I don't mind paying what for what I get.  I still get a tremendous value.  And combining, I'm able to get much better quality, more consistently.


----------



## bnoble

I'm coming to a similar conclusion.  However, I'm also finding weeks in the spacebank where the calculated deposit value is higher than the value assigned to the actual spacebanked week.  I'm not entirely sure what's going on there, but it is curious.


----------



## JudyS

cpnuser said:


> I search for alot of the short dated weeks with my  points.  I can't find them now, since RCI has had 3 days to change everything.  Can anybody tell me in a few simple steps how to search for the short dated weeks?  I'd appreciate it.  Thanks.


Are you talking about RCI Points, or RCI Weeks? Searching by date in RCI Weeks hasn't changed.


----------



## Bourne

MichaelColey said:


> I went back through some of my confirmed exchanges to check to see how my pre-upgrade trades had been.  Although I can only see what the trading powers for the intervals are now, not what trading power my deposit had and what trading power the exchanged unit was when I did the exchange, I think it's safe to assume that they wouldn't have changed all that much.  All of these were fairly recent.
> 
> In one, I appear to have traded down (20->17).  I'm actually okay with this one, because I traded within the same resort, going from a 1BR in a peak season to a 3BR in an off season.  For all the others, I appear to have traded up, sometimes substantially (27->29, 25->29, 23->29, 19->29, 23->29 and 13->17).  The 19->29 was exchanging from a 1BR in Branson with a partial kitchen on a holiday week to a 2BR DVC unit during Spring Break.
> 
> I think this clearly shows that we WERE able to trade up before, where now it takes combining to trade up.
> 
> While trading up for free is nice (and I certainly took advantage of it), I think I prefer the way it is now.  I don't mind paying what for what I get.  I still get a tremendous value.  And combining, I'm able to get much better quality, more consistently.



where do you see this.. I had to call in for mine...

I get it now... I was hoping for a report format.


----------



## itisme

*I sure hope so*



MichaelColey said:


> So far, I see two things we've lost:
> 
> 1) *Exchange Priority.*  For one of my deposits, I had exchange priority into the same resort group.  My lower value deposit was able to see stuff that a higher trading value deposit couldn't see.  That's no longer the case.  Hopefully this is just a temporary oversight.




It will suck if exchange priority within the same resort group is gone.  

I have traded my pink VV @ Parkway for Summer VV @ Berkshires and Massanutten in the past and getting some value out of this. I don't have a VV @ Parkway deposit to actually check that  priority to pull any week within VV Group is now gone.


----------



## DanM

*Wonder if the prospective values will change?*

"My PnP week26 currently deposited yields 37 points. However, the value for the same week available for future deposit is valued at 34 Both weeks are over the 4th of July holiday, so why the discrepancy? "

Similar here. My current deposits, New Years and Presidents Week units at the same New Hampshire resort, are both rated 25. The deposit offer for Christmas 2011 is 19 and Pres. Week 2012 is 21. (Meanwhile, the exchange planner rates both as 17 as it doesn't show the difference for holiday weeks).

What I am wondering is if the deposit point offer won't change over time with inventory? RCI always used to say that was a factor. So, for example, if a resort bulk deposited, would the points offered drop until the inventory was absorbed?


----------



## MichaelColey

Bourne said:


> where do you see this.. I had to call in for mine...
> 
> I get it now... I was hoping for a report format.


I used the Deposit Calculator and looked at the trading value for both sides of my exchanges (my deposit and the week I got) for all my confirmed exchanges.

One thing I didn't do in my calculations...  I know that some of my deposits might have been at 95%, 90% or 80% (and one at 60%) of the listed value because of when they were deposited, but I didn't bother figuring that out.  Most of the units I exchanged into should have been at 100% or 95%.


----------



## itisme

itisme said:


> What I am still not clear is whether  a trading power of a deposit will be same as the trading power required to pull that same deposit.
> 
> Say I deposit Resort X, Week 52, more than 9 months out. I am assigned 20 points.  When another member wants to exchange into this same week (Resort X, Week 52) will he/she be needing 20 points to exchange into (other than for last call)?
> 
> I was under the impression the answer is No. But I am not sure now.



Ok now that I had time to play around with the new system, the answer is No.

My Week 52/2011 CH 1BD deposit is giving me 26 points. The same week (Week 52/2011) is available for exchange for 15 points. Not that I am complaining  .


----------



## bnoble

> What I am wondering is if the deposit point offer won't change over time with inventory? RCI always used to say that was a factor. So, for example, if a resort bulk deposited, would the points offered drop until the inventory was absorbed?


I would assume that it *will* fluctuate over time.  This makes it important to know the "baseline" value of your deposit, so you will recognize if this is a bad (or good) time to pull the trigger.


----------



## paxsarah

DanM said:


> What I am wondering is if the deposit point offer won't change over time with inventory? RCI always used to say that was a factor. *So, for example, if a resort bulk deposited, would the points offered drop until the inventory was absorbed?*



I will be very interested to see the answer to this question.


----------



## jlwquilter

MichaelColey said:


> I used the Deposit Calculator and looked at the trading value for both sides of my exchanges (my deposit and the week I got) for all my confirmed exchanges.
> 
> One thing I didn't do in my calculations...  I know that some of my deposits might have been at 95%, 90% or 80% (and one at 60%) of the listed value because of when they were deposited, but I didn't bother figuring that out.  Most of the units I exchanged into should have been at 100% or 95%.



Wouldn't you have to use the "vacation planner calculator" for the received exchange value? The deposit calc gives what the depositor receives/received, not what the "buyer" has to pay to get it. As ITISME posted, he received more for his deposit than it costs to re-book it... and of course others have posted where it re-booking the exact week costs more.


----------



## rpennisi

Is anyone else, who has a *Mac*, having problems with:
tracking power adjusting schedule
deposit calculator
exchange planner
all under the Manage Your Deposits?
Also under Search for a Vacation:
click to change....and no change from the exchange only, bookable only?
I have no popup blocker on.
Thanks,
Ron


----------



## bnoble

Ron, I'm running Safari 5.0.2, on top of Snow Leopard (10.6) and those things mostly seem to work.

Try resetting Safari (including all cookies, etc.) and see if that helps.


----------



## Carolinian

Instead of ''trading up'' then, you are more likely seeing examples of RCI moving the goalposts on numbers now.  In SA, many people are seeing weeks that deposited in the past still showing the values when deposited which are higher than the new Points Lite numbers they are offered now.  SA was clearly whacked pretty hard.

The exceptions of course would be last minute trades when the short shelf life caused the value to dive from what it had been at one time or bulkbankings which arbitrarily flooded the market causing the supply / demand curve to get out of whack and thus made bargain prices availible.

In the old system, unless you had a situation like one of those, you could only marginally trade up within a band, which was fair and made sense because there is no way to fairly and honestly value every week to the detail of an exact number.  So if the calculator gives you those values now and it was not a last minute or bulkbanking situation, that simply shows another instance of RCI moving the goalposts when they said they would not.




MichaelColey said:


> I went back through some of my confirmed exchanges to check to see how my pre-upgrade trades had been.  Although I can only see what the trading powers for the intervals are now, not what trading power my deposit had and what trading power the exchanged unit was when I did the exchange, I think it's safe to assume that they wouldn't have changed all that much.  All of these were fairly recent.
> 
> In one, I appear to have traded down (20->17).  I'm actually okay with this one, because I traded within the same resort, going from a 1BR in a peak season to a 3BR in an off season.  For all the others, I appear to have traded up, sometimes substantially (27->29, 25->29, 23->29, 19->29, 23->29 and 13->17).  The 19->29 was exchanging from a 1BR in Branson with a partial kitchen on a holiday week to a 2BR DVC unit during Spring Break.
> 
> I think this clearly shows that we WERE able to trade up before, where now it takes combining to trade up.
> 
> While trading up for free is nice (and I certainly took advantage of it), I think I prefer the way it is now.  I don't mind paying what for what I get.  I still get a tremendous value.  And combining, I'm able to get much better quality, more consistently.


----------



## Carolinian

With the grid system of valuation that RCI is using for Points Lite, where they give the same value for example to all weeks between 11 and 21 inclusive on the OBX, the odds of much adjustment for supply and demand just do not seem to be there.  I suspect the difference in the valuations of previously deposited weeks and what it shows for new deposits is simply a result of RCI moving the goalposts on values.  Those valuation changes that came in with this system are quite common in some parts of the world like SA.




DanM said:


> "My PnP week26 currently deposited yields 37 points. However, the value for the same week available for future deposit is valued at 34 Both weeks are over the 4th of July holiday, so why the discrepancy? "
> 
> Similar here. My current deposits, New Years and Presidents Week units at the same New Hampshire resort, are both rated 25. The deposit offer for Christmas 2011 is 19 and Pres. Week 2012 is 21. (Meanwhile, the exchange planner rates both as 17 as it doesn't show the difference for holiday weeks).
> 
> What I am wondering is if the deposit point offer won't change over time with inventory? RCI always used to say that was a factor. So, for example, if a resort bulk deposited, would the points offered drop until the inventory was absorbed?


----------



## rpennisi

bnoble said:


> Ron, I'm running Safari 5.0.2, on top of Snow Leopard (10.6) and those things mostly seem to work.
> 
> Try resetting Safari (including all cookies, etc.) and see if that helps.



Thanks bnoble...that worked like a charm!
Ron


----------



## Laurie

beejaybeeohio said:


> My PnP week26 currently deposited yields 37 points.  However, the value for the same week available for future deposit is valued at 34 Both weeks are over the 4th of July holiday, so why the discrepancy?





DanM said:


> "My PnP week26 currently deposited yields 37 points. However, the value for the same week available for future deposit is valued at 34 Both weeks are over the 4th of July holiday, so why the discrepancy? "
> 
> Similar here. My current deposits, New Years and Presidents Week units at the same New Hampshire resort, are both rated 25. The deposit offer for Christmas 2011 is 19 and Pres. Week 2012 is 21. (Meanwhile, the exchange planner rates both as 17 as it doesn't show the difference for holiday weeks).
> 
> What I am wondering is if the deposit point offer won't change over time with inventory? RCI always used to say that was a factor. So, for example, if a resort bulk deposited, would the points offered drop until the inventory was absorbed?


Same here, regarding my week 26 ownership in New England (different resort). I already exchanged my 2011 wk, but I can look it up as if it hadn't been, and it assigns its current value at 32, w/max of 34. But my 2012 undeposited week would only get 26 currently. (Think I'll hang onto that for awhile...)

It may make a difference that our 2011 weeks begin in month of July, whereas 2012 and 2013 will begin in June, and maybe they automatically rate June-beginning wks lower than July-beginning wks, even tho they all span July 4th.

And yes, I'm almost certain these values will change over time, depending upon their current inventory - of course they could go either way - hopefully some will get higher, as in the max 34 quoted above - which is how RCI has operated for some time.


----------



## MichaelColey

Laurie said:


> It may make a difference that our 2011 weeks begin in month of July, whereas 2012 and 2013 will begin in June, and maybe they automatically rate June-beginning wks lower than July-beginning wks, even tho they all span July 4th.


They do seem to adjust properly for moving holidays (a similar issue to yours).  I looked at one resort that got a great TP for weeks 51 and 52 for 2010.  For 2011, week 51 is low because it doesn't include Christmas and weeks 52 and 53 get the high TP.


----------



## rhonda

rpennisi said:


> Thanks bnoble...that worked like a charm!
> Ron


Ditto!  Thanks Ron and Brian!


----------



## Liz Wolf-Spada

I own weeks that have traded with RCI and can't find them - I can't manage to input Welk Mountain Villas at all. Any suggestions?
Liz


----------



## Conan

MichaelColey said:


> They do seem to adjust properly for moving holidays (a similar issue to yours). I looked at one resort that got a great TP for weeks 51 and 52 for 2010. For 2011, week 51 is low because it doesn't include Christmas and weeks 52 and 53 get the high TP.


 

I have a floating Florida week with a Sunday checkin.  RCI gives an extra 2 points of trading power (compared to other July weeks) to week 26 in 2011 and to week 27 in 2012.

The strange thing is week 26 in 2011 runs 6/26-7/3 and week 27 in 2012 runs 7/7-7/14.  So neither premium week actually includes the 4th of July!


----------



## MichaelColey

Many people extend their holiday vacations to a second week, so the week before and after have slightly more demand than other non-holiday weeks.


----------



## krmlaw

why would i already show a deposit credit of 15?


----------



## kalua

*combined weeks*

has anyone combined weeks ? and if so do you see resorts that you wouldn't see normally with out combining them ? I started to but it wanted a $99. fee so I didn't do it.but am curious if you see anymore or higher class , or whatever.


----------



## Happytravels

krmlaw said:


> why would i already show a deposit credit of 15?



Maybe you got some change back :hysterical:


----------



## bnoble

> has anyone combined weeks ? and if so do you see resorts that you wouldn't see normally with out combining them ?


You can see things "beyond your reach" by changing your search parameters.  Here is how:



> Search for a Vacation, then on the dark blue bar, click on the "Click to Change" box. This brings up your individual units that you can search against, and also the option to "Show all available vacations". If you click that button, you see everything (minus, presumably, things that are VEP-filtered.)
> 
> Then, when you search for something that has some units beyond your reach, you are shown the list of things you can get without combining, and (separately) the list of things you can't. At the bottom of that list, you are provided a link that will allow you to go to the "manage deposits" screen to combine.


----------



## MichaelColey

kalua said:


> has anyone combined weeks ? and if so do you see resorts that you wouldn't see normally with out combining them ? I started to but it wanted a $99. fee so I didn't do it.but am curious if you see anymore or higher class , or whatever.


Yes, I combined three lower value weeks, and I can see (and exchange for) almost everything with it. As bnoble explained, you can see everything by changing your search options.


----------



## patty5ia

Is there any way to see what resorts are available to you BEFORE you deposit?


----------



## rhonda

patty5ia said:


> Is there any way to see what resorts are available to you BEFORE you deposit?


Apparently not.  See: http://tugbbs.com/forums/showpost.php?p=1014233&postcount=33


----------



## patty5ia

Thanks, I thought so.  You have to pay before you know what you can buy!


----------



## mrrick

Is there any way to 'uncombine'?


----------



## dollybaby74

I don't have a membership with RCI, but called them up to find out if I DID signup with them, what points would be assigned to my units.  I was told maximum 22 for my week 10 Wyndham Sea Gardens in Pompano Beach and 28 points for my week 11 unit at Vistana.  I'm surprised the Orlando unit was rated higher.


----------



## Pit

dollybaby74 said:


> I was told maximum 22 for my week 10 Wyndham Sea Gardens in Pompano Beach and 28 points for my week 11 unit at Vistana.



So, did they quote you the minimum as well?


----------



## dollybaby74

She didn't for Vistana, but for Sea Gardens she said if I deposited it today for the 2011 year, it would be 20 points.


----------



## Mel

mrrick said:


> Is there any way to 'uncombine'?



There's no reason to "uncombine."  If you use some of the points, you get the remainder as a new credit balance, good for another 2 years.  You can use that single deposit for however many exchanges you want up to the value of the total credits.


----------



## kalua

*combined weeks*



bnoble said:


> You can see things "beyond your reach" by changing your search parameters.  Here is how:



bnoble; that is what i've been doing since i was able to get on the site but the highest point's I see is 18 , so I thought I must have been doing something wrong , is that the highest point's on all the resort's at this time ? or am I not able to see them ?


----------



## BevL

Mel said:


> There's no reason to "uncombine."  If you use some of the points, you get the remainder as a new credit balance, good for another 2 years.  You can use that single deposit for however many exchanges you want up to the value of the total credits.



Unless you wanted to start two ongoing searches.  You can't do that with one deposit.

I'm sorry but I don't know the answer to the original question.  My guess would be no, otherwise it would be untangling quite a mess if deposits had been combined two or three times and then a customer wanted to "uncombine" them.


----------



## krj9999

On main exchange page, dark blue bar - hit click to change, then select Show all available RCI Vacations.



kalua said:


> bnoble; that is what i've been doing since i was able to get on the site but the highest point's I see is 18 , so I thought I must have been doing something wrong , is that the highest point's on all the resort's at this time ? or am I not able to see them ?


----------



## MichaelColey

mrrick said:


> Is there any way to 'uncombine'?


I suspect that they might be able to.  When you combine, the old deposits still show up in the Trading Power Statement (in "My Account"), with a trading power of 0 and the combined deposit show which deposits were used to combine.  So I think it's *technically* possible.


Mel said:


> If you use some of the points, you get the remainder as a new credit balance, good for another 2 years.


Close, but not quite.  The "change" back is supposed to have the same travel window as the original original deposit.  If you combine today, it's good through November 2012.  If you use part of that next December, the "change" would still only be usable through November 2012 (not December 2013).  If you combine again, it'll extended it out again.


----------



## MuranoJo

If you combine two or more units, can you extend them at the 2-year mark?

(I've tried to follow all of this thread, so apologies if this has already been answered and I missed it.)

On another note:
Tried out the view 'all' option on RCI and was gasping at the MC exchange power which was 37-51 tonight.  Wonder if future bulk deposits will bring that down?


----------



## jacknsara

Aloha,
I have figured out how to screen scrape data from this new system into Excel.  Here's an interesting tidbit I thought I'd share.
Right now, a Shearwater with Friday check in 25-Nov-2011 is 21 points.  A two bedroom Kauai Beach Villas with same check in date is 23 points.  
Anyone else find that surprising?
Jack


----------



## ajmace

Mel said:


> There's no reason to "uncombine."  If you use some of the points, you get the remainder as a new credit balance, good for another 2 years.  You can use that single deposit for however many exchanges you want up to the value of the total credits.



The reason to 'uncombine' is to get your £66  ($99) back from RCI! Having combined you may discover that you would have gotten the same deals in the old system with no need for combining.

Can someone please explain how RCI can possibly justify such a high figure for combining, At the end of the day it is a simple electronic process not even worth a $25 'administration' fee.


----------



## suskey

I have been unable to do any real searching. The RCI calculator keeps getting stuck or will not let me click on enough items to get any results. Also page continually freezes. Can anyone offer any suggestions?

Susan


----------



## Carolinian

MichaelColey said:


> They do seem to adjust properly for moving holidays (a similar issue to yours).  I looked at one resort that got a great TP for weeks 51 and 52 for 2010.  For 2011, week 51 is low because it doesn't include Christmas and weeks 52 and 53 get the high TP.



That is a huge advantage for Points Lite over regular Points, which is so rigid as to, for example, always give the Thanksgiving bump to week 47, even when week 46 is actually Thanksgiving!  Score one for Points Lite over regular Points!


----------



## MichaelColey

Carolinian said:


> That is a huge advantage for Points Lite over regular Points, which is so rigid as to, for example, always give the Thanksgiving bump to week 47, even when week 46 is actually Thanksgiving! Score one for Points Lite over regular Points!


You always seem to miss the fact that while an inefficiency in the market is a negative for one side, it's a positive for those on the other side of the transaction.  You can choose which side of the transaction you're going to be on.


----------



## rickandcindy23

jacknsara said:


> Aloha,
> I have figured out how to screen scrape data from this new system into Excel.  Here's an interesting tidbit I thought I'd share.
> Right now, a Shearwater with Friday check in 25-Nov-2011 is 21 points.  A two bedroom Kauai Beach Villas with same check in date is 23 points.
> Anyone else find that surprising?
> Jack



I find it amazing.  I would say RCI has more demand for the sunny side of the island.  I talked to one of the board members at our CO resort who owns PAHIO Kauai Beach, and he said Princeville and Hanalei are boring, no nightlife, and it's really dark there.  He didn't complain about the weather, which I thought would be his reason to never take a Shearwater.


----------



## jlwquilter

ajmace said:


> The reason to 'uncombine' is to get your £66  ($99) back from RCI! Having combined you may discover that you would have gotten the same deals in the old system with no need for combining.
> 
> Can someone please explain how RCI can possibly justify such a high figure for combining, At the end of the day it is a simple electronic process not even worth a $25 'administration' fee.



RCI charges $99 because they can. No justification needed. But here it is anyway: someone figured out that was the amount that would maximize their profits. Any less would leave money they could have gotten out of us - and charging anymore would turn off too many customers and profits would go down.

My mortgage company charges $4.95 to pay them electronically when it's cheaper for them, faster, etc. than when they have to deal with a paper check. They charge it because some will pay it as it's easier and it's a money maker for the company. But due to them charging they get a paper check from me every month _ I'll pay for the stamp instead.


----------



## Mel

ajmace said:


> The reason to 'uncombine' is to get your £66  ($99) back from RCI! Having combined you may discover that you would have gotten the same deals in the old system with no need for combining.
> 
> Can someone please explain how RCI can possibly justify such a high figure for combining, At the end of the day it is a simple electronic process not even worth a $25 'administration' fee.


Whether or not you can uncombine, I believe RCi states the fee is non-refundable.  So even if you did, you wouldn't get your money back.

I could see charging $25 if the combined points were restricted to the use period of the original points, but they are not.    They charge what they do because they can, and because it is an amount they believe people will be willing to pay.  For a slightly higher fee you can take two expiring deposits and extend them each for 3 months, or extend one for 6 months.  Already at least one TUG member has combined at least 3 deposits to extend the credits out two years.  

The best strategy is obviously to combine several deposits or leftover deposit credits into a single larger credit, which could be used for multiple exchanges.


----------



## Carolinian

*Some other RCI policies & practices*

I wonder what this change will mean on some other RCI programs and practices.

1) color coded seasons - these should now be a do-do bird.
2) VIP program - This is for resort managers, developers, and HOA board members and allows them or the resort to get anything in the system except London, regardless of trading power, for a week of the same color season and size.  This was challenged as part of the lawsuit but was not part of the ''settlement''.  
3) restricting some of the better European deposits for European members only.  I had heard of this a time or two, and when an RCI guide remarked about what she told me were the only weeks at a particular resort ''availible to American members'' and further questioning brought a response that there was additional inventory availible to European members, I switched my membership to Europe and immediately found a good bit more choice especially for UK, Italy, and France.  They definitely did this in the old system, but the question is whether they are still doing it.  Given some of their points lite numbers both places, there is an even bigger need for ringfencing some of this inventory today.
4) VEP filters.  While the upward filter always made some sense, the downward one was always assinine.  Hopefully these have now disappeared but some of the findings on availibility that some have posted have suggested they may still be in place.


----------



## ajmace

*the fee for 'combining' weeks*

Thanks for the explanations.  I agree that it could be a way of extending deposits with little shelf-life left. In my case, on November 15th, by combining two 2012 weeks I was reducing the deadline from 2014 to 2012.  Perhaps they should have been paying me £65  ($99) ! 

I did it, of course, to 'see' directly what availability would be available to me with a higher trading power. (I didn't know then that I could 'see' all RCI deposits anyway).  The answer was - not a lot!   I did not see any deposit that I wanted with a trading power over 30.   I feel that the new point system is a little misleading if all weeks are rated from 5 to 60.  This gives you the idea that there ARE weeks above 30 which might be available.  From my experience this outcome seems somewhat unlikely. 

What do others think?


----------



## Conan

ajmace said:


> I did it, of course, to 'see' what availability would be available to me with a higher trading power.


 
So long as you have any RCI Week deposited in the system, whatever its trading power, you can see the full inventory of available weeks.  At the top of the screen, select "All Available RCI Vacations" before searching.


----------



## ajmace

Conan said:


> So long as you have any RCI Week deposited in the system, whatever its trading power, you can see the full inventory of available weeks.  At the top of the screen, select "All Available RCI Vacations" before searching.


Yes Conran I didn't realise that in the early hours of November 15th and , anyway, the speed of the site does not really allow you to investigate things very easily!

What do others think about my other point about there not really being many weeks available in the RCI system with TP above 30?

Which resort is MC?  Are these actually weeks available or are they just values from the deposit calculator?


----------



## jlwquilter

ajmace said:


> Yes Conran I didn't realise that in the early hours of November 15th and , anyway, the speed of the site does not really allow you to investigate things very easily!
> 
> What do others think about my other point about there not really being many weeks available in the RCI system with TP above 30?
> 
> Which resort is MC?  Are these actually weeks available or are they just values from the deposit calculator?



MC is Manhattan Club in New York City. A very desired place to stay if you are visiting the city apparently. I've never been but am thinking about it for next summer. The posting was of actual weeks that were available at the time of the posting. The units may have been taken by now.

Limited resorts available with a cost of more than 30 TPUs can be a result of many things. People with such valuable weeks may not be depositing them as they can rent them for much more money (always been the case and even more so over the past several years as RCI worthwhile exchanges dried up). Or these more vaulable weeks were once deposited but were taken before the conversion to this new system and new deposits haven't occurred yet. Or RCI priced the vast majority of exchanges at or under 30 TPUs so more people could reasonably get them and there simply won't be alot of exchanges priced over 30.

This last is what seems to be what RCI says re: their grids. So combining weeks to get a mega account is only worth the fee IF:
1) you want one of the few high priced weeks (if they show up for exchange at all of course) or 

2) you need to combine small change to get to a workable number of TPUs or 

3) you need to combine in order to "save" close to expiring weeks/TPUs or

4) you need to "activate" a very early deposit (Michael pointed out that this can be done).

Well, that's the 4 reasons I know about.


----------



## bnoble

> What do others think about my other point about there not really being many weeks available in the RCI system with TP above 30?


Just looking at raw number of available units, and assuming that there wasn't a global revaluation this week, that's been the case for a while now.  My highest current deposit is 31, and over the past six months or so it has consistently seen within 1% or so of the total number of units attributed to tigers.


----------



## Carolinian

It would be interesting to have a European member look at what they can see in Europe at and below a certain points lite number and compare that with a US member.  In the past, RCI used to ringfence a fair number of European deposits that were not availible for exchange except to European members.  I saw my own availibility go up significantly in Europe when I switched my membership from North America to Europe. 

Now they seem to be saying that everyone can see everything.  Given some of the values I have seen assigned in Europe and some reported in the states, if this is so, then it is going to make it easier for North Americans to trade into Europe and harder for Europeans to find exchanges in their own backyard, other than of course, Europe's own overbuilt areas like the Canary Islands.  That may help drive European timesharers to other venues, whether II, DAE, UKRE, or SFX.  One London resort, Sloan Gardens Club, dropped RCI and moved totally to SFX a few years ago and seems to be happy with that move.  Maybe others will choose to go that route.


----------



## bellesgirl

ajmace said:


> I did it, of course, to 'see' directly what availability would be available to me with a higher trading power. (I didn't know then that I could 'see' all RCI deposits anyway).  The answer was - not a lot!   I did not see any deposit that I wanted with a trading power over 30.   I feel that the new point system is a little misleading if all weeks are rated from 5 to 60.  This gives you the idea that there ARE weeks above 30 which might be available.  From my experience this outcome seems somewhat unlikely.
> 
> What do others think?


What you are seeing is the inventory that no one has requested, or at least no one with the point value needed to nab it.  Anyone with an ongoing search would get the most desirable deposits, I would think.  I know that is the way my best trades were acquired.

However, I do enjoy window shopping and I have gone on several exchanges that I would not normally have considered.  The shopping is even more fun now, because you can find some real last minute bargains at reduced rates.  I would never have considered trading my whole week for some of these options, but for a fraction of a week, I can see where RCI will move a lot of inventory and make a lot of additional revenues via extra exchange fees.  As long as it works for many of us (not everyone is happy obviously) why not?


----------



## dukebigtom

*Days in Advance of Deposit Start Date % Value*

Can someone please explain the "Days in Advance of Deposit Start Date" chart.  I think I understand, but want to be sure.

Is the chart saying that if you deposit your week < 14 days before the start of the actual week you are depositing you get %45 of the Trading Power you would have gotten if you had deposited the same week 276+ days days before the start of the actual week you are depositing?   So in other words, if the week was deposited 300 days out and was worth 20, if I deposit it less than 14 days out, it would be assigned a Trading Power of 9?

Also, does the value of your deposit go down as you get closer to the end of the time you have to use your week or once assigned a Trading Power does it stay the same until used or it expires?

Thanks,

BigTom


----------



## suzanne

Maybe I missed this, but did not see it posted. Say I have 5 credits left over from an exchange and  I want to use those 5 credits and another week worth say 15 credits to get another exchange that requires 20 credits to get. Do I have to pay the $99 fee to combine the 5 credits and the 15 credit week to get the 20 credits needed plus an exchange fee to get the resort?

Suzanne


----------



## bellesgirl

suzanne said:


> Maybe I missed this, but did not see it posted. Say I have 5 credits left over from an exchange and  I want to use those 5 credits and another week worth say 15 credits to get another exchange that requires 20 credits to get. Do I have to pay the $99 fee to combine the 5 credits and the 15 credit week to get the 20 credits needed plus an exchange fee to get the resort?
> 
> Suzanne


Yes, that is my understanding.


----------



## pbenham

*Internal Preference with new RCI system (trading back into home resort)*

I was concerned that at my home resort (Smuggs) I was not able to see any weeks with trade value above that of my float weeks.  Clearly this would be a major change since I have often traded back into Smuggs with lesser value (color) weeks.  

I called Smuggs owner services, who in turn called their RCI contact.  Here is what I was told – *“One will not see any weeks of higher trade value by doing a “quick search”, but when an Ongoing Search is initiated there is functionality built into the system that does give owners some sort of priority when trading back into their home resort”.*

I have not tested this yet, but am curious to see if anyone is able to verify this.


----------



## Rene McDaniel

Well that's encouraging, and I hope it's true.

I wonder if anyone knows if this is also true of mini-resort systems preferences, such as VRI resort preferences, or sister-resorts like the Pueblo Bonito Resorts, Grand Mayans, etc.  who were always given a "window" where resort group owners were given a preference on deposits before they could be seen/picked up by others.

-- Rene


----------



## london

*Internal Preference Home Resort*

We had traded our week 44, red time, at Club Regency in Myrtle Beach, for a summer week at the same resort, as an internal exchange.

We did this 3 or 4 times, in last few years.

Now my week 44 has a value of 10, with a summer week a value of 25 to 40.

The new system is probably fairer, based on true demand for the weeks.


----------



## abdibile

I just started a trade test thread on that topic on the Sightings board.

I will repeat the test later to rule out variations in timing.

RCI US members, please post your results there.

It would also help if RCI Europe members would participate to see if VEP filter has any impact on results.

Thanks!



Carolinian said:


> It would be interesting to have a European member look at what they can see in Europe at and below a certain points lite number and compare that with a US member.  In the past, RCI used to ringfence a fair number of European deposits that were not availible for exchange except to European members.  I saw my own availibility go up significantly in Europe when I switched my membership from North America to Europe.
> 
> Now they seem to be saying that everyone can see everything.  Given some of the values I have seen assigned in Europe and some reported in the states, if this is so, then it is going to make it easier for North Americans to trade into Europe and harder for Europeans to find exchanges in their own backyard, other than of course, Europe's own overbuilt areas like the Canary Islands.  That may help drive European timesharers to other venues, whether II, DAE, UKRE, or SFX.  One London resort, Sloan Gardens Club, dropped RCI and moved totally to SFX a few years ago and seems to be happy with that move.  Maybe others will choose to go that route.


----------



## Carolinian

MichaelColey said:


> You always seem to miss the fact that while an inefficiency in the market is a negative for one side, it's a positive for those on the other side of the transaction.  You can choose which side of the transaction you're going to be on.



Generally, I tend to prefer accuracy over inefficiency.


----------



## Carolinian

Thanks for the trade test.  If I had anything in the bank to check with I would help out, but thankfully I emptied my account before this tsunami hit. It would help if European members specified they were European members and looked for specific areas of Europe like England and Italy.  While the VEP issue is interesting, the bigger interest for me is whether RCI is still ringfencing part of the European inventory and only making it availible to European members.  If they are not, it is all the more reason to urge our resorts, at least those of us who own in Europe, to encourage members to deal with other exchange companies.




abdibile said:


> I just started a trade test thread on that topic on the Sightings board.
> 
> I will repeat the test later to rule out variations in timing.
> 
> RCI US members, please post your results there.
> 
> It would also help if RCI Europe members would participate to see if VEP filter has any impact on results.
> 
> Thanks!


----------



## Carolinian

Looking at the absurd grid block that lumps all OBX weeks from 11 to 21 inclusive into one points liite value, I called an aquaintance (thanks to Skype, I can call the US for less than 2 euro cents per minute) who I remembered had both a March and a May OBX week and did at least some trading with both. Actually during this period and extending to week 25, desirabliity increases incrementally week by week, rather than having magic jumps at certain cut off points.

My acquaintance, it turns out has weeks that are about at each end of this continuum, a 2BR week 12 and a 1BR week 21 at the same resort. He always trades the 12 and sometimes has used but more often trades the 21. He had not heard anything about RCI changing the game on exchanging. He told me that, of course his 21 had always outtraded his 12 for the places he like to trade to, the Caribbean and the US east of the Mississippi. He gave me some examples mostly from the Caribbean of the differences of what each week would typically see. When I told him his week 12 now had more trading power than his week 21, because it was 2BR, he was flabbergasted. He said he was going to immediately get on his computer and check out the new landscape for himself, but he did say that it looked like he would be using his week 21 every year from now on and all RCI would get would be the 12.

I also mentioned the new timetable for full value of deposits, and again he seemed stunned, immediately picking up on the implications of that for frequent flyer tickets. It turns out that between business trips and credit card spending, he always gets enough AA miles each year for at least two tickets to the Caribbean and has been regularly combining these with a timeshare exchange. Now, he is either in a position of reserving his ff tickets when he knows he can get them and keep his fingers crossed a timeshare will be availible the same week, or waiting to get the timeshare exchange and keep his fingers crossed that all the ff tickets have not been booked. It will make scheduling his Caribbean vacations a lot more of a crapshoot. What RCI has clearly done with its new timing scheme on deposits is to make timesharing a whole lot less user friendly for members.


----------



## abdibile

*Ongoing searches for high points value weeks?*

Did anyone understand how ongoing searches work now?

Do you search against one of your deposit and only get a match if this one deposit has enough points to get what you want when it becomes available?

Or is there a way to have an ongoing search to look for what you want and if found ask you if you are willing to spend that many points (e.g. by combining several of your weeks)?

How do you handel that?


----------



## beejaybeeohio

abdibile said:


> Did anyone understand how ongoing searches work now?



I wish I understood as I have one in, and everytime I try to access it, I get that spinning circle over the first half of my ongoing.  I have yet to see if my selected resort search is still in place.


----------



## bellesgirl

beejaybeeohio said:


> I wish I understood as I have one in, and everytime I try to access it, I get that spinning circle over the first half of my ongoing.  I have yet to see if my selected resort search is still in place.


I am glad to know it is not just me getting the spinner. 

I had another search that matched and I was sent a notice informing me.  When I look at my account it tells me how many points (for lack of a better term) it would take to confirm the unit.  As far as I can tell, you cannot search for more points than you have in the week.  I think you would have to combine first if you need something stronger - but I don't know that for sure because my week had sufficient points.

One other thing - I don't know if it is just during this transition, but RCI gave me a long time to decide.  I got the alert on Tuesday and they gave me until the end of business on Friday to decide.


----------



## Cathyb

*How about sister resort priority?*



pbenham said:


> I was concerned that at my home resort (Smuggs) I was not able to see any weeks with trade value above that of my float weeks.  Clearly this would be a major change since I have often traded back into Smuggs with lesser value (color) weeks.
> 
> I called Smuggs owner services, who in turn called their RCI contact.  Here is what I was told – *“One will not see any weeks of higher trade value by doing a “quick search”, but when an Ongoing Search is initiated there is functionality built into the system that does give owners some sort of priority when trading back into their home resort”.*
> 
> I have not tested this yet, but am curious to see if anyone is able to verify this.



Grand Pacific Resorts own 5-6 different places.  I wonder if the 'internal' priority given those owners will work as it has in the past and how this new value system will work with that???


----------



## timeos2

*Weeks are credits - pointrs are points*



bellesgirl said:


> I had another search that matched and I was sent a notice informing me.  When I look at my account it tells me how many points (for lack of a better term) it would take to confirm the unit.  As far as I can tell, you cannot search for more points than you have in the week.  I think you would have to combine first if you need something stronger - but I don't know that for sure because my week had sufficient points.



Just a suggestion that to keep things clear we can continue to call RCI Points "points" while the new system -RCI Weeks/aka points lite - could be called "credits".  Hopefully that way everyone knows which system is being referred to.


----------



## Maple_Leaf

*There's only so much supply and demand impact on trading power*



Carolinian said:


> However, when I go week by week through a specific resort, I see clearly that these numbers are NOT computed on a week by week basis.  They are valued in bands and valuation bands (a different issue than trading bands) mean overaveraging, just like in RCI Points and even more so in the crossover grids.  For example in the new Points Lite, on the OBX, one of those valuation bands, in which every week is assigned exactly the same value is weeks 11 to 21 inclusive.  Now a week 21 on the OBX is substantially more desirable than a blue week 11.  Yet RCI's Points Lite (''Weeks'') assigns them and even week in between exactly the same value.  The weeks at the junctions of those bands also are disjointed as to value.  Is a week 25 really worth 80% more than a week 24, while week 24 and 23 are worth the same thing?  Horsehockey!
> 
> Tuggers can run through your own resorts to find the valuation bands there.



I'm seeing the same thing in Ontario cottage country.  Weeks 26, 27 and 31 are the strongest summer weeks because of the long holiday weekends, however, they appear to be banded together with all other summer weeks at the same trading power level.


----------



## Maple_Leaf

*Is exchange priority at the SAME RESORT gone?*



itisme said:


> It will suck if exchange priority within the same resort group is gone.
> 
> I have traded my pink VV @ Parkway for Summer VV @ Berkshires and Massanutten in the past and getting some value out of this. I don't have a VV @ Parkway deposit to actually check that  priority to pull any week within VV Group is now gone.



I have always used the exchange priority within the same resort to trade from a pink (early) September week to a red July week in Ontario cottage country.  I've done it successfully for 7 consecutive summers.  Is this strategy kaput under Points Lite?


----------



## WinniWoman

*RCI New System One More Time*

 I am sorry if this question was already asked, but there are just so many posts to go through! Can you tell what your specific week is worth BEFORE you bank it AND can you see what would be available and what they are worth BEFORE you bank your week?


----------



## shar

*internal exchange through RCI new program*

It appears to me that there is now limited internal exchange available through RCI new system.  I have not added this to the prior discussion as it is ten pages long and just to many for me to read with most before the new system in place.

I own a week that at top exchange is worth 27 credits. If I place this week in the space bank when maintenance fees are due then I receive only only 24 or 25 credits. Before I could trade this space banked week for any week at my resort if available no matter when the deposit was done.  It appears to me that now I will need more points to get a week in the same time period. So I am forced to deposit and pay maintenance fees early to get RCI full points for that period of time. Also forces me to decide if I want to use the week or deposit it  on RCI 's schedule and not mine. Example July week is 27 credits and if not deposited to get maximum points I will no longer be able to trade a week for another July week.  If I deposit July week then want to trade for February week then I do not have enough points ever from one week. Before I could trade a July week and get a Feb week if available,but not now in this system. If I trade a July week and get a May week then I will receive credits back.  If I  deposit my July week when maintenance fees are due, then I will have to trade back into resort during a period which is not as demanded as my week.  (have 24 credits but now need 27 for same week)Seems to me that the internal trading within your own resort as managed by RCI has definitely taken a hit here.      

Shar


----------



## PeelBoy

*Life of Combining Points*

I know there are 1 thread about facts, 1 about opinions, and I remember 1 about strategies.  I don't know where to ask, so decide to raise my question here.

I own:

1. a lock off, which is a good trader and will give me 64 points.
1. a pink week, which will give me 15 points.
2. a points program which if I deposit with RCI, will give me 30-40 points.

Therefore, if combining all for a fee of $99 (or whatever amount for Canadians), I will have 110-120 points every year.

1. If I combine all deposits for year 2012 to obtain say 110 points, I will have 2 years from the date of combining to use, not from the date of unit usage.

2. If I have say 40 points left from 2012 and in 2013, can I combine the 110 points in 2013 with 40 points in 2012?  Sounds like I can.

3. If yes to 2, will I have 150 points to use within 2 years from 2013?  Or, 40 2012 points will expire in 2014 and 110 2013 points will expire in 2015.

4. If I have 150 points to use within 2 years from 2013, I don't have to worry about expiry, since every time I combine, I will give the new combined points a life of 2 years.  Am I right or wrong?


----------



## Becky

I wondered the same thing. We bought at resorts so we would have the internal trading priority within the resort or common managed resorts. We don't now. This is one of the negative points about RCI's new weeks.


----------



## Maple_Leaf

*Michael, don't get too excited...*



MichaelColey said:


> I went back through some of my confirmed exchanges to check to see how my pre-upgrade trades had been.  Although I can only see what the trading powers for the intervals are now, not what trading power my deposit had and what trading power the exchanged unit was when I did the exchange, I think it's safe to assume that they wouldn't have changed all that much.  All of these were fairly recent.
> 
> In one, I appear to have traded down (20->17).  I'm actually okay with this one, because I traded within the same resort, going from a 1BR in a peak season to a 3BR in an off season.  For all the others, I appear to have traded up, sometimes substantially (27->29, 25->29, 23->29, 19->29, 23->29 and 13->17).  The 19->29 was exchanging from a 1BR in Branson with a partial kitchen on a holiday week to a 2BR DVC unit during Spring Break.
> 
> I think this clearly shows that we WERE able to trade up before, where now it takes combining to trade up.
> 
> While trading up for free is nice (and I certainly took advantage of it), I think I prefer the way it is now.  I don't mind paying what for what I get.  I still get a tremendous value.  And combining, I'm able to get much better quality, more consistently.



I think you are correct in assuming the Deposit Credit for your deposit has not changed substantially since you made those trades, however, I believe the Exchange Credit of the units you exchanged for is a more volatile number, e.g. time dependent, since a deposit has a finite shelf life.  The 2BR DVC you traded for probably was valued at the time of the exchange for less than 29.


----------



## jlwquilter

PeelBoy said:


> I know there are 1 thread about facts, 1 about opinions, and I remember 1 about strategies.  I don't know where to ask, so decide to raise my question here.
> 
> I own:
> 
> 1. a lock off, which is a good trader and will give me 64 points.
> 1. a pink week, which will give me 15 points.
> 2. a points program which if I deposit with RCI, will give me 30-40 points.
> 
> Therefore, if combining all for a fee of $99 (or whatever amount for Canadians), I will have 110-120 points every year.
> 
> 1. If I combine all deposits for year 2012 to obtain say 110 points, I will have 2 years from the date of combining to use, not from the date of unit usage. *YES. The combine date trumps the usual expiry date.*
> 
> 2. If I have say 40 points left from 2012 and in 2013, can I combine the 110 points in 2013 with 40 points in 2012?  Sounds like I can. *YES*. *As long as you combine while credits are "live" you can combine any year on deposit with any other year on deposit and the new expiry date will be 2 years from the combine date. This is a way to "borrow" from future years or extend credits that you don't have time/desire to use within what would have been their normal use period.*
> 
> 3. If yes to 2, will I have 150 points to use within 2 years from 2013?  Or, 40 2012 points will expire in 2014 and 110 2013 points will expire in 2015. *It's 2 years from the combine date for the whole ball of combined credits.*
> 
> 4. If I have 150 points to use within 2 years from 2013, I don't have to worry about expiry, since every time I combine, I will give the new combined points a life of 2 years.  Am I right or wrong? *Your are right*.



Of course this is how it works now and things may change not only in the distant future but in the near future as RCI sees where they made mistakes and need to close holes.


----------



## jlwquilter

You'll have to hunt this down a bit to get the exact info but:

I read that if you place on ongoing search then the internal preference thing kicks in. Someone had called their resort and the resort called RCI and that was the answer given.


----------



## DocPepsi

A CSR had mentioned something similar to me.  Basically, your priority is only in place when a new timeshare is deposited - RCI will automatically go through all the ongoing searches, and those who are part of an internal preference that have the ongoing search open the longest will get the new unit.  Once something 'passes through' all the ongoing searches, and is open to everyone (including Rentals), then that internal preference no longer is a factor.


----------



## MichaelColey

pbenham said:


> I was concerned that at my home resort (Smuggs) I was not able to see any weeks with trade value above that of my float weeks. Clearly this would be a major change since I have often traded back into Smuggs with lesser value (color) weeks.
> 
> I called Smuggs owner services, who in turn called their RCI contact. Here is what I was told – *“One will not see any weeks of higher trade value by doing a “quick search”, but when an Ongoing Search is initiated there is functionality built into the system that does give owners some sort of priority when trading back into their home resort”.*
> 
> I have not tested this yet, but am curious to see if anyone is able to verify this.


 


Maple_Leaf said:


> I have always used the exchange priority within the same resort to trade from a pink (early) September week to a red July week in Ontario cottage country. I've done it successfully for 7 consecutive summers. Is this strategy kaput under Points Lite?


 


jlwquilter said:


> You'll have to hunt this down a bit to get the exact info but:
> 
> I read that if you place on ongoing search then the internal preference thing kicks in. Someone had called their resort and the resort called RCI and that was the answer given.


 


DocPepsi said:


> A CSR had mentioned something similar to me. Basically, your priority is only in place when a new timeshare is deposited - RCI will automatically go through all the ongoing searches, and those who are part of an internal preference that have the ongoing search open the longest will get the new unit. Once something 'passes through' all the ongoing searches, and is open to everyone (including Rentals), then that internal preference no longer is a factor.


This has been my observation as well.  Previously, home group (and resort) preference would let you exchange into weeks that took a higher trading power than what your deposit had.  (I have a screen print of what I could see the day before the downtime for the upgrade, and I could only see about half as much after the new site came online.)  Now, it sounds like you don't get more trading power, but you can "jump the line" in ongoing searches instead.  I liked it better the other way.


----------



## rhonda

Cathyb said:


> Grand Pacific Resorts own 5-6 different places.  I wonder if the 'internal' priority given those owners will work as it has in the past and how this new value system will work with that???


I've been wondering the same thing this week.  I figured I'd bring up the question next spring at the GPP annual meeting.  Now, in my opinion, is too early to ask. I'm hoping my next March/April things will be sufficiently stable to get a credible answer.


----------



## pbenham

*Internal Exchange through RCI new program*

A source at RCI told me the following - *I can confirm that there is a priority for internal exchanges only during an Ongoing Search and only if you have the correct trading power. In other words, first you have to have enough trading power, then it matches to internal members over non-internal members.*

My reply was the following - *By saying "you have to have the correct trading power" does that mean that one merely jumps ahead in the queue? In the past I have traded back into Smuggs several times, using lesser colored weeks, and I always booked several months in advance (nothing last minute). How did that occur based on your explanation?*

Here is his response - *You're right, in the past it didn't check if you had enough Trading Power for internal exchanges. I was saying that now it does.*

It seems that I will no longer be able trade into my home resort during prime season, using a single float week.  :annoyed:

I have set up an Ongoing Search to test this scenario.  I am not very optimistic...


----------



## MichaelColey

> Here is his response - *You're right, in the past it didn't check if you had enough Trading Power for internal exchanges. I was saying that now it does.*


It's not that it didn't check the trading power before.  It did.  It just gave a "boost".  You could only trade up within the group so far.

Before the upgrade, I was able to confirm that there was one home group deposit that my lowest trader from within the group couldn't see.  (A higher trader in the group could see it.)  Many of the units I could see with those traders wasn't visible to an even higher trader from a different group.


----------



## Miss Marty

*Combining Deposits*

Example:

Nov 15th 
or 
Nov 30th


When you combine your RCI ts deposits 
You get to extend your time by 2 years 

Now that a few of you have made that decision 

Can you tell us if the new expiration 
you received is

2 years from that date/day
2 years til the end of month


----------



## MichaelColey

It's 2 years from the end of the month, like any other deposit.


----------



## krmlaw

*where do i find weeks i have deposited with no searches against them?*

do i still click search for a vacation then the blue strip at top to open the weeks up?

my resort was going to deposit 2 weeks for me, and i just dont know where to look for them now!

thanks!


----------



## krmlaw

and can anyone get into their ongoing searches now?


----------



## travelguy

krmlaw said:


> and can anyone get into their ongoing searches now?



I have two ongoing searches and I have not been able to get into them or even see them since the RCI "dark period" during the points lite website update.

I get the _spinner _either immediately or after one of my two searches shows (behind the spinner).


----------



## krmlaw

yep me too - cant get in - its a pain


----------



## MichaelColey

krmlaw said:


> do i still click search for a vacation then the blue strip at top to open the weeks up?
> 
> my resort was going to deposit 2 weeks for me, and i just dont know where to look for them now!


Several places:

1) Search and then change the search options.
2) Go to My Account and click View Trading Power Statement.
3) Go to Manage Your Deposits.  (You might have to expand the "Deposits Not Eligible to Combine" to see the ones with ongoing searches.)


----------



## FrmrVacGuide

Carolinian said:


> I wonder what this change will mean on some other RCI programs and practices.
> 
> 
> 4) VEP filters.  While the upward filter always made some sense, the downward one was always assinine.  Hopefully these have now disappeared but some of the findings on availibility that some have posted have suggested they may still be in place.



I signed up just to explain this to you.  I used to read your posts when I was employed at RCI, simply to understand the mindset of some of the members I spoke to who seemed chronically unhappy.

The reason for having the downward filter might seem simplistic, but if you had to take phone calls on the weekend at RCI, you would understand after one or two shifts.  They do it to prevent owners of Gold Crown properties calling in to complain about their units.  You would be amazed at the number of people who don't do any research on the unit they are booking.  If I had a dollar for every time I saw or heard of a member freaking out about the Banyan Club in Oahu, I would be a richer man.  The reviews are quite frank, and most vacation guides will do anything possible to steer members from that resort.

It is for those situations that RCI has the trade down "block" in place.  It creates too many problems, wastes phone time, and makes members unhappy.


----------



## bellesgirl

FrmrVacGuide said:


> ...
> It is for those situations that RCI has the trade down "block" in place.  It creates too many problems, wastes phone time, and makes members unhappy.


Now that there is more transparency, wouldn't it be apparent to people that they are trading down?  If your resort had 40 credits and the one you get costs 6, wouldn't that be a clue?  I know that I have been annoyed with the VEP filter in the past, but I have not noticed it so much recently. Has it been relaxed?


----------



## FrmrVacGuide

bellesgirl said:


> Now that there is more transparency, wouldn't it be apparent to people that they are trading down?  If your resort had 40 credits and the one you get costs 6, wouldn't that be a clue?  I know that I have been annoyed with the VEP filter in the past, but I have not noticed it so much recently. Has it been relaxed?



I don't work there anymore, and haven't had a chance to ask friends that still work there about that particular piece of the new system.  I'm still trying to figure out what to deposit for myself.  We own through Blue Green, and their website is more frustrating than RCI's.  

I wouldn't be surprised if they went either way on the filter.  You would think that people would have been able to figure it out before, as RCI never removed negative reviews of resorts on the website.  We complained about the old reviews for Summer Bay in Vegas that were discussing the resort before it was bought by a different company and renovated that were still up.  Of course, it did mean that members didn't want it as much, so employees were able to get a great place to stay when they wanted to go to Vegas.


----------



## Maple_Leaf

*Thanks for the info...*



FrmrVacGuide said:


> I signed up just to explain this to you.  I used to read your posts when I was employed at RCI, simply to understand the mindset of some of the members I spoke to who seemed chronically unhappy.
> 
> The reason for having the downward filter might seem simplistic, but if you had to take phone calls on the weekend at RCI, you would understand after one or two shifts.  They do it to prevent owners of Gold Crown properties calling in to complain about their units.  You would be amazed at the number of people who don't do any research on the unit they are booking.  If I had a dollar for every time I saw or heard of a member freaking out about the Banyan Club in Oahu, I would be a richer man.  The reviews are quite frank, and most vacation guides will do anything possible to steer members from that resort.
> 
> It is for those situations that RCI has the trade down "block" in place.  It creates too many problems, wastes phone time, and makes members unhappy.



C'mon.  Tell the truth.  Is there really a "Frustrate Carolinian" subroutine in the RCI Weeks software application?:rofl:


----------



## FrmrVacGuide

Maple_Leaf said:


> C'mon.  Tell the truth.  Is there really a "Frustrate Carolinian" subroutine in the RCI Weeks software application?:rofl:



RCI was smart enough to put a mute button on every phone for a reason.  While swearing is a termination offense, it only counts if you are heard.


----------



## rpennisi

*another new twist*

Before buying Mayan Palace timeshares, I used to go on RCI (from another ts ownership) and buy Extra Vacations to mayan resort properties.  Then, they instituted one in 4 rules, so I had to buy MP and did buy 2 on ebay.  This has (had) worked well bec I would use one week and its accompanying fair trade week, for a 2 week stay...and split and deposit the 2nd 2 bedroom unit in RCI for 2 trades.  I could trade into MP and Grand Mayan.  The rules at the bottom of the select available weeks page stated that mayan owners had to bank mayan to use mayan.
For next Feb/March, I have booked 2 Grand Mayan weeks using 2 MP deposits.  Now, my MP deposits will not trade for GM, but my other weeks will.
I called RCI yesterday, eventually was switched to a mayan rep, and was told I could not trade for GM with MP bec it was an upgrade.  To make matters worse, she said I could not trade down for Sea Garden either.  Now, MP can only be traded for MP....which is new to me.
But the system will allow me to trade my Sheraton Buganvilia and Poconos Shawnee to trade for MP, GM and SG...very strange...new rules.


----------



## toby9116

rpennisi said:


> Before buying Mayan Palace timeshares, I used to go on RCI (from another ts ownership) and buy Extra Vacations to mayan resort properties.  Then, they instituted one in 4 rules, so I had to buy MP and did buy 2 on ebay.  This has (had) worked well bec I would use one week and its accompanying fair trade week, for a 2 week stay...and split and deposit the 2nd 2 bedroom unit in RCI for 2 trades.  I could trade into MP and Grand Mayan.  The rules at the bottom of the select available weeks page stated that mayan owners had to bank mayan to use mayan.
> For next Feb/March, I have booked 2 Grand Mayan weeks using 2 MP deposits.  Now, my MP deposits will not trade for GM, but my other weeks will.
> I called RCI yesterday, eventually was switched to a mayan rep, and was told I could not trade for GM with MP bec it was an upgrade.  To make matters worse, she said I could not trade down for Sea Garden either.  Now, MP can only be traded for MP....which is new to me.
> But the system will allow me to trade my Sheraton Buganvilia and Poconos Shawnee to trade for MP, GM and SG...very strange...new rules.



The rules at the bottom state a Mayan owner must deposit a week. It does not specify a Mayan week. As a Mayan owner I have been using a Arizona studio for the past few years to trade into GM. As a Mayan owner you are not limited by 1 in 4 rule but can not use last call or extra vacations.


----------



## rpennisi

pkfox said:


> The rules at the bottom state a Mayan owner must deposit a week. It does not specify a Mayan week. As a Mayan owner I have been using a Arizona studio for the past few years to trade into GM. As a Mayan owner you are not limited by 1 in 4 rule but can not use last call or extra vacations.


Jim,
I know I am not affected anymore by the 1/5 rule, and I know I can't use last call or extra vacations, but I don't understand or believe they mean:

_Important: Mayan owners traveling to Mayan must deposit a week to exchange, Extra vacations to Mayan are not allowed.
_
that a Mayan owner must deposit a week and it doesn't have to be MP.  I interpret it to mean a *Mayan week*.  Of course you have to deposit a week, how else can you trade if you don't deposit a week??


----------



## toby9116

It means you must exchange you can not use extra or last call.


----------



## rpennisi

*oops*



pkfox said:


> It means you must exchange you can not use extra or last call.



My apologies Jim, I now see your point...
Ron


----------



## Rene McDaniel

Well, I decided to give RCI a call this afternoon because I wanted to get a few questions answered.

* HOME RESORT PREFERENCE*
Like others who have posted previously, I was told that it only puts you ahead of non-owners in line, but that *you must have enough trade power for the trade*.  So, if the week I deposit is even 1 credit less than the exchange I am trying to make -- I was told it would not happen without combining points.  

We enjoy our home resort, but it's a real cat-fight to get summer weeks.  Unfortunately, it's a floating week resort and everybody wants summer. (All units are gone within the 1st five minutes on reservation call-in days)  So, it's always been nice that on the years we called the resort 20 different times, and never got a week -- we could deposit the best week we could get, pay the RCI fee and exchange back in the following summer.  But there's no way for that to happen now. RCI is saying they won't let you back into your own resort during the summer (or peak season), like they used to, unless you have the new required point value.  

Okay, what sucks the most about this ---  is that I own a red/high season week at this resort.  I am not a shoulder season owner trying to trade into a higher season than I purchased.  I purchased a red, high season summer week.  So, I have a real issue with RCI thinking that I should spend 2 weeks worth of maintenance fees, plus all of their fees -- for 1 week of exchange back to where I already own.  ($750+$750+$99+$189 = $1,788) for 1 week of vacation?  Are they insane?  Or, do they just think I am really, really stupid?  Did I mention that you can rent a summer week at my resort for 1/2 of that price ($850) on Redweek?   And forget all this "change back" business.  It's a moot point when you've got kids & can only travel when school's out. 

Maybe the November 12th change may not have affected my trade power, but it certainly killed my ability to exchange back into my home resort during peak times.  They also killed uptrades.  If you want an uptrade to a larger unit now, you're going to have to pay the points for it. One by one,  RCI's endless quest for ever-increasing corporate profits, is killing many of the advantages of owning a timeshare.  

Please excuse my rant, but I am not a happy camper!

--- Rene


----------



## FrmrVacGuide

Rene McDaniel said:


> We enjoy our home resort, but it's a real cat-fight to get summer weeks.  Unfortunately, it's a floating week resort and everybody wants summer. (All units are gone within the 1st five minutes on reservation call-in days)  So, it's always been nice that on the years we called the resort 20 different times, and never got a week -- we could deposit the best week we could get, pay the RCI fee and exchange back in the following summer.  But there's no way for that to happen now. RCI is saying they won't let you back into your own resort during the summer (or peak season), like they used to, unless you have new required point value.
> 
> Okay, what sucks the most about this ---  is that I own a red/high season week at this resort.  I am not a shoulder season owner trying to trade into a higher season than I purchased.  I purchased a red, high season summer week.  So, I have a real issue with RCI thinking that I should spend 2 weeks worth of maintenance fees, plus all of their fees -- for 1 week of exchange back to where I already own.  ($750+$750+$99+$189 = $1,788) for 1 week of vacation?  Are they insane?  Or, do they just think I am really, really stupid?
> 
> --- Rene



It sounds more like they closed a loophole that you were able to take advantage of unfairly.  

I think the question is, why don't you have preference when making the reservation through your home resort?  If you bought such a high value week, it would seem that the resort should be the one giving you preference.

The way I've always understood the mission of RCI is that they are built to allow you to trade into a different resort from where you own.  Being able to trade into a different week at your resort is simply a by-product of that.

As far as the value in RCI, if you have a high red summer week, what week are you looking for that has a higher cost then what you are being given?


----------



## MichaelColey

Home group priority (the ability to trade up) is a feature that the resort groups negotiated with RCI.  Here's an excerpt from a 2005 letter from RCI to one of my resorts, with the resort group name removed and emphasis mine:



> [Group] owners requesting an internal exchange at their home resort will continue to have priority over RCI members that do not own a [Group] property, *furthermore exchange priority ranking includes when a blue week [Group] owner is requesting a red week at their home resort*.



I have a feeling that the resort groups will be working to get this back, once they hear that it's been removed.


----------



## Rene McDaniel

My responses are located below the comments/questions.
--- Rene




FrmrVacGuide said:


> "*It sounds more like they closed a loophole that you were able to take advantage of unfairly.*"
> 
> Unfair to whom?  The people who don't own at my resort, or pay maintenance fees like I do?  Preferences for owners vs. exchangers is touted by every resort.  It's one of the big reasons people buy timeshares.  I've never met a timeshare salesman who didn't mention the advantages of "owner preference" & the ability to exchange back into your home resort.
> 
> *"I think the question is, why don't you have preference when making the reservation through your home resort?  If you bought such a high value week, it would seem that the resort should be the one giving you preference."*
> 
> My resort apparently made a larger chunk of the calendar year red than was truly warranted, and the off-season/white weeks smaller. Unfortunately, you don't find out these types of things until after you purchase.  Ours was not the only resort to do this, as it allows the developer to sell more expensive red weeks.  But even putting that issue aside, what would you define as summer?  Most people would say "June, July & August", right?  I would. 3 Months, roughly 12 weeks.
> 
> But for my resort, RCI has given the highest trade power to only the middle 6 summer weeks.  The last week of June which includes 4th of July, all of July, and the 1st week of August.  That's it.  First 3 weeks of June & last 3 weeks of August are valued at substantially less, so quite a drop. Sept 1 - May 31 are much lower, unless they have a holiday. Trade power has actually been this way for several years now.  So even though the numbers were previously unpublished, owners knew they needed these peak weeks to get good trade power with RCI.  The cat fight to get those weeks will be only worse now (and at many floating resorts).  But I don't blame RCI for that.  I think that publishing trade power is a good thing.  Where I strongly disagree with RCI is their narrow definition of summer as basically "6 weeks".  Summer is a season - June, July & August - not just July!
> 
> *"The way I've always understood the mission of RCI is that they are built to allow you to trade into a different resort from where you own.  Being able to trade into a different week at your resort is simply a by-product of that."*
> 
> We have made some nice exchanges through RCI to lots of exotic and interesting places, but we have more than one week & also enjoy going to our home resort.  Is there anything wrong with that?  As long as I'm paying an annual membership fee + the $189 RCI exchange fee.  Why would RCI care whether I want to have an inexpensive drive-to vacation to my home resort, or fly 3,000 miles to my exchange.  Either way, RCI get's paid.
> 
> But the real, true answer for why I often trade back into my own resort is...  *I can't get what I want from RCI*...  Luckily for me, I followed the TUG rule & bought at a resort I like.  Good thing, too.  Because there have been several times when we have given up after having ongoing searches for 12-18 months, and just gone back to our home resort.
> 
> *"As far as the value in RCI, if you have a high red summer week, what week are you looking for that has a higher cost then what you are being given?"*
> 
> Well, that's a little bit personal.  But I will say that we called  this summer trying to get a peak week, but could only get the RCI "shoulder season" instead - last week of August.  We are 18 points short of what it would take to exchange back in while our kids are out of school for summer.  There is no way I'm paying 2 maintenance fees +$189 + $99 combo fees to get back in ($1,788 total).  So, I'll probably just rent my week for $850, then take that money & rent someone else's week at the resort for $850.  Because guess what?  All the summer weeks there rent for roughly the same amount. All of June, all of July, and all of August.


----------



## Carolinian

FrmrVacGuide said:


> It sounds more like they closed a loophole that you were able to take advantage of unfairly.
> 
> I think the question is, why don't you have preference when making the reservation through your home resort?  If you bought such a high value week, it would seem that the resort should be the one giving you preference.
> 
> The way I've always understood the mission of RCI is that they are built to allow you to trade into a different resort from where you own.  Being able to trade into a different week at your resort is simply a by-product of that.
> 
> As far as the value in RCI, if you have a high red summer week, what week are you looking for that has a higher cost then what you are being given?



Not all resorts are floating.  For fixed week resorts, the HOA could not assign a member someone else's week.  Yet fixed week resorts also have had home resort preferences.

This is just one more example that RCI was lying through its teeth when it claimed it was not changing trading power when it moved to Points Lite.


----------



## Carolinian

So, what you are saying is that RCI designed this rule to pander to the witless drones who do not research their vacations while goosestepping all over the savvy travellers who know what they are doing?  Great attitude!

It seems to me that there would be an easy compromise, and one several Tuggers have suggested over the years.  That is to fax a form where the exchangers acknowledges that it is to a lower class of unit and waives any right to object.  Let them sign it and fax it back and you should not get any whining, while still letting savvy travellers make their own decisions without RCI dictating things that make no sense.

The RCI employee I wish we had here on comment on RCI's doings is our old friend Bootleg.




FrmrVacGuide said:


> I signed up just to explain this to you.  I used to read your posts when I was employed at RCI, simply to understand the mindset of some of the members I spoke to who seemed chronically unhappy.
> 
> The reason for having the downward filter might seem simplistic, but if you had to take phone calls on the weekend at RCI, you would understand after one or two shifts.  They do it to prevent owners of Gold Crown properties calling in to complain about their units.  You would be amazed at the number of people who don't do any research on the unit they are booking.  If I had a dollar for every time I saw or heard of a member freaking out about the Banyan Club in Oahu, I would be a richer man.  The reviews are quite frank, and most vacation guides will do anything possible to steer members from that resort.
> 
> It is for those situations that RCI has the trade down "block" in place.  It creates too many problems, wastes phone time, and makes members unhappy.


----------



## JudyS

rpennisi said:


> Before buying Mayan Palace timeshares, I used to go on RCI (from another ts ownership) and buy Extra Vacations to mayan resort properties.  Then, they instituted one in 4 rules, so I had to buy MP...


Extra Vacations can have 1-in-4 rules?  I thought 1-in-4 applied only to exchanges, not rentals. Is this a special Grupo Mayan rule? 





FrmrVacGuide said:


> The reason for having the downward filter might seem simplistic...They do it to prevent owners of Gold Crown properties calling in to complain about their units....
> It is for those situations that RCI has the trade down "block" in place.  It creates too many problems, wastes phone time, and makes members unhappy.





bellesgirl said:


> Now that there is more transparency, wouldn't it be apparent to people that they are trading down?  If your resort had 40 credits and the one you get costs 6, wouldn't that be a clue? ...


But trading power has nothing to do with VEP. Lots of resorts have high TP and low VEP, or vice-versa.

I own at a rather plain resort where most units don't even have a tub, just a shower. The Trading Power is 38 during the summer. I can just see what Gold Crown owners would say: "I traded my luxury unit with two jacuzzis for this dump that doesn't even have a bathtub?!?!?" (Except _now_, they'd probably say: "I traded two years worth of credits at my luxury unit with two jacuzzis for this dump that doesn't even have a bathtub?!?!?") 



FrmrVacGuide said to Carolinian:


FrmrVacGuide said:


> I signed up just to explain this to you.  I used to read your posts when I was employed at RCI, simply to understand the mindset of some of the members I spoke to who seemed chronically unhappy....


While reading Steve's (Carolinian's) posts these past days, I can't help wondering why he hates RCI so much. I *think* it's primarily because he feels RCI should do more to help out HOAs who have way off-season weeks that they need to deal with. The strange thing is, the new, transparent trading system makes it clear that RCI *is* subsidizing the way off-season weeks. 

Ok, Steve, if you could make just one change at RCI, what would it be? And would you be happy with RCI then?


----------



## Carolinian

The one change I would make at RCI is to bring back the Crystal de Hahn system (founder of RCI and owner until Cendant bought it).

No, RCI does not have an obligation to ''sudsidize'' off season owners, but they have a moral obligation based on the sales assistance materials they long provided to developers to maintain the 45 day window as something that gives value to the off season weeks.  This is not giving them a trade up, as last minute inventory in the leisure travel industry is distressed and devalued inventory.  Cendant policies over the last several years have diluted the 45 day window value to the off season owners.  Renting it to non-members and allowing Points members access to last minute Weeks inventory are two of the biggest things that have done this.  Points Lite adds even more competition for the off season owners.  RCI is really sandbagging the HOA's here because now the developers have moved on and the HOA's have no sales force to resell these weeks on any other theory.  The developers cannot be blamed because they were merely pushing something that RCI itself was heavily pushing in its promo materials.

That is my big issue when wearing my former HOA board member hat.

As an individual member, my biggest problems with RCI are:
1) Their rental program to the general public, and
2) Their allowing Points members access to Weeks inventory, especially at the unfair and dishonest crossover grid rates
and now:
3) Their imposition of a points type program on Weeks, coupled with dishonest valuations of many resorts and resort areas in that change


----------



## quince

*double dip costs?*

If I pay $99 to combine (and extend) two expiring weeks, do I again have to pay a combining fee in the future if I have leftover points once I've used the combined points for an exchange?


----------



## jlwquilter

quince said:


> If I pay $99 to combine (and extend) two expiring weeks, do I again have to pay a combining fee in the future if I have leftover points once I've used the combined points for an exchange?



You'd only have to pay another combining fee on those leftover points after exchanging IF you want to combine them with another deposit in order to use them to get a more expensive exchange or in order to extend their use date another 2 years.

People should keep in mind that it may not always be worth the $99 to save a few credits, expecially if the only way to do it is to deposit a new week way early. You'll lose use time on the new deposit and you may not get the most credits for the new deposit either.


----------



## bnoble

> I have a feeling that the resort groups will be working to get this back, once they hear that it's been removed.


Maybe.  I can't imagine Wyndham really cares if its garden variety (resale) owners can get cheap trades back into Wyndham properties through RCI.  I suspect Wyndham would rather have their owners get discounts by virtue of the (ridiculously overpriced) VIP program.


----------



## rickandcindy23

FrmrVacGuide said:


> I signed up just to explain this to you.  I used to read your posts when I was employed at RCI, simply to understand the mindset of some of the members I spoke to who seemed chronically unhappy.
> 
> The reason for having the downward filter might seem simplistic, but if you had to take phone calls on the weekend at RCI, you would understand after one or two shifts.  They do it to prevent owners of Gold Crown properties calling in to complain about their units.  You would be amazed at the number of people who don't do any research on the unit they are booking.  If I had a dollar for every time I saw or heard of a member freaking out about the Banyan Club in Oahu, I would be a richer man.  The reviews are quite frank, and most vacation guides will do anything possible to steer members from that resort.
> 
> It is for those situations that RCI has the trade down "block" in place.  It creates too many problems, wastes phone time, and makes members unhappy.



I definitely get it.  It hurts the ordinary resorts to have people with high expectations to stay there, too.

We own at a very ordinary ski resort, in Winter Park, CO, not in Summit or Eagle counties, where people want to be.  Needs some new furniture, needs some paint and carpet, very cheap board of directors, etc.  Cannot get them to do anything really substantial to create a quality unit.  They won't assess, won't increase fees by more than $25 per year, we have a huge vacancy rate, and the units just get worse every year.  

Some Hilton owners, and other high-quality resort owners, have been assigned to our resort after RCI made huge mistakes with availability.  

For example, RCI assigned too many people to units in Summit County for prime ski season, especially weeks 51 and 52 last year, and had to switch those people to our resort.  We are not where they wanted to be, so we were dinged for everything on the RCI comment cards: unit quality, area, amenities, and absolutely anything they could throw at us, we suffered for it.  

We noticed the units those exchangers used for trade, while reviewing the scores, and Hiltons were in several.  I don't want Hilton owners exchanging into my resorts, not even our Summit County resort.  They are too picky and don't realize that they are hurting US when they give us all bad scores, simply because the unit quality is not what they expect.  

Take your ridiculous expectations of flatscreens and plush furniture to an equally nice place to what you own.  Stay away from podunk, dinky little resorts that have limited amenities, no activities and average accommdations.  Don't take a replacement week in another county that you don't want and then gripe about it.  

Actual comments:

"We were told we had a unit in Breckenridge, but RCI overbooked, so we were stuck here, in this awful "resort".  It smells and has nothing to do.  The hot tubs are cold.  The shuttle that takes you to the ski resort doesn't come by quickly enough.  It's boring here, if you don't ski.  On the bright side, if there is one, there is a crockpot in the unit that saved us time and money buying food in the evenings."  This was a Hilton owner.

"This is no where near where we wanted to be for a new years week of skiing.  this place sucks."  Another Hilton owner.

"The unit quality is lacking for sure.  We haven't been so disappointed in our lives.  RCI gave us back our week of deposit, and that is the only right thing to do." Orange Lake owner.

In Summit County, our resort has few amenities, but we do have private one-car garages, private hot tubs on each deck, and a full-sized washer and dryer, and 2 1/2 baths.  Yet the exchangers actually say we have no amenities.  How does RCI define amenities?  Pools, clubhouses, exercise facilities, etc.  Our "resort" doesn't have a pool, and it only has tennis courts, and a playground, and BBQ grills.  That's it.  So I guess Hilton owners think that is NO amenities.


----------



## FrmrVacGuide

Rene McDaniel said:


> My responses are located below the comments/questions.
> --- Rene



You still get put ahead of non-owners, as you said in your original post.  That would seem to mean that you are given preference.  

If your resort made too much of the year red, that would be something you need to take up with them.  RCI can't really do anything to fix that for you.  If they went through and covered for all of the mistakes that resorts make, they would be making even more of you mad.

My understanding of "summer" at RCI is that it is all based on travel volume.  Because of the ever-shrinking time off for kids, that window has condensed.  If you want to see that change, I would suggest pressuring your elected officials to change the laws and makes schools start after Labor Day.

I've heard "I can't get what I want" from so many people that I beg you to forgive me when if I get a bit annoyed.  Most of the people that I helped got the vacation they wanted.  Of course, there was the woman who canceled her RCI account because we "never got her what she wanted" and had been to SW Florida four of five years.  

I'm sorry, but to have a factual discussion about what you are trying to do, it would be necessary for me to know what you are trading, how far in advance you deposit it, where you were looking to travel, and when you started looking.


----------



## FrmrVacGuide

Carolinian said:


> Not all resorts are floating.  For fixed week resorts, the HOA could not assign a member someone else's week.  Yet fixed week resorts also have had home resort preferences.
> 
> This is just one more example that RCI was lying through its teeth when it claimed it was not changing trading power when it moved to Points Lite.



I thought RCI was pretty upfront about the fact that TP does change over time.  Why are you surprised that when they do the biggest change ever to the Weeks program, that they would update all of the trading power to reflect current market value?


----------



## FrmrVacGuide

Carolinian said:


> So, what you are saying is that RCI designed this rule to pander to the witless drones who do not research their vacations while goosestepping all over the savvy travellers who know what they are doing?  Great attitude!
> 
> It seems to me that there would be an easy compromise, and one several Tuggers have suggested over the years.  That is to fax a form where the exchangers acknowledges that it is to a lower class of unit and waives any right to object.  Let them sign it and fax it back and you should not get any whining, while still letting savvy travellers make their own decisions without RCI dictating things that make no sense.
> 
> The RCI employee I wish we had here on comment on RCI's doings is our old friend Bootleg.



What company doesn't create their products and programs to pander to the lowest common denominator?  As someone who does all of the research, it can still work to your benefit.  The vast majority of RCI members that I've dealt with want their exchange to be as simple as possible.

For example, I've spent the last couple of days going through Blue Green's website finding available week long reservations and then looking up what I'll get from RCI for that, to find my best option.  Most Blue Green owners I talked to on the phone just called BG, said they wanted to deposit a week with RCI and that was it.  They didn't even know that they could request a week at a specific resort to deposit.  These are people who knew that different resorts had different trading power.  Keep in mind, BG owners can reserve at The Suites at Hershey, Lodge Alley Inn (Charleston, SC), and a place in Aruba.

They did try something similar to that for awhile.  It was done on a small scale, and the people involved still complained.


----------



## Rene McDaniel

FrmrVacGuide said:


> You still get put ahead of non-owners, as you said in your original post.  That would seem to mean that you are given preference.



FrmrVacGuide,
Yes, but I only have that preference IF, and only IF I have enough points -- which I would NOT HAVE, if I wasn't able to nab one of those 6 peak weeks!

*You don't seem to be understanding that this is a really huge deal for owners.*  There are 52 weeks in a year.  At my resort (and many others) RCI is designating only 6 summer weeks as "peak".  Owners of the remaining 46 weeks of the year will receive less points, so they with these new changes they will have NO WAY to make a week-for-week exchange back into their owned resort during those prime weeks.

How can you not see or comprehend how this negatively impacts owners, and is a HUGE DEAL?  Until Nov. 12th, I could deposit my week into RCI, run an ongoing search and try to get one of the exchange possibilities my family was interested in.  But if it didn't work out -- oh well, we can just go back to our home resort next summer.  Not the end of the world.   (Mind you, there were no guarantees on this -- but usually enough people spacebank those peak summer weeks, that most owners had the ability to pay the additional $189 RCI exchange fee trade back in during summer.) 

But with the Nov. 12 changes, if I deposit my late August week and am not able to find an exchange my family is willing to accept -- *I have now lost the ability to trade back into summer at my owned resort, on a week-for-week exchange.*  I'm sorry, but how can you NOT see that this is a purely financial issue.  Who would want to pay 2 maintenance fees + the RCI annual membership fee + the $189 exchange fee + the new $99 combining weeks fee?  That's more than DOUBLE the amount of money that we would have paid prior to the Nov. 12 RCI changes!  Hello?  What's fair about this?

What about the resort owners who have own only 1 timeshare week during those 42 non-peak weeks of the year?  They have nothing to combine.  Now they will NEVER have the opportunity to exchange back into their resort during peak summer weeks. 

--- Rene


----------



## PeelBoy

I have another fact question.  The strategy thread talks about a cap of 60 points for combining points.  Is that true?  If so, this combining is good for blue weeks or left over points only.


----------



## FrmrVacGuide

Rene McDaniel said:


> FrmrVacGuide,
> Yes, but I only have that preference IF, and only IF I have enough points -- which I would NOT HAVE, if I wasn't able to nab one of those 6 peak weeks!
> 
> *You don't seem to be understanding that this is a really huge deal for owners.*  There are 52 weeks in a year.  At my resort (and many others) RCI is designating only 6 summer weeks as "peak".  Owners of the remaining 46 weeks of the year will receive less points, so they with these new changes they will have NO WAY to make a week-for-week exchange back into their owned resort during those prime weeks.
> 
> How can you not see or comprehend how this negatively impacts owners, and is a HUGE DEAL?  Until Nov. 12th, I could deposit my week into RCI, run an ongoing search and try to get one of the exchange possibilities my family was interested in.  But if it didn't work out -- oh well, we can just go back to our home resort next summer.  Not the end of the world.   (Mind you, there were no guarantees on this -- but usually enough people spacebank those peak summer weeks, that most owners had the ability to pay the additional $189 RCI exchange fee trade back in during summer.)
> 
> But with the Nov. 12 changes, if I deposit my late August week and am not able to find an exchange my family is willing to accept -- *I have now lost the ability to trade back into summer at my owned resort, on a week-for-week exchange.*  I'm sorry, but how can you NOT see that this is a purely financial issue.  Who would want to pay 2 maintenance fees + the RCI annual membership fee + the $189 exchange fee + the new $99 combining weeks fee?  That's more than DOUBLE the amount of money that we would have paid prior to the Nov. 12 RCI changes!  Hello?  What's fair about this?
> 
> What about the resort owners who have own only 1 timeshare week during those 42 non-peak weeks of the year?  They have nothing to combine.  Now they will NEVER have the opportunity to exchange back into their resort during peak summer weeks.
> 
> --- Rene



The cost to trade into a unit does change over time, just as it did before.  What we are seeing now is that the ongoing search wasn't always just finding new deposits from a place.  Your search might have matched because the "cost" to get what you wanted came down to what you could afford based on your deposit.

Value and cost have always changed within the RCI system.  The difference is that now you can see it.  I actually think this is going to end up being disliked more by people who take an in-depth look at things more than the casual users.  It is going to make you feel like you have to do more work to maximize your value.  I understand that, because I'm in the same boat.

You can still run that ongoing search, so you don't know that it won't still work for you.  How do you not comprehend that the only real thing that has changed system wide is that you can see what you couldn't see before?  They've also added the ability to get "change" back.  Of course, during this change, they've made their normal trading power adjustments that they make every year based on supply and demand.  Again, that happened every year.

RCI is designating "peak" weeks based on what the historical numbers are showing them.  Yes, I'm sure we all wished that the date range was longer, but sadly, that isn't the case.  I still think the issue you really have is with your resort.  Why would they sell weeks at a different cost without a guarantee for people that paid the extra money to do that internal reservation?  I've always been a believer, even before I worked at RCI, that people that want to stay at their home resort should do that internally.  It just doesn't seem practical to do it through an exchange company.  Obviously, fixed weeks are a different story, but that is another topic.

I guess what I'm saying, is I don't understand why your resort is doing it the way they are.  Maybe if I understood that, I would understand why you can't use them to get your home resort reservation.


----------



## Conan

Rene McDaniel said:


> But with the Nov. 12 changes, if I deposit my late August week and am not able to find an exchange my family is willing to accept -- *I have now lost the ability to trade back into summer at my owned resort, on a week-for-week exchange.*


 
If in the real world a late August week has less demand or more supply, why should it exchange one-to-one with an early August week?

And if RCI or an internal exchange system formerly allowed that, why is it wrong for them to change?


----------



## bnoble

> The strategy thread talks about a cap of 60 points for combining points. Is that true?


No, at least two different people have combined to larger totals.


----------



## sandkastle4966

Renee - I fully understand your arguement and your frustration.....however I think the "fault" is with the resorts not RCI.  Resorts have set up floating weeks in a "red" season pool that is too broad - June 1 - Aug 30.  Reality is that there is Pink and HOT RED with HOT being late June - first week august.  RCI recognizes this.  So does wyndham in their point evaluation.  Mid/late august is far easier to get into Alexandria than any time in late June/july.  

You have actually already expressed this - you dont want late august - which you can "more easily" get than the july weeks that go for the first 5 minutes of reserve day.  Why should RCI give late August the same trades value as July weeks, when what more folks really want is July?  

I think RCI has got it right.......

(i also own a floating summer - I will be on that phone every day at 8 am....)


----------



## elaine

*my week 32 has a different value if it is before Aug. 10*

I noticed that my week 32 summer NC beach week has a different value if it starts prior to Aug. 10 (in 2012) vs. after Aug. 10 (in 2011). When arrival is Aug. 12, it gets the same trading power (24 points) as the next 4 weeks. When arrival is prior to Aug. 10, it gets the same as July weeks (32 points).  So, yes, RCI is confirming what many on TUG have said for years: "summer" is weeks 24-32 with weeks 26-30 being red hot. But I was still shocked to see my week 32 lumped with a week 35 and 36.


----------



## krmlaw

*UGGH ongoing search ...*

i still cant see or modify - anyone else?


----------



## janej

Elaine,

I think it has something to do with the location of the resort.  At least, the TP of my two weeks in PA and NY do not drop until after labor day.  RCI either knows that local schools do not start until after labor day or they have some historic demand data supporting the decision.


----------



## FrmrVacGuide

janej,

They do keep track of the historical data.  That is what they have used to determine the trading power.    I contend that they use too wide of a range to draw their average from.  I don't know the specifics, but I would think they would get a better data set by actually using a smaller amount of years to come up with the average.  That way they would actually be tracking useful and timely vacation habits.


----------



## dundey

Rene McDaniel said:


> Well, I decided to give RCI a call this afternoon because I wanted to get a few questions answered.
> 
> * HOME RESORT PREFERENCE*
> Like others who have posted previously, I was told that it only puts you ahead of non-owners in line, but that *you must have enough trade power for the trade*.  So, if the week I deposit is even 1 credit less than the exchange I am trying to make -- I was told it would not happen without combining points.
> 
> We enjoy our home resort, but it's a real cat-fight to get summer weeks.  Unfortunately, it's a floating week resort and everybody wants summer. (All units are gone within the 1st five minutes on reservation call-in days)  So, it's always been nice that on the years we called the resort 20 different times, and never got a week -- we could deposit the best week we could get, pay the RCI fee and exchange back in the following summer.  But there's no way for that to happen now. RCI is saying they won't let you back into your own resort during the summer (or peak season), like they used to, unless you have the new required point value.
> 
> Okay, what sucks the most about this ---  is that I own a red/high season week at this resort.  I am not a shoulder season owner trying to trade into a higher season than I purchased.  I purchased a red, high season summer week.  So, I have a real issue with RCI thinking that I should spend 2 weeks worth of maintenance fees, plus all of their fees -- for 1 week of exchange back to where I already own.  ($750+$750+$99+$189 = $1,788) for 1 week of vacation?  Are they insane?  Or, do they just think I am really, really stupid?  Did I mention that you can rent a summer week at my resort for 1/2 of that price ($850) on Redweek?   And forget all this "change back" business.  It's a moot point when you've got kids & can only travel when school's out.
> 
> Maybe the November 12th change may not have affected my trade power, but it certainly killed my ability to exchange back into my home resort during peak times.  They also killed uptrades.  If you want an uptrade to a larger unit now, you're going to have to pay the points for it. One by one,  RCI's endless quest for ever-increasing corporate profits, is killing many of the advantages of owning a timeshare.
> 
> Please excuse my rant, but I am not a happy camper!
> 
> --- Rene



I agree with you 100%.  We should all be running away from RCI.  Give your weeks to other exchange companies or use them yourself.  Get out of RCI while you can.

I think a lot of people are missing the point of the post.  It is not only home resort preference but also VRI preference, and I'm guessing some other groups as well.  I was always able to trade into any VRI managed resort with my VRI week if it was available.  Trading power did not matter.
THIS IS NOW GONE>

I realize many of you are happy with these changes, and there is some good, but the bottom line is that the over all value of the week exchange model continues to be eroded by RCI, and fees are getting out of hand.  Just compare their fee structure to II - big difference.
I will no longer be a member once my present membership runs out.


----------



## FrmrVacGuide

dundey said:


> I was always able to trade into any VRI managed resort with my VRI week if it was available.  Trading power did not matter.
> THIS IS NOW GONE>
> 
> I will no longer be a member once my present membership runs out.



The last part first.  Why wait until then?  Just cancel now and get a refund.

Trading power has always mattered.  The difference now is that you can see the numbers and all of the availability.  I can tell you that VRI members are wrong when they think that.  

I knew for a fact that a VRI deposit had been made, because I was tracking the account.  There had been some issues with the deposit, and I wanted to make sure it went through correctly.  Shortly after I saw it in the account, I got a call from another VRI member.  They were looking for the same thing that had just been deposited.  They couldn't pull it up.  I thought it was strange, so I checked the account it had been deposited on.  It still showed as available.  I looked for it in extra vacations to see if it had been moved to the rental pool, it wasn't there.  Then I opened up an account that I kept around because that person has better traders than most everyone else, and she kept a few on the account at all times.  She could pull it up for trade.

So, as you can see, just because you own through a group or resort, it doesn't mean that RCI was making everything available to you.  Otherwise, you would have been able to buy the bluest studio ever and gotten a super red 3 bedroom.  That obviously wasn't the case, aside from last minute things.


----------



## rpennisi

*historically speaking*



FrmrVacGuide said:


> janej,
> 
> They do keep track of the historical data.  That is what they have used to determine the trading power.    I contend that they use too wide of a range to draw their average from.  I don't know the specifics, but I would think they would get a better data set by actually using a smaller amount of years to come up with the average.  That way they would actually be tracking useful and timely vacation habits.



How about this for the use of historical data.  I have owned Shawnee River Village 2 (2 bedroom, 2 bath) and been a member of RCI since 1988.  My week is fixed 7, Presidents' Week, when we and the kids had off to go skiing.  About every 10 years or so, Presidents' Week vacation doesn't fall on week 7.  This happens in 2011, so I banked (over 9 months early) and got 13 credits.  For the year 2012, Presidents' Week is back to week 7, so now it's 21 credits if banked.

PS The "kids" still ski, we're retired. 

I agree RCI does check out historical trends pretty closely.


----------



## 5finny

*VRI preference after weeks combined?*

I have a low value VRI week  if I combine it with a non-vri resort will I lose the preference?


----------



## rpennisi

*mixed credits*

Knowing now that as a MP owner, I can't trade on RCI for a higher Grand Mayan or a lower Sea Garden (and this seems to be a new change with RCI, since I used to be able to trade across "mayans"), what happens if I combine Mayan Palace credits with my other TS credits?  Do they all become generic, or will I still be blocked by RCI from making certain Mayan trades?

My inclination is not to mix mayan palace and non mayan palace when I do combine, which I have to do to get the trades I want.  But, I would rather combine them all one time and trade from there.
Ron


----------



## dundey

FrmrVacGuide said:


> The last part first.  Why wait until then?  Just cancel now and get a refund.
> 
> Trading power has always mattered.  The difference now is that you can see the numbers and all of the availability.  I can tell you that VRI members are wrong when they think that.
> 
> I knew for a fact that a VRI deposit had been made, because I was tracking the account.  There had been some issues with the deposit, and I wanted to make sure it went through correctly.  Shortly after I saw it in the account, I got a call from another VRI member.  They were looking for the same thing that had just been deposited.  They couldn't pull it up.  I thought it was strange, so I checked the account it had been deposited on.  It still showed as available.  I looked for it in extra vacations to see if it had been moved to the rental pool, it wasn't there.  Then I opened up an account that I kept around because that person has better traders than most everyone else, and she kept a few on the account at all times.  She could pull it up for trade.
> 
> So, as you can see, just because you own through a group or resort, it doesn't mean that RCI was making everything available to you.  Otherwise, you would have been able to buy the bluest studio ever and gotten a super red 3 bedroom.  That obviously wasn't the case, aside from last minute things.



You are completely and totally wrong as far as VRI is concerned.  VRI had confirmed in the past that their weeks receive preference in RCI and that if a VRI week is available, ANY VRI on deposit will get it, unless it is taken by an ongoing search first.
As an example - I have a Lehigh week that was always one of my poorest traders when looking at what my other deposits could pull.  Yet I was able to get a Presidents Day ski week with it 2 years in a row (I will be there again this Feb.).  Not all of my other resorts could see that week, only the VRI.

And as for canceling now - I have weeks on deposit.


----------



## dundey

FrmrVacGuide, why did you pick Nov. 18, 2010 to register for TUG?


----------



## Maple_Leaf

*Resort Preference*



FrmrVacGuide said:


> So, as you can see, just because you own through a group or resort, it doesn't mean that RCI was making everything available to you.  *Otherwise, you would have been able to buy the bluest studio ever and gotten a super red 3 bedroom.*  That obviously wasn't the case, aside from last minute things.



If I remember correctly RCI put a condition of "same season" on resort preference.  So blue trades into blue, red into red.


----------



## FrmrVacGuide

dundey said:


> FrmrVacGuide, why did you pick Nov. 18, 2010 to register for TUG?



Because that was when I started looking at the website again.  I came here to see if anyone had tips for weeks to deposit from Blue Green with the system change.

I'm assuming you think that I'm an RCI plant, here to tell you everything is rainbows and butterflies, right?


----------



## JudyS

FrmrVacGuide said:


> ...  I looked for it in extra vacations to see if it had been moved to the rental pool, it wasn't there. ....


Any information on what percentage of desirable deposits were put in the rental pool?  That's always a hot topic here. 



dundey said:


> ... VRI had confirmed in the past that their weeks receive preference in RCI and that if a VRI week is available, ANY VRI on deposit will get it, unless it is taken by an ongoing search first.
> As an example - I have a Lehigh week that was always one of my poorest traders when looking at what my other deposits could pull.  Yet I was able to get a Presidents Day ski week with it 2 years in a row (I will be there again this Feb.).  Not all of my other resorts could see that week, only the VRI...


There was, at the very least, a color code restriction in the VRI trades (priority didn't work when trading up in color), as Maple Leaf said.  Almost all Lehigh weeks are red (a few are white), so your week there was probably red.


----------



## Keep Traveling

I have always consider Big Cedar Red weeks (studio) as a good deposit for Blue green, but now it also appears that christmas/new years in Orlando is a good week to deposit.

Any other finds in the BG system.

KT


----------



## FrmrVacGuide

JudyS said:


> Any information on what percentage of desirable deposits were put in the rental pool?  That's always a hot topic here.



We asked about that every now and then, and revenue management would never really give a straight answer.  Honestly, it really is less than you guys think it is.  Especially this last summer, I was seeing more and more non-timeshare resorts in that pool.  I saw more inventory that had its resort ID start with an "R" than ever before.  That stuff isn't being deposited by owners and flipped over.


----------



## Carolinian

FrmrVacGuide said:


> We asked about that every now and then, and revenue management would never really give a straight answer.  Honestly, it really is less than you guys think it is.  Especially this last summer, I was seeing more and more non-timeshare resorts in that pool.  I saw more inventory that had its resort ID start with an "R" than ever before.  That stuff isn't being deposited by owners and flipped over.



Hmmm!  Just the opposite answer from what Bootleg and Anon told us!


----------



## Carolinian

Sometimes people just give themselves away!  This is one of those times. It is RCI and NOT resorts that determine what is red time.  If you think otherwise, ask your resort to call up RCI and tell them to make more of the year red!  All it takes to see through this is common sense.  Look at any resort area and you will find all resorts have the same season.  That is NOT because they just happened to each decide on the same weeks.  It happened because RCI did the deciding.  Same with II.  They decide what weeks are red or other colors not the individual resort.  Indeed, on the OBX many years ago, RCI changed some spring and fall OBX weeks to different color codes, and, of course for the entire OBX, not just one resort.





FrmrVacGuide said:


> You still get put ahead of non-owners, as you said in your original post.  That would seem to mean that you are given preference.
> 
> If your resort made too much of the year red, that would be something you need to take up with them.  RCI can't really do anything to fix that for you.  If they went through and covered for all of the mistakes that resorts make, they would be making even more of you mad.
> 
> My understanding of "summer" at RCI is that it is all based on travel volume.  Because of the ever-shrinking time off for kids, that window has condensed.  If you want to see that change, I would suggest pressuring your elected officials to change the laws and makes schools start after Labor Day.
> 
> I've heard "I can't get what I want" from so many people that I beg you to forgive me when if I get a bit annoyed.  Most of the people that I helped got the vacation they wanted.  Of course, there was the woman who canceled her RCI account because we "never got her what she wanted" and had been to SW Florida four of five years.
> 
> I'm sorry, but to have a factual discussion about what you are trying to do, it would be necessary for me to know what you are trading, how far in advance you deposit it, where you were looking to travel, and when you started looking.


----------



## Carolinian

Current market value?  When I look at many high demand, low supply areas, that is laughable.  Oh, and I am not surprised that they changed value numbers.  There has been an ongoing battle on these boards between a group of staunch RCI defenders who swore RCI was telling the truth when they promised that the values would not change.  I was one who said that they almost assuredly would.




FrmrVacGuide said:


> I thought RCI was pretty upfront about the fact that TP does change over time.  Why are you surprised that when they do the biggest change ever to the Weeks program, that they would update all of the trading power to reflect current market value?


----------



## Carolinian

elaine said:


> I noticed that my week 32 summer NC beach week has a different value if it starts prior to Aug. 10 (in 2012) vs. after Aug. 10 (in 2011). When arrival is Aug. 12, it gets the same trading power (24 points) as the next 4 weeks. When arrival is prior to Aug. 10, it gets the same as July weeks (32 points).  So, yes, RCI is confirming what many on TUG have said for years: "summer" is weeks 24-32 with weeks 26-30 being red hot. But I was still shocked to see my week 32 lumped with a week 35 and 36.



Outer Banks Resort Rentals should not have any problem with renting that week 32 for you if RCI cheats you on deposit value.  And a week 32, whether it starts August 9 or 12 will always rent a heck of a lot quicker and for a lot more money than a week 36. RCI is way off base in lumping these together on a grid.  Just like they are way off base in lumping week 11 and week 21 together at the same value on their grid.  Published points systems seem to always involve such overaveraging.  The desirability and value of weeks increase incrementally week by week in the spring and decrease incrementally week by week in the fall.  Grids that lump lots of those weeks together but then have big jumps between weeks that are only incrementally different, like 21 and 22 do not reflect the real market.


----------



## Carolinian

janej said:


> Elaine,
> 
> I think it has something to do with the location of the resort.  At least, the TP of my two weeks in PA and NY do not drop until after labor day.  RCI either knows that local schools do not start until after labor day or they have some historic demand data supporting the decision.



The OBX has a unique situation in that Viriginia schools and North Carolina schools have different calendars, one tends to be earlier and the other later, which keeps demand up at both ends of the school season.

To protect the vacation industry, the OBX's state senator got a bill through the legislature to set a date in June that no school system in NC could run beyond and a date in August that no system could start before.


----------



## crazyhorse

*"It is RCI and NOT resorts that determine what is red time."*

I have to agree with that remark.

We have been told in the past by RCI that the demand for a week in a particular resort determines its "Colour" Red, White or Blue. This will depend upon local weather, school vacations and general desirability. Only RCI will know that demand, not the resorts.

This and other factors put together should then determine the Trading Value of a specific week in a specific apartment.

The RCI Points to Weeks exchange grids use the above colours in blocks for the Americas, Asia etc. A little odd that they don`t use the colour blocks for Europe though.


----------



## Carolinian

crazyhorse said:


> *"It is RCI and NOT resorts that determine what is red time."*
> 
> I have to agree with that remark.
> 
> We have been told in the past by RCI that the demand for a week in a particular resort determines its "Colour" Red, White or Blue. This will depend upon local weather, school vacations and general desirability. Only RCI will know that demand, not the resorts.
> 
> This and other factors put together should then determine the Trading Value of a specific week in a specific apartment.
> 
> The RCI Points to Weeks exchange grids use the above colours in blocks for the Americas, Asia etc. A little odd that they don`t use the colour blocks for Europe though.



That grid is a sore point with Weeks members, as it averages down the value of prime red, making it cheaper than it should be for Points members to take Weeks inventory, thus the term ''raiding'' of Weeks.

That Points to Weeks crossover grid is one of the things that RCI should have corrected in this change but obviously has not.


----------



## FrmrVacGuide

Carolinian said:


> Hmmm!  Just the opposite answer from what Bootleg and Anon told us!



And didn't Bootleg stop posting about 3 years ago?  I'm pretty sure I knew anon, and if it is who I think it is, he started posting about a month after he started working at RCI.

The growth of that segment of rental inventory denoted with an R at the beginning of the ID is relatively recent.  So your comment really doesn't make sense.  I was saying that the inventory so denoted isn't being deposited by TS owners.  It is coming from a completely different source.

And when I'm talking about the resort making it red time, I'm talking about the way they market and sell it to you.  RCI and the resorts need to do something about the whole color coding system.  It is an extremely out dated way of thinking about travel times.  Because RCI evaluates travel patterns throughout the year and adjusts based on that information, trying to use a color system is pretty silly.


----------



## FrmrVacGuide

Carolinian said:


> Current market value?  When I look at many high demand, low supply areas, that is laughable.  Oh, and I am not surprised that they changed value numbers.  There has been an ongoing battle on these boards between a group of staunch RCI defenders who swore RCI was telling the truth when they promised that the values would not change.  I was one who said that they almost assuredly would.




You have no basis of comparison to back up your statements.  Because you don't know what the numbers were before, how can you possibly compare them now?  Of course, everyone had an idea, but now you can look at numbers and just make something up to back up your claim.

I don't believe that RCI has ever said that trading power is static.  I'm pretty sure they've always said that it is a fluid system.  And why shouldn't it be?  Travel patterns change over time, and the system has to adjust.

One other point, that I've seen you harp on quite a bit.  Yes, I'm sure RCI gives a higher value to large developers.  It only makes business sense.  If they took a hard line approach with someone like Vacation Village, then they would lose a huge amount of members and resorts the next time that contract came up for renewal, because II would make them a sweetheart deal to switch companies.  In the long run, to make as many vacation destinations available as possible, they have to do things like that.  In a perfect world, there would only be one exchange company that worked with every resort, and they would be a non-profit entity.  Unfortunately, that is never going to happen, so you're going to have to learn to deal with the realities of capitalism.


----------



## Carolinian

I may be a sucker for timeshare tours but I have been on enough of them (and some like The Crane in Barbados did not even offer a reward for doing so) and I have NEVER yet seen any developer show any color code grid that was any different from the color code grid in the RCI directory that was devised by RCI.  I would challenge any Tugger who has ever had a developer do that to post it.  Nice dodge but it doesn't flush!

Bootleg vanished suddenly from here, and a couple of other boards during the time the class action was hearing up.  His postings probably got a bit embarassing for RCI and he had to lay low. I am sure the heat would have been on with the lawsuit.  Since Anon was posting from home and keeping his powder dry at the office, I really suspect that you would probably not have known him.





FrmrVacGuide said:


> And didn't Bootleg stop posting about 3 years ago?  I'm pretty sure I knew anon, and if it is who I think it is, he started posting about a month after he started working at RCI.
> 
> The growth of that segment of rental inventory denoted with an R at the beginning of the ID is relatively recent.  So your comment really doesn't make sense.  I was saying that the inventory so denoted isn't being deposited by TS owners.  It is coming from a completely different source.
> 
> And when I'm talking about the resort making it red time, I'm talking about the way they market and sell it to you.  RCI and the resorts need to do something about the whole color coding system.  It is an extremely out dated way of thinking about travel times.  Because RCI evaluates travel patterns throughout the year and adjusts based on that information, trying to use a color system is pretty silly.


----------



## Rene McDaniel

sandkastle4966 said:


> Renee - I fully understand your arguement and your frustration.....however I think the "fault" is with the resorts not RCI.  Resorts have set up floating weeks in a "red" season pool that is too broad - June 1 - Aug 30.  Reality is that there is Pink and HOT RED with HOT being late June - first week august.  RCI recognizes this.  So does wyndham in their point evaluation.  Mid/late august is far easier to get into Alexandria than any time in late June/july.
> 
> You have actually already expressed this - you dont want late august - which you can "more easily" get than the july weeks that go for the first 5 minutes of reserve day.  Why should RCI give late August the same trades value as July weeks, when what more folks really want is July?
> 
> I think RCI has got it right.......
> 
> (i also own a floating summer - I will be on that phone every day at 8 am....)



Okay, I appreciate all the replies to my concerns, including those from FrmrVacGuide.  Maybe I am one of the few Tuggers here who really counted on using the "owner preference" to get back into my home resort, if my RCI searches never came through.  It was always my fallback -- my Plan B.  

I think I understand FrmrVacGuide to say that the trade power of your week has always been a factor in getting back into your home resort, which is something I'd never heard before.  So, that was news to me.  I'm just one person, one opinion.  But we have owned at our resorts many, many years.  We've been through a lot with them, including several years of expensive special assessments.  

When I make an RCI exchange, and the resort gives me the parking lot view, because the best views are reserved for their owners -- I'm okay with that.  I am a person that thinks that resorts should value their owners, more than an exchanger who will visit the resort only once.

I don't know how RCI did home resort preference previously.  But if it is true that red season owners can trade back into their own resort anytime during red season at their resort, (irrespective of point values) that would be great news!  I hope that is what RCI will do, but I would like an official answer on that.

_Response to Conan:_
I called my resort on every call-in day, trying to reserve the peak summer weeks, but couldn't I get one until the last week of August.  The difference between peak summer & late August is 18 points.  Now, if RCI has 1 deposit available for the 1st week of August, and no other owners want it, besides me, who is 18 points "short".  You feel should go to an exchanger who has enough points, not the red season owner at that resort - who doesn't?  Even though owners have paid expensive maintenance fees and several thousand dollars in special assessments at that resort?  See, I totally disagree with that.

For example, if there is 1 Manhattan Club week available, and I have enough points for it, but the Manhattan Club owner is shy the # of points needed -- I think that MC owner should get that unit over me.  That is his resort, he/she pays high maintenance fees to own there.  To think that I can combine up my much cheaper weeks, pay RCI $99 to combine them, and get my search fullfilled ahead of a Manhattan Club owner who pays almost $2,000 a year in maintenance fees -- just doesn't seem right to me.   

In these scenarios, it just feels like RCI will be making more money off that one exchange week ($189 exchange fee + the new $99/fee) if it goes to an exchanger combining their credits than to the MC owner.* I would hate to think that RCI is giving incoming exchangers that trade because RCI might make an extra $99 on it, instead of just the MC owner's exchange fee.*  Also, with this scenario there are lots of happy RCI exchangers (who bumped out that Manhattan Club owner who was shy of points getting back into his own resort), assuming he had a July week (46 pts), but needs to come in June (56 pts).  So, is this really fair to the resort owners?  Is it really fair to ask a MC owner to combine 2 weeks to get 1 week at his resort in exchange? (Let's assume he only owns 2 MC weeks, nothing else) Let's see:  $2000+$2000+$189+$99 = $4,288.  Oh my, he can't get back in at a reasonable cost, can he?  

_Play this scenario out further:_  He should probably dump his MC weeks & buy a cheaper ones.  More people at his resort might also figure out the same thing.  They all start dumping their non-peak weeks, so eventually there are fewer owners left to pay the maintenance fees & make the deposits into RCI.  Maybe RCI can start to bail out all these resorts, when people figure out it is easier, cheaper,  and a lot less hassle to exchange in, rather than own there.  But that would lead to more rentals (for the resorts to recoup the cost of unpaid maintenance fees) rather deposits for exchangers.  So, I guess really RCI wins in just about any scenario.

Like many timeshare owners, I am both an exchanger, as well as a owner-user of my home resort.  I preferred the way RCI handled trade power more fairly before it became Cendant. Mind you, I don't know what actually went on behind the curtains, but pretty much any red week could trade for any other red week.  There was not the cat-fighting (at floating resorts) to try to book the peak 6 weeks of the year, like there is now.  This competition may work best for RCI -- ensuring that those planning to exchange will nab the very best weeks to deposit with RCI.  But I think RCI needs to throw a bone back to the owners as well (if they want these timeshares to stay afloat), that all red week owners at that resort should have 1st shot at those weeks if they are willing to pay the $189 RCI exchange fee.  


--- Rene


----------



## FrmrVacGuide

Carolinian said:


> I may be a sucker for timeshare tours but I have been on enough of them (and some like The Crane in Barbados did not even offer a reward for doing so) and I have NEVER yet seen any developer show any color code grid that was any different from the color code grid in the RCI directory that was devised by RCI.  I would challenge any Tugger who has ever had a developer do that to post it.  Nice dodge but it doesn't flush!
> 
> Bootleg vanished suddenly from here, and a couple of other boards during the time the class action was hearing up.  His postings probably got a bit embarassing for RCI and he had to lay low. I am sure the heat would have been on with the lawsuit.  Since Anon was posting from home and keeping his powder dry at the office, I really suspect that you would probably not have known him.



Okay, this is the last time I'm going to respond to this type of stuff from you, but I might as well get it all out.

Although the timeshares and RCI use the same grids, do you honestly believe RCI just pulled that grid from out of thin air?  Do you think it feasible that there was research?  Maybe even that the major developers all had a hand in creating it so they could maximize their profits?  Wasn't that grid around before RCI was purchased?  It is an outdated system.  Internally, RCI doesn't really discuss it or use it.  We all knew what it was, because members lived and died by the thing.  

As far as knowing who anon was, you do realize that employees socialize, right?  I know that someone I went out to smoke with talked about posting on this board.  I'm assuming he was anon.  With regards to bootleg, I had no idea who that was until you started pining for him.  I looked him up on the boards, and it looked like his last post was in 2007.  If that is correct, the info he provided is hopelessly out of date at this point.


----------



## Carolinian

On another thread, you were apparently calling that a ''conspiracy theory'' but now you agree with it and try to defend it.

One can see what traded even before and now doesn't, which is a pretty darn good indicator that things have changed.  Some places like South Africa have dramatically changed.  JLB on another board mentioned a week he had been trading to the same area for 20 years even, that with the new numbers would require three of those weeks to trade to a smaller unit in a lesser resort in the same area.  That is a dramatic change.  One does not need to have all the actual numbers to see strong circumstantial evidence that RCI has moved the goal posts.  South Africa is another example. Circumstantial evidence is enough to convict someone of murder, so it certainly is enough to determine than RCI has in fact done what it said it would not.  What RCI said is that the trading power would not change, only that members could see it, and that is obviously not true.

Allen House is one I always look at as a bellweather on what RCI is doing.  Not only is it common knowledge that London is right at the top of the food chain in terms of hard to get trades but RCI itself acknowledges that for any HOA board member who has ever been a member of their VIP program.  VIP lets its members trade into anything in the system regardless of trading power, with only one exception and that is London.  I asked why and was told by one of the women who works with VIP that it was because of the huge demand for London and very limited supply, more so than any where else.  I don't own at Allen House, but when I see a top Vacation Village at Parkway, in heavy oversupply exceed a top Allen House, that tells me that something other than supply and demand is at play.

I have always supported a dynamic exchange system but the level of changes that have occured with the imposition of Points Lite are indicative of something far beyond a normal fluctuation of values.  Also, it is far from clear at this point that the values for deposits are very dynamic, although the values to exchange for a week appear to be.




FrmrVacGuide said:


> You have no basis of comparison to back up your statements.  Because you don't know what the numbers were before, how can you possibly compare them now?  Of course, everyone had an idea, but now you can look at numbers and just make something up to back up your claim.
> 
> I don't believe that RCI has ever said that trading power is static.  I'm pretty sure they've always said that it is a fluid system.  And why shouldn't it be?  Travel patterns change over time, and the system has to adjust.
> 
> One other point, that I've seen you harp on quite a bit.  Yes, I'm sure RCI gives a higher value to large developers.  It only makes business sense.  If they took a hard line approach with someone like Vacation Village, then they would lose a huge amount of members and resorts the next time that contract came up for renewal, because II would make them a sweetheart deal to switch companies.  In the long run, to make as many vacation destinations available as possible, they have to do things like that.  In a perfect world, there would only be one exchange company that worked with every resort, and they would be a non-profit entity.  Unfortunately, that is never going to happen, so you're going to have to learn to deal with the realities of capitalism.


----------



## FrmrVacGuide

Rene McDaniel said:


> Okay, I appreciate all the replies to my concerns, including those from FrmrVacGuide.  Maybe I am one of the few Tuggers here who really counted on using the "owner preference" to get back into my home resort, if my RCI searches never came through.  It was always my fallback -- my Plan B.
> 
> --- Rene



I know I cut a lot of your response out, but that was to save space.  I just want to clarify my opinion on this particular subject.

Owner A owns at resort X and deposits a week worth 25.
Owner B owns at resort Y and deposits a week worth 30.

A and B want to go to resort X the same week.  The week they want costs 20.  Owner B starts an ongoing search first.  Owner A still gets it when the week comes in.

I could be wrong about this, and I'll try to remember to double check with a friend that should know the answer.  That was how I remember the basics being explained back in the summer when they first told the guides that this change was coming.


----------



## Mel

Carolinian said:


> Outer Banks Resort Rentals should not have any problem with renting that week 32 for you if RCI cheats you on deposit value.  And a week 32, whether it starts August 9 or 12 will always rent a heck of a lot quicker and for a lot more money than a week 36. RCI is way off base in lumping these together on a grid.  Just like they are way off base in lumping week 11 and week 21 together at the same value on their grid.  Published points systems seem to always involve such overaveraging.  The desirability and value of weeks increase incrementally week by week in the spring and decrease incrementally week by week in the fall.  Grids that lump lots of those weeks together but then have big jumps between weeks that are only incrementally different, like 21 and 22 do not reflect the real market.


Last week you wanted RCI to use a small number of bands, but now that the number of bands has increased you don't think they should place weeks into bands?  That's the essence of what you're saying - if they use a system of bands, that week 32 is sometimes going to fall with the peak summer weeks, and other times it will fall with the late summer/each autumn weeks.

More reason to think RCI really didn't change much.


----------



## FrmrVacGuide

Carolinian said:


> On another thread, you were apparently calling that a ''conspiracy theory'' but now you agree with it and try to defend it.
> 
> One can see what traded even before and now doesn't, which is a pretty darn good indicator that things have changed.  Some places like South Africa have dramatically changed.  JLB on another board mentioned a week he had been trading to the same area for 20 years even, that with the new numbers would require three of those weeks to trade to a smaller unit in a lesser resort in the same area.  That is a dramatic change.  One does not need to have all the actual numbers to see strong circumstantial evidence that RCI has moved the goal posts.  South Africa is another example. Circumstantial evidence is enough to convict someone of murder, so it certainly is enough to determine than RCI has in fact done what it said it would not.  What RCI said is that the trading power would not change, only that members could see it, and that is obviously not true.
> 
> Allen House is one I always look at as a bellweather on what RCI is doing.  Not only is it common knowledge that London is right at the top of the food chain in terms of hard to get trades but RCI itself acknowledges that for any HOA board member who has ever been a member of their VIP program.  VIP lets its members trade into anything in the system regardless of trading power, with only one exception and that is London.  I asked why and was told by one of the women who works with VIP that it was because of the huge demand for London and very limited supply, more so than any where else.  I don't own at Allen House, but when I see a top Vacation Village at Parkway, in heavy oversupply exceed a top Allen House, that tells me that something other than supply and demand is at play.
> 
> I have always supported a dynamic exchange system but the level of changes that have occured with the imposition of Points Lite are indicative of something far beyond a normal fluctuation of values.  Also, it is far from clear at this point that the values for deposits are very dynamic, although the values to exchange for a week appear to be.



I'll reply to this as it is a different topic.

When you get into VIP programs and things like that, I don't know much about it.  The only thing I know about anything similar is in the points world, where a developer with a private account has a few special rules about point totals.

As far as VV@Parkway getting more credits than Allen House, I figure there a couple of things playing into it.  One, there is a higher demand in pure volume for Orlando at Christmas.  (For clarity, that was the week I checked.)  Two, RCI is trying to make VV happy because they don't want to lose the member base and resorts.  Three, RCI gets more return from offering the high exchange credit in Orlando.  There are more units that will actually be deposited, which in turn makes more exchangers happy.


----------



## Rene McDaniel

Conan said:


> If in the real world a late August week has less demand or more supply, why should it exchange one-to-one with an early August week?
> 
> And if RCI or an internal exchange system formerly allowed that, why is it wrong for them to change?



Conan,
My issue on this is that the tiny nuances of 1 week before, or 1 week later -- you have these different values, and now you can't trade back into your home resort if you are *shy* a few points.  It's not a true points system, where when I am short a few points I can stay 6 nights instead of 7.  Having to pony up an entire extra week, just to get back into your home resort sucks.  

At one of my resorts, the maintenance fee is now over $1,100 for 1 week.  Obviously, "pony up another week" can be a very expensive option if you have high maintenance fees.  

-- Rene


----------



## Carolinian

Well, if this person you say mentioned posting on TUG is who you think was Anon, then you are wrong.  Anon posted on a European-based board.

While I am sure that in someplace like overbuilt Orlando, where there are a lot of major developers, they may well politick RCI for such things as a ''red all year'' designation, that probably only plays into a small part of RCI's decisions on its color code grids.  Many resort areas had no major developers at the time these color codes were set and RCI has not changed them since, in the first place.  I am aware that Barrier Island Station was at one time politicking RCI for a change in the color gird on the Outer Banks to add more red time both spring and fall, but they did not succeed.  So RCI did obviously make its own decisions on such matters.  I am also aware that Barrier Island Station did later successfully politick RCI for more points for its Kitty Hawk resort for joining RCI Points (and threw their sold out resorts under the bus as part of the deal) but from what I was told, that deal involved them working in a coalition with other developers from other resort areas.

In short your comments on resorts setting color code charts instead of RCI was way off base, and your excuses fall way short, and that statement raises a real question of one of two things; 1) if you are what you say you are, or 2) if you are shooting straight with the facts.  Your remark on that issue certainly was not shooting straight.




FrmrVacGuide said:


> Okay, this is the last time I'm going to respond to this type of stuff from you, but I might as well get it all out.
> 
> Although the timeshares and RCI use the same grids, do you honestly believe RCI just pulled that grid from out of thin air?  Do you think it feasible that there was research?  Maybe even that the major developers all had a hand in creating it so they could maximize their profits?  Wasn't that grid around before RCI was purchased?  It is an outdated system.  Internally, RCI doesn't really discuss it or use it.  We all knew what it was, because members lived and died by the thing.
> 
> As far as knowing who anon was, you do realize that employees socialize, right?  I know that someone I went out to smoke with talked about posting on this board.  I'm assuming he was anon.  With regards to bootleg, I had no idea who that was until you started pining for him.  I looked him up on the boards, and it looked like his last post was in 2007.  If that is correct, the info he provided is hopelessly out of date at this point.


----------



## Carolinian

FrmrVacGuide said:


> I'll reply to this as it is a different topic.
> 
> When you get into VIP programs and things like that, I don't know much about it.  The only thing I know about anything similar is in the points world, where a developer with a private account has a few special rules about point totals.
> 
> As far as VV@Parkway getting more credits than Allen House, I figure there a couple of things playing into it.  One, there is a higher demand in pure volume for Orlando at Christmas.  (For clarity, that was the week I checked.)  Two, RCI is trying to make VV happy because they don't want to lose the member base and resorts.  Three, RCI gets more return from offering the high exchange credit in Orlando.  There are more units that will actually be deposited, which in turn makes more exchangers happy.



I guess the best way that Allen House could get happy is to do what one other London resort has already done, and that is switch to a different exchange company.


----------



## Carolinian

Mel said:


> Last week you wanted RCI to use a small number of bands, but now that the number of bands has increased you don't think they should place weeks into bands?  That's the essence of what you're saying - if they use a system of bands, that week 32 is sometimes going to fall with the peak summer weeks, and other times it will fall with the late summer/each autumn weeks.
> 
> More reason to think RCI really didn't change much.



You are confusing an exchange system with valuation, and as I have posted before, combining a valuation system based on large grouping with an exchange system based on single points is the worst of both worlds.

Bands make sense for the exchange system as it is just about impossible to accurately and fairly nitpick value down to a single number, so the trading bands make up for that.  Those are the parameters for matching weeks for an exchange rather than setting the values.

In terms of valuation of weeks, both in and out, however, overaveraging can be a big problem if you put too many dissimilar weeks together, a common problem in any published points system.  That is particularly true in spring when weeks gradually gain value incrementally and in fall when they gradually lose value incrementally.  For valuation, there are some periods that are rather static and in those, usually deep off season and the height of high season, a grid of a number of weeks would be appropriate.

If you are going to nitpick the trading value down to an exact number, it is absolutely imperative to value each week individually if the system is going to be in any way fair.


----------



## FrmrVacGuide

Carolinian said:


> I guess the best way that Allen House could get happy is to do what one other London resort has already done, and that is switch to a different exchange company.




Good job ignoring everything I said and just launching a random attack. 

How hard would it have been to simply respond to what I was saying?

Oh, and you might want to clean out your Private Message folder.  I attempted to shift the conversation you insist on having about the validity of my RCI employment there where it wouldn't bother others.


----------



## Conan

Rene McDaniel said:


> now you can't trade back into your home resort if you are *shy* a few points.  It's not a true points system, where when I am short a few points I can stay 6 nights instead of 7.  Having to pony up an entire extra week, just to get back into your home resort sucks.
> 
> At one of my resorts, the maintenance fee is now over $1,100 for 1 week.  Obviously, "pony up another week" can be a very expensive option if you have high maintenance fees.
> 
> -- Rene



I think the new scheme will encourage people who own multiple weeks to deposit all their weeks with RCI (excepting the weeks they want to use for themselves), rather than split their deposits among RCI, DAE, SFX, etc. [and in greater numbers than people who might leave RCI altogether if they're not happy with the new scheme].

Since the new system gives you 'change' when you book a week that's cheaper than the week you deposited, you might decide to apply the missing point from deposit #2 to get the summer week you want from deposit #1, after which you have two years to find a way to spend the one-point-short deposit that you're left with.


----------



## Dottie

Removed my question as I resolved the issue myself


----------



## Carolinian

FrmrVacGuide said:


> Good job ignoring everything I said and just launching a random attack.
> 
> How hard would it have been to simply respond to what I was saying?
> 
> .



Not too hard, but I thought my point covered it.  One other London resort has already plowed that ground.

As to VV@Parkway and its alleged demand at Christmas, another Tugger has already discovered and posted that for Christmas 2011, over a year away, RCI offers 50 points lite for deposit of a 1BR week, but on the other hand if you want to trade into the very same week charges only 11 points lite.  I think this speaks volumes about the real value of that resort versus the corrupt inflated value given to its members by RCI in an underhanded deal with its developer.

It is things like that which cry out for full transparency of the system of setting values.  It shows that a combination of published numbers and a hidden method of setting those numbers creates both the incentive and the mechanism to rig the system.


----------



## Rene McDaniel

FrmrVacGuide said:


> .
> Owner A owns at resort X and deposits a week worth 25.
> Owner B owns at resort Y and deposits a week worth 30.
> 
> A and B want to go to resort X the same week.  *The week they want costs 20.*  Owner B starts an ongoing search first.  Owner A still gets it when the week comes in.
> 
> I could be wrong about this, and I'll try to remember to double check with a friend that should know the answer.  That was how I remember the basics being explained back in the summer when they first told the guides that this change was coming.



FrmrVacGuide,
Thanks for your reply.  Okay, but in your scenario, *both* owners A & B have enough credits for a 20-credit exchange.  You told me in an earlier post that, "if you have sufficient points for the exchange, owner preference is still in place".  I get that.

That's not the same scenario I'm concerned about, or raising as an issue.  My issue is when the resort week they both want, *costs 30 credits*.  They both want to go to resort X, but owner B (an exchanger) has 30 credits.  But the family that owns at that resort (owner A), was only given 25 credits for their deposit at resort X.  I was told by RCI just this week that if the owner does not have enough points for the exchange, they would not get in over an exchanger who does.

Yes, yes.  I know if they both have sufficient points, owner preference kicks in.  But forget about me.  What about poor Mr. Manhattan Club owner, who has a July week (46 credits), but needs to come in June next year (56 credits).  He puts in an ongoing search for MC in June, although he only has 46 credits on deposit.  Someone who has combined their weeks to have 56 credits (and paid RCI an extra $99) also puts in an ongoing search for MC in June.  A June MC week gets deposited (worth 56 credits) into RCI, who will get it?  The MC owner, who has given only 46 credits for his July MC week, or the exchanger who has 56 credits?

_Wouldn't RCI give that week to the exchanger who has 56 credits, over the Manhattan Club owner who received less points (46) for his July deposit?_ 

This is the question I would like you to ask your RCI friend about.

Thanks much!


----------



## 5875racing

*Diamond Resorts and RCI Exchanges*

Need some help.  I am a new TUG memeber and we are a Diamond Resorts Intl Owner on Kaui HI with a EOY week.  There is another DRI resort on Maui that we like to exchange for.  With the new RCI system we get a max of 23 credits for our Kaui week and it takes 40 to get into the DRI resort at Maui?  So with the new RCI system we are losing but RCI says it is more fair???  It may be for some exchanges but I feel we are really losing out from what we had.   They both use to be owned by Emassy, then Sunterra and now DRI and we had priority booking with an even exchange with DRI but now that is all changed.  We are told that RCI memebers will not be able to get into the DRI Maui resort anymore because of very low owner room like 4% left.  When I talked to RCI this morning they said it will now cost me two weeks for one week at the Maui resort with a few credits left over.  I would be paying double for what I was getting two years ago.  Current maintenace fees are $1400 for the EOY and under the new every year plan it would be $1288 per year.  DRI is offering for an additoional $7000 to convert to their points system with an additional 1500 points and have a week every year which we are not entirely crazy about the extra money for the switch.  This puts us in a collectoion of four DRI resorts at Maui, Kaui, Sedona AZ, and Las Vegas as home resorts they call them.  Looking for some assitance by others on what options I have and suggestioins.  Need some Quick Help because we are in HI and if I have to do something I have to do it quickly.  KNOWLEDGE IS POWER and I need some knowledge for fellow TUG memebers.  Thanks


----------



## sandkastle4966

good gosh - what happened to this being a FACT and QUESTON thread......so many opinions (ok, mainly 2 peoples opinions) - can we get this back to FACT and QUESTION, and take everything else to the opinions thread?


----------



## 5875racing

*Diamond Resorts and RCI Exchanges*

Again I am a new TUG Member and learning the system so please bear with me.  

To rephrase my questions,  $7000 for additional 1500 points and a every year program with DRI.  They are giving us 5000 points for our old property so we would have 6500 points barely enough to get into Maui for a garden view.  $1288 for annual maintneance fee.  Is this a fair price fro exchanging to the points system?

RCI new points program only getting 23 credits for Kaui and would need 40 to get into DRI resort on Maui.  No more weeks exchanges becasue of the new RCI credit system.  Is this a fair amount?  Seems low ot me?

Appreicate the assistance


----------



## london

*Too Much*



5875racing said:


> Again I am a new TUG Member and learning the system so please bear with me.
> 
> To rephrase my questions,  $7000 for additional 1500 points and a every year program with DRI.  They are giving us 5000 points for our old property so we would have 6500 points barely enough to get into Maui for a garden view.  $1288 for annual maintneance fee.  Is this a fair price fro exchanging to the points system?
> 
> RCI new points program only getting 23 credits for Kaui and would need 40 to get into DRI resort on Maui.  No more weeks exchanges becasue of the new RCI credit system.  Is this a fair amount?  Seems low ot me?
> 
> Appreicate the assistance



Way too much money. You will never get your investment back. Not a fair price.


----------



## FrmrVacGuide

@Renee

Sorry, guess it got confused for me with all the other conversations going on.  I'll ask, but I think the answer is going to be that it goes to the person with the credits necessary.

Now, what we might see is that the cost changes as time goes by for unused space.  I'm thinking that Manhattan club won't be one of those unused places.

I honestly believe that some resorts like MC are going to like this change.  Before, the pool of people who could exchange there was so limited, it probably hurt their sales.  I would like to think that now it will be open to a larger group of people to experience that.

I will definitely check.  You might want to send me a PM to help me remember.  I know my friend is working a lot of overtime and then going home for the holidays, so it probably won't be until next week that I can get her on the phone.


----------



## FrmrVacGuide

Carolinian said:


> Not too hard, but I thought my point covered it.  One other London resort has already plowed that ground.
> 
> As to VV@Parkway and its alleged demand at Christmas, another Tugger has already discovered and posted that for Christmas 2011, over a year away, RCI offers 50 points lite for deposit of a 1BR week, but on the other hand if you want to trade into the very same week charges only 11 points lite.  I think this speaks volumes about the real value of that resort versus the corrupt inflated value given to its members by RCI in an underhanded deal with its developer.
> 
> It is things like that which cry out for full transparency of the system of setting values.  It shows that a combination of published numbers and a hidden method of setting those numbers creates both the incentive and the mechanism to rig the system.



Instead of throwing around conjecture, why don't you just call RCI and ask why it is set that way?  I'm sure if you ask to speak with a supervisor you'll have a pretty good chance at getting that question answered.

BTW, the maximum for a 2BR at VVPark is 58 for Christmas and right now they are giving 46.  Maybe I should try and buy one of those weeks on eBay.

Oh, and please stop calling it Points lite.  We get it.  You think points are evil, and that this is just another part of the master plan to make everyone switch to points.

Of course, I do remember a survey that was done within RCI that showed a higher satisfaction rating from Points members than from Weeks members.


----------



## PeelBoy

5875racing said:


> Need some help.  I am a new TUG memeber and we are a Diamond Resorts Intl Owner on Kaui HI with a EOY week.  There is another DRI resort on Maui that we like to exchange for.  With the new RCI system we get a max of 23 credits for our Kaui week and it takes 40 to get into the DRI resort at Maui?  So with the new RCI system we are losing but RCI says it is more fair???  It may be for some exchanges but I feel we are really losing out from what we had.   They both use to be owned by Emassy, then Sunterra and now DRI and we had priority booking with an even exchange with DRI but now that is all changed.  We are told that RCI memebers will not be able to get into the DRI Maui resort anymore because of very low owner room like 4% left.  When I talked to RCI this morning they said it will now cost me two weeks for one week at the Maui resort with a few credits left over.  I would be paying double for what I was getting two years ago.  Current maintenace fees are $1400 for the EOY and under the new every year plan it would be $1288 per year.  DRI is offering for an additoional $7000 to convert to their points system with an additional 1500 points and have a week every year which we are not entirely crazy about the extra money for the switch.  This puts us in a collectoion of four DRI resorts at Maui, Kaui, Sedona AZ, and Las Vegas as home resorts they call them.  Looking for some assitance by others on what options I have and suggestioins.  Need some Quick Help because we are in HI and if I have to do something I have to do it quickly.  KNOWLEDGE IS POWER and I need some knowledge for fellow TUG memebers.  Thanks




I have been a Sunterra/DRI member for 13 years, I am not sure I understand your question/scenario.  Do you belong to DRI Club or a Collection?  DRI club members exchanges via II, not RCI.  Owners at DRI resorts who are not club members of course can elect to exchange via RCI.  If you are a collection member, I think you can travel within your collection only.

Ask your question here where there are lots of experts: 

http://www.timeshareforums.com/forums/diamond-resorts-international-fka-signature-sunterra-epic/


----------



## sghokie

I am disappointed with this new system. I have 2 weeks on deposit. One has a lower value (10) while the other has a value of (14).
Prior to the late October re-valuation, my 10 pt week had access to many resorts. Not particularly great ones, but a pretty good selection. I had access to many places that are valued at 14 now with the 10 deposit. And with the 14 deposit I had access to weeks now rated as much as 25.
I wonder why before I could have booked these places and can't now even though the same resorts and weeks are still in the inventory.

So what is seems like to me is that RCI has turned the whole deposit system to a plutonomy. The haves and have nots. If you have one of the coveted weeks you are fine and even golden since you can split your points up, but if you are blue, green, white, and even a less desirable red week, looks like you are destined to have to pay 2 maintenance fees + $99 + $189 just to get 1 week that you very well probably could have gotten before for just 1 maintenance fee + $189.

I think this is going to have a very negative impact on quite a few properties. I would suspect that there are a lot of owners that will just opt to give back their properties or walk away as there will be very few buyers of low value weeks (80%) of the resort.

My 2 cents anyways.


----------



## chriskre

FrmrVacGuide said:


> Oh, and you might want to clean out your Private Message folder.  I attempted to shift the conversation you insist on having about the validity of my RCI employment there where it wouldn't bother others.



Seems pretty obvious that you still work for RCI.   
Not that there's anything wrong with that.   

It's nice to see that RCI is taking an interest in what owners think.


----------



## catcher24

Place holder so that I get email notification of replies to this thread. And I personally would rather prefer that it get back to strictly facts....


----------



## Timeshare Von

FrmrVacGuide said:


> I signed up just to explain this to you.  I used to read your posts when I was employed at RCI, simply to understand the mindset of some of the members I spoke to who seemed chronically unhappy.  <<snipped>>



My my have you been busy since signing up two days ago to explain stuff to Carolinian.

I also see that now that you've signed up for TUG's forums, you've also sought input on exchanging and other ownership questions.

Most employees at companies where members are "chronically unhappy" can generally figure it out from the inside.  Depending on how long you were employed by RCI, I would have thought you'd have some insight from dealing with member calls . . . and not need to check into an online forum such as TUG.  

I'm pretty sure that every VC I ever spoke to understood the source of my frustration . . . at least those with whom I did not have a language barrier.  (Imagine my chagrin trying to explain to a VC at RCI that Alaska is not a country . . . but instead a state in the USA!  He had his world map out and everything . . . even took the time to help me "understand" where it was located "above the USA next to Canada" as I recall was the explanation.)

Sorry to not be more trusting but your timing seems suspect at best.


----------



## dundey

JudyS said:


> Any information on what percentage of desirable deposits were put in the rental pool?  That's always a hot topic here.
> 
> There was, at the very least, a color code restriction in the VRI trades (priority didn't work when trading up in color), as Maple Leaf said.  Almost all Lehigh weeks are red (a few are white), so your week there was probably red.



Yes my week is red, that's probably why I was told that I could trade into any available VRI week.  The bottom line is -
THAT IS NO LONGER THE CASE.


----------



## dundey

FrmrVacGuide said:


> =
> I'm assuming you think that I'm an RCI plant, here to tell you everything is rainbows and butterflies, right?



Based on your posts, yes that is what I think.


----------



## g4fishing

You would pay only the one exchange fee but you would also be out the fee you would have paid to combine your points.


----------



## FrmrVacGuide

dundey said:


> Based on your posts, yes that is what I think.



Well, you are both wrong and bit paranoid, but I don't really care if you think that.

Because I saw all of the other people questioning it, I'll just address it one last time.

I do not work for RCI anymore.  

My family owns points with Blue Green.  I came here when the conversion happened hoping that someone had some good advice on weeks to deposit.  When I saw all of this other stuff going on, I figured I would comment and help where I could.

RCI, from my experience, doesn't know care all that much about this message board.  When I brought it up to my the boss of my boss's boss, she had no idea what I was talking about.  I was trying to get the "Ask RCI" are restarted because we had just heard about the November changes.  

@Von... I know why most members are frustrated when working with RCI.  I also know that a large number of them bring it on themselves.  I'm not saying you specifically, but that is the impression that most vacation guides have.  I knew how to work the old system, which is why I never had to register and ask questions before.  I turned 18,000 points from Blue Green into two 1BD units at Disney for the 4th of July weekend.  Trust me when I say that I could work the old system better than 99% of the people who have ever been RCI members.  That was part of why I went to a department where least senior employee had been at RCI for over 5 years.  I was moved there before I had been with the company for a year.  However, I left at the beginning of August, which is before the training for the new system happened, so I don't know the details of it.  When I get to see my friends from RCI, we don't really talk about that sort of stuff.

Now, if anyone else wants to call me a liar, do it in a PM.  I'll be more than happy to give you a way to verify that I am what I say I am.  I am not going to release that information in public.  I'm also not going to give it to Carolinian, so he doesn't need to ask.  If it is such a big deal, I'm sure a moderator can contact me, and I'll let them verify it.


----------



## Rene McDaniel

FrmrVacGuide said:


> Now, what we might see is that the cost changes as time goes by for unused space.  I'm thinking that Manhattan club won't be one of those unused places.



FrmrVacGuide,
Okay. Now you're seeing the picture more clearly, and that's my point.  It's not _just_ Manhattan Club - it's most resorts!  Peak season weeks in most resorts (beach resorts in summer, ski resorts in ski season, Carribean resorts in Feb/March) those deposits are NOT going to sit idly in the RCI spacebank for weeks, slowly going down in value, and FINALLY allowing other owners a shot at a week-for-week exchange back into their resort.  Peak season weeks are usually taken very quickly everywhere, not just at Manhattan Club.



> I honestly believe that some resorts like MC are going to like this change.  *Before, the pool of people who could exchange there was so limited, it probably hurt their sales.*  I would like to think that now it will be open to a larger group of people to experience that.



This has been my biggest gripe with RCI since the whole Cendant change.  Who's needs are RCI trying to meet? Those who exchange & fund RCI's coffers, or "Developer sales"?  It does not seem to be us, the people who pay handsomely for RCI membership fees + $189 exchange fees for every trade. 

I can't imagine that OWNERS at Manhattan Club are going to like this change more _"because the pool of people who could exchange in was so limited, it probably hurt sales"_ of MC units. I would expect when the MC owner who has a July week (worth 46 credits), needs a June week instead (56 credits), and finds out he is essentially "locked out" of his own resort on a week-for-week exchange.  He is not going to be a happy camper.  Especially when people with low maintenance fees can put 2 weeks together for 56 credits at less than $1,000 -- while it would cost the MC owner over $4,000 to put his 2 weeks together.  Assuming he even has 2 weeks.  What if he only owns 1 week?  Pardon my french, but he's screwed, isn't he?

So, if you understand my Manhattan Club scenario.  Then you should be able to understand that most ALL resorts have peak usage periods.  And almost ALL resorts out there sold "red seasons" that were longer than the 6 - 8 weeks that the RCI computers have deemed "peak".  I have never heard of a resort who sold only 6 or 8 weeks as peak (or red), and the other 45 weeks of the calendar year as shoulder or low season.

I don't know how many RCI exchanges are actually owners exchanging back into their home resort or resort group, but these would probably not have been people you would have talked to as an RCI guide.  An owner just makes an ongoing search, and the computer recognizes your owner status, and usually an exchange comes through, even though most owners are seeking exchanges during prime time, or looking for a larger unit (maybe they have extra family coming this trip).  If those days are over, it might take a while for people to figure this out -- but I think it will cause a lot of people to walk away from RCI, their resort ownership, and timesharing.  

This whole "change back" business is great if you're retired and can travel whenever you want.  But there are plenty of folks out there who work & already have all the timeshare weeks  or vacations they need.  Not everyone has the ability to use this "change" they're supposedly going to get back.  For example, I see "change back" as having no value for me when our family is tied to school schedules.  I will always need bright red/peak weeks, and "change back" is not going to allow me to get a 2nd red/peak week in Southern California that would work for me.

So, I have a couple of questions for you to ask your RCI friend on behalf of owners who trade back into their own resort:

(1) With so many users who trade back to their home resort, or within their resort group (pre Nov. 12) -- why is RCI no longer allowing this?  

(2) Is it just about potentially making an extra $99 in new fees with exchangers getting a trade that previously might have been taken by an owner? 

(3) If there were enough requests from RCI members and resorts, would RCI possibly reconsider reinstating owner preference, to however it was handled in the past.  (If trade power was, in fact a factor, it must have been a much wider band, rather than specific point values as it stands post Nov. 12th)  I have heard that some resort groups are currently in negotiations with RCI to get their preferences back for their group.  (But that would still leave owners who are not in a mini-system out in the cold)

Thanks for your input.  It's been very interesting to hear your perspective on things.  Even though we disagree on several points, I hope you will not take them as a personal attack.  My issue is with the way the new RCI's changes negatively affect my ownership, negatively affect my resort, and negatively impact other owners.  I understand that neither current RCI guides, nor former RCI guides set these policies -- so I have no ax to grind with you.  I hope you will continue posting and help us understand what actually does happen behind the curtain.


----------



## crazyhorse

*"RCI, from my experience, doesn't know care all that much about this message board."*

That`s cleared that one up then!

I would stop digging..


:hysterical:


----------



## Carolinian

This is not an ''as time goes by'' situation.  This is an extremely abrupt change with the imposition of the new system.  I can certainly sympathized with this poster's plight, even if you cannot.




FrmrVacGuide said:


> @Renee
> 
> Sorry, guess it got confused for me with all the other conversations going on.  I'll ask, but I think the answer is going to be that it goes to the person with the credits necessary.
> 
> Now, what we might see is that the cost changes as time goes by for unused space.  I'm thinking that Manhattan club won't be one of those unused places.
> 
> I honestly believe that some resorts like MC are going to like this change.  Before, the pool of people who could exchange there was so limited, it probably hurt their sales.  I would like to think that now it will be open to a larger group of people to experience that.
> 
> I will definitely check.  You might want to send me a PM to help me remember.  I know my friend is working a lot of overtime and then going home for the holidays, so it probably won't be until next week that I can get her on the phone.


----------



## Carolinian

dundey said:


> Based on your posts, yes that is what I think.



I always wondered if RCI would put plants on this board once we discovered this was coming down the pike, and suspected they might.  That is common corporate behavior in the days of the internet.  There are several I have watched you have shown up here since we learned this change was coming that are potentials.

The post that told the tale for me on this guy was when he claimed with great editorial fanfare that it was resorts and not RCI that set the red/white/blue designations.  How dense does he think we are?

Also, the way he keeps contradicting things that Bootleg or Anon revealed, and we knew they were the real deal and customer-oriented.


----------



## crazyhorse

Could be a she?

Whatever, he or she is welcome to continue posting on this forum, whether for or against RCI.

We might learn something.


----------



## lolibeachgirl

*will deposit credits increase with demand?*

I want to pay my 2012 MF's and deposit a 1br and hotel seperately into RCI.  I used the deposit calculator to figure out the values of each week.  I own red MB (which I guess is what others have called pink or shoulder seasons) so I suppose I won't get one of the peak summer weeks assigned to me.  Since every week in 2012 would be over 9 months' deposit, are the values as high as they will ever be now?  Or if demand increases will the values of any of the weeks (President's weekend, Thanksgiving and Christmas, and possibly the fall bike week) go up?  Can I only take advantage of that if I wait to see if the values go up, or will they give me X amount of value credits and increase it if/when demand goes up?

Since we have no historical data on this yet, maybe FrmVacGuide can ask his friends who still work at RCI...this would be a question that I'm sure everyone on this board would want to know the answer to help maximize this new system.

I am one of the few people who may see an advantage to the new system.  I used to deposit the whole 2br MB week 1-2 years in advance and hope for a Hawaii trade. Some years I have even only had the 1br to deposit.  I have turned down some marginal/bad units hoping to get a better one, and so far always have within about 4-6 months of check in.  I hated the wait and hope approach, wondering if I should have taken the crappy unit to just get to Hawaii.  I apparently was getting lucky when someone deposited under certain time frames, making their deposit within my trading range.  Now I can see what the value of what I have is, and what I need to get certain units at certain places.  I don't have kids, so summer is not when I have to travel, I prefer Sept, Oct or Nov coming from the East Coast, but have also traded into Hawaii in July (Bay Club 1br and Paniolo Greens 2br on BI), August (Banyan Harbor 2br) and November (Lawaii Beach 1br).  Just got back at the end of Oct. from Bali Hai 2br.

To get exactly what I want (from what is showing as available with all RCI exchanges-I was able to search with deposits my ex currently has), I won't deposit the full 2br (21 credits) but will get more by depositing seperately the 1br (19 credits) and the hotel (14 credits) and paying $99 to combine them for 33 credits.  I am using all values from week 13 starting March 25.  Now I can pick any 2BR in Hawaii for 2011 when I want to travel that shows up as available right now instead of waiting.  The highest values I saw were 31's except for a 3br Bali Hai in July for 34.  

But if I wait until just before the 9 month window to deposit, will demand drive up the value credits, since right now no one is searching for a 2012 week?  This way I would get more credit "change" after combining.  I'm thinking if I deposit now, even if the value goes up, RCI won't give me the difference, my deposit will remain at the same value?

The problem with waiting is that available units will decrease the further I get into 2011, I was looking to travel in Sept or early Oct. since DH and I love the north beaches for snorkelling and prefer to stay in Princeville to decrease driving time.

It stinks to have to pay the $99, but combining was never an option for me before, so I can take advantage of that now.  I also don't have a second MF to pay for because it's a lock-off unit.

I was checking availability that my ex's hotel unit (12 credits) was picking up before the change.  At most it picked up 6 different resorts, all with checkin with the next month.  He added a 2br for Mar 2011 (15 credits since it's under 9 months he didn't get full credit) right after the change took place.  Even though he doesn't have enough to choose most resorts without combining, I can now see resorts that never would have been an option for me.  Point at Poipu, Shearwater, Kauai Beach, and Kona Hawaiian are all options for me that never were before.  

I didn't post this is in the facts/questions thread so it wouldn't get lost, and will also post on the Hawaii section.

Thanks tuggers!


----------



## catcher24

But do you really think a plant would register as a former RCI guide? Seems a bit too obvious to me. Or perhaps since retiring from law enforcement I've become a lot less paranoid about people and their intentions....


----------



## lolibeachgirl

*sort order for all available exchanges?*

I've been doing some searches for all available exchanges, and you can sort the ones that match your criteria (you have enough credit deposit for an exchange) even though this list is short for my current search.  But the list of ones available that you can't exchange for (some lists are VERY long), doesn't seem to be sorted in any particular order.  Has someone found a way to sort these that I am missing?   Thanks!


----------



## Timeshare Von

Please do not repost in the Hawaii forum as multiple posts of the same message are not permitted on TUG.


----------



## lolibeachgirl

sorry didn't know, already got a pm about it....


----------



## pbenham

*Sorting results*

Unfortunately, whenever you change the # of results from 10 to 25, it treats this as a sort, and for some reason defaults to a reverse alphabetical listing.  In other words, you are not able to see 25 at a time, unless you want to see the list sorted Z to A...I reported this as a bug, and also asked that they change the default to 25 (or more).


----------



## lolibeachgirl

Hi Paul,
I see what you mean, but I wasn't specific enough in what I was asking.  I didn't mean the list of resorts available, I was clicking on a specific resort (use Bali Hai as an example) for "available units" and the list comes up for units that match your deposit under "units that meet your criteria" then the next list is "other matching units" which has 82 units, not listed in any particular order.  There is no way to sort by check-in date, unit type, credit value, nothing....

it allows sorting by each category for the list of units that match your credit deposits (which is a short list), but not for the long list of all available units in the system from your search.  This makes it more difficult than necessary if you have 2 deposits you could combine, but can't sort the long list to find credits needed, size of unit, or a date preference...


----------



## Carolinian

catcher24 said:


> But do you really think a plant would register as a former RCI guide? Seems a bit too obvious to me. Or perhaps since retiring from law enforcement I've become a lot less paranoid about people and their intentions....



Since they are certainly aware of the popularity and credibility that Bootleg had here, it would be a very clever move to do so.  But it would have been even more clever to have him appear months ago and post about non-controversial things for  a while.

But he is not the only one who has appeared on these boards and heavily defended RCI since the time the coming of Points Lite became known,


----------



## jacknsara

lolibeachgirl said:


> Hi Paul,
> I see what you mean, but I wasn't specific enough in what I was asking.  I didn't mean the list of resorts available, I was clicking on a specific resort (use Bali Hai as an example) for "available units" and the list comes up for units that match your deposit under "units that meet your criteria" then the next list is "other matching units" which has 82 units, not listed in any particular order.  There is no way to sort by check-in date, unit type, credit value, nothing....
> 
> it allows sorting by each category for the list of units that match your credit deposits (which is a short list), but not for the long list of all available units in the system from your search.  This makes it more difficult than necessary if you have 2 deposits you could combine, but can't sort the long list to find credits needed, size of unit, or a date preference...


Aloha,
Once in a great while I mention that I screen scrape data into excel.  I have a few cells of formulas that parse out the RCI data into sortable values. It would take a lot of work to explain it all to excel neophytes.  However, if there are tuggers who are excel users and want a blank of the excel sheet, pm me an email address that I can send the excel file to.  fwiw, I currently have more than 1800 rows of data.  Over the next few months, I expect that to increase almost ten fold.  
Jack


----------



## lolibeachgirl

aloha Jack,
I wish I had Word so I could use your excel spreadsheet lol I just wish they had added the same sort feature to the "all available" results of a search as they had for the results that just match the deposit.


----------



## abbekit

sghokie said:


> I am disappointed with this new system. I have 2 weeks on deposit. One has a lower value (10) while the other has a value of (14).
> Prior to the late October re-valuation, my 10 pt week had access to many resorts. Not particularly great ones, but a pretty good selection. I had access to many places that are valued at 14 now with the 10 deposit. And with the 14 deposit I had access to weeks now rated as much as 25.
> I wonder why before I could have booked these places and can't now even though the same resorts and weeks are still in the inventory.
> 
> So what is seems like to me is that RCI has turned the whole deposit system to a plutonomy. The haves and have nots. If you have one of the coveted weeks you are fine and even golden since you can split your points up, but if you are blue, green, white, and even a less desirable red week, looks like you are destined to have to pay 2 maintenance fees + $99 + $189 just to get 1 week that you very well probably could have gotten before for just 1 maintenance fee + $189.
> 
> I think this is going to have a very negative impact on quite a few properties. I would suspect that there are a lot of owners that will just opt to give back their properties or walk away as there will be very few buyers of low value weeks (80%) of the resort.
> 
> My 2 cents anyways.





I'm in the same boat.  I've always been able to get pretty good trades with my mid-range red weeks.  These weeks turned pinkish red in the last RCI devaluation plus my resort went from Gold Crown to Silver Crown.

Still by traveling off season I was able to get into some nice places using one week.  Now it will take combining two or three weeks to get the same trade I got before with only one.

This will cost extra MFs plus the extra $99 making RCI trades much more expensive than other programs like DAE, TPI, etc.  

In my case I won't walk away (my timeshares were inherited from my father so he picked the location and fixed week, unfortunately for a time of year we can't travel).  But I will be using the other exchange companies rather that RCI for more of my trades in the future.  For example I just came home from a wonderful week in Hawaii using DAE.  

I did a screen capture of availability before and after.  Before the new points-lite system my week was showing 148 Hawaii weeks available for exchange (granted not all of them were top ranked places but I snagged a Wyndham Kona Village during the bulk spacebank before the switch).  Now I can see only 2 Hawaii weeks unless I opt to combine.

In my case it will make more sense to use RCI for rentals, not exchanges.  Which perhaps is what they wanted all along.


----------



## DaveNV

If this question has already been answered, plese send me that link.  I haven't found it.

On the RCI Weeks website Deposit Calculator page, if I look up a certain unit or week at a resort I might want to exchange into, is the number the search returns what I should expect to be required to get an exchange into that resort?  Or is it just the trade value number I'd get if I deposited that week?

Example: Labor Day 2011 one bedroom at The Manhattan Club returns a Maximum Trading Power of 46.  Am I correct to expect that if I wanted to exchange something for that week, I'd need 46 points to get it?  (Presuming that particular week was available to be exchanged into.)

Dave


----------



## bnoble

> is the number the search returns what I should expect to be required to get an exchange into that resort? Or is it just the trade value number I'd get if I deposited that week?



The latter.  In many cases, it gives you a good idea of what might be required, but in a few outliers, the difference is substantial.


----------



## Rene McDaniel

BMWguynw said:


> Example: Labor Day 2011 one bedroom at The Manhattan Club returns a Maximum Trading Power of 46.  Am I correct to expect that if I wanted to exchange something for that week, I'd need 46 points to get it?  (Presuming that particular week was available to be exchanged into.)
> Dave



Dave,
I just posted several Manhattan Club units on the Sightings Board a few minutes ago.  There are a couple of weeks you might be interested in.  Looks like there was a bulk banking at some point, but the credits required look as if each week is the same value that it would get using the TP calculator.  

It appears that trade power to get into Manhattan Club might not be affected (or discounted) because of bulk bankings anymore.  I wonder if the credits required would change (decrease) if the resort did a bulk banking closer to the check-in dates.

So, if this current Manhattan Club bulk banking is any indication of what we can expect post Nov. 12th -- it would appear that the prior benefits of bulk bankings are also gone.


----------



## Goofyhobbie

> So, if this current Manhattan Club bulk banking is any indication of what we can expect post Nov. 12th -- it would appear that the prior benefits of bulk bankings are also gone.



Rene,

While you may be correct, especially in regards to The Manhattan Club and other very desirable locations that are Bulk deposited, it is more likely than not that the benefits of "Bulk" banking of large quanities of inventory will still be an advantage to savvy TUG MEMBERS using the toolls we already have available to us. TUG MEMBERS know what I am talking about and non-members will appreciate the benefits referred to when they join TUG and become active participants.

Supply and Demand will determine over time what RCI is willing to do with Bulk deposits. When they have an over abundance of inventory they may try to get members to pony up more credits; but the supply and demand equation will or should enable the Market to work. Those in the know, in my opinion, will still be able to get access when supply is high; but the abilities to use low TP weeks without some kind of combination will no doubt affect the rate of success.


----------



## AFARR

*Had an interesting conversation with an RCI C.S. guy today..*

Dealing with my issue on not getting a points transfer on the week I bought (he contacted the original owner to fill out the account transfer form directly instead of my waiting for the reseller/closing co).

He did mention that they were aware of several glitches in the system.

He did mention that they were aware of people not being happy about being unable to get a 'same resort' or 'same location' trade like they used to...but did specify that (I think it was mentioned above) that an owner can trade at the head of the line (assuming they have enough trade credits) over non-owners looking for the same week.

I did go into the "what if I combine and don't get the trade I want" issue..and he mentioned that they can probably credit the $99 back if you don't use the combined numbers...and they may have that option in the future as an automatic part of searches (he wasn't entirely sure)...pay the $99 to combine, and if you don't, you can get the $$ credited back if you don't match your trade.

***I did mention that I would personally prefer an option to "combine if needed" rather than a "combine first...(i.e..pay first)" option.  Set up a search with your existing trade credits, and check off an option of "offer me weeks that would require combining" (i.e..higher values than your individual week credits), where you could pay at the same time you pay the exchange fee.   That gives the user the option to see what's available and make the decision at that time.****
AFARR


----------



## Mel

Rene McDaniel said:


> I don't know how many RCI exchanges are actually owners exchanging back into their home resort or resort group, but these would probably not have been people you would have talked to as an RCI guide.  An owner just makes an ongoing search, and the computer recognizes your owner status, and usually an exchange comes through, even though most owners are seeking exchanges during prime time, or looking for a larger unit (maybe they have extra family coming this trip).  If those days are over, it might take a while for people to figure this out -- but I think it will cause a lot of people to walk away from RCI, their resort ownership, and timesharing.


If that many owners are trading back into their own resorts, then perhaps those resorts need to have their own internal exchange system.  Many resorts have done just that - instituted an internal exchange program to serve their members, and keep the fees to themselves.  While it may mean less fees to RCI, it can be to RCI's benefit too, given the way owners expected to be able to exchange back into better weeks.


> So, I have a couple of questions for you to ask your RCI friend on behalf of owners who trade back into their own resort:
> 
> (1) With so many users who trade back to their home resort, or within their resort group (pre Nov. 12) -- why is RCI no longer allowing this?
> 
> (2) Is it just about potentially making an extra $99 in new fees with exchangers getting a trade that previously might have been taken by an owner?
> 
> (3) If there were enough requests from RCI members and resorts, would RCI possibly reconsider reinstating owner preference, to however it was handled in the past.  (If trade power was, in fact a factor, it must have been a much wider band, rather than specific point values as it stands post Nov. 12th)  I have heard that some resort groups are currently in negotiations with RCI to get their preferences back for their group.  (But that would still leave owners who are not in a mini-system out in the cold)


I'm obviously not the person you directed these question to, but again I think an internal exchange program run at the resort level would solve some of these problems.

When a group of owners at a given resort use RCI for their internal exchanges, and RCI allows an unever exchange to be treated as even, it leaves an imbalance on RCI's books.

Under the new system, say your resort has 50 units, and 30 owners reserve July 4th and deposit it for 50 credits.  Another 30 owner reserve other summer weeks for 40 credits, and use those 40 credits to exchange back into the July 4th weeks (in effect at a discount, because RCI gives them owner-preference).

Of those original 30 owners, 10 of them trade back into the home resort for different summer weeks (why they did them, who knows?) for 40 credits and get 10 credits change.  The other 20 have not made requests yet.

RCI now has 20 summer weeks work 40 credits each in the bank, 20 members who are owed 50 credits worth of exchanges, and 10 members with 10 leftover credits each.  That's inventory woth 800 credits, and accounts payapbe worth 1100 credits.  Where are those extra 300 credits going to come from?

While it might mean RCI will never see any July 4th weeks, many would argue that those should go to owners who want to use them.  I won't go so far to say that owners who exchange should be treated as second class citizens, but current booking systems seem to do the reverse - owner who want to stay at the resort may not know if they can take a vacation that week, while exchangers can book as soon as it's available because they don't care if they can take vacation then.That leaves the own-to-use members at the mercy of the exchange owners to leave some desireable inventory for them.


Carolinian said:


> I always wondered if RCI would put plants on this board once we discovered this was coming down the pike, and suspected they might.  That is common corporate behavior in the days of the internet.  There are several I have watched you have shown up here since we learned this change was coming that are potentials.
> 
> The post that told the tale for me on this guy was when he claimed with great editorial fanfare that it was resorts and not RCI that set the red/white/blue designations.  How dense does he think we are?
> 
> Also, the way he keeps contradicting things that Bootleg or Anon revealed, and we knew they were the real deal and customer-oriented.


First, while RCI designates Red/White/Blue, it is the resorts the designate reservation seasons.  While many older resorts are stuck with their original seasons (which may have been perfectly acceptable then), whether RCI maintains the current seasonal designations or not.  Newer resorts use different names for their seasons to ensure people understand they are not the same.

As for Bootleg and Anon - when did they work for RCI?  Certainly not as recently as August.  I believe some of what they told use - and also believe that there have been changes since they worked at RCI.  This new individual has a different perspective than they did - that does not make any of their perspectives more or less valuable than the others.  


AFARR said:


> Dealing with my issue on not getting a points transfer on the week I bought (he contacted the original owner to fill out the account transfer form directly instead of my waiting for the reseller/closing co).
> 
> He did mention that they were aware of people not being happy about being unable to get a 'same resort' or 'same location' trade like they used to...but did specify that (I think it was mentioned above) that an owner can trade at the head of the line (assuming they have enough trade credits) over non-owners looking for the same week.
> 
> I did go into the "what if I combine and don't get the trade I want" issue..and he mentioned that they can probably credit the $99 back if you don't use the combined numbers...and they may have that option in the future as an automatic part of searches (he wasn't entirely sure)...pay the $99 to combine, and if you don't, you can get the $$ credited back if you don't match your trade.
> 
> ***I did mention that I would personally prefer an option to "combine if needed" rather than a "combine first...(i.e..pay first)" option.  Set up a search with your existing trade credits, and check off an option of "offer me weeks that would require combining" (i.e..higher values than your individual week credits), where you could pay at the same time you pay the exchange fee.   That gives the user the option to see what's available and make the decision at that time.****
> AFARR


Such a system would be great - since the cost to exchange in is apparently dynamic, this would be good even if we can "afford" the exchange right now with a current deposit, because depending when we make our request, the cost might just as easily go up as go down.  If we have the sense that our request should cost 35 credits and we use a week worth 35 to search, and institute our search after 30 other members, what happens when we get to the front of the line, but demand has moved the cost up to 36?  I would rather be given the option to combine some points and take the trade, or pass it up, rather than see it simply pass along to the first person with 36 credits.  If turning it down allows me to keep my place in line, how close we are to use date might influence my decision - but I would prefer it to be my decision, not RCI's.


----------



## Tommart

sghokie said:


> I am disappointed with this new system. I have 2 weeks on deposit. One has a lower value (10) while the other has a value of (14).
> Prior to the late October re-valuation, my 10 pt week had access to many resorts. Not particularly great ones, but a pretty good selection. I had access to many places that are valued at 14 now with the 10 deposit. And with the 14 deposit I had access to weeks now rated as much as 25.
> I wonder why before I could have booked these places and can't now even though the same resorts and weeks are still in the inventory.
> 
> So what is seems like to me is that RCI has turned the whole deposit system to a plutonomy. The haves and have nots. ......My 2 cents anyways.



Skhokie,

Prior to the new system, RCI grouped resorts into bands.  I don't know how many or what values, but let's say each band was 8.  So there may have been a 1-8 band, and 9-16 band, etc.  

A resort with 10 TP could exchange for any in the band, and any lower band, e.g. 1-16.  

Now a unit with 10 TP can only trade for 1-10.  So you are correct, that the quality of what you can trade for is diminished.  A unit with 8 TP or 16 TP is not impacted at all if bands were 8 wide.

It actually hurts the high TP units too, but I agree it doesn't hurt as much.  A unit with 33 TP had access to units with 40, but now they are limited to 33.  

It really hurts low value weeks.  I saw some Virginia Beach resorts with 2 TP, and my own Woodstone has some 4 TP weeks.  These TPs make yours seem like heaven.  Maybe in the past they could trade for 8 TP units, but are now limited to 2 or 4 TPs units.

I agree this will increase the number of owners who dump weeks, and the ability of developers to sell non-prime weeks.

I guess RCI could bring back the bands and give all 1-8 units 8 TP, and all 6-16 units 16 TP, etc.   33TP units would have 40 TPs.  The problem with this is that a 2 TP unit will cost 8 TPs to exchange into.


----------



## STEVIE

*Combining same week, different year*

Please forgive me if this has been answered already. Only one of my weeks are in RCI. To take advantage of combining weeks for more trade power, can I deposit early and use a week from one year period and combine it with a week at the same resort from another year?  Sue


----------



## bellesgirl

Yes.  And the weeks do not have to be from the same resort.  You may have to wait until RCI confirms your new deposit with your resort before you can combine and trade, though.  I don't know if anyone has done that yet who can comment.


----------



## Timeshare Von

My experience is that until your home resort confirms your deposit (based on MF payment most likely) you won't see newly deposited weeks in your account to combine.  I did my deposits this past week on Tuesday or Wednesday and they're not in my account yet for combining.


----------



## KTaylor

*Looking for help...(with new weeks credits system valuations)*

Being an RCI Points member, I do not have access to the values that RCI is giving deposits.  I have been reading and absorbing all that is being reported, but I haven't seen some specific weeks that I'm interested in.

Could someone please post the value of Las Vegas wk. 52 units please.  I'm particularly interested in The Grandview 2 Bedroom Lockouts. (Assuming the 2 Bedroom would be twice the 1 Bedroom)  Do the resorts closer to the strip give a higher value due to their location or not. (like in the points system)

Also, What is the value of DVC units?  I saw a mention of around 35 in a post I read but I don't think it specified the size or time of year.

Thanks in advance,

Kirk


----------



## abdibile

lolibeachgirl said:


> it allows sorting by each category for the list of units that match your credit deposits (which is a short list), but not for the long list of all available units in the system from your search.  This makes it more difficult than necessary if you have 2 deposits you could combine, but can't sort the long list to find credits needed, size of unit, or a date preference...



Even the results of my (longer) lists of results matching my credits seem to get sorted somehow chaotic when I sort for checkin day.

Is this only with my account or do you see that too?


----------



## Carolinian

Looking at numbers for high demand, low supply areas in Europe and the east coast US, I have absolutely no confidence that supply and demand are the core principles of RCI's new numbers racket.  Indeed, they are more likely to stand supply and demand on their head.




Goofyhobbie said:


> Rene,
> 
> While you may be correct, especially in regards to The Manhattan Club and other very desirable locations that are Bulk deposited, it is more likely than not that the benefits of "Bulk" banking of large quanities of inventory will still be an advantage to savvy TUG MEMBERS using the toolls we already have available to us. TUG MEMBERS know what I am talking about and non-members will appreciate the benefits referred to when they join TUG and become active participants.
> 
> Supply and Demand will determine over time what RCI is willing to do with Bulk deposits. When they have an over abundance of inventory they may try to get members to pony up more credits; but the supply and demand equation will or should enable the Market to work. Those in the know, in my opinion, will still be able to get access when supply is high; but the abilities to use low TP weeks without some kind of combination will no doubt affect the rate of success.


----------



## Carolinian

Tommart said:


> Skhokie,
> 
> Prior to the new system, RCI grouped resorts into bands.  I don't know how many or what values, but let's say each band was 8.  So there may have been a 1-8 band, and 9-16 band, etc.
> 
> A resort with 10 TP could exchange for any in the band, and any lower band, e.g. 1-16.
> 
> Now a unit with 10 TP can only trade for 1-10.  So you are correct, that the quality of what you can trade for is diminished.  A unit with 8 TP or 16 TP is not impacted at all if bands were 8 wide.
> 
> It actually hurts the high TP units too, but I agree it doesn't hurt as much.  A unit with 33 TP had access to units with 40, but now they are limited to 33.
> 
> It really hurts low value weeks.  I saw some Virginia Beach resorts with 2 TP, and my own Woodstone has some 4 TP weeks.  These TPs make yours seem like heaven.  Maybe in the past they could trade for 8 TP units, but are now limited to 2 or 4 TPs units.
> 
> I agree this will increase the number of owners who dump weeks, and the ability of developers to sell non-prime weeks.
> 
> I guess RCI could bring back the bands and give all 1-8 units 8 TP, and all 6-16 units 16 TP, etc.   33TP units would have 40 TPs.  The problem with this is that a 2 TP unit will cost 8 TPs to exchange into.



And to make this worse, while the nitpick on exact numbers on the trade mechanism, for valuing resorts, they now use a grid that lumps many weeks, sometimes very dissimilar together.  For instance, on the OBX, they value weeks 11 through 21 inclusive at the same number.  That is a gift to the least value 11 but defrauds the much high value 21.  Nitpicking numbers on the exchange mechanism while lumping too much together in valuing deposits is the worst of all worlds for members.  Points Lite is neither a fair nor an honest system.


----------



## sfwilshire

If you are an RCI Points member, the only thing that is pertinent is the number of RCI Points required to book a unit. I haven't checked to see if that follows in any way the Trade Credits that are required on the Weeks site, which you can see by doing a search.

Am I missing something?

Sheila


----------



## Conan

Carolinian said:


> And to make this worse, while the nitpick on exact numbers on the trade mechanism, for valuing resorts, they now use a grid that lumps many weeks, sometimes very dissimilar together. For instance, on the OBX, they value weeks 11 through 21 inclusive at the same number. That is a gift to the least value 11 but defrauds the much high value 21. Nitpicking numbers on the exchange mechanism while lumping too much together in valuing deposits is the worst of all worlds for members.


 
This is the Facts/Questions thread, so let's look at the factual portion of what you're saying:

Yes, the new RCI system when it values a deposit doesn't make an exact trading power calculation. For example, a week I own in Florida (it's a floating week which is why I looked all this up) receives the following points depending on the week I deposit (in 2012):
Week 1-5: 17 points
Week 6: 22 points
Week 7-8: 26 points
Week 9-12: 22 points
Week 13: 26 points
Week 14: 22 points
Week 15-24: 15 points
Week 25-26: 17 points
Week 27: 19 points
Week 28-33: 17 points
Week 34-43: 14 points
Week 44-45: 15 points
Week 46: 19 points
Week 47-52 [info not available when I checked]

This does not look to me like RCI is "nitpicking numbers on the exchange mechanism" or "defrauding the much higher value."

The numbers above are what I get when I deposit my week. As far as we know, a person who wants to reserve one of those deposited weeks is offered a price in points that RCI's computer calculates directly by reference to the supply of and demand for that particular week. So the price they are invited to pay may differ (by a little or a lot) from the number of points I was given for making the deposit. 

My personal experience in this area is that a few days ago I deposited a 2012 fixed week (at a Myrtle Beach area property that I own) and I can see it now being offered on RCI's list of available weeks. The price they are offering it for is 5 points *less* than the price they paid me. So apparently the banding of deposits worked in my favor in this case (and don't forget I knew before I made that deposit exactly how many points RCI would give me for it so I could have kept it to rent or deposited it with another company if I didn't like their offer).

Although I should not be giving my opinion in this Facts/Question topic, I will say I think you're wrong to say that the system described above is nitpicking or defrauding us as owners and exchangers. (And I don't know what "lite" means.)


----------



## DocPepsi

Rene McDaniel said:


> My responses are located below the comments/questions.
> --- Rene



I have to say I disagree with you in terms of Summer being all 3 months of June, July and August.  What you are then saying is that all 12 weeks of time from roughly June 1st through August 31st has the same demand for people.

You contradicted yourself however by then posting that you couldn't use the late August week for yourself because you needed to take a vacation while your kids were out of school.  That right there is an example of how not all June, July, and August are the same.  I understand for you as a floating owner, you paid the same as someone that was assigned a one of these mid-July weeks that have the highest value.  For that I certainly feel your pain, but I don't think RCI (and really the other owners that deposit exchanges) should have to subsidize this difference.  In a logical sense, if you get more value for your week, then the value of everyone elses week drops in relation.


----------



## DocPepsi

FrmrVacGuide said:


> One other point, that I've seen you harp on quite a bit.  Yes, I'm sure RCI gives a higher value to large developers.  It only makes business sense.  If they took a hard line approach with someone like Vacation Village, then they would lose a huge amount of members and resorts the next time that contract came up for renewal, because II would make them a sweetheart deal to switch companies.  In the long run, to make as many vacation destinations available as possible, they have to do things like that.  In a perfect world, there would only be one exchange company that worked with every resort, and they would be a non-profit entity.  Unfortunately, that is never going to happen, so you're going to have to learn to deal with the realities of capitalism.



It is unfortunate that this is the case.  I know it is a business, but still, I would say the the majority of people know that the places that this company owns in Western Virginia, Orlando, and South Florida are so massive, that the influx of inventory there can't possibly have a huge value.

I find it interesting your terming a 'sweetheart deal' to switch exchange company alliances.  Disney switched from II to RCI, something tells me based on what you've stated this was something that happened to convince Disney to side with RCI?

Lastly, this thread has generally been productive, but the back and forth angry postings by yourself and Carolinin has been very annoying.  It is very clear at least to me that each of you is just trying to discredit the other and push your own agendas than actually stick with the value of the posting and the forum, which is help educate and explain things.

Maybe others disagree with me, but it would be nice if this type of commentary could be relegated to somewhere else besides here.

Thanks.


----------



## krmlaw

*ongoing searches*

i can see mine now, but cant change, anyone else?


----------



## Mel

Tommart said:


> It really hurts low value weeks.  I saw some Virginia Beach resorts with 2 TP, and my own Woodstone has some 4 TP weeks.  These TPs make yours seem like heaven.  Maybe in the past they could trade for 8 TP units, but are now limited to 2 or 4 TPs units.


What you were looking at was the cost to exchange in, not what RCI offered the owners of those weeks.  If you look at what RCI is offering 9 or more months out, for less than 10 credits, you can identify the weeks RCI seems to value less.  Find those resorts that you can get for 5 points a full year out, and then pull them up with the deposit calculator.  What you will find is that RCI offers 8 or more points for those weeks.  I have yet to find ANY week that is offered less than 8 points when deposited 9 or more months out - and have challenged others to find such a week.

Given that such a week is worth 8 credits on deposit (or 7 even if deposited 6 months out), that member can now in fact exchange in for that 8TP unit.  He can also choose to exchange into 2 or 3 last-minute weeks in something similar to what he owns.  Yes, he might have less access to those exchanges, but it's not as significant a change as some would lead you to believe.

Remember, there are two parts to the equation - Deposit and Exchange.  We can see all the numbers on the exchange side for a resort where deposits are available, but we have to look up the deposit numbers individually.


DocPepsi said:


> It is unfortunate that this is the case.  I know it is a business, but still, I would say the the majority of people know that the places that this company owns in Western Virginia, Orlando, and South Florida are so massive, that the influx of inventory there can't possibly have a huge value.
> 
> I find it interesting your terming a 'sweetheart deal' to switch exchange company alliances.  Disney switched from II to RCI, something tells me based on what you've stated this was something that happened to convince Disney to side with RCI?


Yes.  DVC was part of RCI many years ago, and switched to II.  At the time, RCI did not allow DVC or any other member resort to charge an extra fee to RCI members who exchanged in, if it was not charged to their own onwers.  When DVC moved to II, they started charging $95 to exchange guests to cover "transportation" and other services, yet for DVC members that was already covered in their maintenance fees.

Who knows what RCI offered to Disney this time, but you can be assured Disney is getting something out of the move.  Incidentally, while owners at deeded fixed-week resorts can remain with their old exchange company when a developer (or HOA) decides to change their affiliation, which is why you can still see a few Marriott properties through RCI, while the rest only exchange through II.


DocPepsi said:


> Lastly, this thread has generally been productive, but the back and forth angry postings by yourself and Carolinin has been very annoying.  It is very clear at least to me that each of you is just trying to discredit the other and push your own agendas than actually stick with the value of the posting and the forum, which is help educate and explain things.
> 
> Maybe others disagree with me, but it would be nice if this type of commentary could be relegated to somewhere else besides here.


It would be nice, but one party to those interchanges will continue to attack anyone who disagrees with him - and those who know better feel the need to counterack his statements, or newer member here will not get a balanced view of what is happening at RCI.  I'm sure he feels that he needs to counter anything any of us post as well.  Unfortunately that results in a "FACTS" thread that is largely opinionated, because nobody can agree on what the real facts are.


----------



## KTaylor

sfwilshire said:


> If you are an RCI Points member, the only thing that is pertinent is the number of RCI Points required to book a unit.  Sheila



I'm curious as to the trade credit values in a few places. I'm well aware of how to make reservations and what is pertinent with my own personal ownerships, however, I'd like to know the value that RCI has given those ownerships in separate systems.

My understanding is its fairly easy for someone who is a weeks member to search for and post this value, is that correct?


----------



## travelguy

*Combining Ongoing Search Deposits in RCI Weeks??*

I have two ongoing searches that predate the new RCI weeks enhancement.  I am finally able to see these searches since RCI "fixed" the web sited over the weekend.  

I attempted to combine the two weeks but the web site won't allow it and shows the two deposits associated with the ongoing searches as "Not Eligible to Combine".

I suspect that I need to cancel the ongoing searches, combine the two deposits, and then reenter the ongoing searches associating them with the combined deposits.  The problem with that strategy is that I lose all seniority with the ongoing searches (if seniority still exists with the new RCI weeks system) and have to start over again if I cancel the existing ongoing searches.

Anyone know of a work around to achieve combing the weeks associated with multiple ongoing searches without canceling the searches??


----------



## MichaelColey

Why would you want to combine them if you're doing ongoing searches with them?  I'm assuming you want both of the exchanges and that you have enough trading power for them.


----------



## Carolyn

*In new RCI System what happens if.......*

I booked a June 2010 vacation with a 2009 deposit.  What happens if I have to cancel that week?  Will the original deposit be worth anything when returned to my RCI Weeks account?  In the past I know the week is somewhat devalued. FYI this week was deposited in my RCI account over a year in advance but that is probably a moot point when cancelling a confirmed vacation.


----------



## krmlaw

im nervous too about cancellations ... anyone?

and agree with previous posters about the infighting ...


----------



## Stricky

*RCI weeks resorts greater than 30points?*

I am looking for resorts for travel next year and have not come accross any over 25 points. Anyone know of resorts with trades over 30? Curious to see what they are.


----------



## BevL

I'm guessing you have deposits that are valued under 30 points and are not changing your search to see everything RCI has?

If you search for everything, you will see resorts well into the 40s and 50s and you can actually narrow your search to resorts within certain point ranges.

To do that, when you're at the initial search screen, on the left of the blue band on top of the worldwide map, there's a link to "Click to Change".  Go there and in the upper right hand corner you can switch it from what your deposit will see to total RCI inventory.

If you're doing that and not seeing resorts over 30, that's strange and something I have no explanation for.


----------



## Stricky

I have been doing the "include all" option but have been looking at specific resorts. I just search in Hawaii and saw some.  Thanks for responding.


----------



## BevL

Manhattan Club too is significantly north of 40 as will be SoCal summer weeks, I would expect.


----------



## schiff1997

Try this

Pick a region i.e. USA to search, then scroll all the way down to the bottom and open up Exchange Trading Power, then choose which trading power you would like to see, then go back up and cancel out search area USA.  Then go back down again and reopen Exchange Trading Power.   This will then show you all the units with the trade power you have chosen throughout the world.  

Right now I see 459 units that have a Trade Power Value of 33 +


----------



## MichaelColey

For the most part, it takes a high demand week (think holidays or summer) in a high demand resort or area to need a trading power over 30.  There are some (like Manhattan Club) where everything is higher, but those seem to be pretty rare.


----------



## Rene McDaniel

DocPepsi said:


> I have to say I disagree with you in terms of Summer being all 3 months of June, July and August.  What you are then saying is that all 12 weeks of time from roughly June 1st through August 31st has the same demand for people.
> 
> You contradicted yourself however by then posting that you couldn't use the late August week for yourself because you needed to take a vacation while your kids were out of school.  That right there is an example of how not all June, July, and August are the same.



I am not contradicting myself. But if you want to discredit me on what is truly a side-issue.  Yes, I will take the bait because I cannot let your false statements stand.  I never said that June 1 - Aug. 31 has the same demand.  I'm sure RCI has the stats to even break July up into even more bands of trade value.  A week that includes July 4th would obviously be the most requested of all.  

Our kids first school day was August 23rd and they will finish at the end of May, but we are in a small district with only a few schools.  However, San Diego Unified School District (the 2nd largest school district in California - 225 schools), didn't start school until Sept. 7th and Los Angeles Unified (the largest school district in CA with 1,200 schools) didn't start until Sept. 11th.  Most private schools, state colleges and universities in our area to not start school until after Labor Day in September.  It has been this way for at least the last 20 years. So, *a few million Southern California families are available to take a SoCal beach vacation in August*.  Besides, not everyone has kids in school.

Besides owning at my resort for over 10 years, we also have owned a vacation rental in this same area for over 10 years.  For the past 5 years, our numbers have been about the same: we rent 3 out of 4 June weeks, 100% of the July weeks, 3 out of 4 of the August weeks, and even 3 out of 4 of the September weeks to people from Arizona or desert areas where it is still REALLY hot.  So, although I disagree with RCI trade power allocations that treat only 1 week of June & 1 week of August as the most desirable -- it doesn't really matter because you are arguing with me on a side issue.  What I care about is:

An owner's ability to trade back into their own resort, irrespective of the trade power assigned to their week.  (Not other resorts, mind you, just their home resort where they own.)




DocPepsi said:


> ..... It is very clear at least to me that each of you is just trying to discredit the other and push your own agendas than actually stick with the value of the posting and the forum, which is help educate and explain things.
> 
> Maybe others disagree with me, but it would be nice if this type of commentary could be relegated to somewhere else besides here.  Thanks.



to DocPepsi,
Posts such as yours: sharing your opinion, then stating that I have (foolishly) contradicted myself in my post -- require a response.  Otherwise, it would appear that you know what you're talking about, and I don't.   But, if you truly want everyone to play nice in the sandbox, that means you should hold yourself to the same high standard.

I don't know if you work for RCI, or not.  But it is also odd that you are yet, one more RCI-defender who just joined our BBS 12 days ago (11/10/2010) to tell me how wrong I am, and how this new program is really good & more fair & wonderful.   Maybe it is for some.  But maybe it's not for some others.  Everyone will have to weigh it against their own situation.

I for one, am hoping that RCI will do the right thing, and put the owner preference back in place as it used to be.


----------



## irisheaven

*Question on NEW RCI Trading System*

I have a couple questions. 

1)  Is trading strictly based on your trading power number or is it still by season's also?  Ex...if I own a white week w/20 TP, can I get a Red week 20 TP?

2) The chart below lists available units at one particular resort. My question is, why would the same week be 1/2 the points in a different year?

2 Bedrooms 	6 (4) 	Fri 30-Mar-2012 	Fri 06-Apr-2012 	23
2 Bedrooms 	6 (6) 	Sat 31-Mar-2012 	Sat 07-Apr-2012 	23 
2 Bedrooms 	6 (4) 	Sat 31-Mar-2012 	Sat 07-Apr-2012 	23 
2 Bedrooms 	6 (4) 	Fri 06-Apr-2012 	Fri 13-Apr-2012 	23 
2 Bedrooms 	6 (6) 	Sat 07-Apr-2012 	Sat 14-Apr-2012 	23 
2 Bedrooms 	6 (4) 	Sat 07-Apr-2012 	Sat 14-Apr-2012 	23 
_____________________________________________________________
2 Bedrooms 	6 (6) 	Sat 26-Mar-2011 	Sat 02-Apr-2011 	10 
2 Bedrooms 	6 (4) 	Fri 01-Apr-2011 	Fri 08-Apr-2011 	11 
2 Bedrooms 	6 (4) 	Sat 02-Apr-2011 	Sat 09-Apr-2011 	11 
2 Bedrooms 	6 (6) 	Sat 02-Apr-2011 	Sat 09-Apr-2011 	11 
2 Bedrooms 	6 (4) 	Fri 08-Apr-2011 	Fri 15-Apr-2011 	12 
2 Bedrooms 	6 (4) 	Sat 09-Apr-2011 	Sat 16-Apr-2011 	12 
2 Bedrooms 	6 (6) 	Sat 09-Apr-2011 	Sat 16-Apr-2011 	12 

Thanks,
Sarah


----------



## DaveNV

irisheaven said:


> I have a couple questions.
> 
> 1)  Is trading strictly based on your trading power number or is it still by season's also?  Ex...if I own a white week w/20 TP, can I get a Red week 20 TP?
> 
> 2) The chart below lists available units at one particular resort. My question is, why would the same week be 1/2 the points in a different year?
> 
> 2 Bedrooms 	6 (4) 	Fri 30-Mar-2012 	Fri 06-Apr-2012 	23
> 2 Bedrooms 	6 (6) 	Sat 31-Mar-2012 	Sat 07-Apr-2012 	23
> 2 Bedrooms 	6 (4) 	Sat 31-Mar-2012 	Sat 07-Apr-2012 	23
> 2 Bedrooms 	6 (4) 	Fri 06-Apr-2012 	Fri 13-Apr-2012 	23
> 2 Bedrooms 	6 (6) 	Sat 07-Apr-2012 	Sat 14-Apr-2012 	23
> 2 Bedrooms 	6 (4) 	Sat 07-Apr-2012 	Sat 14-Apr-2012 	23
> _____________________________________________________________
> 2 Bedrooms 	6 (6) 	Sat 26-Mar-2011 	Sat 02-Apr-2011 	10
> 2 Bedrooms 	6 (4) 	Fri 01-Apr-2011 	Fri 08-Apr-2011 	11
> 2 Bedrooms 	6 (4) 	Sat 02-Apr-2011 	Sat 09-Apr-2011 	11
> 2 Bedrooms 	6 (6) 	Sat 02-Apr-2011 	Sat 09-Apr-2011 	11
> 2 Bedrooms 	6 (4) 	Fri 08-Apr-2011 	Fri 15-Apr-2011 	12
> 2 Bedrooms 	6 (4) 	Sat 09-Apr-2011 	Sat 16-Apr-2011 	12
> 2 Bedrooms 	6 (6) 	Sat 09-Apr-2011 	Sat 16-Apr-2011 	12
> 
> Thanks,
> Sarah




I think the difference is the length of time until the usage week.  Those you show with low weeks are just a few months from now, where the ones with higher numbers are the next year.


----------



## lolibeachgirl

abdibile,
The only searches I've done are for Hawaii, so the list I get that matches one of my (ex's) deposits, is a really short list.  His deposit values are only 10 (studio from 2 years ago), and 15 2br (with less than 6 months).  Plus I reduce my search down to Kauai, sometimes all the way down to Princeville, so sometimes I don't get a list of matches at all....


----------



## "Roger"

Rene McDaniel said:


> ...What I care about is:
> 
> An owner's ability to trade back into their own resort, irrespective of the trade power assigned to their week.  (Not other resorts, mind you, just their home resort where they own.)....


Rene,

[Just so that you know in advance, I don't expect to get into a back in forth discussion on this issue.  This will be my one post.]

I fully understand what you lost and it was valuable.  Your ability to trade back into your own resort for a prime week (one in which your kids are not in school) certainly was a bonus.  Still, there are two sides to every story and all I am going to try to do is get you to see the other side.

Years ago when I first joined TUG (I think that you are a long standing member yourself), I remember some mildly heated discussions about resorts where floating weeks spanned over some less to more desirable weeks.  None of these resorts had trade back priorities.  Some of them (the ones that led to the somewhat heated discussions) gave reservation priorty to those who actually planned to use the week that they reserved over those who planned to trade.  On one side we had TUGGERs saying that was totally unfair to exchangers - that they had as much claim to prime weeks as users.  On the other side, there were those who said that if a resort set a priority on giving the best weeks to owners who planned to enjoy vacationing where they bought that was the resorts perogative.  I won't take sides on this debate.  

Apparently, what was different about your resort was that owners (collectively) were able to eat their cake and have it too.  Let me explain with an imaginary two owner deal.

Alice is an exchanger and she reserves a July week for the purpose of exchanging.  Bill reserves an late August (or September) week but uses the resort priority to trade back into the resort for Alice's week.  At the end of the day, Bill has a July week and Alice has maximum trading power.  Put differently, RCI has given maximum trading power to an owner at your resort, but only has a lower power week (the August week) to show for it.

From the point of view of an outsider, this seems unfair.  An owner at your resort ends up with maximum trading power (and, in all likelihood, gets a prime week somewhere else), but someone trading in can only get a less desirable week at your resort. [Admittedly, I did not include the fact that RCI got an exchange fee out of the deal, but still...]

In the end, it seems like your resort got away with something - being able to put less desirable weeks into the RCI system, but always getting maximum trading power for its owners.  Maybe rather than being mad at the change, you should be thankful for all the years where the resort was able to accomplish this.

Regardless of whether you accept this point of view, no hard feelings.  Hopefully, with most weeks during your float system being within the good range for your family (I hope for your sake this is true - you never said how far into the fall the float period extended), you will always be able to reserve a desirable week and what concerns you will never become an issue. Best of luck.


----------



## Rene McDaniel

:deadhorse: Okay. Okay. Okay. I think we're ALL ready to move on.  I know I am.


----------



## catcher24

Question: Do you need to have a deposit in your account in order to see how many TP a possible exchange will take? I've been running vacation searches to see what might be available for my own units TP before I deposit any time with RCI. However, when I click on the Available Units button for a resort it brings up the units OK, but under Price all it lists are the words Exchange Fee, and under the Exchange Trading Power column, all of the spaces are blank. I'm thinking this is because I have no week deposited with RCI but I'm not sure. If so, I'm not very happy about having to deposit a week before I can see what I might be able to exchange it for. Any help/info is appreciated.


----------



## elaine

*3/30/2012 is prime spring break*

Sarah, in 2011, Easter is 4/23 and the demand for March/early April weeks is not as great. For 2012, the week prior to Easter starts 3/30/12. Thus, all those 2012 weeks in your post are either the week prior to or after Easter. Although spring breaks vary, for certain areas (Orlando, for one) the week prior to Easter has the highest demand, with the week after 2nd highest of all the spring breaks--this is proven by those weeks always being premium season for DVC points, number of days that WDW closes due to capacity, airfares, etc. I am certain RCI has tracked demand and thus the high values for that time in 2012 vs. 2011. If you have a floating week during this season, always pick the week prior to Easter for this area to deposit.


----------



## Carolinian

"Roger" you never seem to let an opportunity to defend RCI pass, do you?

While I have never used this internal trading preference myself, I sympathize with those who did and lost it, not with RCI.  RCI promoted the internal trade preference in the materials they provided to developers to help sell weeks (and therefore RCI membership) for many years.  Many bought in reliance on that.  It is just immoral and unethical for RCI to snatch it away.  And it was absolutely dishonest for RCI to tell members that they were not changing the trading powers, only revealing the numbers.  That has clearly been shown to have been a lie.  I am wondering when the RCI Happies on this board who kept telling us that we should believe that RCI promise will admit that they were wrong.

One of the big problems with RCI's valuation system is that  in both late spring/early summer and late summer/early fall many places is that while these weeks rise incrementally week by week in spring and fall incrementally week by week in the fall in real value but RCI uses grids that lump large groups of these weeks together.  If you own on the low end of one of those blocks, then your week is overvalued and you are given institutionalized trades up but if you own at the high end of one of those blocks, you are hosed.  Lumping too many weeks together for valuation purposes seems to be an inherent flaw of published points type systems, and now pops up in an unpublished one, too.  This to me has always been one of the huge drawbacks to RCI Points, and now it is in RCI "Weeks", too!




"Roger" said:


> Rene,
> 
> [Just so that you know in advance, I don't expect to get into a back in forth discussion on this issue.  This will be my one post.]
> 
> I fully understand what you lost and it was valuable.  Your ability to trade back into your own resort for a prime week (one in which your kids are not in school) certainly was a bonus.  Still, there are two sides to every story and all I am going to try to do is get you to see the other side.
> 
> Years ago when I first joined TUG (I think that you are a long standing member yourself), I remember some mildly heated discussions about resorts where floating weeks spanned over some less to more desirable weeks.  None of these resorts had trade back priorities.  Some of them (the ones that led to the somewhat heated discussions) gave reservation priorty to those who actually planned to use the week that they reserved over those who planned to trade.  On one side we had TUGGERs saying that was totally unfair to exchangers - that they had as much claim to prime weeks as users.  On the other side, there were those who said that if a resort set a priority on giving the best weeks to owners who planned to enjoy vacationing where they bought that was the resorts perogative.  I won't take sides on this debate.
> 
> Apparently, what was different about your resort was that owners (collectively) were able to eat their cake and have it too.  Let me explain with an imaginary two owner deal.
> 
> Alice is an exchanger and she reserves a July week for the purpose of exchanging.  Bill reserves an late August (or September) week but uses the resort priority to trade back into the resort for Alice's week.  At the end of the day, Bill has a July week and Alice has maximum trading power.  Put differently, RCI has given maximum trading power to an owner at your resort, but only has a lower power week (the August week) to show for it.
> 
> From the point of view of an outsider, this seems unfair.  An owner at your resort ends up with maximum trading power (and, in all likelihood, gets a prime week somewhere else), but someone trading in can only get a less desirable week at your resort. [Admittedly, I did not include the fact that RCI got an exchange fee out of the deal, but still...]
> 
> In the end, it seems like your resort got away with something - being able to put less desirable weeks into the RCI system, but always getting maximum trading power for its owners.  Maybe rather than being mad at the change, you should be thankful for all the years where the resort was able to accomplish this.
> 
> Regardless of whether you accept this point of view, no hard feelings.  Hopefully, with most weeks during your float system being within the good range for your family (I hope for your sake this is true - you never said how far into the fall the float period extended), you will always be able to reserve a desirable week and what concerns you will never become an issue. Best of luck.


----------



## miamidan

krmlaw said:


> im nervous too about cancellations ... anyone?
> 
> and agree with previous posters about the infighting ...





maybe i am answering the wrong question but, on cancels your trading power i think is recalculated with the deposit calculator.  insurance can protect it.


----------



## miamidan

Carolinian said:


> "Roger" you never seem to let an opportunity to defend RCI pass, do you?
> 
> While I have never used this internal trading preference myself, I sympathize with those who did and lost it, not with RCI.  RCI promoted the internal trade preference in the materials they provided to developers to help sell weeks (and therefore RCI membership) for many years.  Many bought in reliance on that.  It is just immoral and unethical for RCI to snatch it away.  And it was absolutely dishonest for RCI to tell members that they were not changing the trading powers, only revealing the numbers.  That has clearly been shown to have been a lie.  I am wondering when the RCI Happies on this board who kept telling us that we should believe that RCI promise will admit that they were wrong.
> 
> One of the big problems with RCI's valuation system is that  in both late spring/early summer and late summer/early fall many places is that while these weeks rise incrementally week by week in spring and fall incrementally week by week in the fall in real value but RCI uses grids that lump large groups of these weeks together.  If you own on the low end of one of those blocks, then your week is overvalued and you are given institutionalized trades up but if you own at the high end of one of those blocks, you are hosed.  Lumping too many weeks together for valuation purposes seems to be an inherent flaw of published points type systems, and now pops up in an unpublished one, too.  This to me has always been one of the huge drawbacks to RCI Points, and now it is in RCI "Weeks", too!



I have a friend who got a studio week in a terrible terrible location with seriously high supply and low supply.  He never went there but, knew it had trade preference in a large mini system.  In his words he "scammed" the system for years for two bedroom prime weeks.

He is a little bummed now as his unit has low teens but, he does not think it is unfair.  He just adjusted his portfolio and picked a prime week off of that inefficient resale market that is not indicative of the real market


----------



## Timeshare Von

MichaelColey said:


> For the most part, it takes a high demand week (think holidays or summer) in a high demand resort or area to need a trading power over 30.  There are some (like Manhattan Club) where everything is higher, but those seem to be pretty rare.



My (floating) Oahu studio is at least 31, and goes as high as 49 (Christmas week).


----------



## sandkastle4966

*QUESTION:  cancelling a pre Nov exchange*

Has anyone tried:

Cancelling a pre-november exchange for a deposit that has passed?

For example - an exchange using a summer 2010 week for something "next year".

Did you get the week back as a "new week" - with Trade Power?
If you check the calculator for the resort/interval of the deposit for "next year" - did you get the calculated trade power or was it greatly different.

Were you able to "get your trade back" using the week and getting change back ?  

(I have a 58 trade power week using a 2011 calcular with a 30 exchange - afraid to try cancel and "get it back".)


----------



## catcher24

schiff1997 said:


> Try this
> 
> Pick a region i.e. USA to search, then scroll all the way down to the bottom and open up Exchange Trading Power, then choose which trading power you would like to see, then go back up and cancel out search area USA.  Then go back down again and reopen Exchange Trading Power.   This will then show you all the units with the trade power you have chosen throughout the world.
> 
> Right now I see 459 units that have a Trade Power Value of 33 +



I attempted this but there is no button/link at the bottom of my page for Exchange Trading Power...


----------



## sandkastle4966

*FACT:  "prime"  more "GIVE" than to "TAKE"*

I played around with some prime ski weeks - what would I need to "take" the week in TP, and how much would I receive if I deposited that week ("give").

Using 3 resorts that there was prime availability for, I found that you got 3-5 more points on average to deposit the week than to get the week.

Conversely,  where there was "non-prime" availability - you got 3-5 "less" than it would take to "get" the same week.


(We need to standardize on some language - GET  is confusing - what it takes to GET IT,  or what I GET FOR it !)

GIVE (what you receive)   GET (what it would take)
GOT ( what you receive)   GET (what it would take)
GET (what you receive)    NEED (what it would take)

suggestions?


----------



## "Roger"

Carolinian said:


> "Roger" you never seem to let an opportunity to defend RCI pass, do you?...


I couldn't decide if this was an attempt at humor or not.  At this writing, Carolinian has posted 57 times in this thread, in every case attacking RCI.  This will be my 6th post.

Since Carolinian always accuses me of mistating his position, I will offer a correction on his statement.

Yes, I do prefer points based systems (whether RCI or not).  I think that they are more open and fairer.  It comes as no surprise to me that people who are in points based systems seem less suspicious and happier with timesharing.

What I feel even more strongly about is that every exchange system should make known how they value their weeks.  Furthermore, I think anyone should be able to choose whatever system suits them best.  (That includes not just independents, but both RCI and  II.) At that point, people could compare and decide which system works best for their own interests.  In addition, we would have something more closely approaching true supply and demand.  (That phrase has been severely abused on these  boards to describe a system of secret pricing combined with I take everything that you own in order to make this trade regardless of whether the two are equal or not.  To call  that supply and demand is total newspeak.)  

The above position has been stated many times.  Carolinian construes this as being RCI happy (his newest attempt to win debates by trying to debase anyone opposed to him). I get confused about how complete openess with the ability to use whatever system you like is RCI happy.

In conclusion, the various points systems (not just RCI, but Disney, Hyatt, HGVC, etc.) were a nice step toward more openess.  (Is it an accident that those hotel systems with reputations to defend chose openess?)  RCI's recent move toward more transparency is another big step toward lifting the shroud of secrecy and suspicion from timesharing.  Personally, at this point, I would advise anyone to avoid any system that fails to follow suit.  (I realize that many people are stuck and have little choice.  Pressure them!) 

Susan2 said it well earlier in one of these threads - this is a huge step toward cleaning up the sespool that timesharing has historically been.


----------



## sandkastle4966

*FACT:  this is supposed to be the Fact thread*

every post by Carolinian is slamming RCI, and then we get a slew slamming back.  MOVE THIS DISCUSSION TO OPINION !   

I want to learn something here, or share what I have fund -   not keep hearing the arguements from the clearly unhappy, RCI disliking Carolinian.   He (she) has already made it VERY CLEAR that they are not happy (just like several others who own specific weeks that they think are just dandy but don't get the TP they think they deserve).  

I skip every post now from Carolinian, but I still have to wade thru the responses to see if there was a nuget of truth in there....

Can't we please get to questions and facts......


----------



## krmlaw

im trying to enter an ongoing search, but cannot, is anyone else have a problem?


----------



## bnoble

I have not been able to enter an ongoing search at all since 11/15.  I have not followed up very carefully on it though.



> MOVE THIS DISCUSSION TO OPINION !


It is clear that individual members won't bother respecting the boundaries between the fact and opinion threads.  The only way to preserve any separation would be for the moderators to take a firm hand.  So far, they have chosen not to.  Perhaps they will.  Alternatively, perhaps it would be worth creating a new FAQ for the TUG articles page.


----------



## irisheaven

*2 Quick Questions....*

1)  Is trading strictly based on your trading power (TP) number now or is it still by the season your own?    Ex...... if I own a white week with a trading power of 20, can I get a Red week with the trading power of 20?

2) Same question, but now if I own a non award resort with TP 20, can I get a Gold crown resort with TP of 20?

Thanks,
Sarah


----------



## avad88

krmlaw said:


> im trying to enter an ongoing search, but cannot, is anyone else have a problem?



I started a search in September and this morning received an e-mail from RCI that it was canceled with no explanation. I called the rep and she said it was a "glitch" in the system and she would put it back on, but here I am at the back of the bus! When I checked later, she had entered it as a search for a "hotel" unit rather than a 2 bedroom that I wanted. I tried to amend it and could change the unit size, but not expand the dates. I'll try again later, but evidently they are having lots of "glitches".
Gotta love it.


----------



## bnoble

irisheaven said:


> 1)  Is trading strictly based on your trading power (TP) number now or is it still by the season your own?    Ex...... if I own a white week with a trading power of 20, can I get a Red week with the trading power of 20?
> 
> 2) Same question, but now if I own a non award resort with TP 20, can I get a Gold crown resort with TP of 20?
> 
> Thanks,
> Sarah


The only thing that matters is the credit value of the deposit you have, and price of the one you want.  Indeed, season and crown status never *really* mattered before this, either---season was a (*very*) rough indication of overall demand, and crown status measures quality, which (to hear RCI tell it) is a very small component of overall trade power.


----------



## irisheaven

Thanks bnoble!

Another question......

Why won't my deposit calculator work?   I want to find out what my number will be if I deposit one of my weeks.

Thanks,
Sarah


----------



## travelguy

MichaelColey said:


> Why would you want to combine them if you're doing ongoing searches with them?  I'm assuming you want both of the exchanges and that you have enough trading power for them.



Not quite.  The two deposited weeks that I have are 1 dog trader with a TP of 18 and another 30 day cancellation with a TP of 9.  I can SEE all of the RCI weeks available for trade but won't be able to execute the trade on anything higher than a TP of 18 since the weeks can't be combined.

In addition, I have two more weeks eligible to deposit that I want to combine.  I believe I can combine all four weeks with one $99 fee? (or is it $99 per week?).

Once the weeks are combined into one ongoing search, I can confirm any matched searches and continue to search with the "change" left over from the search.

>> Note that this post is in relation to my post # 379 above.  Not sure why my thread was moved into the middle of this blog-fight about the RCI system ... but I'd appreciate any responses to my original question about a work around to achieve combing the weeks associated with multiple ongoing searches without canceling the searches (and the seniority of the searches)??


----------



## bnoble

> Why won't my deposit calculator work?


Try clearing your cache/cookies.  That has helped some other people.


----------



## Carolinian

You are too modest ''Roger''.  You have been a regular defender of everything RCI for a long time.

I tend to call them as I see them, and that is from a perspective of supporting the timeshare owner first, the HOA second, and the exchange company only after that.  Others seem to have different priorities.  With Points Lite, I see more bad than good, but have posted about some of the positives like doing a better job of giving the credit correctly to holiday weeks than regular Points.  On Timeshare Forums, I started a thread listing all the positives and all the negatives of Points Lite.  I have always acknowledges that there are pluses and minuses to it.

As far as openness is concerned, again our positions are different.  I have supported total openness, which includes the formula for setting numbers and the data to support it.  You have stridently opposed openness of the mechanism of setting numbers.  There have been enough examples of distorted values in the new system to show why that is a necessity of there is going to be a fair and honest system of published numbers.  Even one poster who says he has worked for RCI, and strongly supports them in his posts, acknowledges that values of weeks are skewed through insider deals between developers and RCI. While a totally non-published system works great when there is no conflict of interest in the exchange company, it breaks down when the exchange company is putting its fingers in the till to take out weeks to rent to the general public.  But, then again, RCI's rentals to the general public, are another issue that you and I have often crossed swords over.

Calling a semi-open system that gives only the bottom line number but hides the methodology on how it was set ''complete openness'' is newspeak if I have ever seen it!  What a semi-open system does is create both the incentive and the ability to cook the books.

I guess one difference between us is that I am much more concerned about the fairness of the values than merely being given some values, which turn out to have very dubious fairness in too many instances.

You use one of your standard arguing techniques in discussing supply and demand - set up a straw man and knock it down.  What you describe has never been my position on supply and demand.  I support the old Weeks system of trading within a band or range which is inherently fair and flexible, in that one can never completely fairly and accurately determine all timeshare values down to a nitpicked exact number, so trading within a small percentage difference in values is in fact an equal trade.  I have never suggested that my model for RCI Weeks would be letting people trade for absolutely anything.  I think RCI's old bands prior to 5/31 were fair and provided essentially equal trades and made the system flexible.

As to points systems generally, I noticed that you conveniently left out Marriott when you listed the hotel points systems.  Is that because there is a lot of controversy among Marriott owners over the ways they are being screwed in the points system that has recently been imposed on them?

I am quite familiar with the history of timeshare points, from the fact that it was created by the very first timeshare developer, Hapimag, and thus points preceded weeks, that a French developer shortly afterward developed the rival weeks concept, and it was the weeks concept that took off in the market, leaving points in the dust.  I am also aware that points as an overlay to a preceding weeks system was developed in South Africa by a former loan shark (or ''tallyman'' as they are called there) named Andrew Davies, and essentially all ''conversion'' points systems are descended from that.  The incentive for the ''conversion'' points systems for developers is not to benefit the member in any way but 1) money, in selling over again to him the week he already owns, and 2) control, where voting of the week is then ceded to the developer.  The control aspect has been particularly sinister in a few situations, like in Sunterra/DRI.  Sunterra used it to bulldoze the remaining weeks-based owners at Club Brittania and its successor DRI did the same thing with the remaining weeks based owners at Wychnor Park and also with a smaller points club at Thurnham Hall.  That may be a preclude to bulldozing the remaining weeks based owners at Thurnham.

The history of points systems in South Africa is particularly illustrative, as this is the birthplace of conversion of regular weeks into points (as opposed to systems that have been points based from the beginning like Hapimag, DVC, etc.).  The following thread has all the South Africa file relating to the largest and oldest points club operator there from the old Crimeshare site.  They are in posts 2, 4, and 7:

http://www.timeshareforums.com/foru...r-areas/93039-takeover-attempt-dikhololo.html

If you want to talk about the cesspool of timesharing, there are a number of points system that are at the very bottom of it.



"Roger" said:


> I couldn't decide if this was an attempt at humor or not.  At this writing, Carolinian has posted 57 times in this thread, in every case attacking RCI.  This will be my 6th post.
> 
> Since Carolinian always accuses me of mistating his position, I will offer a correction on his statement.
> 
> Yes, I do prefer points based systems (whether RCI or not).  I think that they are more open and fairer.  It comes as no surprise to me that people who are in points based systems seem less suspicious and happier with timesharing.
> 
> What I feel even more strongly about is that every exchange system should make known how they value their weeks.  Furthermore, I think anyone should be able to choose whatever system suits them best.  (That includes not just independents, but both RCI and  II.) At that point, people could compare and decide which system works best for their own interests.  In addition, we would have something more closely approaching true supply and demand.  (That phrase has been severely abused on these  boards to describe a system of secret pricing combined with I take everything that you own in order to make this trade regardless of whether the two are equal or not.  To call  that supply and demand is total newspeak.)
> 
> The above position has been stated many times.  Carolinian construes this as being RCI happy (his newest attempt to win debates by trying to debase anyone opposed to him). I get confused about how complete openess with the ability to use whatever system you like is RCI happy.
> 
> In conclusion, the various points systems (not just RCI, but Disney, Hyatt, HGVC, etc.) were a nice step toward more openess.  (Is it an accident that those hotel systems with reputations to defend chose openess?)  RCI's recent move toward more transparency is another big step toward lifting the shroud of secrecy and suspicion from timesharing.  Personally, at this point, I would advise anyone to avoid any system that fails to follow suit.  (I realize that many people are stuck and have little choice.  Pressure them!)
> 
> Susan2 said it well earlier in one of these threads - this is a huge step toward cleaning up the sespool that timesharing has historically been.


----------



## miamidan

Suffice it to say you don't like the new weeks system or the RCI Points?


----------



## BocaBum99

I am just starting to learn the new RCI system, so I am very behind on the topic. My apologies if my questions have already been answered on this thread.  I read through about half of the posts and didn't see the answer.

What are the limits to the number of weeks a person can combine for the $99 combine fee?


----------



## djyamyam

BocaBum99 said:


> What are the limits to the number of weeks a person can combine for the $99 combine fee?



I don't believe anyone has found the upper end yet.


----------



## Carolinian

miamidan said:


> Suffice it to say you don't like the new weeks system or the RCI Points?



RCI created the best timeshare exchange system that anyone has ever come up with.  Since Cendant (now Wyndham) took over RCI, they have steadily screwed it up.  The latest is the ultimate destruction of their system.  There are many of us who simpoly do not want points.  The choices they now give us is between two variations of points systems, Points Lite and regular Points. Both have some of the same flaws and each has some unique flaws.


----------



## miamidan

I have only combined two weeks as combining others would actually have shortened their shelf life but, did not see anything that would block you from combing as many as you want.


----------



## catcher24

sandkastle4966 said:


> every post by Carolinian is slamming RCI, and then we get a slew slamming back.  MOVE THIS DISCUSSION TO OPINION !
> 
> I want to learn something here, or share what I have fund -   not keep hearing the arguements from the clearly unhappy, RCI disliking Carolinian.   He (she) has already made it VERY CLEAR that they are not happy (just like several others who own specific weeks that they think are just dandy but don't get the TP they think they deserve).
> 
> I skip every post now from Carolinian, but I still have to wade thru the responses to see if there was a nuget of truth in there....
> 
> Can't we please get to questions and facts......



Thanks for posting this, sandkastle, and I agree totally. Yeah, I'm a rookie in these threads and perhaps shouldn't voice my concern. However, I have to say that I DO know the difference between facts/information and opinions, and an awful lot of space in this thread has been taken up by one poster who is obviously posting opinions, and who obviously is convinced that anything RCI does is bad and intended to defraud their members. I get the idea, I don't need to have it sledgehammered into my head.


----------



## catcher24

I posted this question a ways back but never received any reply. Maybe it was missed, since it was in the middle of a certain poster's rants and could have gotten skipped for that reason....

At any rate, I can conduct a search for available units. However, when I click on the Available Units button, I get the usual list of all available units, but there are no numbers listed under the column for the number of TP it would take to get the unit. Is it necessary to have a unit on deposit with RCI to get this figure to come up, or are most of you getting the numbers without having deposited yet? I know when I search points, it always lists the number of points needed to obtain a particular unit, and I just figured that the new Weeks Points Lite system would do the same. Any ideas why the number of points required for a unit is failing to display? Thanks in advance for your help!


----------



## krmlaw

you have to go into each resort to get the TP. on the search page, you can pick from all units, or units that match my points. 

but you should see a range of tp points, just not the specific ones for what week you want.


----------



## BocaBum99

miamidan said:


> I have only combined two weeks as combining others would actually have shortened their shelf life but, did not see anything that would block you from combing as many as you want.



My guess is that RCI will put some limits on it like they did for Points for Deposit.


----------



## BevL

catcher24 said:


> I posted this question a ways back but never received any reply. Maybe it was missed, since it was in the middle of a certain poster's rants and could have gotten skipped for that reason....
> 
> At any rate, I can conduct a search for available units. However, when I click on the Available Units button, I get the usual list of all available units, but there are no numbers listed under the column for the number of TP it would take to get the unit. Is it necessary to have a unit on deposit with RCI to get this figure to come up, or are most of you getting the numbers without having deposited yet? I know when I search points, it always lists the number of points needed to obtain a particular unit, and I just figured that the new Weeks Points Lite system would do the same. Any ideas why the number of points required for a unit is failing to display? Thanks in advance for your help!



It could be that because another poster was having the same problem - didn't want to deposit until they could make sure they could get what they wanted and they couldn't tell.

If you're looking for something specific you could post a sighting request or drop me a line by PM and I can probably help you out.

Bev


----------



## Carolinian

That means prime weeks generally are getter more than like for like while lesser weeks are getting less than like for like.  Hardly a fair, honest, or objective system.




sandkastle4966 said:


> I played around with some prime ski weeks - what would I need to "take" the week in TP, and how much would I receive if I deposited that week ("give").
> 
> Using 3 resorts that there was prime availability for, I found that you got 3-5 more points on average to deposit the week than to get the week.
> 
> Conversely,  where there was "non-prime" availability - you got 3-5 "less" than it would take to "get" the same week.
> 
> 
> (We need to standardize on some language - GET  is confusing - what it takes to GET IT,  or what I GET FOR it !)
> 
> GIVE (what you receive)   GET (what it would take)
> GOT ( what you receive)   GET (what it would take)
> GET (what you receive)    NEED (what it would take)
> 
> suggestions?


----------



## sandkastle4966

*re:  "giving" and "getting"*

I am seeing the same thing for Feb Aruba weeks.......I have been looking at trades that were in the pare in the "forget about it" bucket unless you had primo tigers to use.

it APPEARS based on my data points, that the deposits that are infrequently made (Aruba in Feb,  Vail in March)  are being rewarded.

Weeks that are common place, are being offered "not so much".  Sounds like Econonics 101 to me .......too much supply, not going to give you much for in,  no supply, will pay dearly for it (from the view of RCI).

 I refuse to react to the opinoins being repeated over and over in this thread.  If I wish to state an OPINION on this practice, you will need it in the OPINIONS thread.


----------



## catcher24

Thanks BevL and krmlaw for the replies.  That's probably the answer. I guess I was expecting the search here to be the same as it is over on the points side of RCI, and how it was here prior to the new setup (it listed how many points were needed in order to exchange for a week for every unit available). Maybe that will eventually happen here as well, although if the points seem to be set up on a "sliding scale" of some kind that will probably never happen. Since the amount of points needed for a week are (at least for now) "set in stone" so to speak, they could be listed. But if the number of "Points Lite" needed varies, that wouldn't work here.


----------



## wrldtraveler

I would have to agree with Carolinian. This new RCI system had an opportunity to be a big improvement; instead it just solidifies my view that RCI is in bed with timeshare developers. Take a look at the bid/ask spreads of different regions (the number of points required to trade into a timeshare vs the number of points being offered to deposit a timeshare for a given week - maybe RCI should calculate this by region and then publish and justify it). I own in Las Vegas where this bid/ask spread seems to be 0 - 3 points which I consider fair. California seems similar. Now take a look at Orlando, a total joke. The most egregious example there is Vacation Village at Parkway where it cost 7 points to trade into an Oct 15 week but you get 19 points for depositing it. But Vacation Village is not the only one. Sorry, I don't see the transparancy in assigning these point values. If RCI was subject to the same rules as stock trading or commodities trading, the SEC would be all over these guys.


----------



## MichaelColey

wrldtraveler said:


> The most egregious example there is Vacation Village at Parkway where it cost 7 points to trade into an Oct 15 week but you get 19 points for depositing it.


So how does this hurt anyone other than RCI?  Now that it's transparent, you and I can take advantage of these built-in inefficiencies.


----------



## timeos2

*Use it or avoid it. You know the facts now*



MichaelColey said:


> So how does this hurt anyone other than RCI?  Now that it's transparent, you and I can take advantage of these built-in inefficiencies.



Exactly. Now that it is openly displayed we can take advantage, avoid it or ignore it. But we know what we're dealing with. Isn't that better than the secret society of valuation we had until last weekend?


----------



## BevL

Before The Change, I was frustrated because, based on January 2011 availability I was seeing, I was not going to be able to use two deposits to get two weeks in Hawaii that I want for 2012.

After The Change, it looks like I will be able to one week with one deposit and get enough change to top up my second week for my second exchange.

These are facts based on deposits in my account - the only conjecture is whether the point values will significantly change for where I want to go next year.

Howver, it's also a fact that if I choose, I can spend my points to still get those exchanges in Hawaii - the decision is mine to make.

Again, I have deposits that I can give actual true information about.  If I didn't have that kind of first-hand knowledge I wouldn't post it in this thread.


----------



## BocaBum99

MichaelColey said:


> So how does this hurt anyone other than RCI?  Now that it's transparent, you and I can take advantage of these built-in inefficiencies.



This is a correct statement.  Now that RCI is more transparent, it much more closely supports a free and open market.  It does so because consumers can look at the available exchanges and decide for themselves if an equal trade is possible using their own criteria for what an equal exchange is.  If they don't see anything they like, they can go somewhere else.  I think this is a HUGE improvement over what RCI has EVER had at any time for weeks exchange.

It is also true that to maximize transactions, RCI needs to set supply and demand to be equal.  To the extent they don't, they get fewer transactions than they would otherwise.  Therefore, if RCI distorts the market by currying favor with developers, they will sub optimize their own revenue.  If it's worth it to them to do so, then all power to them.  The best we can hope for as consumers is transparency and choice.


----------



## cmh

sandkastle4966 said:


> Has anyone tried:
> 
> Cancelling a pre-november exchange for a deposit that has passed?
> 
> For example - an exchange using a summer 2010 week for something "next year".
> 
> Did you get the week back as a "new week" - with Trade Power?
> If you check the calculator for the resort/interval of the deposit for "next year" - did you get the calculated trade power or was it greatly different.
> 
> Were you able to "get your trade back" using the week and getting change back ?
> 
> (I have a 58 trade power week using a 2011 calcular with a 30 exchange - afraid to try cancel and "get it back".)



I too am interested in hearing about people's experiences with this.


----------



## Carolinian

MichaelColey said:


> So how does this hurt anyone other than RCI?  Now that it's transparent, you and I can take advantage of these built-in inefficiencies.



As an Orlando owner, I can see why you jump to RCI's defense on this one, but you seem inclined to take RCI's side on most issues.

But the owner who is overpointed, now has those points to compete with other members to get prime inventory.  If he had the 11 points his week was really worth, he could not trade into Allen House.  With the 50 that RCI overpays him, he can snatch any week at Allen House and prevent owners who have weeks that are really equal to Allen House from getting them.

Our perspectives are quite different.  I look at things in this order of priorities: 1) timeshare owner 2) HOA 3) exchange company.  You seem to put #3 first.


----------



## Maple_Leaf

*This isn't a true bid/ask spread...*



wrldtraveler said:


> I would have to agree with Carolinian. This new RCI system had an opportunity to be a big improvement; instead it just solidifies my view that RCI is in bed with timeshare developers. Take a look at the bid/ask spreads of different regions (the number of points required to trade into a timeshare vs the number of points being offered to deposit a timeshare for a given week - maybe RCI should calculate this by region and then publish and justify it). I own in Las Vegas where this bid/ask spread seems to be 0 - 3 points which I consider fair. California seems similar. Now take a look at Orlando, a total joke. The most egregious example there is Vacation Village at Parkway where it cost 7 points to trade into an Oct 15 week but you get 19 points for depositing it. But Vacation Village is not the only one. Sorry, I don't see the transparancy in assigning these point values. If RCI was subject to the same rules as stock trading or commodities trading, the SEC would be all over these guys.



It's more like two options transactions.  The deposit is the sale of an option on a future week.  The trade is the purchase of an option on a future week.  Since these two transactions can occur at different points in time, there is a time value involved.  As you get closer to expiry, the option becomes stale.  Therefore a 9-month deposit gets full credits, a 9-day deposit 45%.  A trade 7 days out should be for less than a trade 7 months out.


----------



## miamidan

MichaelColey said:


> So how does this hurt anyone other than RCI?  Now that it's transparent, you and I can take advantage of these built-in inefficiencies.



As far as taking advantages of these advantages I have come close to pulling the trigger on some of these parkway units that are constantly available on ebay for nothing but, can not believe this massive difference will be constant as they have stated that trading power can and does change.


----------



## miamidan

Carolinian said:


> As an Orlando owner, I can see why you jump to RCI's defense on this one, but you seem inclined to take RCI's side on most issues.
> 
> But the owner who is overpointed, now has those points to compete with other members to get prime inventory.  If he had the 11 points his week was really worth, he could not trade into Allen House.  With the 50 that RCI overpays him, he can snatch any week at Allen House and prevent owners who have weeks that are really equal to Allen House from getting them.
> 
> Our perspectives are quite different.  I look at things in this order of priorities: 1) timeshare owner 2) HOA 3) exchange company.  You seem to put #3 first.



Carolinian,

Please take this as a question and not as a defense of anyone.  Obviously places like Orlando have a very High demand year round with one would assume thousands of people asking for them.  Thus there is also a big supply.

You have used in my mind some obscure places as they are not places my family would go to.

If you look at demand worldwide I would assume that North America would have the highest demand in general due to the large number of North Americans member base.

Most of those members are drive to travellers

Tybee Island who many of us have never heard of what if it had a demand of 100 and a supply of 50

Orlando has a demand of 6000 and a supply of 5500
Although in simple math the demand is much higher for Orlando the supply demand ratio in Tybee is higher.

In your book which should have higher trading power?  Thus what should be the overriding force supply vs. demand or Demand?

Please take this as a real question and use these numbers as hypotheticals.  Please do not turn this into a strawman or changing goal posts etc.  I am trying to understand your argument better.

On another note I would expect RCI to revalue those weeks currently valued at 50 and on sale for 11 or this will turn upside down on them quickly


----------



## jlwquilter

Carolinian said:


> As an Orlando owner, I can see why you jump to RCI's defense on this one, but you seem inclined to take RCI's side on most issues.
> 
> But the owner who is overpointed, now has those points to compete with other members to get prime inventory.  If he had the 11 points his week was really worth, he could not trade into Allen House.  With the 50 that RCI overpays him, he can snatch any week at Allen House and prevent owners who have weeks that are really equal to Allen House from getting them.
> 
> Our perspectives are quite different.  I look at things in this order of priorities: 1) timeshare owner 2) HOA 3) exchange company.  You seem to put #3 first.



The fact is (although I have given up that facts really are what you look at) that the owner of an Allen type timeshare now knows exactly what he's getting and exactly what he can buy and can exactly make a better informed decision of what to do with his week, including take it somewhere other than RCI, now that he can see the exact value assigned to things. That allows the owner to "be number 1" if they choose to be.

The fact is there are always errors in any system. Our "job" here is to ferret them out and use them to our best advantage. That certainly allows us/owners to "be number 1" if we choose/learn to be.

The fact is, as I believe you have stated numerous times, is that HOAs have had dog week issues for a long time and have needed to come up with creative ideas to deal with them. The fact is that lots and lots of HOAs have not. That is not RCIs fault nor duty to solve.

And lastly, the fact is that stating facts does not make one a RCI defender or RCI hater. Ice is cold. Does that mean I love ice? Hate ice? Neither. It means ice is cold... how I feel about it at any moment is how that fact influences what I plan to do/react with the fact (in my warm drink I am happy about the fact. Down my shirt I am unhappy about the fact).

RCI gives so many points for a deposit. They charge so many credits for an exchange. Fact. RCI is a business and in business to make a profit. Fact. Being "fair" is not their job. Keeping resorts in business is not their job. Making me happy is not their job. It is my job to use their system, if I choose, to the fullest extent possible to make me happy.

We all use systems every day that are not "fair", that charge outrageous fees (banks for example), that clearly don't give a crap about their customers, etc. We have to pick and choose among them as best we can and exploit what we find there to our advantage as well. Using RCI is no different. Why should anyone expect them to be.


----------



## Maple_Leaf

*On second thought...*



Maple_Leaf said:


> It's more like two options transactions.  The deposit is the sale of an option on a future week.  The trade is the purchase of an option on a future week.  Since these two transactions can occur at different points in time, there is a time value involved.  As you get closer to expiry, the option becomes stale.  Therefore a 9-month deposit gets full credits, a 9-day deposit 45%.  A trade 7 days out should be for less than a trade 7 months out.



...maybe it is the bid/ask spread.  I'm modeling a deposit as RCI selling you a call option for anything in their inventory valued 19 or below in exchange for an Oct 15 week at VV @ Parkway.

When you exchange you execute the call option and pay RCI the exchange fee and RCI gives you a week valued 19 or less + change.  VV @ Parkway has a credit value of 7 for Oct 15 so if you exchanged back into your own week you get 12 credits for the price of an exchange fee.  Hmmmm.  Nothing to see here folks.  Keep moving!:rofl:


----------



## wrldtraveler

*RCI reduces the resale value of timeshares whose TPs aren't inflated*



MichaelColey said:


> So how does this hurt anyone other than RCI?  Now that it's transparent, you and I can take advantage of these built-in inefficiencies.



How does this hurt anyone other than RCI? At some point in the future, some people may want to sell their timeshare. Eventually prospective buyers who are primarily interested in trading will only look at two factors in making their purchase decision - how many TPs can I get per maintenance dollar, and the amortized cost of purchasing the timeshare (price I buy it at less my estimate of its future resale value when I eventually try to sell it, plus the opportunity cost of sinking my money into the purchase rather than investing it elsewhere). When RCI inflates the TPs per maintenance dollar of certain timeshares based upon non-market factors (sweetheart deals?), it reduces the resale value of my timeshare since I now have to compete against these other inflated TPs timeshares.


----------



## MichaelColey

miamidan said:


> As far as taking advantages of these advantages I have come close to pulling the trigger on some of these parkway units that are constantly available on ebay for nothing but, can not believe this massive difference will be constant as they have stated that trading power can and does change.


I wouldn't suggest taking advantage of those particular deals.  I agree with you and others.  RCI will eventually reign in those huge inefficiencies, like weeks that give you 50 for depositing but can be exchanged into for 11.

But there is a lot that has been revealed that we CAN take advantage of.  Much of this was conventional wisdom before, but now we can see just how big of a difference it makes and make more informed choices.

1) Lockouts are a tremendous value.  If a 1BR is valued at 25, a 2BR is valued at 28 and a 3BR is valued at 31, it's much better to split a 3BR lockout and deposit separately and get 53 rather than 31.  With most resorts, maintenance fees aren't much more on larger units, so that makes them even better.

2) The best weeks have quite a bit better value.  For most locations (even excluding extreme examples like week 51/52 in Orlando), the best weeks get 2-3 times the trading power of the worst weeks.  Maintenance fees are typically the same, so it's worth paying a bit more to get a good week or a good choice of floating weeks.

3) Maintenance fees are very important, especially for exchangers.  Paying $2k per year in maintenance to get a Tiger trader (35-60 TP) never was a good choice when you could get a pair of Tiger Cubs (25 TP each) with a 3BR lockout for under $600.

4) Holiday weeks are very valuable.


----------



## Conan

jlwquilter said:


> And lastly, the fact is that stating facts does not make one a RCI defender or RCI hater. Ice is cold. Does that mean I love ice? Hate ice? Neither. It means ice is cold...
> 
> We have to pick and choose among them as best we can and exploit what we find there to our advantage as well. Using RCI is no different. Why should anyone expect them to be.



You should not be participating in this thread - - what you are saying makes too much sense! 

You too, Coley....


----------



## Carolinian

Tybee Island happens to be the sole resort close to Savannah, which most people have heard of, and is a rather popular tourist destination, and also has the benefit of being oceanfront.  Often there are no weeks at all availible there, while inventory is wall to wall in Orlando.  Yes there is a lot of demand for Orlando, but the problem is that supply greatly exceeds that demand.  Orlando is an easy trade and a blue week anywhere has easily traded in there much of the year because the supply/demand curves are similar.

To most people, London and the French Riviera are hardly obscure.  According to RCI employee Bootleg, Chaleston had the strongest demand for the supply of any place in the southeast.  I take it you are not saying Charleston is obscure?

Bootleg also told us the major overbuilt areas in the US: Orlando, Branson, Williamsburg, and Massanutten.

As to the US versus Europe on timeshare demand, you should remember that timesharing originated in Europe with a Swiss company called Hapimag. Also RCI has had to protect European inventory for Europeans members to keep it from being raided by Americans by holding back some deposits that have been made availible only to European members.  Also RCI has had a bonus arrangement for European members who would agree to trade into the US instead of Europe.  It gave them 2 for 1 credits on their European deposits usable for exchanges to North America.  That speaks volumes on the relative supply and demand between North America and Europe.




miamidan said:


> Carolinian,
> 
> Please take this as a question and not as a defense of anyone.  Obviously places like Orlando have a very High demand year round with one would assume thousands of people asking for them.  Thus there is also a big supply.
> 
> You have used in my mind some obscure places as they are not places my family would go to.
> 
> If you look at demand worldwide I would assume that North America would have the highest demand in general due to the large number of North Americans member base.
> 
> Most of those members are drive to travellers
> 
> Tybee Island who many of us have never heard of what if it had a demand of 100 and a supply of 50
> 
> Orlando has a demand of 6000 and a supply of 5500
> Although in simple math the demand is much higher for Orlando the supply demand ratio in Tybee is higher.
> 
> In your book which should have higher trading power?  Thus what should be the overriding force supply vs. demand or Demand?
> 
> Please take this as a real question and use these numbers as hypotheticals.  Please do not turn this into a strawman or changing goal posts etc.  I am trying to understand your argument better.
> 
> On another note I would expect RCI to revalue those weeks currently valued at 50 and on sale for 11 or this will turn upside down on them quickly


----------



## miamidan

Carolinian said:


> Tybee Island happens to be the sole resort close to Savannah, which most people have heard of, and is a rather popular tourist destination, and also has the benefit of being oceanfront.  Often there are no weeks at all availible there, while inventory is wall to wall in Orlando.  Yes there is a lot of demand for Orlando, but the problem is that supply greatly exceeds that demand.  Orlando is an easy trade and a blue week anywhere has easily traded in there much of the year because the supply/demand curves are similar.
> 
> To most people, London and the French Riviera are hardly obscure.  According to RCI employee Bootleg, Chaleston had the strongest demand for the supply of any place in the southeast.  I take it you are not saying Charleston is obscure?
> 
> Bootleg also told us the major overbuilt areas in the US: Orlando, Branson, Williamsburg, and Massanutten.
> 
> As to the US versus Europe on timeshare demand, you should remember that timesharing originated in Europe with a Swiss company called Hapimag. Also RCI has had to protect European inventory for Europeans members to keep it from being raided by Americans by holding back some deposits that have been made availible only to European members.  Also RCI has had a bonus arrangement for European members who would agree to trade into the US instead of Europe.  It gave them 2 for 1 credits on their European deposits usable for exchanges to North America.  That speaks volumes on the relative supply and demand between North America and Europe.



Carolinian,

I was simply trying to get your opinion on a topic about trading power and we get this.  Geeesh


----------



## Carolinian

miamidan said:


> Carolinian,
> 
> I was simply trying to get your opinion on a topic about trading power and we get this.  Geeesh



So you did not want me to address the points you raised in your question?  Geeesh!


----------



## lolibeachgirl

after reading the latest posts, I had to go back out to see if I was in the opinions thread or the facts thread...it is so hard to tell

fact-although demand vs supply can be thought of strictly in terms of # of units desired vs #of units available, you also have to consider mass volume for # of units desired as a factor, as others pointed out.  Also, most people will want to stay somewhere they have heard of, vs a place they have never heard of.  I know of London, would like to visit there someday, but have never heard of Allen House.  If I looked for an exchange, I still probably will never had heard Allen House (if there is no availability as stated, it won't come up for me as a possible exchange).  I know of Savannah, would like to visit there someday, but have never heard of Tybee Island.  If I looked for an exchange, I still probably will never had heard of Tybee Island (same thing as applied to Allen House).  I know of Disney in Orlando, would like to visit there someday, but I HAVE heard of several places to stay there, which are now available through exchage (sort of) with RCI.  So in 3 examples, there is a difference in customer's knowledge and recognition of a resort.

fact-I love the line of thinking with the ice.  It lightened up this thread a bit.


----------



## Carolinian

Most timesharers I know research the resorts they trade into through directory resources, these days being mainly online, and the reviews for the various resorts, rather than just what they have previously heard of.  In timesharing, most of the time most people going to a new location would not know the names of resorts in that destination and would have to research them.  Even if they do happen to know one or more resort names, most people research the place more thoroughly than just relying on having heard a name before.  I use Allen House for London as it is much better located in central London rather than being out in the Docklands (boondocks) like Odessa Wharf.   Again, location matters, as most tourists going to London want to be in central London.  Again, in researching Savannah, you would find that Tybrissa on Tybee Island is the only timeshare in the immediate vacinity of Savannah.  In researching Orlando, you will find a lot of resorts, and may well find something you had never heard of that suits you better than those you have heard of.




lolibeachgirl said:


> after reading the latest posts, I had to go back out to see if I was in the opinions thread or the facts thread...it is so hard to tell
> 
> fact-although demand vs supply can be thought of strictly in terms of # of units desired vs #of units available, you also have to consider mass volume for # of units desired as a factor, as others pointed out.  Also, most people will want to stay somewhere they have heard of, vs a place they have never heard of.  I know of London, would like to visit there someday, but have never heard of Allen House.  If I looked for an exchange, I still probably will never had heard Allen House (if there is no availability as stated, it won't come up for me as a possible exchange).  I know of Savannah, would like to visit there someday, but have never heard of Tybee Island.  If I looked for an exchange, I still probably will never had heard of Tybee Island (same thing as applied to Allen House).  I know of Disney in Orlando, would like to visit there someday, but I HAVE heard of several places to stay there, which are now available through exchage (sort of) with RCI.  So in 3 examples, there is a difference in customer's knowledge and recognition of a resort.
> 
> fact-I love the line of thinking with the ice.  It lightened up this thread a bit.


----------



## miamidan

miamidan said:


> Carolinian,
> 
> Please take this as a question and not as a defense of anyone.  Obviously places like Orlando have a very High demand year round with one would assume thousands of people asking for them.  Thus there is also a big supply.
> 
> You have used in my mind some obscure places as they are not places my family would go to.
> 
> If you look at demand worldwide I would assume that North America would have the highest demand in general due to the large number of North Americans member base.
> 
> Most of those members are drive to travellers
> 
> Tybee Island who many of us have never heard of what if it had a demand of 100 and a supply of 50
> 
> Orlando has a demand of 6000 and a supply of 5500
> Although in simple math the demand is much higher for Orlando the supply demand ratio in Tybee is higher.
> 
> In your book which should have higher trading power?  Thus what should be the overriding force supply vs. demand or Demand?
> 
> Please take this as a real question and use these numbers as hypotheticals.  Please do not turn this into a strawman or changing goal posts etc.  I am trying to understand your argument better.
> 
> On another note I would expect RCI to revalue those weeks currently valued at 50 and on sale for 11 or this will turn upside down on them quickly



Mr. or Mrs. Carolinian,

I really wanted you to address what you think is more important in supply demand in one case maybe 100 people are fighting for 50 pieces of inventory

in another maybe 10000 people are fighiting for 8000 pieces of inventory what has a greater demand?

Carolinian, you bring up some really interesting points but, I swear you repeat your favorite points so many times that it becomes boring.  can we agree to talk about this in a logical manner and not try to destroy anyone that has a different thought than you?  By the way I do not own in Orlando and my areas were not affected like the parkway etc. that you mention.  My max value is 21 and I am really happy with what I can see especially since I like to travel short notice but, am amazed by the amount of inventory i can see in school vacation time as well.


----------



## lolibeachgirl

I have been an RCI member since 1999, a tug member since 2002, and with the way the RCI searches were before "the Change" in mid Nov. I would do a search for the area I wanted, and my options came up.  If there is never any availability for me at a resort, then I most likely would not have heard of it.  Of the ones I had the option of exchanging into, I would go through the resort ratings and reviews on TUG, also on RCI, and decided if it was worth it to use my week there.  

Previous to the option of an online search, when "the Call" would come offering me a resort that matched my ongoing request, I would do the same thing-  Search THAT one resort through Tug ratings and reviews and RCI reviews.  Only then I couldn't see if I had any other options and risked not getting any exchange for the place I wanted to go.  If a place was never listed, or offered, then of course I'd never heard of it, and if it wasn't an option, why would I do any research on it??

Now, since the big change, I can do an online search, not just for what my deposit qualifies for, but by searching all units that fit the search, and find out what I need to get exactly what I want.  Not just the place, but the unit size, and in some cases some resorts that were never an option to me.  Not in a phone call, not in a search that my deposit matched in it's "band" if that's how it worked.  My options have increased immensely.  No more "hope and wait".   And I can get change back if I trade down.  To me, the pluses outweigh whatever minus' are out there (such as the fee to combine, but they are a business and their goal is to make money). 

I now have the control to get exactly what I want from a timeshare exchange.  That makes me happy that I didn't buy into Wyndham Points, or buy a timeshare in Hawaii (where I want to go most times) with huge maintenence fees.  Which saved me LOTS of money.  And if I can't get a place I want because it never comes up in RCI, then I have the choice to exchange with another company, rent my weeks, or buy where I want to stay.


----------



## Carolinian

We can only speculate at those numbers, so it is pointless to discuss what they might be.

What makes sense in looking at supply and demand is what we can indeed see, such as which areas always have loads of availibility and which almost never show up online.  The latter are the ones where demand clearly exceeds supply.  As to the former, there is another interesting aspect, and that is in those areas with lots of supply, can theoretically lesser weeks trade in?  Orlando is a good case in point.  Under the old system, it was well known that any blue week out there would easily trade into Orlando, which on the surface was ''red all year'', but the fact that any blue week would trade in much of the year clearly showed that the supply / demand curve of Orlando much of the year matched those of blue weeks generally.  Under the new system, it is even more apparent because trading in takes less points lite in many instances than the points lite they gave for the deposit.




miamidan said:


> Mr. or Mrs. Carolinian,
> 
> I really wanted you to address what you think is more important in supply demand in one case maybe 100 people are fighting for 50 pieces of inventory
> 
> in another maybe 10000 people are fighiting for 8000 pieces of inventory what has a greater demand?
> 
> Carolinian, you bring up some really interesting points but, I swear you repeat your favorite points so many times that it becomes boring.  can we agree to talk about this in a logical manner and not try to destroy anyone that has a different thought than you?  By the way I do not own in Orlando and my areas were not affected like the parkway etc. that you mention.  My max value is 21 and I am really happy with what I can see especially since I like to travel short notice but, am amazed by the amount of inventory i can see in school vacation time as well.


----------



## Mel

The real problem is that the number we can see are only for the resorts/weeks where there is availability.  If there is enough demand for nothing to make it into the bank, we don't have any idea what the cost is to trade in.

It only makes sense that anything that make it into the pool that we see online would be discounted, because everything that makes it through the ongoing searches could be considered leftovers.  RCI is reducing the prices of those units to entice people to deposit their own units and exchange into what RCI already has in stock - thus rotating the inventory, and hopefully getting deposits of something somebody else wants (and is maybe waiting for with an ongoing search).

If we want to argue about relative supply and demand between resorts and areas, we need to compare the cost to trade in - and we don't have that for many of the places you want to compare.  We can't compare the value RCI offers for a deposit, because we don't know the dynamics of the agreements between the resorts and RCI regarding those deposits.

Many mediocre resorts used to offer bonus weeks for deposits of their units - implying that they were offered because RCI coveted those deposits.  The reality was that the developer was giving RCI inventory to cover those bonus weeks.  When RCI Points came along, I have no doubt those "bonus weeks" were converted to extra points for the owner of those weeks - and unfortunately for RCI, the way the system was designed, to cover for the fact that they were doing this, they had to charge the same inflated fee to trade in at those resorts.  Now with the new Weeks system, would it not seem reasonable to think that when an owner at BIS Kitty Hawk or Vacation Village deposits a unit worth 20 credits, the developer deposits a second unit worth another 20 credits, and the RCI member sees 40 credits in his account.  On the other side of the equation, when someone else trades in, he pays 20 credits for that same units that appears to have garnered 40 credits as a deposit.

Which number - 20 or 40 - more accurately reflects the demand of those resorts?  Which number should be used to compare those resorts to Allen House or something on the French Riviera.

The other thing you don't seem to be considering is that majority of RCI members are from North America, and thus the North American resorts are going to see much greater demand from the membership.  Also remember that the profile of the average timeshare owner has changed over that last 20 years.  Timeshares are now marketed mostly to families with children - families who will see the most benefit from more space and kitchen facilities.  Most North American families with children are not looking to exchange to England or France, because the cost to get their is prohibitive.  Even if it is cheaper to fly to England from New York than to South Carolina, you can't get there in a car - and with 3 or 4 children that is how many families travel (not to mention those who don't like to fly, or who now don't want to put up with US Airport security).


----------



## miamidan

Carolinian said:


> We can only speculate at those numbers, so it is pointless to discuss what they might be.
> 
> What makes sense in looking at supply and demand is what we can indeed see, such as which areas always have loads of availibility and which almost never show up online.  The latter are the ones where demand clearly exceeds supply.  As to the former, there is another interesting aspect, and that is in those areas with lots of supply, can theoretically lesser weeks trade in?  Orlando is a good case in point.  Under the old system, it was well known that any blue week out there would easily trade into Orlando, which on the surface was ''red all year'', but the fact that any blue week would trade in much of the year clearly showed that the supply / demand curve of Orlando much of the year matched those of blue weeks generally.  Under the new system, it is even more apparent because trading in takes less points lite in many instances than the points lite they gave for the deposit.



but, your arguments are what is and are not overvalued are dependent on what supply demand is.  How can you so strongly advocate that all is wrong when you clearly confirm that all your talk about what is overbuilt and underbuilt is all speculation?


----------



## miamidan

Mel said:


> The real problem is that the number we can see are only for the resorts/weeks where there is availability.  If there is enough demand for nothing to make it into the bank, we don't have any idea what the cost is to trade in.
> 
> It only makes sense that anything that make it into the pool that we see online would be discounted, because everything that makes it through the ongoing searches could be considered leftovers.  RCI is reducing the prices of those units to entice people to deposit their own units and exchange into what RCI already has in stock - thus rotating the inventory, and hopefully getting deposits of something somebody else wants (and is maybe waiting for with an ongoing search).
> 
> If we want to argue about relative supply and demand between resorts and areas, we need to compare the cost to trade in - and we don't have that for many of the places you want to compare.  We can't compare the value RCI offers for a deposit, because we don't know the dynamics of the agreements between the resorts and RCI regarding those deposits.
> 
> Many mediocre resorts used to offer bonus weeks for deposits of their units - implying that they were offered because RCI coveted those deposits.  The reality was that the developer was giving RCI inventory to cover those bonus weeks.  When RCI Points came along, I have no doubt those "bonus weeks" were converted to extra points for the owner of those weeks - and unfortunately for RCI, the way the system was designed, to cover for the fact that they were doing this, they had to charge the same inflated fee to trade in at those resorts.  Now with the new Weeks system, would it not seem reasonable to think that when an owner at BIS Kitty Hawk or Vacation Village deposits a unit worth 20 credits, the developer deposits a second unit worth another 20 credits, and the RCI member sees 40 credits in his account.  On the other side of the equation, when someone else trades in, he pays 20 credits for that same units that appears to have garnered 40 credits as a deposit.
> 
> Which number - 20 or 40 - more accurately reflects the demand of those resorts?  Which number should be used to compare those resorts to Allen House or something on the French Riviera.
> 
> The other thing you don't seem to be considering is that majority of RCI members are from North America, and thus the North American resorts are going to see much greater demand from the membership.  Also remember that the profile of the average timeshare owner has changed over that last 20 years.  Timeshares are now marketed mostly to families with children - families who will see the most benefit from more space and kitchen facilities.  Most North American families with children are not looking to exchange to England or France, because the cost to get their is prohibitive.  Even if it is cheaper to fly to England from New York than to South Carolina, you can't get there in a car - and with 3 or 4 children that is how many families travel (not to mention those who don't like to fly, or who now don't want to put up with US Airport security).



Mel,

With the new what appears to be stricter trading power i would expect more prime inventory to make it into the on-line system as they are not "pre-discounting" or trading within bands


----------



## irisheaven

*Deposit Values Don't match*

I checked the deposit calculator to see what my week would bank for & then checked it against one currently available for trade. 

My week calculated at an 18, but yet if I wanted to exchange it for the same week, same room size, same everything, I would have to give 22 points.   

So, I would only get 18 points, but yet would have to pay 22 if I wanted to trade for the same unit. Anyone know why that would be? Why would I get less value than what RCI is charging?

Thanks, 
Sarah


----------



## bnoble

Only RCI knows for sure.  But, we've seen it work both ways---some deposits get more than they'd require to exchange back into, some less, and some are more or less at par.


----------



## bellesgirl

irisheaven said:


> I checked the deposit calculator to see what my week would bank for & then checked it against one currently available for trade.
> 
> My week calculated at an 18, but yet if I wanted to exchange it for the same week, same room size, same everything, I would have to give 22 points.
> 
> So, I would only get 18 points, but yet would have to pay 22 if I wanted to trade for the same unit. Anyone know why that would be? Why would I get less value than what RCI is charging?
> 
> Thanks,
> Sarah


There are many disparities between depositing and acquiring - in both directions.  It comes down to supply and demand.  If you can see that week sitting in the inventory, then apparently there are no requests for that week.  I guess RCI does not necessarily want another one, right now.  How far in advance are you banking?  The value may go up (or down).  None of us really know.


----------



## irisheaven

bellesgirl said:


> How far in advance are you banking?  The value may go up (or down).  None of us really know.




I'm looking at 2012 week 14.


----------



## tschwa2

Carolinian said:


> Most timesharers I know research the resorts they trade into through directory resources, these days being mainly online, and the reviews for the various resorts, rather than just what they have previously heard of.  In timesharing, most of the time most people going to a new location would not know the names of resorts in that destination and would have to research them.  Even if they do happen to know one or more resort names, most people research the place more thoroughly than just relying on having heard a name before.  I use Allen House for London as it is much better located in central London rather than being out in the Docklands (boondocks) like Odessa Wharf.   Again, location matters, as most tourists going to London want to be in central London.  Again, in researching Savannah, you would find that Tybrissa on Tybee Island is the only timeshare in the immediate vacinity of Savannah.  In researching Orlando, you will find a lot of resorts, and may well find something you had never heard of that suits you better than those you have heard of.



I would love to stay in a one or two bedroom in London during the summer with my family but since I don't think it is likely to happen and even if I put in a search for it I wouldn't anticipate it coming up until after other plans had been made and switching to a transatlantic vacation is different then switching to a drive to location so I don't bother to search for it most years.  I think that those who do a fair amount of research also find out about the limited availability at these places and don't bother requesting them, hence as far as RCI is concerned a lot less demand.  As to Tybrissa, I've seen it come up in the summer in RCI for 2011 about 18 month in advance and looked into it because I had heard it was a difficult exchange but passed as my husband likes areas with more activites in the immediate area.  He also likes Hilton Head off the beach and we get in our car and do Savannah as an all day trip and always think next time we come we might priceline a hotel on the front end or back end of a HHI trip to stay within walking distance of the great pedestrian friendly areas of Savannah.

I don't love RCI but it gives me more options (at a price I'm still willing to pay) then  other exchange companies but I have memberships with II (2 deposits 2 confirmed reservations), SFX (never deposited or confirmed anything yet), VRIety (no deposits, no confirmations), TPI(0,0-mostly the same inventory as VRIety, DAE (1 deposit, 0 confirmed on going search going nowhere),RCI points (8 stays and 2 upcoming confirmations) RCI weeks (3 deposits  2 exchanges so far) during the last 6 years.  RCI like the other companies keeps creeping up fees to the limit that they think customers will pay (which sucks) but all the companies seem to being doing that and offering upgraded memberships for a fee for services that used to be free.

Instead of always worring about where I can't go, I look at all the places I can go and if the places meet my families needs.  And I've never been to Orlando but will probably eventually go.


----------



## bellesgirl

irisheaven said:


> I'm looking at 2012 week 14.


It may be too early to bank 2012.  Many on this board have reported lower values for 2012 due to lower demand.  Not many people (other than TUGGERS) are planning 15-24 months out.  I know my weeks for 2012 are projected at lower credits that what I got for the same 2011 weeks.  If you don't need to bank, wait.


----------



## irisheaven

bellesgirl said:


> It may be too early to bank 2012.  Many on this board have reported lower values for 2012 due to lower demand.  Not many people (other than TUGGERS) are planning 15-24 months out.  I know my weeks for 2012 are projected at lower credits that what I got for the same 2011 weeks.  If you don't need to bank, wait.



Thanks much!


----------



## Happytravels

timbuktu said:


> How can RCI possibly say trading power has not changed ???
> I used to trade 4th of July Peregrine townhomes for MC.  One week for one week.plus MC fees at checkout.
> 
> Now it takes 2 weeks combined, plus 2 maintenance fees, plus fee to combine weeks. plus exchange fees. plus MC fees at checkout.  I can rent for less.
> When I point this out to the "guide"  she says 'You will always have access. I had access before too.
> I think when my membership ends so will I.
> Member since 1979.



We am in the same boat as you.......We have Memorial Day week. most years (another exchange company will give me two exchanges for this week plus the exchange fee is cheaper, there is no combining fee and no membership fee)....We have traded for Hawaii, Destin, and many other beach locations...with the TPU now doesn't look like I will be able to get there (unless I pay through the nose)....just doesn't make sense.  I don't live real far from there, so I will either try another exchange company or rent out the unit or sell it...things are still a little new and I am hoping they change to the SUPPLY/DEMAND  they are taking about and also  LIKE FOR LIKE....(there are no other resorts in Galveston or in Freeport that are ON the beach that are in RCI...only other one is Escapes to Galveston and that is II)  that just seems to not be happening with my weeks.  We own four at the resort and looks like we will be going there a lot in the next few years or renting them out if possible.....

Just checked the other exchange company........they are not offering two for one on my week..   I can't win for loosing......guess I could go on some last minute stuff for 2 pts each...not!!


----------



## JudyS

Sarah asked:


irisheaven said:


> ...  if I own a non award resort with TP 20, can I get a Gold crown resort with TP of 20?...



And Brian replied:


bnoble said:


> The only thing that matters is the credit value of the deposit you have, and price of the one you want.  Indeed, season and crown status never *really* mattered before this, either---season was a (*very*) rough indication of overall demand, and crown status measures quality, which (to hear RCI tell it) is a very small component of overall trade power.



I think this is correct when trading *up* in quality -- I don't think anyone has found a case where RCI prevented someone from using a low quality resort to trade into a high quality resort, assuming the low quality resort had sufficient trade power. However, there were  cases under the old system where RCI prevented someone from trading *down* in quality. For example, there was a resort on Nantucket (or maybe it was Martha's Vineyard) that was reportedly hard to trade into, even in the off-season, because it was very basic and RCI considered it so low quality that owners of many other resorts were blocked from trading into it, regardless of their trade power. 

This inability to trade down in quality was known as the "VEP filter" and was created because owners of high quality resorts often complained if they received an exchange into a low quality resort. I'm not sure if the VEP filter is still in place in the new system, or not.  

In an unrelated note, I just read several hundred posts in this supposed "facts" thread and found mostly just a bunch of arguing, primarily due to one TUG member. What a waste of time!


----------



## catcher24

> In an unrelated note, I just read several hundred posts in this supposed "facts" thread and found mostly just a bunch of arguing, primarily due to one TUG member. What a waste of time!



You also probably noticed that many of the other members requested that particular TUG member to stop posting opinions to the facts thread. And as you undoubtedly also noticed, that request was like talking to a brick or wall, or the little smilie:    Some folks just can't seem to take a hint.:deadhorse:


----------



## HuskyJim

*Facts - Where  ARE the Facts??*

Just where are the real facts, not opinions, discussion, arguments?

This thread is almost of no help to someone who has just begun looking into the "NEW" RCI.

Is there a good summary of the changes, and nuances of them?

Looking through 19 pages of arguments doesn't seem worth it.

Thanks!!


----------



## BevL

HuskyJim said:


> Just where are the real facts, not opinions, discussion, arguments?
> 
> This thread is almost of no help to someone who has just begun looking into the "NEW" RCI.
> 
> Is there a good summary of the changes, and nuances of them?
> 
> Looking through 19 pages of arguments doesn't seem worth it.
> 
> Thanks!!




If you're starting from a full stop, this might be helpful - the official RCI explanation:

http://tugbbs.com/forums/showthread.php?t=136715

Main changes:

You will know ahead of your deposit how many credits your week will be worth.  You can do this by using the deposit calculator in the manage deposits part of your RCI account.  Plug in your unit details and it will give you the number of credits you will get on deposit.

You can combine deposits to get an exchange that you may not have had avaialble to you on a straight week to week exchange.

If your deposit has more trade power than you need for the exchange you want, you will get "change back" which can be used for another exchange or can be combined with other deposits.

You can change your search settings to see not only what your current deposits can get, but also everything in the RCI spacebank, subject to quality filters.  That can help you decide if you want to combine deposits.

If you combine deposits, the new expiration date of the combined deposit is two years from the combination date.  So you can effectively extend the life of your deposits.

There is a $99 fee for combining depoits.

I'm sorry if this is more basic than you were looking for and it is by no means an exhaustive list of the changes, but I believe these are some of the basic FACTS that should hopefully get you started.  As you can probably guess from the length of this thread - and that's not counting the opinions thread that was started, there are some that like the new system, some that hate the new system, some that came out pretty even.  And I think there are many who are just getting into it as they plan their vacations for next year!!

Bev


----------



## HuskyJim

Bev,
Thanks!!!

This is what I was looking for - a good summary of the new stuff.

Very helpful.


----------



## soon2b6

I'm mystified & wondering if I should use a different exchange appraoch/system other than RCI.

I always spacebank w/in a week or two of availability to acheive maximum trading power. I have my OLCC 2 Bdrm wk 50 available for deposit.

However, As I look at the trading power assigned to my week over the past 3 years it makes absolutely no sense & is now worse than ever:

2009 - 26
2010 - 33
2011 - 20!!!!!

I visited w/ the RCI folks & they say it has to do with usage or lask thereof from year to year. Not sure I'm ready to drink the "RCI tea" quite that easily.

Recommendations regarding best exchanging company/approach would be greatly appreciated.

I also have observed the same trading power fluctuations wth my SA resorts.

Thanks,

Mark


----------



## timeos2

*It's always been credits - now you know what they are*



soon2b6 said:


> I'm mystified & wondering if I should use a different exchange appraoch/system other than RCI.
> 
> I always spacebank w/in a week or two of availability to acheive maximum trading power. I have my OLCC 2 Bdrm wk 50 available for deposit.
> 
> However, As I look at the trading power assigned to my week over the past 3 years it makes absolutely no sense & is now worse than ever:
> 
> 2009 - 26
> 2010 - 33
> 2011 - 20!!!!!
> 
> I visited w/ the RCI folks & they say it has to do with usage or lask thereof from year to year. Not sure I'm ready to drink the "RCI tea" quite that easily.
> 
> Recommendations regarding best exchanging company/approach would be greatly appreciated.
> 
> I also have observed the same trading power fluctuations wth my SA resorts.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Mark



According to RCI posts the maximum value is around the 10 month out mark. Remember this was happening in the background anyway - now YOU get to see what the values are and can make an informed choice about when it is best to deposit. That is a major change and a big plus to members. Use your new power to get the most you can.


----------



## sandkastle4966

for this case - week 50 - I think in 2010, wk 50 was "closer to school vacations" than 2011 is.......

2011 is where you week up week 53....so is the "50s shift" in value....

(my best guess - I am seeing the same thing with my other weeks that surround a holiday)


----------



## MichaelColey

Excellent point.  Week 49 is one of the slowest weeks in Orlando, so the shift in 2011 likely valued week 50 more like week 49.


----------



## bellesgirl

sandkastle4966 said:


> for this case - week 50 - I think in 2010, wk 50 was "closer to school vacations" than 2011 is.......
> 
> 2011 is where you week up week 53....so is the "50s shift" in value....
> 
> (my best guess - I am seeing the same thing with my other weeks that surround a holiday)


Absolutely right.  I own weeks 51 and 52 in Orlando.  For 2011, week 51 is about 40% of what it is in 2010 and 2012 because it is not a holiday week.


----------



## soon2b6

Thanks a bunch.

Based on timeos2's suggestion, I guess I should wait a couple months prior to depositing & see if power improves.

Mark


----------



## scooooter

My LORD!  I just spent hours going thru all the posts in this thread and I have to ask this - why on earth is a moderator not doing anything about the back and fourth opinionated attacks??!  I am a member of TUG and just had to go thru countless, countless postings of non members arguing back and fourth when this was supposed to be a fact thread only.  I have no idea what the politics are on here that makes no one do anything about this but I'm curious to know why on earth this is allowed??  If a moderator requests that we not get into opinions on here, have some respect!!!!


----------



## blueparrot

All timeshare boards seem to have their RCI sceptics and their RCI cheering section, and TUG is no different.  Their seems to be a lot of spin in this thread on both sides, but so what?  RCI does not seem to be showing all of its cards, but what else is new?  Since RCI does not reveal everything, interpretations are necessary to get a real grip on what is going on, and I can appreciate the interpretations made on both sides of the issue.  In the past there were more RCI sceptics active on TUG, and I wonder if some of them have been run off.  Aldo, for example.  It would be more productive to have a better balance so that we can really dig into what is going on with the new program.  A healthy debate is a good thing, and both sides are spinning on these issues.

My own thought is that while the revealing of the TP numbers are interesting, where the rubber meets the road in timeshare exchanging is whether I am getting the trades I want or not.  Knowing the numbers or getting change back doesn't benefit me at all if it means I am no longer getting the same trades.  From my review of past trades I have actually made and trades I could have made and had considered, I find that I can no longer get many of them on a one for one basis.  Two of them I could have made and received change back.  On balance, I have lost a lot of trading power with the new system.  For me, then, it is a bad system.  For those who gained trading power, I am sure they regard it as a good system.  If I were in their shoes, I probably would, too.  I have talked to three timesharing friends on the new system.  Two of them are like me and lost trading power, and they don't like it one bit.  The third seems to have come out even and the new system makes no difference at all to him, one way or the other.


----------



## Egret1986

*That's really what it's all about*



blueparrot said:


> My own thought is that while the revealing of the TP numbers are interesting, where the rubber meets the road in timeshare exchanging is whether I am getting the trades I want or not.  Knowing the numbers or getting change back doesn't benefit me at all if it means I am no longer getting the same trades.



I've been an RCI member since 1984 in Weeks.  I've stayed in RCI this long because it has worked for me.  I got into RCI Points about 3 years ago and basically stopped using my RCI Weeks account.  Last night for the first time, I played around a little bit with the new RCI Weeks.  I checked out all my resorts and various weeks to see what the TPUs were.  That was pretty cool and I was surprised by some of the ratings.  Some were higher than expected and some made me scratch my head because the rating seemed low.

However, like you said,......it's whether am I getting the trades I want or not.  In order to answer that, I'll have to take the step and deposit something else into my weeks account (I have one week in there that was part of a purchase of a timeshare) and play around with it for a period of time to try and determine that.

A couple of days ago, for the first time, I wondered to myself, "it might be time to let my RCI membership expire."  However, I am in a unique situation currently that I don't feel I have been in in the past.  I have enough prime season ownerships that will afford me more vacation destinations in various areas of the country than I can possibly use.  The ones that I don't decide to use will be rented.  Or I can just rent them all and rent  somewhere I want to go.


----------



## sharmay2

*45 day prior reservation*

Does RCI still offer to exchange for any available unit within 45 days of start of reservation?


----------



## Conan

scooooter said:


> My LORD!  I just spent hours going thru all the posts in this thread and I have to ask this - why on earth is a moderator not doing anything about the back and fourth opinionated attacks??!  I am a member of TUG and just had to go thru countless, countless postings of non members arguing back and fourth when this was supposed to be a fact thread only.  I have no idea what the politics are on here that makes no one do anything about this but I'm curious to know why on earth this is allowed??  If a moderator requests that we not get into opinions on here, have some respect!!!!



At the top left corner of this page, just below "TUG BBS" there's a link to User CP.  Click there and near the bottom of the control panel choices there's "ignore/buddy list."  Click "ignore", add you-know-who, and you'll have a much easier time making your way through this thread!


----------

