# No change coming to the "No points transfer" policy



## donno (Jan 23, 2009)

I received this today:

Good Afternoon Mr. Nichols,

After considerable review and discussion these past weeks, we have decided to continue the discontinuation of this benefit as of March 1. I very much appreciate your feedback, however the ability to manage this situation leaves us no other choice. Please do consider that you can accomplish what it is that you are trying to with regards to making travel decisions with your extended family. 

I am concerned regarding your mention of this effort being around making more money. Please allow me to note that all fees that are collected on behalf of FSP the Club, are paid directly to the Trust that manages the expenses of the club, and not to Wyndham Corporate. They are two very separate entities. This enables the club to charge for additional services only to those owners that use those services, hence allowing us to limit the increase in the FSP club dues to just 1 ½ % in an otherwise fairly tumultuous financial year.

Again, thank you very much for your feedback, we do very much value your input, and as such I wanted to be sure to get back to you regarding our decision.

Deanne Gabel 
Senior Vice President
Owner Services 
FSP Plan Manager
Wyndham Vacation Ownership


Not Good.

Don


----------



## e.bram (Jan 23, 2009)

Good for points owners who use and don't operate the Wyndham points system for profit at the using owners and non points owners expense.


----------



## GeNioS (Jan 23, 2009)

e.bram said:


> Good for points owners who use and don't operate the Wyndham points system for profit at the using owners and non points owners expense.


----------



## BocaBum99 (Jan 23, 2009)

e.bram said:


> *Good for points owners who use and don't operate the Wyndham points system for profit *at the using owners and non points owners expense.



Yeah, like cutting off your head is a good way to lose 10 pounds of weight.


----------



## Timeshare Von (Jan 23, 2009)

e.bram said:


> Good for points owners who use and don't operate the Wyndham points system for profit at the using owners and non points owners expense.



As the owner of a very dinky points package (77k) this is not good news for me!  Last year I rented out my points and this year I supplemented the through a private rental for a say in New Orleans this summer.

Not having such flexibility will greatly reduce the value and use of my 77k points!


----------



## BocaBum99 (Jan 23, 2009)

Timeshare Von said:


> As the owner of a very dinky points package (77k) this is not good news for me!  Last year I rented out my points and this year I supplemented the through a private rental for a say in New Orleans this summer.
> 
> Not having such flexibility will greatly reduce the value and use of my 77k points!



What this does is makes your small package worthless.  You will need to add points or sell what you've got.


----------



## jdb0822 (Jan 23, 2009)

ignore E.Bram's comments, he has done nothing to contribute to this post, and since he doesn't own points, I don't understand his constant comments to this discussion.


----------



## mshatty (Jan 23, 2009)

e.bram said:


> Good for points owners who use and don't operate the Wyndham points system for profit at the using owners and non points owners expense.



There are many people, including TUG members, who are not Wyndham owners that have benefited from the Wyndham owners who rent out Wyndham units.


----------



## jdb0822 (Jan 23, 2009)

To be honest, if Wyndham rented points at $5/k I wouldn't care about this, but since they rent them FAR ABOVE what the market is willing to spend, I do care.  

Once again, wyndham finds a way to dimmish the value of our points.

You would think that someone wanting .15 per point or more would look for ways to justify that price, not ways to justify the .005 per point resale market.


----------



## jdb0822 (Jan 23, 2009)

e.bram said:


> Good for points owners who use and don't operate the Wyndham points system for profit at the using owners and *non points owners expense*.



PLEASE explain to me in detail how this affects non-points owners expense? or even owners expense for that matter.


----------



## bnoble (Jan 23, 2009)

For the love of all that is holy, don't egg him on!


----------



## Debbyd57 (Jan 23, 2009)

What a disappointment!  I guess we are going to have to start selling off some of our timeshares.  We have more than we can use and had planned to save them for our kids.  Unfortunately they haven't started using them yet as they don't plan far enough in advance and don't have much vacation yet.  I guess the other option would be to book the places that take the most points and book presidential units instead of regular units or burn up points on weekend trips.  I was really hoping they would change their minds.  The only good thing about it is that it will be a great reason not to buy more points when we go to the owner updates.  Debby


----------



## jdb0822 (Jan 23, 2009)

Debbyd57 said:


> What a disappointment!  I guess we are going to have to start selling off some of our timeshares.  We have more than we can use and had planned to save them for our kids.  Unfortunately they haven't started using them yet as they don't plan far enough in advance and don't have much vacation yet.  I guess the other option would be to book the places that take the most points and book presidential units instead of regular units or burn up points on weekend trips.  I was really hoping they would change their minds.  *The only good thing about it is that it will be a great reason not to buy more points when we go to the owner updates.*  Debby



Personally I will use this as an excuse to never attend a owner update   I am sure others will as well.  So much for their precious 65% attending policy.


----------



## Timeshare Von (Jan 23, 2009)

BocaBum99 said:


> What this does is makes your small package worthless.  You will need to add points or sell what you've got.



I will not go as far as to say it is worthless . . . just reduces the value.  I will be able to use the points for a weekend here or there, perhaps but that would be an expensive use given the $540 mf's in 2009).

I don't know much about rolling year's usage together but I thought I read that you can move one year forward to the next.  In which case, I would have 154k points for perhaps a full week somewhere but again, at $1,100 not a good value.

I think the best "value" I might be able to milk out of them would be a couple of 28k crappy RCI deposits, which would be a shame.

Ultimately, you're probably right however, I will probably end up selling (or giving away) the contract.


----------



## vacationhopeful (Jan 24, 2009)

Can't you borrow from future years points also?  At least you would get future use of the points before you paid the MF ...


----------



## Timeshare Von (Jan 24, 2009)

vacationhopeful said:


> Can't you borrow from future years points also?  At least you would get future use of the points before you paid the MF ...



I suppose I could.  Actually, the best ROI on that mini-points contract for me would be to try to line up at the 13mos ARP July 4th weekend for three nights (if it's enough points) and then rent to recoup the MF's.


----------



## Caius (Jan 24, 2009)

Timeshare Von said:


> I suppose I could.  Actually, the best ROI on that mini-points contract for me would be to try to line up at the 13mos ARP July 4th weekend for three nights (if it's enough points) and then rent to recoup the MF's.




This statement supports one of the downsides to this whole debacle which has not been talked about as much.  Folks who rent for income will now look more to snag those prime weeks instead of taking the last minute discounted inventory, as that will be the only way to recoup their MFs plus recover the now absurd guest fees.

I'm not lumping you into this boat, Von - I know you just have the small contract.  But if you came to this conclusion with your 77k, imagine if you had many millions of points.


----------



## bnoble (Jan 24, 2009)

You're absolutely right, and I've been saying this all along.

For the rank-and-file "regular" owners, this policy will _reduce_ availability of desirable time, not improve it.  However, it will also cut down on the competition at the 60-day feeding frenzy for those owners who happen to be VIP.


----------



## BocaBum99 (Jan 24, 2009)

Timeshare Von said:


> I suppose I could.  Actually, the best ROI on that mini-points contract for me would be to try to line up at the 13mos ARP July 4th weekend for three nights (if it's enough points) and then rent to recoup the MF's.



Given how high your maintenance fees are, that would be a lot of work for very little return.  

The bottom line is that given how high the maintenance fees are for your small contract, the total annual fees are higher than it is to rent.  Therefore, the new move by Wyndham has basically made your ownership worthless.  Worthless meaning that you would be lucky to get $1 for it in an auction.


----------



## BocaBum99 (Jan 24, 2009)

bnoble said:


> You're absolutely right, and I've been saying this all along.
> 
> For the rank-and-file "regular" owners, this policy will _reduce_ availability of desirable time, not improve it.  However, it will also cut down on the competition at the 60-day feeding frenzy for those owners who happen to be VIP.



I'm not so sure it will reduce availability of desireable time.  Owners who don't use their points are not likely to all of a sudden become motivated to book prime weeks and rent them.  If they did, they would probably just vacation with those prime week bookings.

I think the much more likely scenario is that the points they normally rented and transferred would simply expire leading to greater defaults.  Maybe Wyndham doesn't care since it will get nearly free inventory.


----------



## BocaBum99 (Jan 24, 2009)

When a developer takes eggregious actions to devalue ownerships to near zero, the PCC story makes a lot more sense.

For instance, what are all of those who own less than 100k points going to do to sell their ownerships?  Their ownerships are nearly worthless.  Some have negative value.  I can see them paying twice or three times the maintenance fees to get rid of it.  The PCC holds it for one or two years loading up ownerships into a trust.  Then, bankrupt the trust when there are enough in it and force Wyndham to take back the ownerships in foreclosure.  Then, start over with a new trust.

For many ownerships, this may be the only way to get the developer to deed back the ownerships.  Sad, but real state of the industry.  In this light, the PCCs actually are providing a service to owners.


----------



## bnoble (Jan 24, 2009)

> I'm not so sure it will reduce availability of desireable time.


I'm referring to the incentive for commercial renters to abandon the last-minute market due to higher cost bases and lower available points capital, and instead look for other ways to obtain leverage.  That's going to be prime weeks.


----------



## BocaBum99 (Jan 24, 2009)

bnoble said:


> I'm referring to the incentive for commercial renters to abandon the last-minute market due to higher cost bases and lower available points capital, and instead look for other ways to obtain leverage.  That's going to be prime weeks.



I can't figure out what you are trying to say here.  I agree that availability of inventory 60-days or less will be more plentiful since mega renters won't be able to get more inventory to book and rent it.  I don't agree it will therefore follow that prime weeks will be less available.


----------



## Timeshare Von (Jan 24, 2009)

BocaBum99 said:


> Given how high your maintenance fees are, that would be a lot of work for very little return.
> 
> The bottom line is that given how high the maintenance fees are for your small contract, the total annual fees are higher than it is to rent.  Therefore, the new move by Wyndham has basically made your ownership worthless.  Worthless meaning that you would be lucky to get $1 for it in an auction.




Actually "worthless" was already established as its value when my sister gave it to me for free in 2007 :rofl:


----------



## bnoble (Jan 24, 2009)

> I can't figure out what you are trying to say here.



Here's a post that describes it at length
http://tugbbs.com/forums/showpost.php?p=637271&postcount=37


----------



## lprstn (Jan 24, 2009)

bnoble said:


> For the love of all that is holy, don't egg him on!



Ha ha ha .... I'm with ya..

I'll be using my points happily within Wyndham and in trading with RCI.  I guess no one else enjoys the flexibility that Wyndham still gives.  Maybe I am the only one that is happy with the product, dispite changes to the program.


----------



## bsheets326 (Jan 24, 2009)

jdb0822 said:


> Personally I will use this as an excuse to never attend a owner update   I am sure others will as well.  So much for their precious 65% attending policy.



I usually avoid the owner updates and sales presentations.  However in the future I intend to attend both of those forums and state my disapproval for this new policy.  I don't intend to purchase any more Wyndham points or properties as long as this policy is in place.  Maybe the sales reps will take this message back to corporate and pressure them to change the policy.


----------



## Timeshare Von (Jan 24, 2009)

bsheets326 said:


> I usually avoid the owner updates and sales presentations.  However in the future I intend to attend both of those forums and state my disapproval for this new policy.  I don't intend to purchase any more Wyndham points or properties as long as this policy is in place.  Maybe the sales reps will take this message back to corporate and pressure them to change the policy.



Here here!!  That's how I feel, now even more so.  At Palm Aire the yoyo who tried to sell us on more points even tried to say we could rent them out and make money off them.  When I challenged that with what was already announced here, she said that we had bad info and it wasn't true.

Clearly, the sales department's only memo is to sell . . . and they are clueless.  Deanne should get her grubbie mits in their department to clean up the mess they cause her in owner relations.


----------



## BocaBum99 (Jan 24, 2009)

bnoble said:


> Here's a post that describes it at length
> http://tugbbs.com/forums/showpost.php?p=637271&postcount=37



You are arguing that the fixed cost of the guest fee will make it more profitable to book prime weeks vs. less than 60-days.  Therefore the megas will switch to prime vs. last minute.

I don't agree.  Let's take Ocean Walk as an example.  If they book a 2br deluxe unit less than 60-days in prime season, it's only 101,500 points.  Let's say their cost of points is $4/1000 points.  Their cost for that reservation is $505 including the $99 guest fee.  If they rent that week for $799, they make $294 profit per week.  2 weeks has a profit of $588.

On the other hand, if they book July 4th week, it's 203k.  Their cost is $911.  Add $588, then you get $1499.

So, for the exact same profit, is it easier to rent 2 weeks for $799 or one week for $1499.  It's easier to rent 2 for $799 and you get your money back right away instead of waiting 8 months to rent that July 4th week.  

As long as the points are owned by a platinum VIP, it's more efficient to rent less than 60-day reservations.  

The biggest change will be that more short term reservations will be available, so it will now be easier to get full weeks less than 60-days.

So, I disagree with your assertion about prime weeks being more likely to be booked.  That would only be true if owners who normally transfer their points actually start booking those reservations and start renting them.


----------



## ace2000 (Jan 24, 2009)

bnoble,

I disagree with your theory also. If you've taken a look at the inventory for rent in the past (on eBay and other well known markets, and even the renter's web sites), you could easily tell that most of the prime weeks that were being rented, were being booked and sold by the mega-renters, by several of the same names.

As you mentioned, I'm sure that they took a lot of the 60-day inventory also, because they could easily purchase more points... however, they were and still are renting prime weeks! 

Now, the mega-renters will have less points to work with and in turn that will mean fewer prime weeks booked by them. There is no doubt about that.


----------



## bnoble (Jan 24, 2009)

> I don't agree.


That's funny.  If you look at the whole thread you thought it was pretty good the first time I posted it. 

http://tugbbs.com/forums/showthread.php?p=637271#post637271


----------



## Charlie D. (Jan 24, 2009)

lprstn said:


> Ha ha ha .... I'm with ya..
> 
> I'll be using my points happily within Wyndham and in trading with RCI.  I guess no one else enjoys the flexibility that Wyndham still gives.  Maybe I am the only one that is happy with the product, dispite changes to the program.



Count me in as very happy with the product.  I am in the minority of the posters on this thread and the other Wyndham site in that I am not that upset with the new non-transfer rule.  I guess I am among the 96% of Wyndham owners who have not even done it in the past nor did I plan to do it in the future.  I think as a VIP owner there will be more < than 60 day inventory with the new rule.  I am losing no sleep over someone not being able to buy up an extra few million points and using them in their rental endeavor.

I had held out hope that the new rule would eventually allow 1-2 transfers so that one could unload unused points before the end of the year.  Now I have decided that we will take a trip near the end of the use year and use however many of our banked pool of points are needed to finish out the last night.  Hence, no unused points at the end of the year.

Charlie D.


----------



## BocaBum99 (Jan 24, 2009)

bnoble said:


> That's funny.  If you look at the whole thread you thought it was pretty good the first time I posted it.
> 
> http://tugbbs.com/forums/showthread.php?p=637271#post637271



I know.  That's why I said I wasn't sure at first.    When you posted it this time, I thought through it a bit more.  And, I changed my mind.  I think for owners with a lot of points who aren't VIP, they will more likely book prime weeks for rent.  If they are Gold or Platinum, it still makes sense for them to continue renting less than 60-days.

Since I am not a mega renter, I needed more time to think about the various scenarios.  I have now concluded that prime will probably not be impacted much.  But, there should be more availbility for 60-days or less.


----------



## ausman (Jan 24, 2009)

Brian,

No interest in this except an intellectual one.

I also think prime time is not a viable alternative for the mega renters, and they will continue to operate in the 60 day window as best able.

As best able now will require adding additional points. Look for them at Ebay in the bidding.


----------



## bnoble (Jan 25, 2009)

I think it will depend on how stable their business is.  Owning more points takes on more risk---especially the risk that Wyndham changes the VIP rules (yet again) to not apply benefits to resale points even if they are in a VIP account.


----------



## Caius (Jan 25, 2009)

bsheets326 said:


> I usually avoid the owner updates and sales presentations.  However in the future I intend to attend both of those forums and state my disapproval for this new policy.  I don't intend to purchase any more Wyndham points or properties as long as this policy is in place.  Maybe the sales reps will take this message back to corporate and pressure them to change the policy.



I agree with you - I absolutely intend to do updates.  Will there be enough of an impact back up the chain to get changes made?  Probably not.  But if some of the unsuspecting folks at the surrounding tables overhear, I'd count that as a positive.  I also intend to have a few of the business cards with these forum addresses, which Bill posted at the Wyndham Owners' Forums.

The funny thing is, I got into a discussion last March with a sales person over Extra Holidays taking inventory even before this whole points transfer mess came up.  For me, it was simply a reason as to why I wasn't interested in VIP, when he brought up the last minute discounts.  He swore up and down that Wyndham would never take inventory and rent it out.  Next time I'll have a photocopy of that page in the trust document


----------



## jdb0822 (Jan 25, 2009)

Charlie D. said:


> Count me in as very happy with the product.  I am in the minority of the posters on this thread and the other Wyndham site in that I am not that upset with the new non-transfer rule.  I guess I am among the 96% of Wyndham owners who have not even done it in the past nor did I plan to do it in the future.  *I think as a VIP owner *there will be more < than 60 day inventory with the new rule.  I am losing no sleep over someone not being able to buy up an extra few million points and using them in their rental endeavor.
> 
> I had held out hope that the new rule would eventually allow 1-2 transfers so that one could unload unused points before the end of the year.  Now I have decided that we will take a trip near the end of the use year and use however many of our banked pool of points are needed to finish out the last night.  Hence, no unused points at the end of the year.
> 
> Charlie D.




Considering the only way to get VIP is to overpay from the developer, I think you may have drank too much of their kool-aid at the sales prensentation.


----------



## jdb0822 (Jan 25, 2009)

Caius said:


> I agree with you - I absolutely intend to do updates.  Will there be enough of an impact back up the chain to get changes made?  Probably not.  But if some of the unsuspecting folks at the surrounding tables overhear, I'd count that as a positive.  I also intend to have a few of the business cards with these forum addresses, which Bill posted at the Wyndham Owners' Forums.
> 
> The funny thing is, I got into a discussion last March with a sales person over Extra Holidays taking inventory even before this whole points transfer mess came up.  For me, it was simply a reason as to why I wasn't interested in VIP, when he brought up the last minute discounts.  He swore up and down that Wyndham would never take inventory and rent it out.  Next time I'll have a photocopy of that page in the trust document



I won't do updates.  Even after March the sales weasels will say its not true.  They don't have accurate info on the product, all they have is training on how to sell the product.  The "owner update" is not an update at all, since they are clueless.  

The sales reps care about one thing, their commisions.  NOTHING ELSE.  Its naive to think they would ever contact corporate for anything else other than their checks.


----------



## e.bram (Jan 25, 2009)

I go to the updates and have dinner on Wyndham. Why not? Better than singing for supper at the local mission.(Salvation Army etc)


----------



## joestein (Jan 25, 2009)

The no points transfer policy really hurts our family.  I have an account, my wife has an account and her sister has an account, and we transfer points back and forth between us as needed.

Joe


----------



## rickandcindy23 (Jan 25, 2009)

joestein said:


> The no points transfer policy really hurts our family.  I have an account, my wife has an account and her sister has an account, and we transfer points back and forth between us as needed.
> 
> Joe



According to Wayne in owner relations, the transfers between accounts that have the same name shouldn't be a problem.  So if you can change the names on the accounts, then transferring is no longer "owner to owner" as the new rule states, since all of the accounts would have the same names.  Our accounts have all of our names, including our kids'.


----------



## bnoble (Jan 25, 2009)

I'd get that in writing, if I were you.


----------

