# The Good and Bad of RCI



## bilfbr245 (Sep 4, 2009)

I have read numerous posts by people who are annoyed that RCI rents their deposit.  In particular, I have read a number of posts by Carolinian from which I have learned a lot, just as I did when I attended college in his state. (Duke)  Or maybe he is from South Carolina.  But I have a few thoughts I wanted to share that might go in the other direction.

First, though, I want to be clear that overall I do not like RCI.  I particularly do not like the woman with the syruppy voice on their phone message, who keeps telling me that RCI wants to make my "next vacation dream a reality."  And I do not like the extra marketing and sales pressure everytime I call, to get me to renew, or take a cruise, or to deposit weeks, etc.

But I do like to try to be objective, however much my starting point is negative.  And, try as i might, I have not really been able to get much of a head of steam against the idea that they might rent my depoist.  Why? Because, in exchange for my deposit, they are obligated to give me another week, concerning  which I have a good deal, but not unlimited, control.  And really, once I deposit it, it is not really mine any more.  So they are not really renting "my" week.  

It also seems to me, from just common sense and no real expertise, that to stay in business, their main job is to manage their inventory.  Weeks deposited have a limited shelf life, and once they are gone, they are valueless.  But RCI still is required to return a week to the one making the deposit,  even if the week deposited is lost. Because my plans once changed at the last minute, I once deposited a week just before the 14 day deadline.  As far as I could see, they had their work cut out for them to deal with that deposit.  But I got an exchange for a nice place a year later that I was able to use.

So, again, it would seem to me that the job would be to manage the inventory:  to rent some deposited weeks to provide cash flow, to obtain other weeks themselves to offer for trade, in part to offset for expired weeks, and to try as much as possible to offer good value in exchange for deposited weeks.  Just like making salami, the process may not always be pretty, but bottomline, the viability of their business model is whether they can offer good value exchanges.  Do they succeed?  I hear many of you saying that they definitely do not.  In my case, they definitely do.  I almost always exchange for units of greater value than the ones I deposit.  That is why I put up with the stuff  I don't like.


----------



## travelhome (Sep 4, 2009)

I saw from sighting board that there are many DVC units for rent between now and Dec. but not for exchange. 

I can understand last minute rental to recover some cash. But rentals span several months before check-in on resorts with high demand?


----------



## PeelBoy (Sep 4, 2009)

I won't complain.  This year, I have reserved two weeks in two different Hyatt hotels and a week in DVC.  The total cost is $1700 (MF + exchange fees), in exchange for a total market value of $8000.

RCI is great this year.


----------



## thheath (Sep 4, 2009)

I believe the problem with RCI renting weeks is all in the timing of those rentals.  I currently see it as favoring RCI and not owners.


----------



## bnoble (Sep 4, 2009)

> I saw from sighting board that there are many DVC units for rent between now and Dec. but not for exchange.


The DVC rental units are developer inventory---the same stuff you'd get (at about the same prices) if you went to disneyworld.com and got a quote for one of the DVC properties.

Developer inventory comes from three places: (1) stuff Disney has not yet sold, or re-obtained through ROFR/default, (2) inventory backing Member exchanges to "other" Disney destinations---Disney Cruise Line, Adventures by Disney, and WDW/DL resorts that are not DVC resorts, and (3) breakage inventory in danger of spoiling, which I think is any unit unbooked at 60 days or thereabouts.

You can tell because, for rentals, you have to schedule Magical Express with Disney's travel company arm, but for exchanges, you have to call DVC Member Services.


----------



## pcgirl54 (Sep 5, 2009)

Been a RCI member for 12 or more years and have always gotten great trades with my week. Going to VWL Halloween week that is $815 a night. Been to South Seas Captiva and many other beach locations. No complaints on that point.

I understand the rental fury because I prefer my deposited week which I freely gave up to go to other RCI exchangers not renters therefore I myself will have a better pool to choose from when I want a trade myself.


----------



## stevedmatt (Sep 5, 2009)

bilfbr245 said:


> Weeks deposited have a limited shelf life, and once they are gone, they are valueless.



This is true, but what did they actually spend to acquire this week? Absolutely nothing. And if it doesn't get picked up in a trade, it's highly likely that it isn't going to be rented either. In fact, if it doesn't get picked up in a trade, what do they lose? Still nothing. They are really only renting the weeks that would most likely get picked up in a trade. 

If the week does get picked up in a trade, they make $164 or $189 or $223 (guest certificate) or more. This is on top of the $89 a year they charge their members. I'm sure this would result in a billion dollar business per year, but I guess that isn't enough, just to change the name on a few pieces of paper.

While I feel that I have been successful overall in my dealings with RCI, I feel that I would have been able to find better trades in locations that more appealing if they were not renting out deposits.


----------



## bnoble (Sep 5, 2009)

I still get very good value out of RCI---even after the Recent Unpleasantness.  My deposits don't see quite as much as they used to, but I'm still able to obtain exchanges that cost me less than renting would.

As for renting---I just accept it as part of the cost of doing business with RCI.  (I did the same with II when I was still with them, as well.)  As long as RCI continues to deliver me value, I don't really care how they make their nut.  When they stop delivering me value, I will stop using them.


----------



## london (Sep 5, 2009)

*Great Trades and Extra Vacations*

We have made over 150 trades since 1991, all to very nice resorts, mostly Gold Crown. 

Been to St Croix, England twice, Carlsbad and Palm Springs Ca. Sedona, AZ.

Washington state twice, Hilton Head Island, Myrtle Beach, and Florida many times. Samoset Resort in Maine.

In February we have 4 weeks in Cocoa Beach, and a trade week at Gulf Tides at Longboat Key in a 2 BR unit for Presidents week.

Next year in early June, we have traded for HGVC Breckenridge, and Sedona AZ.

The key is to deposit a year ahead, and book a year ahead. 

We have also rented weeks from RCI on extra vacations.


----------



## deejay (Sep 5, 2009)

*Good value, good service!*



bnoble said:


> As for renting---I just accept it as part of the cost of doing business with RCI.  (I did the same with II when I was still with them, as well.)  As long as RCI continues to deliver me value, I don't really care how they make their nut.  When they stop delivering me value, I will stop using them.



I really have no complaints. My exchanges continue to meet or exceed my expectations. Much of satisfaction with the exchange companies is directly proportional to reasonable expectations. I know what I own and what they should do for me, and I expect no more. When I get more than I expect, I'm thrilled. I don't own the best weeks by any stretch, but I also don't own at over developed locations or off season weeks and expect them to perform like peak weeks. While some complain about the rental "problem", I consider the Extra Vacations and Last Calls true benefits. Like bnoble, if performance changes, I'll consider other options.


----------



## Lisa P (Sep 5, 2009)

stevedmatt said:


> This is true, but what did they actually spend to acquire this week? Absolutely nothing.... In fact, if it doesn't get picked up in a trade, what do they lose? Still nothing.


Actually, there are significant costs of doing business and shuffling papers or data... salaries and benefits, computer services, buildings, maintenance, utilities, advertising, taxes, etc.  It does cost something to exist and handle transactions or else there'd be more start-up companies challenging RCI/II.  There have to be income-producing transactions to support all this.  I don't think membership dues would be enough but I'm not a business analyst.

It appears that they've moved from renting out inventory that's likely to expire without exchange to renting out desirable member-deposited weeks which, IMO, would be likely to find a taker in an exchange member's request.  That's not good and it's my chief complaint.  Otherwise, we've been very pleased with our RCI exchanges.



stevedmatt said:


> While I feel that I have been successful overall in my dealings with RCI, I feel that I would have been able to find better trades in locations that more appealing if they were not renting out deposits.


Agreed!  :annoyed:  It bothers me to think that (all of) our options are being artificially limited for getting the best trades possible.  I'd rather have more confidence in a company we use annually.  II's customer service wasn't good for us and I don't see the kind of inventory in the smaller companies that I'd like.  So we're sticking with Wyndham (internal points) and RCI _for now_.


----------



## jamstew (Sep 5, 2009)

My *primary* complaint is that, in exchange for a 2BR summer lakefront unit for which I've been able to trade into 2BR high season weeks for the last 25 years, I'm now being offered mostly off-season studio and 1BR units and very few 2BR except in overbuilt areas. That's just wrong.


----------



## Carolinian (Sep 5, 2009)

I am currently back in the states for a couple of weeks and made a trip down to the OBX.  A resort manager had some interesting comments.  It seems that this past summer, they had a number of people from the RCI inbound list (list of ''exchangers'' provided to the resort by RCI) to whom welcome letters were sent out but returned.  This was not a normal occurence, particularly a rash of them.  When these people checked in, she appologized for the welcome letter not reaching them, and was told that the address given was not their address, and that they had rented the weeks online from ICE Gallery.  They did not seem to know about RCI, but all of them had RCI confirmations and had been on the RCI inbound reports.  The manager was not familiar with ICE Gallery and asked several members whose weeks had been rented about it, and they also knew nothing about ICE, saying that the weeks had been deposited with RCI for a normal exchange deposit.  She talked with some other timeshare folks on the OBX and discovered that other resorts had had the same experience this summer.  She still did not find anyone who knew what ICE was until I told her today.

It is apparent that RCI is using ICE as an outlet for prime summer rentals to the general public from member exchange deposits.  And it is apparent that an increasing percentage of summer inventory from RCI exchange deposits is ending up in the rental pool.


----------



## bilfbr245 (Sep 6, 2009)

*bottomline*

I have no doubt that RCI rents premium weeks to enhance its profit position.  I agree with those who would prefer that RCI keep those valuable weeks in the exchange pool.  Even though I feel my trades have delivered great value, I would of course be happy to get even better trades.  And thank you Carolinian for responding to my post.  I meant it when I said that I had learned a lot from you have been saying over a long period of time.  But here is the thing.  I can't square my own experience with what you are saying.  My last two trades were for two July weeks at the Samoset on the coast of Maine.  The resort changes more than $400 a night for these units, and they are very hard to get.  My deposits to get these trades were early May weeks at the same resort, which are worth $150 a night tops.  There is a huge difference between early May and July in on the coast of Maine.  I spent a week in June this year at the Manhattan Club in NYC, in exchange for a deposited week worth far less.  I could cite many other examples.  So for me, the question I ask is whether I get good value for my deposits.  If I did not, I would cancel my RCI membership immediately.  I started this post in part to see how others feel about whether, on an objective basis, RCI delivers value.   If RCI does deliver value, I am not so concerned that they might also be making money in the process.  If they do not, I am out.


----------



## Jennie (Sep 7, 2009)

RCI's ever-increasing rental of weeks to the public has a far greater impact beyond the personal experience of a few very savvy owners who have taken the time to learn how to maximize their chances of getting an acceptable trade. If many more owners learned to do it, there would be far less chance of any of them getting what they want.

Please take a look at the bigger picture:

RCI members have spent a significant sum of money acquiring the weeks they own. They pay annual maintenance fees, real estate taxes, and sometimes Special Assessments which have been as high as $5,000. per week following catastrophic events such as hurricanes. They also pay an annual fee to belong to RCI, plus exchange fees, and sometimes guest certificate fees if they find an acceptable exchange. 

To see the same week being rented to the public, usually at a price well below the owner’s annual cost, is very disheartening. To learn that many of these weeks have been removed from the exchange pool by RCI to rent to the public, instead of remaining in the spacebank to fulfill other member exchange requests, is infuriating. 

Our personal and anecdotal experience indicates that the increasing disappointment in obtaining desired exchanges has led many owners of desirable weeks to rent out their units themselves. They then use the proceeds to rent what they want directly from another owner, leaving RCI totally out of the loop.  Redweek.com (a very popular site where owners place ads) has grown to 1.3 Million members within a few years since its inception. 

Private owner rentals deplete the supply of valuable weeks that would otherwise have been deposited with RCI, creating more dissatisfied members, who then follow the private rental path. It’s a vicious cycle. Many RCI members admit to now depositing only the “junk weeks” they own--the ones so low in quality, or so out-of-season that no one would want to rent them. The dwindling supply of good exchange inventory is exacerbated by removal of the weeks RCI rents to the public. 

Dissatisfied members now warn family, friends, neighbors and colleagues against buying a timeshare, mainly because it’s very difficult to obtain good exchanges, and because units can be rented, as needed, at a far lower cost without assuming the long-term responsibility of ownership. People are further advised to purchase a timeshare only at a quality resort, in a high demand area and season, at a place where they would like to vacation every year. If the resort has an active rental program to assist owners in renting their unit some years, that is a big plus. Thus those higher quality weeks will not be deposited.  

Dissatisfaction re: exchanges may have a devastating impact upon future timeshare development, in an industry that is already reeling from the world financial crisis. Traditionally many people have been motivated to purchase a timeshare with the promise/expectation that they could trade their week to travel all over the world. The growing awareness that desired exchanges are hard to come by, and that cheaper rentals can fulfill the same goal, is a strong disincentive to purchasing a timeshare week.    

An increasing number of RCI members, who have become frustrated over their inability to obtain suitable exchanges, are “walking away” from their timeshare obligations, causing resorts to incur expenses trying to collect arrears, foreclose on units, and resell them. The remaining owners end up paying higher maintenance fees to cover the shortfall.

Owners who unwittenly bought low value weeks have lost a major benefit that used to help them obtain a week--namely the "upgrade feature" that eliminated "trading power" when the check-in date of weeks in RCI's inventory was 2-45 days hence.   

The RCI directories used to tout the Instant exchange feature, clearly stating that all members, even those who owned off season weeks or small units, could exchange their unit for ANY week in inventory within 2-45 days before the check-in date. Previous trading power became irrelevant during this period. People who owned a “blue” week could reserve a “red” week. Owners of a small studio unit could reserve any size (even a 3 bedroom unit) if it were available. 

The inventory came primarily from late owner deposits, cancellations of previously reserved weeks, some resort bulk space-banking, and weeks that had been available for exchange before the 45 day window but had not been claimed by members.

Very few weeks went to "waste" under this system. People with flexible schedules checked the availability frequently and often times accepted weeks that they would never even have thought of looking for in a traditional search. We found one such gem that way--a tiny resort that we didn't even know existed. We have returned to it several times on traditional searches, even though it is rated way below the quality of the other weeks we own. (Maybe our very favorable comment cards replies will  help raise it to a level befitting it's beauty and uniqueness).

This upgrade benefit is why thousands of people bought off season weeks and/or smaller units. They were told that they could pay a lower purchase price, and lower maintenance fees if they were flexible enough to travel on rather short notice during the 2-45 day period when their week would pull anything. This particularly appealed to retired seniors. 

This benefit was quietly eliminated by RCI and removed from their publications. The weeks that for years had fallen within this category began appearing on public rental web sites, and in RCI’s own Extra Vacations category for rental by RCI members.

Fast forward a few years. Look yonder. See all those RCI hotshots sailing off on their golden parachutes? And look at the rubble they left behind. Is that you holding on for 45 minutes waiting to speak with an RCI Vacation Guide again, just like you did yesterday and the day before and...waiting to beg for anything decent that might have made its way into the exchange pool and wasn't suctioned out the back door to the rental program within minutes of its arrival.


----------



## Lisa P (Sep 7, 2009)

Jennie, you've accurately described many of the negative changes that have occurred in the timeshare exchange process over the last decade and I agree with most of it.  What I'm not seeing here is how RCI has the *duty* to make their business decisions based on our projections of further negative impact on timeshare ownership and exchanging.  So much of the list above has occurred due to a _combination_ of RCI's changing business model _and a great many other factors_ outside of RCI's control.

Yes, I agree that RCI has an obligation to retain owner-deposited inventory within the exchange pool because they've identified themselves to new and renewing members as an exchange company, primarily providing exchange services.  This is the bottom line item, to me.

Here's what I get from the "big picture" overview of troubling timesharing trends.
The economy has impacted timesharing and travel in general, big-time.
People make very poor purchase decisions.
People suffer changes in personal health or circumstances.
Developers may market their products unfairly or unwisely.
Resorts fall into disrepair or suffer major unexpected damage.
Older resorts may be unable to keep up with stiff, newer competition.
Popular exchange destinations and travel habits change.
RCI's unfair skimming of exchange inventory has aggravated the situation.

Presenting all of this "big picture" as a justification to paint RCI as the primary bad guy here may be necessary in the world of the courtroom.    I don't know.  It just seems to me that this case needs to cleanly identify the chief issue(s) and remain focused on why RCI has an obligation to deal with that/those in a way that's fair to the consumer.  The rest just leads to rabbit trails, diversionary arguments and distraction.  Keep the main thing, the main thing.


----------



## bilfbr245 (Sep 8, 2009)

Many of the comments here have been very informative.  I have also  been reading some of the posts on the litigation thread, and I can see that the issue is larger and more confusing that I had realized. 

I have only been trading for several years, and have always been surprised at how well things have gone.  And while I would love to be regarded as savvy,  I don't think that I could carry it off.  All I have really done is check periodically to what is available on the website.  But it is clear that many who who have traded for a long time are seeing changes they don't like.  I am still in the learning process, and am trying to square my experience with what I have been reading.  I could understand the objection that RCI had held themselves out to be primarily an exchange company, and then violated its premise.  Personally, though,  I never regarded it as primarily an exchange company, because the information provided at the time of deposit did not suggest that to me. I realize that many who are more critical of RCI have more of a historical perspective, while I have only been active for several years.  Had I been around when things were different, I might see things differently now.  For me, it still seems relevant whether RCI delivers value on exchanges.  But I am not really trying to be a defender of RCI.  If things can be improved in the settlement, that is great.


----------



## Larry (Sep 8, 2009)

Jennie said:


> RCI's ever-increasing rental of weeks to the public has a far greater impact beyond the personal experience of a few very savvy owners who have taken the time to learn how to maximize their chances of getting an acceptable trade. If many more owners learned to do it, there would be far less chance of any of them getting what they want.
> 
> Please take a look at the bigger picture:
> 
> ...



Jennie you are completely correct. When I started in timesharing back in 1992( when RCI was the privately owned entity that was much easier to exchange with than the corporate giant it has become), I usually deposited my week 51 Playa Linda week in Aruba and got a decent exchange but didn't feel that many had the same value as my Aruba week which was rented out by the resort at $425 per night. 

After several years I realized that cold hard fact especially after both RCI and II were sold to greedy corporate giants. With the purchase of seven more Aruba weeks I also realized that I could easily rent out those weeks to pay for all of my 12 weeks of maintenance, plus exchange fees, plus combining ff miles with paying for some airfare from by timeshare rentals, I was Left with my least desirable weeks and resorts to deposit with RCI and II and 4-5 weeks of free vacations.

So I have made it work for me but as Jennie says my most desirable Aruba weeks will never be deposited with RCI or II and never be available to the rest of the timeshare owners out there. Is that due to my actions or is it due to both RCI and II changing the rules to the point were it no longer benefits their customers?


----------



## bnoble (Sep 8, 2009)

Larry makes a good observation.

Part of the difference between Then and Now is that it has become much easier to find a market for rental weeks, thanks in large part to the Internet.  In the Good Old Days, to rent a week, you'd need to advertise in some print publication---maybe your local paper, maybe a timesharing publication, what have you.  That's a pretty narrow audience to market to and try to find a renter for your week at a good price.  

Compared to that, exchange looked pretty good, even for very valuable weeks.  It wasn't that hard, and you got something back.  Clever owners (read: TUGgers) could use this barter system to extract huge value, because barter systems are generally economically inefficient, especially given a lack of information about rental values.

Now, there are several different online marketplaces---including TUG, Redweek, and others---that have very good visability beyond just timeshare owners and to the general public.  That makes it easy to place a dollar value on your weeks, _and_ the weeks you might get in exchange.  There's much better information about the value of an individual week, and that makes the exchange system more efficient.  Unfortunately for us, "more efficient" means "harder to extract huge value."

Add to that the fact that it doesn't take long to figure out what Larry has figured out---that renting gives you a better expected return than exchanging if you really have a high-value week, all things being equal.  So, more and more owners, who are figuring this out, choose not to deposit their high-value weeks.  That lowers the expected value for other high-value owners who still choose to deposit, and so they withdraw, and so on.

RCI has not helped the cause, because they also have figured out that high-value weeks have more value as rentals than exchanges.  But, at least part of the blame lies at the feet of the Internet, which has completely revolutionized the rental market.

Edited to add: I see the Great Unpleasantness of 5/30 as RCI's reaction to this problem.  They tightened how far "up" you could trade, presumably to keep high-value deposits in the spacebank longer for other high-value owners to have a crack at them, raising their expected value, and trying to keep them depositing rather than renting or doing something else with them.


----------



## Carolinian (Sep 8, 2009)

bnoble said:


> Larry makes a good observation.
> 
> Part of the difference between Then and Now is that it has become much easier to find a market for rental weeks, thanks in large part to the Internet.  In the Good Old Days, to rent a week, you'd need to advertise in some print publication---maybe your local paper, maybe a timesharing publication, what have you.  That's a pretty narrow audience to market to and try to find a renter for your week at a good price.
> 
> ...



Looking at the OBX, this ''blame the internet'' argument is far fetched.  For at least a couple of decades the vast majority of rentals by individual timeshare owners on the OBX have been through a local storefront broker, Outer Banks Resort Rentals.  It was true 20 years ago and it is true today.  The internet, in comparision is a drop in the bucket.


----------



## Larry (Sep 8, 2009)

Carolinian said:


> Looking at the OBX, this ''blame the internet'' argument is far fetched.  For at least a couple of decades the vast majority of rentals by individual timeshare owners on the OBX have been through a local storefront broker, Outer Banks Resort Rentals.  It was true 20 years ago and it is true today.  The internet, in comparision is a drop in the bucket.



That may be true with OBX but in my situation my first Aruba rental was through an ad that I placed in timesharing today that I believe cost me around $70. A renter from NJ contacted me who met me in Manhattan and I had to show him my ownership certificate before we made the deal.

Today I do everything through the internet and don't have to pay anything for my ads and have rented to individuals all over the USA and once got a rental through a broker in Aruba who rented out my week to a family from Venezuela. I was very hesitant to make that deal but I insisted on payment through a US bank by the broker in Aruba who I checked out through my resort that she was legit. I paid her nothing and she charged her client whatever fee they worked out. 

I think most deals today for timeshare rentals and sales are made through the internet including resort internet bb's and of course ebay.


----------



## GrammyR (Sep 8, 2009)

*RCI*

I have been exchanging into Sheraton Broadway Plantation in Myrtle Beach for the past 5 years during Spring Break.  I have always gotten a two-bedroom because I am space banking a two-bedroom. This year, however, I can only find a one-bedroom.  I did find a two-bedroom for rent, but not for exchange fee.  When I called the vacation counselor, I got some kind of "canned" answer that RCI has a right to rent.  I could rent the two-bedroom cheaper than my maintenance fees. It's obvious that RCI is no longer caring about its members.  I agree with others that this is going to cause many problems for time sharing.  We have been members for over 25 years.  I am very tempted to just drop my membership when it expires.


----------



## tschwa2 (Sep 8, 2009)

GrammyR said:


> I have been exchanging into Sheraton Broadway Plantation in Myrtle Beach for the past 5 years during Spring Break.  I have always gotten a two-bedroom because I am space banking a two-bedroom. This year, however, I can only find a one-bedroom.  I did find a two-bedroom for rent, but not for exchange fee.  When I called the vacation counselor, I got some kind of "canned" answer that RCI has a right to rent.  I could rent the two-bedroom cheaper than my maintenance fees. It's obvious that RCI is no longer caring about its members.  I agree with others that this is going to cause many problems for time sharing.  We have been members for over 25 years.  I am very tempted to just drop my membership when it expires.



They may have downgraded your trading power during the last "enhancement".  I'm not sure when your Spring Break is but if it is the week before or the week after Easter, I can see several two bedrooms with points in weeks (no trading power required) at Sheraton Broadway Plantation.  All the two bedrooms available for extra vacations are also still in the weeks pool.


----------



## davef (Sep 11, 2009)

*I have had nothing but great success with RCI*

I have never and I mean NEVER been given a sales pitch of any sort.  It really baffles me when I hear/read posters say this.  I wonder what I am doing wrong....right?  

Oh well, lucky me, I guess.

BTW, we have made approx.  20 trades (about 4 or 5 over the phone) and have never had a problem.  "knock, knock" (on hard wood, also known as my head)


----------



## RCIJohn (Sep 12, 2009)

*there are certain situations...*

in which RCI does have the right to rent out weeks that have been deposited by members as stated in the terms and agreements listed on their website.  I.E. if a member banks their week and exchanges it towards a cruise.

RCI really does care about their members, trust me.  But just like everyone else, they still have to make their money.

Also, RCI does lose money when units go unused.  For every week deposited, they owe their members a weeks worth of vacation.  For every unit that goes unused, the member still wants to exchange their week for another desirable week in the RCI inventory.  Over time, that eventually wears down the availability in high demand areas.  Therefore causing a lack of inventory when members request it.  Which in turns makes members angry, and causes friction between RCI and it's members.  In regards to a HUGE company like RCI, every little thing has a trickle effect on much larger issues.
That's not even mentioning the loss of their $189 for the exchange fee.


----------



## Carolinian (Sep 13, 2009)

Many timesharers are savvy to the fact that a ''cruise exchange'' is basically a ripoff, and in the area I am familiar with few fall for it.

Their terms and conditions do not justify their rentals.  Indeed those T&C are  probably Exhibit A in the case against them for violating the consumer protection laws as it is an act or practice that is unfair or deceptive.  RCI presents itself as an exchange company and then hides this contrary provision where most members will never find it.  That is deception with a capital D.

RCI made money hand over fist when Chystal deHaan ran the show in an honest and correct manner, before the shysters of Cendent took over;  They don't have to cheat depositors by renting out their weeks to make money.





RCIJohn said:


> in which RCI does have the right to rent out weeks that have been deposited by members as stated in the terms and agreements listed on their website.  I.E. if a member banks their week and exchanges it towards a cruise.
> 
> RCI really does care about their members, trust me.  But just like everyone else, they still have to make their money.
> 
> ...


----------



## AwayWeGo (Sep 13, 2009)

*A Solution Even Carolinian Could Love.*




Carolinian said:


> RCI made money hand over fist when Chystal deHaan ran the show in an honest and correct manner, before the shysters of Cendent took over;  They don't have to cheat depositors by renting out their weeks to make money.


Within the old Cendant conglomerate & even inside the current smaller Wyndham empire, RCI is only a small & semi-insignificant element that the parent company surely would never miss if it were spun off to emerge as a standalone business doing nothing but timeshare exchanges, just as in the Chystal deHaan Golden Age.  

So what's needed now is a way to show the boardroom tycoons at Wyndham that they're better off cutting RCI loose than holding on to it.  By shucking off RCI, they can concentrate better on their major business concerns -- i.e., Baymont Inn & Days Inn & Hawthorn Suites & Howard Johnson's & Knights Inn & Microtel & Ramada Inn & Super 8 Motel & Travelodge, etc., plus all those Wyndham resorts & hotels & timeshares. 

Shux, with all those other irons in the fire, Wyndham Co. needs a minor business distraction like RCI the way a rooster needs knee sox.  

Rather than tearing their hair & busying their attorneys with court cases, etc., over renting out deposited weeks for cash & allowing Points people to _Raid The Weeks Inventory,_ etc., the Wyndham execs can do themselves a big favor by spinning off RCI to go its own way. 

With RCI out from the ownership of corporate parents who surely don't know or care much about timeshares & timeshare exchanging, RCI will once again be free to pursue a biz model based solely on income from like-for-like timeshare exchanges, with no further need to skim the cream by renting out top weeks.  

Too simple, eh ? 

-- Alan Cole, McLean (Fairfax County), Virginia, USA.​


----------



## Carolinian (Sep 14, 2009)

Great solution!




AwayWeGo said:


> Within the old Cendant conglomerate & even inside the current smaller Wyndham empire, RCI is only a small & semi-insignificant element that the parent company surely would never miss if it were spun off to emerge as a standalone business doing nothing but timeshare exchanges, just as in the Chystal deHaan Golden Age.
> 
> So what's needed now is a way to show the boardroom tycoons at Wyndham that they're better off cutting RCI loose than holding on to it.  By shucking off RCI, they can concentrate better on their major business concerns -- i.e., Baymont Inn & Days Inn & Hawthorn Suites & Howard Johnson's & Knights Inn & Microtel & Ramada Inn & Super 8 Motel & Travelodge, etc., plus all those Wyndham resorts & hotels & timeshares.
> 
> ...


----------



## geekette (Sep 14, 2009)

Thanks for your input, John, but since RCI gets much of its inventory free from developers, I won't be shedding any tears over their "lost" exchange fee or their struggles to balance deposits against exchanges.  They have very little skin in this game so it would take a lot to prove to me that RCI ever "loses" anything.  Lack of inventory?  come on, lack of inventory MADE AVAILABLE to members.  

Altho, I would love to see a show of hands from those who exchanged their week for a cruise.  Anyone?  Anyone at all?  Sorry, not buying the cruise exchange angle - could not possibly account for the enormous amount of weeks in the rental pool.  And how can a week be both for exchange and for rent?  This is clearly not the whole truth.

RCI cares about money - that's fine, they are a business.  I won't be trusting you on their concern for their members as we have seen firsthand what the pecking order is and members rank far below the public.  If they gave a damn about the owners, they would not be undercutting our maint fees with cheaper public rentals.  RCI cares about RCI.  Not the timesharing industry, not the developers, not the resorts, and most certainly, not the owners.

Just as they have a right to make money, I have a right to not approve of their actions and take my business to someone whose business model I respect, and who treats me as a valued customer vs a mark to be bled.



RCIJohn said:


> in which RCI does have the right to rent out weeks that have been deposited by members as stated in the terms and agreements listed on their website.  I.E. if a member banks their week and exchanges it towards a cruise.
> 
> RCI really does care about their members, trust me.  But just like everyone else, they still have to make their money.
> 
> ...


----------



## geekette (Sep 14, 2009)

and then I check email and find $199 Fall Getaways from RCI.  "Fall" including travel thru 12/31 (book by 9/21).

Where does this inventory come from?  Could be cruise exchanges.  I doubt it.

Who has maint fees under $200?  Anyone?

in the small print:
This inventory is made available by Resort Rental, LLC (operating as Holiday Rentals, LLC in MD and TX), an Indiana-licensed limited liability company, whose principal broker is Donald J Killingback. Resort Rental, LLC and related marks are registered trademarks and/or service marks in the United States and internationally. All rights reserved.


----------



## Goofyhobbie (Sep 15, 2009)

*Information On Resort Rental, LLC.*

For those TUGGERS who may not already know, here is more information about who is behind RESORT RENTAL, LLC.  

Their website and their network of agents is no doubt a vehicle for renting inventory to folks who are NOT RCI members.

*Endless Vacation Rentals *brought to you by RESORT RENTAL, LLC.(operating as Holiday Rentals, LLC in MD, and TX; collectively referred to as "RESORT RENTAL, LLC) is part of Group RCI, one of the Wyndham Worldwide family of companies, (NYSE: WYN).

According to their website here is where they get the inventory:



> Endless Vacation Rentals' inventory of vacation rental accommodations is an aggregation of diverse vacation rental properties from leading property management companies, developers, condominium and housing associations around the world. Our inventory represents individual property owners who benefit from the efficient and effective merchandising of their units through www.VacationRentals4Agents.com's travel trade partners.


----------



## chriskre (Sep 15, 2009)

I love and hate RCI at the same time.  I love the deals on last call and the 7000 point deals and I use the heck out of them but know that if I give them a weeks resort deposit I usually won't get much in return.  They did surprise me this year though, I must say.  It must be the economy but I did alright this year with my weeks exchange.  Thanks to TUG & TS Forums I have learned alot this year about alot and have decided that I want to own points resorts in companies with internal exchange just in case my trade powers continue to diminish.  I know that points get inflated but at least I have options for many years.  When things don't work out anymore I'm sure I'll be able to pick up something that will work in the TS world of tomorrow.  I must admit that I'm guilty of not depositing 3/4 of what I own to exchange.  I'm sure I'm not alone.


----------



## Goofyhobbie (Sep 15, 2009)

Getting back to the OP's original reason for this thread, I would now like to add my two cents.  As a 25 year "Weeks" Member of RCI I have received value over the years.

However, I perceive that the opportunity to continue getting that value is diminishing due to the *RCI POINTS *system.

WEEKS owners DO NOT get access to *RCI POINTS*; but *RCI POINTS *owners do get access to WEEKS deposits.

The PIE that represents UNITS owned by WEEKS Members is getting smaller every day.  As WEEKS are converted to POINTS that is just that more inventory that is no longer available to the WEEKS Member looking for an Exchange. 

The "raiding" of the WEEKS inventory without reciprocal access to 7 days worth of Point Inventory is dramatically diminishing the inventory that would otherwise be available to the WEEKS owner looking for a fair exchange.

Yes, loss of inventory due to cruise exchanges diminishes inventory as does rentals (taken out of the pool for whatever reason); but in my opinion the single most significant reason for little or no good visable inventory is the raiding of WEEKS inventory by RCI POINTS owners.

Now, I would like to share some insights regarding other reasons for inventory not readily showing up when one shot searches are randomly made:

Although TUGGERS know it is not a good deal, some RCI members are in fact making deposits to get a Cruise at what they consider a discount.

Once RCI receives the deposit from Resort X, they (according to RCI), immediately transfer the deposit to ICE Gallary. 

Again, according to RCI, it needs to replace that week from Resort X and they do so with the very next deposit that comes in from Resort X. 

However, instead of keeping the deposit in the Weeks bank they put it in Rental Inventory as compensation for the Week that they gave up to ICE Gallary.  Of course that results in two weeks from Resort X that could have been provided to fullfill a request of a Weeks Member. (That is a plausable explanation of where some of the inventory from Resort X has gone.)

There are, however, other plausable reasons for the inventory failing to show-up to the periodic surfer.

1)* Owner Preference *- earlier in this thread 





> *bilfbr245 said:* My last two trades were for two July weeks at the Samoset on the coast of Maine



bilfbr245, an owner of May weeks at Samoset had been given preferential treatment by RCI because he was an Owner (albeit an owner of shoulder weeks). When an Owner sets up a search for a week in his own resort the week sought will go to him first, unless there is a higher priority owner. As a result those "insider weeks" will never show up as available for outsiders. 

2) Gold Crown, Silver Crown and then Standard Weeks owners who submit Prime Weeks, White Weeks, and Blue Weeks (depending on the mix) far in advance are going to have their searches grab good inventory based on their standing and the size of the unit deposited.  

That should happen because the RCI computer is set-up to determine priority the second a week is deposited (the occasional surfer looking for the chance deposit will never see it show up on the RCI website because a previously set-up search should have already grabbed it if such a search was in place prior to the deposit

My Value from RCI will continue to diminish as long as I choose to NOT convert to POINTS. But, I do not see conversion happening in my future, I will just have to dispose of my traders when the opportunity is right before my heirs receive something that is all but worthless except for actual use at the RESORT owned.


----------



## bilfbr245 (Sep 15, 2009)

*Low Rental Prices*

Thank you Dave for that informative post.  I am still thinking about what you have said.  I wanted to address a different point now, however, because I have read on this thread and many others about concerns people have that RCI is undermining the value of timeshares by pricing rentals below the cost of MF's.

I have wondered, however, whether rather than undermining the timeshare market, RCI's low rental prices have simply unmasked weaknesses in the market that already existed.  One thing that is very clear is that there is a huge number of timeshares.  I have been quite impressed at the number of vacant units I have seen at many resorts, including good weeks at good places, but particularly at less attractive places or weeks.  It seems from what I can tell that there is a huge glut on the market, and consequently the supply/demand relationships do not at all favor timeshare owners, the exception of course being the truly premium weeks.  

Generally when there is a glut like this, prices plummet but eventually find a bottom.  As we have all learned  particularly this past year, finding a bottom is an important element of market economics.  Prices at the bottom may be very low, in relation to intrinsic value, but the bottom does start the process of buying and selling again, and the flow of commerce resumes.  Prices will likely then rise over time closer to intrinsic value.  I've wondered this may apply to prices set by RCI.  For example, I would assume that if RCI felt it could get higher prices for its inventory, it would raise the price.  But perhaps it has lowered prices to a point where the inventory begins to move in a substantial way.  If this is correct, this pricing policy could eventually prove therapeutic to the market for timeshares.  This is because an active market of buyers and sellers will eventually move prices closer to where they should be.

I have also wondered whether the "good old days" people talk about resulted in part from a lack of transparency that shielded the underlying weaknesses in the timeshare market.  It was hard to find reliable information about timeshare values, both for sales and rentals.  Prices were higher, but not much inventory actually moved, and high vacancies were very common. The internet is changing this.  New transparencies in the market have exposed a very weak supply/demand relationship underlying prices, and perhaps as a consequence we are seeing a bottoming out phase in prices.  This happened to the Dow Jones back in March when it fell below 7000.  Today it closed above 9600.  I guess the point is that finding a bottom can be a good thing.


----------



## AwayWeGo (Sep 15, 2009)

*Exchanging Into A Points Timeshare Using A Weeks Timeshare As Trade Bait.*




Goofyhobbie said:


> WEEKS owners DO NOT get access to *RCI POINTS*; but *RCI POINTS *owners do get access to WEEKS deposits.


Not sure that's correct. 

Click here for our our experience exchanging into an RCI Points timeshare using an RCI straight-weeks timeshare as trade bait. 

Just a fluke ?

The way it always is ?

Who knows ? 

The only other explanation I can think of is the possibility that the owner of the deposited week we snagged had not converted it to points & so it remained a straight week for RCI exchange purposes, even though the RCI web site showed points values for various weeks & sizes of units there at the time we got the exchange.  

-- Alan Cole, McLean (Fairfax County), Virginia, USA.​


----------



## chriskre (Sep 15, 2009)

Well said bilfbr245.

I'm no economist but I think you nailed something very telling.

I too have often wondered about the supposedly sold out resorts that I am staying in yet the parking lot is empty.  

This explains alot.

Thanks.


----------



## Ironwood (Sep 17, 2009)

Well, we experienced a happy outcome to an RCI screw-up last night!  A few days earlier we had put a 2010 exchange week at a desirable location we are rarely able to pull up, on hold overnight to determine whether we could get away that week.  We went in to confirm the next day within the usual time frame, only to discover the hold was gone....and it wasn't back in the weeks exchange inventory nor available in extra vacations.  The system had taken it from us and someone else grabbed it.    I complained to RCI and gave them a couple of preferable weeks for us at the same resort which we had not been able to pull up, and low and behold they found us a week that works better for us.  Doesn't excuse RCI for the screw-up, but they came through with a satisfactory fix-up!  I just wish I could get a peek at the full inventory they hold at certain resorts I search from time to time.


----------



## stevedmatt (Sep 17, 2009)

Ironwood said:


> I just wish I could get a peek at the full inventory they hold at certain resorts I search from time to time.



Try looking at their rentals, that should give you a good idea.


----------



## Goofyhobbie (Sep 17, 2009)

Alan,

While it is possible that the statement that I recently posted regarding the fact stated below could have exceptions, anomlies or whatever, I have reason to believe that in essence the statement is true:



> WEEKS owners DO NOT get access to *RCI POINTS*; but *RCI POINTS *owners do get access to WEEKS deposits.



My source is someone that I have determined to be trustworthy and forthright about how the interface between RCI and it's POINTS Membership and RCI and its Weeks Membership actually works.

I continue with my research and welcome any comments from any other *Weeks* owner who has, in fact, consistently seen *POINTS* inventory when using a deposited WEEK to make a search for a normal Weekend day to Weekend day search for a desired Exchange.


----------



## Goofyhobbie (Sep 17, 2009)

*bilfbr245: Your basic economic analysis makes a lot of sense.*

The Market Place determines the current value of an item be it real estate, Timeshare Units, or whatever.  There is a tremendous amount of Timeshare Units available.  That Inventory in these Economic times is going unused for many obvious and not so obvious reasons. 

Individuals can easily get bent out of shape if they feel that the value of a property that they own is being undermined by a corporation that essentially acquires competing property at little or no cost.

Getting the property so cheaply means that they can afford to make it available for whatever the Market will provide.  When that Market is seeking a bottom as a reslut of significantly diminished demand - prices fall and; as you put it, those prices will NOT come back until demand returns to overwhelm supply. 

RCI and it's subsidiaries receive property on the cheap and need to turn it relatively quick; but to do that they are not necessarily deliberately undermining the intrinistic value of the property. They, it can be argued, are simply pricing the property available to them at a price that will attract users.

Their Marketing, pricing and resultant acquisition of USERS at whatever Market Price will eventually aid in the establishment of a bottom and hopefully it will be sooner rather than later.


----------



## Carolinian (Sep 19, 2009)

Most of those weaknesses were made far worse when RCI dumped a huge rental inventory on the rental market.  Ever hear of supply and demand?  When an entity like RCI vastly increases the supply, the prices very naturally move sharply in the other direction. RCI has flooded the market and that has hurt resorts and timeshare owners.




bilfbr245 said:


> Thank you Dave for that informative post.  I am still thinking about what you have said.  I wanted to address a different point now, however, because I have read on this thread and many others about concerns people have that RCI is undermining the value of timeshares by pricing rentals below the cost of MF's.
> 
> I have wondered, however, whether rather than undermining the timeshare market, RCI's low rental prices have simply unmasked weaknesses in the market that already existed.  One thing that is very clear is that there is a huge number of timeshares.  I have been quite impressed at the number of vacant units I have seen at many resorts, including good weeks at good places, but particularly at less attractive places or weeks.  It seems from what I can tell that there is a huge glut on the market, and consequently the supply/demand relationships do not at all favor timeshare owners, the exception of course being the truly premium weeks.
> 
> ...


----------



## bilfbr245 (Sep 19, 2009)

I am not sure I can understand how RCI is responsible for the huge oversupply of timeshares  that have been "dumped" onto the rental market.  It makes more sense to assume that somehow the huge oversupply that exists independently of RCI eventually made its way into RCI's inventory, and that RCI is trying to find a market for them.  Carolinian, I am not sure I understand what you would want RCI to do under these circumstances. Should it withhold inventory to articifically prop up prices?  How is that fair to the timeshare owners whose inventory is withheld?  Why should RCI not try to price the rentals in a way that will faciliate rental of most of them?  

    The huge oversupply of timeshare is the elephant in the room that many timeshare owners would prefer to ignore.  This oversupply did not emanate from RCI, but from developers who vastly overbuilt.  But it does influence how RCI deals with its inventory. Somehow the oversupply has to work its way through the system.  The best way that can happen is from an active market, even at low prices.  It only prolongs the problem if prices are artifically supported by deliberate withholding of inventory.   

    Some of the oversupply may have to be dealt with by dissolutions.  It is apparent now that timeshares sometimes do not reflect the most economic use of the underlying real estate.  Some, which sit on valuable oceanfront land, sell for a dollar on Ebay, even though the actual real estate interest associated with that timeshare would otherwise be worth thousands.  These price anamalies result from low demand made worse by extremely poor PR in the industry, extreme oversupply, and articially high maintenance fees, which are too high sometimes  because of owner defaults and excessive management fees.   These problems are real, and need to be corrected.  Timeshare itself is a wonderfully sound economic concept, and should work well if some of its current underlying problems can eventually be worked out.  I personally believe that an active market, both rental and resale, as well as high levels of transparency at all levels, including management, will facilitate this.


----------



## soobee (Sep 19, 2009)

*what lawsuit?*

Hi, I have just found TUG!! I've been a timeshare owner since 1982 in Australia. Up until 5 years ago RCI was terrific. I got the resorts i wanted, when I wanted, even though I was locked into school holidays because I'm a teacher. We have used our week internationally and at home. 
The shift to points had a small impact, but we kept with our exchange week as we'd had no problems.
About 5 years ago it became harder to get what we wanted. Even though I put in a request a year ahead, I ended up giving guest certificates as presents because my husband and I could not get what we wanted and I didn't want to lose the weeks. 
Three years ago I wanted a week in Hawaii for my daughter's honeymoon. I put in the request 18 months before hand. As the time got closer I was given the same story. Finally friends stepped in and used their company and got exactly what was wanted straight away.... it was an RCI resort!
Right now I have waited for over 8 months for a resort in Queenstown NZ. I have requested it for June 2010. Out of 5 resorts not one has come up. Again, our friends can get us 3 of these resorts through their company. What is happening?
Lastly, I only heard about the RCI lawsuit a month ago when a friend emailed me an excerpt from a newspaper, we have not heard anything and I have not read about it, although I really don't read the magazine from cover to cover as I'm not intersested in cruises, packages, points etc, just exchanges.
Is it possible for me to take back the weeks I have banked with RCI and put them somewhere else? Where else is reputable?


----------



## Carolinian (Sep 20, 2009)

Prior to RCI's action, those weeks were in the EXCHANGE market, not the rental market.  Looking at the patterns of owners who rent their weeks from actual records at a resort, those owners are almost all high season.  So RCI dumped a lot of new inventory into the rental market at time periods when individual owners were generally offering few rentals.  That is a huge sea change in the rental market.

RCI made money just fine under the honest Chrystal deHaan policies, without these massive rentals to the general public that started with the Cendant takeover.  They need to do like in those days, and be what they claim to be, which is an EXCHANGE company, not a rental ripoff scam.




bilfbr245 said:


> I am not sure I can understand how RCI is responsible for the huge oversupply of timeshares  that have been "dumped" onto the rental market.  It makes more sense to assume that somehow the huge oversupply that exists independently of RCI eventually made its way into RCI's inventory, and that RCI is trying to find a market for them.  Carolinian, I am not sure I understand what you would want RCI to do under these circumstances. Should it withhold inventory to articifically prop up prices?  How is that fair to the timeshare owners whose inventory is withheld?  Why should RCI not try to price the rentals in a way that will faciliate rental of most of them?
> 
> The huge oversupply of timeshare is the elephant in the room that many timeshare owners would prefer to ignore.  This oversupply did not emanate from RCI, but from developers who vastly overbuilt.  But it does influence how RCI deals with its inventory. Somehow the oversupply has to work its way through the system.  The best way that can happen is from an active market, even at low prices.  It only prolongs the problem if prices are artifically supported by deliberate withholding of inventory.
> 
> Some of the oversupply may have to be dealt with by dissolutions.  It is apparent now that timeshares sometimes do not reflect the most economic use of the underlying real estate.  Some, which sit on valuable oceanfront land, sell for a dollar on Ebay, even though the actual real estate interest associated with that timeshare would otherwise be worth thousands.  These price anamalies result from low demand made worse by extremely poor PR in the industry, extreme oversupply, and articially high maintenance fees, which are too high sometimes  because of owner defaults and excessive management fees.   These problems are real, and need to be corrected.  Timeshare itself is a wonderfully sound economic concept, and should work well if some of its current underlying problems can eventually be worked out.  I personally believe that an active market, both rental and resale, as well as high levels of transparency at all levels, including management, will facilitate this.


----------



## Carolinian (Sep 20, 2009)

soobee said:


> Hi, I have just found TUG!! I've been a timeshare owner since 1982 in Australia. Up until 5 years ago RCI was terrific. I got the resorts i wanted, when I wanted, even though I was locked into school holidays because I'm a teacher. We have used our week internationally and at home.
> The shift to points had a small impact, but we kept with our exchange week as we'd had no problems.
> About 5 years ago it became harder to get what we wanted. Even though I put in a request a year ahead, I ended up giving guest certificates as presents because my husband and I could not get what we wanted and I didn't want to lose the weeks.
> Three years ago I wanted a week in Hawaii for my daughter's honeymoon. I put in the request 18 months before hand. As the time got closer I was given the same story. Finally friends stepped in and used their company and got exactly what was wanted straight away.... it was an RCI resort!
> ...



Especially for Australia, try Dial an Exchange, www.daelive.com


----------



## zgreg9 (Sep 26, 2009)

*"... worst rip off artist and abuser of timeshare owners today is RCI..."*

These are the words from a retired British 25 year timeshare industry insider.  
To read his entire post please go to this link on HolidayWatchdog.com  
http://forum.holidaywatchdog.com/the-home-truths-t106800.html


Greg


----------



## RustyS (Sep 26, 2009)

*No incentive to deposit, so no incentive to continue membership*



Jennie said:


> <snip>The inventory came primarily from late owner deposits, cancellations of previously reserved weeks, some resort bulk space-banking, and weeks that had been available for exchange before the 45 day window but had not been claimed by members.
> 
> Very few weeks went to "waste" under this system. People with flexible schedules checked the availability frequently and often times accepted weeks that they would never even have thought of looking for in a traditional search.
> 
> <snip>.



One point to consider in Jennie's scenario is that the member getting the last minute exchange got something for their deposit, so RCI's obligation to them was fulfilled.  And the member was satisfied so they remained in the system.

On several occasions I was on one side or the other of this equation.  If I deposited late I got poor value for my week, and sometimes by exchange window closed and I never got anything for my week.  But I understood it was because I deposited late and my poor trade power was the result.  Sometimes I used that poor trading power to snag a last minute deal, and although it wasn't my first choice I got SOMETHING for my deposit, so RCI upheld their end of the bargain.

But when I deposit a year in advance, start searching two years out, and all I get offered is my home resort, and a request for a less-than-prime property goes unfilled yet I see weeks in inventory that I can rent, I'm not getting anything for the week I deposited.  So NOW I'm dissatisfied.  Being offered a unit for rent, even at discount prices, is not in keeping with my original agreement with RCI, which is "I give you my week and you give it to someone else, but give me someone elses week in return".  If I have to rent it there is no reason to deposit, so the cycle continues.

If they would give me a week I want, even if it's from excess rental or points inventory, then I would be getting something from my membership and my deposited week.  If not, why should I bother to continue depositing, or in a larger sense even retain my RCI membership?


----------

