# Has the WorldMark Board of Directors torpedoed the owner/renter?



## CO skier (Jul 5, 2013)

If the rumors are to be believed, in May of this year some UltraMegaRenters reserved all the 2 bedroom OF units at the WM Seaside resort for the Entire 2014 Summer and into September.

This brought the whole "rental" issue to a head.

The WM BOD has responded to this situation with the following rule:

10. Grouped Reservations consist of two or more consecutive Red Season reservations (segments) linked together so that the grouped segments comply with the seven-night minimum stay requirement. 

*Grouped Reservation bookings can be facilitated to create one continuous vacation, booked for and occupied by the same guest(s). The individual segments can be at a single, or at multiple resorts. Additional segments can continue to be added to a Grouped Reservation until the total of all segments exceeds 14 nights, at which point no more segments can be added. Any further nights need to be booked as a separate reservation in compliance with the Guidelines. 

There is a 48 hour waiting period for any changes or modifications to a confirmed Grouped Reservation not in compliance with the Guidelines on the original date of booking. 

(Bolded updates requiring all segments of a Grouped Reservation be in Red Season and Grouped Reservations as one continuous vacation booked by and for the same occupants will be enforced for all arrivals after January 1, 2014.)


This new rule has created mass confusion.  The interpretation apparently offered by one of the WM Board members is that a guest can be added to the reservation at the time of booking.  To add a guest later, or change the name of the guest requires cancelling the reservation and having to wait 48 hours to re-book.

This obviously eliminates the possibility of owners cherry-picking popular locations at popular times to book at the first possible opportunity, then finding a renter months later.

This will affect owners' ability to later add a family member as a guest, as well, but it may have killed the standard operating procedure for owners/renters in the WorldMark system.


----------



## cotraveller (Jul 5, 2013)

The modified guideline as listed by the OP is included in the current guidelines which are available on the WorldMark web site so this is no longer a proposed change, it is in place.

I'm not sure how you were able to change the name on a reservation week by week which is what would be required to break a long multi week or multi month reservation into individual weeks for use by different guests.  Apparently that is what was happening though.

When we have booked a reservation that was longer than a week we still only received one confirmation listing the start and end time of the reservation which covered the entire duration. We did not receive one confirmation for the first week and a second confirmation for any remaining time.


----------



## presley (Jul 5, 2013)

cotraveller said:


> I'm not sure how you were able to change the name on a reservation week by week which is what would be required to break a long multi week or multi month reservation into individual weeks for use by different guests.  Apparently that is what was happening though.



Last year, they allowed booking to be done under different names.  I rented from another owner and I only wanted 5 days for a Seaside summer visit.  He booked the 7 days, keeping 2 for himself.  When he made the reservation, he asked if he could put my 5 nights in my name and they let him.  The confirmation went to him with my name on it.

Sadly, I guess that won't be possible for me again in the future.


----------



## ronparise (Jul 5, 2013)

Ive been on the phone today with 5 different vc's and owner services people. And I got different answers from them all. It seems as if how the new guidelines are going to be applied to reservations already in place; is still under discussion. 

On the question of guests however they were all in agreement. As long as all legs of a grouped reservation have the same name attached to them you can add or change guests at will


----------



## CraigWMF (Jul 5, 2013)

ronparise said:


> Ive been on the phone today with 5 different vc's and owner services people. And I got different answers from them all. It seems as if how the new guidelines are going to be applied to reservations already in place; is still under discussion.




It's hard for me to tell what is going on right now.   I know when I talked to Owner Care a few days ago they said the rule was not fully up and running yet.  It looks like there has been updates since I last talked to them.

(I find the history on the first post interesting, that that is how this all came about.)


----------



## uscav8r (Jul 5, 2013)

This rule will probably slow down but not stop megarenters, but will surely have some adverse affect on regular owners who simply wish to vacation due to the requirement to book red for all segments. At least one owner on the WMO site cited a specific example in which he HAD to book an intermediate segment at blue/white as he was planning out a multi-stop road trip. Seems mostly like a clumsy response to the supposed problem... IMHO...


----------



## rhonda (Jul 5, 2013)

Thanks for raising this discussion.  So now I'm very I'm very confused. 

I've used Group Reservations in two ways:

A) To piece together a long road trip where I wanted only a few nights at each stop. Often these reservations become a mix of red and white season nights simply owing to the route and dates of travel.

B) To create a 7 night reservation when I only really wanted one key segment (<7 nights, red season, >9 months from travel).  In this case, we've always added the least expensive units available as throw-away nights.  Example: 4 nights holiday reservation at desired location plus 3 nights in a blue studio anywhere else in the world.

Will this change prevent me from adding the blue studio nights in situation "B)" above?  Would it prevent a Red and White road trip?  (I seem to be interpreting the modified rule as requiring a group reservation to be all one season, red.  Is that a proper interpretation?)

Thx!


----------



## jjmanthei05 (Jul 5, 2013)

wouldn't the simpliest way around this for mega renters be just to have 2 accounts. If an account isn't able to rebook a reservation for 2 days but I would guess someone else could book it if they wanted. So if you had 2 accounts you cancel in one and pick it up with the other immediately getting around the 48 hr hold. I don't own worldmark and know very little about the system but this would seem to be the easiest way around it or am i missing something. 

Jason


----------



## ronparise (Jul 6, 2013)

jjmanthei05 said:


> wouldn't the simpliest way around this for mega renters be just to have 2 accounts. If an account isn't able to rebook a reservation for 2 days but I would guess someone else could book it if they wanted. So if you had 2 accounts you cancel in one and pick it up with the other immediately getting around the 48 hr hold. I don't own worldmark and know very little about the system but this would seem to be the easiest way around it or am i missing something.
> 
> Jason



Jason

What you are missing is the wait list. If I have to cancel a holiday weekend, for example, chances are that there is someone on the wait list that will get it


----------



## cotraveller (Jul 6, 2013)

rhonda said:


> Thanks for raising this discussion.  So now I'm very I'm very confused.
> 
> I've used Group Reservations in two ways:
> 
> ...



The way the rule is written, your road trip booking with red/white season bookings would not be allowed.  Grouped reservations would require all legs to be in red season.  To set up the trip at minimum credit cost you would have to book each segment separately which would mean that you would have to wait until 9 months before check in to book the red segments which were less than 7 nights.  To book it at 13 months you would have to include a red season booking for the nights you intended to stay at a resort in white season and treat those days as throwaway days.  You would book the desired white nights as a separate reservation since you can book short stays in blue or white season at 13 months out. 

For your case B, again all segments would have to be red season.  You would have to book your throwaway nights at a red season studio rather than at a blue season one.  The reservation is still doable but it costs at least 1,200 more credits, which is the typical difference for three nights in a red season studio vrs the same three nights in a blue studio for mid-week nights.


----------



## benyu2010 (Jul 6, 2013)

CO skier said:


> If the rumors are to be believed, in May of this year some UltraMegaRenters reserved all the 2 bedroom OF units at the WM Seaside resort for the Entire 2014 Summer
> 
> This obviously eliminates the possibility of owners cherry-picking popular locations at popular times to book at the first possible opportunity, then finding a renter months later.
> 
> This will affect owners' ability to later add a family member as a guest, as well, but it may have killed the standard operating procedure for owners/renters in the WorldMark system.



Fred,

Not only two bed OF, also three bd OF, all OF units available in WM system got booked out for next three plus months. A gusty move...

You are right. They target the SOP of mega renter with guideline updates. It may just nail it. Grouped reservation is very small % overall booking. The itinerary is more specific, rarely an owner would be in a situation that finding a family to replace him for the exact same route on same dates.


----------



## uscav8r (Jul 6, 2013)

cotraveller said:


> The way the rule is written, your road trip booking with red/white season bookings would not be allowed. ...
> 
> For your case B, again all segments would have to be red season. You would have to book your throwaway nights at a red season studio rather than at a blue season one. The reservation is still doable but it costs at least 1,200 more credits, which is the typical difference for three nights in a red season studio vrs the same three nights in a blue studio for mid-week nights.


 


benyu2010 said:


> ... You are right. They target the SOP of mega renter with guideline updates. It may just nail it. Grouped reservation is very small % overall booking. The itinerary is more specific, rarely an owner would be in a situation that finding a family to replace him for the exact same route on same dates.


 
This is the Law of Unintended Consequences at work. Megarenters will find ways to cope, while normal owners get penalized. I think the single name requirement for all segments of a grouped reservation would have accomplished the intended goal. It's the 2nd requirement of having all segments be red that is problematic and probably doesn't do anything more to stop the megarenters at all. 

What about the famous flexibility that WM offers? It seems to have taken a bit of a hit...


----------



## benyu2010 (Jul 6, 2013)

Although you've seen throwaway is touted as norm and skill in advanced owner forum, it was *NOT* part of intent for grouped reservation, nor flexibility of the system. It is total waste and trick no one likes to use unless you have to. Very small % of owners employ this option and majority of them are renters.* All red season requirement targets this trick and makes it economically unfeasible. *

This may cause inconvenience to owners who resort hopping across season, the impact appears severe, but only affects small amount of personal-use owners among that very small% of 'grouped reservation' owner population. 

The specific impairment is red season only leg <7 days stay, this could be accomplished by 1) extend red stay to 7; 2) re-design route to have 7 days 3) book <7 red at 9 month mark etc. It is a large system with 240K owners, it is impossible to please everyone at the same time. Whatever you do will always have  and  

Hopefully, this change may forcefully correct the booking pattern that less and less owners 'throwaway'. Then we have even more level play field (of booking) for all owners and everyone don't waste to gain an edge anymore


----------



## uscav8r (Jul 6, 2013)

benyu2010 said:


> ...
> This may cause inconvenience to owners who resort hopping across season, the impact appears severe, but only affects small amount of personal-use owners among that very small% of 'grouped reservation' owner population.
> 
> The specific impairment is red season only leg <7 days stay, this could be accomplished by 1) extend red stay to 7; 2) re-design route to have 7 days 3) book <7 red at 9 month mark etc. It is a large system with 240K owners, it is impossible to please everyone at the same time. Whatever you do will always have  and  ...


 
The resort-hopping ability you describe was one of the things that drew me to WM. I generally don't like to plop down for a week in a single location, but like to hit 2 or 3 places in 12-14 days. It's tough to absorb when that was a selling point for me! 

But I also understand the waste aspect you mention. I am all about efficiency and I would likely avoid throwaway days as much as possible. But here is the rub, any throwaway days that are still used by some owners will now be at Red resorts and not at the White/Blue resorts that had no issues with vacancy to begin with. 

I guess we'll see which way the pendulum will tilt, but at first look it seems that Red time/resort availability will be negatively impacted by this new rule. Whether the *net *result will be positive/negative (i.e., offset by more availability opened up from megarenters being somewhat curtailed) is a different story. 

At the very least I get to find out who my fellow West Coast night owls are as I follow this thread! 
:zzz:

Oh, and to the OP's theme... one of my favorite historical quotes: *"Damn the torpedoes... Full speed ahead!" *


----------



## ronparise (Jul 6, 2013)

benyu2010 said:


> .* All red season requirement targets this trick and makes it economically unfeasible. *



I don't think that's 100% true. In my case a blue/red reservation that cost me 8500 credits and 2 housekeeping will now be done as one red reservation at the same resort with 12100 credits and one housekeeping; a difference of less than $200

At my prices that doesn't put me at a loss.i can make it up by doing a few more rentals

Instead of less rentals ill do more. And instead of a few blue throw away days ill be throwing away more red time

Certainly not what's intended


----------



## LLW (Jul 6, 2013)

The subject Club Guideline is already up in the Online Reference Library
https://www.worldmarktheclub.com/board/info/pdfs/WM_Club_Guidelines.pdf

"A10. Grouped Reservations consist of two or more consecutive Red Season reservations (segments) linked together so that the grouped segments comply with the seven-night minimum stay requirement. *Grouped Reservation bookings can be facilitated to create one continuous vacation, booked for and occupied by the same guest(s). The individual segments can be at a single, or at multiple resorts. Additional segments can continue to be added to a Grouped Reservation until the total of all segments exceeds 14 nights, at which point no more segments can be added. Any further nights need to be booked as a separate reservation in compliance with the Guidelines. There is a 48 hour waiting period for any changes or modifications to a confirmed Grouped Reservation not in compliance with the Guidelines on the original date of booking. (Bolded updates requiring all segments of a Grouped Reservation be
2
in Red Season and Grouped Reservations as one continuous vacation booked by and for the same occupants will be enforced for all arrivals after January 1, 2014.)"

One important point about this is it's retroactive to 1-1-2014. So grouped reservations made between 12-1-12 and early July 2013 will have to be made compliant. Board Member Bob Morrison has written that existing reservations do not need to be changed. To accomplish that Club Guideline A(10) would have to be revised.

Also, there has not been any official announcement on this yet, despite 2 recent Board Member enewsletters. Owners who don't participate in the forums or Facebook could arrive at check-in to find out that their reservation has been cancelled. And red replacement legs would be harder to find as days go by, except at new, high-credit valued resorts.

It seems individual VPCs and Owner Care reps are left to interpret the new rule by themselves. In the Board meeting in which this was passed, Peggy Fry said it would only impact 10-15 owners. But there are probably a lot more owners who use Grouped Reservations and throwaway days.


----------



## ronparise (Jul 6, 2013)

LLW said:


> In the Board meeting in which this was passed, Peggy Fry said it would only impact 10-15 owners. But there are probably a lot more owners who use Grouped Reservations and throwaway days.



Peggy Fry obviously doesnt know her own membership.

I suspect the intent was that this attack the practices of just 10-15 members, but  the net they cast is catching a lot more of us.

Its the law of unintended consequences at work and something that would have been apparent if they made this rule change the way any reasonable rule making body would; by holding public hearings and soliciting input from the members first.


----------



## LLW (Jul 6, 2013)

ronparise said:


> Peggy Fry obviously doesnt know her own membership.
> 
> I suspect the intent was that this attack the practices of just 10-15 members, but  the net they cast is catching a lot more of us.
> 
> Its the law of unintended consequences at work and something that would have been apparent if they made this rule change the way any reasonable rule making body would; by holding public hearings and soliciting input from the members first.



So you don't think it's their job to make the rules and our job to adjust to them any more?


----------



## CraigWMF (Jul 6, 2013)

uscav8r said:


> This is the Law of Unintended Consequences at work. Megarenters will find ways to cope, while normal owners get penalized. I think the single name requirement for all segments of a grouped reservation would have accomplished the intended goal. It's the 2nd requirement of having all segments be red that is problematic and probably doesn't do anything more to stop the megarenters at all.




I like your idea of the single name as I would like other colors than just Red.   I can't help but wonder what Mega renters are thinking right now.   Well one certain thing in life is there is always change.


----------



## CO skier (Jul 6, 2013)

LLW said:


> The subject Club Guideline is already up in the Online Reference Library
> ...
> It seems individual VPCs and Owner Care reps are left to interpret the new rule by themselves.



At this point no one, including some WorldMark Board members, know what this Guideline means and how to implement it.  The Guideline appears to have been written on a whim, and it was certainly enacted that way.  The WM legal department must be having a fit; if this Guideline was written or reviewed by the legal department, WM needs a new legal department.


----------



## ronparise (Jul 6, 2013)

LLW said:


> So you don't think it's their job to make the rules and our job to adjust to them any more?



I havent changed my thinking a bit. Im already adjusting the way Im going to handle my Worldmark ownership. Im not so naive to think I can change the new rule or that I can influence its enforcement.  All I can do is adjust

What has changed for me is that I dont believe the party line over at WmOwners.com any more. This episode has convinced me that the Worldmark board does react to their members complaints. The rank and file wanted something done about rentals, and they got what they asked for. Its just that what they asked for is taking away benefits and some of that famous Worldmark flexibility  from everyone

I warned ...be careful what you ask for, you might get it....and I also said that if you ask the Wyndham controlled board for a solution, you will get a Wyndham response.  ,,,,,and thats what we got exactly what was asked for


----------



## cotraveller (Jul 6, 2013)

I have long been an advocate of the Single Name on a Reservation rule. It is a single individual Grouped Reservation, not a group of reservations that can each be treated individually.  Way back in 2007, when I was still writing my WorldMark Blog, I posted the following about splitting reservations among several people:

_The guidelines are mute on how this type of reservation should be handled, and that makes them subject to abuse. You see ads all the time that state "I only need 4 days of my week long reservation. I'm offering the additional three days for cash or credits". That may be within the letter of the guidelines, but it is not within the intent. It's a single reservation, whether it is for a single resort or for a group of resorts. It is not a group of reservations that can be treated individually. My opinion is that the reservation definition needs to be changed to require that the entire reservation be used by the same person, either owner or guest or both. Splitting of parts of a reservation among several people should not be allowed._

I'm neutral on the mixed seasons part.  I see the rational in that the Grouped Reservation capability was intended to provide a way for owners to get shorter stays at resorts in Red season by combining multiple resorts into a single reservation.  But at the same time, throwaway days to get the prime reservations has become a fact of WorldMark life.  This just makes those throwaway days more expensive.  Maybe resorts such as Rancho Vistoso which have a summer red season will show higher booking with this new rule change.


----------



## ronparise (Jul 6, 2013)

CraigWMF said:


> I like your idea of the single name as I would like other colors than just Red.   I can't help but wonder what Mega renters are thinking right now.   Well one certain thing in life is there is always change.




I bought my Worldmark credits to use in my rental business. What I think is; this will not hurt me at all. Ill make a little less on each rental, but I can make it up by doing more.


----------



## benyu2010 (Jul 6, 2013)

ronparise said:


> a difference of less than $200
> 
> At my prices that doesn't put me at a loss.i can make it up by doing a few more rentals
> 
> ...



It is only one of the intended consequences. If you can still make living with near $200 less per ressie while not drawing ire like Seaside oceanfront, more powers to you.

As CO Skier speculated, this new rule may not have the final blessing from WM legal yet. So your Mardi Gras weeks have a good chance to survive as current interpretation is to bring reservation into compliance by 01/01/2014, which you likely rent out (changed to guest name by then).

I don't think they attempt to restrict rental of all kinds necessarily, more to even the play field and make premium weeks more accessible and penalize abusive/speculative booking.


----------



## PearlCity (Jul 6, 2013)

I'm interested to see how lack of booking throwaway days affects available inventory of rooms in blue seasons. Will it mean more availablity of bonus time rooms in blue and white seasons?


----------



## uscav8r (Jul 6, 2013)

benyu2010 said:


> It is only one of the intended consequences. If you can still make living with near $200 less per ressie while not drawing ire like Seaside oceanfront, more powers to you.
> 
> ...
> 
> I don't think they attempt to restrict rental of all kinds necessarily, more to even the play field and make premium weeks more accessible and penalize abusive/speculative booking.



I think we all agree that megarenters will continue to do business, though they might take a slight profit hit, in spite of this rule.

It *will* open up some Red availability for full weeks for regular owners, but *everyone* will have to get online as soon as the 13 month window opens up (other than those with the "new" grouped reservation).

But now, megarenters will just block off an entire week at that Red resort, vice shifting a couple days to blue/white. While the credits will cost them more, they save potential HKT fees. Those red days will never make it back into the system, unless the entire week is cancelled right before 30 days.

Here is the upshot: less red availability <7 days once the 9-month window hits. I'm sure this was _not_ an Intended Consequence.

Objectively speaking is that a logical possibility?


----------



## presley (Jul 6, 2013)

uscav8r said:


> But now, megarenters will just block off an entire week at that Red resort, vice shifting a couple days to blue/white. While the credits will cost them more, they save potential HKT fees. Those red days will never make it back into the system, unless the entire week is cancelled right before 30 days.



Meanwhile, the person who pays for a 4 day rental can stay for free for the other 3 "throwaway" days.  Or, maybe the will sublet their remaining days to the highest bidder and get a free vacation.


----------



## benyu2010 (Jul 6, 2013)

uscav8r said:


> *I think we all agree* that megarenters will continue to do business, though they might take a slight profit hit, in spite of this rule.
> 
> It *will* open up some Red availability for full weeks for regular owners, but *everyone* will have to get online as soon as the 13 month window opens up (other than those with the "new" grouped reservation).
> 
> ...



'We' is a very broad term. You have near quarter million owners with all sorts of opinions, fair or selfish, logical or illogical, reasonable or unreasonable. *You and me, YES*


----------



## benyu2010 (Jul 6, 2013)

PearlCity said:


> I'm interested to see how lack of booking throwaway days affects available inventory of rooms in blue seasons. Will it mean more availablity of bonus time rooms in blue and white seasons?



Not really, JMHO... The throwaway days are mostly book in those resorts you would never go on bonus time, Galena and Surfside inn etc...


----------



## uscav8r (Jul 6, 2013)

benyu2010 said:


> 'We' is a very broad term. You have near quarter million owners with all sorts of opinions, fair or selfish, logical or illogical, reasonable or unreasonable. *You and me, YES*



See, it's all about perspective... My "we" was geared to the handful of people commenting on this thread... But you're absolutely right about the other 1/4 million!

To use a sports euphemism, as Chris Berman of ESPN likes to say, "You can't stop 'em (i.e., megarenters), you can only hope to contain 'em!"


----------



## benyu2010 (Jul 6, 2013)

uscav8r said:


> See, it's all about perspective... My "we" was geared to the handful of people commenting on this thread... But you're absolutely right about the other 1/4 million!
> 
> To use a sports euphemism, as Chris Berman of ESPN likes to say, "You can't stop 'em (i.e., megarenters), you can only hope to contain 'em!"



I know you will take the chance

If you need to bring the food for your family, you will just have to do it. Still remember the word 'personal courage'...? (I forgot which branch you mentioned in the other post though)


----------



## ronparise (Jul 6, 2013)

cotraveller said:


> I have long been an advocate of the Single Name on a Reservation rule. It is a single individual Grouped Reservation, not a group of reservations that can each be treated individually.  Way back in 2007, when I was still writing my WorldMark Blog, I posted the following about splitting reservations among several people:
> 
> _The guidelines are mute on how this type of reservation should be handled, and that makes them subject to abuse. You see ads all the time that state "I only need 4 days of my week long reservation. I'm offering the additional three days for cash or credits". That may be within the letter of the guidelines, but it is not within the intent. It's a single reservation, whether it is for a single resort or for a group of resorts. It is not a group of reservations that can be treated individually. My opinion is that the reservation definition needs to be changed to require that the entire reservation be used by the same persejon, either owner or guest or both. Splitting of parts of a reservation among several people should not be allowed._
> 
> I'm neutral on the mixed seasons part.  I see the rational in that the Grouped Reservation capability was intended to provide a way for owners to get shorter stays at resorts in Red season by combining multiple resorts into a single reservation.  But at the same time, throwaway days to get the prime reservations has become a fact of WorldMark life.  This just makes those throwaway days more expensive.  Maybe resorts such as Rancho Vistoso which have a summer red season will show higher booking with this new rule change.



Fred

As usual you are exactly right. When something is defined loosely or not defined at all it creates what we call a loophole which in this case was big enough to drive a truck through.

I think all the board was trying to do was: 1) define a grouped reservation as one reservation for one guest ( ie the same name has to be on all legs) 
and 2) clarify the 7 nights in red season rule by saying, even with grouped reservations the 7 night rule applies and 3) end the practice of using cheap throwaway days to extend the booking window by a few days

This all makes sense. All I object to is the retroactive application of the new rule


----------



## sue1947 (Jul 6, 2013)

benyu2010 said:


> Not really, JMHO... The throwaway days are mostly book in those resorts you would never go on bonus time, Galena and Surfside inn etc...



Please don't assume that just because you don't want to go there, nobody else does.  As you said, there are 250,000 owners and we like to do different things. 
Galena is less used because there isn't an owner base in the area.  Surfside, however, has been very difficult to get even in blue season.  I travel mid-week and off season and I haven't been able to get bonus time there for many years.  Those of us in the NW like the beach in the winter for storm watching etc.  It's been very frustrating to see those days booked up by others who have no intention of using them.  This is also true of other NW resorts like Chelan Shores which were brought into the system early and require fewer credits.  This area has a high concentration of owners and lots of competition for those resorts ALL year long.  I think the new rule requiring red season will open up access to some of those resorts. 

Sue


----------



## benyu2010 (Jul 7, 2013)

SurfInn has low credit value and nice getaway location. I stand corrected. 

What's other popular resorts used to throwaway?


----------



## rhonda (Jul 9, 2013)

FWIW, I used the "Contact BOD" page on the WM website to write my concerns over this change.  I requested consideration of revising the guideline to require *same name* on all segments of the Grouped Reservation but not require *same season* (red) for each.


----------



## ronparise (Jul 9, 2013)

uscav8r said:


> I think we all agree that megarenters will continue to do business, though they might take a slight profit hit, in spite of this rule.
> 
> It *will* open up some Red availability for full weeks for regular owners, but *everyone* will have to get online as soon as the 13 month window opens up (other than those with the "new" grouped reservation).
> 
> ...



Its a probability


----------



## ronparise (Jul 9, 2013)

benyu2010 said:


> SurfInn has low credit value and nice getaway location. I stand corrected.
> 
> What's other popular resorts used to throwaway?



What were the popular throwaway locations is history. But basically as I used them, it was anyplace with cheap studios and one bedrooms. 

Now that everything has to be red Im looking one resort at a time for the cheapest red weeks.  So far Estes Park studio hotels at 7000 credits a week look the best to me

What that really means for me is that I wont use throw away days at a different resort at all. Ill just add days at my desired location and save a housekeeping


----------



## cotraveller (Jul 9, 2013)

ronparise said:


> What that really means for me is that I wont use throw away days at a different resort at all. Ill just add days at my desired location and save a housekeeping



For most cases that won't work.  For example, if you want to book the Oregon coast (I know, not your cup of tea but it is an oft used example of the need for throw away days) for a week in July or August you will need to use throw away days at a different resort.  The days you need at the desired resort to throw away would be booked by someone using earlier throw away days.

Example:  Say you want to book a Seaside week starting on July 25 which you know you need to book 13 months in advance.  As you watch the availability you will see the days leading up to the 25th start to fill at a few days before the 13 month point.  If you need to use 3 throw away days to get your reservation you would need to book it on July 22.  But July 22 will be booked on July 19 using 3 throw away days by someone wanting that start date.  You will need to either book 6 throwaway days at Seaside or book your 3 throw away days at a different resort.  Paying a housekeeping will cost much less than booking 3 extra throw away days at your desired resort.

So now you have resorts that typically do not fill until well beyond the start of the 13 month booking window seeing more bookings earlier.  Resorts such as Birch Bay, Windsor, etc.  That will make it harder for owners to book those resorts unless they also book those at the 13 month point.

Requiring a single name on the entire reservation stops the practice of making a multi-week or multi-month reservation and splitting it into multiple one week reservations which are rented.  Restricting all segments to Red season does little in that regards.


----------



## herindoors911 (Jul 11, 2013)

From Bob Morrison on Facebook


"Hello all,

Just back from wandering around beautiful British Columbia for a few days and have a few answers about the changes to the Group Reservation Rules. Hope this explanation helps.

I'm sure there will be a million individual variation that some of you may have questions about. Please contact WM Owner Services. They have now been trained and work with the details all day long. They are much better equipped to answer specific variations than I am. Anyway, I'm always happy to help where you can't seem to get results from the Wyndham's people.

Grouped Reservations were created to provide an alternative to the 7 Night RED season requirement. Owners have to book 7 nights when reservations are more than 90 days from the date of arrival. This Grouped Reservation privilege allows multiple resorts stays to fulfill the requirement.

New guidelines will be imposed on all new bookings as of August 1st.

WM will honor all Grouped Reservations as made prior to August 1st, 2013 regardless of arrival date. However, WM will not modify those reservations (i.e. break a 30 day segment into multiple segments or add different names to different segments) after August 1. As an example, if you booked a Grouped Reservation for next June and you have 3 segments with 3 different names, all 3 of your guests will be welcomed as booked. However, if you booked the 3 segments without putting guests names to the segments and call back after August 1st only one name could be put on all 3 segments. If the arrival date is prior to January 1, WM will modify them. WM will not force any cancellation, however, it is anticipate some owners will cancel some reservations booked for next year due to this rule change which hopefully will increase availability to more owners in prime locations during prime vacation times.

If a Grouped Reservation is booked prior to August 1st that has segments in blue/white season, WM will honor it regardless of arrival date. If you cancel and/or attempt to book another with its a segment in blue or white after August 1 we would not book it. Grouped Reservations booked as of August 1, 2013 will be in red season only.

Blue and White seasons do not carry the same requirements therefore they should never have been part of satisfying the seven night RED season requirement. Booking 2 nights in Blue season is a legal booking and no nights needs be added to it. So the 5 nights in Red added to the end of white/blue stay actually does not complete the required 7 night stay.

Note:

I verified that both the Owners name and their Guests name are systematically available at check-in. Which means an Owner can put a guest name on all segments of a Grouped Reservation and either the owner or the guest can check-in to any of those segments. Owner check-in is ALWAYS ok, even if a guest is listed so this adds an element of flexibility to the rule. Sometimes owners put a guest name on a reservation because they don’t know who’s going to show up first and they want their guest to be able to check-in. This process accommodates how many average owners use a grouped reservation yet still prohibits mega check-ins. I think owners will be grateful they can still do this."



NB -- he has corrected the 90 day booking to the actual 9month booking time since this was posted.


----------



## CraigWMF (Jul 11, 2013)

Thanks for the helpful update.


----------

