# WM BOD Adopts new limitations on Rental of Points



## geist1223 (May 17, 2016)

The WM BOD has adopted a new policy that will limit the transfer in and out of WM Points to twice the size of the Account each year. Also the transfer of House Keeping Credits will be prohibited. This action was taken to cut back on Megarentors and make WM Resorts more generally available to the average Owner.


----------



## ronparise (May 17, 2016)

geist1223 said:


> The WM BOD has adopted a new policy that will limit the transfer in and out of WM Points to twice the size of the Account each year. Also the transfer of House Keeping Credits will be prohibited. This action was taken to cut back on Megarentors and make WM Resorts more generally available to the average Owner.



World mark has identified 18 owners that rent in lots of credits to support their rental business>> This change was designed to attack their business model


Just remember when Wyndham did the same thing (actually they banned all owner to owner transfers,)  prices on the secondary market dropped to zero.  Its going to be interesting to see what happens with Worldmark


----------



## bnoble (May 17, 2016)

> Just remember when Wyndham did the same thing (actually they banned all owner to owner transfers,) prices on the secondary market dropped to zero.


This happened right in the midst of a little thing called the Great Recession, which may have had something to do with it.


----------



## ronparise (May 17, 2016)

bnoble said:


> This happened right in the midst of a little thing called the Great Recession, which may have had something to do with it.



No question about that but the recession is over and prices are still pretty low

The only thing holding prices where they are now is ovation which puts sets the price at zero. Now all I have to offer to get a look is to pay closing costs


----------



## ronparise (May 17, 2016)

The big thing that happened when Wyndham stopped owner to owner transfers is growth of the points managers who have become the biggest mega renters

I may be wrong but my educated guess is that's going to happen with Worldmark too.  I've already been approached by three outfits that manage Wyndham and Diamond  and Bluegreen points. The question is will they pay me for my consulting service regarding worldmark


----------



## Marathoner (May 17, 2016)

Ron, How do point managers optimize their use of points in retail owners accounts? For example, if I have multiple 12k accounts, how will it help them in making multiple 30k reservations when moving points across many retail accounts is manually intensive. 

Sent from my LG-H811 using Tapatalk


----------



## clifffaith (May 17, 2016)

We have been owners since 2002 and never heard about "renting credits" until earlier this year when my husband found the WM group on Facebook. Can someone explain briefly how I would go about "renting out" unused credits (won't happen, we always use up all our credits into the following year), or where I would look for access to extra credits should I so desire them. Thanks!


----------



## Tahiya (May 17, 2016)

*Clarification requested*

Where did you learn of the new policy?  I checked the WM website for minutes from the last board meeting and they weren't available.  I often rent four or more times the number of credits we own in a year for our own use.  This is bad!!!  When does the new policy start?  What does twice the number of credits mean?  If I own 10K, can I rent up to 20K?


----------



## ronparise (May 17, 2016)

Marathoner said:


> Ron, How do point managers optimize their use of points in retail owners accounts? For example, if I have multiple 12k accounts, how will it help them in making multiple 30k reservations when moving points across many retail accounts is manually intensive.
> 
> Sent from my LG-H811 using Tapatalk



The whole idea of points Worldmark points managers is a new thing. To my knowledge there aren't many doing it ... Yet

In the past I could have a small account and rent in as many credits as I needed to my rental business.   No more

So the question is.  What now

As I see it if I could find 50 10000 point owners (500000 points ) I could rent in another million under the new rule and I'm back in business without buying another credit

Will it be more difficult? Maybe. But that's why they make the big bucks


----------



## ronparise (May 17, 2016)

Tahiya said:


> Where did you learn of the new policy?  I checked the WM website for minutes from the last board meeting and they weren't available.  I often rent four or more times the number of credits we own in a year for our own use.  This is bad!!!  When does the new policy start?  What does twice the number of credits mean?  If I own 10K, can I rent up to 20K?



The policy is spelled out on the front page of the website

And yes if you own 10 you can rent in 20 more. At least that's how I see it


----------



## barco13 (May 17, 2016)

ronparise said:


> The policy is spelled out on the front page of the website
> 
> And yes if you own 10 you can rent in 20 more. At least that's how I see it



This goes into effect on 9/1/16...Then does the "year" start on your credit anniversary to next anniversary?  I.E. If I have a May anniversary, I can purchase 2X up until 5/1/17 and then the clock starts again?  Up until 9/1/16, no limit...

This seems to be the case after further review.  I'm not a huge renter, but am opposed to this as it seems to chip away at flexibility and attempt to steer owners towards higher credit accounts and have a goal of making money of charging for hk tokens by eliminating ability to transfer/sell tokens with minimum credit transfer.


----------



## ronparise (May 18, 2016)

barco13 said:


> This goes into effect on 9/1/16...Then does the "year" start on your credit anniversary to next anniversary?  I.E. If I have a May anniversary, I can purchase 2X up until 5/1/17 and then the clock starts again?  Up until 9/1/16, no limit...
> 
> This seems to be the case after further review.  I'm not a huge renter, but am opposed to this as it seems to chip away at flexibility and attempt to steer owners towards higher credit accounts and have a goal of making money of charging for hk tokens by eliminating ability to transfer/sell tokens with minimum credit transfer.



nobody knows how its going to be implemented, but 

I dont see that this as a money maker for Wyndham as the hk fees go right to our housekeeping  budget

and for every person that decides to buy more credits I think that there will be one that sells out because of this change. and do we really think that a small account owner that does want more will actually  buy from wyndham?


----------



## vacationhopeful (May 18, 2016)

ronparise said:


> and do *we really think* that a small account owner that does want more will actually buy from wyndham?



What "we really think" has nothing to do with "What WYNDHAM/WORLDMARK thinks".

And I am sure Marketing/Sales is very good a tooting their own horn to get great bonuses.


----------



## bizaro86 (May 18, 2016)

ronparise said:


> nobody knows how its going to be implemented, but
> 
> I dont see that this as a money maker for Wyndham as the hk fees go right to our housekeeping  budget
> 
> and for every person that decides to buy more credits I think that there will be one that sells out because of this change. and do we really think that a small account owner that does want more will actually  buy from wyndham?



Sure the fees go to WM budget, but the management fee is determined by what's left in the budget at the end of the year, so extra revenue effectively does go to Wyndham (until they cap out). 

I do think that the people who were renting in credits are much more savvy than the average owner (whether they do rentals or just personal use) and are not that likely to buy the extra credits they'll now need from Wyndham. However, if the price of rental credits goes down (and especially if it dips below MF) I would expect the price of WM accounts to drop precipitously. Right now there is really no hurry for anyone to sell. If you're not using it, just rent credits out to pay fees. But if that isn't possible anymore, I'd expect a bunch of people who have been doing that to decide they want out, and all at once.


----------



## ronparise (May 18, 2016)

bizaro86 said:


> Sure the fees go to WM budget, but the management fee is determined by what's left in the budget at the end of the year, so extra revenue effectively does go to Wyndham (until they cap out).
> 
> I do think that the people who were renting in credits are much more savvy than the average owner (whether they do rentals or just personal use) and are not that likely to buy the extra credits they'll now need from Wyndham. However, if the price of rental credits goes down (and especially if it dips below MF) I would expect the price of WM accounts to drop precipitously. Right now there is really no hurry for anyone to sell. If you're not using it, just rent credits out to pay fees. But if that isn't possible anymore, I'd expect a bunch of people who have been doing that to decide they want out, and all at once.



That management fee thing will be a one time bonus for Wyndham. The new expense and new revenue will be cranked in to following years

I agree with you about the price of Worldmark credits dropping as we go forward. But there is an opposite argument too


----------



## cyseitz (May 18, 2016)

ronparise said:


> The policy is spelled out on the front page of the website



Can you please post the link to this?  I looked but I am not seeing it.
thanks


----------



## presley (May 18, 2016)

I don't have WM anymore, but I am sorry to read this for all those who do. It has been a really big help for owners to rent out their unused housekeeping tokens. It's too bad that is being taken away, but not really that big of a surprise. Mega renters will make their adjustments and keep on mega renting. 

I know many people here love Wyndham. I will never be in that camp.

I still think it is a good product because of the Monday madness, bonus time and inventory specials.


----------



## ronparise (May 18, 2016)

presley said:


> I don't have WM anymore, but I am sorry to read this for all those who do. It has been a really big help for owners to rent out their unused housekeeping tokens. It's too bad that is being taken away, but not really that big of a surprise. Mega renters will make their adjustments and keep on mega renting.
> 
> I know many people here love Wyndham. I will never be in that camp.
> 
> I still think it is a good product because of the Monday madness, bonus time and inventory specials.



You can still rent in credits or rent out credits just with a 2x ownership limit. So even a guy with a 6000 credit account can use this years 6000 credits, rent in 12000 more and borrow next years 6000
If that's not enough you can team up with another owner with excess credits and rent a reservation from them

And this really does impact the big renters.  I don't know what you see that will allow them to stay in business


----------



## ronparise (May 18, 2016)

cyseitz said:


> Can you please post the link to this?  I looked but I am not seeing it.
> thanks



www.worldmarktheclub.com


----------



## clifffaith (May 18, 2016)

ronparise said:


> www.worldmarktheclub.com



Waaay down at the bottom of the page, under "Worldmark News".  (I had to look twice before seeing it).


----------



## cyseitz (May 18, 2016)

So, it doesn't affect me if I only own Wyndham, right?


----------



## ronparise (May 18, 2016)

cyseitz said:


> So, it doesn't affect me if I only own Wyndham, right?



Wyndham prohibits all owner to owner transfers already. 

Done years ago for the same purpose.  To mess with the mega renters. It didn't work then and it won't work with Worldmark. 

Can you say points managers??


----------



## ronparise (May 19, 2016)

Ive been thinking about this change and have come to some conclusions, so if anyone is interested... here goes, 

The question is will this work to achieve the stated purposeAs stated by the board that purpose is:  "to increase availability and reinforce equitable access for all owners"

gotta say..  No

It wont increase availability. There are still the same number of units and the same number of credits outstanding and the same number of owners. and at the end of the day all the good stuff will be reserved by 6:01, thirteen months in advance

As Chris Santos points out in his facebook post,  it comes down to three numbers:

18, 229982, and 1. 

18 megarenters
230k owners minus 18
1 (oneself)

Removing the 18 megarenters still leaves the other numbers (and all their credits) to vie for the prime bookings.

And does it serve to reinforce equitable access for all owners, ie will anyone will have a better chance of getting the reservation they want? . Not really

I compare it to the lottery, If I buy one ticket and you buy 20 tickets do you really have that much better chance of winning than I do.? Or asked another way, If you dont buy your 20 tickets next week, do my chances of winning improve significantly? The answer is no

The recent changes to the grouped easervation rule did some good This one did nothing except to satisfy those that wanted to stick it to the megarenters


----------



## barco13 (May 19, 2016)

ronparise said:


> nobody knows how its going to be implemented, but
> 
> I dont see that this as a money maker for Wyndham as the hk fees go right to our housekeeping  budget
> 
> and for every person that decides to buy more credits I think that there will be one that sells out because of this change. and do we really think that a small account owner that does want more will actually  buy from wyndham?



I just meant if I am currently purchasing HK tokens with a block of credit rentals for $75 and can no longer do that.  It seems I may pay $100 for the same HK token directly from Wyndham instead of an owner. 

Will be interesting to see how this plays out.  As always, good discussion going on TUG & other forums.


----------



## ladycody (May 28, 2016)

ronparise said:


> And this really does impact the big renters.  I don't know what you see that will allow them to stay in business


  I think the point was that they would simply become points (credit) managers as you mentioned...or that they would drop out and credit managers would jump in...either way not truly impacting the rental business for very long.


----------



## sparty (Jun 1, 2016)

ronparise said:


> The question is will this work to achieve the stated purposeAs stated by the board that purpose is:  "to increase availability and reinforce equitable access for all owners"
> 
> gotta say..  No
> 
> It wont increase availability.. and at the end of the day all the good stuff will be reserved by 6:01, thirteen months in advance



The poster child for IMPOSSIBLE to reserve is Seaside 2 Bedroom Ocean Front...  Why can't they fix this?


----------



## ronparise (Jun 1, 2016)

sparty said:


> Why can't they fix this?



There are less than 5, two  bedroom oceanfront units at seaside and 230000 owners, ...  Thats why


----------



## sparty (Jun 1, 2016)

ronparise said:


> There are less than 5, two  bedroom oceanfront units at seaside and 230000 owners, ...  Thats why



While true that's the easy answer..  The Seaside 2 bedroom Ocean Front is 100% booked 13 months out at 6:01 am for every week, 52 weeks per year.  That is broken.  And why can't the timeshare companies be more transparent in the bookings? Share the booking  data to owners on who is booking..

Don't believe it's true?  Take a look on-line at Worldmark reservations...  I wish the BOD would fix this..


----------



## uscav8r (Jun 2, 2016)

sparty said:


> While true that's the easy answer..  The Seaside 2 bedroom Ocean Front is 100% booked 13 months out at 6:01 am for every week, 52 weeks per year.  That is broken.  And why can't the timeshare companies be more transparent in the bookings? Share the booking  data to owners on who is booking..
> 
> 
> 
> Don't believe it's true?  Take a look on-line at Worldmark reservations...  I wish the BOD would fix this..



What you ask for is a violation of Privacy Act laws. Could they offer stripped down, anonymized data? Perhaps. But this is time consuming and expensive. DOD is having this very issue with sharing similar data with external organizations that do analysis, and even these efforts are getting shut off or are on hold due to recent regulatory changes. 

I,too, would love to have data to crunch, but it will take a concerted effort to convince the BOD to make such data available, if they even have the power to do so.

Even then, the juice may not be worth the squeeze... Mostly due to the disparity of 230k vs 5.

BTW, I've seen a number of posts from folks on a FB site who have stayed in OF units. They are not known to be active renters (or megarenters), so general owners ARE getting into these rooms at Seaside.


----------



## ronparise (Jun 2, 2016)

sparty said:


> While true that's the easy answer..  The Seaside 2 bedroom Ocean Front is 100% booked 13 months out at 6:01 am for every week, 52 weeks per year.  That is broken.  And why can't the timeshare companies be more transparent in the bookings? Share the booking  data to owners on who is booking..
> 
> Don't believe it's true?  Take a look on-line at Worldmark reservations...  I wish the BOD would fix this..



The point is that every owner has exactly the same opportunity to make any reservation.  any "fix"  would be taking rights away from one group of owners in favor of another


----------



## sparty (Jun 2, 2016)

Ah.... a legal discussion.. I don't think it's super complex or an "extra squeeze" to institute opening the books in such a way that doesn't compromise individuals personal data.. In essence such a procedure could be defined in the governing docs..  

Look at it from the flip side:

Owners  deserve a response to an inquiry, unless of course the inquiry is ludicrous or threatening, or the demand(s) are intended to harass.

Owners  should expect that HOA financial and other records will be kept in a routine manner for reasonably easy access. 

Owners  should expect disclosure procedures which ensure easy access to most documents within a reasonable time and without unreasonable restrictions.

Owners  should get a timely notice and a fair opportunity to be heard if the HOA intends to take disciplinary action against them.

Owners  deserve consistent treatment in enforcement of rules and regulations.

Owners deserve a reasonable opportunity to vote in important elections or to appoint another to vote on their behalf.

Owners  deserve to be informed of their voting eligibility if they do not qualify to vote per the governing documents before a vote is held.

So w/o access to data it's impossible  to judge if the HOA is operating to the governing docs..  To say either way is guessing..


----------



## CO skier (Jun 3, 2016)

sparty said:


> While true that's the easy answer..  The Seaside 2 bedroom Ocean Front is 100% booked 13 months out at 6:01 am for every week, 52 weeks per year.  That is broken.  And why can't the timeshare companies be more transparent in the bookings? Share the booking  data to owners on who is booking..
> 
> Don't believe it's true?  Take a look on-line at Worldmark reservations...  I wish the BOD would fix this..



The "fix" is simple.  The OF units are the same cost to an owner as a regular unit, so why differentiate?

Lump the OF units in with the regular 2 or 3 bedroom units.  Potluck, take your chances, and it removes the premium the megarenters can charge.  WorldMark did it with the Kihei units to solve a similar problem.

Like any 4-year old learns (or should learn) -- you get what you get and you don't throw a fit.


----------



## ronparise (Jun 3, 2016)

sparty said:


> Ah.... a legal discussion.. I don't think it's super complex or an "extra squeeze" to institute opening the books in such a way that doesn't compromise individuals personal data.. In essence such a procedure could be defined in the governing docs..
> 
> Look at it from the flip side:
> 
> ...



So you just want to know who reserved the ocean front units?  

Gotta ask why what difference does it make ?  Or are you suggesting that whoever got one must have violated some rule?

What rule ? What do you think they did wrong?


----------



## ronparise (Jun 3, 2016)

CO skier said:


> The "fix" is simple.  The OF units are the same cost to an owner as a regular unit, so why differentiate?
> 
> Lump the OF units in with the regular 2 or 3 bedroom units.  Potluck, take your chances, and it removes the premium the megarenters can charge.  WorldMark did it with the Kihei units to solve a similar problem.
> 
> Like any 4-year old learns (or should learn) -- you get what you get and you don't throw a fit.



Unfortunately they let folks buy timeshares that never learned that playground lesson

good idea by the way I wonder why the board hasn't implemented it


----------

