# Regional Block??



## bccash63 (May 1, 2009)

Is there a regional block that applies when trading into DVC? thanx, dawn


----------



## lawgs (May 1, 2009)

bccash63 said:


> Is there a regional block that applies when trading into DVC? thanx, dawn



any florida resorts within 30 miles of DVC are excluded from trading into DVC through RCI...only exception ...if you own HGVC in Orlando, it does not apply since you have a corporate account with RCI through HGVC ....they do not see where you own points....quite an anamoly


----------



## bccash63 (May 2, 2009)

I finally got an RCI guide to answer my question (he put me on hold to go look it up)--he said that if you OWN at an Orlando resort--even if you were using another resort to trade in--that the regional block prevented you from exchanging into DVC???  This doesn't sound right to me--what if you own 10-15 timeshares--chances are one of them is an Orlando resort--also if its not listed on your RCI acct how would they know you own in Orlando--anyone with further clarification would appreciate it--thanx, Dawn


----------



## Lisa P (May 2, 2009)

This makes no sense.  If your deposit is from an Orlando area resort, then you own that deposit.  Sounds like he/she misunderstood or misread the restriction.  RCI would eliminate a LOT of potential exchanges by prohibiting every ACCOUNT that includes an Orlando timeshare week from EVER trading into DVC.  It would go against RCI's business model.     Try calling again to request an exchange using a different ownership and see what they say.  If they do limit you, ask for a supervisor to clarify this for you.     I don't believe it.


----------



## timeos2 (May 3, 2009)

*No surprise - wrong answer*



bccash63 said:


> I finally got an RCI guide to answer my question (he put me on hold to go look it up)--he said that if you OWN at an Orlando resort--even if you were using another resort to trade in--that the regional block prevented you from exchanging into DVC???  This doesn't sound right to me--what if you own 10-15 timeshares--chances are one of them is an Orlando resort--also if its not listed on your RCI acct how would they know you own in Orlando--anyone with further clarification would appreciate it--thanx, Dawn



No, that is incorrect. It only applies to resorts within the radius NOT the whole account. Just trade with a non-Orlando deposit. And find a more knowledgeable guide.


----------



## Dean (May 10, 2009)

timeos2 said:


> No, that is incorrect. It only applies to resorts within the radius NOT the whole account. Just trade with a non-Orlando deposit. And find a more knowledgeable guide.


I'm not sure that's true John.  That was what I was expecting but it appears that this is being interpreted as anyone that owns an "Orlando or Kissimmee resort" cannot exchange in.  That's not only true with weeks but also with points owners.  I know of someone that made RCI points reservations at a DVC resort and has been contacting saying they'll have to cancel citing this rule even though the points they used were likely not from their Orlando ownership.  



> **MEMBERS WHO OWN AT RCI RESORTS IN ORLANDO/KISSIMMEE CANNOT EXCHANGE INTO DVC RESORTS IN THE ORLANDO/KISSIMMEE AREA**


----------



## bccash63 (May 10, 2009)

Dean--that is also what I was told by an RCI guide.  Luckily I do not own an Orlando resort and have a confirmed exchange into a 2 br at the Wilderness Villas for Oct 09'.  Dawn


----------



## schiff1997 (May 14, 2009)

I own Silver Lake Resort -Kissimmee and Cape Winds Resort -Cape Cod and the Cape Winds is pulling all the DVC units.  But my Silver Lake cannot get any.


----------



## Dean (May 14, 2009)

schiff1997 said:


> I own Silver Lake Resort -Kissimmee and Cape Winds Resort -Cape Cod and the Cape Winds is pulling all the DVC units.  But my Silver Lake cannot get any.


As I noted, I've already heard from one person that had 2 reservations in hand and was called by RCI saying they were canceling under this rule.  Granted this was an RCI points reservation but in general RCI points should have been immune to the restriction.  Seeing is not necessarily the entire story.  The question is whether you're going to take the chance.


----------



## charford (May 17, 2009)

Does anyone know if this applies to DVC owners? I just confirmed Old Key West for next March. The only RCI timeshare in my RCI account is in Vermont, but I also own DVC plus an Orlando timeshare not in my account. Will I get hit with the regional block? The language in the confirmation says "a RCI resort within Orlando/Kissimmee".


----------



## Twinkstarr (May 17, 2009)

charford said:


> Does anyone know if this applies to DVC owners? I just confirmed Old Key West for next March. The only RCI timeshare in my RCI account is in Vermont, but I also own DVC plus an Orlando timeshare not in my account. Will I get hit with the regional block? The language in the confirmation says "a RCI resort within Orlando/Kissimmee".



The DVC account is a corporate one with RCI. So you should be okay, it's not like the Corp account lists every DVC owner. 

Now if it were set-up where as DVC owners we had our own RCI accounts, then I might be worried.


----------



## cindi (May 17, 2009)

Well, I own an Orlando resort that is dual affiliated with both RCI and II.  As of right now, I have had zero interest in adding it to my RCI account.  If this is the case, it is going to stay that way! 

Shesh!


----------



## Dean (May 17, 2009)

Twinkstarr said:


> The DVC account is a corporate one with RCI. So you should be okay, it's not like the Corp account lists every DVC owner.
> 
> Now if it were set-up where as DVC owners we had our own RCI accounts, then I might be worried.


Actually RCI does have a list of every established owner.  They have essentially loaded each owner into their system.  But given it's a separate contract, and "membership", I don't think you'd have a problem.  In the past the blocks have stopped at a given account number.  But this is new territory from what I've known about in the past though I am not quite as experienced with RCI as II.  My understanding previously was as long as you weren't using the Orlando timeshare to trade in you were OK and also that for points, these restrictions weren't upheld.  So this represents a fundamental change for RCI that is not unlike when the Mayan resorts or Orange lake resorts apply the 1 in 4 (etc) to one visit for all of their resorts.  Regional blocks are fairly new and rare for RCI though (mostly II in the past) so this could be a moving target.



cindi said:


> Well, I own an Orlando resort that is dual affiliated with both RCI and II.  As of right now, I have had zero interest in adding it to my RCI account.  If this is the case, it is going to stay that way!
> 
> Shesh!


That sounds like a wise choice Cindi.  If it's a quality resort, it'll likely do better in II anyway.


----------



## timeos2 (May 17, 2009)

*Don't ever depend on trading for your value or you will get burned*



Dean said:


> I'm not sure that's true John.  That was what I was expecting but it appears that this is being interpreted as anyone that owns an "Orlando or Kissimmee resort" cannot exchange in.  That's not only true with weeks but also with points owners.  I know of someone that made RCI points reservations at a DVC resort and has been contacting saying they'll have to cancel citing this rule even though the points they used were likely not from their Orlando ownership.



That has never been the case in the past and would be almost impossible to enforce. If RCI tried to pull that I would simply remove my Orlando units thus removing the so called "block". But I have never had any issue with trades or Points use back into Orlando even though two of my resorts are from there. They look at the deposit you're using not the resorts in the account. And in Points all limits seem to disappear. 1 in 4 has never been enforced in my experience using points (in fact we ave actually returned to the same resort 5 times in 6 years using points that supposedly has a 1 in 4 rule) while I have seen it used when making week for week exchanges. Of course nothing in the wild west of exchange rules (and fees) is set in stone so what they may say or do today might be different tomorrow (why it is best to own in a system or at a resort you like rather than depend on the ever changing and costly trade landscape).  Of the general points traders RCI Points comes closest to being universal but I still prefer a group with a lot of internal choices such as Wyndham so I don't need to depend on outside choices to get where we want to go.


----------



## cindi (May 17, 2009)

Dean said:


> That sounds like a wise choice Cindi.  If it's a quality resort, it'll likely do better in II anyway.



It is, it does, and it's staying there.


----------



## timeos2 (May 17, 2009)

*If you haven't tried you don't know what you're missing*



cindi said:


> It is, it does, and it's staying there.



If you haven't tried it in RCI how would you know? Every one of our resorts (except Wyndham of course) can be used in II OR RCI. Over a 10 year period we tried deposits - always top weeks - in RCI, II & SFX.  RCI and SFX were consistent in getting us fair trades (size for size, quality for quality, use dates for use dates) while II invariably came back with off season, wrong areas, smaller units and generally were a pain to deal with. We never felt we got equal value out and almost always had to "settle" just to not lose the deposit. After a decade of trying (and again, equal deposits so it was a fair trial) we dropped II. We got back in via Diamond Club as Corporate members and found it acceptable (hey, its free rather than paying so that's a start) but still far from the best. With the preference they give corporate members over the mere paying clients (!) it makes II a little better than it was when we paid - and much cheaper.  I'd never pay to be in II again and still see them as a poor third choice.  As the tag line says there is a difference between delivering quality time/resorts (as SFX actually does) and using quality as a marketing slogan. II has the second down pat but sure can't deliver the first.


----------



## Dean (May 17, 2009)

timeos2 said:


> That has never been the case in the past and would be almost impossible to enforce. If RCI tried to pull that I would simply remove my Orlando units thus removing the so called "block". But I have never had any issue with trades or Points use back into Orlando even though two of my resorts are from there. They look at the deposit you're using not the resorts in the account. And in Points all limits seem to disappear. 1 in 4 has never been enforced in my experience using points (in fact we ave actually returned to the same resort 5 times in 6 years using points that supposedly has a 1 in 4 rule) while I have seen it used when making week for week exchanges. Of course nothing in the wild west of exchange rules (and fees) is set in stone so what they may say or do today might be different tomorrow (why it is best to own in a system or at a resort you like rather than depend on the ever changing and costly trade landscape).  Of the general points traders RCI Points comes closest to being universal but I still prefer a group with a lot of internal choices such as Wyndham so I don't need to depend on outside choices to get where we want to go.


My understanding previously was the same as yours but this is a new day.  You may want to pay attention to this issue and consider how it will affect you and how it evolves.  Though it shouldn't affect you at all since I was under the impression you'd vowed never to stay at a DVC resort and never to trade for a resort that charged an extra fee.  As I noted, there have been reports of RCI enforcing this issue in a way as to make anyone who has an Orlando resort listed in their account affected whether using that deposit or not and including those trading through points.  It's still early so it might be a moving target.  As for being unenforceable, or nearly so, I don't think that's the case.  As I noted, at least one RCI points member has already been called saying their reservations were being cancelled under this rule.  I also know of the Mayan resorts turning people away at the door.  Given DVC already has direct access to RCI's computers and my info suggests they are actively checking on this issue, you may want to act now if you have changed your mind about trading in to DVC.

I guess the other question is what if your RCI points account and RCI weeks account are linked, as they are when you use the Points account to get the free weeks account.  Could they then enforce this across both accounts as if they were one, my feeling is they could but likely won't.  Hopefully other systems don't take up this approach.  We'll see, it should be intersting.


----------



## Dean (May 17, 2009)

timeos2 said:


> If you haven't tried it in RCI how would you know? Every one of our resorts (except Wyndham of course) can be used in II OR RCI. Over a 10 year period we tried deposits - always top weeks - in RCI, II & SFX.  RCI and SFX were consistent in getting us fair trades (size for size, quality for quality, use dates for use dates) while II invariably came back with off season, wrong areas, smaller units and generally were a pain to deal with. We never felt we got equal value out and almost always had to "settle" just to not lose the deposit. After a decade of trying (and again, equal deposits so it was a fair trial) we dropped II. We got back in via Diamond Club as Corporate members and found it acceptable (hey, its free rather than paying so that's a start) but still far from the best. With the preference they give corporate members over the mere paying clients (!) it makes II a little better than it was when we paid - and much cheaper.  I'd never pay to be in II again and still see them as a poor third choice.  As the tag line says there is a difference between delivering quality time/resorts (as SFX actually does) and using quality as a marketing slogan. II has the second down pat but sure can't deliver the first.


John, now with experience with RCI weeks, RCI points, II and SFX, my experience has been far from yours.  However, a large number of our trades in II have been for Marriott's, Westin and DVC, often using the internal trading preference of Marriott where applicable.  I believe Cindi was referring the Cypress Harbour, she would be nuts to trade that resort in RCI given the specifics.  My view is that even with the move of DVC to RCI, II still has the better resorts but do realize that many of them are Marriott's where it's a tale of 2 cities depending on whether you're trading a Marriott or now.  The two things I like about RCI weeks are being able to specify unit size regardless of what I'm trading with and that they tend to have inventory further out.  My experience with SFX is that they are less likely to come through for me and are more of a gamble given the smaller numbers of units involved but still a nice option for some situations.

Also I believe II rewards resort quality more than does RCI, not wrong, just different.  This should help Cindi also, esp with the internal Marriott preference.


----------



## timeos2 (May 17, 2009)

*Why put up with limitations?*



Dean said:


> I guess the other question is what if your RCI points account and RCI weeks account are linked, as they are when you use the Points account to get the free weeks account.  Could they then enforce this across both accounts as if they were one, my feeling is they could but likely won't.  Hopefully other systems don't take up this approach.  We'll see, it should be intersting.



My weeks account is separate as it is through Wyndham (paid 100% and a FULL account with it's own number - not some corporate limited thing) and I can also cross over using the points to weeks link.  I don't plan on using DVC (been there, had enough of that) but I do tend to go to Orlando and thus bump on the "block" that applies not only to DVC but to many other area resorts. Yet, as of today, have never had an issue with a reservation. I'm not a heavy user as I prefer not to trade but when we do it's been OK. If they start to pull funny stuff (unlikely - they WANT the fees. THAT'S what they live for) then I'll pull my Orlando units. We use them most of the time or trade for RCI Points (eliminates the issue in any case. They DO NOT block points trades regardless of source  - only weeks. If a resort tries to block a points trade outside of RCI then go get it straightened out with RCI as resorts can't make their own rules). Once your resort is converted to points it has no "home" basis for trade. I prefer RCI Points over weeks and the lack of silly blocks is one of the primary reasons.


----------



## Dean (May 17, 2009)

timeos2 said:


> My weeks account is separate as it is through Wyndham (paid 100% and a FULL account with it's own number - not some corporate limited thing) and I can also cross over using the points to weeks link.  I don't plan on using DVC (been there, had enough of that) but I do tend to go to Orlando and thus bump on the "block" that applies not only to DVC but to many other area resorts. Yet, as of today, have never had an issue with a reservation. I'm not a heavy user as I prefer not to trade but when we do it's been OK. If they start to pull funny stuff (unlikely - they WANT the fees. THAT'S what they live for) then I'll pull my Orlando units. We use them most of the time or trade for RCI Points (eliminates the issue in any case. They DO NOT block points trades regardless of source  - only weeks. If a resort tries to block a points trade outside of RCI then go get it straightened out with RCI as resorts can't make their own rules). Once your resort is converted to points it has no "home" basis for trade. I prefer RCI Points over weeks and the lack of silly blocks is one of the primary reasons.


Other than DVC I doubt it'll be an issue.  The info I have for RCI points and DVC would suggest that your statements that they can't institute restrictions in RCI points is now incorrect as RCI has already canceled at least 2 reservations made for DVC using RCI points by members who own at least one Orlando resort in their points account.


----------



## timeos2 (May 17, 2009)

*Let them try. It won't fly.*



Dean said:


> Other than DVC I doubt it'll be an issue.  The info I have for RCI points and DVC would suggest that your statements that they can't institute restrictions in RCI points is now incorrect as RCI has already canceled at least 2 reservations made for DVC using RCI points by members who own at least one Orlando resort in their points account.



How can they prove it? I have 2 Orlando resorts in my weeks account (available to deposit- may or may not actually be in there) but only a Texas resort in my (different number) Points account. So how/why would they try to combine the two? And why would DVC get to negate a policy RCI has had since 2002 regarding the non-sourcing of Points? Not that I'm likely to have to deal with it but if it came up I would fight it all the way to the top.  Points are points and if that changes they can say goodbye to memberships (and they sure don't want THAT as Points are where they are trying to get everyone to).  Tempest over nothing IMO.  Now in weeks I can see it being enforced and I understand that has also always been the rule.  I have no problem with that as we signed on with that understanding.


----------



## Dean (May 17, 2009)

timeos2 said:


> How can they prove it? I have 2 Orlando resorts in my weeks account (available to deposit- may or may not actually be in there) but only a Texas resort in my (different number) Points account. So how/why would they try to combine the two? And why would DVC get to negate a policy RCI has had since 2002 regarding the non-sourcing of Points? Not that I'm likely to have to deal with it but if it came up I would fight it all the way to the top.  Points are points and if that changes they can say goodbye to memberships (and they sure don't want THAT as Points are where they are trying to get everyone to).  Tempest over nothing IMO.  Now in weeks I can see it being enforced and I understand that has also always been the rule.  I have no problem with that as we signed on with that understanding.


I think we're talking a little different now.  My statements were about a single account though I did extrapolate to bridge the question that IF the accounts were linked it was possible they might institute a blanket block in the future or simply change how they interpret the current situation.  If your accounts are truly unrelated as they should be in this situation, I wouldn't think you'd have any risk.  However, I do know of the two cancelations based on the premise that the member had an Orlando area resort listed in their account and at least a few others have confirmed this is what RCI is telling them.  

As for your questions about how they would know.  They have access to RCI's computers and can (and do at time it appears) look at your account to check this information.  They can look by name as well.  And for those that are using the RCI points account to get a free RCI weeks account, they are linked in the computer system.  And even in RCI points, the ownership info as to resort is present and discoverable.  I'm not sure I can address the issue of whether this has been a policy or whether it's just been the way it's been done, two different things in my book but both open to possible change.  I just know how you love it when DVC comes in and tilts your playing field.


----------



## Lisa P (May 17, 2009)

Dean said:


> I do know of the two cancelations based on the premise that the member had an Orlando area resort listed in their account and at least a few others have confirmed this is what RCI is telling them.


Were these accounts in which the only points ownerships were from Orlando resorts?  Or did they have points from various resorts, including Orlando resorts?  Just wondering.

This whole thing seems fishy, like some RCI reps may have been stepping over the line of the intent of the policy.  One would think that RCI would want to keep the members who own the most weeks or the most points the happiest as they're RCI's _best customers_ for making deposits and generating RCI's income.  Yet a policy as is suggested here, even on RCI Points reservations, would penalize the largest multi-week/points owners the most, given that the more one owns, the more likely that they'll own something in Orlando.  And then ALL their exchanges are restricted from trading into DVC????  Too weird.


----------



## Dean (May 17, 2009)

Lisa P said:


> Were these accounts in which the only points ownerships were from Orlando resorts?  Or did they have points from various resorts, including Orlando resorts?  Just wondering.
> 
> This whole thing seems fishy, like some RCI reps may have been stepping over the line of the intent of the policy.  One would think that RCI would want to keep the members who own the most weeks or the most points the happiest as they're RCI's _best customers_ for making deposits and generating RCI's income.  Yet a policy as is suggested here, even on RCI Points reservations, would penalize the largest multi-week/points owners the most, given that the more one owns, the more likely that they'll own something in Orlando.  And then ALL their exchanges are restricted from trading into DVC????  Too weird.


Lisa, the specific situations I'm aware of were by report accounts that had both Orlando area resorts and non Orlando resorts.  Here's the post that you may have seen recently on DIS.  As you see on this thread, others have been told the same thing.



> I own both RCI weeks and RCI Point resorts. In my weeks account I do not own any timeshare in Orlando and I can exchange into DVC and I have already done this. In my points account I do own (but just sold today!) at a points resort in Kissimmee. I did make a couple of exchanges and was later called by RCI saying my exchanges would be canceled because of my Kissimmee points ownership I was not allowed to exchange into DVC.


They went on to say they transferred the points to a friends account which worked out for this situation though I'm sure they'll now need a guest certificate.


----------



## Dean (May 30, 2009)

We've had reports of another RCI points member who selected an exchange to DVC using RCI points and that exchange was later canceled because they own in Orlando.  They are reportedly being told by RCI that DVC has it in their contract that no one who owns at a resort within a 30 mile radius can exchange in.


----------



## agottl2 (Jun 8, 2009)

Any thoughts on what the rationale is for disney to block Orlando Timeshares from trading in.


----------



## Bill4728 (Jun 8, 2009)

Many TS don't like traders from the same region trading into their resorts. It is much more difficult to sell a TS to someone who can say, " Why would I buy here if I can just trade my cheap TS from just down the road and still stay here?"


----------



## Dean (Jun 8, 2009)

agottl2 said:


> Any thoughts on what the rationale is for disney to block Orlando Timeshares from trading in.


They Know they're better than the rest and don't want others in the area trading in.  They did this with II and have carried it over to RCI.  Truth be known I don't think they'd allow trading in at all if they could figure out a way to give their members the chance to trade out without allowing the reverse.


----------



## timeos2 (Jun 8, 2009)

*They may think they are the best but they actually know better*



Dean said:


> They Know they're better than the rest and don't want others in the area trading in.  They did this with II and have carried it over to RCI.  Truth be known I don't think they'd allow trading in at all if they could figure out a way to give their members the chance to trade out without allowing the reverse.



They are better than SOME and not up to the size or quality of the best - it's easy to see why they want to keep both groups out. They are not alone. Many resorts implement the 100mile radius block.  SOP.


----------



## Dean (Jun 8, 2009)

timeos2 said:


> They are better than SOME and not up to the size or quality of the best - it's easy to see why they want to keep both groups out. They are not alone. Many resorts implement the 100mile radius block.  SOP.


John, with the onsite location and amenities and the demand both in RCI and previously, in II, it's hard to argue with their position in the pecking order.  Add to that the idea they've been able to essentially dictate their terms to be RCI and II over the years and the liquidity and prices for resale and it's clear what the market forces think about this issue whether you agree or not.


----------



## icydog (Jun 11, 2009)

Dean said:


> They Know they're better than the rest and don't want others in the area trading in.  They did this with II and have carried it over to RCI.  Truth be known I don't think they'd allow trading in at all if they could figure out a way to give their members the chance to trade out without allowing the reverse.



DEAN, I was thinking the opposite. They know their members don't trade out. It has been proven over, and over, historically, members use their points at DVC locations. 

What I think DVC is doing (by allowing the vast numbers of trades available now) is hoping the RCI exchangers will buy DVC once they see it. Why else would they put so much inventory into RCI. Not that I've ever seen it but I have heard there are literally hundreds of villas sometimes available. And not just at SSR but at AKV and BCV the most sought after resorts by members.


----------



## timeos2 (Jun 11, 2009)

*High demand isn't the same as high quality - ask Carolinian*



Dean said:


> John, with the onsite location and amenities and the demand both in RCI and previously, in II, it's hard to argue with their position in the pecking order.  Add to that the idea they've been able to essentially dictate their terms to be RCI and II over the years and the liquidity and prices for resale and it's clear what the market forces think about this issue whether you agree or not.



Demand for the Manhattan Club also far exceeds supply due to location/ amenities but no one that has stayed there recently is going to say it is "the best" in timeshare anymore (it once had some stake to claim that title).  The simple fact that people want to stay in a location doesn't make a resort better - look at all the so-so resorts on beaches that are super high demand during a 4-8 week period each year - it just means it's a place a lot of people want to visit if they can.  DVC is far from "the best" in amenities, unit sizes or physical condition despite some of the highest annual fees in the industry.  It does of course have a unique location much like those beach resorts or the MC. Unlike those the demand is nearly year round thanks to weather in Orlando/CA. The original post tried to say DVC is "the best" thus not wanting those cellar dwellers from surrounding resorts trading in. It doesn't take much to find far better quality resorts (Marriott, Hilton, Wyndham, many more as Orlando is the meca of high end timeshares) so that isn't the case - they simply want to control access as the rules of II / RCI allow and I already posted the reasons why.  It has nothing to do with relative quality but simply good business sense.  No one is denying that there is demand for DVC but you are attributing it to the wrong reasons.


----------



## Dean (Jun 11, 2009)

icydog said:


> DEAN, I was thinking the opposite. They know their members don't trade out. It has been proven over, and over, historically, members use their points at DVC locations.
> 
> What I think DVC is doing (by allowing the vast numbers of trades available now) is hoping the RCI exchangers will buy DVC once they see it. Why else would they put so much inventory into RCI. Not that I've ever seen it but I have heard there are literally hundreds of villas sometimes available. And not just at SSR but at AKV and BCV the most sought after resorts by members.


One could say it's elitist or little man syndrome, more likely, a combination of the 2.



timeos2 said:


> Demand for the Manhattan Club also far exceeds supply due to location/ amenities but no one that has stayed there recently is going to say it is "the best" in timeshare anymore (it once had some stake to claim that title).  The simple fact that people want to stay in a location doesn't make a resort better - look at all the so-so resorts on beaches that are super high demand during a 4-8 week period each year - it just means it's a place a lot of people want to visit if they can.  DVC is far from "the best" in amenities, unit sizes or physical condition despite some of the highest annual fees in the industry.  It does of course have a unique location much like those beach resorts or the MC. Unlike those the demand is nearly year round thanks to weather in Orlando/CA. The original post tried to say DVC is "the best" thus not wanting those cellar dwellers from surrounding resorts trading in. It doesn't take much to find far better quality resorts (Marriott, Hilton, Wyndham, many more as Orlando is the meca of high end timeshares) so that isn't the case - they simply want to control access as the rules of II / RCI allow and I already posted the reasons why.  It has nothing to do with relative quality but simply good business sense.  No one is denying that there is demand for DVC but you are attributing it to the wrong reasons.


John, my guess we'll have to agree to partly disagree.  Comparing resorts is in large part subjective and thus it depends on what is important to you as to what's best.  By your own admission in the past you are biased against DVC.  Location is a major part of the criteria for real estate and timeshares.  However, ignoring specific location, DVC resorts compare very favorable to those other resorts you alluded to.  For Orlando I'd put this group as the A list:

All DVC resorts.
Marriott's (CH, GV)
Hilton's (Sea World, Tuscany)
It's almost a certainty that the new Hilton and new Marriott will fit into this list.  If you asked 10 different people to rank them I think you'd get 10 totally different lists.

A- list

Marriott's Harbour Lake (maybe, esp once upgraded)
Vistana Villages
The Fountains
Maybe Bonnet Creek but partly due to location.
? Houses at Summer Bay
There really are not any other resorts to put in this group from what I can see.  Certainly none of the other Wyndham, Worldmark, Marriott's or Starwood properties. Certainly the rooms are smaller overall at DVC but not dramatically so compared to say MGV which is under 1300 sq ft compared to just under 1100 for most DVC resorts (OKW, HH, BWV & VB are larger, most larger than MGV).  The pools at the other resorts tend to be a little more elaborate with more activities but that's in large part BECAUSE their off site.  And the TUG ratings are comparable to those other resorts as well, actually look at the ratings for Orlando, the are dominated by DVC resorts.  It may be hard to say their better other than location but it's impossible to say their worse overall than even one of the specific resorts I mentioned taken as an overall resort.


----------



## elaine (Jun 11, 2009)

*what can I say, I went, I stayed, I bought!*

I'm guessing it's a marketing ploy, and it worked for me!  After 5+ years of trading into the top timeshares in Orlando and thinking DVC was too $$$ and not worth it, we stayed at DVC for a few days 2 years ago---I was so impressed, I came home and bought (a small) DVC contract.
It was not so much the rooms, HGVC is nicer, or the pools, although they are good. It was the kids' activities, the ME bus from the airport, the WDW buses throughout the entire complex,  the Dining Plan, and the great cast members---I felt like I was on a "land cruise."  
DH joked that they must sprinkle pixie dust in the water!  So, maybe the DVC-RCI marketing or whatever they are doing will work for them.


----------



## schiff1997 (Jun 11, 2009)

Heres what a VC told me today about the block.  I currently have a week in Quebec, week in Orlando and week in Cape Cod.  My Cape Cod week pulls all the Disney even after the mess of the revamp of RCI.  I am safe for trading into DVC because my account number is linked to my Quebec week and not to my Orlando week, so if my Cape week pulls DVC I am able to get away with the exchange, but I cannot use the Orlando week.  This I was told is a DVC rule and not RCI's.


----------



## Dean (Jun 11, 2009)

schiff1997 said:


> Heres what a VC told me today about the block.  I currently have a week in Quebec, week in Orlando and week in Cape Cod.  My Cape Cod week pulls all the Disney even after the mess of the revamp of RCI.  I am safe for trading into DVC because my account number is linked to my Quebec week and not to my Orlando week, so if my Cape week pulls DVC I am able to get away with the exchange, but I cannot use the Orlando week.  This I was told is a DVC rule and not RCI's.


It's actually an RCI rule that DVC chooses.  Prior to DVC, regional blocks were rare in RCI but I understand they have existed in some situations.  They are common in II.  What you were told is different than what I have been told.  As I've noted, I do know of at least 2 incidence where a member was able to trade in and later been called to be canceled.  It's a gamble if you decide to take it.  One thing with DVC, as compared to say the Grand Mayan, is you won't be turned away at the front desk with an exchange conf in hand due to this rule if it wasn't canceled previously by RCI.


----------



## schiff1997 (Jun 12, 2009)

Dean said:


> It's actually an RCI rule that DVC chooses.  Prior to DVC, regional blocks were rare in RCI but I understand they have existed in some situations.  They are common in II.  What you were told is different than what I have been told.  As I've noted, I do know of at least 2 incidence where a member was able to trade in and later been called to be canceled.  It's a gamble if you decide to take it.  One thing with DVC, as compared to say the Grand Mayan, is you won't be turned away at the front desk with an exchange conf in hand due to this rule if it wasn't canceled previously by RCI.



Dean, here is what happened,  I saw 100+ DVC units the my Cape week, one I wanted but need to know how many bathrooms, called VC to check and they could not see any of the DVC showing up that I saw online, after numerous tries by the VC using different things he said must be extra vacations I see, but I advised him that they said exchange fee only.  So while on phone I put the unit on hold and suddenly wham poof it appears in my account in front of him, he didn't know what to say or how it happened.  So we confirmed it online together, nothing said about my Orlando owned week at all,  let's hope I get to keep it.


----------



## Dean (Jun 12, 2009)

schiff1997 said:


> let's hope I get to keep it.


We'll certainly hope but I'd give you about a 50/50 chance of getting a phone call prior canceling it.  Let us know either way, good luck, I hope it works out for you.


----------



## icydog (Jun 13, 2009)

Dean, with the state of RCI being in turmoil now,  and DVC not caring where their trades come from, I am pretty confident this trade will  go through. DVC want bodies.. That's the bottom line... Otherwise why would they, DVC, be submitting so many weeks for trade. They want those people to buy their product, otherwise, I don't understand why they, DVC again, is doing this dumping of weeks into RCI..


----------



## Dean (Jun 13, 2009)

icydog said:


> Dean, with the state of RCI being in turmoil now,  and DVC not caring where their trades come from, I am pretty confident this trade will  go through. DVC want bodies.. That's the bottom line... Otherwise why would they, DVC, be submitting so many weeks for trade. They want those people to buy their product, otherwise, I don't understand why they, DVC again, is doing this dumping of weeks into RCI..


I don't think that's the case.  As I noted previously, they have recently canceled 3 weeks for 2 people that were made under RCI points.  Plus DVC does not market to exchangers specifically.  It may get past them but it won't be because they look the other way to get bodies in.

I'm not sure I'd use the word turmoil with RCI.  They did an upgrade and it didn't go smoothly.  I don't think anything else has fundamentally changed.  I'm confident we'll end up back where we were once all is said and done, seems to be back pretty close to where it was before now from a trade standpoint.


----------



## MichaelColey (Jul 26, 2010)

What are the latest observations on the regional block?

If you have linked accounts and an Orlando unit in one, is the other blocked as well?  For instance, if I have an Orlando unit in RCI Weeks, is a linked RCI Points account safe?  From previous posts in this thread, it appears so.

Would a completely separate RCI account avoid the regional block?  I would suspect so, and I'm seriously thinking about going that way.  It's worth $89/year to me to have the ability to book into DVC.  (And a nice side effect is that 1 in 4 and 1 in 5 resorts would become 2 in 4 and 2 in 5.)


----------



## Dean (Jul 26, 2010)

MichaelColey said:


> What are the latest observations on the regional block?
> 
> If you have linked accounts and an Orlando unit in one, is the other blocked as well?  For instance, if I have an Orlando unit in RCI Weeks, is a linked RCI Points account safe?  From previous posts in this thread, it appears so.
> 
> Would a completely separate RCI account avoid the regional block?  I would suspect so, and I'm seriously thinking about going that way.  It's worth $89/year to me to have the ability to book into DVC.  (And a nice side effect is that 1 in 4 and 1 in 5 resorts would become 2 in 4 and 2 in 5.)


The last info I had suggested that any single account with a direct Orlando connection was technically off limits but that those restrictions did not pass from a separate weeks account to a points account or vice versa.  Some have reported success using non orlando deposits in weeks when they had a listed Orlando week that was not the object of the exchange.  However, I personally know of people with confirmed exchanges later being canceled in both weeks and points due to this "rule".


----------

