# New RCI Domestic Exchange fee $164!



## timeos2 (Jun 13, 2006)

Wow. In addition to higher annual fees & International fees a week exchange is going to $164.  That was more than half my original annual maintenance fee in 1993.


----------



## Jya-Ning (Jun 13, 2006)

*Re: New RCI Domestic Exchange fee $159!*

I believe in 2000, their exchange fee is 79.  It is doubled in 6 years.  

Jya-Ning


----------



## timeos2 (Jun 13, 2006)

Corrected to $164 Domesti.

$199 International and $119 to cancel an exchange. 

Where is the value? New prices effective 9/10/06.


----------



## TravelSFO (Jun 13, 2006)

Glad to know this just before we were going to deposit another week with RCI.  This changes everything (for now...)


----------



## geekette (Jun 13, 2006)

Wow, it's like an auction!!!  

I'll bid $199 for a subpar week in a subpar resort!  That's my final offer!!

(greedy pukes)  :annoyed:


----------



## geekette (Jun 13, 2006)

WHOA, wait a sec - there is A CHARGE TO CANCEL!?!?

I'm checking my calendar, but it seems to be way past April 1.  Is this for real?


----------



## Walt (Jun 13, 2006)

timeos2 said:
			
		

> Corrected to $164 Domesti.
> 
> $199 International and $119 to cancel an exchange.
> 
> Wheree is the value?




Is there a link to all of RCI's Membership Fees, Weeks and Points Fees?

Walt


----------



## timeos2 (Jun 13, 2006)

Walt said:
			
		

> Is there a link to all of RCI's Membership Fees, Weeks and Points Fees?
> 
> Walt


Not for the new fees yet. It came to Affiliates in a letter.


----------



## Jya-Ning (Jun 13, 2006)

When will it be effective?

Jya-Ning


----------



## marybeach (Jun 13, 2006)

Another nudge for Points from RCI.  Exchanges are cheaper with Points.  I assume max there is still $99.


----------



## lawren2 (Jun 13, 2006)

Walt said:
			
		

> Is there a link to all of RCI's Membership Fees, Weeks and Points Fees?
> 
> Walt



http://www.rci.com/RCI/CDA/rciInfo/...quest=RCI_WeeksFAQ2&Country=US&Language=en#1c

It has not been updated to reflect the new prices.


----------



## lawren2 (Jun 13, 2006)

geekette said:
			
		

> WHOA, wait a sec - there is A CHARGE TO CANCEL!?!?
> 
> I'm checking my calendar, but it seems to be way past April 1.  Is this for real?




There has always been a penalty to cancel after 24 hours. They keep most or all of your exchange fee.

*What happens if I need to cancel my vacation?
Any change to your confirmed travel dates constitutes cancellation of your exchange and is subject to our standard cancellation guidelines. When cancellation is made 61 days or more prior to your confirmed travel dates, $109 USD ($143 CAD) of your original exchange fee is retained by RCI. Should cancellation be requested 60 days or fewer prior to travel, no portion of your exchange fee is refundable. However, in either case, your deposited week will be eligible for a new exchange*.


----------



## Liz Wolf-Spada (Jun 13, 2006)

Well, that does it. We've prepaid RCI till 2012 because of S. Africa, but if I can ever get S. Africa straightened out it will go to DAE and I may join II for Welk and SFX will get my Gaslamp or maybe both of my US resorts! That price is ludicrous. SFX is still $99 per exchange.
Liz


----------



## timetraveler (Jun 13, 2006)

Big changes coming with some resorts that are fed up with the same gouging!


----------



## Wonka (Jun 13, 2006)

marybeach said:
			
		

> Another nudge for Points from RCI.  Exchanges are cheaper with Points.  I assume max there is still $99.



It's hard not to think this is very true.  The exchange fees and costs of RCI have really gotten out of hand.  They seem to keep increasing fees and diminish services to non-points owners.  How on earth can they justify a $99 fee for a points exchange compared to a $169 fee for a weeks trade.  I too think I'm done with RCI.  I think I'll start looking for a buyer for my 2BR DK and Club Regina.  I'd much rather deal with II and others.


----------



## quiltergal (Jun 13, 2006)

You can exchange your Club Regina through SFX.


----------



## grest (Jun 13, 2006)

...another unhappy camper...
connie


----------



## MULTIZ321 (Jun 13, 2006)

RCI Points Fees Clarification -

If you book 7 days at a RCI Weeks Resort (i.e., a NonPoints Resort) via RCI Points, the exchange fee is $149.

If you book 7 days at a RCI Points Resort then the exchange fee is $99.

Booking 1 to 2 nights at a RCI Points Resort - the exchange fee is $49

Booking 3 to 4 nights at a RCI Points Resort - the exhange fee is $79

I asked the VC if she was aware of any imminent increase in RCI Points Exchange Fees - she said no.  However, she was also unaware of the 
proposed incease in the RCI Weeks exchange fee to $169 that was mentioned earlier in this thread.


Richard


----------



## PAJim (Jun 13, 2006)

Already sold my membership with my last trader.  Just me and my OC now!


----------



## Carolinian (Jun 13, 2006)

marybeach said:
			
		

> Another nudge for Points from RCI.  Exchanges are cheaper with Points.  I assume max there is still $99.



Also a nudge to RCI rentals - now even more of a bargain compared to owning and exchanging!

For knowledgable timesharers it will also be a nudge to look more into using independent exchange companies.

How should we spell R-E-L-I-E-F???

www.daelive.com

www.sfx-resorts.com

www.htse.net

www.platinuminterchange.com

www.tradingplaces.com

www.interchange-timeshare.com.au

Several of these offer $99 (or less) exchanges, and FREE membership, too!


----------



## Carolinian (Jun 13, 2006)

timetraveler said:
			
		

> Big changes coming with some resorts that are fed up with the same gouging!



HOA's need to let their members know about the independents.


----------



## T_R_Oglodyte (Jun 13, 2006)

Carolinian said:
			
		

> Also a nudge to RCI rentals - now even more of a bargain compared to owning and exchanging!


And a nudge toward the mini-systems.

If you can find a mini that has resorts in lots of places you want to visit, you simply reserve where you want to stay, with no exchange fee and no waiting on tenterhooks for a reservation to come through.

When you want to visit someplace outside your system, use an independent or rent.


----------



## susieq (Jun 13, 2006)

Carolinian said:
			
		

> Also a nudge to RCI rentals - now even more of a bargain compared to owning and exchanging!
> 
> For knowledgable timesharers it will also be a nudge to look more into using independent exchange companies.
> 
> ...




Thanks so much for this listing ~~ sure deserves some lookin' into!


----------



## bogey21 (Jun 13, 2006)

marybeach said:
			
		

> Another nudge for Points from RCI.  Exchanges are cheaper with Points.  I assume max there is still $99.



But not when you use your points to exchange into a Weeks Resort!!

I have made extensive use of the 45 day Weeks window.  Valuing say 7,500 Points at $75 means my cost is now $239 ($164 + $75).  Still a bargain, I guess!!

GEORGE

P.S. - This makes my ORE Exchange look even better at $99 including the 2 bedroom uprade ($74 for basic exchange + $25 for the upgrade).


----------



## Carolinian (Jun 13, 2006)

susieq said:
			
		

> Thanks so much for this listing ~~ sure deserves some lookin' into!



Most of these companies have representatives who will answers questions about their company on forums at www.timeshareforums.com


----------



## susieq (Jun 13, 2006)

Thanks again!!


----------



## geekette (Jun 13, 2006)

MULTIZ321 said:
			
		

> RCI Points Fees Clarification -
> 
> If you book 7 days at a RCI Weeks Resort (i.e., a NonPoints Resort) via RCI Points, the exchange fee is $149.
> 
> ...




I would expect increases here, too.  Remember, there didn't used to be a charge for PFD.  Last Call got raised, GCs were free online or some such, but that got changed.  Even the worthless One Plus One got increased!


----------



## geekette (Jun 13, 2006)

lawren2 said:
			
		

> There has always been a penalty to cancel after 24 hours. They keep most or all of your exchange fee.
> 
> *What happens if I need to cancel my vacation?
> Any change to your confirmed travel dates constitutes cancellation of your exchange and is subject to our standard cancellation guidelines. When cancellation is made 61 days or more prior to your confirmed travel dates, $109 USD ($143 CAD) of your original exchange fee is retained by RCI. Should cancellation be requested 60 days or fewer prior to travel, no portion of your exchange fee is refundable. However, in either case, your deposited week will be eligible for a new exchange*.



Right, but penalty on monies already paid is slightly different than a new charge.  It's a "forget about getting a refund" policy.


----------



## Timeshare Von (Jun 13, 2006)

I guess I'm darn glad I got in three exchanges last week!!!!!


----------



## ragtop (Jun 13, 2006)

The best part of RCI's announcement is the part where it says they "have listened to our subscribing RCI members" before instituting these new charges. Talk about Blame the  Victim!


----------



## Sylvia W (Jun 13, 2006)

I'm afraid to check what they now want in Canadian dollars.  They have never given fair exchange.  I am only glad we love our resort and would not mind going there every year.  RCI will not get another deposit from us!


----------



## Jimster (Jun 14, 2006)

I find this increase nothing short of offensive.  They haven't justified the last increase let alone this one.  The service is worse than ever, but what is most disgusting to me is that they apparently believe they can just continue to price gouge.  If I can find a way to continue to trade my resorts effectively I will say good bye to RCI forever.  Unfortunately, I have to find a place for my points resort first.  I know I can trade some through SFX and DAE but my points resort is the problem.  I'm sure its not going to solve the problem, but I hope people take a few minutes and contact RCI and tell them how you feel.


----------



## BocaBum99 (Jun 14, 2006)

T_R_Oglodyte said:
			
		

> And a nudge toward the mini-systems.
> 
> If you can find a mini that has resorts in lots of places you want to visit, you simply reserve where you want to stay, with no exchange fee and no waiting on tenterhooks for a reservation to come through.
> 
> When you want to visit someplace outside your system, use an independent or rent.



It's now time for the mini-systems to create their own internal direct exchange programs.  

And, they should create their own affiliation programs as well.  Can you imagine what would happen to resorts like OLCC if they took the following actions:  dual affiliated with II, created their own internal exchange and point system, dedicate specific buildings in certain sections of the resort to individual mini-systems.  This would enable you to use your HGVC, Hyatt points, Bluegreen Points, WorldMark points, SVO points directly to reserve OLCC for $49?  

All mini system owners would gain as would OLCC owners.  The number of deposits into RCI would diminish drastically.  When you dramatically reduce supply and keep demand the same, trading power goes WAY up.

I think these ridiculous prices for exchange are a clear sign that Cendant sees RCI's future as dead money.  So, they are just milking the cow until it dies.  Suck out all the profit while they can.


----------



## Carolinian (Jun 14, 2006)

ragtop said:
			
		

> The best part of RCI's announcement is the part where it says they "have listened to our subscribing RCI members" before instituting these new charges. Talk about Blame the  Victim!



That reminds me of the airlines which always seem to say that ''customers were demanding it'' when they make their so-called ''enhancements'' (always negative to the customer) to their ff programs.

The part that hit me in the letter RCI emailed to resorts yesterday was where they tried to justify the fee increase by citing improvements in ''Endless Vacation'' magazine.  But I thought that it was the membership fee (''subscription'') that paid for EV, not exchange fees!  And IMHO most RCI members would give a thumbs up if they just cancelled EV and reduced their fees.  One advantage of the independents is that you do not get stuck paying for a useless magazine as part of your fees.


----------



## BocaBum99 (Jun 14, 2006)

The cost to exchange is not just $164.  You need to add in the $89 annual membership fee as well.  So, if you exchange your week, the cost is $253.  If you don't exchange your week, the fee is $89.


----------



## Carolinian (Jun 14, 2006)

BocaBum99 said:
			
		

> The cost to exchange is not just $164.  You need to add in the $89 annual membership fee as well.  So, if you exchange your week, the cost is $253.  If you don't exchange your week, the fee is $89.



In comparision, DAE is FREE membership and $99 exchange fee, total $99.
If you don't exchange your week, the fee is $0

At HTSE, membership is $49 and the exchange fee is $89, total $138.
If you don't exchange your week, the fee is $49.

At Platinum Interchange, membership is FREE and the exchange fee is $99, total $99.  If you don't exchange, the fee is $0.

Resorts are ill serving their members if they do not pass along such information.  They are also ill serving themselves, as I am sure the rising fees will cause some bailouts of members.  Giving members other, cheaper, exchange options helps keep them onboard.  Tuggers need to point this out to their resorts, as many resorts have not yet figured it out for themselves.
Several independents (DAE and Platinum) will even pay the resorts newsletter postage if the resort will enclose a brochure of the independent exchange company.


----------



## rickandcindy23 (Jun 14, 2006)

II still charges just $135.  Three years ago, during July or August, RCI raised its fee to $139, when II was still only $118.  I couldn't believe that increase, now we are going to have this new increase for less service than ever before?  

What makes points members think those fees are not going up soon?  They increased our exchange fees from $79 to $99 just a few months ago.  

Why is it RCI's goal for us to feel "stuck" with our timeshare weeks that are affiliated with them? 

When you own more than one week of timeshare, it is not as painful to pay the RCI membership dues.  That is my only comfort here because I own 6 weeks that I trade with them.  That makes membership more reasonable.  So buy more timeshare and it will hurt less.   

When are these changes taking place?  Maybe I should get our vacations set for 2008!


----------



## rickandcindy23 (Jun 14, 2006)

Carolininan, I own at a resort, am even on the board of that resort (as you know), that believes we have an "exclusive contract" with II, so they will not let us use alternate exchange companies.  I think many resorts are in the dark on our rights as deeded timeshare owners.  

This has been one of my frustrations!  I have no idea if our other resort will allow us to exchange with anyone other than RCI either.  It seems that smaller resorts are uninformed.


----------



## Carolinian (Jun 14, 2006)

rickandcindy23 said:
			
		

> Carolininan, I own at a resort, am even on the board of that resort (as you know), that believes we have an "exclusive contract" with II, so they will not let us use alternate exchange companies.  I think many resorts are in the dark on our rights as deeded timeshare owners.
> 
> This has been one of my frustrations!  I have no idea if our other resort will allow us to exchange with anyone other than RCI either.  It seems that smaller resorts are uninformed.



If I were in that situation, I would tell the HOA board that I was going to ask for an opinion on the subject from both the state Real Estate Commissiion (which is the body in most states that oversees timeshare exchanging) and the anti-trust division of the state Attorney General's office, so the resort would not be in violation of the law, and then I would follow through on asking for those opinions.  I would let some of the independents know you were doing it, so they could also communicate with those bodies on that subject.

In the UK, there were some resorts where the HOA board voted to open up use of the independents and it was the management companies that refused to cooperate.  After some back and forth, there were formal complaints filed with the UK Department of Trade and Industry, which regulates monopolies, and they opened an official investigation.  That got things straightened out!

Whether it is management companies or HOA boards or developers that are the problem, official complaints to the proper authorities are the means to address monopolistic practices.  A wronged member can file such a complaint.
A board member who just wants things done correctly can just ask for an advisory opinion.

On the OBX, all resorts cooperate with independents.  Several have mailed brochures of one or more independents out in their newsletters.


----------



## Jimster (Jun 14, 2006)

Although I can't cite the case, it was my understanding that the courts had ruled that TS resorts could not restrict affiliation with exchange companies.


----------



## timeos2 (Jun 14, 2006)

BocaBum99 said:
			
		

> And, they should create their own affiliation programs as well.  Can you imagine what would happen to resorts like OLCC if they took the following actions:  dual affiliated with II, created their own internal exchange and point system, dedicate specific buildings in certain sections of the resort to individual mini-systems.



As I posted at least once before adding an option of another exchange company to the original, in OLCC case II in addition to RCI, isn't close to a magic pill. In fact the resorts I've seen that have done it have seen very little owner interest in the newcomer.  It is nice to have the option available but has vitually no effect on the original, favored exchange company. The majority of owners aren't spending a lot of time learning the timeshare ropes as the minority of people that troll the timeshare BBS' do. Most are lucky if they can figure out how to use the time they own and maybe make a trade or two with the company the resort was affiliated with when they bought. RCI and II know that and therefore aren't too worried about defections it seems. 

As for mini systems that could have the muscle to make a difference stay tuned. There may be some big news on that front in the next few months.


----------



## funtime (Jun 14, 2006)

*Re:yea! Alternate Exchange Companies*

I tried Platinum Interchange last year and HTSE this year and both were very nice and easy to deal with!  Funtime


----------



## PerryM (Jun 14, 2006)

*The solution*

As an investor in a number of mutual funds, I probably own Cendant stock - so this is great news!  *Go RCI!!!*

If you, however, find their prices intolerable simply start using a competitor, like II, and competitive pressures will hold this price in check.  Simple solution.

Ohhh; on the off chance that your resort is not affiliated with anyone but RCI you need to call the President of the HOA and ask if he/she has any problems with just a sole source for something this critical to the well being of the resort and which eventually affects the resale price of your week.

Go ahead, there’s the phone and the solution.

P.S.
I agree that simply adding a competitor is not the complete answer.  You need to foster competition between the two – that’s your job as the consumer.  Pick out the exchange company doing the least and ask them for help – I’m sure they could throw a number of certificates your way.  Raffle those things off to foster more usage.  The answer is in the hands of the consumer and nowhere else.


----------



## PerryM (Jun 14, 2006)

*RCI is like my garbage problem*

Our subdivision has 440 homes.  We used to have 3 garbage haulers rumbling up and down our subdivision at all hours and days.  It was fun to watch them get stuck on a cul-de-sac as one was rounding the bend and half way up the street while a competitor was coming the other direction.  This was dueling garbage trucks and a lot of fun to watch.

Well it seems that all 3 garbage companies charged the same exact price – what a 1 in a million coincidence.  Well we had a guy run for the HOA and pledged that we would solve our problems of dueling garbage trucks and high prices.

He won and simply had the 3 companies over one day and had them submit bids in front of each other.  What do you know – we got one company to give us a 25% discount and supply each home with a huge trash bin that makes collecting the garbage much faster and less trash from storms blowing over the trash cans.

I know comparing RCI to garbage might be a stretch but why on earth is there not a group of resorts that ban together and put unbearable pressure on the exchange companies?  OLCC itself should have negotiated a sizeable discount (maybe they have).

All of the problems with the exchange companies, including RCI Points, can be addressed with resorts banning together and demanding lower prices and better services.

Is this not the American way?


----------



## T_R_Oglodyte (Jun 14, 2006)

*Re: RCI is like my garbage problem*



			
				PerryM said:
			
		

> I know comparing RCI to garbage might be a stretch  ...


I think there are a few TUGgers who wouldn't find that a stretch at all.


----------



## CaliDave (Jun 14, 2006)

*Re: RCI is like my garbage problem*

This is rdiculous. 

More and more people are booking online.. which costs RCI next to nothing. 
I signed up for my endless vacations to be online or emailed to me.. Saving RCI more $$. 

I get fantastic vacations with RCI.. but they are reaching the pricing point that will get me out of timesharing with RCI.


----------



## PerryM (Jun 14, 2006)

*Who needs ARDA and why am I paying for them?*

Every year when I pay my dues on line they have include a fee to ARDA of a couple of bucks.  I always uncheck the box and do not pay ARDA – they represent the developer and all those loveable timeshare salesreps – not me.

Link: http://www.arda.org//AM/Template.cfm?Section=Home

I just love their motto: "The mouthpiece of the developer" ////// "The voice of the timeshare industry".

Every time I visit their site, they are patting each other on the back for one reason or another.  I never see them demanding lower prices for exchange fees – just more awards to this guy for that and that guy for this.

Dave is correct – anytime computers are involved to a large degree with an enterprise the costs should reflect either slowing increases in prices or actual reductions.  Computer power decreases in price each year while it increases in its capabilities.

(Ring – Ring: my cell phone just rang (this is for real))
Seems it was some chap at II chatting to me about my vacation plans and an on-going search in II for Maui in just 2 weeks.  The guy sounded like he loves to chat during the day to II members.  Well I guess computer power isn’t going to make any difference here.

We need our own ARDA equivalent that looks out for the owners and has their sights set on the developers and exchange companies.


----------



## discodan (Jun 14, 2006)

*Re: RCI is like my garbage problem*



			
				PerryM said:
			
		

> I know comparing RCI to garbage might be a stretch


Actually it's not   , in Montreal we have garbage trucks with RCI on them. It's actually a waste management company down here. DAN


----------



## PerryM (Jun 14, 2006)

*RCI Garbage Truck Photo*

Dan,

I've got to have a picture of that RCI garbage truck - can you get one and share it with us?  This would make a great Father's day gift for us.

Anyone have an II garbage truck rumbling around their streets?


----------



## Carolinian (Jun 14, 2006)

*Re: The solution*

Many of them will give certificates for a free exchange to HOA's for their annual meeting doorprizes.  DAE has done that with several resorts on the OBX, and I am aware that others will, too.

The free postage for HOA newsletters if they include a brochure, offered by DAE and Platinum and perhaps others, is helpful to the HOA, too.

We should be suggesting all of these things to our HOA's.




			
				PerryM said:
			
		

> As an investor in a number of mutual funds, I probably own Cendant stock - so this is great news!  *Go RCI!!!*
> 
> If you, however, find their prices intolerable simply start using a competitor, like II, and competitive pressures will hold this price in check.  Simple solution.
> 
> ...


----------



## Elli (Jun 14, 2006)

Liz Wolf-Spada said:
			
		

> Well, that does it. We've prepaid RCI till 2012 because of S. Africa, but if I can ever get S. Africa straightened out it will go to DAE and I may join II for Welk and SFX will get my Gaslamp or maybe both of my US resorts! That price is ludicrous. SFX is still $99 per exchange.
> Liz


Liz, SFX has gone up as well, but they only charge 109.00.
Elli


----------



## topcop400 (Jun 14, 2006)

I just telephoned RCI to cancel my membership extension.  The rep asked me why I was canceling.  I mentioned the fee increase and (of course) he knew nothing about it.

Sooooo........I asked him if he knew that RCI was being sued in a class-action suit.  Didn't know that either.

He canceled my extension.


----------



## T_R_Oglodyte (Jun 14, 2006)

topcop400 said:
			
		

> I just telephoned RCI to cancel my membership extension.  The rep asked me why I was canceling.  I mentioned the fee increase and (of course) he knew nothing about it.
> 
> Sooooo........I asked him if he knew that RCI was being sued in a class-action suit.  Didn't know that either.
> 
> He canceled my extension.


Are you sure he canceled your extension?  You might think he did, but he might have canceled the cancellation of your extension.


----------



## short (Jun 14, 2006)

I don't know why everyone is so surprised by the price increase.  RCI has to pay for all the big attorney fees to defend themselves in some lame class action law suit.

Short


----------



## topcop400 (Jun 14, 2006)

T_R_Oglodyte said:
			
		

> Are you sure he canceled your extension?  You might think he did, but he might have canceled the cancellation of your extension.



Well, his last words were that a credit will post to my credit card statement next month.  I will certainly be watching my statement.


----------



## T_R_Oglodyte (Jun 14, 2006)

short said:
			
		

> I don't know why everyone is so surprised by the price increase.  RCI has to pay for all the big attorney fees to defend themselves in some lame class action law suit.
> 
> Short


LOL.

That's like the tobacco company settlements.  They know people are not going to stop smoking, so they simply raise the price sufficiently to cover the cost.  Further, because of the limits on advertising and promotions, they don't have to worry about some upstart cigarette maker (who doesn't share in the financial burden) being able to capture the market by undercutting prices.

RCI is much the same.  As long as RCI and II are as big as they are, they can push the price as high as they believe they can get away with.


----------



## rickandcindy23 (Jun 14, 2006)

*Re: The solution*



			
				Carolinian said:
			
		

> Many of them will give certificates for a free exchange to HOA's for their annual meeting doorprizes.  DAE has done that with several resorts on the OBX, and I am aware that others will, too.
> 
> The free postage for HOA newsletters if they include a brochure, offered by DAE and Platinum and perhaps others, is helpful to the HOA, too.
> 
> We should be suggesting all of these things to our HOA's.



I actually did get several companies to give us free exchanges and free weeks for our annual meeting last year.  I was so excited, four door prizes from alternate exchange companies, and there I was, wanting a board position for Twin Rivers.  The management company said our exclusive contract with II prohiibited using other companies and the board and themanagement company would NOT BUDGE on the subject.   

Needless to say, all of the flyers and certificates went into the garbage at my house.  I was angry and still am.  Now I am on the board and feel no different than before.  I am still unheard and misunderstood.


----------



## donnaval (Jun 14, 2006)

Wow.

I've only been an RCI member for a year now.  In that short period of time, my RCI costs have increased through:

 - Last Call rates increased and availability all but destroyed
 - PFD fee imposed
 - Nightly Stays through Points fees increased
 - Guest Certificates for online reservations went from free to $49 each
 - Penalty for cancelling reservation after 24 hours from $109 to $119
 - Exchange fees increased 
 - Points schedule "adjusted" so that my good red week can't reserve 
    a comparable good red week in another resort unless I book inside the 
    45-day window

Yikes.  If Fairfield didn't pay my RCI fee, I'd drop RCI.  I hate to think what's in store with my second year of RCI membership.

I have already spacebanked one 2007 week with DAE.  Looks like I'll be depositing my other non-Fairfield weeks with SFX or DAE as well.


----------



## timeos2 (Jun 14, 2006)

short said:
			
		

> I don't know why everyone is so surprised by the price increase.  RCI has to pay for all the big attorney fees to defend themselves in some lame class action law suit.
> 
> Short


That exact premise crossed my mind as well. Even if the whole lawsuit turns out to be nothing, the most likely result, they are still being forced to pay to defend themselves. That cost is now going to be charged directly to the end users via these new fees.  It isn't unexpected, as many have said thats exactly what a class action would result in. Even with a win the legal costs are spent so you won't see the fee go back down - ever.  It may help hasten the end of weeks if enough owners do walk away (I don't actually think many will).  

The real interesting thing will be when II follows with their increase (I can almost guarantee they will as they'll feel the market can bear it). They don't have a suit to defend (yet) so it's pure profit for them if they raise fees. Heavens knows they aren't investing in better or redundant systems.


----------



## chemteach (Jun 14, 2006)

short said:
			
		

> I don't know why everyone is so surprised by the price increase.  RCI has to pay for all the big attorney fees to defend themselves in some lame class action law suit.
> 
> Short



I'm not so familiar with your stance on RCI - but I thought this was complete sarcasm when I read it.  RCI already has the highest fees I know of, and is the largest exchange company.  They are already making a huge profit.  They just want a larger profit.  

Of course, the places I want to go are in RCI, so I'll have no choice but to pay an additional $15 for my trades.  Not happy about it, but the RCI members themselves are pretty powerless here.  I don't believe many people will walk away from RCI due to a $15 increase.  But HOAs could make a difference if enough resorts switched over to II due to the increase.  I still don't see that happening, either...

Edye


----------



## short (Jun 14, 2006)

chemteach said:
			
		

> I'm not so familiar with your stance on RCI - but I thought this was complete sarcasm when I read it.  RCI already has the highest fees I know of, and is the largest exchange company.  They are already making a huge profit.  They just want a larger profit.
> 
> Of course, the places I want to go are in RCI, so I'll have no choice but to pay an additional $15 for my trades.  Not happy about it, but the RCI members themselves are pretty powerless here.  I don't believe many people will walk away from RCI due to a $15 increase.  But HOAs could make a difference if enough resorts switched over to II due to the increase.  I still don't see that happening, either...
> 
> Edye



This is mostly sarcasm and some opinion.  I do believe the class action law suit is lame and will result in higher fees.  If RCI wins we have higher fees.  If RCI loses we have higher fees and a $10 coupon in the mail good for $10 off an much higher exchange fee someday in the distant future.  Either way the consumer does not win.  The lawyers do.

As to my opinion on RCI rentals, I sense it would be wildly unpopular.(kind of like my support for higher gas prices) 

Short


----------



## Carolinian (Jun 14, 2006)

From what I have learned about some of those involved with the class action lawsuits, I am confident that there are key folks involved who will seek real, meaningful reform, not just a slap on the wrist and a big payout for the lawyers, as too often happens with class actions.

I remember Cendant's corporate filings after the last increase where they stated that they had increased profits on a lower volume of exchanges because they had increased the fees.  I think that comes closer to the mark this time as well.


----------



## mav (Jun 14, 2006)

I called RCI and 2 different reps told me that the fee is still $149.


----------



## timeos2 (Jun 14, 2006)

mav said:
			
		

> I called RCI and 2 different reps told me that the fee is still $149.



The new rates don't take effect until 9/10/06. It seems the only notification so far has been to the affiliates not the rank and file.


----------



## discodan (Jun 14, 2006)

*Re: RCI Garbage Truck Photo*



			
				PerryM said:
			
		

> Dan,
> 
> I've got to have a picture of that RCI garbage truck - can you get one and share it with us?  This would make a great Father's day gift for us.
> 
> Anyone have an II garbage truck rumbling around their streets?



Here is the garbage truck:
http://www.rcienvironnement.com/ang/ser1.html , they also have portable toilets... DAN


----------



## JillChang (Jun 14, 2006)

T_R_Oglodyte said:
			
		

> And a nudge toward the mini-systems.
> 
> If you can find a mini that has resorts in lots of places you want to visit, you simply reserve where you want to stay, with no exchange fee and no waiting on tenterhooks for a reservation to come through.
> 
> When you want to visit someplace outside your system, use an independent or rent.



Exactly what I am thinking right now.  I am even trying to go a step further and try not to use independents at all.  Rent!


----------



## eal (Jun 14, 2006)

It has never occurred to me to ask the resort's permission to deposit my week with any exchange company I choose.  Am I missing something?  I use dae, htse, SFX, trading places and platinum and the unit just gets deposited into the appropriate account because I designate it to go there.  How can a resort prevent you from using any exchange company you want, whether they are formally affiliated with RCI or not?


----------



## reddiablosv (Jun 14, 2006)

eal said:
			
		

> It has never occurred to me to ask the resort's permission to deposit my week with any exchange company I choose.  Am I missing something?  I use dae, htse, SFX, trading places and platinum and the unit just gets deposited into the appropriate account because I designate it to go there.  How can a resort prevent you from using any exchange company you want, whether they are formally affiliated with RCI or not?


THey Can't!!!  Ben


----------



## Carolinian (Jun 14, 2006)

reddiablosv said:
			
		

> THey Can't!!!  Ben



The problem is that some of them think they can.  They are not familiar with anti-trust law, and only see the provision in the RCI/II contract.  Fortunately, that represents only a relatively small minority of resorts, but it can be a pain if one happens to be YOUR resort.  More and more seem to be getting the message.  My neighbor who owns both on the OBX and in Orlando ran into that problem with her Orlando resort the first year she tried to deposit it with DAE, but now that resort gives no problem with DAE deposits.  A number of UK resorts that were taking this position got their chains jerked pretty hard by the UK Department of Trade and Industry which opened a formal inquiry on this monopolisitic practice.  The problem seems to be taken care of there.


----------



## Walt (Jun 15, 2006)

*RCI Is Both and Exchange Company and a Rental Company.*



			
				short said:
			
		

> This is mostly sarcasm and some opinion.  I do believe the class action law suit is lame and will result in higher fees.  If RCI wins we have higher fees.  If RCI loses we have higher fees and a $10 coupon in the mail good for $10 off an much higher exchange fee someday in the distant future.  Either way the consumer does not win.  The lawyers do.
> 
> As to my opinion on RCI rentals, I sense it would be wildly unpopular.(kind of like my support for higher gas prices)
> 
> Short



What is the cause of all of the increases in RCI's Membership Fees over the _last several years_? Is it because of the Class Action Lawsuits or is it the *actions of Cendant *that is the cause of the Class Action Lawsuits?

Being both an Exchange Company and a Rental Company is the real problem.  If they were only an Exchange Company there would not be any Class Action Lawsuits about the many RCI rental programs.

You are placing the blame on the wrong party. The Lawyers are not the problem.  RCI many rental programs are the problem.

As for the reason for all of the increases over the last several years----extra profit is the reason.

How can more expenses be the reason?  They are doing more and more online Exchanges.  I would assume they have reduced the number of VC's because of the online Exchanges.  How many long time VC's do they have on their VC staff? Long time VC's would be getting higher wages than new VC's. And where are the VC's located? ---In Counties with lower wages?  When I do call RCI, I never seem to get anyone that really knows what they are talking about. And they are renting more and more weeks at higher and higher rental fees with no cost to them...our spacebanked weeks.


Walt


----------



## PerryM (Jun 15, 2006)

*You will pay for all of this*

I’m going to make a prediction about the class-action lawsuits – *RCI will win*; and their members will pay for all of this.  You can bookmark this and call me on the carpet when this suit is settled.

It doesn’t matter if RCI actually wins the lawsuit – what possible harm is RCI doing to mankind?  This is going to be seen as a complex, convoluted, abstract case where maybe someone didn’t get a good enough vacation - maybe.  Our 12 jurists (or whatever number), who cannot figure out how to get out of jury duty, are going to figure this out?

Like so much US litigation, this is going to make two law firms extremely rich and I’d bet few of those lawyers owns a timeshare that uses RCI.

This, unfortunately, is how business is done in America anymore – anyone with $25 can file a lawsuit against any company and cause two law firms to get rich while the customers pay for all this dribble.

We need tort reform in the US – this case will be another example of how the legal system is being used to wage war on American business; and make no mistake about this – this is a war by many in this country against US enterprise – it’s viewed as evil by them.

P.S.
I’m going to add a definition of WIN – RCI’s profits will increase up to, though, and past the lawsuits and the Cendant stockholders will make even more money.  This will be a bug splattering on the windshield that will be wiped off by the consumers – thanks to all the lawyers and courts involved with this.


----------



## short (Jun 15, 2006)

*Re: You will pay for all of this*



			
				PerryM said:
			
		

> I’m going to make a prediction about the class-action lawsuits – *RCI will win*; and their members will pay for all of this.  You can bookmark this and call me on the carpet when this suit is settled.
> 
> It doesn’t matter if RCI actually wins the lawsuit – what possible harm is RCI doing to mankind?  This is going to be seen as a complex, convoluted, abstract case where maybe someone didn’t get a good enough vacation - maybe.  Our 12 jurists (or whatever number), who cannot figure out how to get out of jury duty, are going to figure this out?
> 
> ...



PerryM,

I couldn't have said it better.  I total agree. 

Short


----------



## Zib (Jun 15, 2006)

I just picked up a 2 bedroom Gold Crown week on the Big Island of Hawaii for next April through Platinum Interchange with my Mayan studio!  Haven't used RCI for a long time.  I think they discriminate against week owners.  Thank heavens for the smaller,BETTER exchange companies.


----------



## Gadabout (Jun 15, 2006)

T_R_Oglodyte said:
			
		

> That's like the tobacco company settlements.  They know people are not going to stop smoking, so they simply raise the price sufficiently to cover the cost.  Further, because of the limits on advertising and promotions, they don't have to worry about some upstart cigarette maker (who doesn't share in the financial burden) being able to capture the market by undercutting prices.



But for those who don't use them (or don't smoke), it is a total non-issue. I think the biggest effect of the lawsuit will be to put people on notice that there IS a problem (I'm sure there are people out there who don't realize that there is one), and that alone may cause people to not renew--and then they don't have to care what the exchange companies do.


----------



## quiltergal (Jun 15, 2006)

I just emailed my resort to see if they have a dual affiliation with RCI and II.  If they are affiliated with II I may switch over in 2008 when my RCI membership expires.  Eagle Crest does not exchange through SFX except in summer months.  I own ski weeks, so that's not an option.  If I switch to II am I just acquiring a different set of problems?  How is the learning curve?


----------



## beachsands (Jun 15, 2006)

My plan is to divest myself of my lone SA this year and buy a timeshare in the U.S. that we will go to each year. If we want to trade I will use one of the independents. My RCI membership expires at the end of 2007 and it won't be renewed. 

I think the continual rising fee schedules is merely a way to return more to the Cendant stockholders, even if it is  drop in the bucket to Cendant. Until there is a mass exodus leaving RCI, you can expect fees to go up every year.


Joel


----------



## Steve (Jun 15, 2006)

beachsands said:
			
		

> .
> 
> Until there is a mass exodus leaving RCI, you can expect fees to go up every year.
> 
> ...



I did my part.  When my RCI membership ran out at the end of 2005, I did not renew.  

Steve


----------



## timeos2 (Jun 15, 2006)

Steve said:
			
		

> I did my part.  When my RCI membership ran out at the end of 2005, I did not renew.
> 
> Steve


We ended our RCI & II weeks individual memberships in 2002. Haven't missed them one bit. (DISCLAIMER: Due to our membership in Club Sunterra and Fairfield Fairshare Plus we continue to have access to weeks at both exchenage systems. However we have not used those systems in over 3 years).


----------



## Marvin (Jun 15, 2006)

*Re: You will pay for all of this*



			
				PerryM said:
			
		

> I’m going to make a prediction about the class-action lawsuits – *RCI will win*; and their members will pay for all of this.  You can bookmark this and call me on the carpet when this suit is settled.
> 
> It doesn’t matter if RCI actually wins the lawsuit – what possible harm is RCI doing to mankind?  This is going to be seen as a complex, convoluted, abstract case where maybe someone didn’t get a good enough vacation - maybe.  Our 12 jurists (or whatever number), who cannot figure out how to get out of jury duty, are going to figure this out?
> 
> ...




I, for one, will NOT pay for this.  Only those who chose to continue to line Cendant's pockets by staying with them will pay, and, IMHO, they would continue to pay dearly, even without the class action suits.  I do not think that class actions suits are good, but when there is no other choice........


----------



## Dani (Jun 15, 2006)

*Re: You will pay for all of this*



			
				PerryM said:
			
		

> I’m going to make a prediction about the class-action lawsuits – *RCI will win*; and their members will pay for all of this.  You can bookmark this and call me on the carpet when this suit is settled.
> 
> It doesn’t matter if RCI actually wins the lawsuit – what possible harm is RCI doing to mankind?  This is going to be seen as a complex, convoluted, abstract case where maybe someone didn’t get a good enough vacation - maybe.  Our 12 jurists (or whatever number), who cannot figure out how to get out of jury duty, are going to figure this out?
> 
> ...



  I completely agree.  As I said when the posts re: the class action lawsuits were first made, RCI has a very good case for summary judgment in their favor....and you can quote me on that too.

  That being said, these increases are not good.  This is particularly true if people find that they can get what they want elsewhere cheaper.   Luckily for RCI, they continue to provide locations and exchanges that their subscribers want.  However, if II ever catches up to them in terms of affiliated resorts, RCI will have a serious problem on their hands.


----------



## Carolinian (Jun 15, 2006)

*Re: You will pay for all of this*



			
				Dani said:
			
		

> I completely agree.  As I said when the posts re: the class action lawsuits were first made, RCI has a very good case for summary judgment in their favor....and you can quote me on that too.



Have you read the pleadings to be able to render such an opinion?????

IMHO, it depends on what issues are raised in the pleadings.  There are some very solid theories out there that should hit pay dirt if argued properly.  I have heard some bits and pieces from the pleadings but never seen either complaint in its entirety.  One of the most critical pieces of the puzzle is, from what I am told, pled in Murrillo but not in Chase.  Now with the plaintiffs lawyers getting together, we will have to see what emerges.  I wish TST or The Timeshare Beat or someone would post the pleadings online in their entirety.

I am still of the opinion that a state AG consumer protection lawsuit is the best avenue to deal with RCI's scams on its Weeks members.  You know the lawyers there are motivated by reform and protecting the public, not personal enrichment.  Whatever happens in the class actions would not preclude an AG action.  A state AG, in say, North Carolina, could sue in North Carolina courts under the North Carolina Unfair or Deceptive Trade Practices statutes.  They could also start out with agressive pre-litigation discovery with the statutory tools at the AG's disposal.


----------



## PerryM (Jun 15, 2006)

*KFC’s Killer Cooking Oil and RCI*

Here’s a link to another class action http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewNation.asp?Page=/Nation/archive/200606/NAT20060613c.html

This one is for the cooking oil that KFC uses to cook up their chicken.  I wonder if the two law firms are related in any way?

Both companies offer a product that is optional, both may have to now have warning labels plastered all over the place to warn their patrons that using their product can kill them or result in less than optimum vacations.

Here’s a great quote:

"troubling example of a narrow interest group and their self-serving trial lawyer allies using a 'regulation through litigation' strategy, rather than making their case where it belongs -- in the public policy arena."

If renting of timeshares is so hazardous to our health, the government should legislate rules to the timeshare exchange community - just exactly how do private companies handle timeshare rentals - I'm sure our government knows the answers.

I can’t wait for the new RCI resort book with the huge yellow and black warning label wrapped around the book reading:

*“Warning: by breaking this seal you agree to all the terms and conditions that you used to but the trial lawyers and courts will feel much better.  Oh, you paid for all of this.”*


----------



## Carolinian (Jun 15, 2006)

*Re: KFC’s Killer Cooking Oil and RCI*

Legislation is indeed a good alternative in dealing with a quasi-monopoly.  It would be more practical to pass such laws at the state level.

The states currently require any developer in sales (including in many states, HOAs in resales) to make a series of disclosures.  Taking into account the practices of the larger exchange companies, these disclosures should be brought up to date by requiring detailed disclosure of exchange company rentals.  Indeed, each prospect in developer presentations should have to sign a statement that they are aware that the exchange company their prospective resort is affiliated with rents to the general public and the approximate range of rental prices.  Of course, the developers would then howl to the exchange companies to stop these rentals that interfered with their sales.

Exchange companies should also be required to disclose these rental activities in a meaningful way to their existing members.  What is wrong with transparency in exchange company rental activitiies?





			
				PerryM said:
			
		

> Here’s a link to another class action http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewNation.asp?Page=/Nation/archive/200606/NAT20060613c.html
> 
> This one is for the cooking oil that KFC uses to cook up their chicken.  I wonder if the two law firms are related in any way?
> 
> ...


----------



## timeos2 (Jun 15, 2006)

*Re: KFC’s Killer Cooking Oil and RCI*



			
				Carolinian said:
			
		

> The states currently require any developer in sales (including in many states, HOAs in resales) to make a series of disclosures.  Taking into account the practices of the larger exchange companies, these disclosures should be brought up to date by requiring detailed disclosure of exchange company rentals.  Indeed, each prospect in developer presentations should have to sign a statement that they are aware that the exchange company their prospective resort is affiliated with rents to the general public and the approximate range of rental prices.  Of course, the developers would then howl to the exchange companies to stop these rentals that interfered with their sales.
> 
> Exchange companies should also be required to disclose these rental activities in a meaningful way to their existing members.  What is wrong with transparency in exchange company rental activitiies?



Except the buyer isn't being forced to accept any exchange company. They have the option to accept it and the option to pay to remain a member.  It isn't, and shouldn't be, part of the sale disclosures. That is trying to tie exchanging into the sale in a way that the actual documents prohibit.  It is an optional part that has no direct or ongoing relationship with the ownership of the week/UDI, club, etc the buyer is purchasing. It goes back to the idea that somehow exchange companies "owe" it to resorts to give value to otherwise virtually worthless use periods. It isn't part of the deal when a person buys unless it is in writing. And it isn't.


----------



## mamiecarter (Jun 15, 2006)

*$164! that's too much to pay. By By RCI!*

The new exchange fee is just too much to pay. Then add on the agravation of not knowing if you will get what you want on an exchange. Can I get the money back on what's left of my 3 year RCI membership?


----------



## Carolinian (Jun 15, 2006)

*Re: KFC’s Killer Cooking Oil and RCI*



			
				timeos2 said:
			
		

> Except the buyer isn't being forced to accept any exchange company. They have the option to accept it and the option to pay to remain a member.  It isn't, and shouldn't be, part of the sale disclosures. That is trying to tie exchanging into the sale in a way that the actual documents prohibit.  It is an optional part that has no direct or ongoing relationship with the ownership of the week/UDI, club, etc the buyer is purchasing. It goes back to the idea that somehow exchange companies "owe" it to resorts to give value to otherwise virtually worthless use periods. It isn't part of the deal when a person buys unless it is in writing. And it isn't.




Wanna bet????

North Carolina's timeshare statutes, like many states, are based on those of Florida.  The relevent North Carolina statute is NCGS 93A-48, entitled ''Exchange Programs'' and begins as follows:

''(a) If a purchaser is offered the opportunity to subscribe to any exchange program, the developer shall, except as provided in subsection (b), deliver to the purchaser, prior to the execution of (i) any contract between the purchaser and the exchange company, and (ii) the sales contract, at least the following information regarding such exchange program: '' (which is followed by 18 paragraphs of required info, some with further subparts.
This is essentially the info in the Disclosure Guides provided by RCI and II.

NCGS 93A-49 interestingly is entitled ''Service of Process on exchange company''.

I would say that NCGS 93A-48, and its counterparts in other states, needs a good bit of updating on what needs to be disclosed in light of the rental activities of the big exchange companies.

Let the light of day shine on these activities!  What in the world do you think is wrong with that, especially in light of the huge conflict of interest involved in dealing both exchanges to members and rentals to non-members out of the same spacebank?


----------



## Dani (Jun 15, 2006)

*Re: You will pay for all of this*



			
				Carolinian said:
			
		

> Have you read the pleadings to be able to render such an opinion?????
> 
> IMHO, it depends on what issues are raised in the pleadings.  There are some very solid theories out there that should hit pay dirt if argued properly.  I have heard some bits and pieces from the pleadings but never seen either complaint in its entirety.  One of the most critical pieces of the puzzle is, from what I am told, pled in Murrillo but not in Chase.  Now with the plaintiffs lawyers getting together, we will have to see what emerges.  I wish TST or The Timeshare Beat or someone would post the pleadings online in their entirety.
> 
> I am still of the opinion that a state AG consumer protection lawsuit is the best avenue to deal with RCI's scams on its Weeks members.  You know the lawyers there are motivated by reform and protecting the public, not personal enrichment.  Whatever happens in the class actions would not preclude an AG action.  A state AG, in say, North Carolina, could sue in North Carolina courts under the North Carolina Unfair or Deceptive Trade Practices statutes.  They could also start out with agressive pre-litigation discovery with the statutory tools at the AG's disposal.



  Do I have to? You have certainly rendered an opinion as to the likely success of these lawsuits based upon what is now known yet admitedly have not read the pleadings.   I have done the same based upon your statements, the statements of others on the issue and links given about the pending lawsuits.


----------



## Carolinian (Jun 15, 2006)

*Re: You will pay for all of this*



			
				Dani said:
			
		

> Do I have to? You have certainly rendered an opinion as to the likely success of these lawsuits based upon what is now known yet admitedly have not read the pleadings.   I have done the same based upon your statements, the statements of others on the issue and links given about the pending lawsuits.



My comments, as in this thread, have always had the caveat that the chances of success were based on whether the issues were properly pled or argued.   I have on several occaisions commented that it would be nice to see the pleading to be able to get a better idea of whether these lawyers seemed to be getting it all together.  IMHO a properly pled and argued case agasint RCI rentals has merit and a reasonably good chance of success.  Are these properly pled?  It would be great to see the complaints to be able to know.  I hope so, but I do have some real concern about a key issue being left out of the Chace complaint, although it is in the Murrillo complaint, and hopefully will move forward in the amended complaint now that the cases are joined. 

You on the other hand, offer the opinion that a summary judgment motion would be succesful without even having read the complaint.

And how did we get off on this tangent, when the thread is about RCI big fee increase?


----------



## timeos2 (Jun 15, 2006)

*Re: KFC’s Killer Cooking Oil and RCI*



			
				Carolinian said:
			
		

> Wanna bet????
> 
> North Carolina's timeshare statutes, like many states, are based on those of Florida.  The relevent North Carolina statute is NCGS 93A-48, entitled ''Exchange Programs'' and begins as follows:
> 
> ...



So like a new car manual in the glove compartment they have to supply the buyer with a copy of the exchange companies agreement. If that has been approved by who/whatever looks at these things - as RCI's no doubt was - then you get to say yes I agree and wish to be a member - or no, I don't agree and end your membership. Either way there is no effect on the only purchase the buyer made - the week, UDI, club, etc.  I have read all of the hundreds of pages for three timeshare developments and there is not one mention of the exchange company being required in any of them.  It is an option. Period. No one has to take it and if they do they are agreeing to the terms that, as you note, they are being given.  The rest is operational and those who don't agree with the operations have every right to take their exchange elsewhere. If enough do the company that loses the business will respond - no lawyers required.  It's the approach that people need to be protected from themselves and more laws make things better that trouble me. There are more than enough remedies without involving the trolls and their outrageous fees that in the end hurt far more than they ever help.


----------



## Carolinian (Jun 15, 2006)

*Re: KFC’s Killer Cooking Oil and RCI*



			
				timeos2 said:
			
		

> So like a new car manual in the glove compartment they have to supply the buyer with a copy of the exchange companies agreement. If that has been approved by who/whatever looks at these things - as RCI's no doubt was - then you get to say yes I agree and wish to be a member - or no, I don't agree and end your membership. Either way there is no effect on the only purchase the buyer made - the week, UDI, club, etc.  I have read all of the hundreds of pages for three timeshare developments and there is not one mention of the exchange company being required in any of them.  It is an option. Period. No one has to take it and if they do they are agreeing to the terms that, as you note, they are being given.  The rest is operational and those who don't agree with the operations have every right to take their exchange elsewhere. If enough do the company that loses the business will respond - no lawyers required.  It's the approach that people need to be protected from themselves and more laws make things better that trouble me. There are more than enough remedies without involving the trolls and their outrageous fees that in the end hurt far more than they ever help.



Go back and re-read the statute, or look at the Florida version, if you wish.  The portions of the Fla statute that have been quoted a few times on TUG track the NC version closely, if not word for word.

The statute requires disclosures by the developer of exchange company info prior to the sales contract for purchase of the unit ''if a purchaser is OFFERED the opportunity to subscribe to any exchange program''.  Even though the program is optional and only offered to (not required of) the purchaser, the developer is still required by law to disclose the exchange company info.  The info required does include certain info about the exchange company membership agreement, but it also requires a lot of other things, like ''the number of units in each project or other property participating in the exchange program'',  ''the number of owners with respect to each time share project or other property which are eligible to participate in the exchange program'',  ''the number of exchanges confirmed by the exchange company during the year'', and many other items of info.

RCI and II print the Disclosure Guides covering all of this and sell them to developers and HOA's.  There is a whole lot more in there than just the agreement!


----------



## Dani (Jun 15, 2006)

*Re: You will pay for all of this*

Yes I do offer an opinion on this issue.  I do so because as far as I'm concerned, there is no cognizable legal right being violated by RCI.  It does not much matter how the complaint is pled out.   

BTW, you offered up an opinion in the original thread about these class action suits being brought against RCI.  You offered that these suits would in fact survive summary judgment.   Like I said, you too have never read the pleadings.   

  Whatever the case...I do agree with you that this  discussion is decidedly now off on a tangent and will hopefully get back on track.


----------



## boyblue (Jun 15, 2006)

To get us back on tangent:

I guess this signifies the beginning of the end of points raiding as we have come to know and love it.  As a Points member you would have to come across some ultra low point deals for weeks usage to make sense.  At the same time because of the increased differential we have to begin to look at RCI points as an entity in and of its self.  Does RCI points have the number of locations to dominate the way RCI Weeks does.  I don’t think Points is ready to stand on its own but I guess RCI thinks differently.


----------



## RonaldCol (Jun 16, 2006)

MULTIZ321 said:
			
		

> RCI Points Fees Clarification -
> 
> If you book 7 days at a RCI Weeks Resort (i.e., a NonPoints Resort) via RCI Points, the exchange fee is $149.
> 
> ...



RCI increasing costs to conduct business in the Weeks area is by design. By increasing these costs the RCI Points accounts will see more activity because the RCI Points transactions will be cheaper relatively.

Eventually there will be no more activity in the RCI Weeks accounts and current member users will not continue to renew their memberships.


----------



## RonaldCol (Jun 16, 2006)

topcop400 said:
			
		

> I just telephoned RCI to cancel my membership extension.  The rep asked me why I was canceling.  I mentioned the fee increase and (of course) he knew nothing about it.
> 
> Sooooo........I asked him if he knew that RCI was being sued in a class-action suit.  Didn't know that either.
> 
> He canceled my extension.



Your response is exactly what RCI wants from their Weeks members. RCI has the design of killing the RCI Weeks in favor of the RCI Points.

The increased costs across the board that other members of other exchange companies may be attributed to increasing overall costs in the conduct of business in our highly inflationary environment. The increase in RCI Weeks fees has been much greater than their costs of doing business would warrant, hence, the inference by me that RCI corporate is killing off RCI Weeks.


----------



## dboy1 (Jun 16, 2006)

I understand how everyone? can be upset by the increase in fees but let's look ay the hard numbers. We own at a TS with a maintenance fee now of $315. We just traded that studio for a 2 bedroom at a TS with a Maintenance fee of $650. $315+$169=$474.R.C.I. saved me money and allowed me to exchange a studio for a 2 bedroom unit. No complaints here!! My original purchase price was also about 1/4 of the purchase price of the resort we traded into--won again-No complaints here either. I am sure that some will point out that these trades are dissapearing, but this has happened in the last month so they are still there now I fully expect to continue doing the same for years to come!!


----------



## RonaldCol (Jun 16, 2006)

*Re: RCI Garbage Truck Photo*



			
				discodan said:
			
		

> Here is the garbage truck:
> http://www.rcienvironnement.com/ang/ser1.html , they also have portable toilets... DAN



It's a picture of a Rear Loader RCI Garbage Truck. Bend over bud.


----------



## PerryM (Jun 16, 2006)

*RCI's goose*

The ability to upgrade from a studio to a 2BR is a great exploitation of the RCI Week system – my hats off to anyone who does this.  If price and MF’s indicate that this is a completely lopsided exchange then we have exploited a weakness of the Week system – good for us.

dboy1’s example in post #95 is a great exploitation of the RCI system by a member – congratulations.

However, why do we assume it only works for the members?

I’m assuming that the convoluted computer logic that allows for this lopsided exchange allows for RCI, who would be just another user of the computer logic, to do the same thing.  i.e. those 2BR weeks that RCI is renting were pulled from the population of units just like dboy did and RCI has every right to rent them out if that’s what their own rules allow for.

Until evidence is presented and a guilty verdict announced (or a finding for the plaintiff), we must:

1)	Assume RCI is completely innocent of any charges criminal or civil

2)	Assume RCI is playing by the same rules as we use to exploit the Week system

Exploiting works both ways; what’s good for the goose is good for the gander

I doubt that raising fees to kill off Weeks is the motive for higher fees – if so, the stock holders of Cendant should ask their BOD to investigate.  Hopefully, higher profits motivate every thought, and action of RCI.


----------



## timeos2 (Jun 16, 2006)

boyblue said:
			
		

> To get us back on tangent:
> 
> I guess this signifies the beginning of the end of points raiding as we have come to know and love it.  As a Points member you would have to come across some ultra low point deals for weeks usage to make sense.  At the same time because of the increased differential we have to begin to look at RCI points as an entity in and of its self.  Does RCI points have the number of locations to dominate the way RCI Weeks does.  I don’t think Points is ready to stand on its own but I guess RCI thinks differently.



I'm guessing that a good portion of the points inventory now comes from PFD.  If so every one of those weeks is technically in RCI Points - but they have to be used at full 7 day periods. They could use the generic points chart in & out with the exchange fee at the Points rate rather than the weeks exchange rate. Since that rate is lower RCI may not want to do that but they could and they to not have to continue to prop up the weeks system by placing those PFD units into  RCI Weeks if they don't want to.  RCI hadn't seen one of my weeks deposits into the weeks system in over 5 years yet by PFD they have received 4 since 2004. If others are doing the same it is the Points side that is growing while weeks is fading away quickly. As a product line starts to wind down one of the common practices is to raise prices so revenues stay flat. Eventually the company hopes a newer, higher volume product line will replace that income even if the unit pricing is lower. We may be seeing that with RCI Weeks and Points right now.


----------



## abbekit (Jun 16, 2006)

*Re: RCI's goose*



			
				PerryM said:
			
		

> The ability to upgrade from a studio to a 2BR is a great exploitation of the RCI Week system – my hats off to anyone who does this.  If price and MF’s indicate that this is a completely lopsided exchange then we have exploited a weakness of the Week system – good for us.



This is not exploitation.  Everyone is suggested dropping RCI for the indies but this is exactly how the indies work.  The RCI rules of trade power, VIP, etc. don't exist.  You put in a week, you take out a week.  

I've deposited with DAE but I'll continue to use RCI Weeks.  I don't want to go to the expense to buy points.  

RCI Weeks is still working for me even with higher exchange fees.  I have a low MF and even adding the RCI membership fee to the bottom line (I divide it in half since I own two weeks) I can get a week for under $500.  I can't rent for that and I usually can't find Last Call or Extra Vacations for that in the places I want to go.


----------



## PerryM (Jun 16, 2006)

*RCI Bingo*

If we assume that RCI has not violated any of the own rules (a valid assumption) then here is an example of how RCI can rent Gold Crown weeks with no problem:

Inspiring you customer to use your product is the hallmark of sales and marketing.  We all know that exchanging a studio for a 2BR makes no sense – yet it happens enough that we know, for a fact, that RCI allows for it.  (The 2BR costs much more than the studio and the MF is far higher; the studio could be a non-rated and the 2BR a Gold Crown)

This is probably not a defect in the computer logic but a built in sales technique – a gimmick to keep their customers in the game.  This gimmick keeps the rumors of the little guy with a Motel 6 type of timeshare in the game – he hears how someone exchanged their Motel 6 for a 2BR Gold Crown.

This is how and why folks play the lottery and flock to Vegas – a one in a zillion chance of winning.  Assuming that RCI is simply using sales gimmicks to build sales then they can exploit their own rules to get those GC 2BR’s that we are moaning about.  If they play by their own rules then RCI has done nothing wrong.

It doesn’t mean that they can’t design their rental program to exploit this rule and maybe dozens of other rules we know nothing about – it’s their rules and as long as the computer logic give no advantage to RCI over any other user of the logic they are perfectly right to exploit these rules that work for us too.

BINGO - I believe that this could be an explanation what RCI is doing and it’s perfectly legal.

Reasonable doubt?


----------



## T_R_Oglodyte (Jun 16, 2006)

*Re: RCI's goose*



			
				abbekit said:
			
		

> This is not exploitation.  Everyone is suggested dropping RCI for the indies but this is exactly how the indies work.  The RCI rules of trade power, VIP, etc. don't exist.  You put in a week, you take out a week.


A few indies work that way, but most do not.

The big "trade power" issue with independents is that most of them will not accept any old week you want to deposit.  That is a form of trade power.  They only accept strong weeks into the bank so that they can guarantee a certain quality of week in return.

Even after that, some independents such as SFX still impose a trade power requirement - you can't use any deposited week with RCI to pull any other week out of the SFX system.

****

The big thing that the affiliated exchange companies have going for them is that they will accept any week from an affiliated resort and offer a week in exchange.  That is not the case with the independent companies.


*************

If an independent company that is a free-for-all exchange company, such as DAE apparently is, were to get flooded with unusable blue and green weeks, they will have to change their policies or the company will go under.  They may be able to survive at the level they are right now, but if they start to gain any traction in the market the free-for-all approach will change.


----------



## boyblue (Jun 16, 2006)

PerryM said:
			
		

> BINGO - I believe that this could be an explanation what RCI is doing and it’s perfectly legal.
> 
> Reasonable doubt?


You can bet the farm that what RCI is doing is legal but you can make a strong case (even with the little we know) that they are testing the bounds of business ethics.


----------



## boyblue (Jun 16, 2006)

timeos2 said:
			
		

> I'm guessing that a good portion of the points inventory now comes from PFD.  If so every one of those weeks is technically in RCI Points - but they have to be used at full 7 day periods. They could use the generic points chart in & out with the exchange fee at the Points rate rather than the weeks exchange rate. Since that rate is lower RCI may not want to do that but they could and they to not have to continue to prop up the weeks system by placing those PFD units into  RCI Weeks if they don't want to.  RCI hadn't seen one of my weeks deposits into the weeks system in over 5 years yet by PFD they have received 4 since 2004. If others are doing the same it is the Points side that is growing while weeks is fading away quickly. As a product line starts to wind down one of the common practices is to raise prices so revenues stay flat. Eventually the company hopes a newer, higher volume product line will replace that income even if the unit pricing is lower. We may be seeing that with RCI Weeks and Points right now.



Good insight John,
I too aquire some of my points (half) through PFD if our deposits were to stay in RCI Points the system would not only be sustainable it would soon be the the biggest dog in the fight.  If that's where this whole thing is headed I can't wait till we get there.


----------



## PerryM (Jun 16, 2006)

*Ethics and RCI and us*

Blue,

You bring up a great topic of ethics  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethics

Exploiting a computer system or any system by merely taking someone else’s rules and finding the strengths and weaknesses and using common sense – this is the American way.  We then have every right to use the rules that benefit us and bypass the ones that don’t do us any good.

Many (Most? - All?) of us here have had completely lopsided exchanges – to our benefit.  We know that the exchange is completely crazy – I used get them all the time.  I, however, don’t call II or RCI and turn myself in for punishment.  Am I ethically challenged?  I think not.  I’m assuming that everyone lives by the same rules and the results are more or less the same.

Well for every lopsided exchange I've gotten, (And that's a lot) I've always assumed that RCI and II did just as well.

I great case can be made against the exchange companies becoming their own customer.  I would have no problems if all exchange companies were prevented from being a customer to themselves – it does smack of special favors and ripe for temptation.  This would then eliminate the renting of timeshares by the exchanges and thus eliminate exchanging timeshare usage for airline tickets, car rentals, etc.

However, that would take governmental action – and those folks are not the shinning example against double standards and corruption.

This is why I’ve gone to renting our reservations out and renting other owners reservations.  Both sides of the transaction take place in the free market and thus the outcome is as just as we humans can design.  Don’t get me wrong, I will exploit the exchange company if I see an opportunity – did that just the other day.


----------



## RonaldCol (Jun 16, 2006)

*Re: RCI's goose*



			
				PerryM said:
			
		

> The ability to upgrade from a studio to a 2BR is a great exploitation of the RCI Week system – my hats off to anyone who does this.  If price and MF’s indicate that this is a completely lopsided exchange then we have exploited a weakness of the Week system – good for us.
> 
> dboy1’s example in post #95 is a great exploitation of the RCI system by a member – congratulations.
> 
> ...



Perry, very good analysis, but ...

... RCI is trying to kill off the Weeks accounts in favor of the Points accounts.

RCI has already maxed out it's own exploitation of the lopsided exchange multiplier. They've gotten as many of the larger units with minimal costs, llike some of us have already done.

The ability for us as RCI Weeks members to deposit a studio and obtain a three bedroom was the reason why we saw inherent advantages in participating in this type of program rather than in the Interval International (II) program. II's program literally allowed like-for-like exchanges. RCI  Week got the jump on II and expanded it's membership base, either knowingly or unknowingly, at the cost of future growth. The use of the internet by the public accelerated this "demise" curve.

RCI Weeks then conjured up the RCI Points. This was an out for the dilemma that would eventually confront RCI Weeks: an abundance of studios and a lack of multiple bedroom units. A lack of appealing weeks for exchange feeds on itself: no inclination to deposit weeks, be they multiple bedroom units OR even studios.

The RCI Points account will serve to equalize the exchangeability function. You deposit a studio that's worth 10,000 RCI points but cannot get a three bedroom unit that's worth 40,000 RCI points; whereas with RCI Weeks, you deposit a crappy bkue week studio two years in advance and can get a luxrious three bedroom red week one year in advance.  (Note there was period of about two years when depositers complained their VEP's were being adjusted downward. There was public umbrage over the "secret" ratios that no one outside of RCI knew. Vain attempts were made to determine what these ratios were by actions like deposit tests, etc.)

Additionally, RCI can then internally putz around with the ratios to it's benefit.

Once the RCI Weeks accounts die off, then RCI Points accounts activity willincrease AND RCI Points will then facilitate RCI's entry into it's ultimate goal: to be the world's largest hotelier without spending a dime to build their hotels.


----------



## PerryM (Jun 16, 2006)

*What is our role as consumer?*

Ron,

II is integrating condo-hotel and fractional usage with IntraWest – how long before RCI integrates Cendant hotels?  Link: http://www.cendant.com/about-cendant/travel-content/hospitality-services/hotel-group.html

It will be impossible to relate a 2BR GC 7 day reservation to a Friday and Saturday night stay at a Ramada, Days Inn, Wyndham, etc. RCI Points would, of course, be the logical place to allow this type of integration.

I do believe that RCI is favoring Points and Weeks gets the short end of the stick – that’s up to RCI and their business model they are following.

All we can do as consumers is to analyze and exploit RCI.  Trying to force our will on RCI with governmental intervention or civil suits is the wrong approach – the only ones winning in those cases will be the lawyers.  RCI will easily outmaneuver the government or civil lawyers and be 10 miles down the profit road by the time verdicts or findings are returned.


----------



## T_R_Oglodyte (Jun 16, 2006)

boyblue said:
			
		

> You can bet the farm that what RCI is doing is legal but you can make a strong case (even with the little we know) that they are testing the bounds of business ethics.


I quite honestly don't see any ethics issue in play here at all.  RCI conducts it's business as any other company does; consumers should either choose to do business with them or take their business someplace else. No need to set up another nanny-patrol.

What I see going on here is just enother example of special inteest moral imperative.  A set of people is offended by what someone else is doing, so a moral argument is created why that offending person or entity's action is wrong and therefore must be suppressed.  But the simpler solution is that if you don't like it, just walk away and refuse to participate, while allowing those who don't have a problem to continue.

And if you think that RCI is reaping exorbitant profits, then you should invest in its competitors, who are sure to be able to profit from it.  And if you think that RCI is shooting itself in the foot with shortsighted actions, then there is no reason to get worked up about it because the situation will cure itself without any need for you to do anything at all.


----------



## Timeshare Von (Jun 18, 2006)

From RCI this morning . . . 


Hello,

Thank you for your e-mail.

We have not increased the exchange fee, it has been $149 domestic since 
2004.

Thank you for your interest in RCI.

Kind regards,

Kathy Traeger
Customer Communications Specialist
RCI North America


----------



## huestous (Jun 18, 2006)

T_R_Oglodyte said:
			
		

> But the simpler solution is that if you don't like it, just walk away and refuse to participate, while allowing those who don't have a problem to continue.


This would solve the majority of problems that I hear discussed daily.


----------



## grest (Jun 18, 2006)

I wrote to RCI to express my concern about these rates, and the response I got from the feedback division is that they were not aware of this, and asked the source.  I told them "in a letter to your affiliates" as stated by original poster.  Hope this is correct information. 
connie


----------



## Carolinian (Jun 19, 2006)

Unfortunately, you overlook the fact that RCI is in a quasi monopoly position, at least with respect to exchangers at resorts that are not dual affiliated and where HOAs do not publicize the ability to use independents.  Consumer there are in effect trapped into using RCI or not exchanging.  There is no corrrective force of the market.  This is the circumstance that fully justifies governemnt action to quash monoopolisitic practices and cheating the consumer.

Just telling individuals to just not use RCI does NOT solve the problem.  The problem is that there is not a real free market for timeshare exchange for many exchangers.  Buryin our heads in the sand will not change that.

The solution is to be proactive, and help educate our resorts why they should be educating their members about the independents and why they should dual affiliate with both of the big boys.  Its all about growing the competition so that we can really have a free market in exchanging and the big boys cannot just walk all over consumers.  Once we have a free market in exchanging, there will not be a need for government intervention, as the market can then take care of itself.  We are a long way from that point now.

And BTW, saying that most independents do not take all timeshare weeks is putting too much emphasis on the SFX model, which is different from the models of most independents.  The only other limitations I know of is UKRE only taking resorts in the UK and HTSE only taking red non SA weeks.  Most other independents are generally wide  open.






			
				T_R_Oglodyte said:
			
		

> I quite honestly don't see any ethics issue in play here at all.  RCI conducts it's business as any other company does; consumers should either choose to do business with them or take their business someplace else. No need to set up another nanny-patrol.
> 
> What I see going on here is just enother example of special inteest moral imperative.  A set of people is offended by what someone else is doing, so a moral argument is created why that offending person or entity's action is wrong and therefore must be suppressed.  But the simpler solution is that if you don't like it, just walk away and refuse to participate, while allowing those who don't have a problem to continue.
> 
> And if you think that RCI is reaping exorbitant profits, then you should invest in its competitors, who are sure to be able to profit from it.  And if you think that RCI is shooting itself in the foot with shortsighted actions, then there is no reason to get worked up about it because the situation will cure itself without any need for you to do anything at all.


----------



## BocaBum99 (Jun 19, 2006)

RCI is not going to kill the golden goose simply because it is not a goose.  RCI weeks is a cow that is being properly milked for profits that can be reinvested into more worthwhile business endeavors such as Fairfield and Trendwest.  The real money is in resort development of points based resort groups.  Cendant has figured this out and is managing their portfolio of businesses accordingly.

RCI Points will follow up with higher fees as well.  RCI doesn't favor points over weeks.  It favors profit maximization to suck out as much cash as it can as its exchange empire dies a slow death.  

I haven't run the numbers yet, but I'll bet that the reduced number of exchanges that RCI gets from OLCC moving to an internal exchange program more than offsets the revenue increase in the $15/year price increase.

The only people who are going to make money out of the class action lawsuits will be the attorneys for Cendant who get paid by billable hour.  The class action law firm will get nothing because they will lose the lawsuit.


----------



## geekette (Jun 19, 2006)

BocaBum99 said:
			
		

> ... RCI Points will follow up with higher fees as well.  RCI doesn't favor points over weeks.  It favors profit maximization to suck out as much cash as it can as its exchange empire dies a slow death.



Yes, this is what I think, too.  

Cendant didn't start the exchange company and doesn't really give a crap about it, but saw an opportunity to grow themselves more profit off of this going concern.  I believe they will attempt to become a one-stop-shop for all your travel needs and throw out the ridiculous exchange "logic" and just have you Make Reservations at their price or, go elsewhere.  I think they will have enuf levels of quality to suit most any budget.  

It's just business.


----------



## T_R_Oglodyte (Jun 19, 2006)

I've been mentionng off and on for several years my opinion that RCI beliefs these is a major market inefficiency that they can exploit.  And that efficiency is the difference in value offered by timeshare accommodations compared with the hotel option.  

Most of us are aware of it.  People who have stayed in decent vacation condos can't imagine ever going back to cramped hotel rooms - or if you don't want a just a cramped hotel room you wind up paying nightly rates that are equal to an annual fee at a condo.

Ever since RCI first announced their initial points program I've thought their objective has been to totally eliminate the distinction between timeshares and other vacation accommodations and travel services.  Points just becomes a medium for exchanging among various options.


----------



## Gadabout (Jun 19, 2006)

T_R_Oglodyte said:
			
		

> People who have stayed in decent vacation condos can't imagine ever going back to cramped hotel rooms - or if you don't want a just a cramped hotel room you wind up paying nightly rates that are equal to an annual fee at a condo.



As long as the prices stay comparable, I would agree. 

But throw in any large price difference, as well as Location of TS vs. hotel (car rental or taxi fares can add up), or even just the particular need of the traveller--which in many cases is "a place to leave my stuff, shower, and to sleep for a few hours when I'm not out sightseeing" and the TS can still lose out to even a not-so-great hotel (amenities-wise, that is).  And if companies ever start charging _per person_ for TS (for towels, etc.) that will also make them less desirable.


----------



## Carolinian (Jun 20, 2006)

I would bet that the old Savings and Loans thought what they were doing was legal; too!



			
				boyblue said:
			
		

> You can bet the farm that what RCI is doing is legal but you can make a strong case (even with the little we know) that they are testing the bounds of business ethics.


----------



## Carolinian (Jun 20, 2006)

*Re: You will pay for all of this*

These actions were brought under the New Jersey consumer protection statutes.  Such statutes are typically VERY broad.  North Carolina's for example, provides that "unfair or deceptive acts or practices in or affecting commerce are declared unlawful".  Are RCI' practices unfair?  You betcha!  And probably deceptive, too!




			
				Dani said:
			
		

> Yes I do offer an opinion on this issue.  I do so because as far as I'm concerned, there is no cognizable legal right being violated by RCI.  It does not much matter how the complaint is pled out.
> 
> BTW, you offered up an opinion in the original thread about these class action suits being brought against RCI.  You offered that these suits would in fact survive summary judgment.   Like I said, you too have never read the pleadings.
> 
> Whatever the case...I do agree with you that this  discussion is decidedly now off on a tangent and will hopefully get back on track.


----------



## Carolinian (Jun 20, 2006)

You probably missed Bootleg's info on this subject.  He checked RCI's computers to see where the prime rental info was coming from, and it was not PFD, Points Partners, cruises, or the like.  It was normal exchange deposits from Weeks members.  That was not that long ago and PFD was in  full swing then.  So I guess Bootleg's facts disprove your guess.





			
				timeos2 said:
			
		

> I'm guessing that a good portion of the points inventory now comes from PFD.  If so every one of those weeks is technically in RCI Points - but they have to be used at full 7 day periods. They could use the generic points chart in & out with the exchange fee at the Points rate rather than the weeks exchange rate. Since that rate is lower RCI may not want to do that but they could and they to not have to continue to prop up the weeks system by placing those PFD units into  RCI Weeks if they don't want to.  RCI hadn't seen one of my weeks deposits into the weeks system in over 5 years yet by PFD they have received 4 since 2004. If others are doing the same it is the Points side that is growing while weeks is fading away quickly. As a product line starts to wind down one of the common practices is to raise prices so revenues stay flat. Eventually the company hopes a newer, higher volume product line will replace that income even if the unit pricing is lower. We may be seeing that with RCI Weeks and Points right now.


----------



## Carolinian (Jun 20, 2006)

*Re: RCI's goose*

I would have guessed the same if it were a new theory, but DAE has used this plan very succesfully in Australia where they are a major player, and so has another Australian independent, Interchange, and in many years of operation, they have not been flooded with only off season weeks.





			
				T_R_Oglodyte said:
			
		

> *************
> 
> If an independent company that is a free-for-all exchange company, such as DAE apparently is, were to get flooded with unusable blue and green weeks, they will have to change their policies or the company will go under.  They may be able to survive at the level they are right now, but if they start to gain any traction in the market the free-for-all approach will change.


----------



## rcnet (Jun 20, 2006)

*Here's what I've decided to do.*

First-time poster here.  Wow.  I've spent the last 1.5 days just reading about this whole RCI weeks shenanigans across multiple Internet sites to enlighten myself (I really should be working instead!  ).  I'm not a fancy timeshare "insider", but I have owned my TS for almost 8 years now, and I have done a few exchanges with RCI in the past, so I've been through the "process".  Plus, it was time to think about family vacations for 2007, so I've stumbled upon this "hornet's nest" at the right time! 

Like most of you, I'm very much bewildered about RCI's sleazy rental practices, plus this new exchange fee increase takes the cake.  I was a RCI member up until 2004, but I knew I was going to my home resort (red week at Plantation Resorts in Myrtle Beach) for a couple of years so I let my subscription expire.

Well, my wife said she wanted to try something different next year, so I was just about to call RCI (usually I hang up on them when they call about renewing, but for the last couple of weeks I was actually _hoping _they would call me so that I could renew for 2 years at a discount), but then I read all this.  Honestly, I've never liked the whole TS "hard-sell pressure" experience that I went through when I originally bought it, and I've always felt going to the timeshare presentations + dealing with RCI exchanges as a necessary "evil" in what would otherwise be a nice relaxing weekly vacation.  To bad we can't just have a _simple _ "owner-led" online exchange system without all these greedy corporations/middle-men/con-men milking it for every last penny till it's dead.

Ahem, so after I read about all the difficulty that RCI members were having getting exchanges that they wanted, I said "hold on", and being internet-savvy, started looking for alternatives.  I'm literally spooked about  shelling out membership fees ($89) + exchange fees ($149) to do a search and hear back "sorry, no availability".  I called my resort and asked them what other exchange options were available and they mentioned www.newhorizonsexchange.com.  I don't know anything about them, but they seem a little bit cheaper.  Obviously, I want to pay as little as possible because I'm already paying higher maintenance fees than I ever imagined 8 years ago.  I also signed up with redweek.com (6 months for $10) so hopefully between those, plus some of the other's that have been mentioned like daelive.com, I can find a suitable alternative to RCI for my TS exchanges.  

When I talked to my resort, I specifically asked the rep and she said that as long as I notify them that somebody else is coming, I can make the exchange without any problems.  Nothing prevents me from not using RCI for this. It will be a long dark cold day in hell before the resort gets another penny of mine to switch to RCI points.

I'll never go back to RCI ever again.  I'll never sit through another RCI "presentation" ever again (regardless of the free trinkets).  From what I've read RCI Points is just the latest scam in a litany of scams to milk you for more money.  I'm not saying that for new TS owners, Points wouldn't be a good deal, I don't know. But what I do know, after paying over $11K "retail" on my TS (It was cheap champagne even!) + steadily climbing maintenance fees + occasional yearly membership fees + ever-higher exchange fees, I'm just sick and tired of paying, paying, paying.  I remember running the numbers in my head before I signed on the dotted line thinking that, if all the numbers stayed the same (remember this was 8 yrs ago), that I'd break even somewhere after 10 years on my TS, compared with do-it-yourself vacationing.  We'll obviously, the numbers haven't stayed the same.

I'm really hoping the market for "alternative" exchanges opens up in the next 6 months, because come on, it's 2006.  Computers are cheap, storage and bandwidth are cheap.  Electronic "exchanges" should be costing less and less, _not more and more_.  

Honestly, if I sit back and think about all the things that were promised me back 8 yrs ago, I can say this whole timeshare experience has been average, at best.

YMMV


----------



## timeos2 (Jun 20, 2006)

Carolinian said:
			
		

> You probably missed Bootleg's info on this subject.  He checked RCI's computers to see where the prime rental info was coming from, and it was not PFD, Points Partners, cruises, or the like.  It was normal exchange deposits from Weeks members.  That was not that long ago and PFD was in  full swing then.  So I guess Bootleg's facts disprove your guess.



I wasn't talking about rentals - I am saying that many of the "weeks" deposits - especially the good ones - may now very well be coming in through PFD rather than the old regular weeks side of things. I know of at least 1/2 dozen owners who have started to use PFD that had given up on the old weeks world. So while those are "weeks" style deposits they are only there because of the RCI Points system and if they are used in that system then an argument can be made that RCI Points is in fact being used to prop up weeks - not the other way around. The majority of "old week" deposits seem to be the lesser times and resorts vs the better ones that PFD attracts due to high values.  If they kept those better weeks in a pool available only to RCI Points members then the selection in RCI weeks would decline even more.


----------



## Carolinian (Jun 21, 2006)

I don't think you mean blue weeks.  If someone is doing PFD, the best thing to give RCI Points is the pinkest week you can find, right on the edge of white.  It is the "overaveraging" mania in the Points system that creates this opportunity, and that is one of the fundamental flaws that exists throughout the Points system.

Weeks would be better off without PFD.  That is not propping up Weeks.  It is a minor player, along with the unfair generic points grids for crossover trades through which Weeks props up Points.  The best that could happen is to totally seperate the two systems.






			
				timeos2 said:
			
		

> I wasn't talking about rentals - I am saying that many of the "weeks" deposits - especially the good ones - may now very well be coming in through PFD rather than the old regular weeks side of things. I know of at least 1/2 dozen owners who have started to use PFD that had given up on the old weeks world. So while those are "weeks" style deposits they are only there because of the RCI Points system and if they are used in that system then an argument can be made that RCI Points is in fact being used to prop up weeks - not the other way around. The majority of "old week" deposits seem to be the lesser times and resorts vs the better ones that PFD attracts due to high values.  If they kept those better weeks in a pool available only to RCI Points members then the selection in RCI weeks would decline even more.


----------



## MaryH (Jun 21, 2006)

Does anyone know with the increase of domestic exchange fee, what the C$ equivalent would be?  With the rise of C$, I am hoping the rise in fee is offset.


----------



## Carolinian (Jun 22, 2006)

*The independent alternative*

For those wanting an alternative to RCI, the first thing to do is to join ALL of the independents with free membership and a request first system, which are:

www.daelive.com
www.platinuminterchange.com
www.tradingplaces.com
www.interchange-timeshare.com.au (mostly Australian)

Then, if you have a resort and week they accept, add www.sfx-resorts.com

Then, if you have a red week located somewhere other than South Africa, add www.htse.net (small annual fee, but low exchange fee)


----------



## PerryM (Jun 22, 2006)

*Same boat new captain*

Of course, relying on any company to arrange an exchange places oneself in exactly the same position we face with II and RCI – we agree to their rules and regulations, even if one of them is to willy-nilly change them to maximize their stockholders profits.

The best way to exchange, at free market rates, is to simply rent your unit.  Granted you have to declare the rental income but the cash you get can be used anyway you want.  Lock in a juicy holiday week and rent for 3-5 times the MF and you can then rent a bunch of those cheap RCI Gold Crowns.

One of RCI problems with renting is their cross contamination from Cendant’s hotel group.  (Link: http://www.cendant.com/about-cendant/travel-content/hospitality-services/hotel-group.html) Renting a 7-day timeshare reservation is best done to the timeshare audience that frequents RedWeek, MyResortNetwork and VRBO.

RCI is discounting their rental fees since they seem to want to compete in the hotel arena where folks rent for 3 days max over the weekend.  It doesn’t take an Einstein to figure out that they have to sell at half price to attract the 3-day renter.  If RCI had half a brain they would buy RedWeek and take it over with their timeshare rentals and charge double or triple what they charge now.

The evil renter:
I know that many an owner is ticked at us renters who lock in holiday weeks and rent them out for big bucks.  I don’t view it that way at all.  This is how I exchange my timeshare for another timeshare and we go on fantastic vacations.  I additionally have the option of renting many units, combine the sales, and take a much fancier vacation that none of the timeshares could ever exchange into.

Many 2BR units are now rented with just the scrap lock-offs dumped into the exchange companies for hopefully an upgrade back to a 2BR unit.  As it gets easier and easier to rent via the Internet, this is just going to escalate.  Join the crown and get all the high demand holiday weeks you want in a 2BR on the rental sites.


----------



## timeos2 (Jun 22, 2006)

*Re: Same boat new captain*



			
				PerryM said:
			
		

> Many 2BR units are now rented with just the scrap lock-offs dumped into the exchange companies for hopefully an upgrade back to a 2BR unit.  As it gets easier and easier to rent via the Internet, this is just going to escalate.  Join the crown and get all the high demand holiday weeks you want in a 2BR on the rental sites.


Perry - You may have hit on one of the biggest reasons the choices in weeks trades have become so much less desireable. As owners figure out how to maximize value they are using the better units and times for PFD, rentals, SFX or other ways they can be reasonably certain of getting a fair trade. Meanwhile the 1BR, offseason and lockoffs get dumped on II & RCI since, like Joey, they eat anything.  The all you eat exchangers can only exchange what they get and more and more that is the dregs I'm guessing.  So besides the fact that the cream is going to other places by owners choice and some is being used by RCI/II as rental there is no surprise that whats left isn't the easy trade up it used to be to get a 2 bedroo for that offseason unit or a studio/1 bedroom.  The systems are evolving and owners had better adapt as well.


----------



## AwayWeGo (Jun 22, 2006)

*Juicy Holiday Weeks.*




			
				PerryM said:
			
		

> Lock in a juicy holiday week and rent for 3-5 times the MF and you can then rent a bunch of those cheap RCI Gold Crowns.


Great idea -- rent'm out high for the holidays & use the proceeds to rent somebody else's off-peak timeshare, or take an RCI _Instant Exchange_ or _Last Call_ bargain.  Makes sense to me. 

So, which are the juicy holiday weeks?  Any holiday?  Just certain 1s?  Christmas?  New Year?  MLK Day?  Valentine's Day?  George Washington's Birthday?  Easter?  Mother's Day?  Memorial Day?  Father's Day?  Independence Day?  Labor Day?  Columbus Day?  Halloween?  Veterans Day?  Thanksgiving? 

Shucks, maybe we could pay ahead on our timeshare fees, lock in a juicy 2007 or 2008 holiday week, & get in on some of this. 

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


----------



## PerryM (Jun 22, 2006)

*Morphing the timeshare*

AwayWeGo,

Using your timeshare for creative purposes is one of the great attributes of timeshare ownership.  Using one’s timeshare portfolio to vacation at places and ways that might not be contained within those timeshares is part of the fun for me.

Owning a timeshare week (or points/credits in a club) is the “base” use which we use for many a nice vacation but renting out the same unit for cash and then enjoying totally different vacations is, to me, the thrill of timeshare ownership.

If RCI has something that fits into our vacation plans and wants to compete in the motel/hotel arena, I’m happy to exploit RCI and rent their unit.

Renting out your unit opens a whole different universe of vacation options that RCI and II just can’t offer.  Cash is king.  My observation of the stuff I see in II and RCI has me looking elsewhere for our family vacations.


----------



## bogey21 (Jun 22, 2006)

Gadabout said:
			
		

> As long as the prices stay comparable, I would agree.
> 
> But throw in any large price difference, as well as Location of TS vs. hotel (car rental or taxi fares can add up), or even just the particular need of the traveller--which in many cases is "a place to leave my stuff, shower, and to sleep for a few hours when I'm not out sightseeing" and the TS can still lose out to even a not-so-great hotel (amenities-wise, that is).  And if companies ever start charging _per person_ for TS (for towels, etc.) that will also make them less desirable.



I agree.  This is similar to my selection of motels.  Give me a clean, well located Motel 6 anytime and I can save $40 - $50 per night and get everything I need including ice and dial-up internet access.

GEORGE


----------



## Carolinian (Jun 23, 2006)

*Re: Same boat new captain*

The stand-alone exchange companies have actually had quite a good track record for exchangers.  RCI had a great one back when it was a stand alone company.  Its when the conglomerates, like Cendant, take over that exchangers have problems.

We haven't seen the independents playing games, and I don't think we will.




			
				PerryM said:
			
		

> Of course, relying on any company to arrange an exchange places oneself in exactly the same position we face with II and RCI – we agree to their rules and regulations, even if one of them is to willy-nilly change them to maximize their stockholders profits.
> 
> The best way to exchange, at free market rates, is to simply rent your unit.  Granted you have to declare the rental income but the cash you get can be used anyway you want.  Lock in a juicy holiday week and rent for 3-5 times the MF and you can then rent a bunch of those cheap RCI Gold Crowns.
> 
> ...


----------



## Carolinian (Jun 23, 2006)

*Re: Same boat new captain*

Did you forget that Bootleg did locate those good weeks in the RCI system, and they were in RCI's rental pool?




			
				timeos2 said:
			
		

> Perry - You may have hit on one of the biggest reasons the choices in weeks trades have become so much less desireable. As owners figure out how to maximize value they are using the better units and times for PFD, rentals, SFX or other ways they can be reasonably certain of getting a fair trade. Meanwhile the 1BR, offseason and lockoffs get dumped on II & RCI since, like Joey, they eat anything.  The all you eat exchangers can only exchange what they get and more and more that is the dregs I'm guessing.  So besides the fact that the cream is going to other places by owners choice and some is being used by RCI/II as rental there is no surprise that whats left isn't the easy trade up it used to be to get a 2 bedroo for that offseason unit or a studio/1 bedroom.  The systems are evolving and owners had better adapt as well.


----------



## "Roger" (Jun 23, 2006)

*Re: Same boat new captain*



			
				Carolinian said:
			
		

> The stand-alone exchange companies have actually had quite a good track record for exchangers.  RCI had a great one back when it was a stand alone company....


When I joined TUG the oft quoted figure on this board was that only about 75% of those who deposited with RCI ever got *any* exchange at all.


----------



## boyblue (Jun 23, 2006)

*Re: Same boat new captain*



			
				Roger said:
			
		

> When I joined TUG the oft quoted figure on this board was that only about 75% of those who deposited with RCI ever got *any* exchange at all.



That statistic must have included folks that deposited and never looked for an exchange.


----------



## "Roger" (Jun 23, 2006)

Probably.  It still is not what I would call a "great" record.  How many people deposit with the independents and never look for an exchange?


----------



## geekette (Jun 23, 2006)

*exchange stats*



			
				Roger said:
			
		

> When I joined TUG the oft quoted figure on this board was that only about 75% of those who deposited with RCI ever got *any* exchange at all.



I think this is misleading - many times people turn down an exchange that is offered for any number of reasons.  And yes, sometimes people deposit and forget about it.

Often I'll see people saying that they won't get a vacation at all, but that's not really true - they may not get exactly what they want, but certainly have the opportunity to take a week.


----------



## "Roger" (Jun 23, 2006)

I am baffled by what is going on here.  When someone posts (and I never have) that RCI claims to have a 95% success rate in securing exchanges (a number currently touted by RCI), a number of posters (correctly in my opinion) chime in, "Yeah, but a lot of these people ended up taking what they considered undesirable exchanges."  

When I post what had been a number circulating on TUG in the mid-nineties (only about 75% of people who deposit ever received any exchange) this number is misleading because it is the people themselves who are at fault.

I'll just make the point that I was trying to make and bow out of this thread:  Whatever the failings of RCI currently (and there are many), we shouldn't try to glorify the old days and say everything was fine then.  In the mid-90's, the reputation of timesharing was in the gutter and the frustration people had getting exchanges had a lot to do with it.  Let's not mythologize the past.

JMHO


----------



## geekette (Jun 23, 2006)

I'm sorry, Roger, I did not intend to insult you.     It just hadn't been mentioned yet in this thread and so I did.  

I wouldn't say it's the fault of the people, necessarily; more that expectations and reality fail to match up.  That's a fault on both sides, and let's not forget the developers play a huge part in creating owner expectations.  

My point was that I can arrange the facts to fit the percentage I'd like to float.  I would be interested in % happy customers of their entire Weeks base; % happy customers of their entire Points base but I'll never get the facts on that.  How much of their entire membership base always gets exactly what they want (excluding the "Anywhere but home!" population)?  How many have had to "settle"?  How many gave up because there was NO EXCHANGE AVAILABLE and how many gave up because there was NO EXCHANGE THEY WANTED AVAILABLE?

And then, of those in the latter category, how many specified less than 5 "suitable resorts" or less than 5 suitable dates and put in an ongoing search over a year in advance?


----------



## "Roger" (Jun 23, 2006)

Haning said that I would disappear, I will reappear just long enough to clarify that I did not feel insulted... just puzzled. I pretty much agree with everything that you said in your last post.


----------



## T_R_Oglodyte (Jun 23, 2006)

geekette said:
			
		

> I'm sorry, Roger, I did not intend to insult you.     It just hadn't been mentioned yet in this thread and so I did.
> 
> I wouldn't say it's the fault of the people, necessarily; more that expectations and reality fail to match up.  That's a fault on both sides, and let's not forget the developers play a huge part in creating owner expectations.
> 
> ...



For those who consider anecdotes as proof (i.e., those who believe that universally applicable extrapolations can be made from the experiences of a limited group of exchangers or from activities involving resorts in one geographic area), I offer the following illustration.

My best friend and his wife have been involved in timesharing for probably 15 years, starting when his children were small.  He owns prime weeks at Wapato in Washington and McCall in Idaho.  

For years they were frustrated with the old weeks exchange system, feeling that they were seldom able to get trades that were comparable to what they were giving up, and often having to wait a long time to get trades to areas they wanted to visit.  They were totally ordinary timeshare owners, not aware of any other resource such as TUG.  They owned their units, they paid their annual fees when due, they owned at resorts they visited regularly, and they also wanted to trade at times to visit new areas or create special family vacations, They were pretty disillusioned with timesharing.

When they were offered the opportunity to convert to RCI Points they decided to try it.  Now they are totally sastisfied with timesharing.  They are able to plan in advance.  Due to changes in family circumstances, they have had fewer opportunities to take family vacations, and when they do have opportunities those happen to be in peak demand periods.  

Before converting to points they couldn't even get an exchange into places they wanted to visit for those trips, and had to settle for a vacation in a place they really didn't want to go to.  With points they are able to combine weeks from a couple of years (which is no burden since with fewer vacation opportunities they were finding it harder to use all of their weeks) and have enough points to secure reservations in places they want to visit, at resorts they would like to stay at, and to do so far enough in advance to coordinate travel plans and schedules.

My friend cannot fathom why I haven't converted to Points.  To him it's all about flexibility.  He now has flexibility in spades.


----------



## timeos2 (Jun 23, 2006)

T_R_Oglodyte said:
			
		

> For years they were frustrated with the old weeks exchange system, feeling that they were seldom able to get trades that were comparable to what they were giving up, and often having to wait a long time to get trades to areas they wanted to visit.  They were totally ordinary timeshare owners, not aware of any other resource such as TUG.  They owned their units, they paid their annual fees when due, they owned at resorts they visited regularly, and they also wanted to trade at times to visit new areas or create special family vacations, They were pretty disillusioned with timesharing.



That is so typical of most owners, not the few who knew how the play the weeks game.  It is those few that look back on the old days as the golden years. Most others would find they would be happier in RCI Points or another points based system that has far less chance and luck involved n making desireable trades.


----------



## rickandcindy23 (Jun 23, 2006)

With Al Gore's internet invention,   playing the weeks timeshare game has been made easier.  As soon as I logged onto rci's website years ago, I cannot remember when that was, my weeks ownership became fascinating.  A new world of vacation opportunities opened up to me.  I cannot believe the luxury of looking at my leisure without making that awful call to a VC.  Requesting over the phone and taking whatever they would give was getting old.  

We have supertraders with RCI and I love to test our trade power when sightings are posted here on TUG.  When my summer rotating weeks are FULL RED and not the weeks that are in September (supposedly red), I can pull everything.   

As I said before, the exchange fee increase is only another $15.00 so I will pay it.  I look at it this way:  Our weeks at Val Chatelle cost us $440 MF for red, $420 for blue, we own four weeks.  with our exchange fees, the most we will pay is $604 for our weeks.  What do I get with that?  Anything my heart desires for now.  We get Orlando trades, anytime of the year we want, at GC resorts.  If I find a week that is cheaper to use with points (very difficult since the points increases in January), I can bank 45,500 points for my MF's and get what I need.  Marriott's Cypress Harbour is on RCI as a regular resort for 38,000 points, so I save a little by using my points, plus I only have to pay $99 for that exchange.  If our kids want to use the weeks, no more Guest Certificates for points because they are all listed on our account.  It works out well for us.  I am amazed at what I can get with points.  

As far as Hawaii goes, Points has more availability, but I have been able to get weeks trades for many years now, so Points just does not make sense.  But if I did choose to use points, the cost to me would not be much more than the owners pay for their maintenance fees, so I would probably acquiesce, if I had to.  

I have only figured out how to really take advantage of RCI opportunities because of TUG.  This membership is the best thing I ever purchased.  Sightings is worth the money alone, then you have all the great advice from experts here.  I love this site.


----------



## CraigU (Jun 24, 2006)

*Re: RCI's goose*



			
				RonaldCol said:
			
		

> Perry, very good analysis, but ...
> 
> 
> RCI Weeks then conjured up the RCI Points. This was an out for the dilemma that would eventually confront RCI Weeks: an abundance of studios and a lack of multiple bedroom units. A lack of appealing weeks for exchange feeds on itself: no inclination to deposit weeks, be they multiple bedroom units OR even studios.



My opinion is that RCI created their points program to compete with the resort developers mini internal exchange systems and point programs. The flexibility to trade for a variety of uses shakes the foundation of the weeks for weeks programs.

I believe the other motivation was to provide value to the resort developers who could drive revenue from existing owners as they paid large fees to convert. This would provide incentive for a developer to affiliate with RCI versus any alternative that didn't provide the same value.

I do NOT believe they had any "sinister" secret motivations.


----------



## timeos2 (Jun 24, 2006)

*Re: RCI's goose*



			
				CraigU said:
			
		

> My opinion is that RCI created their points program to compete with the resort developers mini internal exchange systems and point programs. The flexibility to trade for a variety of uses shakes the foundation of the weeks for weeks programs.
> 
> I believe the other motivation was to provide value to the resort developers who could drive revenue from existing owners as they paid large fees to convert. This would provide incentive for a developer to affiliate with RCI versus any alternative that didn't provide the same value.
> 
> I do NOT believe they had any "sinister" secret motivations.



Craig - As usual you provide a reasoned and useful analysis. Your thoughts make perfect sense and are much more believeable than the multiple conspiricy theories banished about so often. RCI, and every other business, makes decisions to remain competitive in a changing environment not some sinister plot to undermine owners, resorts, etc. Thank you.


----------



## jerseygirl (Jun 24, 2006)

Craig,

You're probably right about a lack of sinister motivation when RCI Points was originally created.  But, at a minimum, there is an _appearance _of wrongdoing in the way they've implemented it.  The biggest known example was the time that Walt uncovered MANY MANY Embassy Maui weeks at Snap Travel.  After Embassy confirmed that the weeks were not developer inventory deposited for rental purposes, RCI's excuse was along the lines of:

... although these particular Embassy weeks may not have been used for points partner transactions, they were "equal" to other weeks used for PP transactions that their members wanted more .... therefore, the Embassy weeks were moved to the rental pool and the original "oh so desirable" weeks were left in the exchange pool ...

I might have actually believed that explanation if there were 2 or 3 Embassy weeks moved to the rental pool, but there were hundreds, if I remember correctly.  I'm gullible, but not that gullible!

Bottom line:  Some believe that RCI has not been fair and balanced in their implementation of the points program, despite any original intention to meet member need. 

I can fully understand why some love RCI Points and make the most of it.  That's fine, as long as they're prepared to accept the risk that they'll be on the other side of the unfair treatment someday.  My philosophy has always been, "if they're messing with the "other guy" today, it's only a matter of time until they're messing with me too."


----------



## CraigU (Jun 24, 2006)

jerseygirl said:
			
		

> Craig,
> 
> You're probably right about a lack of sinister motivation when RCI Points was originally created.  But, at a minimum, there is an _appearance _of wrongdoing in the way they've implemented it.  The biggest known example was the time that Walt uncovered MANY MANY Embassy Maui weeks at Snap Travel.  After Embassy confirmed that the weeks were not developer inventory deposited for rental purposes, RCI's excuse was along the lines of:



I understand how people may perceive  the "appearance" of wrong doing. However, I would bet examples such as these are nothing more than a mistake at best.

My understanding is the original RCI system was built on a mainframe legacy system. While this may have had benefits in the past, they probably have had to add systems as the data structure and scalability (sp?) required for the web probably could not be supported. In addition, they have interfaces with many different entities within their own organization and external companies .

My opionion is they inadvertently created "inventory silos" that require manipulation to transfer weeks from program to program. The complexiity of which could never be imagined unless we were fortunate enough to internally watch the development over time. I doubt even they have anyone who truly understands every nuance of their systems integration.

Therefore, my assumption about these types of examples is that they weren't aware a glitch has occurred until it was reported. This would explain why it was rectified afterwards.


----------



## jerseygirl (Jun 24, 2006)

I never heard that they rectified the Embassy situation, but will gladly stand corrected if something happened that I have not heard about.

As I understood it, they raised the rental rates (to ~$1200/$1300, I think) when Embassy owners screamed loudly that the rental price (originally ~$699, I think) was lower than the maintenance fees.  But, they didn't pull the weeks from the rental pool and put them back in the exchange pool, where many would argue they belonged.  That form of rectification simply added more money to RCI's pocket -- it didn't help the owners or members ... or even the renting public!

I do agree that they have made progress toward rectifying the unfair "generic points grid for weeks exchanges" situation.  There is still room for improvement, but it's a heck of a lot better than it used to be (back in the days when a Gold Crown points owner in Orlando could trade his/her one week in an inflated points resort for two weeks at Orange Lake. a non-points resort ... just one example of the unfairness of the past).

Craig, please don't tell us that your defense of RCI means you're thinking of going to work for them now that your non-compete clause is up?!  Just kidding .... sort of!!!    Actually, that would probably be a great thing ... I'm still a major fan of II, and I think you probably had a lot to do with building that company!  (Although, they don't seem to be as generous with ACs as they used to be ... do you have any friends who can fix that?   )


----------



## Dani (Jun 24, 2006)

jerseygirl said:
			
		

> ICraig, please don't tell us that your defense of RCI means you're thinking of going to work for them now that your non-compete clause is up?!  Just kidding .... sort of!!!    Actually, that would probably be a great thing ... I'm still a major fan of II, and I think you probably had a lot to do with building that company!  (Although, they don't seem to be as generous with ACs as they used to be ... do you have any friends who can fix that?   )




  I have always wondered if II realized the impact Craig made on TUG.  When Craig first came to TUG I did not care for II and felt that they were far inferior to RCI.    After Craig came to TUG and provided much needed answers to our questions, I decided to test the II waters with a cheapie studio deposit and then moved on to purchase another II week and have been a ever member since.   Today, I can't imagine not being a member of II.    Craig's professionalism spoke volumes for II.


----------



## T_R_Oglodyte (Jun 24, 2006)

CraigU said:
			
		

> I understand how people may perceive  the "appearance" of wrong doing. However, I would bet examples such as these are nothing more than a mistake at best.
> 
> My understanding is the original RCI system was built on a mainframe legacy system. While this may have had benefits in the past, they probably have had to add systems as the data structure and scalability (sp?) required for the web probably could not be supported. In addition, they have interfaces with many different entities within their own organization and external companies .
> 
> ...


That's the old bromide that you should never attribute to intelligence actions that can be as easily explained by incompetence.


----------



## CraigU (Jun 24, 2006)

jerseygirl said:
			
		

> Craig, please don't tell us that your defense of RCI means you're thinking of going to work for them now that your non-compete clause is up?!  Just kidding .... sort of!!!    Actually, that would probably be a great thing ... I'm still a major fan of II, and I think you probably had a lot to do with building that company!  (Although, they don't seem to be as generous with ACs as they used to be ... do you have any friends who can fix that?   )



LOL....no, I have no intention of working for RCI. There were many instances where I could have explained what I believed they were doing and addressed misperceptions. However, at that time, I didn't think I should help a competitor. 

The challenge with RCI is they made the mistake of not retaining the employees who built the system and the bureaucracy took over without enough individuals knowledgable and empowered to proactively resolve issues. The same thing happens to every company that makes the same mistake. Unfortunately, they usually don't realize the damage thats been done until its too late.

Having said that, my non-compete expired in February of this year so I could work for RCI or anyone else for that matter. :whoopie: For the time being, I will continue building my own company so hopefully you will se my artificial trees, plants and flowers in all of the hospitality projects you visit.


----------



## boyblue (Jun 24, 2006)

Apologies for going off topic for a moment but Craig with you being in South Florida, did you get any business from The Atlantis.  If not they have just started Phase III you might want to make some calls.  I'm pretty sure their corporate office is somewhere in your neighborhood.

Another heads up, the other major development here in Nassau, Bahamar is also getting started.


----------



## Lee B (Jun 24, 2006)

jerseygirl said:
			
		

> The biggest known example was the time that Walt uncovered MANY MANY Embassy Maui weeks at Snap Travel.  After Embassy confirmed that the weeks were not developer inventory deposited for rental purposes, RCI's excuse was along the lines of:
> 
> ... although these particular Embassy weeks may not have been used for points partner transactions, they were "equal" to other weeks used for PP transactions that their members wanted more .... therefore, the Embassy weeks were moved to the rental pool and the original "oh so desirable" weeks were left in the exchange pool ...


I'm not taking RCI's side, but they might have been using the excuse that all of those fine Embassy deposits would have had to go to depositors of inferior intervals.  So they kept them away from those depositor scumbags (like me) and rented them instead, in order to keep the system fair.  

If RCI only worked to eliminate trades up, they could excuse themselves for renting out fancy deposits.  OTOH, if members can't get any more trade improvements at all, and only get like for like, they probably will drift away from RCI.  Right now, TUGgers who use RCI Points can get trade improvements.  How long will that last?


----------



## Carolinian (Jun 24, 2006)

*Re: RCI's goose*

Craig - If that were really their motivation, it seems to have backfired.  Not long after RCI came out with Points, it drove a number of mini-systems right into the arms of II - Worldmark, Sunterra, and Seasons.  I wish the special issue of the Seasons newsletter announcing their switch to II was still online with its well-aimed broadside at RCI over both the Points and rentals issues.

This "flexibility" of non-timeshare goods and services is a disease not a cure.  It feeds the rental operation, and thus degrades the core business of exchanging.  Thanks to all of these frills, we cannot get the exchanges we used to.  I bought timeshare for the exchanges and use, not the frills, and I suspect that most people did.  To heck with the frills! 




			
				CraigU said:
			
		

> My opinion is that RCI created their points program to compete with the resort developers mini internal exchange systems and point programs. The flexibility to trade for a variety of uses shakes the foundation of the weeks for weeks programs.
> 
> I believe the other motivation was to provide value to the resort developers who could drive revenue from existing owners as they paid large fees to convert. This would provide incentive for a developer to affiliate with RCI versus any alternative that didn't provide the same value.
> 
> I do NOT believe they had any "sinister" secret motivations.


----------



## Carolinian (Jun 24, 2006)

Every survey I have seen shows that a substantial majority of timesharers prefer a weeks based systems.  We have been through the Points supporters trying to shoot down those surveys, but none of you have produced one that backs up your assertions.




			
				timeos2 said:
			
		

> That is so typical of most owners, not the few who knew how the play the weeks game.  It is those few that look back on the old days as the golden years. Most others would find they would be happier in RCI Points or another points based system that has far less chance and luck involved n making desireable trades.


----------



## bogey21 (Jun 24, 2006)

This is a survey of 1.  After 3 years of using separate non-linked RCI Weeks Account (Self-Wife) and RCI Points Account (Daughter-Self) I have clearly done far better with the Points Account.  Primary reasons are PFD and low point 45 day window reservations.  If these disappeared, I would have to re-evaluate.

GEORGE


----------



## timeos2 (Jun 24, 2006)

Carolinian said:
			
		

> Every survey I have seen shows that a substantial majority of timesharers prefer a weeks based systems.  We have been through the Points supporters trying to shoot down those surveys, but none of you have produced one that backs up your assertions.



Don't need no stinkin' survey!  The sales reports prove that points are were the action is.  What people pay out of pocket is much more telling than any poll could ever be even if they were scientific (those you have quoted in the past are not).  

As for the points groups that "fled" to II remember they are mostly points based and are only using the II weeks system to gain a priority for their points members!  How does that favor  or show a preference for weeks except to continue the long tradition of upgrading?  And from what I hear on the grapevine there are one or two of those groups that switched to II that now are wondering if they made a good move.  The grass is always greener...


----------



## CraigU (Jun 24, 2006)

*Re: RCI's goose*



			
				Carolinian said:
			
		

> Craig - If that were really their motivation, it seems to have backfired.



Every strategy is dependent upon communication and execution. I didn't say they did either well.


----------



## timeos2 (Jun 24, 2006)

*Re: RCI's goose*



			
				Carolinian said:
			
		

> Craig - If that were really their motivation, it seems to have backfired.  Not long after RCI came out with Points, it drove a number of mini-systems right into the arms of II - Worldmark, Sunterra, and Seasons.  I wish the special issue of the Seasons newsletter announcing their switch to II was still online with its well-aimed broadside at RCI over both the Points and rentals issues.



You ignored that he ended with "to compete with the points systems".  Sure some of them fled - they couldn't compete with another points system much larger than theirs. They needed the priority to offer their system members, usually points based, outside resorts that they could obtain on the cheap with hand picked and averaged deposits.  You seem to think having the mini's move to II was a coup - it is a nightmare for weeks owners in that system!  The mini's now get first choice and turn in so-so deposits in exchange leaving the pickings mighty slim for the mere individual weeks owners. It's exactly what you complain about in RCI - cherry picking the best for the points systems and leaving the leftovers for the paying weeks members.  My Sunterra week was a horrible trader with II weeks but great with RCI. Once Sunterra became a premium member at II I can pick up Marriotts or DVC with ease that I NEVER saw with week for week deposits in II and its the same exact resort/weeks to deposit. I don't even have to use the full value to get those times (I still have Sun options left - again cannot occur in week for week trades) I still prefer RCI Points but when I need it II is there, no cost to me to be a member, priority booking and low Club Options required. As a points member it's great - as a II weeks member I bailed in 2002.  Haven't missed them a bit.  II is combining the worst of weeks and points IMHO.


----------



## taffy19 (Jun 24, 2006)

*Re: Same boat new captain*



			
				timeos2 said:
			
		

> Perry - You may have hit on one of the biggest reasons the choices in weeks trades have become so much less desireable. As owners figure out how to maximize value they are using the better units and times for PFD, rentals, SFX or other ways they can be reasonably certain of getting a fair trade. Meanwhile the 1BR, offseason and lockoffs get dumped on II & RCI since, like Joey, they eat anything. The all you eat exchangers can only exchange what they get and more and more that is the dregs I'm guessing. So besides the fact that the cream is going to other places by owners choice and some is being used by RCI/II as rental there is no surprise that whats left isn't the easy trade up it used to be to get a 2 bedroo for that offseason unit or a studio/1 bedroom. The systems are evolving and owners had better adapt as well.


Would this be also the reason why RCI increased the rate because they want to get rid of the week-based owners because we no longer deposit our choice weeks to them?


----------



## AwayWeGo (Jun 24, 2006)

*Little Nudges, Not 1 Big Shove*




			
				iconnections said:
			
		

> Would this be also the reason why RCI increased the rate because they want to get rid of the week-based owners because we no longer deposit our choice weeks to them?


Well, sure. 

Sometimes at bedtime, the cat has already picked out a cozy place on the bed, down near the foot, & has snoozed out right there, comfy as can be. 

When I slide in between the sheets, I never just shove the cat off.  Rather, I just sort of start crowding him little by little with my feet, nudging him slightly.  He doesn't jump right off.  He tries to adjust to the remaining space, which I crowd by more foot movement.  Before long, he decides he'll be more comfortable somewhere else & quietly leaves all the space on that side of the bed to me. 

In a similar way, if I were the Grand Pro of RCI & I wanted my members & customers to move their RCI Weeks business over to RCI Points, I think I would nudge them in the desired direction by a series of minor moves rather than 1 large radical revision that might drive them away entirely. 

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


----------



## rickandcindy23 (Jun 24, 2006)

Alan, that is a great analogy.  I love to read your posts.  

John, I think Carolinian makes great points and I appreciate the regular banter that Steve has with several of you.  I use points and also use weeks within RCI.  Points are new, but I spend hours per week searching availability for both points trades and weeks trades.  I have to say that points trades are just too expensive for me.  

I can travel to Orlando and stay in a two bedroom unit at Vistana Villages for $440 MF + RCI trade fee= $589  (for now)

If I PFD the same week for 45,500 points it costs me more @ 97 cents per point X 57,500 points + $99  + my $26.00 PFD fee.  That totals $682.75  

Hawaii I pay the $589, but if I want to stay in most resorts I have to PFD two weeks and use 88,000 points (kind of a guess right now) which is  $853.60+ 99 + $52 (PFD)=$1004.60

You might say it is more fair, but I don't think so because it is my pocketbook.


----------



## skimble (Jun 26, 2006)

*The Law of Diminishing Returns*

At what point will this come back to bite them?  A 10% increase may seem nominal to RCI, but your average timesharer does have options. 
First ________ Bank about 13 years ago decided to increase their profit margin by pulling a minor little shananigan-- they increased late fees and did a few things to insure more people would end up paying them. 
No exageration, 80% of their customers did the silent walk, and the company went out of business.  
There IS a point at which the consumer will make his/her decision.  And, even those who don't understand timeshareing have choices.... Sell, rent or use/give.


----------



## skimble (Jun 26, 2006)

RCI has a guaranteed deposit from all resorts that deal with them.  Other than that, they rely on owners.  With them being the leader of the pack in pricing, they will take the first hit when people decide they've had enough.
They've obviously done the research, and they are confident in the fact that people will continue to use this business at this price threshold.  
They will reach a breaking point.  It's not greed; it's laissez-faire economics.  No need to complain.  I've never complained about the fees, but I asure you this year my So Cal Beach weeks (3 of them) will be deposited with the internal exchange company or DAE.


----------



## geekette (Jun 26, 2006)

skimble said:
			
		

> RCI has a guaranteed deposit from all resorts that deal with them.



Could you please elaborate?  I did not know about this.


----------



## AwayWeGo (Jun 26, 2006)

*Source Of R.C.I. Inventory*




			
				skimble said:
			
		

> RCI has a guaranteed deposit from all resorts that deal with them.


At 1 of the earliest modern era timeshare sales tours we took -- 1 which covered Timeshare 101 & RCI Exchange 101 -- we asked the sales guy how we could be assured that a resort we might want to exchange into would actually have availability when we wanted to go.  That was in 2002 or so. 

"Simple," he said.  "Every timeshare resort affiliated with RCI is required to place on deposit with RCI 10% of their unsold weeks for exchange to RCI members." 

Later I repeated that to somebody more knowledgeable who said that's total baloney.  So I don't know what to think. 

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


----------



## timeos2 (Jun 26, 2006)

There are no deposits guaranteed from a member resort unless RCI/II has made an extraordinary agreement with the reort to do so. That type of special arrangement would usually involve a developer and unsold inventory not a "regular", owner controlled resort.


----------



## quiltergal (Jun 26, 2006)

I can verify it's actually going to increase.  I copied the verbage below from the Raintree Vacation Club Members Only site.

You can purchase a Guest Certificate for US$49 for either
RCI Weeks or RCI Points.
To make an External Exchange for RCI Weeks or RCI Points,
contact a Raintree Vacation Guide:
From US and Canada 1 800 424 6532
From Mexico 01 800 667 27 11
From Mexico City 5283 0835
International (317) 805 9167 (USA)
*EXCHANGE FEES (as of September 10, 2006)*
RCI Weeks: Domestic US$164 International US$199
RCI Points: 1-2 Nights US$49 3-4 Nights US$79
5-7 Nights US$99


----------



## taffy19 (Jun 26, 2006)

timeos2 said:
			
		

> There are no deposits guaranteed from a member resort unless RCI/II has made an extraordinary agreement with the reort to do so. That type of special arrangement would usually involve a developer and unsold inventory not a "regular", owner controlled resort.


At one time there was such a guarantee because they told us that too when we bought in the 1980s. I don't know if this is still true today and certainly not if the resort is sold out completely and run by the HOA for the owners mainly without a developer behind it.


----------



## geekette (Jun 26, 2006)

iconnections said:
			
		

> At one time there was such a guarantee because they told us that too when we bought in the 1980s. I don't know if this is still true today and certainly not if the resort is sold out completely and run by the HOA for the owners mainly without a developer behind it.



Who is "they"?  I'm not too likely to believe anyone in the sales office.


----------



## taffy19 (Jun 27, 2006)

geekette said:
			
		

> Who is "they"? I'm not too likely to believe anyone in the sales office.


The resorts where we bought at in the 1980s because RCI must have required it then. However, we were told also that red weeks would trade into red weeks only or to white and blue but a blue week could not trade into a white or red week unless it was in the last 45 days, when red, white and blue were available to everyone. I don't know how well the system worked for white or blue weeks but it worked well for us with the red weeks.

I also remember that a one bedroom would trade into a one bedroom only unless you had a resort that was clever enough to put five beds into a one bedroom unit. Because of that, we traded up several times from a one bedroom to a two bedroom unit because we would tell RCI that there were five people in our party.  

The whole RCI system is so different today because it's another company running it and they do so much more besides exchanges plus it is so much more expensive too.


----------



## Carolinian (Jun 27, 2006)

I guess you are referring to many of the multi-resort developers going to points.  That is primarly becuase a points system allows them to keep selling sold out locations by deeded points elsewhere and telling their buyers ''points are points.''

Looking at the tremendous market resistance to points systems, I look at things like the numbers for Sunterra in Europe on the vogas.com site.  In spite of not even offering a weeks-based option for many years on new sales, and doing all they can to strongarim existing members into switching to points, Sunterra still has more weeks-based members than points-based members. 






			
				timeos2 said:
			
		

> Don't need no stinkin' survey!  The sales reports prove that points are were the action is.  What people pay out of pocket is much more telling than any poll could ever be even if they were scientific (those you have quoted in the past are not).
> 
> As for the points groups that "fled" to II remember they are mostly points based and are only using the II weeks system to gain a priority for their points members!  How does that favor  or show a preference for weeks except to continue the long tradition of upgrading?  And from what I hear on the grapevine there are one or two of those groups that switched to II that now are wondering if they made a good move.  The grass is always greener...


----------



## Carolinian (Jun 27, 2006)

*Re: Same boat new captain - NOT!*

Does this mean that you contend that by dealing with any energy company, we should expect them to behave like Enron, just because they are in the same business???? 

Actually, some of the independents have shown a tremendous amount of integrity in this area.  The DAE organization, for example, discovered that their former Swiss office was renting exchange deposits to the general public, which DAE does NOT allow.  Their response was swift and brutal.  They kicked the Swiss office out of the organization.  I wish some of the big exchange companies had this level of integrity!




			
				PerryM said:
			
		

> Of course, relying on any company to arrange an exchange places oneself in exactly the same position we face with II and RCI – we agree to their rules and regulations, even if one of them is to willy-nilly change them to maximize their stockholders profits.
> 
> The best way to exchange, at free market rates, is to simply rent your unit.  Granted you have to declare the rental income but the cash you get can be used anyway you want.  Lock in a juicy holiday week and rent for 3-5 times the MF and you can then rent a bunch of those cheap RCI Gold Crowns.
> 
> ...


----------



## JimJ (Jun 27, 2006)

The increase in exchange fees is probably going to have to cover the cost of hiring those who can fix the newly screwed up RCI website.


----------



## Carolinian (Jun 27, 2006)

*Another survey*

Here another one of those surveys which the fans of RCI are probably not going to like:

TimeshareTalk (mostly UK viewership) concluded June 24, 2006

''How would you rate the service provided by RCI?"
Exceptional      4%
Very Good        6%
Good               9%
Average          14%
Poor               17%
Very Poor        29%
Abysmal          21%

334 respondents


----------



## geekette (Jun 28, 2006)

JimJ said:
			
		

> The increase in exchange fees is probably going to have to cover the cost of hiring those who can fix the newly screwed up RCI website.



I don't think so.  

IT in Indy is a pretty closeknit community - we call each other when job opportunities arise so we can steer clear of bad scenes.  RCI would be a 10 minute commute for me but they couldn't possibly pay me enough to work for them.  Major release every Saturday night?  Who but entry level would take a job under those circumstances??

Maybe in retirement I'll be a VC part-time for the free resort weeks, but I would not subject myself to their IT management.


----------

