# Exchange for Profit: The Tugger's debate--revisited.



## skimble (Dec 1, 2012)

In the past, people would post questions about renting their exchange weeks.  Debates would ensue about the ethics of it:  
Some Tuggers argued that an exchange is like an ownership-- you have rights to the week, and therefore you should be able to use it in any way you see fit, including renting it.  
Others would argue that the exchange companies set rules prohibiting the rental of exchange weeks, and we are bound by these rules.  Violators would lose their membership privileges and be denied the ability to check in.  And, they could lose all future reservations.  So, there was a risk.  
Tuggers would debate about how-- if these rules were not in place, profiteers could deplete the system of prime weeks and utilize them for self-serving purposes.  In fact, if it were done right, one could book a series of primes, rent them, and make a decent living.  
The consequence were discussed extensively-- the system would get depleted of prime weeks quickly, leaving very little to offer the average exchanger.  Rental offerings could undercut the cost of maintenance fees taking away all benefits to ownership. Tuggers would get irate over the thought of someone booking their exchange week and using it to rent for profit.

The risk of getting caught was huge-- loss of exchange weeks and membership, renters turned away.  And, there were stories floating around about people who got caught (or were those hypothetical?)

Something has changed.   
There are a LOT of people renting exchange weeks out there.  I understand there are mini-systems with their Points.  And, I understand those Points members like Wyndham, Worldmark and HGVC have the right book weeks and rent them.  But they are not allowed to rent weeks outside their own system.  Yet, there seems to be nothing stopping these people.  
There are tons of exchangers renting-- on the open market, on Redweek.  
The rental market for prime weeks is often undercutting maintenance fees.  

What has changed?  Why are the exchange companies letting this happen?  Don't they realize this is undercutting the value of ownership?


----------



## ronparise (Dec 1, 2012)

skimble said:


> The consequence were discussed extensively-- the system would get depleted of prime weeks quickly, leaving very little to offer the average exchanger. Rental offerings could undercut the cost of maintenance fees taking away all benefits to ownership.
> 
> What has changed?  Why are the exchange companies letting this happen?  Don't they realize this is undercutting the value of ownership?



I think you are off base with your assumption that if folks were allowed to rent exchanges, the system would get depleted of prime weeks quickly.

I would suggest that because there are so few prime weeks and so many folks that want them, the prime weeks are depleted quickly with or without pressure from the rental crowd.. The average exchanger is screwed anyway.

No one that rents their weeks,  rents them for less than maintenance fees, unless they have to. We rent for as much as the market will bear. Its just that lots of times thats less than maintenance fees. You are right that this fair rent to mf ratio has taken all the reasons to own a timeshare away for most timeshares, but you are wrong to blame the guy thats renting his stuff. 


I dont think anything has changed. There are still folks that rent their exchanges and it still violates the rules of exchange companies. And if they get caught they will pay the penalty.


----------



## SueDonJ (Dec 1, 2012)

I can't say whether the exchange companies are more likely these days to turn a blind eye towards the blatant rule violations, but I can say that I'll be sorely disappointed if ever TUG's accepted stance turns a blind eye to them.  There's a difference between learning the various timeshare companies' rules and their loopholes and taking advantage of that knowledge, compared to a blatant disregard for the rules.  It might be a fine line but it wouldn't be good if TUG crossed it.  IMO.


----------



## VacationForever (Dec 1, 2012)

If you do a quick scan on eBAY, I can tell that most rentals are really exchanged weeks and I keep hoping RCI and II will catch these folks.  I also wonder if / when RCI and II catch these folks/weeks, will the buyer of the rental week be left without a room when they check in.  Has anyone heard such stories?

When you look at TUG last minute rentals I also see postings that make me conclude that TUGgers are advertising exchanged weeks.   My opinion is that TUG is facilitating such violations.  

I have never rented a week nor I have put a week up for rent.  At some point if I were to rent I would only rent from owners of the resorts as opposed to exchanged weeks.


----------



## memereDoris (Dec 1, 2012)

sptung said:


> When you look at TUG last minute rentals I also see postings that make me conclude that TUGgers are advertising exchanged weeks.   My opinion is that TUG is facilitating such violations.
> 
> I have never rented a week nor I have put a week up for rent.  At some point if I were to rent I would only rent from owners of the resorts as opposed to exchanged weeks.



I rent on Ebay, TUG and other sites.  My rentals are all owned weeks and Wyndham points.  I have never rented an exchange nor plan to in the future.  I own enough timeshares to be gone all winter but due to circumstances, I have been renting them out for the past few years.  

I am curious as to how you would know unless you contacted the seller that these rentals are exchanges.  Only a few I have seen are blatantly obvious.  Some are possibly exchanges but I can't be sure.  

Reporting these rentals to the exchange companies is an option if this really bothers you.  The exchange companies would be happy to hear from you.


----------



## VacationForever (Dec 1, 2012)

memereDoris said:


> I rent on Ebay, TUG and other sites.  My rentals are all owned weeks and Wyndham points.  I have never rented an exchange nor plan to in the future.  I own enough timeshares to be gone all winter but due to circumstances, I have been renting them out for the past few years.
> 
> I am curious as to how you would know unless you contacted the seller that these rentals are exchanges.  Only a few I have seen are blatantly obvious.  Some are possibly exchanges but I can't be sure.
> 
> Reporting these rentals to the exchange companies is an option if this really bothers you.  The exchange companies would be happy to hear from you.



I tend to look at Westin, Marriott, Four Seasons and you can tell from the pricing and I have even seen "I will pay for a guest certificate from II".


----------



## skimble (Dec 1, 2012)

memereDoris said:


> I rent on Ebay, TUG and other sites.  My rentals are all owned weeks and Wyndham points.  I have never rented an exchange nor plan to in the future.  I own enough timeshares to be gone all winter but due to circumstances, I have been renting them out for the past few years.
> 
> I am curious as to how you would know unless you contacted the seller that these rentals are exchanges.  Only a few I have seen are blatantly obvious.  Some are possibly exchanges but I can't be sure.
> 
> Reporting these rentals to the exchange companies is an option if this really bothers you.  The exchange companies would be happy to hear from you.



Why so defensive?


----------



## skimble (Dec 1, 2012)

ronparise said:


> I think you are off base with your assumption that if folks were allowed to rent exchanges, the system would get depleted of prime weeks quickly.
> 
> I would suggest that because there are so few prime weeks and so many folks that want them, the prime weeks are depleted quickly with or without pressure from the rental crowd.. The average exchanger is screwed anyway.
> 
> ...



Those who are in the know in the Wyndham system deplete it of prime weeks quickly.  There is a guy (in particular) who has a website dedicated to the weeks he has booked through Wyndham that he rents.  He grabs summer coastal Monterey, CA weeks (rare.)  He offers a bunch of locations that are rare.  He knows the system and he knows when to book them-- 6 am 12 months out.  
Things have changed... and it's not really stemming from owners.  
True, owners have done this for a long time, and they've gotten away with it.  But... it's changed.  Now, there are owners who are using their points and premium access to book prime weeks for rental income.  AND, RCI is doing the same-- not just through their website.  
The mini-systems are also renting the primes.  In fact, there are shills on Redweek who rent weeks.


----------



## skimble (Dec 1, 2012)

Diamond Resorts has a rule against renting exchange weeks.  This is good in the sense that it protects average exchangers from the pros who would deplete the system for personal gain-- rental profits.  
However, as part of the sales presentation I went to in Lake Tahoe, the sales representative from DRI told me I COULD rent those weeks because nobody really monitors it.  And, he said... plenty of people do.


----------



## memereDoris (Dec 2, 2012)

skimble said:


> Why so defensive?



Not necessarily defensive.  I have reported some renters to RCI and am not ashamed of it.  I play within the rules.  I also believe exchanges should not be rented within systems that don't allow it.

I just hadn't noticed that many of them.

I have not looked at Marriott, Hyatt, Four Seasons or Westin because I don't own any of those.  Wyndham allows me to rent my units so I do.

I purchased my timeshares to use, but health issues have interfered with our travels.  Hopefully, this spring is the last season that I have to rent.  Things are looking up.


----------



## Carolinian (Dec 2, 2012)

skimble said:


> Diamond Resorts has a rule against renting exchange weeks.  This is good in the sense that it protects average exchangers from the pros who would deplete the system for personal gain-- rental profits.
> However, as part of the sales presentation I went to in Lake Tahoe, the sales representative from DRI told me I COULD rent those weeks because nobody really monitors it.  And, he said... plenty of people do.



DRI does a lot of renting itself, sometimes for less than m/f to the general public.

Of course, some of that they own themselves, and with a points system, they can cherry pick their own system for rentals.

What is particularly bad is what happened at Wychnor Park timeshare in the UK.  Sunterra had bought this from its original developer, and it later got passed to DRI.  DRI told the fixed week owners that they were going to close the resort if the fixed week owners did not give up their weeks, to be replaced either by DRI points or a fixed week at another resort.  They said they had the votes with their weeks in the DRI points club to do that.  The fixed week owners fumed but caved.  DRI told their points members that this would open up member inventory at Wychnor Park, but instead what they have been doing with that inventory they extorted from the fixed week owners is to rent it to the general public.


----------



## Carolinian (Dec 2, 2012)

Airline revenue protection units regularly monitor eBay and other sites to catch people violating the rules and selling ff miles or tickets based on them.  It would make sense for exchange companies to do the same.  When caught, they cancel tickets, cancel ff accounts, revoke miles, etc.

Of course, RCI is a huge hypocrite when they rent out exchange deposits themselves.  Between RCI's own rentals, and the rentals you have picked up on by members, no wonder it is harder and harder for members to find decent exchanges at RCI.



skimble said:


> In the past, people would post questions about renting their exchange weeks.  Debates would ensue about the ethics of it:
> Some Tuggers argued that an exchange is like an ownership-- you have rights to the week, and therefore you should be able to use it in any way you see fit, including renting it.
> Others would argue that the exchange companies set rules prohibiting the rental of exchange weeks, and we are bound by these rules.  Violators would lose their membership privileges and be denied the ability to check in.  And, they could lose all future reservations.  So, there was a risk.
> Tuggers would debate about how-- if these rules were not in place, profiteers could deplete the system of prime weeks and utilize them for self-serving purposes.  In fact, if it were done right, one could book a series of primes, rent them, and make a decent living.
> ...


----------



## ronparise (Dec 2, 2012)

skimble said:


> Those who are in the know in the Wyndham system deplete it of prime weeks quickly.  There is a guy (in particular) who has a website dedicated to the weeks he has booked through Wyndham that he rents.  He grabs summer coastal Monterey, CA weeks (rare.)  He offers a bunch of locations that are rare.  He knows the system and he knows when to book them-- 6 am 12 months out.
> Things have changed... and it's not really stemming from owners.
> True, owners have done this for a long time, and they've gotten away with it.  But... it's changed.  Now, there are owners who are using their points and premium access to book prime weeks for rental income.  AND, RCI is doing the same-- not just through their website.
> The mini-systems are also renting the primes.  In fact, there are shills on Redweek who rent weeks.



I rent the timeshares I own

First a fact check

The "Club Wyndham" system allows owners at a specific resort to make reservations at that resort 13 months in advance (advanced reservation priority) These arp reservations have to be made on the phone and the call center opens at 8 am east coast time. the phones work as well for me as they do for any other owner, and we all have an equal chance of getting the reservation we want

In Wyndhams other system "Worldmark", (I suspect that this is the one you are thinking of because its the system with the Monterey, CA resort) reservations open online for all owners at 6 am pacific time 13 months in advance Again every owner has the same chance of getting what they want

No doubt that if you want a reservation at the Monterey property you will be shut out if you wait a month after reservations open. There are just 33 units here and over 200000 worldmark owners. As you suggest most owners will not get a reservation at this place, but the fact is all owners have equal access and an equal chance. That your friend is able top get several reservations to rent here is not due to his practice of renting them, Its because he knows certain "tricks" and is able to beat the 13 month rule and make his reservation ahead of 13 months. These "tricks" are well known and not secret.

the fact is that these few rooms at Monterey will be reserved early. Only a few lucky or smart Worldmark owners will get to see this place, That most wont is not due to the actions of the folks that rent their reservations. You have the very same chance to get a reservation there as they do

My point is that high demand /low supply weeks are just that...and very few owners or exchangers will be able to snag one of them. It doesent matter if my intent is to rent them, give them to my daughter and grandkids, or use them myself. I have to get that reservation in my name first. And you and I have exactly the same chance of snagging that reservation (little or none)

Now for my pet peeve.

You and others seem to imply that if I rent out a week that I own for money, my use is some how inferior to your personal use of the same week. I disagree....The key word here is "use".  That I use what I own to make a dollar or two is in no way inferior to your use.(whale watching or whatever) and I would add, my use in no way infringes on yours


By the way I dont rent rci or II exchanges. I have plenty to keep me busy with my fixed weeks, Wyndham points and Worldmark credits, operating within the rules...RCI and II are nothing more to me than a dumping ground for my mistakes


----------



## AwayWeGo (Dec 2, 2012)

*You Typed A Mouthful.*




ronparise said:


> You and others seem to imply that if I rent out a week that I own for money, my use is some how inferior to your personal use of the same week. I disagree....The key word here is "use".  That I use what I own to make a dollar or two is in no way inferior to your use.(whale watching or whatever) and I would add, my use in no way infringes on yours


You are correct, sir.

Same goes when I use my deeded floating non-Wyndham unit to nail down a prime high-demand week, then rent that out for cash or deposit it for major TPUs.  

The deeded & paid-for time is mine to use as I prefer, just so long as I pay my fees on time & make my reservations & deposits & rentals, etc., within the rules. 

The idea that timeshare renters & rentees, likewise exchangers & exchangees, are 2nd class citz. next to owner-users is bunk & hogwash & codswollop.

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


----------



## dougp26364 (Dec 2, 2012)

Never mind


----------



## ace2000 (Dec 2, 2012)

ronparise said:


> Now for my pet peeve.
> 
> You and others seem to imply that if I rent out a week that I own for money, *my use is some how inferior to your personal use of the same week*.


 
Since I'm not a renter (or much of one), I do feel that your use to rent is inferior to my personal use.  That's how it works, everyone gets to fulfil their own selfish interests in today's world, and takes the side of their own selfish interests.


----------



## bogey21 (Dec 2, 2012)

Seems to me that "Owners" should have the right to do what they please with their Week or Weeks they acquire using their Weeks (or Points).  When I acquired my Sabal Palms Week (pre-construction) many years ago Marriott not only told me that I could rent my Week, but also that they would help me select a most desirable  rentable Week and would rent it for me, at a profit for me I might add.  This I did successfully for years.

I bought my Week.  I paid for it and should be able to do what I want with it.  If I am unable to use my Week I should be able to rent it.  We probably all agree on that.  But how is that any different from owning more Weeks (or Points with which to acquire Weeks) knowing that I can't use them all and choosing to rent out the Weeks I acquire with them.

If I choose to deposit my Week with RCI, II or any other Exchange Company I should be able to exchange it for any Week I can and to use the Week acquired in the same manner as if I owned it in the first place.  Once I make the exchange I should have the same rights with the acquired Week  as the original Owner.

George

Note that I have sold all but one of my many Weeks I once owned and am speaking pretty much as an observer rather than an owner.


----------



## ace2000 (Dec 2, 2012)

bogey21 said:


> If I choose to deposit my Week with RCI, II or any other Exchange Company I should be able to exchange it for any Week I can and to use the Week acquired in the same manner as if I owned it in the first place. Once I make the exchange I should have the same rights with the acquired Week as the original Owner.
> 
> George


 
It really comes down to the rules that RCI sets, regardless of how we all feel about it. RCI will have to balance their desire for profits with the loudest segments of the customer base. 

I honestly don't know who's more important to RCI, the renters or the non-renters? Seems like both are pretty important.


----------



## SueDonJ (Dec 2, 2012)

bogey21 said:


> Seems to me that "Owners" should have the right to do what they please with their Week or Weeks they acquire using their Weeks (or Points).  When I acquired my Sabal Palms Week (pre-construction) many years ago Marriott not only told me that I could rent my Week, but also that they would help me select a most desirable  rentable Week and would rent it for me, at a profit for me I might add.  This I did successfully for years.
> 
> I bought my Week.  I paid for it and should be able to do what I want with it.  If I am unable to use my Week I should be able to rent it.  We probably all agree on that.  But how is that any different from owning more Weeks (or Points with which to acquire Weeks) knowing that I can't use them all and choosing to rent out the Weeks I acquire with them.
> 
> ...



Marriott Owners still have the right to rent out their Weeks (and DC Points) privately or through Marriott's inhouse rental service.  Granted, like you say the rental terms offered today by Marriott are much less lucrative than they used to be, and they don't guarantee that they'll accept every Week for their service.

But it isn't Marriott whose rules prohibit renting of II exchanges.  Those are II's rules, and from what I gather reading this thread RCI and other exchange companies also have similar rules.  No sense blaming or badmouthing the timeshare companies for rules that they didn't implement and cannot enforce.  IMO there's also no sense in claiming that if they can do it we should be able to do it also - the facts are, the companies have a lot more rights than the owners do and that's never going to change.

IMO where the timeshare and exchange companies allow private rentals, the owners who do it aren't doing anything legally or morally wrong.  (Although if anyone's asking, I wouldn't mind if the rules changed to prohibit at least private rentals of high-demand intervals.)  But anyone who's renting out timeshares in violation of any rules IS doing something wrong and I wish the companies who set the rules would work harder to enforce them.  And if TUG's policies are actually facilitating "illegal" rentals as sptung theorized above, I'm not happy about that.  I don't think TUG should promote a, "it's technically illegal but go on and do it anyway" mantra.


----------



## mommaO3 (Dec 2, 2012)

Those mega renters on ebay are also connected (or the same co) to pcc.
They use seller's RCI accounts to grab Disney weeks and other high demand weeks and rent through ebay.
So it is very hard to catch "each owners" in RCI's point of view, because it is not one mega owner, those weeks come from many different owners and controlled by one pcc company.
I believe they take majority DVC inventory from RCI and rent.
It is a big damage for other RCI members like me but there's no clear solution to stop it.

By the way, I rent my weeks lower than maintenance fees due to last minute plan changes occasionally.
For example, rented my four seasons aviara x-mas week for under 2k which is $300 lower than MF.
So not all cheap rentals are from exchange weeks. Some owners decide to take cut rather than sit it empty.


----------



## memereDoris (Dec 2, 2012)

There is also another side of the coin when looking at renters of weeks.

These (mega)renters pay their maintenance fees as compared to a lot of other owners which are delinquent in recent years.  This helps keep my fees down.

Also, a lot of these renters own prime fixed weeks so they are taking nothing that I would have had access to anyhow.

I am actually envious of those who have managed to make a business of this.  When I manage to rent out 75% of my units, I am surprised.  Then the rest get deposited into RCI, II or other systems for future use.  About 50% of my units do not make great rentals since they were purchased for my own use and the weeks (and locations) are not great rentals.  But since I enjoy these locations it works for me.

Renting out an exchange is a totally different scenario.  This cannot be compared to owners renting out their own units.


----------



## lcml11 (Dec 2, 2012)

ronparise said:


> I rent the timeshares I own
> 
> First a fact check
> 
> ...



As a owner at a number of timeshare resorts, use is use is use to me, or for that matter, unused.  I could care less as long as the maintance fees are paid for the resorts I own at (sorry about the narrow perspective limiting to the resorts I own at).


----------



## skimble (Dec 2, 2012)

The bottom line is greed.  
Whether it's RCI/II skimming the cream and renting it for profit or the little guy, it corrupts the system.  Unfortunately, RCI and II have taken a stronghold on the practice they forbid; they violate their own rule.  That's Greedy!
Then there are those mini-systems that have opened their systems to a greedy practice.  If you buy Wyndham Oceanside then by all means, rent every bit of it.  But allowing owners to use points to book week 52 in Hawaii to rent is a flaw in the mini-systems.  
In practice, yes... you are not breaking the rules.  Thereby, you can do it with good conscience.  However, from the macro-perspective, the protocol is flawed.  Strong inventory selection maintains a strong base of dues-paying owners.   

Diamond doesn't allow it.  Why?  They know it depletes the system of prime inventory, and in the end, it devalues ownership.  Yet, the hypocrites don't follow their own rules.  

RCI and II can't beat them, so they've joined them.  And, he who controls the gold makes the rules.  

How long will it be before Marriott, Wyndham, Worldmark, etc. do exactly what Diamond has done?  How long before these mini-systems take advantage of this same rule-- and skim the prime inventory to rent for their own profit?  The operative word is profit--it's only a matter of time.


----------



## Carolinian (Dec 3, 2012)

The only way around it is to own fixed weeks and either own to use or, if exchanging, only use exchange companies that do not play the rental to the public game.  Any points based system is highly vulnerable to this, as are floating week systems.




skimble said:


> The bottom line is greed.
> Whether it's RCI/II skimming the cream and renting it for profit or the little guy, it corrupts the system.  Unfortunately, RCI and II have taken a stronghold on the practice they forbid; they violate their own rule.  That's Greedy!
> Then there are those mini-systems that have opened their systems to a greedy practice.  If you buy Wyndham Oceanside then by all means, rent every bit of it.  But allowing owners to use points to book week 52 in Hawaii to rent is a flaw in the mini-systems.
> In practice, yes... you are not breaking the rules.  Thereby, you can do it with good conscience.  However, from the macro-perspective, the protocol is flawed.  Strong inventory selection maintains a strong base of dues-paying owners.
> ...


----------



## benyu2010 (Dec 3, 2012)

There is a lot of fuss about renters and rental-for-profit. Why should one feel inferior or shame becuase he made a profit morally and legally? Renters are part of the market, directly or indirectly pay into MFs and support the operations of resorts. could every owner use all his weeks or afford it empty every year? Be careful what you wish for, you may have all weeks available for reservation.


----------



## ronparise (Dec 3, 2012)

skimble said:


> The bottom line is greed.
> Whether it's RCI/II skimming the cream and renting it for profit or the little guy, it corrupts the system.  Unfortunately, RCI and II have taken a stronghold on the practice they forbid; they violate their own rule.  That's Greedy!
> Then there are those mini-systems that have opened their systems to a greedy practice.  If you buy Wyndham Oceanside then by all means, rent every bit of it.  But allowing owners to use points to book week 52 in Hawaii to rent is a flaw in the mini-systems.
> In practice, yes... you are not breaking the rules.  Thereby, you can do it with good conscience.  However, from the macro-perspective, the protocol is flawed.  Strong inventory selection maintains a strong base of dues-paying owners.
> ...



Dont look now, Wyndham is already there


Wyndham Worldwide (the parent of Wyndham Vacation Ownership, has another division called Wyndham Exchange and Rentals. RCI is their exchange Company and the rental companies are Resort Quest, The Resort Company, Hoseasons, Cottages4You, James Villa Holidays, Novasol, Landal Green Parks, Canvas Holidays and Extraholidays.com

We Wyndham owners can assign our weeks to Extra Holidays and they will try to rent them for us (40% commission) In fact the Wyndham sales force encourages new sales, by offering this possibility...Rent what you dont use yourself, to help cover the maintenance fees for what you do use.  The individual resorts also contract with Extra Holidays to rent their foreclosed inventory and even inventory in default. Wyndham can also rent their unsold inventory. Wyndham  also gets into the trust within about 2 months of check in and grabs unreserved inventory to rent. (upsetting some owners)


I cant speak to the other systems, only Wyndham, but the problem with access to prime weeks is not a problem created by those of us that make reservations and rent them. The problem is systemic and was caused when timeshare developers created the concept of floating weeks and carried it to an extreme with the creation of minisystems and points.

heres one example Im familiar with. I own floating weeks at a resort where with the exception of a couple of special event weeks everything floats across the entire year. This resort offers the additional flexibility of split week reservations and "bonus weeks" (pay a second mf and you can have a second week)  Forget prime weeks, it is possible, and it happens every year, that some owners pay their maintenance fees, but wait too long to make a reservation. They get shut out...maintenance fees are paid, but no weeks are left for them to reserve. And this has nothing to do with folks that rent their week. 

To my knowledge this has never happened in a points system. ie there is always something to reserve.  but as you point out to get the prime weeks in a points system you have to know how the system works and work it to your advantage.

In Wyndham the owners at a particular resort get first crack at a reservation. The rest of us have to wait 3 months before we can reserve the leftovers.   Using your example: If I own own at Oceanside and I want week 52 in Hawaii, I have to wait for all the Hawaii owners to make their reservations.  They have from 13 months in advance to 10 months in advance of check in to lock one up. Then at the 10 month mark it becomes a free for all and the reservations are open to all of us. And the way it works in practice is that there is very little if any  really prime stuff left at the 10 month mark for us to grab. My example is in New Orleans at La Belle Maison.  Last April, 10 months ahead of the 2013 Mardi Gras, (a prime week by the way) there were exactly zero reservations available to Wyndham points owners. Those pesky La Belle owners had snapped them all up in their Advanced Reservation Priority window of opportunity.  By the way, the same thing happened the week before for Superbowl 2013 

If I read your post correctly, that would be ok with you, even if some of those owners are renting  those Mardi Gras and SuperBowl weeks for profit.

So with your permission....I just bought 770000 Wyndham points at La Belle Maison so I can go to the head of the line for the 2014 Mardi Gras. And any reservations I get, I will surly rent

Heres my point.... when I get up at 6am to be ready at 7am when the reservations website opens up, 10 months ahead of a reservation that I want to rent out. The "owners" have already had their shot at the prime stuff.  I am competing with the rest of the points ownership base for the leftovers....And its hard for me to equate "leftover" with "prime"


----------



## ronparise (Dec 3, 2012)

Carolinian said:


> The only way around it is to own fixed weeks and either own to use or, if exchanging, only use exchange companies that do not play the rental to the public game.  Any points based system is highly vulnerable to this, as are floating week systems.



I disagree with almost everything Carolinian says (perhaps its my bias against lawyers) but I agree with this.

If you want a guarantee, buy a fixed week. If you want flexibility buy a floater or buy points

and i would add....If you wanted or expected a guarantee, but bought into a points system, you will be disappointed


----------



## gnorth16 (Dec 3, 2012)

As long as everyone plays by the rules, I'm happy.  Some don't know the rules and others just ignore them.  Unfortunately I have learned that I can't control other people and what they do....I make the odd complaint to RCI or eBay, but that's it.


As well, I  think some people are jealous that others can make a quality business by renting TS's within the rules, or that they did not think of it themselves...


----------



## geekette (Dec 3, 2012)

some of it is sour grapes.  

I do not own in the same system as Ron, but it would be hard for me to be upset with him if he got up early on the day the reservation window opened and I did not.  If he has the week I want, why not rent from him vs griping that he's making a business, 'grabbing everything', etc.?

No, if Ron is the early bird, then I have no one to blame but myself for my not having landed the early worm.  We had an equal shot at it, he just got the edge while I hit the snooze alarm.


----------



## geekette (Dec 3, 2012)

also, I would be interested in how someone has determined that most listings here on Rentals Offered are exchanges???   I do not think this is the case at all.

Aren't there some systems that do charge an owner to put a ressie into someone elses name?  I would not let the term "guest certificate" *prove* anything, as that is an RCI term that seems to have been widely adopted.


----------



## SueDonJ (Dec 3, 2012)

geekette said:


> also, I would be interested in how someone has determined that most listings here on Rentals Offered are exchanges???   I do not think this is the case at all.
> 
> Aren't there some systems that do charge an owner to put a ressie into someone elses name?  I would not let the term "guest certificate" *prove* anything, as that is an RCI term that seems to have been widely adopted.



II uses the term "Guest Certificate" and charges a fee for it, but the rules say that II reservations and any GC attached to them cannot be bartered for cash or any other consideration.

If the resort is a Marriott and the rental ad mentions a GC or name-change fee, that's pretty much a guarantee that it's an II exchange being rented because Marriott doesn't use the term "GC" and doesn't charge an Owner to put another name on an owner's reservation.


----------



## skimble (Dec 3, 2012)

ronparise said:


> Dont look now, Wyndham is already there
> 
> 
> Wyndham Worldwide (the parent of Wyndham Vacation Ownership, has another division called Wyndham Exchange and Rentals. RCI is their exchange Company and the rental companies are Resort Quest, The Resort Company, Hoseasons, Cottages4You, James Villa Holidays, Novasol, Landal Green Parks, Canvas Holidays and Extraholidays.com
> ...



It's a case of goose and gander... good for both.  You're being smart-- using the system to your advantage-- playing by the rules, and I cannot fault you with that, and I don't.  Just understand, the 77k points you're buying to get Mardi Gras week will likely not be attainable in a few years-- I hope you aren't paying much.    
The exchange companies have FAR more leverage when it comes to gaining the system.
You are playing by the rules.  And, using the rules in the most advantageous way is not bad-- for you.  And, by that same token, skimming 20% of timeshare inventory (with 75% of that being comprised of primes) is a wise business decision for the exchange companies.  

My beef-- in its simplest form, timeshare exchanging should be be comprised of weeks in, weeks out.  But, it now resembles our US tax code.  Too many loopholes, too much top-down corruption.  I can't fault people who study the tax code and find lucrative loopholes--we all have those opportunities.


----------



## jnbsevy (Dec 5, 2012)

*Timeshares In Trouble*

As 5 year owners in a great resort chain, we were surprised to learn that "lots" of timeshares are deteriorating due to poor utilization. The owners then lose their equity. Everybody loses, it seems. 

Wyndham is apparently taking steps to make sure their properties are full, happy, and well kept up.

I appreciate individuals who successfully challenge giants like Trump and RCI by renting out their own timeshares and exchanges. *BRAVO!*

I want my own resorts to continue to be 5 star, first class. My family loves the vacations we've spent together there. We will certainly rent any weeks that we cannot use, and recommend that you do the same.

Being TUG members, we all know that if our resort is NOT up to snuff, we can sell and buy a better one on eBay for a few dollars and then do what we can to keep the good ones growing. That's what I consider being part of the solution.


----------



## jnbsevy (Dec 5, 2012)

*Got a phone call after posting*

I just got a weird phone call. "Mr. Watson" once had an international timeshare, he said, and thinks his member number has been confused with mine. 

My red flags went up.  I did not tell him my membership number, resort, or anything else.

I asked what his number is. He gave me a number. It wasn't anything like mine, and I said so. He said OK, and good bye.

Sounds like a phishing expedition to me.  Anybody else?


----------



## ronparise (Dec 5, 2012)

skimble said:


> It's a case of goose and gander... good for both.  You're being smart-- using the system to your advantage-- playing by the rules, and I cannot fault you with that, and I don't.  Just understand, the 77k points you're buying to get Mardi Gras week will likely not be attainable in a few years-- I hope you aren't paying much.
> The exchange companies have FAR more leverage when it comes to gaining the system.
> You are playing by the rules.  And, using the rules in the most advantageous way is not bad-- for you.  And, by that same token, skimming 20% of timeshare inventory (with 75% of that being comprised of primes) is a wise business decision for the exchange companies.
> 
> My beef-- in its simplest form, timeshare exchanging should be be comprised of weeks in, weeks out.  But, it now resembles our US tax code.  Too many loopholes, too much top-down corruption.  I can't fault people who study the tax code and find lucrative loopholes--we all have those opportunities.



I wonder what you see happening in the Wyndham system that will prevent me from reserving one (or several) Mardi Gras weeks in a few years.

Regarding your beef: exchanging should be weeks in and weeks out.  That may have been how things started, but even at the beginning the reason for an exchange company was to give the poor guy stuck with a mud week at a ski resort, or a winter week at the beach a chance at a nice vacation. The goal was always to try to trade up. In the end there are only so many "good: weeks, and a lot more "bad" ones. Just like a game of musical chairs; someone is going to be left out.

In todays world of points and credits and TPUs the old week for a week model is pretty much ancient history. as my young friends never tire of telling me...You gotta keep up


----------



## skimble (Dec 6, 2012)

ronparise said:


> I wonder what you see happening in the Wyndham system that will prevent me from reserving one (or several) Mardi Gras weeks in a few years.
> 
> Regarding your beef: exchanging should be weeks in and weeks out.  That may have been how things started, but even at the beginning the reason for an exchange company was to give the poor guy stuck with a mud week at a ski resort, or a winter week at the beach a chance at a nice vacation. The goal was always to try to trade up. In the end there are only so many "good: weeks, and a lot more "bad" ones. Just like a game of musical chairs; someone is going to be left out.
> 
> In todays world of points and credits and TPUs the old week for a week model is pretty much ancient history. as my young friends never tire of telling me...You gotta keep up



I likened my point of view to the US tax code for a reason.  (Trying not to invoke politics).)  From those who work the code for targeted revenue to those who work it for personal gain, the system is rot with problems.  Who pays the most?  The ignorant-- the average.
Exchange in/exchange out is the simple way of phrasing-- get the thumbs off the scale.  A prime should always have priority exchange into a prime.  But we know there are new developments that rate higher than their actaul worth-- that's thumbing or.  
 There are new users like the guy above (with 8 posts) who do not know the the rule and the consequence.  There are a LOT of owners like him out there.  The whole reason the big 2 exchange companies prohibit renting exchange weeks is that it leads to system exploitation.  RCI users will snatch up the Mardi Gras inventory for a quick profit.  The long term effect:  when average users see nothing desirable to exchange for, they will no longer patronize the system.  Less patronage effects the overall business model over time.    
However, the argument is more convoluted today when we have (court supported/tested) rentals fro the exchange companies.  
Why do I think your mardi gras will disappear?
1.  RCI/Wyndham read these boards-- plenty of proof exists.
2.  Wyndham controls inventory-- and you divulged a profit source.
3.  Other profiteers like you read these too... that means competition.
4.  Wyndham does not need to compete to do what you're doing-- they just need to earmark the prime rental sources.  And... they're greedy enough to shut you out.


----------



## ronparise (Dec 6, 2012)

skimble said:


> Why do I think your mardi gras will disappear?
> 1.  RCI/Wyndham read these boards-- plenty of proof exists.
> 2.  Wyndham controls inventory-- and you divulged a profit source.
> 3.  Other profiteers like you read these too... that means competition.
> 4.  Wyndham does not need to compete to do what you're doing-- they just need to earmark the prime rental sources.  And... they're greedy enough to shut you out.



1)  RCI and Wyndham reading this stuff doesn't mean they will see a problem they have to react to. We are no more than an irritation to them I think, like a mosquito on an elephants behind

2) Wyndham knows this week could be profitable to them. But the way I read the rules (assuming that they follow them) is that they dont grab inventory until just before check in

3)Of course there is competition. but there is honor even among thieves I think that there is enough business for all of us and Im not afraid of the competition. My experience has been what I call cooperative competition. (one example of how it can work is this : if you have the week for rent, and I find a tenant, we share in the profit)

4) I know I am eating the scraps that drop from Wyndhams table. But Wyndham has been a sloppy eater. and Im beting that that continues. If Im wrong and  If they clean up their act and dont leave anything for me, then they will have several million points to resell

Then they get their points back to sell again (no I didnt pay much for this stuff)


----------



## skimble (Dec 6, 2012)

jnbsevy said:


> As 5 year owners in a great resort chain, we were surprised to learn that "lots" of timeshares are deteriorating due to poor utilization. The owners then lose their equity. Everybody loses, it seems.
> 
> Wyndham is apparently taking steps to make sure their properties are full, happy, and well kept up.
> 
> ...



1.  The only thing that makes a resort prosperous is owners who pay their maintenance fees.  This gets complex because resorts grapple with delinquencies every year.  The question is-- what makes people forego their timeshare investment/obligation?  For many (most), it happens when they fail to perceive value.  
Why would they fail to see value?  TONS of things-- but for the sakes of arguing my initial point... unless you plan to use your timeshare at your resort every year and you own a fixed week, you are subject to the availability of the managed inventory.  When mini-systems snatch up, hold back, or create preferential rules that hinder an average owner's ability to make an adequate reservation or exchange, perceived value in the investment diminishes. 

Why is there hold-back inventory?  To appeal to the potential new-buyer... giving them a 64 pack of crayons where existing owners only have 16.  
Why do mini-systems hold back inventory?  There are deals that go on behind the scenes between RCI/II and the mini-systems.  

In the end, a resort that has 90% dues-paying owners spreads the cost accordingly in the same way a resort with 50% dues-payers spreads costs.  Both try to rent out the unpaid inventory to help the HOA (and management.)      
Yet, both resort can be in desirable locations.

In the medical industry, there's a thing called "Capitation."  To keep a medical facility operating year-round, not just during flu season, they need a consistent flow of cash.  This goes on behind the scenes with the insurance companies.  Just know, your insurance pays your doctor's office money-- even in the off-times, when you aren't using it.
Off-season timeshare owners pay a sort of "Capitation" cost, and we rely on them to pay these costs.  Even if they do not utilize the service they are paying for, the service HAS to be there for them when they do choose to use it.  Otherwise, they will stop paying, and the resort will go under.  
Outsiders who seize prime weeks at resorts for personal profit pick away at the availability of decent exchange inventory.  When decent exchanges go away, so do the dues-paying owners-- and that effects us all.


----------

