# Disgusted with Interval International



## AArbittier (Aug 25, 2009)

Well tell me how you would feel ! I own week one at Royal Sands. I called Interval International in January , 2007 to exchange this week 1  for 12/26/09 - 1/2/10 ,approx. 3 years later !!! I did what they told me , i did a "Deposit First " I was told that Royal Resort owners had priority over others trying to exchange into a Royal Resort !! I gave them the choice of ANY OF THE 5 Royal Resorts in Cancun PLUS the Royal Haciendas in Playa ( 6 choices total ). It is now almost September and they still have NOT been able to confirm an exchange. 
I am so depressed and fed up with Interval International. I call them many times a week and get the same story that it is done by a computer and they are just waiting for the next deposit.
I am at the point that i would never recommend them or renew my membership !!!!


----------



## alwysonvac (Aug 25, 2009)

AArbittier said:


> Well tell me how you would feel ! I own week one at Royal Sands. I called Interval International in January , 2007 to exchange this week 1  for 12/26/09 - 1/2/10 ,approx. 3 years later !!! I did what they told me , i did a "Deposit First " I was told that Royal Resort owners had priority over others trying to exchange into a Royal Resort !! I gave them the choice of ANY OF THE 5 Royal Resorts in Cancun PLUS the Royal Haciendas in Playa ( 6 choices total ). It is now almost September and they still have NOT been able to confirm an exchange.
> I am so depressed and fed up with Interval International. I call them many times a week and get the same story that it is done by a computer and they are just waiting for the next deposit.
> I am at the point that i would never recommend them or renew my membership !!!!



All weeks are not deposited into Interval International (II). II only has access to weeks that have been deposited. 

Week #52 is a high demand week - see II's travel demand index http://www.intervalworld.com/images/tdi-14.gif (click on the chart to make the image larger).
Owners who booked this high demand week, most likely will use or rent it. For example, take a look at the for Rent Ads on the TUG Marketplace for the Royal Resorts for week 52 - http://tug2.com/TimeshareMarketplace/default.aspx

When you get a chance, read the Timeshare 101 article on the TUG advice page regarding "Realistic timeshare exchange expectations" - http://www.tug2.net/advice/TimeShare-101.htm

Good Luck


----------



## dougp26364 (Aug 25, 2009)

Actually, looking at Interval's demand index shows week 52 and week 1 to be maxed on the demand index. However, if week 52 is sold as a premium fixed week at this resort, owners of that week may not be releasing it for exchange as mentioned in the post above. When you pay a premium for a week, you tend to use that week or rent it for profit rather than buying it to exchange. If there isn't a week available then no matter how strong the week your using to exchange back in might be, it won't happen. 

It could also be the Royals messing with your exchange in hopes of getting you to buy a week 52 to go along with your week 1. Never put manipulation above a resort. Especially if they can place the blame on one of the exchange companies.


----------



## timeos2 (Aug 25, 2009)

*It's not II its the rest of the world!*



dougp26364 said:


> It could also be the Royals messing with your exchange in hopes of getting you to buy a week 52 to go along with your week 1. Never put manipulation above a resort. Especially if they can place the blame on one of the exchange companies.



And remember that II will go along with ANY games that any resort wishes to play - you as a paying member are below the bottom of any pecking order.  

Never blame II for anything that can be passed off on you, your resort, your cash or your unreasonable desire for a fair trade. Doing so will have no effect in any case as II simply isn't a good company to attempt to deal with especially with place and hope deposits. Of course I'm not really seeing these complaints as we know II is flawless to many.  I just don't seem to have run across them yet.


----------



## mightywyrm (Aug 26, 2009)

timeos2 said:


> ... you as a paying member are below the bottom of any pecking order.  ...



This is an important point to understand.  

II's view is that your timeshare developer is an important _client _that drags along hundreds or even many thousands of _customers _like you and I.  Individually we are of little consequence, walking around blind without a cane, as we are.  We're on the hook with our subscriptions and maintenance fees, holding very few cards compared to the oligopoly of collaborating developers, exchange companies, and business partners.  

Of course, TUG and other sources can help combat the information disadvantages we have.  It's been a big help for me.


----------



## Quimby4 (Aug 26, 2009)

Why not open up your options and add more resorts to your request. The new Westin Cancun gets rave reviews and I'm sure there are others that compare to the Royals.  Good luck!


----------



## dougp26364 (Aug 26, 2009)

timeos2 said:


> And remember that II will go along with ANY games that any resort wishes to play - you as a paying member are below the bottom of any pecking order.
> 
> Never blame II for anything that can be passed off on you, your resort, your cash or your unreasonable desire for a fair trade. Doing so will have no effect in any case as II simply isn't a good company to attempt to deal with especially with place and hope deposits. Of course I'm not really seeing these complaints as we know II is flawless to many.  I just don't seem to have run across them yet.



Seems RCI does the same thing with "overbooking." 

I'm sure there is just NO WAY that a week 52 isn't available. I mean it's only the strongest week (along with week 1) according to the travel/demand index. I see just no way there shoudn't just be tons of NYE weeks lying around just waiting to be snapped up.

I wonder how many week 52's at this resort are available through Interval International rental networks?


----------



## dougp26364 (Aug 26, 2009)

mightywyrm said:


> This is an important point to understand.
> 
> II's view is that your timeshare developer is an important _client _that drags along hundreds or even many thousands of _customers _like you and I.  Individually we are of little consequence, walking around blind without a cane, as we are.  We're on the hook with our subscriptions and maintenance fees, holding very few cards compared to the oligopoly of collaborating developers, exchange companies, and business partners.
> 
> Of course, TUG and other sources can help combat the information disadvantages we have.  It's been a big help for me.



Don't lose sight that RCI views members in the exact same way. You are a member, not an owner with RCI or Interval. 

Memebrs do have a lot of power. You have the power to walk away from your membership. You don't have to give the exchange company your money or your week unless you're part of a coporate account (DRI with Interval or HGVC with RCI come to mind). If more members just refused to give them their weeks and refused to pay the subscription fee's, changes would have to be made in favor of the members.


----------



## myip (Aug 26, 2009)

dougp26364 said:


> Seems RCI does the same thing with "overbooking."
> 
> I'm sure there is just NO WAY that a week 52 isn't available. I mean it's only the strongest week (along with week 1) according to the travel/demand index. I see just no way there shoudn't just be tons of NYE weeks lying around just waiting to be snapped up.
> 
> I wonder how many week 52's at this resort are available through Interval International rental networks?



I did get confirmation on week 52 in the newest Royal resort.   I got the unit 1.5 years out.  It is mostly demand and supply...  Not too many folks will deposit week52 when they can easily rent it up above the maintenance fees


----------



## alwysonvac (Aug 26, 2009)

myip said:


> I did get confirmation on week 52 in the newest Royal resort.   I got the unit 1.5 years out.  It is mostly demand and supply...  Not too many folks will deposit week52 when they can easily rent it up above the maintenance fees



Interesting... don't know what unit size the OP was searching for since 2007. Perhaps the owner preference match failed due to unit size.

myip, what unit size did you get - studio, one bedroom or two bedroom?


----------



## T_R_Oglodyte (Aug 26, 2009)

dougp26364 said:


> Actually, looking at Interval's demand index shows week 52 and week 1 to be maxed on the demand index. However, if week 52 is sold as a premium fixed week at this resort, owners of that week may not be releasing it for exchange as mentioned in the post above. When you pay a premium for a week, you tend to use that week or rent it for profit rather than buying it to exchange. If there isn't a week available then no matter how strong the week your using to exchange back in might be, it won't happen.
> 
> It could also be the Royals messing with your exchange in hopes of getting you to buy a week 52 to go along with your week 1. Never put manipulation above a resort. Especially if they can place the blame on one of the exchange companies.



A similar situation arises in ski resorts where the prime ski weeks have been sold as fixed weeks, at premium pricing.  Generally people bought those weeks because they ski the resort that week almost every year.  The years they don't use the weeks, they can generally rent them out a premium rates.  Accordingly, very few of those prime fixed ski weeks ever make it into an exchange pool.  

In a points system more of those types of weeks will show up because those weeks generate sufficient points that the owners can get multiple weeks back from a deposit.

I don't know if that's what's going on at the Royals, but it sounds as if could be similar.  BTW - I've seen similar things with Club Regina in Mexico where Christmas and New Years weeks were also sold as fixed holiday weeks.


----------



## mightywyrm (Aug 26, 2009)

dougp26364 said:


> ... Memebrs do have a lot of power. You have the power to walk away from your membership. You don't have to give the exchange company your money or your week unless you're part of a coporate account (DRI with Interval or HGVC with RCI come to mind). If more members just refused to give them their weeks and refused to pay the subscription fee's, changes would have to be made in favor of the members.



I'd like to agree with you Doug, but this is not a complete picture...  

It is true that many of us can punish the exchange company, very slightly, by choosing not to play their game, but it doesn't follow that we have a lot of _power_.  We're inherently individual customers each holding one or possibly more cards, with no collaboration or spokesperson, presented with take-it-or-leave-it options by exchange companies working with developers and others to extract fees and advantageous trades from us, on their terms and while providing minimal information.  They control tens of thousands of inventory units.  They have teams of people designing marketing programs, they condescendingly try to hurry us into bad trades with faux congratulations, and they otherwise playing a zero-sum game with us.  They have client relationships with developers and other business entities that help them to exploit the market, and these mean far more to them than we do.  They have statistical information on which to predict outcomes, set prices, etc.  And more...

We are individuals hoping to have a great vacation (often getting it, but no guarantees).  If we don't like one exchange company, we do have options: stay at our home resorts (i.e., not trade), go to a different exchange company, or unload our units.  We have very weak bargaining positions relative to the exchange companies.  (Those with great intervals may well have better bargaining positions relative to other members, but that's a different matter.)

I also suspect that power is not the right term for the damage we could collectively do to II - _force _is.  We can apply force, but the result might well NOT be in favor of the members.  II might well respond by raising fees, booting out certain members, aggressively marketing their best inventory through other avenues (a la RCI?), go out of business and refuse to honor commitments, or who knows?  

That is, unless there is some militant advocacy group out there willing to apply this force to achieve a _specific _result(s).

I've been a customer of II's since '92, and I have angrily let my membership lapse for a few years after being treated very poorly (and damn unapologetically, I might add) by them.  I live in the real world, though, and for me the best course of action is to learn how to play their game.

I realize my comments aren't a complete picture either, but hopefully they're useful.  I'm irritated with the poor treatment I've received from II, but am not trying to be argumentative or anti-capitalist.


----------



## dougp26364 (Aug 27, 2009)

mightywyrm said:


> I'd like to agree with you Doug, but this is not a complete picture...
> 
> It is true that many of us can punish the exchange company, very slightly, by choosing not to play their game, but it doesn't follow that we have a lot of _power_.  We're inherently individual customers each holding one or possibly more cards, with no collaboration or spokesperson, presented with take-it-or-leave-it options by exchange companies working with developers and others to extract fees and advantageous trades from us, on their terms and while providing minimal information.  They control tens of thousands of inventory units.  They have teams of people designing marketing programs, they condescendingly try to hurry us into bad trades with faux congratulations, and they otherwise playing a zero-sum game with us.  They have client relationships with developers and other business entities that help them to exploit the market, and these mean far more to them than we do.  They have statistical information on which to predict outcomes, set prices, etc.  And more...
> 
> ...



If the business model becomes so bad that no one wants to use it anymore, things will change. The problem is, people have to stop using I.I. or RCI in mass to affect change. Over time, this may happen. There were reports of RCI sending out survey's to members and former members about why they didn't renew, are not renewing or would consider non-renewal. I'm hoping this might mean that there's been sufficient loss of membership that they recognize something is wrong yet are to stupid to see that it's greed. I suspect it's just wishful thinking. 

At any rate, until I'm convinced that RCI has made significant improvements in their weeks program, I won't play in their sandbox. I've picked my money up off the table and use my resort rather than give it to RCI to rent. If/when Interval's model falls to the level of RCI's weeks program, I'll do the same with them. 

I can use our DRI points for internal exchanges and, if Marriott get's their own internal exchange system going, I can go strictly internal with Marriott as well. That would leave only one resort that we own as an unafilliated resort and, I can either sell that week (or give it away) or keep it for personal use. At this point I pretty well have myself set up where we could avoid using either exchange company if we didn't want to use them. 

Boycotting either exchange company would bring them back to reality about who is REALLY the most important customer and it wouldn't be the developer winning that battle. The problem is getting the majority of member/owners all on the same back at the same time.


----------



## LisaH (Aug 27, 2009)

To the OP: do not despair (yet). I won't be surprised that you might still get a match closer to the check-in date. The week 52 owners may not be able to go or rent it out this year with the current economy...


----------



## e.bram (Aug 27, 2009)

II is not so bad. they can only give you what is deposited nad let you decide if you want to deposit for what is available. RCI forces you to deposit and gives you the dregs after they skim the prime for rental.


----------



## AwayWeGo (Aug 27, 2009)

*R. C. I. Dregs Typically Include Plenty Of O. K. Weeks.*




e.bram said:


> RCI forces you to deposit and gives you the dregs after they skim the prime for rental.


I pretty much just deposit cats & dogs with RCI.  

Frequently other people's cats & dogs -- what's left over after the _el primo_ weeks are snapped up or rented out -- are still pretty good. 

Best of all are the leftover RCI _Last Call_ & _Instant Exchange_ weeks available on short notice for next to nothing. 

Is this a great country or what ? 

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


----------



## AArbittier (Aug 28, 2009)

*Great News*

Happy to report that exchange request went through !!! I got week 52 at Royal Islander for week 1 at Royal Sands.:whoopie: 
I wonder if my posting here on TUG had anything to do with it !!!!


----------



## Need2Getaway (Aug 28, 2009)

AArbittier said:


> Happy to report that exchange request went through !!! I got week 52 at Royal Islander for week 1 at Royal Sands.:whoopie:
> I wonder if my posting here on TUG had anything to do with it !!!!



AWESOME.. maybe the thread titlwe should now be (Not) Disgusted with Interrval International  :hysterical:


----------



## LisaH (Aug 28, 2009)

Glad to hear it all works out for you...much sooner than I even expected


----------



## dougp26364 (Aug 28, 2009)

AArbittier said:


> Happy to report that exchange request went through !!! I got week 52 at Royal Islander for week 1 at Royal Sands.:whoopie:
> I wonder if my posting here on TUG had anything to do with it !!!!



Glad it all worked out. I doubt it had anything to do with your posts on TUG. It was probably more of a lack of supply than anything else. Those strong weeks just don't get deposited for exchange very often. It's why they're so tough to get in the first place.


----------



## AArbittier (Aug 30, 2009)

*( NOT ) Disgusted with Interval International*



Need2Getaway said:


> AWESOME.. maybe the thread titlwe should now be (Not) Disgusted with Interrval International  :hysterical:[/QUOTE ]
> No longer disgusted !!! Interval International are now my new best friends !!!!:hysterical: :whoopie:


----------



## m61376 (Aug 30, 2009)

Congrats! More likely someone realizing that with the economy they just can't afford the trip this year. My guess is that you will see several of these later deposits over the next few months, as people who own holiday weeks and can't use them also discover the rental market is severely underpriced this year.


----------

