# RCI changing my weeks to points without asking?



## aries339 (Jul 8, 2011)

Hi y'all - I've read a few threads about points and RCI, but I haven't found something specifically like this...

My folks own 2 deeded floating weeks at "Lifetime in Hawaii".  They have always traded them week-for-week for other resorts, usually Arroyo Roble in Sedona, AZ.

This year, RCI assigned their banked weeks "trading value" - they were careful not to say anything about "points" - which meant that one of the weeks was worth 80000 "trading power" and the other was 50000 or something like that.  Well, the weeks they wanted at Arroyo Roble only "costed" 35000 "trading value" each, so they were able to get TWO weeks at Arroyo Roble for only ONE banked week in Hawaii.

Now...  My folks have been given the HARD sell to convert to points, by representatives ostensibly from RCI.  They have declined each time.

This year is great because they get two weeks for one.  But what happens next year when their "trading value" goes down and they can't get a week-for-a-week???

Does anyone know what RCI is trying to pull?  We're going to be furious if we are ever told that we can't trade an even week-for-week...


----------



## alexadeparis (Jul 8, 2011)

Are your parents trading through RCI weeks or RCI points?
RCI recently switched to valuing units by TPU (trading power unit)
But that range of points is like 5-75 or something. Not 80000 or 30000. 
Could this be what you mean?


----------



## aries339 (Jul 8, 2011)

Yeah I thought my dad said "thousand" but sure - it could be the double digits.  They have always used RCI weeks.

I did actually just find a thread on this, but it was more of an argument as to whether the points values were fair or not.

I'm just curious how RCI can get off telling someone that they can't trade a week-for-a-week anymore.

For instance, in my folks' case, someone at Arroyo Roble would have to bank 2 weeks in order to get only 1 week in Hawaii.  But up until this year, the exact same trade has always been an even 1-week trade.  Has anyone experienced this sort of problem?  And is there any recourse in RCI?


----------



## sfwilshire (Jul 9, 2011)

You still trade a week for a comparable week, just like you always did. The differences are you know if you are trading for an equivalent value per RCI's evaluation and you get "change" back if you trade down. Before, you couldn't trade to a week with a much higher value than your own. Now you have the option to combine deposits and do so if you want it that badly.

Sheila


----------



## BevL (Jul 9, 2011)

aries339 said:


> Yeah I thought my dad said "thousand" but sure - it could be the double digits.  They have always used RCI weeks.
> 
> I did actually just find a thread on this, but it was more of an argument as to whether the points values were fair or not.
> 
> ...



It sounds from this post like you're assuming that since your parents could get a week at Arroyo Roble, that owner who deposited that Arroyo Roble week could also exchange for Hawaii.  That's not necessarily true at all.

As mentioned, it is still a week for week exchange.  But think of it this way.  In the past, your parents used their one week for one week at Arroyo Roble.  RCI got more than they gave, basically, because your parents' week was more "valuable" than what they were exchanging for.  With the new system, your parents actually get a fairer exchange because they get the change back.  

On the flip side, the person who deposited that Arroyo Roble week would never, presumably, have been able to get your parents' Hawaii week, they wouldn't have the trade power for it.  Now they have the option of combining two weeks if they choose, to get that Hawaii exchange they want.

Could RCI change the value of your parents' week or other weeks in the system?  Sure they could.  But that is certainly no different than it's been in the past.  Many of us experienced big fluctuations in the trade value of our weeks in May of 2010, I believe it was, or could have been 2009, not sure.  I own two weeks and at that time one increased substantially in trade power, one decreased substantially in trade power.  But at least you know now if you have a chance of exchanging for what you want.

There is no recourse with RCI, their exchange system has changed across the board.  Your only option is to try independent exchange companies.  However, if your parents are getting two weeks where they used to get one, sounds like they're coming out pretty well.

As an aside, you will see that these new "points" are referred to here as trade point units or TPU for short, to avoid confusion from actual RCI points.

As you observed in other threads, there are people who love the new system, people who hate the new system and people who make do with the new system.  There are also those who like RCI period and those who dislike RCI period.  Hopefully your question won't prompt a pro/con RCI debate.

Bev


----------



## Carolinian (Jul 9, 2011)

The other differences are that they simultaneously moved the goalposts on their valuation of many weeks, so what used to be an equal trade may not be availible to you one for one any more, and that they play hide the cheese with what they will charge you on an ongoing search, where the best inventory is usually found, and they may really gouge you on the points lite they demand on such ongoing searches.  Another key difference is that the new system has eliminated the ability to trade within a range or band, which was a valuable benefit of the old system and recognizes the reality that it is simply impossible to get exact numbers exactly right.

And the point about RCI using sleight of hand in imposing this new system is spot on.  Participants is timeshare boards like TUG and others got advance notice of it, but many members did not.  RCI was also highly selective in which resorts they chose to tell about it and which they did not.




sfwilshire said:


> You still trade a week for a comparable week, just like you always did. The differences are you know if you are trading for an equivalent value per RCI's evaluation and you get "change" back if you trade down. Before, you couldn't trade to a week with a much higher value than your own. Now you have the option to combine deposits and do so if you want it that badly.
> 
> Sheila


----------



## BevL (Jul 9, 2011)

Edited - changed my mind.


----------



## resort (Jul 11, 2011)

For years RCI kept their method of determining trading power a secret. Now they have created "enhancments"  - assigning Trading Value based on date deposited - number of similar units RCI has on hand - area, etc., etc.

When weeks owners find out that their trading power may not be what it used to be - they will want to change to points for a few thousand dollars. 

Where does RCI make more  $$$ - you got it  -  Points - more fees - also affords RCI the ability to "fill in" the unused invenetory created by points owners.

Your trading power will decrease as time goes by - if you deposit your week 9 mths to 2 yrs prior to the start date- the longer you wait to deposit - the less trading power you have - your week might have a trading value of 45 today and 36 tomorrow.  The timeshare "week" may no longer be a week.

RCI of course will contorl this -  and you can bet your salesperson is going to be pushing points.  Read - get informed - for some people points are great - you need to determine how you want to use your week - how much  you can afford to spend on changing to points and are you  willing to pay more RCI fees. Look at RCI on the internet. 

The choice is yours  - dont let a pushy salesperson make the decision.


----------



## vacationhopeful (Jul 11, 2011)

The old RCI Weeks system is now the TPU system with values running for 2 to 62 TPUs (nickname is Points Lite).

The salesman might be selling the RCI Points system which has been around 10 or more years. These point values are 12,000-124,000 - like a prior poster stated, the points are in the thousands. Hence, the newer (Jan 2011) TPU system's slang name became Points Lite (like lite beer, less calories).

There is NO COST for the conversion to TPUs/Points Lite. There is a several thousand dollar fee to convert to the RCI Points system.


Many here are enjoying TPUs/Points Lite. These values will go down either in depositing your week to RCI or when booking last minute inventory. Say the week your parents own, gets at 12 months before checkin =>32 TPUs. You can book as many weeks stays that are offered until you use up the 32 TPUs. So, if a large 2bdr is 24 TPUs and a Studio at a different resort is 8 TPUs, you could go on 2 weeks of vacations with just the additional costs of the $179 online exchange fees for each booked week. I have seen weeks in Orlando for 4 TPUs each.

Hope this helps...


----------



## Carolinian (Jul 12, 2011)

You should also remember your other option to the ever shifting sands and moving goalposts of RCI, and that is the independent exchange companies, which continue to work on a weeks based system.

www.daelive.com

www.htse.net

www.sfx-resorts.com

www.tradingplaces.com

www.platinuminterchange.com





resort said:


> For years RCI kept their method of determining trading power a secret. Now they have created "enhancments"  - assigning Trading Value based on date deposited - number of similar units RCI has on hand - area, etc., etc.
> 
> When weeks owners find out that their trading power may not be what it used to be - they will want to change to points for a few thousand dollars.
> 
> ...


----------



## Mel (Jul 12, 2011)

Carolinian said:


> You should also remember your other option to the ever shifting sands and moving goalposts of RCI, and that is the independent exchange companies, which continue to work on a weeks based system.


While I agree the independents are good option for some people (they don't accept all deposits), I fail to see why makes them inherently better.

Some of them will allow you to exchange into anything in their system, but limit what they will accept for deposit.  Some charge an "upgrade" fee to reserve a different size unit (but don't give a rebate if you take a smaller unit). While some offer "bonus weeks" for certain deposits (again, not for all deposits, but select resorts), those bonus weeks are restricted.

Aries - your parents did not know about the changes at RCI, so are concerned that they might get less for their future exchanges.  That is possible, but that was also possible in the "old" week for week system.  As Bev explained, their deposit week was worth more than what they usually take in exchange, so they have been giving the excess value to RCI in the past.  Now they get to keep it, and can use it, or choose to let it expire.  They are no worse off than they were before.  If I were them, I would be upset that nobody ever told them they were trading way down, if they have enough trade power for 2 weeks.  Even if their trading power is reduced over time, it would have to be cut in half before they are no longer able to trade into what they they want.


----------



## Carolinian (Jul 12, 2011)

Mel said:


> While I agree the independents are good option for some people (they don't accept all deposits), I fail to see why makes them inherently better.
> 
> Some of them will allow you to exchange into anything in their system, but limit what they will accept for deposit.  Some charge an "upgrade" fee to reserve a different size unit (but don't give a rebate if you take a smaller unit). While some offer "bonus weeks" for certain deposits (again, not for all deposits, but select resorts), those bonus weeks are restricted.
> .



The independent that is selective about what you can deposit is SFX, as they only deal in high season GC's or equivalent, or UKRE that only exchanges weeks within the UK.  It is generally not an issue with others.  It is one of the independents that I don't use which charges the upgrade fee, but again many do not have this feature.

One of the best things about the independents is that most of them do not charge an annual membership fee, so you can belong to several and take advantage of the strengths of each of them.


----------



## aries339 (Jul 12, 2011)

Thanks for the discussion everyone; I appreciate it.

Yeah my folks are getting a golden deal on this, but it just astounded us.  They traded ONE week (Christmas week) at a STUDIO unit in Hawaii, for TWO weeks in June at a 2-story, 2-bedroom, 2.5 bath townhome unit in Sedona, AZ - and still had "TPUs" left over.

I understand that the week of the year, the location, and demand all factors in, but we just couldn't believe that there would be THAT much of a difference!

(I don't like my chances of trading my Sedona weeks through RCI, but we never trade anyway - don't wanna go anywhere else!    )


----------



## Carolinian (Jul 13, 2011)

At the resorts in the area I am most familiar with, coastal NC, it is the ''own to use'' members like yourselves who are the backbone of the HOA membership.  ''Own to exchange'' members are in the minority.

You have also hit the nail on the head that the new ''Point Lite'' system is a two edged sword.  RCI has moved the goalposts and some are winners from that and some are losers.  In addition the ''trading within a range or band'' within the old system, which is now gone, was far more useful and valuable to many members than the change back or combining weeks (which means an extra fee and combining m/f's) in the new one. YMMV.



aries339 said:


> Thanks for the discussion everyone; I appreciate it.
> 
> Yeah my folks are getting a golden deal on this, but it just astounded us.  They traded ONE week (Christmas week) at a STUDIO unit in Hawaii, for TWO weeks in June at a 2-story, 2-bedroom, 2.5 bath townhome unit in Sedona, AZ - and still had "TPUs" left over.
> 
> ...


----------



## theo (Jul 13, 2011)

*Not sure about this statement...*



resort said:


> Where does RCI make more  $$$ - you got it  -  Points - more fees - also affords RCI the ability to "fill in" the unused invenetory created by points owners.



I do not exchange anymore and I want *nothing* to do with RCI in the future.

That said, it has always been my own understanding that it's the *resort* (i.e., *not* RCI) that actually makes *all* the money from selling conversions of weeks ownerships to points.

My further understanding was (...still is) that RCI collects just a few hundred dollars from the resort to allow the change to become a "Points" facilty --- and that *every penny thereafter goes right into the pockets of the resort*. 

I have *no* use whatsoever for RCI and will never deal with them again, but still like to accurately understand the current industry facts. Am I somehow mistaken in this particular clear and long standing belief about *exactly who actually benefits* from facility conversion of ownerships from weeks to RCI Points?


----------



## Carolinian (Jul 13, 2011)

Most, but not all, resorts charge a conversion fee substantially higher than the fee paid to RCI for the ''conversion'', and if they do, they are getting more money than RCI for the conversion itself.  On the other hand, RCI Points is structured so that it extracts more fees out of members than RCI Weeks (at least up to when it became Points Lite).  Those higher fees were what one German timeshare manager told me upset many of those who had switched and had decided they wished they had not.

As to Points Lite, it is again structured to extract more fees.  Instead of trading within a range or band, you have to stump up extra points lite for an exchange or get change back.  Either event triggers the new fee for combining points lite.

One could say it is all about the fees, but that would overlook the impact Points and Points Lite play in feeding RCI's rental to the public operations, another one of their big reasons for trotting both of these out.




theo said:


> I do not exchange anymore and I want *nothing* to do with RCI in the future.
> 
> That said, it has always been my own understanding that it's the *resort* (i.e., *not* RCI) that actually makes *all* the money from selling conversions of weeks ownerships to points.
> 
> ...


----------



## JudyH (Jul 13, 2011)

I have exchanged into both the resorts the OP mentions.  While Lifetime iin Hawaii provides tiny units, it is in an excellent location, thus the reason for its high TPU value, not unlike Manhattan Club in NYC.  The Sedona resort is lovely also, but probably has more availability than Honolulu does.

I own to exchange, and the OP has posted a good example of how a smart purchase can benefit the TS owner who just wants to exchange.


----------



## resort (Jul 14, 2011)

*who gets the $$*

When you convert to RCI Points the developer usually charges $5000 - $7500 or more for the conversion. RCI receives a small fee. Thereafter, RCI charges the owner a membership fee - an exchange fee - and a fee for just about anything they do. 

Another important factor when it comes to fees - the resort you are visiting is likely to impose a housekeeping fee if you stay less than seven days.  This fee must be paid to the resort for each clean made to a unit after the initial clean - in other words, the owner of the unit is paying for one  cleaning fee in his maintenance fee. Any additional cleanings then fall to the RCI user.  So, if you are staying 1 -2 nights you could be charged a housekeeping fee for $60 - $80 or more +  an exchange fee + ++ to RCI. So, let the RCI Member beware - those convenient short stays may cost you more than a top notch hotel room!

If your home resort is not charging for the additional cleaning fee  - you will pay for this in your maintenance fees.

Sad thing is the original week owners who don't convert to points are probably getting squeezed with the new "Points Lite"  - likely cant trade a week for a week - and the "value" of your week is not what it once was - hope you enjoy your home resort - because exchanging with RCI is getting tougher for the long-time weeks owners.  RCI is pushing out these folks  - going to be interesting to see how this all shakes out and how it affects your HOA and your maintenance fees - hope these old owners hang in there....  








theo said:


> I do not exchange anymore and I want *nothing* to do with RCI in the future.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## theo (Jul 14, 2011)

*How can RCI "squeeze" deeded fixed week owners who don't care about trading?*



resort said:


> Sad thing is the original week owners who don't convert to points are probably getting squeezed with the new "Points Lite"  - likely cant trade a week for a week - and the "value" of your week is not what it once was - hope you enjoy your home resort - because exchanging with RCI is getting tougher *for the long-time weeks owners.  RCI is pushing out these folks* - going to be interesting to see how this all shakes out and how it affects your HOA and your maintenance fees - *hope these old owners hang in there*....



I guess I am one such (non-exchanging) "old owner". I usually use and enjoy my prime weeks at my several home resorts and I will *never* convert to RCI Points. In fact (at least to the best of my knowledge) RCI Points has not yet infected arrived at any of my particular resorts anyhow. 

Anyway, I am completely unclear on just what you mean by "RCI is pushing out these folks", as quoted and highlighted in red above. Unless I'm missing something, it certainly seems to me that there is absolutely *nothing* on earth that RCI can possibly do to / with / about deeded fixed weeks if the owners thereof have *no* interest at all in being "converted" (...or in even listening to the conversion "pitch" in the first place). Accordingly, would you be kind enough to elaborate on what you see or believe to be any possible or available RCI avenue to apply the "squeeze" to which you refer?


----------



## e.bram (Jul 14, 2011)

Au contraire mon frere;
RCI is helping deeded week owners. Since in general prime week owners do not convert. Dog week owners who convert are more likely to continue paying MFs than bail.


----------



## Carolinian (Jul 14, 2011)

theo said:


> I guess I am one such (non-exchanging) "old owner". I usually use and enjoy my prime weeks at my several home resorts and I will *never* convert to RCI Points. In fact (at least to the best of my knowledge) RCI Points has not yet infected arrived at any of my particular resorts anyhow.
> 
> Anyway, I am completely unclear on just what you mean by "RCI is pushing out these folks", as quoted and highlighted in red above. Unless I'm missing something, it certainly seems to me that there is absolutely *nothing* on earth that RCI can possibly do to / with / about deeded fixed weeks if the owners thereof have *no* interest at all in being "converted" (...or in even listening to the conversion "pitch" in the first place). Accordingly, would you be kind enough to elaborate on what you see or believe to be any possible or available RCI avenue to apply the "squeeze" to which you refer?



I think he is referring to Points Lite rather than Points, and neither the resort nor the member had any choice about being converted to Points Lite.


----------



## theo (Jul 15, 2011)

*Confirmation (...or correction) requested*



Carolinian said:


> I think he is referring to Points Lite rather than Points, and neither the resort nor the member had any choice about being converted to Points Lite.



You're likely right. Not to split hairs, but I'm trying to clearly understand. Maybe I'm just dense....

Points "Lite", if I understand correctly, is completely unrelated to RCI Points, but is instead merely the assignment of a numerical "trade value" by RCI via "TPU" assignment at the time of "deposit", no? 

If correct, there is no actual "conversion" of any kind, per se, as the underlying ownership is completely unaffected in *any* way. There is merely the assignment of RCI-contrived TPU, something which is of absolutely no interest whatsoever to a non-exchanger anyhow.

Do I have this right, or am just I missing something else?


----------



## vacationhopeful (Jul 15, 2011)

theo said:


> ...Points "Lite", if I understand correctly, is completely unrelated to RCI Points, but is instead merely the assignment of a numerical "trade value" by RCI via "TPU" assignment at the time of "deposit", no?
> 
> If correct, there is no actual "conversion" of any kind, per se, as the underlying ownership is completely unaffected in *any* way. There is merely the assignment of RCI-contrived TPU, something which is of absolutely no interest whatsoever to a non-exchanger anyhow.



Theo,
That is correct.


----------

