Interval international

[abingha]

Seems to be going down hill! Fewer sites, less accommodating rules. Anyone else seeing this?
How dies it compare to RCI

 

[VacationForever]

II is still as good for me as when I first switched from RCI to II in 2008. I won't ever go back to RCI.

 

[montygz]

Seems to be going down hill! Fewer sites, less accommodating rules. Anyone else seeing this?
How dies it compare to RCI

If you want to stay in Marriott and DVC timeshares, it compares great.

If you want to stay in Wyndham properties, not so much.

There is still plenty of value to be had in timesharing in Interval and RCI.

Is it different than what it was 10 or 20 years ago? Sure, the world is different. Costs are different. Change is inevitable.

 

[Hindsite]

II have been missing their financial targets and there are now activist investors on the parent company board so expect costs to continue to increase and benefits squeezed.

Still plenty of value to be had if you have a decent deposit. The sun has started to set on really low cost junk resorts dramatically out-performing, but still lots available, just not as good as it was. Like so much in life......

 

[dioxide45]

II have been missing their financial targets and there are now activist investors on the parent company board so expect costs to continue to increase and benefits squeezed.

Still plenty of value to be had if you have a decent deposit. The sun has started to set on really low cost junk resorts dramatically out-performing, but still lots available, just not as good as it was. Like so much in life......

I'm curious though, what does making exchanges harder for those junk resorts really do? II gets the same exchange fee from those owners as they do owners who have the high end stuff. In fact you could say they get a higher exchange fee given the internal exchange discount for Marriott to Marriott and the like. II hasn't really been in the business of doing cash rentals of units given for deposit unless it is truly excess inventory in places like Orlando, Williamsburg, Vegas, Palm Desert, etc. Perhaps they may try that path that RCI did over a decade ago?

 

[escanoe]

I'm curious though, what does making exchanges harder for those junk resorts really do?

Makes it more likely someone trading something good can get something good — and want to keep trading with II.

It does make sense to make good stuff easier to trade into once the check in date is getting close so it will be used and they will go ahead and get the exchange fee.

 

[jp10558]

Seems to be going down hill! Fewer sites, less accommodating rules. Anyone else seeing this?
How dies it compare to RCI

I am relatively new to TS, starting in 2023. I only got II access in the last year. So keep that in mind. I've had RCI since I started, but only though corporate accounts so far. (I think I should do a video on this similar to my timeshare value proposition) Here's my current impressions:

II and RCI operate pretty differently IMO, more like comparing a Ford gas truck to a Tesla Model Y, than a gas F150 to a GMC Sierra 1500. There are several parts.
First, the UI is rather different, and I personally much prefer RCIs - II has basically no filters I can tell, so you spend a lot of time looking at hotel or 1BR options when you need a 2BR or larger. Second, there's really no way to just ask for a list of all available exchanges or getaways. You can get a list of areas, but you can't easily glance at the entire east coast at once, no you need to drill down to Maine, Central through Florida Lower Keys and about 100 sub areas in between.

Then there's the actual operation - II is far more opaque. Some things "trade better" than others, but everyone is constantly kind of feeling around in the dark against IIs changing trade strength, and you're never sure if an OGS is ever going to match. The only way to tell what you could trade for is to try and do an exchange, and each unit/week "sees" different things. RCI on the other hand, as far as I gather, has one of several points values depending on if you have a Corporate account like me or if you have RCI weeks or RCI Points. Just like using HGVC or Wyndham internally, there's a point value on every exchange that's offered. As far as I can tell, you see all possible exchanges, but you may not be able to book them if you don't have the points. This seems straightforward - you can see what the points values are and then make your decisions.

However, I think RCI beats II soundly in amount of resorts and availability of deposits, as well as cash stays. The cash stays tend to be cheaper as well in RCI. The exchanges cost more however, and almost every resort in RCI charges resort fees as well. I so far have one reason for II - the reason I think most TUGgers have it, to get access to MVC and/or Disney properties. The independents in II do not seem to be that exciting except as traders, and the independents solely in II do not seem to be all that exciting. Many of the independents are also in RCI.

I have found it way easier to book something via RCI - but that doesn't mean it's easy to book HGVC or Wyndham necessarily. Most easy bookings in RCI are mid tier, 3star places IMO, which often and more than fine for me. My one independent II so far was the "infamous" Villa Roma which... well. So far II when you CAN get an exchange that works for you tends to be a better value IMO if your MFs are around $1k, and better if you can get a good MVC lock-off - probably. If the studio pulls stuff etc... However, I am going to say that by the time you pay upgrade fees and exchange fee - that $600 of MFs for the lock off of the studio can get pretty close to the straight $1k so . . .

If I had to have only one, I think 100% RCI. The cash stays alone are way more useful to me. But I think RCI isn't going to let you "trade up" as easily as II does, even if it's been lesser recently. The RCI exchange fees are IMO at the top of what's at all acceptable, and honestly, I do not know why there hasnt' been an "Uber" that gets those down to like $25 or less. I'm getting an RCI trader and will update my views next year when I can use it, but for now I don't know that I'd suggest using RCI much for trading if you have HGVC or Wyndham unless you have a lot of extenuating circumstances. II I think may be most useful for trading vs cash.

 

[chosshaul]

Some good points in here. do people see more availability with point based systems like worldmark? from what i've heard the worldmark points based exchange is not tdi based so it shows everything availalbe. still tempted to get a wm account if it can pull some of the top tier resorts on ii for 10k points a week.

 

[rickandcindy23]

II is still as good for me as when I first switched from RCI to II in 2008. I won't ever go back to RCI.

Right there with ya!

 

[rickandcindy23]

II is great, when you own a resort that has preference, like Marriott or Sheraton or Westin. Owning timeshares since 1981, yes that long, I can say that I used to love RCI. I could exchange into any Hilton and paid reasonable exchange fees. Now the exchange fees are:

$299 for RCI exchanges + $25 per day for Hilton fees = $474 for an exchange into Hilton. I already have Wyndham, so I am not going to exchange into Wyndham, when I can use my points.

$199 for II exchanges, Marriott into Marriott (same system); Marriott-Westin/Sheraton; Westin/Sheraton-Marriott; Westin/Sheraton to same. No extra fees, except TAT fees for Hawaii. What resorts do I want to trade into? Only those resorts, with a few Hyatt and others thrown in. I believe the exchange fees for other resorts is only $229.

I can add retrade to II exchanges, 3 retrades for $89, expire one year from the date of the first exchange. Nothing like that in RCI.

RCI's insurance covers no part of the exchange feee of $299. Right now, I have a week in a 3 bedroom on Maui in February that I am probably going to cancel, I was able to get something through II for the same dates. If I cancel that week, I won't get my exchange fee back, just the points I used.

In II, using retrade, I can move a week ahead and rebook inventory that I see online. For example, I have some weeks for us and our kids for next May on Maui. I used 2 bedrooms to get every one of those trades. If those come available with lesser deposits, I can grab another week and use that bigger unit for another trade. I can move units around as I am able. It works great.

Another example of using a retrade is using a Marriott deposit for a Marriott preference, then if I see the same week with a Sheraton deposit later on, I can grab the unit and keep my Marriott for something else.

For me, RCI is only for getting Hiltons on the Big Island (I keep hoping Maui Bay Villas will start showing up as well), getting Hilton in some locations where only Hilton exists (like Scotland), or for some of our favorite generic resorts, like Samoset in Maine; Brewster Green in Cape Cod; Val Chatelle in CO (we own there); and Door County anything in September. There are some others, I am sure, but of our 22 weeks of travel in 2024, 16 were II exchanges, 2 RCI, and the rest were owned resorts.

 

[dioxide45]

Makes it more likely someone trading something good can get something good — and want to keep trading with II.

It does make sense to make good stuff easier to trade into once the check in date is getting close so it will be used and they will go ahead and get the exchange fee.

There is that, but I was replying to a post that put it into the context of it making more revenue for II, but it doesn't seem to do that.

 

[Hindsite]

There is that, but I was replying to a post that put it into the context of it making more revenue for II, but it doesn't seem to do that.

I'm not party to the revenue models for II, but I expect them to have contracts with the various companies that have revenue streams associated with them. The move to adjust (downgrade) the trading value of Hyatt, Welk and Diamond etc can only have had a financial reason behind it, or they wouldn't have done it as it reduces transaction volumes. So I'm making the leap that there are revenue streams that exist that are outside of what we the depositers and exchangers see. I'm then making the leap that the revenue per member KPI is higher for an MVC weeks owner (or similar) than per junk resort owner. That additional revenue based on member ownership might be derived directly from their usage and/or indirectly from the usage that flows from them depositing decent inventory and/or from the revenue streams that flow between the resort/system and II. It could be a link to Guest or Owner satisfaction that owners are vocal enough about encountering people at the resorts who got there for a lot less than "owners" pay, and GSI is an indirect revenue indicator.

I suspect that the junk resort owners have been very useful historically in shifting sticky inventory. That has been the essence of the message in positioning II in previous investor reports, achieving 99% inventory utilisation if I recall correctly. Now and then companies do stupid stuff like intentionally reducing market share to improve profitability, sometimes it works, sometimes they go out of business, so they may be relaxing the utilisation KPI as they've found that the presumed link to profit isn't really there.

As II and MVW get better at business analytics they will be able to be much, much more refined in targeting the revenue hot-spots and that's where II's variability in trading power gives them an edge to be able to legitimately adjust (manipulate) TP to address an inventory and revenue need at a specific time. So expect more changes as they adjust and refine their models.

There is much more going on in the business than we can see, as there are for all businesses, and I have no clue at all why offering promotions for free unit size upgrades for weeks exchanges delivers value, but its interesting that this time round they limited the date out to which you could do it, so they are testing to see how customers respond and probably didn't get what they wanted out of the previous promotion.

I also haven't worked out how the resorts/systems make money from so much deeply discounted inventory such as low value trades, Accom certs, getaways or availability on Bonvoy that is below the maint fee costs, but someone clearly thought it was a good idea and crafted the numbers accordingly. It might be that people who reserve those weeks tend to spend more per guest at the resort, I hope other people do because I don't! It may be that the analytics are now showing that it isn't worth it, hence the steady increase in some getaway prices for them to test the elasticity of demand. Same for why MVC Club points are such really dreadful value in II compared to weeks, why would you do that, when you could just make it not very good?

Forgetting all of the above, II is a business in a group that is stock market listed in the US so everything is about money one way or another!

 

[Fido Chuckwagon]

Forgetting all of the above, II is a business in a group that is stock market listed in the US

Isn’t it just owned by Marriott Vacations Worldwide? (Yes, I recognize that MVW is a publicly traded company).

 

[dioxide45]

I also haven't worked out how the resorts/systems make money from so much deeply discounted inventory such as low value trades, Accom certs, getaways or availability on Bonvoy that is below the maint fee costs, but someone clearly thought it was a good idea and crafted the numbers accordingly.

Thanks for your detailed thoughts. I think in the case of what I quoted above, at least for Marriott and I am sure many other properties, II doesn't pay anything to acquire the inventory they are dumping via cheap getaways and ACs. Owners paid the maintenance fees and deposited the weeks. Marriott can also reserve a lot of unreserved inventory at 75 days out and put it up on Marriott.com for rent. Someone likely already paid the maintenance fees on that but just never made a reservation. If it comes from defaulted inventory, then owners again are paying the maintenance fees through the Bad Debt line item of the resort budget. So for II and Marriott, they get to rent stuff out for cash that they paid nothing to acquire.

 

[chosshaul]

How much of an incentive does Marriott have to make II worse to try to get more people to sign up for abound points? I guess they have to juggle how much they can scrap out of II without giving up that golden goose while also not making II too easy or cheap so that no one would ever want abound points. Clearly they can raise the getaway prices for all the premium MVC properties and people will still pay up.

Artifucual intelligence is getting better and better and I’m sure they are already wanting to analyze all the data to maximize revenue. Such a dinosaur like II is ripe for adjustments, and they typically won’t be in the members favor just like the flex change to 30 days. Why would they give members more time for those last minute deals when they can try to use that extra 30 days to first maximize their own gains

 

[rickandcindy23]

Generic resorts are limited to Marriott studios and lots of Westgates in Orlando. When I say generic, I am talking about "resorts" that are old, don't have many (or any) amenities, and are not what Marriott owners want to visit. Twin Rivers in Fraser, CO, is that type of resort.

We own 2 three bedroom units, one week 12, prime ski season, and a week 28. The "resort" sits next to the confluence of the two rivers. You can fish in Fraser river anytime you want (with a fishing license). RCI values these better than II values them. That is the one example I can give of a generic resort that barely pools Westgate 2 bedrooms in II. In RCI, I get 23-25 TPU's. I have them as my PIC weeks in Wyndham, which gives me 508K points for the two units. $2,000 in MF's plus the Wyndham program fees + PIC fees.

On the other hand, I have had excellent trading power with Foxrun, even though my week is a week 52. Twin Rivers has never seen a Disney resort, not even once, not in the many years we owned it and traded with II, which made me look at other timeshares that would trade into Disney. I am grateful for that knowledge.

 

[Hindsite]

Thanks for your detailed thoughts. I think in the case of what I quoted above, at least for Marriott and I am sure many other properties, II doesn't pay anything to acquire the inventory they are dumping via cheap getaways and ACs. Owners paid the maintenance fees and deposited the weeks. Marriott can also reserve a lot of unreserved inventory at 75 days out and put it up on Marriott.com for rent. Someone likely already paid the maintenance fees on that but just never made a reservation. If it comes from defaulted inventory, then owners again are paying the maintenance fees through the Bad Debt line item of the resort budget. So for II and Marriott, they get to rent stuff out for cash that they paid nothing to acquire.

I struggle to believe that there is no revenue stream between the resorts/systems and II, even if its the kind of stream that is a reconciliation based on usage volumes, which is commonplace in the travel sector. Why would Hyatt have been downgraded if there wasn't some form of saving to Hyatt in doing so, all II sees is fewer exchanges from Hyatt members, why would MVC Club points be so dreadfully poor value to use in II if there wasn't some form of cost attached to MVC, all II see is next to no usage from Club points only members? Just my speculation and business perspective.

I can't see anything specific in the MVW accounts to show this so it may not exist, but there is a note on "Sales and Operational support for Interval Network resorts", so they put effort in, so will be measuring some kind of return for that.. There is also mention of the Affiliation agreements in the risk section, which implies a level of contract agreement that would have some form of consideration included, but there is no mention of this as a specific revenue stream, so it may not exist. What is down is all 3 operating stats for Exchange and Third Party management: Total number of members, revenue per member and total revenue. Whatever the structure of costs and revenues, those stats mean more will need to be extracted from members as a result.

 

[Hindsite]

How much of an incentive does Marriott have to make II worse to try to get more people to sign up for abound points? I guess they have to juggle how much they can scrap out of II without giving up that golden goose while also not making II too easy or cheap so that no one would ever want abound points. Clearly they can raise the getaway prices for all the premium MVC properties and people will still pay up.

MVC Sales have been touting for 15 years that II inventory will dry up, and its not changed noticeably in that time for me. There are MVC resorts, like Aruba, that are markedly easier to get via II than via Abound and I don't understand why they would let that persist if it didn't work for them, as they can shuffle inventory across all the systems then manage if they want to. Clearly there isn't tight enough correlation between killing off II and selling more Abound for them to do that at scale.

 

[jp10558]

How much of an incentive does Marriott have to make II worse to try to get more people to sign up for abound points? I guess they have to juggle how much they can scrap out of II without giving up that golden goose while also not making II too easy or cheap so that no one would ever want abound points. Clearly they can raise the getaway prices for all the premium MVC properties and people will still pay up.

Artifucual intelligence is getting better and better and I’m sure they are already wanting to analyze all the data to maximize revenue. Such a dinosaur like II is ripe for adjustments, and they typically won’t be in the members favor just like the flex change to 30 days. Why would they give members more time for those last minute deals when they can try to use that extra 30 days to first maximize their own gains

I think we also need to consider that there was some reason they decided to keep using II for internal exchanges instead of just issuing everyone including resale a points value like HGVC did and doing their internal exchanges that way. So MVC is a draw, but I question how many people would go for a world where the choices are pay up to get Abound or just have a fixed week fixed resort you can use and no other way to exchange? They might get a lot of people walking away in that case (or maybe not IDK). To the extent dots on a map sell (and I guess we're really debating that with the recent Wyndham news) having the location options II has to expand MVC over their necessarily limited locations seems like it really helps. I know having RCI in addition to HGVC really helped me decide to buy resale HGVC originally, though I know MVC isn't as location limited.

 

[rickandcindy23]

I think we also need to consider that there was some reason they decided to keep using II for internal exchanges instead of just issuing everyone including resale a points value like HGVC did and doing their internal exchanges that way. So MVC is a draw, but I question how many people would go for a world where the choices are pay up to get Abound or just have a fixed week fixed resort you can use and no other way to exchange? They might get a lot of people walking away in that case (or maybe not IDK). To the extent dots on a map sell (and I guess we're really debating that with the recent Wyndham news) having the location options II has to expand MVC over their necessarily limited locations seems like it really helps. I know having RCI in addition to HGVC really helped me decide to buy resale HGVC originally, though I know MVC isn't as location limited.

As TUG members years ago, when Hilton announced a new resort, and it was another one in Orlando or Vegas, we were all, "Of course, same place!" Taking over Diamond and Bluegreen was a step in the right direction, but how many of those resorts are not going to fit the Hilton model enough to keep them in that system.

 

[Beefnot]

I love II way more than I do RCI due to the overall better quality resort options, cheaper exchange fees, preferable UI, etc. However, I do like RCI's TPUs, particularly for low MF / high trading power resorts like one I have.

One frustrating thing about Interval I have noticed in the last couple of weeks, is the frequency the site goes down for 'maintenance'. Like for example it is down right now, and showing the same banner from Saturday night's actual scheduled maintenance.

 

[jp10558]

I love II way more than I do RCI due to the overall better quality resort options, cheaper exchange fees,

I'll give you those, but

preferable UI, etc.

Really? Really? Maybe the Corporate RCI accounts have a much better UI than normal RCI, but if not, I strongly disagree that II has a better UI. I'm making a video, but am stymied right now due to II being down lol. I want to highlight the II UI deficiencies.

However, I do like RCI's TPUs, particularly for low MF / high trading power resorts like one I have.

I can't speak to TPUs, but hope for next year to have points to compare. I also think there's something to be said for quantity/availability in mid range resorts - there's a lot of times, especially for driving resorts for me in upstate NY where having something that's 6/10 is better than having nothing that would theoretically be 8/10 ... if it existed for me to book.

 

[Beefnot]

Really? Really? Maybe the Corporate RCI accounts have a much better UI than normal RCI, but if not, I strongly disagree that II has a better UI. I'm making a video, but am stymied right now due to II being down lol. I want to highlight the II UI deficiencies.

Yes, really, more aptly UX. Just my personal preference, I really do not like the RCI site. I do wish II had the functionality of RCI.

 

[WorldT]

Yes, really, more aptly UX. Just my personal preference, I really do not like the RCI site. I do wish II had the functionality of RCI.

Okay, the II site is "nicer" but the functionality of RCI (which has room for improvement) makes II look like it was designed by high school kids who do not know how people use timeshares.

 

[jp10558]

Yes, really, more aptly UX. Just my personal preference, I really do not like the RCI site. I do wish II had the functionality of RCI.

Well, I finally got my video together giving my opinion.

EDIT EDIT: I'm stupid and didn't plug my headphones back in lol. Video back and there is audio.

I really can't see what's to like about the II UI TBH, but I guess agree to disagree. I hate the II UX and find it like someone made it in roughly 1998 and never heard of any web app development since then. It's very cludgey as far as I can tell, but maybe you can watch my flail and tell me how I'm just missing an important part of the UX on the II site.