Change to Interval Int'l history functionality

[klpca]

I did a quick search and didn't see any reports of this change.

It appears that they made changes so that when you query your exchange history, it is very quick. Unfortunately, and I am not surprised, we can no longer see our full history. It looks like it goes back 1 year. I think that I have all of my records in an excel spreadsheet but now I will have to make sure that I keep up that spreadsheet because there's no going back into the history on Interval Int'l. Win some, lose some.

In the long run, I think that not having to wait forever for the history to load when doing an eplus search is a good thing.

 

[HudsHut]

Thanks for the alert. I just tried History and I see it goes back to Dec 2024.

 

[dioxide45]

I am trying to figure out the logic behind it. For our account that has a lot of transaction history, the earliest exchange is March 2025. It has almost the last two years of our deposits. We deposit six weeks each year. It has all the ones from 2026 but only half of the ones from 2025 use year.

It would have been nice to know the change was coming so people could go in and capture their history. Luckily I track stuff separately on a spreadsheet. This should help people like @rickandcindy23 who have been unable to access their history through the II website.

 

[SmithOp]

It would be nice if they let you specify the number of rows to pull from the database. Try to pull too many and it times out waiting.

To get a specific amount of records after a starting point
LIMIT (MySQL):
SELECT * FROM your_table WHERE id > 12 LIMIT 5;

TOP (SQL Server):
SELECT TOP 5 * FROM your_table WHERE id > 12;

FETCH FIRST (Oracle):
SELECT * FROM your_table WHERE id > 12 FETCH FIRST 5 ROWS ONLY;

 

[klpca]

I am trying to figure out the logic behind it. For our account that has a lot of transaction history, the earliest exchange is March 2025. It has almost the last two years of our deposits. We deposit six weeks each year. It has all the ones from 2026 but only half of the ones from 2025 use year.

It would have been nice to know the change was coming so people could go in and capture their history. Luckily I track stuff separately on a spreadsheet. This should help people like @rickandcindy23 who have been unable to access their history through the II website.

Exactly! A heads up would have been nice.

 

[dioxide45]

It would be nice if they let you specify the number of rows to pull from the database. Try to pull too many and it times out waiting.

To get a specific amount of records after a starting point
LIMIT (MySQL):
SELECT * FROM your_table WHERE id > 12 LIMIT 5;

TOP (SQL Server):
SELECT TOP 5 * FROM your_table WHERE id > 12;

FETCH FIRST (Oracle):
SELECT * FROM your_table WHERE id > 12 FETCH FIRST 5 ROWS ONLY;

Ideally, they could let you do an additional search by date range.

 

[MabelP]

Has anyone contacted II to see if there is a way to get your history?
Thank you, SmithOp for the instructions. I only use an IPad and wouldn’t know what to do with them.

 

[BJRSanDiego]

Has anyone contacted II to see if there is a way to get your history?
Thank you, SmithOp for the instructions. I only use an IPad and wouldn’t know what to do with them.

On ii Community a person or persons said that ii said that there is NO WAY to get your old history.

I wonder why they just didn't display the last, say dozen entries, and let you manually select to look further back. That is what I experience with eBay, Marriott.com, etc.

BTW I can only see entries from March 2025. I used to do back searches to see how many times I've stayed at a particular location, or what size unit that I used to make an exchange, etc.

Frankly, I'm disappointed with Interval. This sucks.

 

[dioxide45]

On ii Community a person or persons said that ii said that there is NO WAY to get your old history.

I wonder why they just didn't display the last, say dozen entries, and let you manually select to look further back. That is what I experience with eBay, Marriott.com, etc.

BTW I can only see entries from March 2025. I used to do back searches to see how many times I've stayed at a particular location, or what size unit that I used to make an exchange, etc.

Frankly, I'm disappointed with Interval. This sucks.

It seems like a HUGE change that impacted a lot of people to fix something that was only impacting a few.

 

[GrayFal]

It would have been nice to know the change was coming so people could go in and capture their history. Luckily I track stuff separately on a spreadsheet. This should help people like @rickandcindy23 who have been unable to access their history through the II website.

I was caught high and dry! Did not keep a separate record because why? It’s all here online.
My one account goes back to 2001 and now that history is gone.

I wish there had been a heads up.

I can see the exchange from 11/29/2024
But nothing before that.

 

[klpca]

This will only help going forward, but this is an excellent opportunity to remember to add a TUG review for all of your II exchanges.

I’m not happy about the lack of notification though. I had made about ~70 lifetime exchanges going back to 2011 and it was *minutes* to pull up my history when I wanted to use eplus. It is so weird that they just didn't limit the query data instead of purging the entire history. That said, it doesn't seem like I am going to get this data back, so I am choosing to let this go. It was fun to look back at the exchanges - especially the eplus exchanges - but apparently that is in the rear view mirror. Luckily I have my excel spreadsheet and my email confirmations to help me fill in the gaps and rebuild my history.

I use yahoo mail (I know). I have had it since 2004. I also have a gmail account but since I use my email as a virtual file cabinet, it was too much work to migrate everything over from yahoo to gmail because of the loss of date stamps. I made a serious effort in 2013 when, without warning, yahoo purged a huge chunk of my emails. Anything for about 10 years that wasn't in a created folder was gone and I never got it back. Luckily I am a big time folder user so my important-to-me emails survived, but it drove home the danger of relying on a provider to do the right thing for me. At the end of the day, they are looking out for themselves, not their customers.

 

[LMD]

I noticed the same thing disappointed when I tried to look back at the dates of certain trips I have taken

 

[rickandcindy23]

Of course it's because II doesn't want us to compare our past exchanges with our current trading power. We could complain and be completely justified in our complaints. They've reduced trading power for every one of my 2026 weeks, and because they did that, they aren't going to get as many deposits from me in the future. I remember. I wish I had printed that history.

 

[dioxide45]

Of course it's because II doesn't want us to compare our past exchanges with our current trading power.

I think they made the change because some people were locked out of going in to there history to do retrades and such.

 

[Larry M]

It would be nice if they let you specify the number of rows to pull from the database. Try to pull too many and it times out waiting.

To get a specific amount of records after a starting point
LIMIT (MySQL):
SELECT * FROM your_table WHERE id > 12 LIMIT 5;

TOP (SQL Server):
SELECT TOP 5 * FROM your_table WHERE id > 12;

FETCH FIRST (Oracle):
SELECT * FROM your_table WHERE id > 12 FETCH FIRST 5 ROWS ONLY;

Umm, what does the URL look like when you make the search. Often the limits are specified in the URL, and all you have to do is edit it to specify what you want. Here's a real life example (domain obscured). This website has 80 entries, but makes you slowly page through them, 15 at a time.

First page:

https://example.com/current-members/

Second page:

https://example.com/current-members/?ps&limit=15&pn=2

Now, it's obvious that ps invokes the page-segmentor, limit is the number to show, and pn is the page number or segment of 15 to start with

Test page to get everything

https://example.com/current-members/?ps&limit=90&pn=1

Editing the URL parameters should get all the entries on one page, starting with the first one...and it does!

Hacking the SQL is great--if the website fails to sanitize its inputs--but manipulating the URLs is much easier for amateurs.

 

[GrayFal]

Umm, what does the URL look like when you make the search. Often the limits are specified in the URL, and all you have to do is edit it to specify what you want. Here's a real life example (domain obscured). This website has 80 entries, but makes you slowly page through them, 15 at a time.

First page:

https://example.com/current-members/

Second page:

https://example.com/current-members/?ps&limit=15&pn=2

Now, it's obvious that ps invokes the page-segmentor, limit is the number to show, and pn is the page number or segment of 15 to start with

Test page to get everything

https://example.com/current-members/?ps&limit=90&pn=1

Editing the URL parameters should get all the entries on one page, starting with the first one...and it does!

Hacking the SQL is great--if the website fails to sanitize its inputs--but manipulating the URLs is much easier for amateurs.

I just sent you what mine looks like via PM. You have to be logged in to go to "My History"

 

[Larry M]

I just sent you what mine looks like via PM. You have to be logged in to go to "My History"

I responded with some things to try. I have no II login, link just takes me to the home page. Let me know what happens.

 

[JeffW]

Also disappointed that no notice that decades of history would be lost.

My URL is: https://www.intervalworld.com/web/cs?a=285#exchanges What would be the rewrite to that?

 

[dioxide45]

Also disappointed that no notice that decades of history would be lost.

My URL is: https://www.intervalworld.com/web/cs?a=285#exchanges What would be the rewrite to that?

That seems to be the same URL that I see. I don't know that the URL contains any criteria related to the query.

 

[rickandcindy23]

I think they made the change because some people were locked out of going in to there history to do retrades and such.

This is true, and a positive for me because now I can see my history again to retrade with my laptop. It's a good change.

Still, our trading power has gone downhill at the same exact time. Yep.

 

[heathpack]

Still, our trading power has gone downhill at the same exact time. Yep.

I keep waiting for the problem to “correct”. Is there any word on the street as to whether this is intentional, or some kind of programming mistake.

It seems stunning to me if it’s intentional, given the recent shake up at MVCI. Are they actually trying to drive people to abandon less desirable weeks? Talk about a spiral of poor management decisions!

 

[rickandcindy23]

I keep waiting for the problem to “correct”. Is there any word on the street as to whether this is intentional, or some kind of programming mistake.

It seems stunning to me if it’s intentional, given the recent shake up at MVCI. Are they actually trying to drive people to abandon less desirable weeks? Talk about a spiral of poor management decisions!

I have no idea. I did notice the new TDI charts for Shadow Ridge Villages' platinum season weeks have seen a reduced TDI for weeks before President's Day. They used to have a wider range of dates before the week 7. My President's Day deposits still show as high TDI, but week 7 is now the first week in that high TDI range. I should have deposited a few weeks later to be more in the middle.

I am unhappy with the high cost of those weeks for exchange purposes. It's not the ideal. These fees went up substantially over the last few years, this year being the exception.

 

[heathpack]

I have no idea. I did notice the new TDI charts for Shadow Ridge Villages' platinum season weeks have seen a reduced TDI for weeks before President's Day. They used to have a wider range of dates before the week 7. My President's Day deposits still show as high TDI, but week 7 is now the first week in that high TDI range. I should have deposited a few weeks later to be more in the middle.

I am unhappy with the high cost of those weeks for exchange purposes. It's not the ideal. These fees went up substantially over the last few years, this year being the exception.

The TDI for our summer Mountainside deposits is unchanged but what I can see with those deposits for 2026 and beyond is dramatically restricted now. The deposits are the best gold weeks at this resort.

It seems MVCI/II for some reason wants to make those resorts poor traders? This makes no sense to me: you have a person happily paying MF on a medium value week that’s only moderately attractive to your Abound owners. Do they really want me to deed it back or abandon it, because it no longer works as a trader? Where is the logic in that?

We bought it to use, but since have moved. We won’t use it and if we can’t trade it, we’ll cut it loose. Maybe it’s just the perspective from my side of the fence, but I don’t really see how this is a smart move for MVCI.

 

[Hindsite]

We bought it to use, but since have moved. We won’t use it and if we can’t trade it, we’ll cut it loose. Maybe it’s just the perspective from my side of the fence, but I don’t really see how this is a smart move for MVCI.

Its not MVCI any more than its Hyatt, Sheraton or Westin making changes to II trading power. They all have the same corporate overlord (MVW) and other than putting II under pressure for business underperformance I doubt MVW get into the detail of specific TDI ratings and resort trading power. What II might be doing is starting to level the playing field on historically outperforming II traders, we saw that happen with OL and Hyatt over a year ago, where they have gone from exceptional to good traders.

The very first line in the II FAQs is that the goal of exchanging is "comparable exchange", if what you are using as a trader exceeds that significantly, then you're vulnerable to that being adjusted. I don't think its just impacting the traditional traders, just that we hear more about those than middle of the road ones that I have. Its harder to get the best stuff, but as that's not what I need so I don't see the stark reality of that. I'm still getting fantastic value exchanges so that's all that matters for me at the moment.

 

[heathpack]

Its not MVCI any more than its Hyatt, Sheraton or Westin making changes to II trading power. They all have the same corporate overlord (MVW) and other than putting II under pressure for business underperformance I doubt MVW get into the detail of specific TDI ratings and resort trading power. What II might be doing is starting to level the playing field on historically outperforming II traders, we saw that happen with OL and Hyatt over a year ago, where they have gone from exceptional to good traders.

The very first line in the II FAQs is that the goal of exchanging is "comparable exchange", if what you are using as a trader exceeds that significantly, then you're vulnerable to that being adjusted. I don't think its just impacting the traditional traders, just that we hear more about those than middle of the road ones that I have. Its harder to get the best stuff, but as that's not what I need so I don't see the stark reality of that. I'm still getting fantastic value exchanges so that's all that matters for me at the moment.

Well since Marriott owns II- IMO its Marriott making these decisions.

Is it smart? Well, I dumped my Hyatt weeks as a result of this move and HVC now owns both of them, and will try to sell them as points. Who knows? Maybe successfully, maybe not. But if they are not successful, then they are stuck paying the MF that I was previously paying.

I understand that this is an "adjustment" possibly intended to level the playing field. I assume that Marriott, as the owner of II, somehow thinks this adjustment will be more profitable for them. My point is that a system in which savvy owners can (in some circumstances) trade up to a more desirable week provides an incentive for those owners to keep owning those weeks. The lack of an even playing field for Marriott, Westin, Sheraton and Hyatt weeks is financially advantageous for Marriott because it keeps medium-value weeks owned and their MF paid.

Of course one of the premises of timeshare ownership is that all you ever own is what is stated in your deed. However, if a timeshare company disincentivizes ownership for an increasing percentage of their owners (by increasing MF substantially and then decreasing usefulness of the ownership markedly), a tipping point towards death spiral may be reached. This is why I'm having trouble understanding how exactly this is a smart move for Marriott. Where does it increase revenue so substantially that it outweighs the risk of an exodus of owners?