[2016] Account review email [Accts. suspended]

[Sandy VDH]

I believe Ron alluded to it a bit - You own a 2 million point contract, you buy 2,000,000 points, credit pool all future year points in the contract you just bought, and sell the contract with no points remaining in it for 3 years. You now own 2,000,000 points, but you have 8,000,000 points available to reserve.

It would definitely look odd at first glance when looking at account totals.

Yes I get that, I was saying if you had MORE than 4X.

You would also need to lack any reservations in the previous 3 years to accomplish that. I am doubting that situation is applicable either.

 

[scootr5]

Yes I get that, I was saying if you had MORE than 4X.

You would also need to lack any reservations in the previous 3 years to accomplish that. I am doubting that situation is applicable either.

I'm thinking if you buy enough of those large contracts and strip/sell them, you could have way more than 4x.

 

[tschwa2]

So you are saying that someone with a 2 million point account was somehow credited with 8 million points for the year and the owner just went ahead and booked 8 million points of reservations?

If the owner had nothing to do with being credited with the extra points then they need to give the owner the option to cancel 6 million in reservations or pay 4X's their normal MF for the year and in the mean time they need to find out why/how it happened and prevent it from happening again.

____
If they stripped and sold them and the taker (be it wyndham or another) agreed to take the stripped account and is paying the MF without the points then again no harm no foul.

 

[Sandy VDH]

I'm thinking if you buy enough of those large contracts and strip/sell them, you could have way more than 4x.

That would be the only reasonable explanation I could think of.

 

[SueDonJ]

It sounds to me like renters should be scouring the governing docs to see if there's anything in there related to a prohibition on "commercial renting." Disney and Marriott are two companies that have such a prohibition; I'm sure they're not alone.

As far as we know Marriott doesn't enforce it but it's pretty much acknowledged that they could (and no doubt, some owners wish they would.) Several years ago Disney, on the other hand, got the word out that on an ongoing basis they would be reviewing accounts with a certain number of Guest names attached to owner reservations, while at the same time they limited the number of transfers allowed in/out of owner accounts to one per year. That resulted in changes to the process that spurred some owner-renters to sell their ownerships.

I'm not saying that I think personally that renting is bad and should be stopped, just saying that what's happening here gives the appearance that this company is looking very closely at it. Be like the Boy Scouts, prepared for whatever may come. And Good Luck!

 

[Braindead]

Wyndham has decide to allow renting to continue or put a stop to it including Wyndham itself!!! Personally I prefer no renting period. I would argue it allows a lower class of people into the resorts. Renting causes higher maintenance fees because of extra wear and tear- higher utility bills- more staffing. More units would simply be unused because owners don't use their points or weeks saving money. I'm ready to get beat up on this post!

 

[SueDonJ]

Wyndham has decide to allow renting to continue or put a stop to it including Wyndham itself!!! Personally I prefer no renting period. I would argue it allows a lower class of people into the resorts. Renting causes higher maintenance fees because of extra wear and tear- higher utility bills- more staffing. More units would simply be unused because owners don't use their points or weeks saving money. I'm ready to get beat up on this post!

In the two systems I mentioned the docs don't say that renting is all-or-none in the way you suggest. If either of them chooses to completely prohibit rentals by owners, their right to rent would not be impacted at all.

 

[ronparise]

It sounds to me like renters should be scouring the governing docs to see if there's anything in there related to a prohibition on "commercial renting." Disney and Marriott are two companies that have such a prohibition; I'm sure they're not alone.

As far as we know Marriott doesn't enforce it but it's pretty much acknowledged that they could (and no doubt, some owners wish they would.) Several years ago Disney, on the other hand, got the word out that on an ongoing basis they would be reviewing accounts with a certain number of Guest names attached to owner reservations, while at the same time they limited the number of transfers allowed in/out of owner accounts to one per year. That resulted in changes to the process that spurred some owner-renters to sell their ownerships.

I'm not saying that I think personally that renting is bad and should be stopped, just saying that what's happening here gives the appearance that this company is looking very closely at it. Be like the Boy Scouts, prepared for whatever may come. And Good Luck!

No need to look. It's there, I can give you the reference if you want it

 

[ronparise]

Wyndham has decide to allow renting to continue or put a stop to it including Wyndham itself!!! Personally I prefer no renting period. I would argue it allows a lower class of people into the resorts. Renting causes higher maintenance fees because of extra wear and tear- higher utility bills- more staffing. More units would simply be unused because owners don't use their points or weeks saving money. I'm ready to get beat up on this post!

The problem with the " class" argument is that it's too late to do that. I already own

 

[ronparise]

It sounds to me like renters should be scouring the governing docs to see if there's anything in there related to a prohibition on "commercial renting." Disney and Marriott are two companies that have such a prohibition; I'm sure they're not alone.

As far as we know Marriott doesn't enforce it but it's pretty much acknowledged that they could (and no doubt, some owners wish they would.) Several years ago Disney, on the other hand, got the word out that on an ongoing basis they would be reviewing accounts with a certain number of Guest names attached to owner reservations, while at the same time they limited the number of transfers allowed in/out of owner accounts to one per year. That resulted in changes to the process that spurred some owner-renters to sell their ownerships.

I'm not saying that I think personally that renting is bad and should be stopped, just saying that what's happening here gives the appearance that this company is looking very closely at it. Be like the Boy Scouts, prepared for whatever may come. And Good Luck!

[Deleted.]

I've had one on one discussions with a number of Wyndham executives and they haven't been shy about the fact they don't like renting

I've told them the same thing I posted here. "Buy me out"

 

[Braindead]

The problem with the " class" argument is that it's too late to do that. I already own

There's always that exception! You stay hidden. I have never looked around and said I bet that's Ron !!!

 

[Sandy VDH]

I Don’t Want to Belong to Any Club That Will Accept Me as a Member

Groucho Marx

 

[SueDonJ]

No need to look. It's there, I can give you the reference if you want it

No thanks, I'm not an owner, just thought maybe owners could be helped by my thoughts. It's my opinion, take it or leave it.

[Deleted.]

I've had one on one discussions with a number of Wyndham executives and they haven't been shy about the fact they don't like renting

I've told them the same thing I posted here. "Buy me out"

Again, for owners who might want to focus on the issue, what the owners or Wyndham might "like" is irrelevant. What you or they can DO is important.

 

[rickandcindy23]

The salespeople sell Wyndham based on the ability to rent points you cannot use. Until these sales' tactics end, I don't see how Wyndham can enforce a rule against renting.

 

[vacationhopeful]

The salespeople sell Wyndham based on the ability to rent points you cannot use. Until these sales' tactics end, I don't see how Wyndham can enforce a rule against renting.

If not part of the WRITTEN contract that renting is permitted and unlimited, it can be terminated.

 

[bnoble]

I've told them the same thing I posted here. "Buy me out"

I think I know why they haven't. Here's a story as to why:

I'm a CS Professor at Michigan. Our building is set up so that all faculty have master keys to (almost) every office, but the grad students have keys only to their own offices. However, in a building set up this way, if you have several examples of individual room keys, the search space for the master key is quite limited---maybe only a handful of possibilities to check, assuming key-holders collude.

Well, of course our Ph.D. students colluded on this question. And, they have access to 3-D printers, so they printed the handful of possible candidates, and lo and behold, one of them worked.

This was all fine and good until one of those morons dropped a copy of the master key in the parking lot, and a faculty member found it. He freaked out and went to the senior administrator in the department. She freaked out and was about to order a re-key of the whole building, at a cost of $40K.

I got wind of this, and walked down to her office. "If you re-key the building, you have to give all the grad students keys to their new offices. They're just going to do this again. Let's save ourselves the $40K and just talk to them instead."

I suspect this is why Wyndham is not buying Ron out. He'll just do it again, and pocket the proceeds from selling off the first account along the way. For Wyndham to get out of this, they have to fundamentally change the rules. One way is to adopt the DVC rule that if you sell a contract, you lose any reservations made with that contract. Extend that to "until you've paid the MFs for the points used for those reservations" and then they've made their master key "copy-proof."

 

[SueDonJ]

The salespeople sell Wyndham based on the ability to rent points you cannot use. Until these sales' tactics end, I don't see how Wyndham can enforce a rule against renting.

That seems backwards? As long as it's allowed it makes sense for the salespeople to play up the ability to rent. If/when the rules are changed and it's no longer allowed, that's when it would be incorrect for the salespeople to use the ability as a selling point.

 

[DeniseM]

OK - but are we assuming that Sales People are going to tell the truth? When did that start?

 

[raygo123]

You misread my post. I did not call Ron or anyone else a scammer; I called cancel-rebook a scam. Some people refer to cancel-rebook as a trick or loophole. It is all synonymous.

There are many methods to turn 2 million points into 8 million points of reservations. As I understand the process, a 2 million point Platinum owner can reserve a Bonnett Creek 1 bedroom for 180,000 points plus a few 3 and/or 4 bedroom Presidentials for 385,000 or 424,000 points, respectively. Within 60 days cancel the 1 bedroom and rebook it for 90,000 points, then cancel one of the Presidentials and upgrade to it, then rebook the 1 bedroom at half cost, cancel another Presidential and upgrade, then rebook the 1 bedroom at half cost, again, and keep repeating until the all the Presidentials are reserved at half the points cost for a 1 bedroom.

Do it right and with a bit of luck, that is how 2 million points becomes 8 million points of reservations. At $6/thousand, 2M points costs $12,000 maintenance fees and 8 million points is worth $48,000. Is this fair use of the system, or is this a scam? Pay $12,000 and walk out the door with $48,000 worth of 13-month reservations? Should Wyndham do something about this or not?

If someone can reserve a 4 bedroom Presidential at 13 months for full points and use it with their family or rent it, that is one thing. If, instead, they cancel-rebook it for 50% off, or manipulate the reservation system to reserve it at half the cost of a studio or 1 bedroom, that negatively impacts other owners, so it should not be allowed. That is just my thought, but that and all the money in my pocket will not get me a Starbucks coffee.

Wyndham’s opinion of the various cancel-rebook schemes is the only opinion that matters. They will investigate and decide to hand the Ferrari keys back to the owners or not. When something similar happened ten years ago, owner-to-owner points transfers were eliminated. Could this latest development mean the end of VIP points discounts? It is not out of the question. How else could they solve the problem, if they think it is a problem worth solving?

Megarenting happens, and it will continue to happen. I think Wyndham is obligated to respond when Owners reserve more than their Fairshare of reservations.

Keep the cancel and rebook just make it like RCI, you cannot use credit pool points as you cannot deposit credit pool points in RCI

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk

 

[CO skier]

That would be the only reasonable explanation I could think of.

Here is a crude example to illustrate how cancel-rebook pours points into an account. Forget the credit pool. For this discussion, it is a red herring.

Start with 2 million points, book 1 bedroom for 180k + four 3 BR Pres for 1.54M + 280k leftover points = 2 million
Run cancel-rebook-cancel-upgrade

You now have 4 Presidentials @90k = 360k + 1.64M points to run again
Book 1 bedroom for 180k + three 3 BR Pres for 1.155M + 305k leftover points = 1.64M points
Run cancel-rebook-cancel-upgrade

You now have 7 Presidentials @90k = 630k + 1.37M points to run again
Book 1 bedroom for 180k + three 3 BR Pres for 1.155M + 35k leftover points = 1.37M points
Run cancel-rebook-cancel-upgrade

You now have 10 Presidentials @90k = 900k + 1.1M points to run again
Book 1 bedroom for 180k + two 3 BR Pres for 770k + 150k leftover points = 1.1M points
Run cancel-rebook-cancel-upgrade

You now have 12 Presidentials @90k = 1.08M + 920k points to run again
Book 1 bedroom for 180k + one 3 BR Pres for 385k + 355k leftover points = 920k points
Run cancel-rebook-cancel-upgrade

You now have 13 Presidentials @90k = 1.17M + 830k points to run again
Book 1 bedroom for 180k + one 3 BR Pres for 385k + 265k leftover points = 830k points
Run cancel-rebook-cancel-upgrade

You now have 14 Presidentials @90k = 1.26M + 740k points to run again
Book 1 bedroom for 180k + one 3 BR Pres for 385k + 175k leftover points = 740k points
Run cancel-rebook-cancel-upgrade

You now have 15 Presidentials @90k = 1.35M + 650k points to run again
Book 1 bedroom for 180k + one 3 BR Pres for 385k + 85k leftover points = 650k points
Run cancel-rebook-cancel-upgrade

You now have 16 Presidentials @90k = 1.44M + 560k points to run again
Book 1 bedroom for 180k and there are 380k left – 5k short of reserving another Presidential

So 2 million points reserved 16 Presidential units for 1.44M points + 1 BR for 180k + 380k points left.

16 Presidentials has a value of 6.16M of reservations (in an account that should have only 2 million) + 180k 1BR + 380k leftover points = 6.72 million points.



This elaborate cancel-rebook scheme generated an extra 4.72 million points for this account. A more refined process using more efficient units could easily generate 6 million or more.

It seems some such accounts have been frozen, whether Wyndham was looking for them or not. There are other accounts where Wyndham might have swept up the account, but the credit pooling or other explanation might be the reason. It will be a mess to sort out. Look how complicated this account would be, and it is only at one resort, not scatted across unit sizes in multiple resorts.

 

[johnstonga]

Audit/Frzn Account of only 1.1M points

OK --- I too have had my account frozen.

I only own 1.126M points all in one account ..... but I began pooling points a few years ago, and pool everything since the elimination of 'cancelled' points.
Plus I rent 1.126 points from Wyndham every year @ $8/per K.

So that means I can have as many as 5.0 million points available at the beginning of any given year ---- and usually use about 2.25 million --- which I then replace at the beginning of next year.

I'm hardly a mega renter --- rarely use all 30 of my allowed free guest certs.
But I do take advantage of all the VIP discounts/upgrades I can find.

I'd actually called owner services to 're-rack' some of my "cancelled points" that should have gone back into a "Pool" but ended up as regular points.
I ended up with twice as many 'regular' points for a 3/31 use year than I own with a 3/31 use year end date. Prima Facie case that something is wrong.

The next day I got the account audit --- although based on the voicemail I got I don't think one triggered the other.

From other posts, sounds like they've taken a "Freeze now" figure it out later approach --- hope they've got enough dedicated staff to work thru all of these cases quickly...... I fear that is not the case ..... "winter is coming" and it could be a Deep Freeze.

GAJ

 

[Sandy VDH]

shoot first ask questions later

 

[CO skier]

More like a round-up, then sort them out one at a time.

 

[ronparise]

No thanks, I'm not an owner, just thought maybe owners could be helped by my thoughts. It's my opinion, take it or leave it.



Again, for owners who might want to focus on the issue, what the owners or Wyndham might "like" is irrelevant. What you or they can DO is important.

My point is that those of us that rent are already well aware of what the policy on commercial renting is. I do appreciate your eagerness to help though

 

[ronparise]

I think I know why they haven't. Here's a story as to why:

I'm a CS Professor at Michigan. Our building is set up so that all faculty have master keys to (almost) every office, but the grad students have keys only to their own offices. However, in a building set up this way, if you have several examples of individual room keys, the search space for the master key is quite limited---maybe only a handful of possibilities to check, assuming key-holders collude.

Well, of course our Ph.D. students colluded on this question. And, they have access to 3-D printers, so they printed the handful of possible candidates, and lo and behold, one of them worked.

This was all fine and good until one of those morons dropped a copy of the master key in the parking lot, and a faculty member found it. He freaked out and went to the senior administrator in the department. She freaked out and was about to order a re-key of the whole building, at a cost of $40K.

I got wind of this, and walked down to her office. "If you re-key the building, you have to give all the grad students keys to their new offices. They're just going to do this again. Let's save ourselves the $40K and just talk to them instead."

I suspect this is why Wyndham is not buying Ron out. He'll just do it again, and pocket the proceeds from selling off the first account along the way. For Wyndham to get out of this, they have to fundamentally change the rules. One way is to adopt the DVC rule that if you sell a contract, you lose any reservations made with that contract. Extend that to "until you've paid the MFs for the points used for those reservations" and then they've made their master key "copy-proof."

Exactly right until you consider my age. I only have a few good years left to keep doing this

Seriously though. Read big robs post. A third effect of an aggressive buy back program is that Wyndham will control the secondary market. I won't be able to do it again

For 6 years now I've been buying at an average price of $2/1000 points These contracts are worth about $18 to me (because they have 3 years of points in them worth about $6/1000) so push the market to $18/1000 and there is nothing there for me

The Hunt brothers once nearly cornered the whole worldwide silver market. I think Wyndham could probably corner the market for their points if they wanted to

I will say that just as you describe your grad students as morons for doing what they did. it takes a moron to do what I do