As the owner of WM points, I'm happy with the high TPU cost. Let's face it, the best, most sought after RCI inventory comes from the mini systems (i.e. WM, Hilton, DVC and Wyndham). Why shouldn't the mini system resorts cost the most to trade into? Demand for DVC is crazy high and I think the 2 bedroom prime weeks (whenever kids are out of school) should cost 60 TPU, because of the demand for those weeks.
My hope is that with higher TPU costs, the DVC inventory becomes easier to get for EVERYONE.
...and sure mini systems pay a set price for DVC weeks no matter what the TPU cost is but that means we can never exchange into these resorts for a discount (outside of flex, which hardly ever happens). We don't get change back from exchanges and we can't combine a bunch of cheap trader weeks to get whatever we want in RCI. We have to pay the premium price for any exchange we make through RCI, so it is a pretty fair system. For the year and a half or so RCI has been a TPU system, I've read countless posts from tuggers who were very happy to post about how many DVC weeks they booked and how cheap it is for them to do so. I do not think the higher TPU cost will change any of that for the die hard DVC exchangers but something had to be done becuase it was just so cheap to exchange into those resorts. There is also that big issue with DVC RCI weeks being sold on EBAY. I wonder if the high TPU cost is a means to curb that activity -- though I think the TPU change has everything to do with demand. People will pay whatever price they have to for DVC.