Newbie Q: Understanding the points charts in sticky

[molly2004]

I am interested in purchasing a FF resort that trades through II. As far as I know, these are Star Island, Governor's Green and Royal Vista. Two of these are Florida resorts which carry high maintenance and property fees whereas GG does not. I am not interested in buying Star Island.

So if I am understanding the points charts correctly, despite the fact that ff points are points, Royal Vista would be more desirable for trading than GG, right? I am presuming this because it appears that most of the weeks at Royal Vista is labeled as red/peak and GG has more quiet season periods. So it follows, at least in my mind, that it'll be easier to trade internally with FF and externally via II if the weeks are desirable.

Am I correct in my understanding? If so, do you think that this increased "value" justifies the maintenance fees + real estate taxes?

Thanks for your advice.

 

[Jya-Ning]

FF point value has nothing to do with its tradability internally or externally.

It just show how much FF spend on these resorts. Since their retail price per point are the same. The point with the same resort may indicate what FF believes based on the local vacation pattern, what the season will be at the time it sell this resort. It does not reflect the trade value. If you see one week it need 120k, the other need 60k, it does not mean the 120k will have twice or more demand than 60k. It maybe much less or much more demand.

External tradewise you will deposit to RCI/II through a generic points chart which does not depend on resort you own. What you own does allow you to make reseravtion there earlier before other FF owner. Don't own II, don't know if they (FF) will allow you to deposit a week you selected to II.

That say, Royal Vista will demand higher renting price then GC because it cause more for an owner to get it.

Jya-Ning

 

[timeandenergy]

Both Royal Vista and GG are nice resorts. When it comes to FF points, I feel points are points. If you are purchasing a package w/ equivalent point values, the difference from an "internal exchange" standpoint is that you can book 12 months out at your home resort but only 10 months out for the other FF resorts. I use the term "internal exchange" loosely because I always use my points to go to a variety of places (with NO internal exchange fee). I left my home resort behind the day after I purchased it. Don't get me wrong. It is a great resort, but for me variety is the spice of MY life, and FF definitely allows for this flexibility.

A 2BR prime week at GG is 154,000, but a 2BR prime week at Royal Vista is 203,000. Points at different resorts vary widely, so you want to purchase the number of points that fit your travel desires (location and timeframe)

I own points at Royal Vista (bought before I realized points are points), and I am familiar with trading into II. With FF and II, it doesn't matter what your home resort is. You are depositing points only, not the resort. You basically deposit the number of points equivalent to the type of trade you want. Below is the chart showing the point deposits you can make and what size unit/season they fall under.

Season Demand----Studio-----1 BR------2 BR-----3 BR or more

RCI Red
II Red
Greater -----------70,000---105,000---154,000----254,000

RCI White
II Yellow
Average-----------42,000----77,000---126,000---189,000

RCI Blue
II Green
Lesser-------------28,000----63,000----77,000---154,000

I have not personally been blessed w/ getting upgraded trades w/ 28,000 pts unless the trade is within 45 day of the stay.

So NO, from an internal or external exchange standpoint, there isn't an "increased value" at Royal Vista that justifies the MF and real estate taxes. I would go for GG w/ the lower MF.