RCI Pushing Rentals over Exchanges

[regatta333]

Just had a very irritating experience with a call to RCI that reinforces my view that they are more interested in driving their rental business than in having satisfied exchange customers.

I have a domestic exchange on hold for October with a generic red Fairfield studio (non-searchable). I called to see if that unit would pull anything in Austria for the same timeframe in a one-bedroom. The nice female VC gave me the numbers for 3 resorts that had availability. When I went to check them out online, the third resort ID I had written down was not in Austria and none of the Austrian resorts had similar IDs.

I called back to check on the ID and got a male VC, who seemed to be taking an inordinate amount of time to check the availability. After a long wait, he tells me that the only units available are hotel units, but that there are one-bedroom rentals starting at $350. I then informed him that I was given at least two resorts that had one-bedrooms available and gave him the IDs. Another long wait, and then he says that one-bedrooms ARE available at those resorts. When I asked why he had initially said there were only hotel units, he claimed he had initially searched with a different unit that had lower trading power.

I accepted this since a have another searchable studio that has lower trading power than the generic and figured that this must be what he used initially. Out of curiosity, I went online and did the search myself with that week--two one-bedrooms and one studio in Austria were available for October.

Yet another example of sleazy RCI business practices.

 

[kwilson]

Weeks trades have no basis. Renting does

[The post below was actually posted by John Chase, as a result of both John and Kenny using the same public computer at a resort. Please see this thread for more information and a tip on how to prevent this from happening to you. -- Makai Guy, TUG BBS Administrator]


The problem with weeks based systems is the unequal nature of the deposits. Since equalization factors have to be applied, and they are secret, the exchange companies hold the ultimate in "finger on the scale" power. You are in a barter with no idea what the other side holds. They don't disclose the value you hold or what they have to give. It is all too simple for you to be "short" thus leaving the inventory you disired as "surplus" for them to do as they please.

In points and in rentals there is a common basis to facilitate trades. Dollars or points. You know what you have and what things cost. I would suspect that the "games" you refer to will continue as long as the weeks systems have unpublished value time to play around with. I won't deal blind.

 

[Carolinian]

The problem with weeks based systems is the unequal nature of the deposits. Since equalization factors have to be applied, and they are secret, the exchange companies hold the ultimate in "finger on the scale" power. You are in a barter with no idea what the other side holds. They don't disclose the value you hold or what they have to give. It is all too simple for you to be "short" thus leaving the inventory you disired as "surplus" for them to do as they please.

In points and in rentals there is a common basis to facilitate trades. Dollars or points. You know what you have and what things cost. I would suspect that the "games" you refer to will continue as long as the weeks systems have unpublished value time to play around with. I won't deal blind.

Addressing the poster who is hiding behind the name of a bona fide Tugger, this is precisely the reason that allowing timeshare exchange companies to rent out exchange deposits is a massive conflict of interest that can lead to nothing but fraud against their members, and why it should be shut down as quickly as possible by legistlation or litigation.

 

[Topeka Tom]

Message for Oldtimers Only

For rentals, the common basis is money. Money is anything generally accepted in trade.

For Points, the common basis would better be described as scrip. Not many remember scrip, unfortunately.