VC told me with high confidence that Cancel/Rebook will be eliminated in April..

[iaminak]

Thats not correct Raygo123

there is a discussion about cancelling reservations in the book, and
there is a discussion about the vip benefit of booking reservations at a discount in the book, and
there is a discussion about how vip owners can get free up grades in the book

You may be right there is no such thing as cancel and rebook, but there are things called cancel and rebook and upgrade.

I have to laugh at the title of this thread because I was just at a presentation where the salesman told me with great confidence that cancel and rebook always works and no one ever loses their reservations... I think they lie so much they can't keep straight which angle they are supposed to be spinning.

 

[raygo123]

Thats not correct Raygo123

there is a discussion about cancelling reservations in the book, and
there is a discussion about the vip benefit of booking reservations at a discount in the book, and
there is a discussion about how vip owners can get free up grades in the book

You may be right there is no such thing as cancel and rebook, but there are things called cancel and rebook and upgrade.

You can call me raygo for short. The point is how can you do away with something that doesn't exist? Yes cancel tells you how and when, and then there is the discount window, and upgrades. But no cancel and rebook policy. So how can it be done away with?

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk

 

[DeeDibble]

I have to laugh at the title of this thread because I was just at a presentation where the salesman told me with great confidence that cancel and rebook always works and no one ever loses their reservations... I think they lie so much they can't keep straight which angle they are supposed to be spinning.

We attended a presentation this morning and they were talking about cancel rebook - sure would like to know who the VC was that said a waitlist will replace cancel/ rebook in April 2017

 

[BellaWyn]

You can call me raygo for short. The point is how can you do away with something that doesn't exist? Yes cancel tells you how and when, and then there is the discount window, and upgrades. But no cancel and rebook policy. So how can it be done away with?

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk

Did this just become an existential discussion?

Just because there is no policy doesn't mean it doesn't happen or that WYN likes that it happens. Do not confuse Policy with Procedure. WYN is brilliant at skirting their day to day procedures and practices by not including what happens as part of policy. Procedure doesn't have to be surrounded by the legalese that comes with presenting policy. Can be easily changed with minimal communication to the community.

 

[Sandy VDH]

Thats not correct Raygo123

there is a discussion about cancelling reservations in the book, and
there is a discussion about the vip benefit of booking reservations at a discount in the book, and
there is a discussion about how vip owners can get free up grades in the book

You may be right there is no such thing as cancel and rebook, but there are things called cancel and rebook and upgrade.

Especially if you do them very quickly and in the order outlined.

 

[raygo123]

Did this just become an existential discussion?

Just because there is no policy doesn't mean it doesn't happen or that WYN likes that it happens. Do not confuse Policy with Procedure. WYN is brilliant at skirting their day to day procedures and practices by not including what happens as part of policy. Procedure doesn't have to be surrounded by the legalese that comes with presenting policy. Can be easily changed with minimal communication to the community.

Policy or procedure, neither matters. You cannot do away with something that doesn't exist. My point is that other things would have to change in order to eliminate cancel and rebook. Simply adding a wait list will not change anything unless they do away with the discount window, or change something else. Wyndham can limit the availability of resorts in prime time, to an extent, but that is not doing away with cancel and rebook.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk

 

[BellaWyn]

Maybe it's the "RE" part of the Booking process they take issue with because it is perceived as a gross mis-use by Mega-renters. Don't agree with that posture but WYN doesn't need me to agree with it in order to find a way to change it. There is change on the horizon. Given their IT has a long history of inefficiency (or under funding) it may not be a simple solution but doesn't mean they won't try.

 

[raygo123]

Maybe it's the "RE" part of the Booking process they take issue with because it is perceived as a gross mis-use by Mega-renters. Don't agree with that posture but WYN doesn't need me to agree with it in order to find a way to change it. There is change on the horizon. Given their IT has a long history of inefficiency (or under funding) it may not be a simple solution but doesn't mean they won't try.

I hope whatever Wyndham does, they take it slow. Last August a change was made, and created this mess, because it didn't work it didn't do what Wyndham thought it would.



Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk

 

[Joe33426]

Maybe it's the "RE" part of the Booking process they take issue with because it is perceived as a gross mis-use by Mega-renters. Don't agree with that posture but WYN doesn't need me to agree with it in order to find a way to change it. There is change on the horizon. Given their IT has a long history of inefficiency (or under funding) it may not be a simple solution but doesn't mean they won't try.

I think you hit the nail on the head. I think it's the "RE" part too that Wyndham is having the problem. And the fact that multiple reservations are often used to effect the cancel, rebook, and upgrade strategy.

 

[wjappraise]

I hope whatever Wyndham does, they take it slow. Last August a change was made, and created this mess, because it didn't work it didn't do what Wyndham thought it would.



Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk

Amen brother. Coming from one of the impacted owners, I am very leery of IT changes from the Wyndham corporate arm.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[Bigrob]

I hope whatever Wyndham does, they take it slow. Last August a change was made, and created this mess, because it didn't work it didn't do what Wyndham thought it would.

Actually, it was a YEAR ago last August (August 2015) when the change was made to do away with cancelled points, returning points from cancelled reservations to wherever they came from (in theory). In practice that didn't work correctly as many times the points did NOT go back to where they came from (for example, from a credit pool).

While those issues were obvious almost from day one, there seems to have been a "ticking time bomb" effect that culminated in the suspension of multiple accounts a year later (almost to the day of when the original ill-fated change went in).

This was what should have been an easy, straightforward implementation of a very basic function. I can only imagine the disasters that lurk upon a more ambitious bit of logic surrounding a waitlist.

 

[ronparise]

Raygo, you may be right.. Im just not willing to make the bet that Wyndham wont do their best to eliminate commercial renting, (whatever that is) and I think that means going after the cancel and rebook for a discount strategy

 

[henley1]

At the last annual meeting Geoff Richards promised that Voyager would be up and running by the next meeting... So April makes sense. At that last meeting I asked Geoff about a wait list... his answer was not this year. I wonder if the suspensions mess is speeding up their plan.

Heres what I learned in my interviews with Wyndham (around my suspension)
1) they are serious about enforcing the "Commercial" use prohibition
2) they are serious about enforcing the "no unfair advantage" rule
3) they know that cancel/rebook/upgrade gives an unfair advantage to the owners that do it
4) they know that Commercial renters, (or megarenters if you prefer) use the cancel/rebook /upgrade to capture discounts and they know that the discounts are necessary to make a reasonable profit

 

[henley1]

From Ron's quote above...

What is the "Commercial" use prohibition? I've never heard of that. I thought Wyn owners were allowed to rent?

 

[Richelle]

From Ron's quote above...

What is the "Commercial" use prohibition? I've never heard of that. I thought Wyn owners were allowed to rent?

It's in the "Acknowledgments" section if the contract. Its also on page 394 in the book.

"The program is for a members own personal use and enjoyment, and not for any commercial purposes"

They do have the option to rent if they use Wyndham's program. I don't think it says they can rent out their reservations.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[ronparise]

It's in the "Acknowledgments" section if the contract. I cannot recall if it's in the book. View attachment 3111


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

It is in the book. Page 394

 

[Jan M.]

It's in the "Acknowledgments" section if the contract. Its also on page 394 in the book.

"The program is for a members own personal use and enjoyment, and not for any commercial purposes"

They do have the option to rent if they use Wyndham's program. I don't think it says they can rent out their reservations.

View attachment 3111


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I always thought that originally the statements in that section were made to protect Fairfield and then Wyndham from any claims the sales people made in effort to make sales. The sales people always tell you that you can rent, make money and all sorts of things; some of which are true and some of which are outright and deliberate lies. These were drawn up before the mega renters and point managers got so big or maybe even before they existed, before Extra Holidays and before Ovation. But of course anything we sign has been drawn up by lawyers and their job is to protect Wyndham for any eventuality.

 

[Richelle]

I always thought that originally the statements in that section were made to protect Fairfield and then Wyndham from any claims the sales people made in effort to make sales. The sales people always tell you that you can rent, make money and all sorts of things; some of which are true and some of which are outright and deliberate lies. These were drawn up before the mega renters and point managers got so big or maybe even before they existed, before Extra Holidays and before Ovation. But of course anything we sign has been drawn up by lawyers and their job is to protect Wyndham for any eventuality.

It's also in the member directory. I would imagine new contracts have that in it. The mega renters bought developer to get VIP, so they probably have the same clauses in their contracts that they had to acknowledge and initial.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[ronparise]

I always thought that originally the statements in that section were made to protect Fairfield and then Wyndham from any claims the sales people made in effort to make sales. The sales people always tell you that you can rent, make money and all sorts of things; some of which are true and some of which are outright and deliberate lies. These were drawn up before the mega renters and point managers got so big or maybe even before they existed, before Extra Holidays and before Ovation. But of course anything we sign has been drawn up by lawyers and their job is to protect Wyndham for any eventuality.

I think you are right. I remember signing something that it wasn't supposed of as an investment. And I took that the same way you see it. To protect Wyndham. I would say "you may not have sold it as an investment, but I bought it as an investment" if I was to fail in my rental business I understood that it wasn't wyndhams fault

However the disclosures in the back of the directory are more direct and perfectly clear. The product is for personal use, no commercial use allowed

So Wyndham chose to look the other way, or I was able to stay under their radar, or maybe my crystal ball has just started working. But I believe that they are going to get serious about that "no commercial use" clause in the disclosures

Times; they are a changing

 

[raygo123]

I think you are right. I remember signing something that it wasn't supposed of as an investment. And I took that the same way you see it. To protect Wyndham. I would say "you may not have sold it as an investment, but I bought it as an investment" if I was to fail in my rental business I understood that it wasn't wyndhams fault

However the disclosures in the back of the directory are more direct and perfectly clear. The product is for personal use, no commercial use allowed

So Wyndham chose to look the other way, or I was able to stay under their radar, or maybe my crystal ball has just started working. But I believe that they are going to get serious about that "no commercial use" clause in the disclosures

Times; they are a changing

Did I read somewhere that the CEO is stepping in to oversee the transition after the president quit?

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk

 

[am1]

I think you are right. I remember signing something that it wasn't supposed of as an investment. And I took that the same way you see it. To protect Wyndham. I would say "you may not have sold it as an investment, but I bought it as an investment" if I was to fail in my rental business I understood that it wasn't wyndhams fault

However the disclosures in the back of the directory are more direct and perfectly clear. The product is for personal use, no commercial use allowed

So Wyndham chose to look the other way, or I was able to stay under their radar, or maybe my crystal ball has just started working. But I believe that they are going to get serious about that "no commercial use" clause in the disclosures

Times; they are a changing

If anyone purchased a Wyndham timeshare because the sales person said it would be good for rentals (regardless of what it says in the directory) then they should be offered full refunds and possibly the appreciation that sales talk about.

 

[Jan M.]

I think you are right. I remember signing something that it wasn't supposed of as an investment. And I took that the same way you see it. To protect Wyndham. I would say "you may not have sold it as an investment, but I bought it as an investment" if I was to fail in my rental business I understood that it wasn't wyndhams fault

However the disclosures in the back of the directory are more direct and perfectly clear. The product is for personal use, no commercial use allowed

So Wyndham chose to look the other way, or I was able to stay under their radar, or maybe my crystal ball has just started working. But I believe that they are going to get serious about that "no commercial use" clause in the disclosures

Times; they are a changing

I agree with you. Plus there is always a bigger picture that we may only catch a glimpse of by our pooling of information, conjecture and reading between the lines.

I too think that it is very likely that owners who are primarily commercial renters will find themselves faced with changes that will impact their ability to rent or make it profitable. I think Wyndham intends to do something and has wanted to do it for a few years now. But that they haven't yet leads me to believe there are some considerations/consequences that they haven't yet figured a way around. It doesn't mean that they won't; just that it might take them awhile longer to do it.

Those of us who spent the money to buy a significant number of developer points from Fairfield and/or Wyndham certainly would like to be reassured that Wyndham isn't making changes to the VIP program or other changes that will in effect devalue the worth of our ownership to us. I truly believe that if Wyndham is foolish enough to make changes that comprise the worth of the VIP program in the owners opinion that they might as well cut their sales staff by 90% or even more immediately.

How is Wyndham going to justify owners turning reservations over to Extra Holidays which most certainly can be construed as commercial renting. I would think a good group of attorneys could make a case and might even possibly ask for and be granted an injunction to prohibit Extra Holiday rentals while a suit is ongoing. I have no idea if they would even stand a chance of winning if it actually went to court and realize it would most likely be settled out of court. Wyndham is at a distinct disadvantage right now as they have been getting a lot of unfavorable notice with the public, States attorneys and courts. They also have invested a lot in the Extra Holidays program.

I can't begin to guess at how many hundreds of millions, probably even billions, of points are owned/handled by the mega renters and point managers. Is Wyndham in the financial position of being able to take them all back through Ovations, settlement or default? Perhaps at this time the mega renter/points manager relationship is more symbiotic than Wyndham likes to admit even to themselves. If the market were to be flooded with resales would there be more articles on financial sites and publications questioning Wyndhams stability? Negative publicity, legal and financial, unhappy owners, lower stock prices, etc. all impact sales.

In fact cutting their sales staff to a minimal number of people and perhaps putting them permanently on salary would be my first suggestion to Wyndham. I truly believe they have a good product but the predatory and aggressive salespeople and sales tactics screams that Wyndham thinks so little of the worth of what they are selling that they have to con, coerce, deceive and badger people into buying it. It has become a viscous cycle. The more they drive people away with their sales tactics the more desperate and underhanded the sales people become which in turn drives even more people away. When they do make a sale, people are usually to varying degrees dissatisfied with their purchase when they find out how much of what their sales person told them was lies. And sooner or later they always do find out.

You used the quote: "Times they are a changing." The old leadership has continued to do business as they have always done it instead of adapting and changing with the times. Maybe the new leadership will be smart enough to see what any of us can tell them; what they are doing isn't working! Stop trying variations of the same old thing where nothing truly changes, scrap your sales program entirely and start over with a totally new and different approach to sales. Wyndham doesn't have much to lose and a great deal to gain by doing that because Wyndham is walking a very fine line these days. Unless they make some sweeping changes Wyndham is in very real danger of making the name Wyndham a byword for everything that is wrong with the timeshare industry.

 

[paxsarah]

I too think that it is very likely that owners who are primarily commercial renters will find themselves faced with changes that will impact their ability to rent or make it profitable. I think Wyndham intends to do something and has wanted to do it for a few years now. But that they haven't yet leads me to believe there are some considerations/consequences that they haven't yet figured a way around. It doesn't mean that they won't; just that it might take them awhile longer to do it.

It seems to me that whatever change Wyndham makes to make cancel/rebook/upgrade in its current form untenable for renters is going to need to be backed by some solid IT. The last change they made, which on the surface seems fairly minor - the elimination of cancelled points and putting points from canceled reservations back into the pot they came from - has uncovered some big problems for Wyndham on the IT side. To layer another policy and/or process change on top of that before they fix what's already broken could be a disaster. I guess the question is at what point do they feel they have a good enough handle on what's going on with their IT infrastructure to move forward with making changes? And will they miss the sort of underlying pitfalls that they've run into with the last change, and how bad will those pitfalls be?

 

[Braindead]

Wyndham doesn't need to change the rules!!! Just enforce the rules in place! No VIP benefits for resale points. Hardly any owners have 5 million or more developer points to tie up points on multiple prime reservations to end up with 1 reservation. No commercial renting. I'm sure there's an exemption for Extra Holidays already in place if you interpret the wording correctly. Wyndham has the authority to use its discretion. If your reservation or points are listed or advertised on a website or through a third party that would be considered commercial by almost any court. Loss or profit doesn't matter. Commercial entities lose money everyday. Wyndham has a IT problem to fix. But I also think they are drawing out the audits to see how much business they can pickup at Extra Holidays and get a handle on how much renting was occurring. They were diffidently caught off guard at the amount of commercial renting. Extra Holidays is a great way to get new sales! If you liked your stay here let me show you how you can save money on your vacations. Just look at TripAdvisor comments sometime. People comment on renting constantly. I looked up Wyndham Waikiki Beach Walk. Mr. Weng told a client he has thousands of rentals. Shelby Resorts mention several times. I truely believe all of us would be surprised at the availability of prime reservations if the current rules were enforced. I don't think even some renters here realize the amount of renting currently. I don't know how AM1 and others believe they can defend their actions in court. When they are in clear violations of the rules. Wyndham has sole authority on how to handle the situation. You can't say your not guilty because you did it for years. People break laws for years but when caught you are still guilty. This may sound harsh but sometimes the truth isn't what you want here

 

[Richelle]

Wyndham doesn't need to change the rules!!! Just enforce the rules in place! No VIP benefits for resale points. Hardly any owners have 5 million or more developer points to tie up points on multiple prime reservations to end up with 1 reservation. No commercial renting. I'm sure there's an exemption for Extra Holidays already in place if you interpret the wording correctly. Wyndham has the authority to use its discretion. If your reservation or points are listed or advertised on a website or through a third party that would be considered commercial by almost any court. Loss or profit doesn't matter. Commercial entities lose money everyday. Wyndham has a IT problem to fix. But I also think they are drawing out the audits to see how much business they can pickup at Extra Holidays and get a handle on how much renting was occurring. They were diffidently caught off guard at the amount of commercial renting. Extra Holidays is a great way to get new sales! If you liked your stay here let me show you how you can save money on your vacations. Just look at TripAdvisor comments sometime. People comment on renting constantly. I looked up Wyndham Waikiki Beach Walk. Mr. Weng told a client he has thousands of rentals. Shelby Resorts mention several times. I truely believe all of us would be surprised at the availability of prime reservations if the current rules were enforced. I don't think even some renters here realize the amount of renting currently. I don't know how AM1 and others believe they can defend their actions in court. When they are in clear violations of the rules. Wyndham has sole authority on how to handle the situation. You can't say your not guilty because you did it for years. People break laws for years but when caught you are still guilty. This may sound harsh but sometimes the truth isn't what you want here

You might be right for the commercial renters, but there are people who are not commercial renters that had their accounts suspended without just cause. In the mean time, they are forced to pay dues on something they cannot use. If Wyndham wants to enforce the no commercial use rule, that's fine, but don't mass suspend a bunch of accounts on a whim. If they detected an issue, they could have done the audit quickly (if they wanted to) without suspending the account. After the audit, if they detected a violation, then suspend the account. It sounds like they did a mass suspension almost all at once. That is not fair to those who did not break the rules. While doing the investigation, they can work on their IT issue. If the accounts that where violating the rules were suspended, they would have more time to fix the issue. It sounds like this was a shoot first, ask questions later type of thing. If Wyndham wanted to limit their liability, they should not have suspended accounts without doing the audit FIRST. The commercial renters may not have a court case, but the people who didn't break the rules do.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk