Would you keep your membership in RCI if they did not Rent?

[Dani]

Hi Dani,

I think I give proof that RCI has more weeks available than II in Hawaii during this time period.

Walt

Exactly Walt... you've already proved the point. Even if there were not a single other week in RCI other than those you have listed, the point has been made.

 

[Walt]

I Don't Understanding The Bold Print Part

Walt,
This is a flaw in the weeks theory of trading. Everyone agrees that in the weeks system there must be a system of equal for equal. So trading power and VEP create a little group weeks that my week is eligable to trade into. If a week has to high a quality or to high of trading power I will never see it. If it sits on RCIs website for very long it becomes excess inventory and goes to the rentals. RCI does not wait around for the rest of us to take it at the 45 day window.

If I want to go to Hawaii its not going to be with the week I have in the bank. I'm not going to cry about it. I'll get a better trading week or I'll rent an extra vacation.

As an aside, if I can find a extra vacation for $500 or less I'll go for it even without insurance. At $500 or more I'm not so sure. AT $1200 for a week in Hawaii I would not rent from RCI without some sort of vacation insurance. Actually I would not rent at all for $1200, I would look for other options with less costly cancellation penalties and/or more flexability in checkin and checkout dates.

JMHO
Short

I don't want to put my words in your mouth. Could you explain the Bold Print part of your post?

As far as VEP, I have a question. Does VEP help the membership or RCI? Say I have a top trader and I am willing to go to any Resort that is available to me. RCI should allow me to do so by showing me all of the available Resorts. VEP trades should be my option. I should be allowed to do an override.

As an example, Let us say, I have a GC Resort in Hawaii that is a fixed week in Jan. and Feb. And Let us say, I want to go to Ocean City, MD. in April. This seems like a really, really, dumb trade.

There are many Resorts available but because of VEP, I don't see them. But, I can rent them from Snap Travel/RCI for $1000. Who does this Help? RCI or me, the RCI member? RCI says they are only protecting me by not allowing me to see the exchanges that any low trader could see. They are judging what is best for me based on the VEP.

let us talk more about this really, really, dumb trade in my example.

1) How does RCI know that I can only take one vacation this year?

2) How does RCI know that I can not afford to fly to Hawaii this year?

3) How does RCI I can not afford to spend $1000 for a week in Ocean City MD in April.

4) How does RCI know that I have worked for 9 months on a Bird Carving for the Annual Ward World Championship Wildfowl Carving Competition show in April.

5) How can RCI know that I have a buyer for the Bird Carving if the carving places in the top 3 places. And he is willing to pay me $20,000 for the carving? And the award for being the top bird carving is another $20,000.

Now, none of the above is true. (except there is a Annual Ward World Championship Wildfowl Carving Competition in Ocean City MD in April)

But, what right does RCI have to play BIG Brother and not allow me to take a trade down if it is in my best interest to do so? Why should I allow RCI to judge what is best for me if they do not have all the facts. RCI is telling me that a VEP trade is best for me.... I would rather be the judge what is best for me...Not RCI and their VEP. I am over 21 and I should the right to decide for myself.

Walt

 

[Walt]

What do you think?

Exactly Walt... you've already proved the point. Even if there were not a single other week in RCI other than those you have listed, the point has been made.

Hi Dani,

I would like to see what you think and make of the following facts.

1) While my search for Exchanges for November and December showed 6 Resorts, only 2 were for December.

2) My search for RCI Extra Vacations Rentals showed 17 Resorts Available.

Walt

 

[Dani]

Hi Dani,

I would like to see what you think and make of the following facts.

1) While my search for Exchanges for November and December showed 6 Resorts, only 2 were for December.

2) My search for RCI Extra Vacations Rentals showed 17 Resorts Available.

Walt

I think you pretty much know what I think. Besides...I have no desire to have this discusssion yet again. Maybe in a few weeks or months.

 

[Judy]

Walt,
If a week has to high a quality or to high of trading power I will never see it.

Or too low a quality

 

[Judy]

Does VEP help the membership or RCI? Say I have a top trader and I am willing to go to any Resort that is available to me. RCI should allow me to do so by showing me all of the available Resorts. VEP trades should be my option. I should be allowed to do an override.

You can do an override. First you have to call a VC. Then you have to convince him/her and possibly the supervisor that you won't complain if you don't like the resort. Then the VC can lift the VEP block and do a manual search for you. If nothing comes up, you can call back a million times every day until you get your trade, unless members with ongoing searches get it first. Or you can take your business elsewhere.
IMHO, RCI benefits from the VEP restrictions because if you and other members can't see the exchange options you want, there's a better possibility that those weeks will be available for rental.

As an example, Let us say, I have a GC Resort in Hawaii that is a fixed week in Jan. and Feb. And Let us say, I want to go to Ocean City, MD. in April. This seems like a really, really, dumb trade.
There are many Resorts available but because of VEP, I don't see them.

VEP shouldn't keep you from seeing off-season resorts. It will keep you from seeing resorts that RCI thinks are too good or not good enough in quality for you.

 

[short]

Clarification

I don't want to put my words in your mouth. Could you explain the Bold Print part of your post?
Walt

Walt,
My apologies. I meant to say if my VEP is to high or low and my trading power is to low.

As an example I will offer my lower VEP week for Orlando for October 2006. This week sees almost all of Orlando but not the HGVC on I drive.

I go to extra vacations all(at least I thing all) of the Orlando inventory for October is in Extra Vacations for $340. per week including HGVC I Drive. I believe this is VEP restriction at work. It has created excess inventory because I cannot trade into it.

As an example of trading power my lower trading power week does not see any of the HI weeks mentioned previously. I as well as probobly lots of other weeks cannot get an HI week. These weeks historically then become excess inventory and go on sale as extra vacations or Snap travel.

Right or wrong, the weeks system of protecting the trading power of Hawaii and high VEP weeks leaves some weeks out there to be rented. Yes perhaps RCI should leave them for the 45 day window folks. Yes perhaps RCI should have the weeks be more competatively priced.

As a point of clarification I have rented a week in EV that was clearly a points week. I check and it was not available in weeks at all. Other weeks I've rented on EV are clearly weeks exchanges moved to EV as excess inventory.

Short

 

[Walt]

No Problem

I think you pretty much know what I think. Besides...I have no desire to have this discusssion yet again. Maybe in a few weeks or months.

No Problem. That seems fair. Anytime you want to talk about it you know where I am.

Walt

 

[regatta333]

VEP restrictions with Ongoing Searches

If I place an ongoing search against a specific resort that I am normally precluded from seeing due to VEP restrictions (requested resort has lower VEP), will this match if the resort becomes available? Just curious as to whether a specific resort request on an ongoing search will automatically override VEP.

 

[timeos2]

VEP is a weeks tool

But, what right does RCI have to play BIG Brother and not allow me to take a trade down if it is in my best interest to do so? Why should I allow RCI to judge what is best for me if they do not have all the facts. RCI is telling me that a VEP trade is best for me.... I would rather be the judge what is best for me...Not RCI and their VEP. I am over 21 and I should the right to decide for myself.

Walt

The whole idea of VEP is only necessary because week for week trades are almost never equal. It is easy to understand that since a weeks owner only gets one bite at the apple with their week they may, despite all protests to the contrary, complain when the week they get is far below the quality they gave up. RCI tries to avoid this by blocking them from such weeks. How much better it is to simply make the lower quality unit/time just cost less thus leaving "change" for the exchanger. RCI Points accomplishes that. If a points owner is willing to take a week with only some of their points then that time can't be rented as it was claimed through the exchange system. It went to an owner, not an outsider. And both sides - depositor and user - feel they are getting fair value. It is the way things are supposed to work.

 

[Judy]

If I place an ongoing search against a specific resort that I am normally precluded from seeing due to VEP restrictions (requested resort has lower VEP), will this match if the resort becomes available? Just curious as to whether a specific resort request on an ongoing search will automatically override VEP.

No. Your search could run for years while hundreds of weeks at the resort you want become available and you will never match. Even if you ask RCI to lift the VEP restriction for an ongoing search, they will not do it. They claim their system can't. Hello....somebody set up the system that way

 

[Walt]

Wow! Bill Rogers quote!

Wow!

Even Bill is thinking Rentals!

Time-share rental "is one of the true travel bargains today," said Bill Rogers of the Timeshare Users Group at Tug2.net, which was created by time-share owners.

"If I were getting involved with time share again from the start, knowing what I do now, I would not buy a time share but rent from current owners instead," said Rogers. "Usually you can find great rental deals just about anywhere you want to go and at prices that are sometimes near the annual maintenance fees" that owners pay to their resorts.


http://www.tugbbs.com/forums/showthread.php?p=132901#post132901

Walt

 

[Carolinian]

It is the number of exchanges being made that is decreasing rather than the number of members. I believe that many are taking a wait and see attitude hoping that things will improve, or just waiting until their membership runs out.

As I have said before, RCI created the best timeshare exchange system that has ever been set up back in the days before rentals and points, and it is sad to see them fly it into the ground. For me to stay with RCI, they will need to make some serious changes both in the rental scheme and in the interface between Weeks and Points. While it is a long shot, I keep my fingers crossed that they will come to their senses at some point and get back to being the great exchange company they used to be, and so will keep my RCI membership until it runs out, but not renew it thereafter unless there are some major changes. At the same time, I have substantially reduced the deposits I make with RCI, prefering to give them to independents.

Exactly,

Contray to popular belief, membership in RCI has increased and not decreased.

There are only two reasons for which I would drop my RCI membership. First and foremost, its all about the exchanges that I am able to obtain. Period. If the day comes when I am no longer able to make the exchanges that I feel are appropriate for the week and/or weeks that I own, I will drop my membership. Thankfully, I continue to obtain the exchanges that I desire. I would also drop RCI if the cost to exchange increased to the point where it was no longer cost effective to exchange through RCI. I think that an ever-increasing fee structure is a much bigger danger to their long-term prognosis than rentals ever could be.

 

[Carolinian]

I think the only way that such facts are going to be established with direct evidence is through interrogatories and depostions in either class action or consumer protection lititation against RCI. However, circumstantial evidence is sufficient to prevail in a civil matter (and even to convict in a criminal matter) and there seems to be an ever growing body of circumstantial evidence on this issue.

Most here know that I am not a strong proponet of the Cendant RCI business model, the open-timeshare model, as opposed to the DeHaan Model.

Most here also know that no one else here, or likely anywhere, has studied and documented a specific area for a specific timeframe as long or as thoroughly as I have. My study goes back to the advent of on-line transactions via RCI.com, 1997 I believe.

Nothing I have done, either externally or from within RCI, has been able to establish a link between RCI's business model and the disappearance of availability of prime resorts in prime months. It just so happens that what I used to see and no longer can occurred during the timeframe when RCI has focused on, in fact highlighted, their rental programs.

More power to anyone who can establish the connection.

 

[Carolinian]

The big problem is that Points often ignores or downplays, the most important factors in the relative value of t/s weeks, and that is, of course, LOCATION and supply vs. demand. A Motel 6 conversion in central London will always be more valuable than a Platinum Crown in an overbuilt location like Orlando, Branson, or the Canary Islands. VEP seems to be generally ignored, as it should be, when one is trading into an overbuilt area.

The whole idea of VEP is only necessary because week for week trades are almost never equal. It is easy to understand that since a weeks owner only gets one bite at the apple with their week they may, despite all protests to the contrary, complain when the week they get is far below the quality they gave up. RCI tries to avoid this by blocking them from such weeks. How much better it is to simply make the lower quality unit/time just cost less thus leaving "change" for the exchanger. RCI Points accomplishes that. If a points owner is willing to take a week with only some of their points then that time can't be rented as it was claimed through the exchange system. It went to an owner, not an outsider. And both sides - depositor and user - feel they are getting fair value. It is the way things are supposed to work.

 

[JeffV]

Most of us are quietly making good exchanges and happily enjoying life rather than bemoaning what used to be and threatening litigation at the drop of a hat.
I don't think things are going back to "the good old days" and if that is what you are waiting on, cut and run.

 

[Joe M]

It is the number of exchanges being made that is decreasing rather than the number of members.

I keep copies of old RCI Disclosure Guides in .pdf format for both Weeks and Points on my computer so that I can track exchange statistics. RCI and II are required to disclose their exchange statistics by statute. I have the last three reported annual figures for RCI:

2002>>2.49 million exchanges

2003>>2.53 million exchanges

2004>>2.61 million exchanges

I fail to see a drop in exchanges.

 

[Carolinian]

Funny thing, that those disclosure statements don't track with some of the other disclosures that RCI is required to file, that have been discussed on these boards a number of times.

 

[Joe M]

Funny thing, that those disclosure statements don't track with some of the other disclosures that RCI is required to file, that have been discussed on these boards a number of times.

I can't follow what you are saying in your statement. If you are aware of other RCI disclosures that conflict with the above figures then please advise. A link to such disclosed statements by RCI would be helpful.

 

[Carolinian]

Those statements have been discussed here on TUG quite a number of times, and are part of a Cendent filing with, as I recall, the SEC.

 

[Joe M]

Those statements have been discussed here on TUG quite a number of times, and are part of a Cendent filing with, as I recall, the SEC.

Thank you. The 2004 Cendant Form 10-K reported a drop in exchanges of 2%. That exactly matches the Disclosure Guide figures for RCI Weeks:

2003>>2.159 million Weeks exchanges

2004>>2.112 million Weeks exchanges

But the Disclosure Guide figures for RCI Points show:

2003>>.370 million Points exchanges

2004>>.496 million Points exchanges

so when the figures are combined there is an overall increase in exchanges.

I do not think the Disclosure Guide conflicts with the 10-K filing. The two documents refer to different parts of the exchange program.

 

[Carolinian]

However, in the filing two years ago, there is very specific language that says that RCI had a loss of revenue from a decrease in the number of exchanges but made up for it by an increase in fees. That language did not single out either program and obviously lumped both together. Although that specific language does not seem to be in the most recent filing, common sense would indicate that, again, for purposes of that filing they must be lumped together.

 

[Walt]

How does RCI count Extra Vacations?

Thank you. The 2004 Cendant Form 10-K reported a drop in exchanges of 2%. That exactly matches the Disclosure Guide figures for RCI Weeks:

2003>>2.159 million Weeks exchanges

2004>>2.112 million Weeks exchanges

But the Disclosure Guide figures for RCI Points show:

2003>>.370 million Points exchanges

2004>>.496 million Points exchanges

so when the figures are combined there is an overall increase in exchanges.

I do not think the Disclosure Guide conflicts with the 10-K filing. The two documents refer to different parts of the exchange program.

Do they count rentals as exchanges in the above numbers?


I have rented from II. My history of rentals and exchanges shows the Rentals as Gateway and Exchanges as Exchanges.

I have also rented from RCI. RCI does not call it an Extra Vacation. The Confirmation sheet is the SAME for Rentals and for Exchanges. Below is part my my confimation sheet for my RCI Rental. Please note they call it an Exchange. WHY?

Could it be to hide their Rental practices from the Resorts?

Could it be to hide their Rental practices from the RCI membership?

Could it be to hide their Rental practices from the State and Local Tax departments?



So I ask all of the defenders of RCI this question.

Why would RCI not call it a Rental?


ONLINE VACATION CONFIRMATION

TERMS AND CONDITIONS
1. Late Check-In: Please notify the resort in advance if you anticipate a late arrival.
2. Transferring an Exchange: This confirmation is transferable only with an RCI Guest Certificate.
3. Cancelling a Confirmed Exchange: Should your plans change, please notify RCI immediately. Cancelling early may enable you to retain a portion of your exchange fee. Please call RCI for details. Our Vacation Guides will be available to assist you.
4. Unit Assignments: The resort reserves the right to assign a different unit of the same size and occupancy as the unit confirmed above.
5. Fees and Assessments: When you utilize the RCI exchange system, you warrant that you have paid, or will pay when due, all maintenance fees and other assessments with respect to the vacation time you own at your resort.
6. Guest Certificates: The RCI member who has received the confirmed exchange is the only individual who may request a guest certificate.


Walt

 

["Roger"]

Do they count rentals as exchanges in the above numbers?

No. Here are the exact words...

"Timeshare points and rental transaction revenue (rentals of unused timeshare inventory) grew $24 million (28%) driven principally by an 18% increase in points and rental transaction volume and a 14% increase in the average price per rental transaction. Revenue trends reflect the expected shift in the RCI timeshare membership base toward a greater mix of points members from traditional one-week timeshare members. Points transactions are those executed by points members for other than a standard, one-week stay at an RCI timeshare property. Rental transactions are rentals of unused timeshare inventory to RCI members and non-members."

The bottom line is that any points for products transactions and points for partial weeks are not counted within the number of exchanges. Nor do any of the Extra Vacation transactions.

I forget what the current number of Points owners is, but I am sure that it is now over 10%. RCI has reported that about 30% of points are used for points for products. That alone would account for a sizable decrease in the number of standard exchanges.

These numbers and the passage above have been posted before. In response, Carolinian argued that most of the Points people were using up their points on 9,000 point exchanges within the 45 day period. (These would count as exchanges.) Thus, he claimed that Points people are making at least as many if not more exchanges than what they would have prior. So, his contention was still that the total number of exchanges is down.

I have no idea where he came up the numbers (or, his estimate) for this contention. (They would be about the only avenue left to defend the claim that exchanges are down.) If Carolinian's claim is true, however, this would mean Weeks owners have nothing to fear with regard to the plundering and pillaging of their system. Apparently, points owners are doing almost nothing but exchanging for products, making some exchanges within the Points system (those who read only this board would be surprised how often Points owners say that they do this and nothing but this), and moping up the exhanges that Weeks owners have passed over. They wouldn't have any points left over for taking anything else out of the system.

Actually, I don't think this is what is happening. I think when you take into account the shift toward points usage, which Cendant openly cites in the above statement, exhanges are actually up, but modestly.

 

[Judy]

The exchange statistics don't take into account the members who took something they didn't really want, just to avoid losing their week.