Wyndham limiting access by non-owners during most sought-after dates/locations

[dioxide45]

I have a problem with these restrictions, I feel if you buy at a specific resort you own that right to stay there OR rent the reservation out if you do not want to use it that year, that should be your right as an owner.
I am a landlord who have several tenants who are not paying rent due to rental mortatorium , I cannot evict them.
I feel this restriction policy is a loss of a right as an owner of the property, if you are using points from another resort to make the reservation , maybe that's a different story, maybe wyndham owners should have priority over large owners.

Do any of these restrictions apply if you book your home resort during the home resort priority period?

 

[chapjim]

I would also say this may help the all resale points owners.. More inventory for them while only paying pennies for their contract...

Dare we call them "little guys?" At least some of them -- the ones with a single contract for 200K-300K points.

 

[55plus]

Do any of these restrictions apply if you book your home resort during the home resort priority period?

In the past I’ve tried to book at two of my home resorts at 13 months out to no avail. Ocean Walk for Bike Week and Daytona 500, and Old Town Alexandra for Presidential Inaugurations. Granted, some one bedrooms were available. If I wanted a two bedroom or larger I’d have to rent it from an owner. I’m retire so I can plan 13 months out. I’m sure the majority of owners work and can’t plan that far out, whereas renters can plan rentals and do book prime time at prime locations 13 months out to use as a commercial venture leaving the leftover units for owners who work, if there are any left. It’s not right for an owner to have to rent at a home resort when other owners are renting out units there, or at any resort for that matter. Personal travel/usage should come before commercial venture. Ya, I know sales weasels talked about renting to off set costs, but if you actually read the contract you signed, it states something about anything said or promised is moot if not spelled out in the contract. I’m lobbying Wyndham for the restrictions to become permanent, with maybe some tweaking and some additional resorts/timeframes added.

 

[chapjim]

In the past I’ve tried to book at two of my home resorts at 13 months out to no avail. Ocean Walk for Bike Week and Daytona 500, and Old Town Alexandra for Presidential Inaugurations. Granted, some one bedrooms were available. If I wanted a two bedroom or larger I’d have to rent it from an owner. I’m retire so I can plan 13 months out. I’m sure the majority of owners work and can’t plan that far out, whereas renters can plan rentals and do book prime time at prime locations 13 months out to use as a commercial venture leaving the leftover units for owners who work, if there are any left. It’s not right for an owner to have to rent at a home resort when other owners are renting out units there, or at any resort for that matter. Personal travel/usage should come before commercial venture. Ya, I know sales weasels talked about renting to off set costs, but if you actually read the contract you signed, it states something about anything said or promised is moot if not spelled out in the contract. I’m lobbying Wyndham for the restrictions to become permanent, with maybe some tweaking and some additional resorts/timeframes added.

I've reserved Bike Week at Daytona for the last fifteen years or so. Used to have to call when they opened the phone lines. Now, you just have to stay up late (if you're in the east).

 

[55plus]

I would also say this may help the all resale points owners.. More inventory for them while only paying pennies for their contract...

Points are points whether purchased from a developer or on the secondary market. The deeds are the same. The same goes for CWA. Purchasing directly from a developer may give you some additional perks/benefits, but priority to use as a commercial venture over owners’ personal travel/use isn’t one of them.

 

[abeachbum]

IF that happens... why do any of us care? You specifically mentioned helping the little guy. If a mega renter exits, and Wyndham gets points back to re-sell to some new buyer that does not affect you or me negatively one bit. If anything, it helps us likely by not having to compete with someone who knows how to most efficiently get units, owns 10,000,000 points and is making multi-week reservations at the high demand resorts and then hawking them online. The average CWA buyer Wyndham is selling units to owns less than 200k points and maybe takes one vacation a year in the system. I would rather compete with these type owners...

I've pondered these facts, related to availability by non owners and had to question... do mega renters really hurt things? Could it be possible they create a balance that benefits the system? Always remember, no matter who owns the points they are going to be used. And the little guy wants the same reservations the mega renter does.

Get rid of the mega renter and the points go back to Wyndham. They sell those to multiple new owners. Little guys. They buy 154K of those 10 millions points to take that one typical vacation per year. This creates nearly 65 new owners. Like the mega renter, they seek those desired dates. They are going after the same bookings as the mega renter was, and the rest of us are. Now we are competing against 65 others, instead of just 1 mega renter. Get rid of another 60 million point mega renter, and you add over 450 more people chasing what you want. No, they are not all going for an identical time, but given there are 52 weeks in a year, and many of those are weeks no one is interested in... it does increase the competition. Here is where it is important: The mega renter can only book 1 unit at a time, just like anyone else. So it takes them time to book their rooms. This creates time for you and me to book what we want also. And there are limits / caps as to how much inventory they can book. At some point, they have to stop. I guess the way I see it, I have a better chance competing against 1 person than having hundreds more out there. It may be different that what you think, but consider it. Think about it........

 

[55plus]

But there is more than just one mega renter out there, and a lot of other renters are not what one would call a mega renter who also do rentals. The current restrictions benefit those who use their points for personal travel. It’s more fair to compete against those who use their points for personal use than those who use their points as a commercial venture. Allowing non owners to stay at resorts over those that actually own points who want that same reservation is just wrong. There are how many other resorts and timeframes that do not fall under the restriction? Those are still available to use as rentals.

 

[wjappraise]

Allowing non owners to stay at resorts over those that actually own points who want that same reservation is just wrong.

While I can certainly respect your opinion, I cannot say it’s accurate or true. Each owner has the same access to the preferred inventory at 13 months for the home resort. I have found that when I make reservations at 13 months I get the rooms I want every time. Including two bedroom units and even three bedroom units at Ocean Walk. Of course, if I wait a few days they are gone. But I can’t blame the boogie man (mega renter) for my ineptitude.

Also, being an “owner” does include certain rights including allowing guests to stay in my stead. Restricting those rights to placate ones who don’t plan ahead is just wrong.

Don’t forget - most guest reservations are NOT for rentals - they are for family and friends of the owner. So casting aspersions on the use of guest reservations is just wrong.

And remember that Wyndham is driven by sales. And the best supply of new buyers is from our guests. Try as I may, I am not successful in telling family and friends to NOT take the timeshare tour. But still many take it. And sadly about 1/4 of those actually buy. And they never use it correctly (because they don’t stay up til midnight at 13 months to reserve a special week). But that illustrates the fact that Wyndham really does want our guests staying in our rooms. My guess is that their sell success rate is better with guests than it is with grizzled owners.

Just my opinion.

Wes.

 

[paxsarah]

They are going after the same bookings as the mega renter was, and the rest of us are. Now we are competing against 65 others, instead of just 1 mega renter.

I remember Ron Parise mentioning that even with all of his rentals, he was only one man and he could only make one reservation at a time when ARP opened. Even if you assume that a megarenter is online at midnight making a reservation at 13 or 10 months (which the vast majority of the time they're probably not), they can only make one reservation at a time. You can beat them.

 

[dgalati]

While I can certainly respect your opinion, I cannot say it’s accurate or true. Each owner has the same access to the preferred inventory at 13 months for the home resort. I have found that when I make reservations at 13 months I get the rooms I want every time. Including two bedroom units and even three bedroom units at Ocean Walk. Of course, if I wait a few days they are gone. But I can’t blame the boogie man (mega renter) for my ineptitude.

Also, being an “owner” does include certain rights including allowing guests to stay in my stead. Restricting those rights to placate ones who don’t plan ahead is just wrong.

Don’t forget - most guest reservations are NOT for rentals - they are for family and friends of the owner. So casting aspersions on the use of guest reservations is just wrong.

And remember that Wyndham is driven by sales. And the best supply of new buyers is from our guests. Try as I may, I am not successful in telling family and friends to NOT take the timeshare tour. But still many take it. And sadly about 1/4 of those actually buy. And they never use it correctly (because they don’t stay up til midnight at 13 months to reserve a special week). But that illustrates the fact that Wyndham really does want our guests staying in our rooms. My guess is that their sell success rate is better with guests than it is with grizzled owners.

Just my opinion.

Wes.

Do you think all owners are grizzled? Guests are their new revenue steam and most owners that have learned the system they could never sell to. Keep in mind Wyndham does put shareholders above what owners think. It also helps their bottom line.

 

[55plus]

If I recall, you can make as many reservations at your home resort as long as you have the points for that resort. And, I don’t have a problem with owners‘ family and friends as guests, but if it is listed for rent online then it’s not for family and friends. It turns into a commercial venture when it’s listed for rent.

 

[dgalati]

I've pondered these facts, related to availability by non owners and had to question... do mega renters really hurt things? Could it be possible they create a balance that benefits the system? Always remember, no matter who owns the points they are going to be used. And the little guy wants the same reservations the mega renter does.

Get rid of the mega renter and the points go back to Wyndham. They sell those to multiple new owners. Little guys. They buy 154K of those 10 millions points to take that one typical vacation per year. This creates nearly 65 new owners. Like the mega renter, they seek those desired dates. They are going after the same bookings as the mega renter was, and the rest of us are. Now we are competing against 65 others, instead of just 1 mega renter. Get rid of another 60 million point mega renter, and you add over 450 more people chasing what you want. No, they are not all going for an identical time, but given there are 52 weeks in a year, and many of those are weeks no one is interested in... it does increase the competition. Here is where it is important: The mega renter can only book 1 unit at a time, just like anyone else. So it takes them time to book their rooms. This creates time for you and me to book what we want also. And there are limits / caps as to how much inventory they can book. At some point, they have to stop. I guess the way I see it, I have a better chance competing against 1 person than having hundreds more out there. It may be different that what you think, but consider it. Think about it........

Yea but what about the mega renter that only bought 1 million developer points but has 5 million resale points that can be used with the VIP discounts and free upgrades. How much inventory could be created by eliminating the 50% discounts on resale points? To many VIP owners have abused this loophole to rent cheap reservations at the expense of owners looking to book for personal use. It also is competition for EH.

 

[VacayKat]

I recently checked Extra Holidays for rentals during the restricted timeframes and found no rentals at the subject resorts during the restricted timeframes. As for the other rental sites that Wyndham doesn't control, there may be rentals, but they are most likely from owners who are not aware of the restrictions. If Wyndham does rent during the restricted timeframe, which I don't think they will, owners might have a claim for damages through a class action.

Extraholidays advertises their inventory on those external sites such as travelocity etc. if you see it there- it’s from Wyndham.

 

[wjappraise]

I don’t have a problem with owners‘ family and friends as guests, but if it is listed for rent online then it’s not for family and friends. It turns into a commercial venture when it’s listed for rent.

But the current restrictions don’t differentiate between guest and renter. So please don’t hurt those of us who use our ownership as we see fit.

 

[55plus]

Extraholidays advertises their inventory on those external sites such as travelocity etc. if you see it there- it’s from Wyndham.

But if Wyndham has listing on these other websites during the restricted timeframes then Wyndham needs to be called out for it. Does Wyndham currently have rentals listed on these other sites during the restricted timeframe?

 

[tschwa2]

Does it seem like this change is aimed at knocking out Koala, the same as the last big change was aimed at points managers, basically at businesses that make their business to rent out owner inventory.

 

[dgalati]

Does it seem like this change is aimed at knocking out Koala, the same as the last big change was aimed at points managers, basically at businesses that make their business to rent out owner inventory.

This could be a angle to eliminate EH competition.

 

[55plus]

But the current restrictions don’t differentiate between guest and renter. So please don’t hurt those of us who use our ownership as we see fit.

Didn’t I read you can travel with guests twice during the restricted timeframe as long as an owner travels with them? That fixes that and provides a loophole to rent as long as an owner also has a reservation during that timeline. Instead of each renter eating up a block of reservation, more are open to owners’ use for personal travel. I guess it’s a win win for everyone - rental use and owner travel.

 

[wjappraise]

Didn’t I read you can travel with guests twice during the restricted timeframe as long as an owner travels with them? That fixes that and provides a loophole to rent as long as an owner also has a reservation during that timeline. Instead of each renter eating up a block of reservation, more are open to owners’ use for personal travel. I guess it’s a win win for everyone - rental use and owner travel.

Ummm. I have friends going on a honeymoon. I have zero interest in accompanying them. They have less than zero interest in me accompanying them.

Guests may travel with the owner. But often they don’t.

No guest reservation restrictions will free up enough inventory to make up for delays from other owners who don’t make reservations early enough.

 

[dgalati]

Didn’t I read you can travel with guests twice during the restricted timeframe as long as an owner travels with them? That fixes that and provides a loophole to rent as long as an owner also has a reservation during that timeline. Instead of each renter eating up a block of reservation, more are open to owners’ use for personal travel. I guess it’s a win win for everyone - rental use and owner travel.

They should put a penalty on this loophole if the owner doesn't show up for the reservation booked.

 

[CO skier]

I've pondered these facts, related to availability by non owners and had to question... do mega renters really hurt things?

Yes, there really is no question about this. Wyndham acknowledges this and is slowly grinding away at the problem. Owners know it also, and are supporting Wyndham's efforts. Other timeshare companies are also attacking the problem.

Get rid of the mega renter and the points go back to Wyndham. They sell those to multiple new owners. Little guys. They buy 154K of those 10 millions points to take that one typical vacation per year. This creates nearly 65 new owners. Like the mega renter, they seek those desired dates. They are going after the same bookings as the mega renter was, and the rest of us are. Now we are competing against 65 others, instead of just 1 mega renter. Get rid of another 60 million point mega renter, and you add over 450 more people chasing what you want.

You can bet that most of those 60 million points are booked into premium reservations by the megarenter to maximize profits. If the megarenter gets out of the business, how many of those 60 million points are sold to new owners who do not book premium reservations? How many of those points are sold to new owners who do not plan ahead or cannot book ahead due to vacation scheduling at their work? How many of those points will expire unused by the new owners?

troy12n is exactly right, and there are facts to back it up.

In WorldMark, where statistics are available to owners, only 6-7% of reservations are booked at 13 months. I would much rather compete against 450 new owners who (statistically) will book 3.6-4.2 million points of premium reservations than 1 megarenter who is booking 60 million points of premium reservations.

Sure, other owners who do plan 13 months ahead will step-in to book the remaining 55.8-56.4 million points of premium reservations where the competition has been reduced by the absence of the megarenter. The difference is that in the owner priority periods, most of those reservations will be booked for owners' personal usage and not commercial usage.

 

[dioxide45]

They should put a penalty on this loophole if the owner doesn't show up for the reservation booked.

Isn't there already a penalty in the lost points they had to use to book the overlapping stay?

 

[r4rab]

Didn’t I read you can travel with guests twice during the restricted timeframe as long as an owner travels with them? That fixes that and provides a loophole to rent as long as an owner also has a reservation during that timeline. Instead of each renter eating up a block of reservation, more are open to owners’ use for personal travel. I guess it’s a win win for everyone - rental use and owner travel.

I read it that you can use as many guest reservations as often as you like if an owner is travelling with the guest. I also read it as twice a year you can use a GC during the restricted time at a restricted resort without the owner present.

This would seem to cover the various family trips & reunions (owner present, needing at least 1 day overlap) and still allow for a couple prime time rentals or gifts.

 

[CO skier]

Isn't there already a penalty in the lost points they had to use to book the overlapping stay?

The cost of the overlapping stay is more a nuisance tax than any kind of "penalty" if it protects more than a dozen guest rentals at a time.

 

[ilya]

Points are points whether purchased from a developer or on the secondary market. The deeds are the same. The same goes for CWA. Purchasing directly from a developer may give you some additional perks/benefits, but priority to use as a commercial venture over owners’ personal travel/use isn’t one of them.

Exactly.. More availability for them since booking is limited for guests. I am sure Wyndham doesn't want someone who paid a few thousand dollars for a 1 mill contract to have the same benefits as someone who paid over $100,000... With all the chipping away of benefits for those platinum owners its looking more like they are treated the same..

If they really wanted to put a halt on renting for guest they should train the sales people not to lie..