no more renting-transferring of Wyndham pts. between owners

[e.bram]

Wyndham is right. Megarenters and renters in general use up prime weeks at the expense of users like myself. definatelly a step in the right direction.

 

[rickandcindy23]

Wyndham is right. Megarenters and renters in general use up prime weeks at the expense of users like myself. definatelly a step in the right direction.

Do you even own Wyndham? I don't think so... and you (of all people) a very vocal person who dislikes the developers and the salespeople and their lies? Your post makes no sense to me, as I have known you to be very much against these losses of benefits and value....

 

[e.bram]

rickandcindy23:
I own 2 weeks at Wyndham's Newport Overlook.
Look at my profile before making assumptions.

 

[rickandcindy23]

rickandcindy23:
I own 2 weeks at Wyndham's Newport Overlook.
Look at my profile before making assumptions.

Two fixed weeks, or are they in points? I am not making any assumptions, as I know you to be against the changes and loss of benefits that developers throw at people, once they have purchased. Blame the company, not the other owners, if you have points and want to find someone to blame that your availability is not there. The company is renting lots of inventory themselves, so they are the most blatant mega-renter of all.

 

[BocaBum99]

Wyndham is right. Megarenters and renters in general use up prime weeks at the expense of users like myself. definatelly a step in the right direction.

Actually, your point is wrong. You clearly do not understand how the wyndham points system works for renters. Most megarenters book last minute reservations 60-days or less from checkin since they get 50% discounts from their Platinum VIP account. So, they profit more by renting out excess inventory instead of prime weeks.

This helps all owners because points that would normally expire and go unused are actually getting booked less than 60-days from checkin. It helps because those owners got something back for the points. If they got nothing, they are more likely to default on their ownerships which really hurts the Club.

 

[ecwinch]

Do you even own Wyndham? I don't think so... and you (of all people) a very vocal person who dislikes the developers and the salespeople and their lies?

Why does his ownership or lack of ownership, matter?

This helps all owners because points that would normally expire and go unused are actually getting booked less than 60-days from checkin. It helps because those owners got something back for the points. If they got nothing, they are more likely to default on their ownerships which really hurts the Club.

I understand your logic - but would have to suggest that this is a very marginal gain (if any) over us having the unit vacant and not subject to wear and tear, cleaning costs, etc. Less usage/demand tips the supply equation in our favor - potentially meaning earilier check-ins, better views, less crowded facilities, ability to add an extra day at the last minute, etc.

And Mega-Renters do go after the super-premium weeks - ie. around major events that they can rent out at a much higher premium. And since it is a business to them, they tend to be more systematic in acquiring those weeks.

Plus, the generalization is that true renters are going to be a little rougher on the property then owners. Go up to e-bay and look how many Wydham Panama City spring break weeks are being rented out. If that trend continues, that resort is going to be trashed in short order.

Yes, I know - not every college kid is going to know a 25 year old that they can take along.

 

[bnoble]

Mega-Renters do go after the super-premium weeks - ie. around major events that they can rent out at a much higher premium.

I don't think most would---not if they're smart. The return on investment is lower in most cases, and it ties up capital for too long a period. The discounted/upgraded weeks turn better profit, especially because you can buy distressed points for next to nothing, but still turn them around.

the generalization is that true renters are going to be a little rougher on the property then owners.

I'd like to see evidence of this.

The net effect of the changes, as I've written elsewhere, is that the commercial renters will no longer be able to wash points through their VIP accounts, plus the cost basis (thanks to the GC fee) will go up. This makes renting "cheap" weeks untenable, and will push all of them to go after "prime" weeks much more seriously than they do even now.

In other words, regular owners lose on these new policies. They don't win. On the other hand, there will be less competition for "better" distressed inventory at 60 days, and "regular" VIP owners will benefit from that.

 

[Jya-Ning]

And Mega-Renters do go after the super-premium weeks - ie. around major events that they can rent out at a much higher premium.

Transferred point can not be used before regular reservation time (10 month or within). I would certain hope at that time, no super-premium week is available (which the home resort owner should be able to get it from 13 month to 11 month). If that is not the case, the owner is really lack knowledge.

For that reason, I totally agree on Brian's analysis.

Jya-Ning

 

[e.bram]

I have a floating week in Newport Overlook. I did not convert to or belong to Wyndham points. The less demand for the floating weeks allows me to have a better choice of weeks. The less renters the less competation for the better weeks. in a way I am an indirect befeficiary of this new rule restricting points transfers. Anyway tyhe bylaws of my TS strictly forbids anyone from setting up a business renting out weeks at the resort(which had been ignored by Wyndham when they made it a points resort under the old rules). As another Poster pointed out the less occupancy lessens the cost of operation and translates into lower MFs.

 

[BocaBum99]

I understand your logic - but would have to suggest that this is a very marginal gain (if any) over us having the unit vacant and not subject to wear and tear, cleaning costs, etc. Less usage/demand tips the supply equation in our favor - potentially meaning earilier check-ins, better views, less crowded facilities, ability to add an extra day at the last minute, etc.

And Mega-Renters do go after the super-premium weeks - ie. around major events that they can rent out at a much higher premium. And since it is a business to them, they tend to be more systematic in acquiring those weeks.

Plus, the generalization is that true renters are going to be a little rougher on the property then owners. Go up to e-bay and look how many Wydham Panama City spring break weeks are being rented out. If that trend continues, that resort is going to be trashed in short order.

Yes, I know - not every college kid is going to know a 25 year old that they can take along.

So, you like the Club is better if it has higher vacancy rates and more owners defaulting because of it. That's a false hope because if points aren't used, then Extra Holidays rents them out. They get the profit, the resorts get the wear and tear anyway, and you have a higher delinquency rate.

I know over a dozen mega renters. How many do you know? Just look at the reservations that actually rent. You will see that it is by far the stuff that is 60-days or less from check in that is rented. It could be holidays, but it does NOT hurt owners who want prime weeks since they can get them more than 60-days from check in.

Age and family size makes more of a difference to wear and tear than renter vs. owner. A 65 year old couple who rents does on average less damage to a unit than a family of 4 with a 5 and 7 year old who are owners.

 

[BocaBum99]

As another Poster pointed out the less occupancy lessens the cost of operation and translates into lower MFs.

So, you believe that owners who get nothing for their weeks will keep paying their maintenance fees forever. And, you don't think Extra Holidays is filling it up. Interesting.

 

[ecwinch]

I know over a dozen mega renters. How many do you know? Just look at the reservations that actually rent. You will see that it is by far the stuff that is 60-days or less from check in that is rented.

I know 2 mega renters.

Yes, the majority of the market is within 60 days. But just look at e-bay on the number of summer beach weeks that are available at Myrtle Beach, Daytona Beach, etc.

I understand your position that the Mega-Renters benefit the owners by providing an outlet for those owners who want to rent out their points, keeping them in the timeshare family and paying their MF. I just think that benefit is minor.

I think that is point the Mega-Renters are missing. You are a numeric minority. For some of the recent policies to be reversed, you have to convince the majority of the owners on why these changes are bad for the majority. We know why it is bad for the Mega-Renters, but I do not think my goals are aligned with yours. Yours is a profit motive.

 

[bnoble]

In the interests of full disclosure, I am a resale peon with a measly 189K points, but have also rented very infrequently.

We know why it is bad for the Mega-Renters, but I do not think my goals are aligned with yours. Yours is a profit motive.

If a penny saved is a penny earned, we are all here, at some point, for profit motive. In the words of another TUGger, I am able to secure luxury 2BR condos for Motel 6 and Super 8 rates. We all want the best possible value from our ownerships, and that's profit, after a fashion.

The GC fees and point transfer elimination do impact me, as a regular owner, very much. For example, the mini-family reunion I was thinking about putting together in summer '09 would have been an extra $75 per family (four families in addition to my own, but only one free GC) with the GC fees, and impossible without point transfers---I don't own enough points, and Wyndham limits what they will rent to me. Having both changes in place makes some things impossible with my ownership, and other things more expensive. Neither is consistent with my personal goals.

What's more, the real impact of these changes on renters is very little. The smart ones (and most of them are smart) will just adjust their business model to the new reality. That adjustment means more competition for the weeks that *I* want---weeks that I book at 10 months in desirable locations and at high-demand times. Wyndham will make some extra money along the way. The value I can extract from the system goes down even more.

Honestly, the only people who do win with these rules are Sales (which no longer has to pay to wash points) and some VIP owners who will find less competition for 60-day inventory. And, as a resale peon, I don't particularly much care if they win.

 

[ecwinch]

We all want the best possible value from our ownerships, and that's profit, after a fashion.

The GC fees and point transfer elimination do impact me, as a regular owner, very much. For example, the mini-family reunion I was thinking about putting together in summer '09 would have been an extra $75 per family....

... And, as a resale peon, I don't particularly much care if they win.

But you should care. The problem is that Mega-Renters are essentially selling a benefit we enjoy by being a member, and this directly undermine the value of being a member. You are starting to see this with the SVO rental market. This directly contributes to lower resale prices.

I am not saying that these changes have no impact on the ordinary owner. They do, but are manageable. You probably do not host this reunion every year.

Sure, we all want to derive maximum value from our membership. And to a lesser degree, Wyndham wants us to derive additional value from our membership or they would not establish those programs. We always accuse them of being anti-owner, but it would actually be in their best interest to not offer discounts for last minute usage, as it would increase the supply of units they could rent out.

But clearly the Mega-Renters were selling those benefits at a profit. In an effort to correct this imbalance, over-corrections are natural. In the long run, a better balance will occur.

 

[rickandcindy23]

But you should care. The problem is that Mega-Renters are essentially selling a benefit we enjoy by being a member, and this directly undermine the value of being a member. You are starting to see this with the SVO rental market. This directly contributes to lower resale prices.

I am not saying that these changes have no impact on the ordinary owner. They do, but are manageable. You probably do not host this reunion every year.

Sure, we all want to derive maximum value from our membership. And to a lesser degree, Wyndham wants us to derive additional value from our membership or they would not establish those programs. We always accuse them of being anti-owner, but it would actually be in their best interest to not offer discounts for last minute usage, as it would increase the supply of units they could rent out.

But clearly the Mega-Renters were selling those benefits at a profit. In an effort to correct this imbalance, over-corrections are natural. In the long run, a better balance will occur.

Wyndham itself is using your resorts for a rental income for its greedy corporation. Don't even think they are doing anyone a favor by stopping the owners from being able to use the points they pay fees for.

 

[e.bram]

rickand cindy:
The income from Wyndham's rentals go to the trust that administers the points system, not the corporation. (or so they say).

 

[ecwinch]

Wyndham itself is using your resorts for a rental income for its greedy corporation. Don't even think they are doing anyone a favor by stopping the owners from being able to use the points they pay fees for.

Yes, but Wyndham has an inherent reason for maintaining a floor in rental prices. As you constantly hear from a variety of sources - no one is going to buy a timeshare, when they can rent that same week for less than mf.

Mega-Renters have no such floor. They undercut Wyndham in price, and where price is equal they offer a condo over a hotel room. And they do so by exploiting programs designed to increase owner value.

And beyond BocaBum's point that Mega-Renters help out distressed owners, I do not see where it benefits me to facilitate Mega-Renters making a profit. As an owner, why do I want to support individuals you run businesses that promote rentals and increase usage. Sorry.

Just look at Hyatt. There is now a very active e-bay market for rental Hyatt Key West units exploiting similar owner friendly policies. A trade that used to be very difficult. Now that you can rent a Key West unit on e-bay, why buy? As someone who is seriously looking at buying there, I definitely am giving it second thoughts after looking at the rentals on e-bay.

 

[Jya-Ning]

I don't believe I know any megarenter by person. I maybe able to guess a few people I know is depended on TS rental income, and how they do it.

The disccusion show case the flexibility of point system. You could rely on 60 days or you could rely on premium season, or you could rely on best point/rent ratio. If I want a system that have very less selctions when I face different situations, I have fixed week system. If I just want to rent out, I can pick week systems.

I am pretty sure the people that renting points, will use most of them on 60 days. If they do get premium week, it will be their own points. So, with or without these renting points, I am pretty sure if I want a premiun season, I will need to fight with the same %. The problem is the people that used to rent out points, now they will have to fight in the premiun season. So I will actually expect tougher fight in premiun season.

Not VIP, so 60 days has nothing to do with me. Very likely, it may open more in 60 days if EH does not take it out. If I want to take 60 days, I am pretty sure most will fall on the much closer days, I will either goes to RCI... exchange company, or more flexible myself.

By the way, although Trust allows EH take out inventory at 60 days, it never states that EH has to return the profits to the trust. Wyndham also own 20% of points, not trust.

There are some operation income that is stated to belong to the trust, which I am pretty sure Wyndham will have very clear accounting statement sure it all goes to trust. GC is part of them. Of course, it will be after the cost since Wyndham is the operation company.

But Each will decide for themselves.

Jya-Ning

 

[Jya-Ning]

why buy?

Sounds like you will pay less if you rent. Isn't this benefit you more? Why you have to be the owner? If I only care to visit Disney once for example, I don't have to be a Disney owner. You don't have to pay developer price, you do enjoy some benefits.

The only reason you want to make the system more unflexible, is you want to buy resale, and find some cheap way to get to Plantimun, so you can beat renting price. Or you already bought retail, and wishful that none can compete with your renting business.

Jya-Ning

 

[ecwinch]

The only reason you want to make the system more unflexible, is you want to buy resale, and find some cheap way to get to Plantimun, so you can beat renting price. Or you already bought retail, and wishful that none can compete with your renting business.
Jya-Ning

Sorry, none of the above - bought points resale. It is just that Mega-Renters do not benefit me as an owner. Our goals are not aligned - they are in it strictly for profit - there is no altruistic motive here. In a profit-motivated environment, I should do nothing if it does not benefit me. Our goals are not aligned.

 

[BocaBum99]

rickand cindy:
The income from Wyndham's rentals go to the trust that administers the points system, not the corporation. (or so they say).

So you believe their spin? Extra Holidays earns a FAT 40% commission for each rental. So, the Vacation Club trust only gets 60%.

 

[jdb0822]

my issue is with the points, I have 126K, which is doable if I use them like I have travelling off-season, but if I want to travel during a busy season, or even just want a larger accomodation, I could rent points AT A REASONABLE price, not $8-10/k.

Further, what if I book a unit at a resort that only requires 105K ?, well, then I lose the the other 21K. I can't bank it, I can't rent it.

I, as an owner, lose.

So, with ever loser, there must be a winner, so who is the winner in this case?

If Wyndumb wants to go thru with this, then they should allow us to bank unused points ANYTIME, therefore eliminating any of us having unused points.

 

[e.bram]

jdb0822:
For you the new rule is a detriment, but, for large points owners it is a great benefit since there is leee competition for the premium units. Since the large points owners have more votes they control the trust. As in any demcracy the rules benefit the majority. You can always buy more points and be benefited that way by having more access to premoum(high points) units.

 

[rickandcindy23]

jdb0822:
For you the new rule is a detriment, but, for large points owners it is a great benefit since there is leee competition for the premium units. Since the large points owners have more votes they control the trust. As in any demcracy the rules benefit the majority. You can always buy more points and be benefited that way by having more access to premoum(high points) units.

Who are these people getting to vote? No one has allowed me to vote on anything. I don't think you understand that Wyndham is controlling everything, and that NO owner is getting a vote. What in the world are you talking about? If you have fixed weeks, you can choose whatever week you want at your own resort, before any points owners can touch what you own. Just pay your maintenance fees in advance, and you will see that you can have what you want at your resort. A floating week owner gets zero benefit from the points side. I don't understand where you are benefiting in any way from the changes Wyndham recently put into place.

 

[Tia]

I....By the way, although Trust allows EH take out inventory at 60 days, it never states that EH has to return the profits to the trust. .......
Jya-Ning

Unless I missed something ...IF it is not written as Jya-Ning says... guess what!? Just like sales they are doing only what is actually in writing and legally don't have to do anything else.