WEEKS owners - OPINIONS - new RCI Program

[Tommart]

Rentals

Actually, my UK resort also allows owners, including high season owners, to rent HOA inventory in the off and shoulder season very cheaply. It is more than just cleaning fees, but still a bargain. I know of a couple of other UK resorts that also do that..........

.

Massanutten has a rental program.

They take your week, charge $25, and "if" it rents, give you 75%. At times they only rent a weekend and charge accordingly.

I know one person who tried to rent his week 24 unit, and it didn't rent at all. He lost everything that year, plus $25.

This summer, my wife and I did rent two nights over one weekend, and paid $240. I bet the owner got about $150.

I'd rather take my RCI TPs than gamble it will be rented out. Guess for some, they would rather have some money or nothing.

 

[Mel]

up with their own ways to boost the underlying value of their deeds. While an exchange program is great, and getting extra benefit through that exchange program is wonderful, that's what it is, extra value!

While it is true that some resorts are hogtied by regulations that say they must charge the same maintenance fees to all owners, those same regulations do require all members to have the same usage. Perhaps some of those HOAs need to have a frank discussion with their members about the "fairness" of their programs, and the implications of a "mass exodus" of owners. My resort, Tropical Breeze has just such a discussion several years ago when we had to rebuild following hurricane Opal. around 30% of the weeks were turned back to the HOA, and we filed an amendment to the condo docs underlying every deed. Some units were eliminated, and the few remaining owners of those units were reassigned other units for the same weeks. While eliminating units is not a true option, perhaps reducing the number of owners by combining deed would. Assume you have 100 units in your resort, with 5100 ownership weeks, so each week represents 1/5100 share of the resort. If you combined usage for the 10 lest valued weeks, giving each blue week owner the right to use 2 units, you reduce the number of deeds by 500 to 4600. Now each owner owns a larger share of the resort (yes, with a slightly larger maintenance fee), but not moreso than if 500 of those owners simply turn their weeks in.

Owners of peak weeks see a slight increase in their fees, but a stronger resort.
Owners of poor week who use their weeks can have 2 units to use.
Owners who exchange can deposit two weeks and get a combined deposit credit closer to what the peak week owners have.

The condo docs could be amended to deal with such a change, or the HOA could simply keep ownership of those returned weeks, and simply give the owners of the low weeks the opportunity to use/deposit those weeks. While some peak week owners might balk at the idea of what amounts to a free giveaway to the other owners, they might be shown that it is still in their own best interest.

This is only one possible solution - if owners get together perhaps each resort can come up with a solution to fit their particular situation.

 

[AFARR]

Your resort OBBC has also been creative in marketing resales to local residents, who can then use the facilities yearround. Some UK resorts have done the same with offseason weeks. Indeed, Wychnor Park was originally marketed by its developer primarily to local people as ''a country club that is also a timeshare''. Some resorts, however, either do not have the parking or would have issues with amenities getting overcrowded, to do that.

Even BIS Duck allows owners 'day use' (I don't know that they are marketing it actively however). My OBBC II MF bill came and has a resale flyer in it (weeks are about $2-$3k...including a 1 Br Bright red week...I'd be on it if it was a 2 Br at that rate). Not a bad way to keep the weeks in owners hands (and get MFs rolling in).

AFARR

 

[Carolinian]

Massanutten has a rental program.

They take your week, charge $25, and "if" it rents, give you 75%. At times they only rent a weekend and charge accordingly.

I know one person who tried to rent his week 24 unit, and it didn't rent at all. He lost everything that year, plus $25.

This summer, my wife and I did rent two nights over one weekend, and paid $240. I bet the owner got about $150.

I'd rather take my RCI TPs than gamble it will be rented out. Guess for some, they would rather have some money or nothing.

The program I was talking about was one that allows members to rent HOA inventory in off season at a cheap rate. This is not a rental of members' owned weeks, nor can the general public rent those HOA weeks.

Stouts Hill has a program like you refer to, but they are not developer controlled, and the HOA board, made up of homeowners runs that rental program to benefit the members not the HOA. They seem to be rather successful with it. A board member told me that it was set up after they started getting too many complaints of members who had been using RCI not getting the exchanges they were used to getting in the past anymore.

 

[Carolinian]

Even BIS Duck allows owners 'day use' (I don't know that they are marketing it actively however). My OBBC II MF bill came and has a resale flyer in it (weeks are about $2-$3k...including a 1 Br Bright red week...I'd be on it if it was a 2 Br at that rate). Not a bad way to keep the weeks in owners hands (and get MFs rolling in).

AFARR

Most OBX timeshares have governing documents that permit day use, and most if not all have day use owners. Indeed, at least one right now has a day use owner who is on its HOA board. Not all have actively marketed to try to sell to this group due to some having potential to overload facilities.

It would not surprise me at all to see BIS Duck doing exactly the same marketing, as it now has the same management company as OBBC. It may be a little harder to do that, as Duck is farther from the population center of the county and the turnoff to Duck at Kitty Hawk can be a bottleneck in the summer. Still, I think there should be good potential there.

 

[Carolinian]

Destruction of a resort and rebuilding is a time you can do things like that, especially when there is a safety valve for those who do not agreed to turn in their deeds and take an insurance payout. That way, instead of a 30% ''no'' vote, those people just walk. Absent a major disaster, with an insurance payout, that is just not going to happen in most instances as amending declarations of covenants in a timeshare is an incredibly hard thing to do.

It is much more productive to seek non-exchange markets for those weeks.

up with their own ways to boost the underlying value of their deeds. While an exchange program is great, and getting extra benefit through that exchange program is wonderful, that's what it is, extra value!

While it is true that some resorts are hogtied by regulations that say they must charge the same maintenance fees to all owners, those same regulations do require all members to have the same usage. Perhaps some of those HOAs need to have a frank discussion with their members about the "fairness" of their programs, and the implications of a "mass exodus" of owners. My resort, Tropical Breeze has just such a discussion several years ago when we had to rebuild following hurricane Opal. around 30% of the weeks were turned back to the HOA, and we filed an amendment to the condo docs underlying every deed. Some units were eliminated, and the few remaining owners of those units were reassigned other units for the same weeks. While eliminating units is not a true option, perhaps reducing the number of owners by combining deed would. Assume you have 100 units in your resort, with 5100 ownership weeks, so each week represents 1/5100 share of the resort. If you combined usage for the 10 lest valued weeks, giving each blue week owner the right to use 2 units, you reduce the number of deeds by 500 to 4600. Now each owner owns a larger share of the resort (yes, with a slightly larger maintenance fee), but not moreso than if 500 of those owners simply turn their weeks in.

Owners of peak weeks see a slight increase in their fees, but a stronger resort.
Owners of poor week who use their weeks can have 2 units to use.
Owners who exchange can deposit two weeks and get a combined deposit credit closer to what the peak week owners have.

The condo docs could be amended to deal with such a change, or the HOA could simply keep ownership of those returned weeks, and simply give the owners of the low weeks the opportunity to use/deposit those weeks. While some peak week owners might balk at the idea of what amounts to a free giveaway to the other owners, they might be shown that it is still in their own best interest.

This is only one possible solution - if owners get together perhaps each resort can come up with a solution to fit their particular situation.

 

[JEFF H]

Again, the old wisdom for many years has been OWN when & where you want to vacation. Exchanging is just a side option done sometimes.

That may be good advise but it does not reflect the vacation ownership reality of the last 10 years.
Most people do not want to goto the same place year after year. They want variety and to explore new places.
Thats why almost all timeshares are affiliated with a exchange company.

 

[elaine]

we bought to use, but our tastes changed

our week 32 2 BR NC beach week was perfect for us---6 years ago. We bought to use and even told our neighbors that we would be coming every year and would "never" trade it. The place is still great, and the week is at the perfect time, and the beach one of the best. But, we have changed---our kids no longer want to sit and make sand castles, older DD wants more activities, Mom wants more variety than just the beach, etc. We have thought about selling or just getting rid of it, as we have more than gotten our money's worth---but it is an excellent trader with II and we can pull Marriotts after the M preference is gone. Same now for another HHI beach week--we have found we can trade for a place that we like even better--got our RCI trade for 2011--I won't deposit anymore with RCI until I see how my 2012 trade comes out next summer. We still have enough points to get where we want--pretty much an equal trade (38>35)--but now we have to compete with others who got 50-60 points, when we used to "outrank" them.

 

[Tommart]

up with their own ways to boost the underlying value of their deeds. While an exchange program is great, and getting extra benefit through that exchange program is wonderful, that's what it is, extra value!

While it is true that some resorts are hogtied by regulations that say they must charge the same maintenance fees to all owners, those same regulations do require all members to have the same usage. Perhaps some of those HOAs need to have a frank discussion with their members about the "fairness" of their programs, and the implications of a "mass exodus" of owners......

Your suggestions make sense, but I think it will be impossible to get the votes to change the original purchase agreements.

What puzzles me is the number of units which go unused each year. I've been in resorts that were "sold" out, but less than 50% of the week's units were occupied. Probably the worst case was a week 49 resort at Breckenridge. Of the 50-60 units, only about 5 were occupied.

Seems like there should be some way to use these vacant units. Maybe they could use them as you propose. Maybe the HOA could rent out units (not through RCI) that will not be used to other resort members who are in good standing with the HOA at a greatly reduced price--lets say one-quarter the MF. Members could notify the HOA that they don't plan to use the week, knowing any revenue could help reduce future MFs. Also this gives the owner of a non-prime week the chance to rent a better week for a reduced price. But I would also allow the prime week owner to take advantage.

 

[crazyhorse]

Your suggestions make sense, but I think it will be impossible to get the votes to change the original purchase agreements.

What puzzles me is the number of units which go unused each year. I've been in resorts that were "sold" out, but less than 50% of the week's units were occupied. Probably the worst case was a week 49 resort at Breckenridge. Of the 50-60 units, only about 5 were occupied.

Seems like there should be some way to use these vacant units. Maybe they could use them as you propose. Maybe the HOA could rent out units (not through RCI) that will not be used to other resort members who are in good standing with the HOA at a greatly reduced price--lets say one-quarter the MF. Members could notify the HOA that they don't plan to use the week, knowing any revenue could help reduce future MFs. Also this gives the owner of a non-prime week the chance to rent a better week for a reduced price. But I would also allow the prime week owner to take advantage.

RCI quote for 2009 that over 600,000 units of inventory not subject to exchange or used for any purpose. This is more than one third of their inventory, after exchange and rental.

As you say, seems a waste.

I don`t know if how many of these "wasted" units were transferred by RCI from deposits over to rental, and then they found they couldn`t rent them out. I know this is not the thread for these comments but it is hoped that with this new system and the "Points" side, that better use is made of these unused units.

 

[crazyhorse]

Link pasted here did not work. Post deleted.

 

[Mel]

RCI quote for 2009 that over 600,000 units of inventory not subject to exchange or used for any purpose. This is more than one third of their inventory, after exchange and rental.

As you say, seems a waste.

I don`t know if how many of these "wasted" units were transferred by RCI from deposits over to rental, and then they found they couldn`t rent them out. I know this is not the thread for these comments but it is hoped that with this new system and the "Points" side, that better use is made of these unused units.

Sounds to me like this is precisely why they are offering "change" when we make exchanges. It appears RCI has the inventory to absorb any discounts they give when the credits that award for a deposit don't quite match the credits they charge for an exchange, so they can offer a bit of a benefit for those trading down.

The effect of this will be significant:

Member A has always looked for what he thought was the best bang for the buck be seeking the best unit available for an exchange - we have seen this often with people taking the largest unit they qualify for, since it would cost them the same as the smaller unit. Some will continue to do that, because they don't want to bother with change, but others will see some value in having that change leftover to get an offseason trade.

While this might produce higher demand for those resorts that look to be a good value but are not as "expensive" as others, and might make them a bit harder to trade in going forward, it also reduces the demand for those bigger/better units, freeing some of them up for those with stellar trade power, as well as those willing to combine their credits.

The biggest problem is that we don't know all the facts at this point, and we won't know the impact the new system will have on the behavior of RCI members. I suspect a large part of this conversion was to have the ability to encourage certain behaviors. RCI wants us to deposit weeks and to exchange; if that many weeks go unused, they must find a way to encourage us to use them. If they still sit empty with a trade value of 2 credits, it becomes clear nobody is interested.

 

[bellesgirl]

Member A has always looked for what he thought was the best bang for the buck be seeking the best unit available for an exchange - we have seen this often with people taking the largest unit they qualify for, since it would cost them the same as the smaller unit. Some will continue to do that, because they don't want to bother with change, but others will see some value in having that change leftover to get an offseason trade.

I find myself doing this as I look for a couple of upcoming trips. Before I always took the biggest and best - why not? Now I am negotiating with myself saying - I could live with this place and a 1BR.

I also am open to using an exchange for a shorter period. If I only need 3 or 4 nights, a unit that costs 5 credits is very attractive. Cost wise, I could have gone to EV but then I would have to pay more money since I have already paid my maintenance. This way I just have to pay the exchange fee and mentally allocate a portion of the maintenance I have already spent. Even if it is a little more than the EV price, I would go that route.

 

[krmlaw]

i too am reevaluating how best to go forward. same thing here - i can live with a one bedroom, not a 2, and have the change to use again.

for me, im looking at the change as bonus time, not taking into account the MF attached to it. im thinking - the MF went for the 1st unit i exchanged. the left over, well thats just an exchange fee, which is MUCH less than last call or EV

 

[DocPepsi]

Sounds to me like this is precisely why they are offering "change" when we make exchanges. It appears RCI has the inventory to absorb any discounts they give when the credits that award for a deposit don't quite match the credits they charge for an exchange, so they can offer a bit of a benefit for those trading down.

The effect of this will be significant:

Member A has always looked for what he thought was the best bang for the buck be seeking the best unit available for an exchange - we have seen this often with people taking the largest unit they qualify for, since it would cost them the same as the smaller unit. Some will continue to do that, because they don't want to bother with change, but others will see some value in having that change leftover to get an offseason trade.

While this might produce higher demand for those resorts that look to be a good value but are not as "expensive" as others, and might make them a bit harder to trade in going forward, it also reduces the demand for those bigger/better units, freeing some of them up for those with stellar trade power, as well as those willing to combine their credits.

The biggest problem is that we don't know all the facts at this point, and we won't know the impact the new system will have on the behavior of RCI members. I suspect a large part of this conversion was to have the ability to encourage certain behaviors. RCI wants us to deposit weeks and to exchange; if that many weeks go unused, they must find a way to encourage us to use them. If they still sit empty with a trade value of 2 credits, it becomes clear nobody is interested.

I'm with you here. Definitely interested to understand RCI's motivation behind all of this. I mean ultimately, it is to grow profits for shareholders of the Wyndham Worldwide stock obviously.

At least to me, it seems they are trying to drive more business for member exchange. I can't be a coincidence that all of this happened after all of that information spread about their rental practices. Maybe this is a way to slow down the rental business, and expand the exchange business in order to rebuild brand satisfaction of members?

 

[krmlaw]

im thinkinig they must have had a lot of weeks dying (no rental/exchange) and now, with change back, people might be exchanging for more weeks, thereby giving Rci more fees for both combining and exchange fees.

 

[Carol C]

Maybe this is a way to slow down the rental business, and expand the exchange business in order to rebuild brand satisfaction of members?

If TUG is any kind of litmus test, I don't see too much satisfaction in TUG-land thus far. Seems like the Wyndham brand is imploding, imho...just look at all the Wyndham giveaways on eBay.

 

[Conan]

I don't see too much satisfaction in TUG-land thus far.

Maybe we can put it to a poll or survey. The loudest voices in TUG-land lately are coming from a few very unhappy people.

 

[avad88]

Not happy yet

If TUG is any kind of litmus test, I don't see too much satisfaction in TUG-land thus far. Seems like the Wyndham brand is imploding, imho...just look at all the Wyndham giveaways on eBay.

After reading TUG threads, the RCI site information and talking at length to a RCI rep, I'm reserving complete judgment, but thus far, I'm NOT a happy camper.
For the last 8 years, I've been fairly happy with my RCI trades, but now I realize that I've usually traded "up". The new "trading power units" that have been assigned to my OBX June lock outs are not high enough to get trades that I've obtained in the past. When I called to try to understand, the rep gave me the spiel about "combining the units" for $99, but I resent giving RCI that extra money, and a big plus was being able to use 1/2 the yearly MF to reduce the vacation cost. Also, I'm disappointed that the "home resort advantage" has effectively disappeared.
I'm considering joining II for one of my resorts and eventually selling the ts that is only with RCI.
BUMMER!:annoyed:
Did I read that someone is going to combine ALL their units (for the $99)into one large number and draw from that?

 

[Carolinian]

Well, no, you did NOT necessarily ''trade up''. What happened in that RCI whacked your trading power. RCI claimed they were not going to do that, which some of the ''RCI Happies'' on these boards swallowed hook, line, and sinker. but the fact is they have made massive adjustments. Some have gained, some have lost, and others stayed the same.

June might be part of your problem. While using an exchange mechanism that nitpicks exact numbers to make an exchange, they use grids that often lump dissimilar weeks together for valuation. On the OBX, for example, all weeks between 11 and 21 inclusive are given the same trading power! A May week 21 the same as a March week 11? That is just nuts but it is RCI's new Points Lite. If you are at the top of one of those valuation grids you are getting screwed on valuation.

Also, the new system has taken away the old flexibility of trading within a band or range. If the weeks you traded into were, say 5-10% higher, then they probably were within your band in the old system and therefore considered equal trades. Now they nitpick exact numbers.

After reading TUG threads, the RCI site information and talking at length to a RCI rep, I'm reserving complete judgment, but thus far, I'm NOT a happy camper.
For the last 8 years, I've been fairly happy with my RCI trades, but now I realize that I've usually traded "up". The new "trading power units" that have been assigned to my OBX June lock outs are not high enough to get trades that I've obtained in the past. When I called to try to understand, the rep gave me the spiel about "combining the units" for $99, but I resent giving RCI that extra money, and a big plus was being able to use 1/2 the yearly MF to reduce the vacation cost. Also, I'm disappointed that the "home resort advantage" has effectively disappeared.
I'm considering joining II for one of my resorts and eventually selling the ts that is only with RCI.
BUMMER!:annoyed:
Did I read that someone is going to combine ALL their units (for the $99)into one large number and draw from that?

 

[DaveNV]

which some of the ''RCI Happies'' on these boards swallowed hook, line, and sinker.

Now that's just plain funny. Love that term. Power to the sheeple! :hysterical:

In my not-so-considered-opinion, I don't see how RCI could do this weeks-kinda-equals-points thing and NOT take advantage of some people. Those who own lesser weeks who have gotten trade-up exchanges over the years were bound to eventually have to pay the piper. But how do you gauge things now, if a blue week has finally become a blue week? I appreciate that things now may not be as advantageous as they once were for those people, but is it really anyone's fault? Not as I see it. What am I missing?

Dave

 

[elaine]

hmmmm, what are missing?

hmmmm, well a 4th of July Gold Crown at HHI gets 32 points both as deposit and trade--ok, seems fair--but them I see that a 2 BR week 51 in Orlando gets 56 points to deposit, but only takes 24-32 points to trade into? What's that about? Something stinky!
So, now those Orlando owners (who used to be behind me in the RCI trading food chain) now come out with 20+ points more than me? Which means they will be competing with me in searches for exchanges.
And, of course all the good Tug skimming is gone b/c you now have to have the trading power, so no trading a dog during a bulk for nice stuff--but I can live with that--those were not really fair trades in any stratosphere--nice while it lasted. At this point, given our great TUG skimming during bulks, and getting the exact trade we wanted for summer 2011 (prior to the change) I am still OK with RCI--for now.

 

[tschwa2]

i too am reevaluating how best to go forward. same thing here - i can live with a one bedroom, not a 2, and have the change to use again.

for me, im looking at the change as bonus time, not taking into account the MF attached to it. im thinking - the MF went for the 1st unit i exchanged. the left over, well thats just an exchange fee, which is MUCH less than last call or EV

Unfortunately RCI is really emphasizing the one bedroom deposits with the new program. My family really needs 2 or 3 bedrooms most of the time and now all members with lockouts are encouraged to deposit 2 one bedrooms or a one bedroom and studio. If no 2 bedrooms are available, I am looking at 2 exchange fees and more credits to get 2 one bedrooms then I get for my (like) dedicated two bedroom. On the flip side unless only 2 people are traveling when the difference is 2-4 points between a one and two bedroom at the same location, most families, including smaller families, will opt for the bigger unit if available. If a one bedroom were 1/2 the points or even 2/3 the points of a two bedroom, members would think more about whether or not to take the bigger units. So it looks like there will be more competition due to the smaller supply for the larger units.

 

[Tommart]

Good or Bad

Unfortunately RCI is really emphasizing the one bedroom deposits with the new program. My family really needs 2 or 3 bedrooms most of the time and now all members with lockouts are encouraged to deposit 2 one bedrooms or a one bedroom and studio. If no 2 bedrooms are available, I am looking at 2 exchange fees and more credits to get 2 one bedrooms then I get for my (like) dedicated two bedroom. On the flip side unless only 2 people are traveling when the difference is 2-4 points between a one and two bedroom at the same location, most families, including smaller families, will opt for the bigger unit if available. If a one bedroom were 1/2 the points or even 2/3 the points of a two bedroom, members would think more about whether or not to take the bigger units. So it looks like there will be more competition due to the smaller supply for the larger units.

You are correct in that RCI is making it far more desirable to split lockout units.

However, at my resort (Woodstone) the extra bedroom is only worth 2 more points. So you can get a two-bedroom for only 2 more TP than a one-bedroom -- a bargain.

Many resorts 2-bedroom units that are not lockouts, and one-half the units at Woodstone are 4-bedroom lockouts. Two other HOAs at Massanutten are 100% 4-bedroom lockouts (Summit and Regal Vistas).

So if may not be as bad as you fear.

Tom

 

[Carolinian]

Now that's just plain funny. Love that term. Power to the sheeple! :hysterical:

In my not-so-considered-opinion, I don't see how RCI could do this weeks-kinda-equals-points thing and NOT take advantage of some people. Those who own lesser weeks who have gotten trade-up exchanges over the years were bound to eventually have to pay the piper. But how do you gauge things now, if a blue week has finally become a blue week? I appreciate that things now may not be as advantageous as they once were for those people, but is it really anyone's fault? Not as I see it. What am I missing?

Dave

From an HOA standpoint, RCI's policies of crowding the blue week owners out of what they used to have, and many bought on the strengths of RCI's own blandishments, in the 45 day window (not a trade up as last minute inventory in the leisure travel industry is distressed and devalued inventory) is probably the biggest threat to resort financial stability. Yes that is RCI's fault. They have sandbagged both the HOA's and the blue week owners.

From an individual member perspective Points Lite also stinks, although some who gain may be okay with it. Many, however, lost. Internally trades back into your own resort are now dealt with in a new may, which hurt those who like to do that. While that doe not impact me as I have never done that, I recognize that many do and therefore it is a big negative of Points Lite.

Some resort areas have been severely whacked, with their trading power significantly reduced, and owners there are understandably upset. To unfairly reduce that trading power, in at least one area, South Africa, RCI now values their weeks under an entirely different manner than its usual methodology. That new method is what has artificially reduced trading power. How many other areas have they put their thumb on the scales either negatively or positively? This shows the crying need for full transparency of RCI's methodology and supporting data to establish their numbers. It is clear evidence that RCI is not being honest or fair in the numbers they have set. A system with published bottom line numbers but a hidden method of setting them is the worst of all worlds as it gives both the incentive and the opportunity to cook the books.

Another area that is manifestly unfair is nitpicking exact numbers for the trading mechanism but using overly broad girds for valuing weeks. Again this is the worst of both worlds for members. Nitpicking the exact numbers for the trading mechanism has destroyed the flexibility of trading within a range or band. Since it is impossible to fairly reduce the value of every timeshare to a nitpicked esact number, the bands were more fair, as weeks with numbers that were relatively close even if not exact are realistically like for like.

The broad grid categories used in the new system for valuation are even worse. On the OBX, for example they give exactly the same value for a March blue week 11 as a middling red week 21. That is just nuts. It cheats the week 21 owner and gives a gift to trade up to the week 11 owner. Who says there is no trading up in Points Lite? Week 11 owners on the OBX and others like them throughout the system now have institutionalized trading up thanks to RCI's insane grids for setting values. In the old system a week 21 traded much better than a week 11, as well it should.

Some of the weeks given high values are clearly the result of politicking between developers and RCI. Vacation Village at Parkway, the resort identified by Bootleg as having the largest oversupply of any resort in the RCI system, and the excessive numbers given for some of its weeks is a good example. Yet RCI seems to know it is overpointed. Tuggers have discovered that while RCI gives 50 points lite for a week 51 1BR at VV@P for 2011, if you want to trade into that same week it only takes 11 points lite, and that is for a week over a year off. RCI clearly knows the real value, but has put its thumb on the scales for the developer. And when one compares an example like this with the much lower points awarded to resorts with a very high demand and very low supply, on both sides of the Atlantic, it is very clear that considerations other than supply and demand were the main factors in setting so many downright fraudulent numbers.