Where do all the unused weeks go?

[John Cummings]

Just burying your head in the sand and personally not using RCI doesn't work.

The financial health of timesharing is significantly dependent on the exchange system. If exchangers start bailing, as is already happening to some extent from RCI's actions, to the point that it raises m/f's significantly and undermines the financial underpinnings of resorts, it will impact everyone including those who just bought to use and have never cared about exchanging.

Just personally not using a particular company in this instance is a simplistic solution that just doen't get it.

We need to be proactive and get alternatives out there in front of our fellow timesharers. And we need to give at least moral support to those who are trying to deal with the problem through the class action lawsuit that has been filed.

I am not looking for a solution because I do NOT have a problem. I get the trades that I want as always. If you want to waste your time then that is your business. Have you actually done anything pro-actively, such as contacting an attorney? In any event, I have more important things to do with my time then worry about what RCI and II are doing.

 

[AwayWeGo]

Ahhh. A Refreshing Breath Of Fresh Air.

Trying to force things to operate the way we think they should - and heaven knows we can't even agree on that - is never going to result in a viable system.

That's for sure.

Thanks for the refreshing breath of fresh air on this worn-out topic -- much less tiring than the continuing tilt against windmills.

-- Alan Cole, McLean (Fairfax County), Virginia, USA.​

 

[BillR]

RCI Bashing/Defense

It was interesting reading the "differences" between Carolinian and Boca. My perspective on this is simple.

RCI simply has management that has NO CLUE - typical of large companies. If they do not adapt to the industry and current trends, then they will diminish in size and could eventually be taken over by a more astute and forward leaning company.

Below is a list of the Original Dow Industrials companies from 1896:

American Cotton Oil
American Sugar
American Tobacco
Chicago Gas
Distilling & Cattle Feeding
General Electric
Laclede Gas
National Lead
North American Company
Tennessee Coal, Iron and Railroad Company
U.S. Leather pfd.
U.S. Rubber

In the past couple of weeks I have had conversations with four RCI employees (including supervisors) in customer relations. These people certaintly meant well and were very polite when I tried to explain to them that RCI has POOR public relations.

They defended RCI as they have no knowledge of the past year adage that "The customer is always right." This, from RCI and businesses in general, is simply not true today!

We have multiple options besides RCI. I am very pleased with my "inventory" of TS's and what I can do with them. I, personally, am choosing to NOT deposit into RCI weeks but am very active in RCI Points, SunOptions and II.

I remember well as a child walking into a bank with my father and being introduced to the PRESIDENT of that bank. For years I believed that bank presidents were SPECIAL. It took a lot of years and experience to realize that a president of a bank is just another employee and is PROBABLY president because he learned how to _ _ _ _ _ _ _.

RCI is not evil and, if you read their 16 pages of single spaced Terms and Conditions, they almost have achieved the rights to your first born. THEY CAN DO ANYTHING THEY WANT WITH YOU DEPOSITED WEEK.

Do they have an excellent legal staff? I believe so. Do they have a fabulous IT staff? In their marketing division, I believe so. In their web-site and internal operations, they are COMPLETELY INEPT. When I asked WHY the Point Values were ALL eliminated from the web-site, they stated that they could not remove just the ones they were going to change - they had to remove ALL of them. That is the way the program was written.

I tried to explain that I could easily construct, in a few days, a temporary spreadsheet that could be used by RCI members who wanted access to these points values - a simple scan, drag and drop into a spreadsheet. The data base was NOT needed.

I also explained that IF they had simply added a large note in the point value are stating that these values were not necessarily correct and should be used as a guide UNTIL the new values were released on XX/XX/XXXX.

Their answer was simple. We have our own agenda and our own timeframe. Why should RCI do this for YOU? If RCI does not know, the marketplace will tell them. I have spent a LOT on money on dues and excanges in the past. RCI will still get revenue from me - but far less than prior years. I have Sunterra - II - SFX - CT exchange - Redweek etc. etc.

Life is good!​

 

[AwayWeGo]

Ahhh. Another Refreshing Burst Of Clarity.

RCI simply has management that has NO CLUE - typical of large companies. If they do not adapt to the industry and current trends, then they will diminish in size and could eventually be taken over by a more astute and forward leaning company.

Thanks for that.

Got to love it when such a bright burst of clarity comes along to shine through all that fog.

-- Alan Cole, McLean (Fairfax County), Virginia, USA.​

 

[Carolinian]

The notion a company can do anything they want just because they say in their own documents that they can is simply wrong. Enron learned that a company cannot simply do anything it wants. All companies are constrained by state and federal consumer protection laws, which are generally very broad. A company can essentially be sued for any of its acts and practices that are ''unfair'' or ''deceptive'' and the terms and conditions THEMSELVES may be the items that are unfair or deceptive. Indeed that is exactly what is happening with the current class action suit against RCI.

I know that some strong Points advocates just want to bury all of these issues under rug and make them go away. That is a natural self interest reaction. Points members benefit personally from being able to loot prime Weeks inventory through the unfair generic crossover grids, and the rental operations help sustain the Points Partner operations. Weeks owners, however, are in a different situaiton. We need to keep doing all we can to spotlight the problems these policies are causing for our system by depleting our inventory to prop up points and line RCI pocket.

I fully understand the motivation of Points members wanting to muzzle the criticism of RCI practices, but they should understand why vocal Weeks members cannot just sit back and accept the fraud being perpetrated against Weeks members (FYI, I mean fraud in a civil rather than criminal context) by Cendant-inspired RCI policies.

I also fully understand that the shrill postings of some of the RCI defenders on these boards over the years have led some Weeks supporters to either move to other boards or to refrain from posting. I appreciate the email encouragement I have received in the course of this thread, and I can understand why some people would rather not jump into the fray.

 

[timeos2]

How much will be said when the class action fiasco ends?

I will be very interested in seeing what gets posted/acknowledged by the lawsuit backers when one of the most likely outcomes - total dismissal of the frivolous lawsuit or virtually meaningless promises and a few worthless vouchers get sent out - occurs. Will the tirades continue to bash every RCI move or will they move on? Will anything that RCI does in response, including those worthless vouchers, be declared a "victory" for the members?

If, by some ill fated twist, there actually was a serious order issued - such as the absolute prohibition of rental outside of the owner base - I'll be happy to come here and declare the lawsuit supporters victorious. There can't be outcomes some desire like the separation of Points and Weeks since, as noted above, that isn't even on the table. So besides the now extremely limited scope of the lawsuits and the unlikelihood of any real change we sit back to wait - most likely years - to see how much this farce will cost us. And to see what the response of the "sue them all" cheerleaders will be when it fails.

And I too understand why those who want the old days of free upgrades on others dimes to return back the suit. That desire has every bit as much self-interest as the Points view would have for the methods of today.

 

[AwayWeGo]

Lawsuit Aimed At Turning Back The Clock Will Not Succeed.

And I too understand why those who want the old days of free upgrades on others dimes to return back the suit. That desire has every bit as much self-interest as the Points view would have for the methods of today.

I am not a lawyer. I do not play 1 on TV. Shucks (just to show how big an in-the-dark doofus I am) I didn't even know this TUG-BBS topic was about taking sides in the big RCI class action lawsuit. I thought it was about something else. Who'd a-thunk?

However that may be, I can pretty much offer assurance that a lawsuit, class-action or otherwise mox nix, whose aim is to turn back the clock to the way things used to be way back during some long gone Golden Age, is not going to succeed.

Sure, plaintiffs might prevail. Settlements might be reached. For sure attorney fees will be awarded. The sound of a judge's gavel smacking wood will be heard. All will rise. And when the dust settles, as it eventually will, the Golden Age of pre-points timeshare exchanging will still be just a memory.

The bell cannot be unrung.

So it goes.

-- Alan Cole, McLean (Fairfax County), Virginia, USA.​

 

[bruwery]

For those tuning in late, I will provide Cliff Notes summarizing this thread:

OP: Where does Club LaBourse get the thousands of weeks they claim they can access?

A: RCI Stinks.
A: No, RCI is great.
A: You stink for thinking RCI is great.
A: No, you stink for thinking RCI stinks.
A: Yeah, well, you stink for thinking that I stink.
A: What?
A: What?
A: Lawsuits are great.
A: No, lawsuits stink.
A: II stinks.
A: Hey keep it on topic, this post is about how RCI stinks.
A: A tree fell in the forest and made no sound, therefore RCI doesn't stink.
A: Who made you the boss?
A: You just proved my point.
A: What?
A: What?
A: Points stinks.
A: No they don't.
A: The judge in the lawsuit smacks his wood.

 

[CarolF]

A: RCI Stinks.
A: No, RCI is great.
A: You stink for thinking RCI is great.
A: No, you stink for thinking RCI stinks.
A: Yeah, well, you stink for thinking that I stink.
A: What?
A: What?
A: Lawsuits are great.
A: No, lawsuits stink.
A: II stinks.
A: Hey keep it on topic, this post is about how RCI stinks.
A: A tree fell in the forest and made no sound, therefore RCI doesn't stink.
A: Who made you the boss?
A: You just proved my point.
A: What?
A: What?
A: Points stinks.
A: No they don't.
A: The judge in the lawsuit smacks his wood.

:hysterical: :hysterical: :hysterical:

 

[Elan]

For those tuning in late, I will provide Cliff Notes summarizing this thread:

OP: Where does Club LaBourse get the thousands of weeks they claim they can access?

A: RCI Stinks.
A: No, RCI is great.
A: You stink for thinking RCI is great.
A: No, you stink for thinking RCI stinks.
A: Yeah, well, you stink for thinking that I stink.
A: What?
A: What?
A: Lawsuits are great.
A: No, lawsuits stink.
A: II stinks.
A: Hey keep it on topic, this post is about how RCI stinks.
A: A tree fell in the forest and made no sound, therefore RCI doesn't stink.
A: Who made you the boss?
A: You just proved my point.
A: What?
A: What?
A: Points stinks.
A: No they don't.
A: The judge in the lawsuit smacks his wood.

Best post I've read in ages. Thanks!

 

[Mel]

Mark

You missed the fact that the answer to the original question was in fact burried deep among the other responses. In case you didn't notice it, the answer is that the inventory given to these "vacation clubs" is likely to be what RCI calls excess inventory. The ensuing arguments are based on RCI's definition of said excess inventory.

The real problem with all these arguments it that whatever solution comes from these lawsuits, someone (not just RCI) is going to be unhappy. There are several exchange companies precisely because one size does not fit all. Yes, the way RCI works has changed over time, but much of that has been due to adapting to a changing marketplace. The problem is that when something happens to improve exchanges for part of the membership, it almost always comes at the expense of other members. If you think we can't agree here in this forum, a microcosm of timeshare owners, what do you think will happen when some settlement is forced upon all timeshare owners, because that is what it will feel like.

 

[Aldo]

The problem is that when something happens to improve exchanges for part of the membership, it almost always comes at the expense of other members.

That's simply not true. If the class action lawsuit succeeds in stopping RCI from looting the Spacebank and renting out weeks deposits rather than making them available to weeks members, then there will simply be more weeks available from which to exchange. All members win.

 

[Carolinian]

Renting exchange deposits to the general public creates a conflict of interest for an exchange company because it creates a huge incentive for them to skew the exchange system to create artificial ''excesses'' so they can rent such weeks out to line their own pockets. Than can do it by setting points grids where certain weeks back up in the system or they can do it with weeks by manipulated trading power. Either way it is bad news for timesharers. An exchange company can set up the system to make any category of inventory they want ''excess''. Such conflicts of interest should either be prohibited entirely or subject to extensive and far reaching disclosure laws to try to keep the exchange company honest.

A result that dictates a fair, honest, and evenhanded system, where it is not rigged so the inventory of one element is looted to prop up another element, will cause heartburn for those who had been given the keys to the candy store. But so what, bringing them back down to earth so they are on the same level playing field with everyone else is only fair. The only ones who will scream from an honest system are those who are beating the system now.

Mark

You missed the fact that the answer to the original question was in fact burried deep among the other responses. In case you didn't notice it, the answer is that the inventory given to these "vacation clubs" is likely to be what RCI calls excess inventory. The ensuing arguments are based on RCI's definition of said excess inventory.

The real problem with all these arguments it that whatever solution comes from these lawsuits, someone (not just RCI) is going to be unhappy. There are several exchange companies precisely because one size does not fit all. Yes, the way RCI works has changed over time, but much of that has been due to adapting to a changing marketplace. The problem is that when something happens to improve exchanges for part of the membership, it almost always comes at the expense of other members. If you think we can't agree here in this forum, a microcosm of timeshare owners, what do you think will happen when some settlement is forced upon all timeshare owners, because that is what it will feel like.

 

[bruwery]

Mark

You missed the fact that the answer to the original question was in fact burried deep among the other responses. In case you didn't notice it, the answer is that the inventory given to these "vacation clubs" is likely to be what RCI calls excess inventory. The ensuing arguments are based on RCI's definition of said excess inventory.

The real problem with all these arguments it that whatever solution comes from these lawsuits, someone (not just RCI) is going to be unhappy. There are several exchange companies precisely because one size does not fit all. Yes, the way RCI works has changed over time, but much of that has been due to adapting to a changing marketplace. The problem is that when something happens to improve exchanges for part of the membership, it almost always comes at the expense of other members. If you think we can't agree here in this forum, a microcosm of timeshare owners, what do you think will happen when some settlement is forced upon all timeshare owners, because that is what it will feel like.

Umm, thanks for your concern regarding my reading and interpretation skills. I don't mind that your sense of humor is clearly quite different than mine. However, your pedantic lecture - which basically repeated what's already been stated about 50 times - seemed to be a bit over the top.

 

[Mel]

That's simply not true. If the class action lawsuit succeeds in stopping RCI from looting the Spacebank and renting out weeks deposits rather than making them available to weeks members, then there will simply be more weeks available from which to exchange. All members win.

Since when? Do you honestly think that RCI will infuse weeks from outside the exchange system if they can't take anything out in exchange? The same number of weeks will be available, but inventory will ONLY be from individual weeks members. Very few weeks will come from new resorts. The cost will be to those who want to exchange into those new resorts, but can't because that inventory will be segregated from the regular exchange inventory, and it will trickle down.

Say I own a prime week at a prime location, with among the best trading power in RCI's system. I want to travel next summer to a brand new resort that is about to open. RCI has told me they can't accomodate me, because the only inventory they have is from the developer, and it is in a rental pool. My response is to take my week for next year, and rent it out, rather than deposit it. I will use the proceeds to rent a week at this new resort from RCI.

Net result - RCI doesn't get my week, it ends up as a rental, and I visit the new resort. Whoever might have gotten my week as an exchange won't because it never even entered the exchange pool. Is that really any different than it works now, with RCI acting as an intermediary?

Under the current system, it costs me an exchange fee to go to the resort I want. Under your "improved" system, it might or might not cost me more to rent out my week and use the proceeds. However, under that system I am legally obliged to pay taxes on any rental income above maintenance fees. So if I pay $1000 in fees, rent for $2000 and have to pay RCI $2000 for a similar week at the new resort, I will be out any costs associated with renting my week (which are not deductible), plus income tax on $1000.

My point was that there is a net balance. I don't think RCI is the only one benefitting from the current system. If a change is forced, someone will lose, and it will likely be some of us. In most class-action lawsuits, when a settlement is reached, the only winners are the lawyers and the original parties to the suit. Even if the corporations have to "pay up" it simply results in higher costs down the road - those costs are passed on to us, the consumers.

Carolinian:

I agree that the secrecy could allow RCI to loot, I just don't think that they are doing so at this point. There are too many other possible answers. I won't state that I know they are not doing so, because I don't know. But my perspective is different from yours. RCI has multiple "customers" to satisfy - the exchangers, the developers and the shareholders. They won't exist without any one of those three, it would dramatically change the system. I simply believe we must consider the implications of these lawsuits, and be careful about what we ask for. We don't want to swing too far in the opposite direction, or we risk destroying the exchange system in other ways. I think RCI made an honest effort by developing the points program, but made mistakes in its implementation. Without the large conversion fees, the other problems with assigning points could work themselves out eventually, and maybe they still will.

 

[Carolinian]

Who cares about ''new'' resorts? Most care about resorts located where they want to go. Often the better locations are already taken and the ''new'' resorts don't get them.

RCI seems big into ''flexibility'' and the concept of ''excess inventory'' is extremely ''flexible''. It can be anything RCI wants it to be and to adjust the numbers to accomplish that. Renting spacebank inventory to the general public is simply a huge conflict of interest and needs to be brought to a screaching halt.

 

[AwayWeGo]

The Pudding Stirs. The Pot Boils.

I was wondering whether the various TUG-BBS participants might have resolved all this while I was away over the weekend.

Guess not.

Meanwhile, don't hold your breath waiting for that screeching halt to happen.

-- Alan Cole, McLean (Fairfax County), Virginia, USA.​

 

["Roger"]

Who cares about ''new'' resorts? ....

??? If no one cares about those resorts, the developers have made multi-million dollar boo-boos. Of course, there are people who want to go to those resorts.

Are you preposing that all exchangers be shut out from those resorts? Is this being proposed just for RCI or also II, SFX, etc.?

 

[Carolinian]

Whether they have made a boo-boo or not depends on LOCATION. However, it is not necessarily that the location is high demand for exchange. The key for them is that the location is where they have good access to potential customers.

When a developer finishes selling one resort, he is likely to build another, so there will always be new resorts.

As a demand factor for exchanging a resort being ''new'', however is a very secondary driver of demand. Location is the principal driver of demand. A good example is London, where the old but well located Allen House has much better demand than distant but much newer and Gold Crown Odessa Wharf.

People are indeed going to care about well located new resorts, just like they care about other well located resorts.

??? If no one cares about those resorts, the developers have made multi-million dollar boo-boos. Of course, there are people who want to go to those resorts.

Are you preposing that all exchangers be shut out from those resorts? Is this being proposed just for RCI or also II, SFX, etc.?

 

["Roger"]

You are avoiding the real issue. Are you and Aldo saying that developer weeks should be segrated - that no exchanger should want to are be allowed to trade into one? That way the exchange pool can be kept pure? ("Who cares about "new" resorts" -- So what if no one is allowed to exchange into them.)

(I find it hard to believe that no one wants to trade into the newest resorts. In fact, they seem to be quite popular. Since Cedent - the ruination of timesharing - the percentage go GC resorts has risen from less that 5% to about 30%. Most of these started with developer weeks being put into the exchange pool. But NO ONE cares about this. No one wants these weeks.)

 

[Carolinian]

You are avoiding the real issue. Are you and Aldo saying that developer weeks should be segrated - that no exchanger should want to are be allowed to trade into one? That way the exchange pool can be kept pure?

(I find it hard to believe that no one wants to trade into the newest resorts. In fact, they seem to be quite popular.)

If a new resort is in a good location, it will be popular. If it is in a mediocre location, it will not.

On the OBX, for example, the newest resort and only one still in sales has by far the lowest demand because it has a poor location. Location always trumps other factors.

 

[John Cummings]

I see nothing wrong with exchanging into developer weeks. Many of my exchanges, going back to my RCI and II days as well as SFX have been into developer weeks. When I make an exchange, I don't give a hoot where it came from as long as it is what I want.

 

[Mel]

Who cares about ''new'' resorts? Most care about resorts located where they want to go. Often the better locations are already taken and the ''new'' resorts don't get them.

Perhaps we should have a poll. While there are many here who care more about location, I would venture to say there are quite a few that care as much if not more about quality. For some, they don't care as much where the resort is located, as they do about the amenities, because they will never leave the resort.

If people didn't care so much about the quality of the resort, then Marriott, Hilton, and the other big hospitality names wouldn't do so well. Some people want to be papmpered, and that is what happens at some of the newest resorts. Some people have to continue their work on vacation, and the newer resorts make that more convenient, while the older resorts cobble together solutions. There are plenty of "timeshare snobs" who ONLY want to stay in the newest resorts. Who cares about new resorts indeed?

Yes, for the millionth time, you are right that most people would rather stay ON the beach in the outer banks, but that doesn't translate to nobody wanting to stay at BIS Kitty Hawk, or any other new resort. Some of those new resorts are in better locations than other existing resorts, and do have higher demand. Some of them are newer phases of existing resorts too. Like John, I have staying in developer units several times, and enjoyed them. I don't want them removed from the exchange pool.

 

["Roger"]

If a new resort is in a good location, it will be popular. If it is in a mediocre location, it will not.

On the OBX, for example, the newest resort and only one still in sales has by far the lowest demand because it has a poor location. Location always trumps other factors.

You are still evading the topic. When Mel posted that people would not be happy if there were no developer weeks within the exchange system, your response was that no one would care. Flat out - no one would care if there were no developer weeks in the system. That is a mistaken belief.

 

[Carolinian]

The key, of course, is WHERE the developer weeks are FROM. If they are from overbuilt areas where there is plenty of inventory, anyway, who cares? If they are from mediocre locations within a decent resort area, then ho-hum. If they are from a super hot destination, then yes they matter. Location, as always, is the key.

I look at the areas I trade into and I really don't see developer inventory from new resorts as making much difference. I can't think of any resort I would trade into just because it is ''new''. In fact, I could name a long list of ''old'' resorts I would much rather have than anything ''new'' I can think of. It is all about location.