RCI sheds market share while II gains

[Carolinian Super Moderator Find all posts View Profile Close Carolinian]

The trend lines for the two largest timeshare exchange companies are dramatic and are mirror images of each other, RCI downward and II upward. A chart published on the front page of Timesharing Today makes this graphically clear.

Looking at annual reported numbers of exchanges, RCI peaked in 2003 with about 2.6 million exchanges, plateaued for two years and has been steadily falling since, witht he latest number for 2009 down to a bit over 1.8 million exchanges.

The line for II during that period has been upward from about 800,000 exchanges in 2003 to over 1 million in 2009.

If one goes back to the earliest year shown, 1993, RCI had about 1.3 million exchanges and II about 300,000.

One has to consider what was happening when RCI lost its way and started shedding market share. They were pushing points and they were renting out exchange deposits to the general public, and their members were increasingly becoming aware of these activiteis and how it was downgrading exchanging.

RCI's new ''Points Lite'' that they are strongarming their weeks members into will do nothing but accelerate this trend. When RCI first rolled out GPN (now RCI Points) I predicted that II would eat their lunch. It is taking a while, but the trend is obviously there.

TS4MS members should be pushing any resort they own at which is not already dual affiliated to dual affiliate with II as quickly as possible. The spectre of Points Lite is almost upon us.

[tonyg Goomba & Super Moderator Find all posts View Profile Close tonyg]

I had watched those numbers many moons ago and perhaps even posted on them somewhere. I'm really not surprised. I'll bet RCI would dwarf II in the number of deposited weeks rented--if they would even release those numbers.
IF II keeps a notable price differential in their fees vs RCI's, they should continue to increase their exchange share.

[BWolf Senior Member Find all posts View Profile Close BWolf]

Strictly an II exchanger here, so I know little about RCI. However, I understand RCI has some really nice resorts, many of which are in places II doesn't have a presence.

Wouldn't it take some of these RCI resorts moving to II exclusively or dual-affiliating to make it attractive for current RCI members to switch to II?

Do the resorts get a cut of the RCI rental of exchange deposits, thus making it financially attractive to remain with RCI?

[Carolinian Super Moderator Find all posts View Profile Close Carolinian]

Strictly an II exchanger here, so I know little about RCI. However, I understand RCI has some really nice resorts, many of which are in places II doesn't have a presence.

Wouldn't it take some of these RCI resorts moving to II exclusively or dual-affiliating to make it attractive for current RCI members to switch to II?

Do the resorts get a cut of the RCI rental of exchange deposits, thus making it financially attractive to remain with RCI?

The key is dual affiliation, and it will take members at resorts making a point of requesting it to accomplish that.

RCI does not give resorts any cut of the rentals to the general public that they do from spacebank deposits. In fact, with the way RCI has made exchanging less attractive, thus driving away members, they have made it less attractive for resorts. At the Timeshare Stripped Bare conference in the UK last year, a major European developer complained that RCI's stripping its exchange pool for either rentals or points was hurting his resorts' member retention.

[BWolf Senior Member Find all posts View Profile Close BWolf]

Very interesting, Carolinian.

Thank you.

[Carolinian Super Moderator Find all posts View Profile Close Carolinian]

One other interesting thing is RCI's explanation of why they are losing market share. RCI Vice President Julie Tenney's explanation was ''Our number of exchanges has declined in recent years due to recent trends among timeshare vacation ownership developers to enroll members in private label clubs whereby the members have the option to exchange within the club or through RCI channels.''

Huh? II has as many if not more of these so-called mini-systems, but they are steaming ahead instead of falling behind like RCI. If this were the explanation, why is II not impacted? Guess again, RCI!

It is also interesting that a number of mini-systems fled RCI soon after RCI introduced RCI Points. The only way that RCI pulled two of those, Fairfield (Wyndham) and Worldmark, back into the fold was having its parent, Cendent, buy them. This switch of affiliations after Cendant bought these two chains back for RCI did not stop II's upward trend.

[dolly1504 Member Find all posts View Profile Close dolly1504]

Does anyone have an explanation for Disney's move from II to RCI?

Joyce

[timeos2 Senior Member Find all posts View Profile Close timeos2]

Does anyone have an explanation for Disney's move from II to RCI?

Joyce

Disney only moved to II when RCI (correctlY) refused to allow them to charge incoming guests a fee - not allowed by the standard agreement all resorts/systems sign. II of course let them do it - they do not in any way stand up for owners rights - they let Westgate substitute crap weeks for FIXED DEEDED WEEKS as deposits while RCI will not allow that as another bad example - so DVC switched for awhile. But II service and inventory was not satisfactory and they returned to RCI (who since knuckled under & allows fees - thanks DVC NOT!) as the inventory there - the true value of any exchange system - dwarfs what II could offer. Chalk it up as a failed experiment and/or a strong arm move to get the unfair exchange penalty fee imposed by DVC but they never intended to be in II as they started in RCI and really wanted to be there all along it appears.

To be fair all resorts / systems should really allow owners to be in any exchange company they want. The needless exclusivity that RCI/II try to achieve hurts everyone. On the other hand the ideal system has EVERY resort in it - and none have that (yet). RCI comes closest thus they are #1 as it is inventory that makes a system not what names or slogans they may have. Inventory. First last and only. RCI wins that and has since the start of timeshare.

[Irish_Reign Junior Member Find all posts View Profile Close Irish_Reign]

I've been with both RCI and II. RCI's resort list is based more on quantity than quality while II is the oposite. Yes RCI has some nice resorts but the low end resorts far outnumber the high end.

Customer service at both companies stink but II has better customer service (based on my experience with both)

RCI has gotten caught up in so many different programs that they have lost their focus. It's similar to MTV who no longer shows videos... II has started to offer more programs like exchanging for cruises (giant ripoff) and offering a gold membership. For the most part they are still focused on exchanges. I only hope they don't follow RCI too far down the wrong path.

I wouldn't go back to RCI if they paid me. For now my money is with II. There is definitely a bright future if someone could pull off the creation of an exchange company that focuses soley on exchanges and can offer every resort worldwide... (not holding my breathe)

[fishingguy Member Find all posts View Profile Close fishingguy]

Carolinian wrote:
"RCI's new ''Points Lite'' that they are strongarming their weeks members into will do nothing but accelerate this trend."

I'm a newbe, can you give me a link to more info about this? I've been searching the forum, but don't know what I'm searching for -- if that makes sense.

fishingguy

[ace2000 Senior Member Find all posts View Profile Close ace2000]

I think the bottom line to this discussion is the bottom line. All a company like RCI cares about is the total net profits. With RCI points and exchange rentals, it's way too complicated to analyze by just looking at the number of exchanges. What real conclusions that affect you and I, can be drawn from this?

I'll continue to use both to my own personal advantage.

Also, can you provide a link?

[mkarizona Member Find all posts View Profile Close mkarizona]

As a weeks owner "points lite" looks attractive to me. Am I missing something?

[ArtsieAng Super Moderator Find all posts View Profile Close ArtsieAng]

timeos2

Disney only moved to II when RCI (correctlY) refused to allow them to charge incoming guests a fee - not allowed by the standard agreement all resorts/systems sign. II of course let them do it - they do not in any way stand up for owners rights

Currently, if you trade for a Disney through RCI, you still have to pay the guest fee of $99, same as II.