Now the Points people are crying too

[lawren2 Malibu Beach Barbie & A Super Moderator Find all posts View Profile Close lawren2]

****

When you say you are not seeing bulk deposits, how far back in time would it be that you last recall seeing the large bulk deposits?

For Poipu? Probably a year ago....I would have to check back in the ex-op forum to be more accurate then that. Walt would know as well. They used to be regular 6 months out deposits.

I need to go get on a horse. The weather here is far too nice to play on the internet today. I will leave you with one last very interesting link in my next post though.

ETA: Last Bulk sighting posted was early April 2006
http://www.timeshareforums.com/forum...14-2006-a.html

[lawren2 Malibu Beach Barbie & A Super Moderator Find all posts View Profile Close lawren2]

Interesting no el-cheap-o for points

For those who follow the on-going drone of JLB and myself regarding exchanging within RCI. We have 2 ends of the spectrum. We have the 2 years out and THEN we have what used to be the 45 day window.

<notice I said USED TO BE>

That would be at the point where a total dog < and I mean woof-woof, blue swamp week>> could pick up some very very nice trades if they are still sitting on-line..

The same type of scenario is supposed to exist for points where it would cost a very small number of points to grab a spectacular trade at the last minute.

So when 2 threads pop up stating that there are problems with the 9k points window; It does kind of make you wonder <well it does me>.

Restrictions in RCI Points Instant Exchange - TUG Bulletin Board

I have a major complaint with RCI points! - TUG Bulletin Board

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

All of the t/s internet boards reach only a tiny fraction of timesharers. How do you suggest that the message has gotten out to the others?????

''Minis'' as a stand alone are a niche that is forever limited by the ''mini'' size of the exchange options compared to the broad range of options of an exchange company in spite of the infatuation that some on these boards seem to have with them. A serious competitor to exchange companies? That's a real belly laugh!

I don't think we can underestimate the impact that the "RCI is crooked" and "You can rent for less than own" mantras of the past few years has had on the deposits of the best weeks. It is self fulfilling. The best weeks hear that they can't get what they used to so they use or rent. There are less of them so the next step down finds they have to take less than they used to get so some of them stop depositing. Then there is the 80% that wants the best 20% of the time but the pool really is shrinking. Big chunks of the brand names are in exclusive deals that mean none of their top weeks will ever hit the pools. If any of the exchange middlemen are skimming some of the remaining decent time things get even worse. The mini's are most likely the main cause of the fall off in availability for individual owners with use and rentals by the best owners in second place. RCI saw that coming and started the more universal "mini" points system but the implementation may have killed any hope of that becoming the savior of the general use exchange systems. Now it looks like the 5-10 largest minis and straight rentals for cash without the middleman are the most likely big players in timeshares a decade from now. I don't see any of the all you can eat weeks exchanges willing to take any week in surviving as a major player.

[T. R. Oglodyte Moderator Find all posts View Profile Close T. R. Oglodyte]

"Minis'' as a stand alone are a niche that is forever limited by the ''mini'' size of the exchange options compared to the broad range of options of an exchange company in spite of the infatuation that some on these boards seem to have with them. A serious competitor to exchange companies? That's a real belly laugh!

We've been down this path before, and one time you actually admitted you were wrong. But here you are again, knowingly dissembling disinformation. As far as availability of resorts for exchange goes, there is no difference between being a member of an exchange company through an independent exchange company versus being a member of an exchange company through a mini.

No difference. None. Zero. Zip, Nada. Log(1), Not a tittle's worth.

I'll issue you a challenge, Steve. Please identify me as many as ONE exchange option I no longer have available to me as an owner in a mini that I wouldn't have as a member of an independent.

If you can identify ONE I will admit my error, apologize, and pledge to stop correcting you on this. Will you agree to the same if you fail? Or will you simply ignore this challenge as you've done in the past.

If there's a belly laugh here, Steve, it's a belly laugh at how some people can be corrected on something so many times, even admit their error, and then continue posting the same disinformation.

****

edited to add:

Actually I was incorrect when I said there was no difference. Because of the preferences granted to many minis by exchange companies and the reduced application of VEP type filters, exchangers who own minis may actually have more exchange options available to them.

Oh and please don't do the trick you are wont to of pretending the mini owner is not part of an exchange company. As you know every well, many minis automatically include an ownership in an exchange company. And if not, a mini owner has the same option of joining an exchange company as does an independent.

So make it an apples to apples comparison. If you are going to assume the independent owner has gone to the effort and paid the extra bucks to join an exchange company, then credit the mini owner with the same decision (even though the mini owner might have the ownership included).

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

The tides are changing away from the old models

All of the t/s internet boards reach only a tiny fraction of timesharers. How do you suggest that the message has gotten out to the others?????

''Minis'' as a stand alone are a niche that is forever limited by the ''mini'' size of the exchange options compared to the broad range of options of an exchange company in spite of the infatuation that some on these boards seem to have with them. A serious competitor to exchange companies? That's a real belly laugh!

Steve - Word doesn't have to get out, owners learn by themselves. In my small circle of timeshare owning friends I used to be the one that used 70% of the time and traded 30%. Most of the others were the reverse and also owned only one or two vs our 5. A few years later we're up to 7 and most of them are at 3-5 but the use pattern has shifted to where we use our time 90% of the time (counting use within a mini-system as home resort use) and they are now in the 60% use range. In other words they have bought more time but at places they want to stay not trade. When asked why the answers are almost always the same.

- We bought into mini-system X and its so much easier than trying to exchange with RCI/II

- We found areas we want to visit every year

- Trades weren't equal anymore and costs too high

- So many rentals available that we don't need to use our weeks to get what we want for exchange - we just rent

Not one of these friends has sold off their holdings - in fact all but one have added more units. But they have all cut back on week for week deposits. They are not big TUG or other timeshare board readers they just found that the other approaches have worked better and they have changed how they use their time. The biggest factor in the mix is the conversion to a mini-system which pulls inventory away from the "traditional" pools of inventory and places into someone else's control. It is the real reason behind the drop in available old style inventory.

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

As usual, you miss the language ''as a stand alone'' in my post. Your response is clearly geared toward using an exchange company rather than just trading internally within the mini, which is what my post is directed at.
If you are using the mini to access an exchange company, you are back to relying on exchange companies.

You are distorting my arguments in order to accuse me of disinformation.

We've been down this path before, and one time you actually admitted you were wrong. But here you are again, knowingly dissembling disinformation. As far as availability of resorts for exchange goes, there is no difference between being a member of an exchange company through an independent exchange company versus being a member of an exchange company through a mini.

No difference. None. Zero. Zip, Nada. Log(1), Not a tittle's worth.

I'll issue you a challenge, Steve. Please identify me as many as ONE exchange option I no longer have available to me as an owner in a mini that I wouldn't have as a member of an independent.

If you can identify ONE I will admit my error, apologize, and pledge to stop correcting you on this. Will you agree to the same if you fail? Or will you simply ignore this challenge as you've done in the past.

If there's a belly laugh here, Steve, it's a belly laugh at how some people can be corrected on something so many times, even admit their error, and then continue posting the same disinformation.

****

edited to add:

Actually I was incorrect when I said there was no difference. Because of the preferences granted to many minis by exchange companies and the reduced application of VEP type filters, exchangers who own minis may actually have more exchange options available to them.

Oh and please don't do the trick you are wont to of pretending the mini owner is not part of an exchange company. As you know every well, many minis automatically include an ownership in an exchange company. And if not, a mini owner has the same option of joining an exchange company as does an independent.

So make it an apples to apples comparison. If you are going to assume the independent owner has gone to the effort and paid the extra bucks to join an exchange company, then credit the mini owner with the same decision (even though the mini owner might have the ownership included).

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

Mini system related inventory losses are a drop in the bucket compared to the RCI rentals to the general public. The rentals are the real source of loss of inventory for exchanngers. RCI still seems to have plenty of those weeks to rent to outsiders, but a decreasing pool for exchanges availible to their dues paying members.

There are other factors at work, such as some knowledgable resorts which are actively trying to sell their HOA inventory to own-to-use buyers instead of own-to-exchange buyers, due to the changing exchange landscape at RCI.

From what I hear from people in the resale business locally, more and more own-to-exchange owners are becoming upset at RCI. They used to almost never hear complaints about exchanging as a reason for putting a week up for sale, but since RCI cranked up its rentals scheme, it is a frequent chorus.
Most of these people aren't even aware that RCI is renting, they just know that suddenly RCI is not what it used to be in terms of exchanges. Many of these people had exchanged with RCI for years with no complaints.

Steve - Word doesn't have to get out, owners learn by themselves. In my small circle of timeshare owning friends I used to be the one that used 70% of the time and traded 30%. Most of the others were the reverse and also owned only one or two vs our 5. A few years later we're up to 7 and most of them are at 3-5 but the use pattern has shifted to where we use our time 90% of the time (counting use within a mini-system as home resort use) and they are now in the 60% use range. In other words they have bought more time but at places they want to stay not trade. When asked why the answers are almost always the same.

- We bought into mini-system X and its so much easier than trying to exchange with RCI/II

- We found areas we want to visit every year

- Trades weren't equal anymore and costs too high

- So many rentals available that we don't need to use our weeks to get what we want for exchange - we just rent

Not one of these friends has sold off their holdings - in fact all but one have added more units. But they have all cut back on week for week deposits. They are not big TUG or other timeshare board readers they just found that the other approaches have worked better and they have changed how they use their time. The biggest factor in the mix is the conversion to a mini-system which pulls inventory away from the "traditional" pools of inventory and places into someone else's control. It is the real reason behind the drop in available old style inventory.

[T. R. Oglodyte Moderator Find all posts View Profile Close T. R. Oglodyte]

As usual, you miss the language ''as a stand alone'' in my post. Your response is clearly geared toward using an exchange company rather than just trading internally within the mini, which is what my post is directed at.
If you are using the mini to access an exchange company, you are back to relying on exchange companies.

You are distorting my arguments in order to accuse me of disinformation.

OK - I did miss the part about standalone. I retract.

Bu then my response is that you're making an artificial comparison

If you're going to consider a mini-onwer as a standalone, then you should consider the independent resort owner as a stand-alone - that is the apples-to-apples comparison.

The owner either owns an independent or they own a mini. The owner of a standalone mini has far more exchange options than the owner of a standalone independent.

I think that's pretty obvious.

If you then relax the constraint and allow an owner to join an exchange, that relaxation should similarly apply to all owners; there's no reason to limit that option to owners at independents when owners at minis have the same option.

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

Within the discussion of "minis"....are you talking ownership by resale or developer?

Are the minis you refer to ones like Marriott, Starwood, Fairfield, Hilton, Hyatt, Sunterra, Shell, et al?

If one is to buy into one of these, aren't they prohibited in many instances to the perks of a mini unless they buy thru the developer?

If FF is your mini, (and isn't it now Wyndham?)...would you be gaining something from RCI because RCI is co-partner of the brand? Conversely, if RCI is partnered with W/FF, aren't you thus also at RCI's mercy as to how many points in that system it wants to let you play with for any given transaction....

[Carol C Senior Member Find all posts View Profile Close Carol C]

Within the discussion of "minis"....are you talking ownership by resale or developer?

Are the minis you refer to ones like Marriott, Starwood, Fairfield, Hilton, Hyatt, Sunterra, Shell, et al?

If one is to buy into one of these, aren't they prohibited in many instances to the perks of a mini unless they buy thru the developer?

If FF is your mini, (and isn't it now Wyndham?)...would you be gaining something from RCI because RCI is co-partner of the brand? Conversely, if RCI is partnered with W/FF, aren't you thus also at RCI's mercy as to how many points in that system it wants to let you play with for any given transaction....

Katiemack...Lots of people on the FF/Wyn boards are saying that FF is trading worse with RCI now than before. So the co-partner in branding remains to be seen...things seem to be changing. I'm watching it like a hawk 'cause I just bought my first 105K FF/Wyn pts package. I hope for my sake it still has some perks and some internal exchange priority.

[T. R. Oglodyte Moderator Find all posts View Profile Close T. R. Oglodyte]

Within the discussion of "minis"....are you talking ownership by resale or developer?

A mini is any system in which an owner or member can reserve units directly in other resorts within the group, bypassing the need to go through an exchange company.

If you don't have the option of booking time directly in more than one resort, you're not part of a mini even though the resort itself might be in a mini-type network.


****

The operative concept is that an owner can travel to a collection of participating resorts on a preferential, direct reservation basis, without going through an exchange company.

[barndweller Moderator Find all posts View Profile Close barndweller]

A mini is any system in which an owner or member can reserve units directly in other resorts within the group, bypassing the need to go through an exchange company.

So this would include the "branded" resorts such as Worldmark, Westin/Sheraton(Starwood) & Disney with their own internal systems & independent minis like ORE & PSE & Premier Access at TPI. Does HGVC have an internal exchange system? What other independent systems are out there?

[Jya-Ning Silver Contributor Find all posts View Profile Close Jya-Ning]

I know Blue Green, Fairfield, Sunterra, Royal Holiday Club, Shell for sure. Not sure, but I believe HGVC does has internal exchange system. Now OLCC start their expansion also, but I am not sure if the owner need to go through RCI or just internal exchange. Not sure about Royal Aloha Club.

FF/WM/PSE has over 1/2 mil owners. So I will guess owners inside mini is around 2 M at least or 1/2 of RCI member size although a few mini are trade with II, and some owners inside the mini do trade with RCI.

Jya-Ning

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

No, I am responding to the contention that minis are an alternative to exchange companies.

Own to use is something else entirely, and at least on the OBX happens to be the majority of owners.

OK - I did miss the part about standalone. I retract.

Bu then my response is that you're making an artificial comparison

If you're going to consider a mini-onwer as a standalone, then you should consider the independent resort owner as a stand-alone - that is the apples-to-apples comparison.

The owner either owns an independent or they own a mini. The owner of a standalone mini has far more exchange options than the owner of a standalone independent.

I think that's pretty obvious.

If you then relax the constraint and allow an owner to join an exchange, that relaxation should similarly apply to all owners; there's no reason to limit that option to owners at independents when owners at minis have the same option.

[T. R. Oglodyte Moderator Find all posts View Profile Close T. R. Oglodyte]

Own to use is something else entirely, and at least on the OBX happens to be the majority of owners.

How does owning to use within a mini differ substantially from owning to use within an independent, apart from the situation that a mini owner has more choices available?

If you want to talk about owning to use, I utterly fail to see how owning a mini is in any way worse than owning at an independent.