Class action filed against RCI on rental issue

[JLB Please excuse me, I'm a Dick. Not a moron just a Dick Find all posts View Profile Close JLB]

Yeah, we had so much control before!

This was the main drawback for me from the beginning.....loss of any control.

[JLB Please excuse me, I'm a Dick. Not a moron just a Dick Find all posts View Profile Close JLB]

The problem with us, those who fritter our lives away on these debates, is that we know too much, we understand what is going on.

I don't think that ever crossed the minds of those who put these plans together.

I played golf with some Wisconsinites last week.

3) Points harder to understand (You know why RCI would want this)

Walt

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

If only a week really were a week

First of all, I agree with your heading. Renting would only be a last resort if none of the members want that week. They should do away with the other perks (flights and cruises, etc.) as they complicate the system too much.

Second, a week is a week is a week but points are not all equal because there are too many point based systems out there and everyone is different so how can you ever make it work great? A point based system would work great if all companies belonged to the same system and I doubt if that will ever happen. JMHO.

But a week isn't a week - thats the underlying problem. If all weeks were equal and could trade freely there would be no VEP, no issues with trade value, etc. But they aren't. And the process put in place to deal with that undeniable fact is what leads to rentals. Weeks that are too valuable to be a fair week to week trade go unclaimed. Not because no one wants them - they sure do - but due to the unseen, untracable magic trade values that say it isn't a fair trade. Back to the need to combine two weeks for one (not allowed) or have a system that lets the owner adjust the value he offers (points). A pure points based system, without all the unnecesaary junk like cruises, car rentals, etc, would result in very little excess inventory and little need to rent by its inherent efficiency of matching desires to units under the clients - not RCI/II - control. It is the unknown nature of secret trade power and promise of free improvements that fed the weeks beast and led to the surplus of deposits over requests. If they ignored value there would still be a surplus but all at the low end that has virtually no value while all the top units would be gone in a heartbeat. That would be an all you can grab buffet for the low end and would drive away even more of the top deposits.

They have to put something in place to ensure a reasonable level of trade. That it's a secret means they can - and I think they may - set the bar so high that far too much desireable time is suddenly "surplus". That is and always has been a problem with week for week barters that are too inflexible to allow for the inherent differences between 7 days use at different resorts.
Thats why they have "surplus" great times to rent.

[taffy19 Gold Contributor Find all posts View Profile Close taffy19]

Was the VEP filter put in place years later with RCI? All I remember is that a 1 br would trade for a 1 br and red for red, white for white, etc. It was simple to understand when we bought so many years ago and we made several exchanges that we were happy with.

I have no clue if we traded up or down but we got the week at the places we wanted to go. Not everyone wants to go to the beach or ski slopes all the time so someone else used these weeks. Many people would also rather travel outside the peak periods. They made it so complicated later. The problem is that buyers are sold a dream that is hard to fullfill instead of the truth and that is to buy where you want to vacation most often.

Why not rent when you want to go somewhere else? RCI sure makes it attractive today but it is at the expense of the timeshare exchanger and that's unfair! They should use timeshare developers' unsold inventory for that which may be a source for more sales too. JMHO.

[JLB Please excuse me, I'm a Dick. Not a moron just a Dick Find all posts View Profile Close JLB]

What If RCI Was a Rental Agent

Would you feel differently if RCI was a rental agent, renting your timeshare for you for a fee rather than renting it for themselves and only giving you the right to make an exchange?

If you wanted an exchange, you would deposit into the exchange pool, and that stuff could not be rented.

If you did not want an exchange, just the money from renting it less RCI's fee, you could specify that.

Would that anyone feel better?

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

And that is what RCI is counting on!

The problem with us, those who fritter our lives away on these debates, is that we know too much, we understand what is going on.

I don't think that ever crossed the minds of those who put these plans together.

I played golf with some Wisconsinites last week.

And that is what RCI is counting on. Even the VC can not get all the rules and fee changes correct. Muddy the level playing field and anything goes. Smoke and Mirrors and Keep them guessing. One sided written rules by RCI that they can change at anytime.

I've seen it written many times on TUG that it is the consumer's fault (timeshare owner's) when they are involved in a scam. However, that does not mean it is alright to scam someone.

Walt

PS: I bet you didn't play golf in Wisconsin last week.

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

What you forget is that the supply and demand system in the RCI Weeks system works this out, as trade values adjust over time. When there is more supply and less demand of anything than anticipated, the trade value goes down so that it can be accessed by a broader pool of members. The dynamic trading power of the Weeks system adjusts for this factor.

That is a market based system setting values, as opposed to the arbitarily set values of Points, which is more akin to a command economy. And command economies are inefficient. Remember the old Soviet Union?

It is the rigid valuation system that cannot adjust to supply and demand factors that is found in the set in cement numbers of the Points system that react as you describe.

The key is flexibllity in the trading power - something Weeks has and Points doesn't. Points seems almost designed to generate a surplus for rental purposes.

Several RCI employees have posted that RCI puts desirable weeks DIRECTLY into the rental pool, rather than seeing if anyone wants them. That smacks of skimming.

They may also play games with trading power to generate an excess by failing to let it adjust completely as it should. That is certainly plausible. Doing so illustrates why it is a huge conflict of intetest to allow an exchange company to rent out exchange deposits at all. They already have their hand in your pocket, so it doesn't take much more for them to put their thumb on the scales.

But a week isn't a week - thats the underlying problem. If all weeks were equal and could trade freely there would be no VEP, no issues with trade value, etc. But they aren't. And the process put in place to deal with that undeniable fact is what leads to rentals. Weeks that are too valuable to be a fair week to week trade go unclaimed. Not because no one wants them - they sure do - but due to the unseen, untracable magic trade values that say it isn't a fair trade. Back to the need to combine two weeks for one (not allowed) or have a system that lets the owner adjust the value he offers (points). A pure points based system, without all the unnecesaary junk like cruises, car rentals, etc, would result in very little excess inventory and little need to rent by its inherent efficiency of matching desires to units under the clients - not RCI/II - control. It is the unknown nature of secret trade power and promise of free improvements that fed the weeks beast and led to the surplus of deposits over requests. If they ignored value there would still be a surplus but all at the low end that has virtually no value while all the top units would be gone in a heartbeat. That would be an all you can grab buffet for the low end and would drive away even more of the top deposits.

They have to put something in place to ensure a reasonable level of trade. That it's a secret means they can - and I think they may - set the bar so high that far too much desireable time is suddenly "surplus". That is and always has been a problem with week for week barters that are too inflexible to allow for the inherent differences between 7 days use at different resorts.
Thats why they have "surplus" great times to rent.

[4ARedOctober Super Moderator Find all posts View Profile Close 4ARedOctober]

Agreed Jim but it did feel like we had more control.....or we knew what to expect and not expect and usually the suprises were good ones......all of that radically changed with the points and rentals issue....now I have no idea what to expect.

Yeah, we had so much control before!

[reddiablosv Member Find all posts View Profile Close reddiablosv]

What you forget is that the supply and demand system in the RCI Weeks system works this out, as trade values adjust over time. When there is more supply and less demand of anything than anticipated, the trade value goes down so that it can be accessed by a broader pool of members. The dynamic trading power of the Weeks system adjusts for this factor.

That is a market based system setting values, as opposed to the arbitarily set values of Points, which is more akin to a command economy. And command economies are inefficient. Remember the old Soviet Union?

It is the rigid valuation system that cannot adjust to supply and demand factors that is found in the set in cement numbers of the Points system that react as you describe.

The key is flexibllity in the trading power - something Weeks has and Points doesn't. Points seems almost designed to generate a surplus for rental purposes.

Several RCI employees have posted that RCI puts desirable weeks DIRECTLY into the rental pool, rather than seeing if anyone wants them. That smacks of skimming.

They may also play games with trading power to generate an excess by failing to let it adjust completely as it should. That is certainly plausible. Doing so illustrates why it is a huge conflict of intetest to allow an exchange company to rent out exchange deposits at all. They already have their hand in your pocket, so it doesn't take much more for them to put their thumb on the scales.

I guess what we are doing here is speculating as to how RCI determines which weeks to skim from the exchange pool. I mean, we don't really know! We are like theoretical astrophysicists constructing logical scenarios from the best available data. But, new data may become available in the form of discovery. A suggestion has been made that RCI does not allow the valuation system to adjust in weeks if there has been a bulk banking such as occurred with the EVR Maui. This bulk banking had the effect as to generate a surplus in prime weeks to be available which were diverted to the rental pool as there were no comprable weeks requests pending. Thus, even though these were prime weeks at prime times, no comprable weeks requests were pending hence these weeks were surplus weeks. Do I believe this? NO. RCI has performance goals for each division and its must meet them any way they can. Thats what I think.

On the other hand, to be fair and complete. II has a system that allows the valuations to adjust to supply and demand.
As a timeshare owner and a frequent exchanger, I want the valuation system to adjust to supply and demand as does the II system. How else could I take advantage of the system when the Westin Kaanapali Resort decided to do bulk spacebank this year and I snag a trade with my lowly Royal Aloha Vacation Club Unit.

I guess the point of my post is that trying to devise a perfect system that accounts for transient changes in trading power, supply and demand, is always going to be just a best guess. IMHO Ben

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

In case you missed this on TUG!



Another Problem with allowing anyone to rent out Timeshare Weeks!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Here is another problem with Renting out Timeshare Weeks to anyone. It appears that this person is buying the weeks from RCI and Snap Travel, adding a profit and renting to anyone.

I guess if this person is not a RCI member, it is OK.

Walt

From this Web Site:

http://www.resort-vacation-rentals.com/

http://www.resort-vacation-rentals.c...on_rentals.htm

Embassy Vacation Resort at Kaanapali, Lahaina, Maui Hawaii. One bedroom units, sleep 4. Many check-in dates for late April, May, Sept, Oct, Nov, Dec 2006 ONLY $1395 Week! Please add $100 for Holiday Weeks! June, July, August Weeks are higher.


http://www.tugbbs.com/forums/showthread.php?t=20992

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

I don't we'll ever know what's found in discovery because it won't get to trial and the info won't be made public.

I don't like what they're doing, but agree they've covered their legal butts.

I don't like this Goss Enterprises grabbing stuff up and selling it. I guess any of us could do the same if we didn't care if RCI halted our membership.

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

But They Also Said This!

RCI'S TERMS AND CONDITIONS:

6. PAGE 473 IN THE RCI WISHBOOK

(C) "BY DEPOSITING VACATION OWNERSHIP WITH RCI, YOU RELINQUISH ALL RIGHTS TO USE THAT VACATION OWNERSHIP AND AGREE THAT SUCH DEPOSITED VACATION OWNERSHIP MAY BE USED BY RCI TO CONDUCT EXCHANGES, INSPECTION VISITS, PROMOTIONS AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES AT RCI'S DISCRETION".

In other words, they ARE legally covered.

But RCI also wrote this.

Walt


VI. RCI Rentals


A. Generally-Comments from a Vice President, RCI


Many people have asked questions regarding our rental programs; where does the inventory come from? Is RCI renting weeks we have deposited for exchange?


Before I try and clarify what is a complex subject, let me say first of all that we take this issue VERY seriously. We are audited annually by Deloitte & Touche to ensure that we are managing inventory consistent with our stated policies. This is an area which is highly regulated in many states so we have to do it. But it's also true that we started this audit process long before we had to do it so we could confidently state that we have a fair exchange policy.



One of the reasons that many of RCI's new programs are so complex is because we go to elaborate lengths to make sure we're doing everything we can to ensure that we're giving our Members the best possible opportunity to get the exchange they want. We have a large Inventory Management department dedicated to delivering this. I know that this sounds like spin so far (it's not) so let me lay out the facts.


I can assure you that ALL of the weeks deposited by RCI Weeks members for exchange are available exclusively for exchange unless and until they fall within the "marketable inventory" category (at which point they are still available for exchange), which refers to weeks that members historically simply do not want or use. With one exception.

Now, it would make everything nice and simple if I could tell you that the RCI Weeks member who exchanged his week for a cruise, let's call him Joe Smith, that we took Joe Smith's week out of our inventory, and that's the week we rented to cover those costs. It would be easier for us, without question. But we'd be missing an opportunity. Because sometimes, Joe Smith's week, exchanged for a cruise, might be a week that's in very short supply, one that other members want, perhaps at a small resort with few units, for example. At the same time, we may have weeks in our RCI Weeks system that are considered identical in quality to Joe's, but are in more abundant supply, and we will take one that is more plentiful and rent it rather

No RCI member has lost their opportunity for a fair and comparable exchange, but a Member has gotten the vacation they wanted, which is what we're in business for. This is the same way we provide the Points Partners program that allows RCI Points members to use their Points for airfare, rental cars, cruises, etc. They deposit a week, but do not take a week out of our inventory. Their points are used for something else, say an airline ticket, which RCI pays cash for; we then rent the week to cover our cost for the airline ticket. Again, no member has lost their opportunity for exchange, because this member chose to utilize the value of their timeshare in a different way, and again, that's what we're in business for.


All of these weeks in RCI's rental inventory are first made available to RCI members for rental, by virtue of your ability to make a pending request. If you have a pending request for a week, and you don't have trading power for it, or there's nothing in the inventory when you make your request, and then that week gets deposited at a later date, or goes unrequested by those members who do have the trading power, it is claimed from the system before it is placed in the rental pool. And, all of the weeks in RCI's rental inventory are offered to members at a significant discount off the price charged to the general public.

[JLB Please excuse me, I'm a Dick. Not a moron just a Dick Find all posts View Profile Close JLB]

There sure are a lot of Perry Masons.

As I've already said, the important thing is the filing of the suit(s), that someone has the nads to let 'em know that customers are upset.

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

I agree.

I'd love to have them have to cough up endless documentation for discovery, even if we never get to see it. Just to hassle them, ya know?

Be fun to go picket them, but, I don't have that kind of free time. Or nads. Besides, sandwich boards make my butt look big

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

I hope Perry is on the RCI membership side!

There sure are a lot of Perry Masons.

As I've already said, the important thing is the filing of the suit(s), that someone has the nads to let 'em know that customers are upset.

Is Perry Available?

Walt