Challenging the assertion that automatic deposits are bad

[BocaBum99 Super Moderator Find all posts View Profile Close BocaBum99]

Today, someone asked me the question about availability at a specific point resort. It turned out to be a Bluegreen resort. I told that person that my experience has been very good at Bluegreen resorts that were created as point resorts from the start vs. a weeks resort they converted to points.

I further explained that I thought the availability was better because there were a lot of units in the system and it was very predictable when the inventory would be there and when it would run out. I believe strongly that this is a huge benefit of point systems vs. weeks systems.

Then, I thought about Carolinian's assertion that automatic deposits are always bad. Well, I already know that that is not true for point systems. One of the key principles of point systems is that all inventory is assigned and made available at the same time and is available to all owners on a first come, first served basis.

As I thought about it more, I determined that a weeks system could also benefit from such a practice. Let's say that people committed their weeks for 3 years at a time to a week system and all of those weeks were doposited at exactly the 8 month prior to check in date. I think this would be a much improved system over the current one. The real supply and demand for units would manifest itself because the exchangers would know when the weeks would be available. There are some floating weeks systems that work in this way. Most point systems work this way.

Therefore, I believe that automatic depositing can be very beneficial to both weeks and points exchange.

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

Boca, how can they change a system that has been sold some time ago or many years ago and gave you the choice to deposit your week whenever you want to deposit? You were made aware that early deposits will give you the best exchanges but some people cannot decide so far in advance if they want to exchange or use the timeshare unit where they bought.

What if you want to rent, do a direct exchange or give it to another exchange company or use it yourself at the last minute? You no longer have that choice so I am against it as a week based timeshare owner.

At a true point based system, you own no resort and that is a complete different story and then you have to belong to an exchange system too. I would rather rent and not pay any upfront fees. This is what timesharers do if RCI or II are renting your units. They let you finance the resorts so they don't have to but they reap the profits of your capital investment. This is how I see it unless you buy for use mainly. Of course, many TUGgers buy wholesale and then the picture changes. This is probalby why you want the system changed so much in your favor.

Why can't they rent your week or points and pay you a percentage like the Marriott does for us but it is not guaranteed. This would be so much fairer. Some of these companies want to have the cake and eat it too. JMHO.

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

Boca, how can they change a system that has been sold some time ago or many years ago and gave you the choice to deposit your week whenever you want to deposit? You were made aware that early deposits will give you the best exchanges but some people cannot decide so far in advance if they want to exchange or use the timeshare unit where they bought.

What if you want to rent, do a direct exchange or give it to another exchange company or use it yourself at the last minute? You no longer have that choice so I am against it as a week based timeshare owner.

At a true point based system, you own no resort and that is a complete different story and then you have to belong to an exchange system too. I would rather rent and not pay any upfront fees. This is what timesharers do if RCI or II are renting your units. They let you finance the resorts so they don't have to but they reap the profits of your capital investment. This is how I see it unless you buy for use mainly. Of course, many TUGgers buy wholesale and then the picture changes. This is probalby why you want the system changed so much in your favor.

Why can't they rent your week or points and pay you a percentage like the Marriott does for us but it is not guaranteed. This would be so much fairer. Some of these companies want to have the cake and eat it too. JMHO.

Does the fact that you don't like it mean that it shouldn't be available as an option for those who might like it?

And if you agree that it could be an option for those who might want it, then I don't understand what you are objectiing to in Boca's post.

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

The majority of timesharers in my area, and also at resorts where I own weeks in other areas, own to use, not to exchange. Why in the world would they want to have their weeks deposited with ANYBODY? Why should they be compelled to?

Astute timesharers may well give their weeks to different exchange companies in different years. Why (other than monopolistic practices) should they be compelled to automatic deposit with any one of them? Similarly, many timesharers may use in some years and exchange in others. Should they be straightjhacketed into automatic deposit?

I like to be in control of my week in the exchange process, not be governed by a 'book of the month' type plan. I usually deposit a year out to maximize trading power if I deposit with RCI. With DAE such timetables are of less significance, so I usually give them the week when the maintainance fee is paid. I sometimes consider using a week myself, and in that instance may not deposit it until much later.

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

That I don't like it to happen is my personal choice and has nothing to do with my question to Boca. I asked him to explain how they can change a system that has been put in place many years ago? The people, who bought then, may have done so because the choice was available to deposit early, late or not at all. You also had the choice to belong or not to belong to an exchange company.

If they start selling timeshare resorts today with the requirement of depositing eight months out, then that would be the way you want it from now on. It is up to the new timeshare buyers if they want to buy this way or not.

The reason I think that it cannot be changed is that the reservation rules are outlined in the papers that came with the deed. I can also give you another example here. We own at a little timeshare resort where they tried to convert us to RCI points and they changed the reservation rules too for these people to be in line with the point-based system anywhere else. Of course, this was not explained very well at the owner's meetings unless someone came up with that question. We did. Only a very few people decided to go this way because of the high conversion fee too and now these people are very upset because they paid a lot more and no longer have the option to book 13 months out like the week-based owners still have today. We would be very upset if that feature were taken away from us and I don't see it happen.

Do you expect us to go along with this because you and a few others here want this change to happen more than anything else? It is perfectly OK for you to take our 13 months in advance booking feature away because you want this rule changed as it is to your advantage?

We bought here because we had this feature over timeshare exchangers that only had one year out. The point-based week owners here are penalized even more because they can only book ten months out now in their own resort where they bought. No wonder that they are very upset so do you see my point?

Another question yet. How would you handle this with fixed weeks/fixed units at some of the resorts? People paid extra money to buy these weeks. Please, explain that too.

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

If you mean to assign to exchange company, this automatic assignment is not good. Since as owner, you can not do anything with the week you assigned out ot get back. You can only use it yourself. On the other hand, in most of mini system (like BG and FF), you can do whatever you like to the week you picked. Use it, Exchange it, Rent it. That is what I call ownership.

RCI points will failed compare to any mini system, if they keep the current renting business model that does not allow exchanger to rent out the week they got from RCI or allow owner to rent out their unit with option to exchange. They need to treat owner as their partner too.

Jya-Ning

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

Exchange companies aren't your resort

The reason I think that it cannot be changed is that the reservation rules are outlined in the papers that came with the deed. I can also give you another example here. We own at a little timeshare resort where they tried to convert us to RCI points and they changed the reservation rules too for these people to be in line with the point-based system anywhere else. Of course, this was not explained very well at the owner's meetings unless someone came up with that question. We did. Only a very few people decided to go this way because of the high conversion fee too and now these people are very upset because they paid a lot more and no longer have the option to book 13 months out like the week-based owners still have today. We would be very upset if that feature were taken away from us and I don't see it happen.

Do you expect us to go along with this because you and a few others here want this change to happen more than anything else? It is perfectly OK for you to take our 13 months in advance booking feature away because you want this rule changed as it is to your advantage?

Show me where in any timeshare purchase agreement it talks about deposit rules with exchange companies. It doesn't because it is not REQUIRED it is an option. And if RCI or II or any other exchange company decided tomorrow to impose a new "3 year automtatic deposit rule" for each renewal after 6/1/06 and you renewed after that date you would have agreed to that program. Exchanges have nothing to do with independent weeks based resorts except they are one options for owners to utilize. It is different with the mini-systems which may have exchanges within the system included in the sales agreement but even then they are free to change the external side of the equation (ie Sunterra didn't ask me if I preferred they use RCI or II for their outside exchanges - they just changed when they felt like like it and could change again of the mood hit them). Being able to reliably predict what inventory will be available helps create a more reliable exchange experience as the various points systems show. Having an automatic deposit or a refusal only system would help create more reliable trade opportunities in weeks as well (ignoring the rental syphon factor of course).

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

... Do you expect us to go along with this because you and a few others here want this change to happen more than anything else? It is perfectly OK for you to take our 13 months in advance booking feature away because you want this rule changed as it is to your advantage?

Not at all. I just trying to imagine why anyone would object if it were offered as as an optional program and you were freee to join the program or not.

I imagine that if I were doing it in a Weeks program, the people who joined the program would be a subset of regular weeks members. The owner would have until 8 months out to elect to use their unit. If they hadn't decided at 8 months, it automatically went into the pool. Once in the pool it would only be available to other 8-month program members. At some point, such as six months out, it goes into the general and is available to all.

[BocaBum99 Super Moderator Find all posts View Profile Close BocaBum99]

Not at all. I just trying to imagine why anyone would object if it were offered as as an optional program and you were freee to join the program or not.

I imagine that if I were doing it in a Weeks program, the people who joined the program would be a subset of regular weeks members. The owner would have until 8 months out to elect to use their unit. If they hadn't decided at 8 months, it automatically went into the pool. Once in the pool it would only be available to other 8-month program members. At some point, such as six months out, it goes into the general and is available to all.

Yeah, that is what I am talking about. They could call it RCI Platinum Weeks exchange. And, for a limited time, the $1995 membership fee is waived for all participants. They have access to all RCI weeks inventory and all RCI Platinum weeks inventory.

Emmy, I am not suggesting that people be forced into this option. I am saying that if it were created this way to start that it would be better than the current system.

Think Hyatt. When you buy a timeshare from the Hyatt Vacation Club, you are actually buying a fixed week. At a new resort, you pick the actual unit you want to buy. As part of the Hyatt Vacation Club rules, you get exclusive rights to your unit as long as you elect to use it prior to 6 months from check in. If you don't elect to use your week prior to 6 months, the week gets automatically deposited into the Club where it has a point value and can be booked by the day. You get points you can use for exchange in II or reserving other Hyatt Vacation Club resorts. I love that system.

[BocaBum99 Super Moderator Find all posts View Profile Close BocaBum99]

The majority of timesharers in my area, and also at resorts where I own weeks in other areas, own to use, not to exchange. Why in the world would they want to have their weeks deposited with ANYBODY? Why should they be compelled to?

Astute timesharers may well give their weeks to different exchange companies in different years. Why (other than monopolistic practices) should they be compelled to automatic deposit with any one of them? Similarly, many timesharers may use in some years and exchange in others. Should they be straightjhacketed into automatic deposit?

I like to be in control of my week in the exchange process, not be governed by a 'book of the month' type plan. I usually deposit a year out to maximize trading power if I deposit with RCI. With DAE such timetables are of less significance, so I usually give them the week when the maintainance fee is paid. I sometimes consider using a week myself, and in that instance may not deposit it until much later.

They don't have to join. They can keep doing what they want. We are talking about exchanges not fixed week owners who want to use their weeks all the time.

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

I have read the whole thread over again. If it is offered as a choice to belong to this new exchange system, where everyone deposits eight months out, that you and Boca are in favor of, I have no problem with that either. I would not belong to it as I would rather try to rent my week out myself or try to do a direct exchange if I don't want to use the resort one year or use another exchange company.

I agree with Jya-Ning that it is very unfair that we cannot rent the weeks that RCI or II give us for an exchange but they can rent the week that we give them as a deposit. This is why I will give my week to another exchange company.

However, some of the timeshare developers do not even give you this choice either because they make it mandatory to belong to the exchange company that they chose to do business with and the fees are already included in your maintenance fees. If you decide to use another company anyway, then you will have to pay double fees! What right of ownership do you really have? They can change the rules any time and point values too and it will never be in your favor.

From what I have read so far, Bluegreen seems to be the most fair and flexible system to belong to because you are allowed to rent your exchange week and people seem to be happy with the resorts that are in the system too but I don't know if you have to belong to their system or if it is a choice. I don't think that there are many resorts in the West and the same for Fairfield too. However, that is changing too. I am curious if it will be more like Fairfield or more like Trendwest?

Timeos2, the reservation rules that are outlined in the papers that came with our deed have to do with making reservations at our own resort and not with the exchange companies. I never said that. It used to be that owners could make reservations for a particular unit 13 months out. The RCI people could make reservations 12 months out until the point-based system came into being. The RCI member would get the unit that the owner had chosen and deposited with RCI. The owners, who converted to this new system now only have 10 months out to make reservations at their own resort for which they paid plenty because it is on the ocean.

By the time that they make reservations, there is not much left, if any, and certainly not an ocean view unit as they are longtime gone. The poor owners, who paid the extra conversion fees too are really holding the bag. That's what I meant because RCI changed the rules on them but these owners agreed to it. The other owners still have the choice to belong to RCI, II, or SFX or none of them but the point-based owners no longer have this choice, as far as I know.

I like choices and only hope that they are not taken away from us. If they are, then the deed is not worth the paper that it was written on. That's what I meant.

Now I am curious how other people feel about Boca's suggestion.

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

Again, knowledgable timeshare exchangers may not want to have to use the same exchange company, and should be free to use one company one year and another the next. Like points, if RCI did this, there would be a stick with the carrot. Those who refused to knuckle under to the new regime would see their trades decline, coersing them to join.

You also project a fee. That is further coersion to keep people with this regime.

Locking consumers into using one company beyond one transaction is anti-competitive and therefore anti-consumer. What we need in timesharing is MORE competition between exchange companies, not less!! Too often your views, as here, look out more for the interests of the big exchange companies rather than the interests of the members.

They don't have to join. They can keep doing what they want. We are talking about exchanges not fixed week owners who want to use their weeks all the time.

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

Again, knowledgable timeshare exchangers may not want to have to use the same exchange company, and should be free to use one company one year and another the next. Like points, if RCI did this, there would be a stick with the carrot. Those who refused to knuckle under to the new regime would see their trades decline, coersing them to join.

....

And maybe, just maybe, some knowledgeable timeshare owners might decide they prefer a different system that does lock them into one exchange company for some different benefits.

BTW- there also isn't a reason why a person couldn't reerve their own week, ahead of the 8 month window, then give it whatever exchage company they wanted.

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

Bluegreen does include the RCI membership fee in its club dues. I'm a member whether I want to be or not.

They do some cross-marketing (my RCI directory came with a Bluegreen cover). I can join any other exchange company I want, so long as they will take weeks that Bluegreen offers.

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

Bluegreen does include the RCI membership fee in its club dues. I'm a member whether I want to be or not.

They do some cross-marketing (my RCI directory came with a Bluegreen cover). I can join any other exchange company I want, so long as they will take weeks that Bluegreen offers.

Same as FF. But assume for Fairness, they should really assigned all their unit to the exchange company after certain peiod of time since other point resorts should do the same (the inventory will show at certain time pre-defined by exchange company right?). So image what happen.

Now after that period, you can only get that week using exchange. Since the week is assigned to exchange company, you will no longer be able to reassign it to other exchange company, and you can not rent it out, you can only use it at that time. Which is not the case if you got that week from BG or FF. So, at this moment, the big chain will hold a big % of their inventories to their internal owners. After all, ownership is the reason anyone want to buy a TS to start with. And from developer's point of view, that is one of the reason they can differentiate their pricing.

There is no way an exchange company can solve that issue.

Jya-Ning