Wyndham Points

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

It's aimed at everyone because everyone (as a group) is in competition with Wyndhams own rental operations and as a group is a threat to their competitiveness.

We had a long discussion about this OY---I'm now of the opinion that this was done at the behest of Sales, which is tired of paying for the upgrades/discounts on points that are washed throuh Pt VIP acccounts. I'm sure rental competition plays a role too, but I don't think that's the most important reason.

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

We had a long discussion about this OY---I'm now of the opinion that this was done at the behest of Sales, which is tired of paying for the upgrades/discounts on points that are washed throuh Pt VIP acccounts. I'm sure rental competition plays a role too, but I don't think that's the most important reason.

And at the conclusion of that thread OY and this thread, I believe it comes down to one item - REVENUE. By closing down the private point transfers, and with the fee increase on renting points announced a few months ago, it all comes together. And at the same time, putting the squeeze on the mega-renters (and diluting the competition for rentals)... it all adds up to a nice increase in revenue.

At least that's the thought process at work here. So, I think you may be right about that one aspect, but I believe there's been a total plan at work here.

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

I think you are mis-representing my position on that thread. I do not believe it is primarily to increase revenue. I believe it is primarily to limit Sales' liabilities in providing VIP upgrades and discounts (the only perk of real value) to points that otherwise do not qualify for them.

The details are OY.

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

Brian,

I'm not sure what you think I'm mis-representing, as I stated in my posts those are MY conclusions.

I feel the fee increase a few months ago is directly correlated to Wyndham ceasing the point transfers a few months later, and that this will help to increase Wyndham revenue. This will also mean a drop in resale prices and the mega-renters will get hurt by these decisions.

Just to clarify... What is it that you specifically disagree with? I think you are saying that you believe Wyndham decided to do this because of the mega-renters, and that it is directed exclusively at the mega-renters (and the process of 'washing' other points through their VIP benefits)???

Anyway, I respect your opinion, just want to clarify that there was nothing that I mis-represented.

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

I think you are mis-representing my position on that thread. I do not believe it is primarily to increase revenue. I believe it is primarily to limit Sales' liabilities in providing VIP upgrades and discounts (the only perk of real value) to points that otherwise do not qualify for them.

The details are OY.

You don't think that all of that logic is tied into increasing revenue in the end? Also, I'm using the term mega-renters and you're using the term VIP's, and in my mind they are the same - the mega-renters are using their VIP perks to make reservations.

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

Well, only in the sense that reducing expenses is just as good as increasing revenue.

But, I don't think that the main reason is to collect more guest fees, etc.

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

I think you are mis-representing my position on that thread. I do not believe it is primarily to increase revenue. I believe it is primarily to limit Sales' liabilities in providing VIP upgrades and discounts (the only perk of real value) to points that otherwise do not qualify for them.

The details are OY.

I agree with your view. In fact, it is a legitimate issue for Wyndham. I think the issue is that they cannot easily create a mechanism for limiting transferred points from inheriting platinum VIP benefits.

In WorldMark, there was a similar issue that they addressed in a different way. Owners who had no housekeeping accounts were renting and transferring credits from owners who normally pay for housekeeping. In essence, WorldMark was losing lots of housekeeping revenue.

So, they implemented a new credit type call "assigned credits." Assigned credits are transferred between accounts. Once they are labelled assinged, they must pay housekeeping fees on reservations using those credits even when in a no housekeeping account.

This created a lot of anger by owners of no housekeeping accounts. But, it is fair in my view. If Wyndham implemented such a thing, I think it would be a legitimate way to address a real issue.

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

I agree with your view. In fact, it is a legitimate issue for Wyndham. I think the issue is that they cannot easily create a mechanism for limiting transferred points from inheriting platinum VIP benefits.

In WorldMark, there was a similar issue that they addressed in a different way. Owners who had no housekeeping accounts were renting and transferring credits from owners who normally pay for housekeeping. In essence, WorldMark was losing lots of housekeeping revenue.

So, they implemented a new credit type call "assigned credits." Assigned credits are transferred between accounts. Once they are labelled assinged, they must pay housekeeping fees on reservations using those credits even when in a no housekeeping account.

This created a lot of anger by owners of no housekeeping accounts. But, it is fair in my view. If Wyndham implemented such a thing, I think it would be a legitimate way to address a real issue.

Are you both suggesting that this is the ONLY reason they decided on this policy? I disagree in that case, and still belive the biggest benefit to Wyndham, is the increased revenue that will be gained from no further competition from the private point rental exchanges and the increased revenue gained from reducing the competition with the Extra Holiday segment, in the rental market. I don't think they are doing this solely on the basis of the scenario you are suggesting.

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

Are you both suggesting that this is the ONLY reason they decided on this policy? I disagree in that case, and still belive the biggest benefit to Wyndham, is the increased revenue that will be gained from no further competition from the private point rental exchanges and the increased revenue gained from reducing the competition with the Extra Holiday segment, in the rental market. I don't think they are doing this solely on the basis of the scenario you are suggesting.

No, I am saying that this is probably the number 1 reason for doing it. Wyndham just did something similar for WorldMark in a different way. There is plenty of competition for extra holidays. I think that eliminating competitionn is just a side benefit.

Besides, they are not eliminiating competition. Megarenters can still buy 50M points and do the same thing they are doing today without transferring the points.

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

Precisely. The competition for EH isn't just the megarenters. It's also Marriott, Starwood, etc. And, if I'm Wyndham, I'm much more worried about the other brand names than I am some Mom-and-Pop rental outfits. Some of them are very successful, but they are still small potatoes in a big stew.

It's very tempting to believe that your perspective on the problem is the only perspective. But, Wyndham's perspective is very very different, because they don't deal in the ones and tens of units at a time that the "megas" deal with---they deal in hundreds and thousands. From an individual owner's perspectives, the megas are a big deal. From Wyndham's perspective, not so much.

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

Precisely. The competition for EH isn't just the megarenters. It's also Marriott, Starwood, etc. And, if I'm Wyndham, I'm much more worried about the other brand names than I am some Mom-and-Pop rental outfits. Some of them are very successful, but they are still small potatoes in a big stew.

It's very tempting to believe that your perspective on the problem is the only perspective. But, Wyndham's perspective is very very different, because they don't deal in the ones and tens of units at a time that the "megas" deal with---they deal in hundreds and thousands. From an individual owner's perspectives, the megas are a big deal. From Wyndham's perspective, not so much.

Well say.

Plus the megas are advertise in different deomain, thus attract different group of renters that will be very different than the one they can get through EH or their own Wyndham site.

On the other hand, I am not sure the VIP benefit should be the main issue. Last VOA meeting, based on what they say, they have get from sale and what they actually paid out to the POA, I believe there is a lot of saving there. Although I am not sure about the deal is. Even if assume they only has 40% of sales this year, and thus corp will not pay any for VIP benefit, that still look O.K. to me. Although I have to admit I kind of day dream through when they talk about these type of thing, so could get all the figures wrong.

The discount or unit ungrade should not be a problem. They may not have any way to control / tracking the housekeeping fee or deal with the potential transaction cost.

This is a very bad move, it just turn the whole product much more illiquidable.

Jya-Ning

[ace1001 Junior Member Find all posts View Profile Close ace1001]

Are the mega renters buying lots of points and then selling package vacations? Or do some people live there for long periods or retire on permanent vacation.
Are you blaming them for the loss of timeshare value?
Do you feel that they don't pay their share of MF? Why should they matter to me? Ace

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

Are the mega renters buying lots of points and then selling package vacations? Or do some people live there for long periods or retire on permanent vacation.
Are you blaming them for the loss of timeshare value?
Do you feel that they don't pay their share of MF? Why should they matter to me? Ace

There are some here that have proposed the 'theory' that Wyndham has made the decision of cancelling the benefit of renting points mainly because of previous abuses that the mega-renters/VIPs have done in the past.

I feel the decision is more based on raising revenue to make up for the current losses they're faced with now (in sales, rentals, and operating revenue). I also believe that is why they established the fee increases a few months ago. The company is currently severely hurting... within the last week they've closed down at least two call centers (that I know of), with over 800 people losing their jobs. This is on top of all the massive sales layoffs earlier this year.

This is a decision that they could make that is within their span of control...and competing against the Marriots, Starwoods, etc. is not something they can easily make a decision to have much of an influence.

To answer your questions - yes, the mega-renters do buy points and then use those points to book rooms, and rent them out... yes, some mega-renters use them for their own personal reservations only.

I personally don't blame the mega-renters... it's their right to use the system to the best of their ability within the rules. And many have paid a hefty price for that privilege. There are many owners that feel the mega-renters are taking the better inventory, etc. and causing other problems. So, I'm just trying to give you both sides.

I don't think anyone is blaming them for the loss in resale value. I don't, and I'll let the others speak for themselves. I would be more likely to blame Wyndham for the loss in resale value for taking away the features and benefits that used to make Wyndham an outstanding value in purchasing resale.

And one of the most important features for me, was the ability to rent or purchase those points from other members.

Signed 'The First Ace'

[ace1001 Junior Member Find all posts View Profile Close ace1001]

IF Wyndham had an inexpensive easy system to exchange extra points, it would be the preferred method. They just want to be richly rewarded for everything they do. They need to wake up and provide an efficient service and make their money on volume. Cut out the fat.Ace

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

You aren't having a conversation with yourself, are you?