RCI why the huge difference in summer 2011 vs summer 2012

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

Doing what I do here on a regular basis it is hard not to see "trends". I have been noticing them for a while now but they are becoming more prevalent and more drastic.

I understand that summer weeks are finite. They carry a higher price tag. It makes sense.

What I'm having trouble coming to terms with is why summer 2012 is so much more expensive. For many years the reward for planning far ahead, 15 to 24months ahead was usually a great trade. Now if you plan ahead it is costing a minimum of a 10point premium in most cases.

ie. Wyndham Kona Hawaiian is ~31 points for this summer as opposed to ~40 for summer 2012. The same could be said for OBX and others.

Looking at a supply and demand chain I would suspect theopposite to be true. MOST 2011 maintenance fees have been paid. Historically deposits are heaviest in in the 3 to 6 months prior to check-in. So the 2011 inventory will become even more restricted going forward where the 2012 is still wide open.

Just random thoughts looking for equally random comments.

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

why summer 2012 is so much more expensive.

I'm not sure it is in all cases, though. For example, some of the areas I check seem to be about the same, or maybe even a bit lower.

One possibility---if I were pricing things dynamically, I would offer at a higher price initially, to see if anyone bites. If not, I can lower a little bit over time. Back in the opaque days, we had some evidence that for individual deposits, that seemed to happen. The glaring exception was bulk-banking, which went the other way.

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

Another thought: now that values are transparent, that may be influencing how people value exchanges, thereby changing the confirmation patterns. Retailers often use price as a substitute for quality, etc. Some of that is to be expected, I think.

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

If RCI were to be fully transparent, instead of only partially so, then we would know how these numbers are established. Partially transparency is the worst of both worlds, and that is exactly what Points Lite is.

Have you looked at what they offer for those 2012 weeks for deposits? If at the same point in time there is a difference is valuation for the same unit type and week at the same resort for a deposit as opposed to an exchange, then the exchange company is skimming. Dynamic valuations do indeed change over time, but at the same point in time if the value of a week is different for a deposit than it is for an exchange, then the exchange company is being dishonest with its members.

[logan115 Senior Member Find all posts View Profile Close logan115]

Is the spread (aka skim) if there is one between 2011 and 2012 somewhat consistent too ? I would hope that the TPUs associated with 2012 deposits are also higher to account for the higher exchange requirements - this would at least compensate for the higher TPUs you're seeing in 2012.

Admittedly I know very little about the timeshare exchange game so I apologize up front if I'm completely off base, but wouldn't the real comparison be between the 2012 requirement and deposit values ? At a very high level would it matter if a 2012 requirement was 10 TPUs higher if you received 10 TPUs more for your deposit ? You'd still be able to get the same exchange, and the spread between the deposit and requirement didn't change (ie 30 to 30 in 2011 and 40 to 40 in 2012).

Chris

[Glitter Brunello Super Moderator Find all posts View Profile Close Glitter Brunello]

In the beginning it was the opposite for many things - back in November it took more TPUs for 2011 summer than 2012 at many places. Not everywhere, but I did notice. RCI definitely did quite a bit of tweaking after the initial launch. I think demand for 2011 summer may have peaked already and we are well within the 6 month line... Also thinking that based on ytd 2011 demand they have increased 2012 accordingly. And maybe folks are requesting further out? Also perhaps there isn't as much 2012 inventory yet so supply is lower than it will be? Lots of wonderings...

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

In the beginning it was the opposite for many things - back in November it took more TPUs for 2011 summer than 2012 at many places. Not everywhere, but I did notice. RCI definitely did quite a bit of tweaking after the initial launch. I think demand for 2011 summer may have peaked already and we are well within the 6 month line... Also thinking that based on ytd 2011 demand they have increased 2012 accordingly. And maybe folks are requesting further out? Also perhaps there isn't as much 2012 inventory yet so supply is lower than it will be? Lots of wonderings...

The big question is whether they are giving as many points lite for deposits of those summer 2012 weeks as they are charging for exchanges of the very same weeks?

[Glitter Brunello Super Moderator Find all posts View Profile Close Glitter Brunello]

The big question is whether they are giving as many points lite for deposits of those summer 2012 weeks as they are charging for exchanges of the very same weeks?

Last time I checked there were some getting penalized on deposit and others who came out ahead. An imperfect system to be sure.

A July 4th week at Wyndham Kona Hawaiian would yield a max TPU of 41 whether 2011 or 2012. That was definitely NOT the case when I decided to rent it instead of deposit it. Currently it only costs 31 to trade in that week for 2011 (though RCI will still give the deposit a 37), but it costs 42 for 2012 (would yield 41). The other July 2012 weeks do seem off, though I didn't check them all. An imperfect system, for sure. If I were going to try to deposit a 2012 week, I would write to customer service first.

[1950bing Senior Member Find all posts View Profile Close 1950bing]

It's simple, 2012 is the last year of the world so they need to make as much as they can !!!

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

One possibility---if I were pricing things dynamically, I would offer at a higher price initially, to see if anyone bites. If not, I can lower a little bit over time. Back in the opaque days, we had some evidence that for individual deposits, that seemed to happen. The glaring exception was bulk-banking, which went the other way.

That's probably right. On a whistler 2012 unit, I saw it priced highest when it first got deposited and then saw the TPU drop a couple weeks later before it disappeared.

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

I'm not sure it is in all cases, though. For example, some of the areas I check seem to be about the same, or maybe even a bit lower.

One possibility---if I were pricing things dynamically, I would offer at a higher price initially, to see if anyone bites. If not, I can lower a little bit over time. Back in the opaque days, we had some evidence that for individual deposits, that seemed to happen. The glaring exception was bulk-banking, which went the other way.

The old system was based on supply and demand. Bulkbanking, a stupid policy by stupid resort managers which hurt their members, created a sudden increase in the supply all at once which then knocked down trading power. In the new system, instead of relying on an honest system of valuatiion like supply and demand, RCI seems to constantly have its thumb on the scales.

[Glitter Brunello Super Moderator Find all posts View Profile Close Glitter Brunello]

The old system was based on supply and demand. Bulkbanking, a stupid policy by stupid resort managers which hurt their members, created a sudden increase in the supply all at once which then knocked down trading power. In the new system, instead of relying on an honest system of valuatiion like supply and demand, RCI seems to constantly have its thumb on the scales.

That is for sure! Though I suppose it favors owners who stay at their home resort rather than exchange through the Big Two. Not fair, but that's been the logic I've heard from a couple of resorts that are bogged down with deeds that float 1 -52 and owners who want only a small portion of those.

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

Another why?

Why has Marco Resort and Club for January and February been 34, 24, 20, 19 & 13?

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

One thing I think we are seeing is the result of the ''change back'' policy of Points Lite. Since RCI has to give change back, they want to gouge you everywhere they can so they don't have to. If ''change back'' means being gouged by RCI on our primary trades, then ''change back'' is more of a bad thing for members than good.

[Glitter Brunello Super Moderator Find all posts View Profile Close Glitter Brunello]

One thing I think we are seeing is the result of the ''change back'' policy of Points Lite. Since RCI has to give change back, they want to gouge you everywhere they can so they don't have to. If ''change back'' means being gouged by RCI on our primary trades, then ''change back'' is more of a bad thing for members than good.

Change back also generates additional fees for combining deposit lines. There are pros and cons, depending on the strength of deposit v. tpu required to book desired exchange. Some can choose whether to take two shoulder season vacations rather than one prime, and RCI gains an extra fee. I've got two lines of "change back" of seven points. That's def going to come out in RCI's favor if I use them - either I'll pay two full exchange fees to book weeks so low in demand that they might otw go unused, or I'll combine them for $99 and still pay another exchange fee in addition to the initial change-generating trade.