posted 08-10-2002 18:51            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Northern Willy:
Hi Craig,

I have another Accomodation Certificate question. Reading the details it states that it can't be used for resorts under common ownership/management (paraphrasing). As a Marriott owner does that eliminate all the Marriotts? (I know my home resort is not eligible) If so, could you provide the reasoning? It seems like a lot of the inventory comes from Marriott.

Thanks in advance!

---

posted 08-10-2002 18:52            

I have been on vacation this week. I will speak to the internet development team on Monday. I apologize for the frustration caused.

Once again, I'd like to thank you for your constructive criticism.

quote:

---

Originally posted by EdB:
Craig, one problem is fixed. I can now search for accommodation certificates within the grid beyond January 1.

However, the other problems remain as severe as before if not more so.

1. I am still encountering the "too many requests" message frequently. I would estimate it occurs more than 33% of the time. It occurs with multiple deposited and shopped weeks, at all times of day or night. Other people have reported this as well.

2. The grid listed for accommodation certificates has some serious bugs in it. The locations list ALWAYS contains multiple rows for the same locations. I can provide details to your developers if they like.

3. The grid for accommodation certificates changes frequently within a single search session. After using it several times, some locations disappear, and others are listed as many as 6 or 7 times. Again, this appears to be a bug in the AC search function and I can provide details to your developers if you need them.

Ed

---

posted 08-10-2002 18:54            

quote:

---

Originally posted by JeffW:
New question - any timetable on when RCI Sunterra resorts (Powhatan specifically) will become part of II? I have a another resort I'd like to add to my II account, and I thought I'd save money by trying to add both at the same time. Thanks.

Jeff

---

posted 08-10-2002 18:55            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jeff George:
Craig,

With the recent fluctuation in the stock market and especially usai is the merger still on?

---

posted 08-10-2002 18:56            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mitch and Jeff:
Hi Craig-

Thanks for all your repsonses to everyones questions.

I just wanted to pass along kudos for a VC who was great. I worked with Jackie on the Marriott desk to reserve a getaway and plan airfare. Not only was she great to work with, she had a great sense of humor and made all the difference in making our conversation productive and enjoyable.

Please pass along to her supervisors, that the clients think she is great.

Thats all.....

Thanks.

---

posted 08-10-2002 18:58            

quote:

---

Originally posted by PamH:
I also wanted to say that two days ago I called II to add my Cypress Pointe week to my account. I was told it would take about two weeks to verify that I owned the week etc.
The week is now showing in my account ready to deposit or shop.
Great job!
Pam

---

posted 08-10-2002 19:00            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Fayeoctober:
Thank you for all your help Craig. My question which relates to a question in another thread but for which I would like the Interval answer is What kind of trading power is assigned to an exchange that is cancelled 61 days ahead of time? If the original exchange was from a Marriott to another Marriott and then the second is the one cancelled, is the trading power greater to another Marriott and minimal to something else or are there other factors? Thank you.

---

posted 08-10-2002 19:02            

quote:

---

Originally posted by MattC:
Craig,
I just received an II return mailer. It shows increases of yearly Interval Prefered Membership renewals.

When does this go into effect?

1 Year $133.,
3 Year $338.,
5 Year $519..

---

posted 08-10-2002 23:00            

The envelope has the following code on it: EX0366/0502/10000.

When I renewed my membership I was charged the following:
Interval Membership - 5 Years $329.00
Interval Preferred - 5 Years $199.00
Total for 5 Years $528.00 not $519.00.

Craig thanks for reviewing and your input concerning this post.

------------------
Matt

posted 08-11-2002 14:11         

quote:

---

Originally posted by CraigU:
You received a renewal offer for a combined basic/preferred (soon to be renamed GOLD) membership. We have not had and do not have any plans for a membership fee increase at this time.

---

posted 08-11-2002 15:54            

Phone volumes in July and August are always unusually high. We receive tens of thousands of calls daily for summer flexchanges. Unfortunately, there is little available during this peak period. However, our members call numerous times every day looking for last minute availability which does cause strains on servicing standards.

We have not had a reduction in vacation advisers.
While we want our members to always experience world class customer service, it is not practical to hire a significant amount of staff for a two month period. It takes six months to get an adviser proficient on the nuances of the exchange system. Additionally, it would mean we would need to "lay off" masses of employees at the end of the summer. We do not believe the negative impact on morale, which can affect quality of service, outweighs the temporary inconvenience caused. The best time of day to call during summer is between 3:30 - 6:30 p.m. EST.

I'd like to apologize for the frustration experienced. I wish there was a way to accomplish every goal but we must find a balance that results in the best long term customer satisfaction.

Thank you for your understanding.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Lynda:
New Question- Dear Craig, Has Interval cut back on VC staff in the past several months? It seems that it is getting more difficult to get through on the phone, and, while complaints of this nature directed toward RCI seemed more frequent on these boards, I had never experienced this sort of problem with II until recently. Unfortunately, I have heard the same concern from a friend of mine, too. Are you experiencing phone difficulty or has something changed? Thanks, Lynda in NH
PS- I apologize to Fern/Craig if this is one of those personal situations- I couldn't really tell...??

---

posted 08-12-2002 07:53            

quote:

---

Originally posted by suzanne:
Hi Craig,
Just curious, have you read The Shadows piece on RCI and their renting of weeks? If so where does II stand on this issue?
Suzanne

---

posted 08-12-2002 10:43            

I've noticed the new organization of destinations in II's online search screens. Instead of listing destinations as "Arizona, Mountains" or "North Carolina, Hills," it appears II is trying to label everything with a city. That's a good move, but I have two comments:

1. Some of the realignments just aren't working. "Arizona, Sedona," for instance, currently shows resorts in Pinetop, Oro Vista, and Overgaard. Those destinations are a LOOOOONG ways from Sedona. In this case, "Arizona, Mountains," was actually a better choice. I'm sure there are other examples as well. Who do we write to with corrections like these?

2. From a more global perspective, I am frustrated by the search interface, and the new divisions make it worse. If I am considering travel to a certain region of the country, like the Rockies, I may want to look at many locations in that area. Going through the II search screens means that I have to click at least 8 or 10 times for each of those locations. Until I look in each one, I have no idea what's available. Is it a single studio or a bunch of 2BR units? It's very tiring and frustrating. It would be much better if the user could check a variety of locations or a region and say, show me all availability in these locations.

posted 08-12-2002 11:09            

quote:

---

Originally posted by EdB:
Craig,

I've noticed the new organization of destinations in II's online search screens. Instead of listing destinations as "Arizona, Mountains" or "North Carolina, Hills," it appears II is trying to label everything with a city. That's a good move, but I have two comments:

1. Some of the realignments just aren't working. "Arizona, Sedona," for instance, currently shows resorts in Pinetop, Oro Vista, and Overgaard. Those destinations are a LOOOOONG ways from Sedona. In this case, "Arizona, Mountains," was actually a better choice. I'm sure there are other examples as well. Who do we write to with corrections like these?

2. From a more global perspective, I am frustrated by the search interface, and the new divisions make it worse. If I am considering travel to a certain region of the country, like the Rockies, I may want to look at many locations in that area. Going through the II search screens means that I have to click at least 8 or 10 times for each of those locations. Until I look in each one, I have no idea what's available. Is it a single studio or a bunch of 2BR units? It's very tiring and frustrating. It would be much better if the user could check a variety of locations or a region and say, show me all availability in these locations.

Ed

---

posted 08-12-2002 14:29            

I am interested in a statement you made in the Frommers thread, and thought I would post it here for further clarification as that thread has gone way off topic and I would rather address it here.

You wrote:

quote:

---

I.I. spends millions of dollars on weeks that are partially made available for owners to exchange into.

---

Does this mean that, for example, my resort in Aruba or Vail might be selling I.I. weeks, which I.I. then would use for either rental or exchanges?

posted 08-12-2002 15:17            

quote:

---

Originally posted by katiemack:
Hi, Craig,

I am interested in a statement you made in the Frommers thread, and thought I would post it here for further clarification as that thread has gone way off topic and I would rather address it here.

You wrote: Does this mean that, for example, my resort in Aruba or Vail might be selling I.I. weeks, which I.I. then would use for either rental or exchanges?

Thanks.

---

------------------
Craig Urbine
Vice President
Member Services
Interval International

posted 08-12-2002 15:56            

quote:

---

Originally posted by CraigU:
Yes, if the developer still owned weeks. We also purchase space at condo properties that aren't timeshare.

---

posted 08-12-2002 17:46            

1. Is there a formula for the case of the areas? For example, there is ECUADOR (all CAPS), uruguay (all lower case), and Peru (first letter capitalized).

2. Related to #1, is there a formula for how the destinations are displayed when you select Search all Destinations? They aren't alphabetical, they aren't by area (Mexico resorts often come up as the first and last resorts), and they aren't random, as the order is always the same.

3. Often if I select Search all Destinations, I'll see nothing for a particular area. However, if I specify that area directly, I'll see exchanges. Is this the intended behavior, and if so, why? It's already annoying enough that often you'll see a listing for an area appear, only to find no available resorts when you click down to it. It's I believe worse for it to not show you areas where there is availability.

4. I'd consider replacing 'Search all Destinations' with 'Search all US Destinations' and 'Search all int'l Destinations' (2 boxes). I don't know any exact numbers, but I'd guess that those who currently select 'Search All Destinations', the majority of those people are either interested just in US destinations, or just in international ones. By easily being able to select one or the other, you could theoretically reduce the load induced by an 'All' seach by half.
For those that might say, "Why not add N number of areas to choose from?", there is already precident for this, in that there are 2 exchange fees, one for domestic and one for international.

5. I emailed Customer Service on this, they said they would look into it but it hasn't been fixed - Belize shows up as an available resort destination if you do an 'All' search, however there is no category for it either in the Exchange section nor the online directory. Surprisingly, it is listed in the Getaway section. You might have your programmers do a simple query to identify the Destination area each of your resorts is located in, and then verify that area is one that is selectable.

posted 08-12-2002 19:32            

quote:

---

Originally posted by katiemack:
Thanks, Craig. To further educate me, could you clarify this: then that means if the developer has been long gone, and it is run by owners and their management, I.I. doesn't buy the weeks then?

---

posted 08-12-2002 19:41            

2) They are displayed according to internal codes we use in our system. You are correct that a consumer couldn't make sense of the order in which they are displayed.

3) It would be helpful to know if you are referring to exchanges or getaways to properly respond to this question.

4) Our international offices and members are sensitive to the U.S. being designated as a "special area". International fees are based on the country of residence. Therefore, as an example, English members would pay a domestic fee if traveling within England.

5) As I stated in the first item, we will introduce new areas names within the next week or two.

quote:

---

Originally posted by JeffW:
Some comments on the Destination selection:

1. Is there a formula for the case of the areas? For example, there is ECUADOR (all CAPS), uruguay (all lower case), and Peru (first letter capitalized).

2. Related to #1, is there a formula for how the destinations are displayed when you select Search all Destinations? They aren't alphabetical, they aren't by area (Mexico resorts often come up as the first and last resorts), and they aren't random, as the order is always the same.

3. Often if I select Search all Destinations, I'll see nothing for a particular area. However, if I specify that area directly, I'll see exchanges. Is this the intended behavior, and if so, why? It's already annoying enough that often you'll see a listing for an area appear, only to find no available resorts when you click down to it. It's I believe worse for it to not show you areas where there is availability.

4. I'd consider replacing 'Search all Destinations' with 'Search all US Destinations' and 'Search all int'l Destinations' (2 boxes). I don't know any exact numbers, but I'd guess that those who currently select 'Search All Destinations', the majority of those people are either interested just in US destinations, or just in international ones. By easily being able to select one or the other, you could theoretically reduce the load induced by an 'All' seach by half.
For those that might say, "Why not add N number of areas to choose from?", there is already precident for this, in that there are 2 exchange fees, one for domestic and one for international.

5. I emailed Customer Service on this, they said they would look into it but it hasn't been fixed - Belize shows up as an available resort destination if you do an 'All' search, however there is no category for it either in the Exchange section nor the online directory. Surprisingly, it is listed in the Getaway section. You might have your programmers do a simple query to identify the Destination area each of your resorts is located in, and then verify that area is one that is selectable.

Jeff

---

------------------
Craig Urbine
Vice President
Member Services
Interval International

posted 08-12-2002 21:08            

quote:

---

Originally posted by CraigU:
It is possible as the HOA can own weeks due to foreclosure. However, the quantity usually wouldn't justify a purchase agreement.

---

Another question, if you don't mind, Craig. When you say the quantity doesn't justify a purchase agreement, are you saying that it isn't likely that I.I. would purchase from an HOA (foreclosed weeks) unless it could buy a bulk quantity? Is this what you mean by "purchase agreement"? Is that an agreement to buy in bulk on a regular basis from an HOA? Thanks again.

posted 08-13-2002 03:35            

quote:

---

Originally posted by katiemack:
Another question, if you don't mind, Craig. When you say the quantity doesn't justify a purchase agreement, are you saying that it isn't likely that I.I. would purchase from an HOA (foreclosed weeks) unless it could buy a bulk quantity? Is this what you mean by "purchase agreement"? Is that an agreement to buy in bulk on a regular basis from an HOA? Thanks again.

---