posted 09-02-2002 07:24            

I completely agree with the comments of Tori above and applaud II for taking the steps necessary to encourage the early deposit of weeks. This has long been a gripe of mine about Interval. Along these lines however, I want to inform you of a conversation I had this morning with a II rep which I believe does anything but encourage the early deposit of weeks with Interval.

Specifically, I am happily anticipating the addition of a new week to my Interval account. Based upon the comments that I have read here I asked the rep if my resort allowed me to deposit my week two years out. I was happy to learn that they did in fact allow deposits two years out. I was told however that it wouldn't be in my best interest to do so as I would not be eligible for a bonus week for my 2004 deposit. Of course I thanked her and told her that I would deposit my 2003 week as soon as my ownership was verified (it is eligible for a bonus week). However, I can see no reason to deposit my 2004 unit now if I will not be able to obtain a bonus week for it. I know that for the past 4 years my week has been able to obtain a bonus week.

Is there any way that an Interval member could deposit before the bonus weeks are assigned AND be awarded a bonus week in the event their week becomes eligible for one in the future? I think that this would be an incentive to deposit even earlier than one year out and would allow your members to plan vacations even further out than they are now presently capable of doing. I know that in my case I would likely depost early as I do not intend to trade this particular week through RCI.

By way of comparison, I always deposit 2 years out with RCI if given the chance. I believe that the current availabilty of weeks from RCI, at least on-line, for 2004 reflects that many others do the same.

------------------
Danielle

posted 09-02-2002 08:16            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tori:
Craig,

For my 2002 Marbella unit, I received the bonus week offer in March for a season that floated in June-Oct. By the time I received this offer, I had already traded my week directly with another TUG member. This offer came way too late in the game. For my 2003, I received the bonus week offer in late Aug. (5 months earlier than the year before.)

Just wanted to say I think it is great that II is out there trying to get early deposits. Offering bonus weeks earlier as well as decreasing trade power for late deposits will really help us who like to plan 10-12 months out. I am going to take advantage of this offer and deposit my Marriott Marbella week w/ II

---

posted 09-02-2002 08:21            

I'll pass your comments on to our inventory management department for review. I think it is a good idea.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Dani:
Craig,

I completely agree with the comments of Tori above and applaud II for taking the steps necessary to encourage the early deposit of weeks. This has long been a gripe of mine about Interval. Along these lines however, I want to inform you of a conversation I had this morning with a II rep which I believe does anything but encourage the early deposit of weeks with Interval.

Specifically, I am happily anticipating the addition of a new week to my Interval account. Based upon the comments that I have read here I asked the rep if my resort allowed me to deposit my week two years out. I was happy to learn that they did in fact allow deposits two years out. I was told however that it wouldn't be in my best interest to do so as I would not be eligible for a bonus week for my 2004 deposit. Of course I thanked her and told her that I would deposit my 2003 week as soon as my ownership was verified (it is eligible for a bonus week). However, I can see no reason to deposit my 2004 unit now if I will not be able to obtain a bonus week for it. I know that for the past 4 years my week has been able to obtain a bonus week.

Is there any way that an Interval member could deposit before the bonus weeks are assigned AND be awarded a bonus week in the event their week becomes eligible for one in the future? I think that this would be an incentive to deposit even earlier than one year out and would allow your members to plan vacations even further out than they are now presently capable of doing. I know that in my case I would likely depost early as I do not intend to trade this particular week through RCI.

By way of comparison, I always deposit 2 years out with RCI if given the chance. I believe that the current availabilty of weeks from RCI, at least on-line, for 2004 reflects that many others do the same.

---

posted 09-02-2002 09:55            

Thanks for listening and passing this suggestion on. I'll keep my fingers crossed.

posted 09-02-2002 15:41            

quote:

---

Originally posted by CraigU:
The first number is the private sleeping capacity. The second is the maximum number the unit will sleep.

Private sleeping capacity is two people per area that has private access to a bathroom. Non private sleeping capacity is greater as there may be two beds in one room. Thus a two bedroom unit that has one bed in the master bedroom, two beds in the second bedroom and a pullout sofa in the living area would sleep 6 privately, 8 non privately.

I hope that answers your question.

---

posted 09-03-2002 09:20            

quote:

---

Originally posted by CraigU:

At the time we affiliated these properties, we did not accept lock off units that didn't meet the square footage requirement or did not offer kitchen facilities. The ability to trade the different sides of a lock off unit are negotiated at the time of the resort's affiliation. The studio side of the lock out did not have this negotiated as part of the affiliation.
Since that time, with lockoffs of this type becoming common, Royal Resorts did negotiate the ability to trade both halves of the units at the Islander & Sands.

---

Craig:
Thanks for the response.

Is it possible for the affiliation contract at the Royal Mayan and Royal Carribean to be re-negotiated to allow deposit of the Hotel unit lock-offs with II?

Im thinking owners of the Mayan and Carribean should write letters to there owners advisory board at the Mayan and Carribean and request this be done.

posted 09-03-2002 11:12         

quote:

---

Originally posted by CraigU:
If someone sold you a week, and had a membership with I.I., you could assume the membership with any unexpired deposited weeks. The trading power of a week is affected by the lead time to the check in dates of the deposited week. However, if the deposit is made prior to 60 days in advance of occupancy, you make request dates up to the maximum request window aloowed by the resort.

---

Thanks so much. I think I'm beginning to get this, though some of it is still pretty fuzzy. I suspect a lot of it will clear up when I eventually get welcome packages from my first resort purchase and II.

But in the meantime I'll pass along to the current owners that they need to get the deposit made since the 60 day window is fast approaching.

posted 09-03-2002 12:44            

quote:

---

Originally posted by hvsteve1:
Craig,

I am a Sunterra (Powhatten Plantation) owner and am told we are migrating from RCI to II. That's probably a good thing as it has always been difficult to exchange through RCI,despite having a week 52 in a desirable resort,and appears to be getting tougher as owners convert to a point system. II seems to also have a better choice of resorts with big players such as Marriott and Disney (which may or may not realistically be available for exchange)in the mix. What can you tell me about this changover and what I can expect.

---

posted 09-03-2002 12:45            

quote:

---

Originally posted by JEFF H:
Craig:
Thanks for the response.

Is it possible for the affiliation contract at the Royal Mayan and Royal Carribean to be re-negotiated to allow deposit of the Hotel unit lock-offs with II?

Im thinking owners of the Mayan and Carribean should write letters to there owners advisory board at the Mayan and Carribean and request this be done.

---

posted 09-03-2002 12:46            

quote:

---

Originally posted by bigjimblue:
Craig,

I am an owner at Tree Tops in Gatlinburg. It is an individual pedestal unit with 2 bedrooms and a loft with twin beds. In the past with II this has been rated a 6 private sleeping accommodation. Now it is counted as a 4 and when I shop it, it only brings up 1 bedroom units. This is unfair and I am considering dropping my II membership because of this change. Can you help? Thanks

---

posted 09-04-2002 04:22            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Dean:
]Craig, I think you must have missed the intent of my post. I understood the basic makeup of sleeping capacity and was merely trying to rationalize the reasons for those listed in the II book for the DVC resorts. The basic information was that the info was WRONG and asking how often you think this might happen with other resorts. Or put another way, what is the remedy if a member gets caught because II Has the wrong information listed.

---

------------------
Dean
My Timeshare Page

posted 09-04-2002 07:08            

quote:

---

Originally posted by CraigU:
Some, but not all resorts, have an internal trading priority. Hyatt and Starwood are included.

---

How does the *internal trading priority* work? And where can someone find which resorts or groups have this *internal trading priority*?

Thanks.

posted 09-05-2002 08:55         

A couple of questions that I think are new to this BBS:

#1 -- Is II proactively recruiting properties in high-demand areas, and if so, is there a way that we can influence this? For example, the selection of II options in New Mexico and in the Napa/Sonoma (California) areas is very limited.

posted 09-05-2002 19:07            

quote:

---

Originally posted by K Hodl:
Hi Craig,
I have been told by a very informed source that Marriott was tightening up on last minute availability. I thought maybe that was just a rumor, but when checking online there seems to be no Marriott availability during the 59 day window right now. There always used to be plenty of weeks available for last minute exchanges in the past. What's up? Is Marriott responsible for restricting last minute exchanges?

Ken

---

I was playing around this afternoon checking the 2nd week of October and I saw Grand Vista, Horizons, and Sabal Palms in Orlando. On HHI, I saw Grande Ocean, Barony, and Harbour Pointe.

posted 09-05-2002 19:22         

quote:

---

Originally posted by MarTN:
I was playing around this afternoon checking the 2nd week of October and I saw Grand Vista, Horizons, and Sabal Palms in Orlando. On HHI, I saw Grande Ocean, Barony, and Harbour Pointe.

---

posted 09-05-2002 21:20            

Question?
I have purchased a Timeshare resale. As part of this purchase I am to receive the previous owner's two weeks banked (year 2002 & 2003) with II.
How do I get these two (2) II banked weeks transferd to my II account?
Is there a form that needs to be filled out and submitted to II?
Thank you,
MattC

posted 09-06-2002 08:43            

It would be interesting if Marriott owners had preference in availability with Bonus certificates and Getaways. I also suspect it would make a lot of people mad.

Oh Craig???

quote:

---

Originally posted by Fletch:
Your bio says you ONLY own Marriott. If you own Marriott and used that, you would see them. Inside 60 days, EVERY resort should see them !!
[This message has been edited by Fletch (edited 09-05-2002).]

---

posted 09-06-2002 18:28            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Radman:
Craig.
I think I have read every post and answer. Thanks for being here. I have a question regarding online search. I used to be able to do a "shop" with my VDP Cabo unit even though you did not yet have the deposit. Now however, I can't shop as that option is not present on my screen for any of my future weeks. Is that a change or is it only my screen? I have been assigned my 2003 week and am deciding on RCI versus II for deposit and it would be nice to see what my week would pull with II. Used to be able to do that.

---

posted 09-06-2002 18:31            

I've been out of town since Tuesday. I don't see anything wrong with the way this has been listed.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Dean:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Dean:
[b]]Craig, I think you must have missed the intent of my post. I understood the basic makeup of sleeping capacity and was merely trying to rationalize the reasons for those listed in the II book for the DVC resorts. The basic information was that the info was WRONG and asking how often you think this might happen with other resorts. Or put another way, what is the remedy if a member gets caught because II Has the wrong information listed.

---

[/B][/QUOTE]

posted 09-06-2002 18:33            

quote:

---

Originally posted by bigjimblue:
Craig,

I did contact them, but they were no help!

---