posted 08-12-2002 08:53         

The developers will be taking the weeks that have been sold (owners inventory) and placing them up for rental????

posted 08-12-2002 09:06            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Roger:
From the Shadow's article: The PR continued: "…RCI affiliates [developers] can now use the Internet to load inventory [owners' accommodations] and make it available for rental to RCI members or general consumers [aka: non-owners] through RCI's various distribution channels, including the RCI Holiday Network…" (Phrases in brackets added by Shadow)

The developers will be taking the weeks that have been sold (owners inventory) and placing them up for rental????

---

The "article" contains absolutely no evidence to back up that assertion. In fact, "RCI affiliates" includes resorts where the developer is long gone. And the "inventory" could include weeks that have been abandoned or foreclosed and are thus owned by the HOA. Meanwhile, if the developers are still on site and in active sales, then presumably they still own units and have the right to do with them as they wish, including giving them away as part of promo packages or renting them.

posted 08-12-2002 10:11            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Carolinian:
Geez, if someone doesn't write a legal brief, some Tuggers like to go on about ''no evidence''. We should be aware that RCI is going to try to avoid anyone finding the smoking gun, but circumstantial evidence is sufficent to convict someone of even the most serious crimes in our courts, and the body of circumstantial evidence of what RCI is doing is growing constantly.

The article was basically a good one, letting owners know what is going on at RCI. I wonder, however, why The Shadow didn't take it the next logical step as to impact on developers, since The TimeshareBeat is mostly industry-oriented. When the public perceives buying timeshare not to be a good deal because renting from RCI is more cost effective, that has to impact developers and in a big and negative way.

---

I have an open mind about this question. I'm not an RCI defender, I don't give a hoot about RCI Points, and I want the value of the timeshares I own to stay high. But I have seen no circumstantial evidence, even, to back up the things you keep bringing up. Correlation does not equal causality. And this editorial is just a rehash of the same old tired allegations. Repeating something endlessly without evidence doesn't make it more true.

posted 08-12-2002 10:48            

quote:

---

Originally posted by EdB:
Repeating something endlessly without evidence doesn't make it more true.

[This message has been edited by EdB (edited 08-12-2002).]

---

posted 08-12-2002 11:04         

I guess my definition of a "good article" is one that helps clarify the issues, makes the reader aware of what is happening, and what is at stake because of that. I freely admit that I would not give my earlier post a very good grade by these same standards.

Contrary to what the Shadows "clarifying" parenthetical comments claim (and the latter part of the article continues to protest against), RCI has not announced that it will help developers take customer owned weeks and put them up for rent. If my developer were to take the week that I owned and rent it out, that would be theft. (I am not using the word "theft" in some sort of rhetorical exaggeration -- it would be theft.)

RCI is helping developers take weeks that they (the developers) themselves own and rent them out. That does raise some interesting issues that ought to be debated. For example, when I first looked into timesharing -- and this is in what you often refer to as the good old days (before Points) -- Consummer Reports called it a bad deal because many developers would purposely not sell some of the best weeks, but put them up for rental. Surprise, they did this because of bigger profit margins. This was bad for timesharers because it made it hard to trade for such weeks because they were non-existent. One issue that we should be debating is to what extent will RCI's rental service help developers until they sell off their inventory and to what extent will it encourage developers to become primarily renters.

If the Shadow were to have clearly raised that issue (among others) and discussed its consequences, I would have called it a good article regardless of what stance he took. As it is (and the point of my question marks in my first post), I was just stunned by the way that his wording misrepresented what was happening. That does no one service including committed RCI bashers. You deserve a better presentation of your concerns than that.

------------------
Owner since 1996 (a paltry one)
TUG member since 1997

[This message has been edited by Roger (edited 08-12-2002).]

posted 08-12-2002 13:39         

Now, all of a sudden you say it's okay to rent to the military (since you are part of the military), but you do not like timeshares being rented to the general public because of the damage that might occur with not being an owner. Military personnel are not owners either.

You can't have it both ways. The military is, in essence, the general public.

posted 08-12-2002 15:20            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Roger:

If the Shadow were to have clearly raised that issue (among others) and discussed its consequences, I would have called it a good article regardless of what stance he took. As it is (and the point of my question marks in my first post), I was just stunned by the way that his wording misrepresented what was happening.

---

The Shadow did ruin an otherwise sound argument by misrepresenting the stated goal of RCIWorks. Developer inventory and association (HOA) inventory are not our spacebanked weeks. I fully understand that both RCI and II do rent member deposits but RCIWorks is not another avenue for that activity. The Shadow has often criticized timeshare salespeople for ruining their worthwhile product through misrepresentation but seems to have fallen victim to that same tactic in his column.

posted 08-12-2002 16:22            

I posted some material from the RCI Affiliates Connection newsletter from RCI where they cited three sources of their rental inventory - developer inventory, inventory from Points Partner trades, AND ''excess'' spacebank inventory. Contrary to what the Points advocates say, RCI has clearly admitted they rent out spacebanked weeks. They did it in their own newsletter.

There is also the little matter of the summer weeks on SkyAuction at cheap prices in summer at Hilton Head in sold out resorts. This is NOT developer inventory, and common sense tells you that this is spacebank inventory.

Also, I have confirmed with the management at one of my home resorts that RCI rentals are coming in for weeks members deposited into the spacebank, and ALL during desirable times of the year when there is more exchange demand than supply.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Carolinian:
Roger -

Also, I have confirmed with the management at one of my home resorts that RCI rentals are coming in for weeks members deposited into the spacebank, and ALL during desirable times of the year when there is more exchange demand than supply.

The evidence is there, in spite of the points advocates repeated
and untrue claims that it is not.

---

posted 08-12-2002 21:12         

quote:

---

Originally posted by Joe M:
His valid point in the article was that convincing someone to spend $50,000 (his figure) over twenty years for a single timeshare week would be very difficult if lower cost options exist. If the public becomes generally aware of these other lower cost options that would certainly dampen sales at active resorts. I would guess that public is becoming more aware of rentals. When they also become more aware of the resale market that will make developer sales harder still.

---

Of course, that's thinking on a smaller economic scale, with a short timeframe. If I remember my college economics course right, the end game of all of this is a benefit to those of us who already own timeshares (or to our heirs). If growing knowledge of the RCI tactics and the resale market ultimately mean that developers can't profitably sell timeshares, then ultimately they will stop building and selling timeshares. That means the available pool of existing units will shrink when viewed with regard to demand, and resale prices will eventually rise, as will the weekly rental cost of renting a timeshare, to the point where it becomes profitable to own a timeshare.

posted 08-12-2002 23:11         

Suzanne, do you own any timeshare(s) in Mexico? Have you vacationed in Mexico in the recent past?

posted 08-13-2002 06:40            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Trevor:
My ongoing frustration with RCI is not only do we know they read our posts here, I firmly believe that they post here under aliases to defend their actions and to do damage control.
T

---

posted 08-13-2002 11:56            

I would like to address your concerns regarding RCI's rental program. First, I would caution you to take what you read from Mr. Rod Hackman (aka "The Shadow Knows") with a grain of salt. Mr. Hackman has acknowledged that he has a bias against Cendant and RCI, which he will not clarify to his readers but which is palpable in his publication.

Mr. Hackman likes to claim that our rental business takes vacation weeks away from members, but in fact, the exact opposite is the case. Timeshare resort developers provide rental inventory to RCI that is placed into the general pool of weeks that are available to members...not for exchange, but for rental, where RCI members have their pick of the best weeks at significant discounts before these weeks are ever offered to the public. Thus, since we have instituted this rental program, we have been able to add literally thousands of additional vacation weeks to members, weeks that they are able to rent at up to $200 below the public rental cost...weeks that allow members to take vacations at resorts where they may not have had sufficient trading power to access via exchange.

Transacting member exchanges is our primary core business. It is our first priority, to enable "like-for-like" exchanges. The rental business takes the weeks that nobody wants and offers them to the public. It also offers weeks provided by developers that do not belong to RCI members, which would be rented direct to the public by the developer at prices set by the developer, and makes them instead available first to RCI members, and at favorable pricing.

If you have had difficulty getting the exchanges that you want, there may be a variety of factors that influence this, and I'll be happy to investigate and determine exactly what your circumstances are. But the rental business is not one of those factors. And that is the fact, irrespective of what Mr. Hackman -- who refuses to ever check with us first to get his facts straight -- writes.

Sincerely,

John R. Barrows
Director, Communications
RCI

------------------
Trish

posted 08-13-2002 13:43         

TRISH...Thank you for sharing what that RCI company man had to say. Maybe he needs to hear from someone like me who paid for two timeshare weeks from developers, plus financed both purchases at high interest rates...and now has maint fees and all of RCI's ever-increasing fees to deal with. Maybe he needs to understand the unfairness of it all...these rental schemes of theirs that exploit people like me for Cendant's profit motives.

I question when he says: "we have been able to add literally thousands of additional vacation weeks to members, weeks that they are able to rent at up to $200 below the public rental cost."

Now, maybe I'm not so good at the RCI/Cendant brand of fuzzy math. If the AFVC member gets to pay $234 for a week that's highly desirable to me, then if I subtract 200 ("$200 below the public rental cost" as per Mr. RCI Communications Director)...then am I to assume that I can pay 34 bucks for that same week? If so, where can I sign up for a membership account? I'll gladly take even a blue week in Branson for $34 per week or less than 5 bucks a day!

P.S. Instead of RCIWorks...since it only works for RCI and Cendant...would anybody mind if I rename it here as RCIPimps?

posted 08-13-2002 13:56            

With respect to TUG, we monitor the site but prefer not to export our customer service to third parties. If we provide someone to TUG, we will get requests from the other timeshare consumer bulletin boards, and our preference is to deal with member inquiries directly. We have discussed having an RCI representative make "guest appearances" on TUG and expect that this will happen at some point in the future.

You may share our correspondence with the group if you wish.

Regards,

John R. Barrows
Director, Communications
RCI

Carol: It's too bad it isn't what everyone wanted to hear. I was fortunate, though. I didn't spend boo-coos of money on timeshares. I've only bought resales. Just couldn't afford them otherwise. And your very welcome. I figured this information should be shared among other Tuggers. Once John Barrows gave me the go ahead, I immediately posted here.

------------------
Trish