Anyone else hoping DVC switches back to II from RCI?

[akl-fan]

I have no experience of II but we traded into RCI with developer points we had and booked a week in England. The room was just ok but the rest of the resort was a dump, I could have cried when I saw the swimming area. The whole place was 2 stars at best.

I would never trade into RCI again so if II is better then I would love to see Disney switch back.

 

[bethy]

We're not likely to use DVC to trade anyway, but I do agree that II has better choices, and we would be more likely to trade into II than into RCI. HGVC and some of the WorldMark properties are the only ones I've seen in RCI that are comparable to what we have. The rest are pretty iffy.

Ditto for us! I am still disappointed in the switch to RCI.

 

[Dean]

Makes me think it must be a financial arrangment with DVC as opposed to a member satisfaction issue but maybe someday DVC will trade with II again!

Of course it is.

 

[dmank]

My parents own 1 week in RCI and two weeks in II, and have been able to trade into Disney using both systems. [Not always though: my husband and I bought DVC since we want to go to Disney on our own terms, and we love the quality of DVC resorts].

Anyway, my mom mentioned to the DVC staff during the time of the switch from II to RCI - why? The II resorts are so much better. The response was that RCI allows smaller timeshare rentals (rather than the standard week). And that DVC owners like that flexibility.

Either way: while the II resorts are nicer, try trading either for prime summer on the beach and it's tough to find a 2 bedroom place. They have a lot of luck trading around the country during the 'offseason' but it's tough during the summer to trade well in either system.

We were checking RCI and II the other night and could find nothing (a 2 bedroom or 2 one bedrooms) on any beach anywhere in the US for early Aug. So she saw SSR 2 BR and we booked that. I can save my points this year!!

 

[Chuck S]

I also don't like that they give RCI week-long stays at BCV. It's no wonder it's so hard to get a ressie there.

Any trading partner would receive week long stays at DVC resorts. THis really isn't any sort of argument for II vs. RCI. When an owner trades out, a week becomes available. If BCV were never available to RCI, why should BCV owners be allowed to trade out?

 

[Dean]

Any trading partner would receive week long stays at DVC resorts. THis really isn't any sort of argument for II vs. RCI. When an owner trades out, a week becomes available. If BCV were never available to RCI, why should BCV owners be allowed to trade out?

Many of the weeks deposited are more than 7 months out. In that situation they MUST use home resort points thus any BCV deposits more than 7 months out are from BCV members that traded. Given the popularity, it's likely that essentially all BCV deposits are due to BCV owners trading. In an earlier rendition of trading rules (several years ago and with II at the time), the rule was that home resort deposits had to be used. I have a friend who had an in with II at the time and they wanted to go to DVC's VB resort. II only got 1-3 deposits per year during this period at VB due to this rule. Now VB is about the most deposited for red time compared to it's size.

 

[Brian Noble]

Many of the weeks deposited are more than 7 months out.

As an aside, this seems to have been changing recently. The past 2-3 months worth of deposits seem to have been focused within the 7-month booking window. There are still the odd few units deposited farther out, but by this time last year, we had seen several 2011 units. This year, we've seen nothing in 2012 so far.

 

[Dean]

As an aside, this seems to have been changing recently. The past 2-3 months worth of deposits seem to have been focused within the 7-month booking window. There are still the odd few units deposited farther out, but by this time last year, we had seen several 2011 units. This year, we've seen nothing in 2012 so far.

Brian, I didn't want to be complicating things too much. I do agree there have been a lot of deposits within the 7 month window lately and that a large portion of the deposits will be at 7 months or after. However, it seems to me that Disney tends to reserve at one time and deposit at another in many situations. Thus they may reserve at more than 7 months out where they can only do a home resort reservation but still not make the actual deposit until 7 months or under in some cases. In addition, I think the only way they can make the numbers work out for the deposits is to have a large amount of cheaper deposits to get to the average of 160/270. That means AKV standard, OKW, SSR, BWV standard and more lower seasons than higher.

 

[ACDSNY]

I wish DVC would go back to II too.

The choices we have in RCI keep us from trading out again. I think the increase in matches with RCI are due to less DVC members even requesting an exchange.

 

[waffles77]

II, II, II, II

I have belonged to both II and RCI.

I have had many bad experiences with RCI. I am hoping that DVC at some point is measuring the happiness of their owners and takes it into consideration.

 

[dblr]

We have been trying for 2 years now to trade into RCI for a ski vacation in VT. or anywhere in the east but have never had any luck. The worst thing was I banked a week in RCI as not to loose points that were going to expire and now it seems like we will never get a chance to use them, next time I guess it will be better to rent the points out.

 

[Dean]

We have been trying for 2 years now to trade into RCI for a ski vacation in VT. or anywhere in the east but have never had any luck. The worst thing was I banked a week in RCI as not to loose points that were going to expire and now it seems like we will never get a chance to use them, next time I guess it will be better to rent the points out.

Your situation emphasizes a limitation that I try to get across to those who are looking at exchanging out. There's a big difference between looking at the lists and getting that dream exchange.

 

[murcor]

I would prefer II to RCI also. Seems to be better quality resorts.

I agree!

 

[ORD2KOA]

Any trading partner would receive week long stays at DVC resorts. THis really isn't any sort of argument for II vs. RCI. When an owner trades out, a week becomes available. If BCV were never available to RCI, why should BCV owners be allowed to trade out?

I agree that weeks have to be given, or perhaps not entire weeks. Why not have the trades be in smaller increments? Regardless, I think of DVC as a group and not as specific resort owners. Maybe that's not the right way to think about DVC, but it is how I think. We own individual resorts, but we're a group.

When I inquired at HGVC about my options for trading into DVC via RCI, I was told my only option was Beach Club Villas, a week at a time and that they were available 7 months in advance. Maybe the guy didn't know what he was talking about, but if he did, why should DVC give RCI owners an edge to trade into BCV when our own DVC members can't get ressies at BCV? Why shouldn't they use SSR or OKW or a variety of the DVCs at WDW?

Anyway, that's why I said I didn't like them giving weeks at BCV.

 

[ORD2KOA]

We have been trying for 2 years now to trade into RCI for a ski vacation in VT. or anywhere in the east but have never had any luck. The worst thing was I banked a week in RCI as not to loose points that were going to expire and now it seems like we will never get a chance to use them, next time I guess it will be better to rent the points out.

I've had similar problems in the past, lost the points, and decided never to do it again. It can be a real PITA, and some of the locations, as others have mentioned, aren't the greatest, so it can be more of a crap shoot than it should.

 

[Sammie]

Many of the weeks deposited are more than 7 months out. In that situation they MUST use home resort points thus any BCV deposits more than 7 months out are from BCV members that traded. Given the popularity, it's likely that essentially all BCV deposits are due to BCV owners trading. In an earlier rendition of trading rules (several years ago and with II at the time), the rule was that home resort deposits had to be used. I have a friend who had an in with II at the time and they wanted to go to DVC's VB resort. II only got 1-3 deposits per year during this period at VB due to this rule. Now VB is about the most deposited for red time compared to it's size.

Ok I will admit I am not timeshare savvy at all. And trading out is something I never completely understood.

Is this correct: in order for a RCI member to trade into a DVC resort, a DVC member has to have traded out. So if BCV is available to be booked through RCI it is due to a DVC member not booking at a DVC resort.

I guess I am just surprised at how much this option is used then, especially at locations such as BCV, BLT, and BWV.

Because I see RCI rentals on Ebay to these resorts.

 

[Dean]

I agree that weeks have to be given, or perhaps not entire weeks. Why not have the trades be in smaller increments? Regardless, I think of DVC as a group and not as specific resort owners. Maybe that's not the right way to think about DVC, but it is how I think. We own individual resorts, but we're a group.

When I inquired at HGVC about my options for trading into DVC via RCI, I was told my only option was Beach Club Villas, a week at a time and that they were available 7 months in advance. Maybe the guy didn't know what he was talking about, but if he did, why should DVC give RCI owners an edge to trade into BCV when our own DVC members can't get ressies at BCV? Why shouldn't they use SSR or OKW or a variety of the DVCs at WDW?

Anyway, that's why I said I didn't like them giving weeks at BCV.

He was either feeding you a line, ill informed or more likely, both. DVC gives up all resorts but mostly VB, HH, SSR and OKW. HH and VB esp more off season.

Ok I will admit I am not timeshare savvy at all. And trading out is something I never completely understood.

Is this correct: in order for a RCI member to trade into a DVC resort, a DVC member has to have traded out. So if BCV is available to be booked through RCI it is due to a DVC member not booking at a DVC resort.

I guess I am just surprised at how much this option is used then, especially at locations such as BCV, BLT, and BWV.

Because I see RCI rentals on Ebay to these resorts.

It's true that RCI can only give what DVC has given them and I explained already a general idea of how they decide what will be deposited. For exchanges, it's very likely they will only give member deposited (or exchanged) time. However, DVC also "gives" RCI rental inventory. While I haven't seen indications that DVC has ever done this, many systems do what they call "developer deposits" where they give weeks to get more exchangers and then target them for sales opportunities. However, renting an exchange is a no no under both II and RCI's policies.

 

[Sammie]

It's true that RCI can only give what DVC has given them and I explained already a general idea of how they decide what will be deposited. For exchanges, it's very likely they will only give member deposited (or exchanged) time. However, DVC also "gives" RCI rental inventory. While I haven't seen indications that DVC has ever done this, many systems do what they call "developer deposits" where they give weeks to get more exchangers and then target them for sales opportunities. However, renting an exchange is a no no under both II and RCI's policies.

Thanks Dean for the explanation.

So when some complain about members that bought at SSR constantly booking other DVC resorts at 7 months it could actually be that members at their own resort have traded out and are reducing inventory.

It does seem alot to keep balanced and hopefully DVC does a good job of it. Not sure how we would ever know if it wasn't.

 

[Dean]

Thanks Dean for the explanation.

So when some complain about members that bought at SSR constantly booking other DVC resorts at 7 months it could actually be that members at their own resort have traded out and are reducing inventory.

It does seem alot to keep balanced and hopefully DVC does a good job of it. Not sure how we would ever know if it wasn't.

You're welcome. I don't think you've ever seen me complain about the 7 month window. What you have seen is my honest assessment of the impact SSR has had on the system which is impossible to deny and I do not see a a problem.

Inventory limitations at the 7 month window come from several groups. Members booking to use, members who exchanged out, villas reserved by DVD for rental (both owned and exchanged) and potentially even breakage inventory (though not likely much of an issue at the highest demand resorts) and these are additive. SSR tipped the scale but did not change the basics. The reality is that the impact of exchanging on the 7 month window is very small for 7 months because DVC purposefully shy's away from the highest demand times whenever possible. Under a previous version it had a potentially much larger impact than it does now, that was many early 2000's or late 1990's. However, at the time, the other forces were much less so most didn't notice.

Given the current setup, the majority (both % and total numbers) of exchanges are lower demand weeks and resorts even adjusting for size. Put another way, the current occupancy and availability discrepancies would be even worse without exchanges. Exchanges are up overall so it will not be absolute that they avoid the times that you or I want to go. I've seen all the holidays including Xmas, early Dec, 4th of July, etc. I've seen a couple of 3 BR and I've seen all resorts from WDW except BLT. DVC normally waits a couple of years before allowing deposits from a given resort, likely for this very reason related to sales.

What would be interesting is if DVC allowed direct membership with an exchange company and the members could pick the week and resort deposited. That might create a fun discussion here. Actually members can do that now with the independent's and some do but only a few I am aware of.

 

[Brian Noble]

What would be interesting is if DVC allowed direct membership with an exchange company and the members could pick the week and resort deposited.

Most other systems have moved *away* from this model---including Wyndham, Diamond, and Starwood. Allowing owners to choose deposits generally biases towards exchange and away from internal use, because owners naturally choose to deposit the highest-value weeks they can for a given point value.

Wyndham, in contrast, retains all choice of deposited weeks, and they don't even deposit weeks until after owners have had a month or two to book internally at any resort. Wyndham's reservation windows are 13 months at the home resort, and 10 months at any resort in the system. They don't deposit to RCI until about 8.5 months, on average. So, they almost never deposit holiday weeks, and rarely deposit at the higher-demand resorts, because the owners have already booked them internally. This reduces Wyndham's value for exchange, but increases the chances that owners can get highly-demanded time. And, Wyndham has a notoriously low value in RCI exchanges. However, as most people use internally rather than exchange, this is probably better for the owners generally.

DVC seems to be a bit of a hybrid model, as they do deposit some time before the 7 month window hits, but they also appear to deliberately choose things that owners would not book quickly---not always, as there are a few high-demand weeks here and there (BCV/BWV in October, VWL in December, holiday weeks, etc.) But it is low-demand time at the larger resorts more often than not.