DVC renews with RCI

[dvc_john]

According to this report on a Wyndham website:

http://www.wyndhamworldwide.com/new...-club®-renew-multi-year-affiliation-agreement

Personally, I think it devalues DVC and wish they would go back to II.
It's great for RCI owners though - they get DVC vacations at bargain basement prices.

 

[LauraLea]

I read this as DVC members having access to all 4500 RCI properties. Currently that is not the case, correct? Are things changing?

Laura

 

[wdrl]

I read this as DVC members having access to all 4500 RCI properties. Currently that is not the case, correct? Are things changing?

Laura

Yes, the DVC/RCI agreement appears to be changing. Based on the wording of DVC's announcement, DVC members can use their direct-purchased and unrestricted resale points (those points acquired prior to March 21, 2011) to exchange into RCI's complete inventory. DVC members with restricted resale points (those acquired after March 21, 2011) will have access to a limited number of RCI properties.

 

[mouseclick1]

I just checked the RCI exchange through the members' website and we still have access to only 538 properties. All of our points were purchased through Disney. Perhaps they plan to update the site to eventually include full access to all 4,500 properties, but I'm not holding my breath.

Update:
I just did a search and found that there will be updates in March. Now I'm interested!

http://******************/article/disney-vacation-club-launches-membership-magic-program

 

[RescueRanger]

Yes, the DVC/RCI agreement appears to be changing. Based on the wording of DVC's announcement, DVC members can use their direct-purchased and unrestricted resale points (those points acquired prior to March 21, 2011) to exchange into RCI's complete inventory. DVC members with restricted resale points (those acquired after March 21, 2011) will have access to a limited number of RCI properties.

When I first saw this, I thought there would be more chatter on the boards about it than there has been. Not only because we are now potentially going to have access to a great deal more properties, but also because it is another opportunity to limit resale owners. I think we are going to start seeing more and more limitations to resale contracts as the current direct pricing continues to rise.

 

[tjkraz]

Personally, I think it devalues DVC and wish they would go back to II.
It's great for RCI owners though - they get DVC vacations at bargain basement prices.

DVC was always a poor trader through II. They have literally dozens of locations in the central FL area and the Disney resorts were not highly sought-after by other II members. That left DVC owners with little trading power to get the best II destinations.

On paper II has a better list of trading destinations but if DVC owners can't access them, they aren't of much value.

As a whole, RCI resorts aren't as prestigious but DVC trades much better.

 

[Dean]

DVC was always a poor trader through II. They have literally dozens of locations in the central FL area and the Disney resorts were not highly sought-after by other II members. That left DVC owners with little trading power to get the best II destinations.

On paper II has a better list of trading destinations but if DVC owners can't access them, they aren't of much value.

As a whole, RCI resorts aren't as prestigious but DVC trades much better.

II used market ratings for Orlando lumping them all together as well as II has always put more emphasis on resort quality over area demand. RCI generally has taken this approach as well but to a lessor degree. The issue with DVC trading in II was not the demand but rather II's approach. However, in reality, II was only better on paper mostly because of the Marriott system which had little true availability. RCI is a better fit at the present time.

IMO however, I think DVC's best approach would be an alliance with Marriott, Hilton, etc directly similar to the BVTC. I think it remains to be seen how this will work out and I'm doubtful of a distinction between qualified and non qualified points but we'll see.

 

[wdrl]

When I first saw this, I thought there would be more chatter on the boards about it than there has been. Not only because we are now potentially going to have access to a great deal more properties, but also because it is another opportunity to limit resale owners. I think we are going to start seeing more and more limitations to resale contracts as the current direct pricing continues to rise.

First of all, I should have qualified my earlier posts by saying "it appears" that direct buyers and grandfathered resale buyers will have access to the complete inventory of RCI properties, while resale buyers will be limited to about 500 properties. I have yet to see anything official about this change, so it may play out differently than I suspect.

If, indeed, DVD gives direct buyers access to the full RCI inventory, it will be interesting to see the reaction of people. Is this a limitation imposed on resale buyers, or is this an expanded offering to direct buyers? Personally, I see it as more of an expansion of options for direct buyers. Before DVD signed the new agreement with RCI, resale owners had access to only 500 RCI properties. Now, with the new agreement resale owners will still have access to 500 RCI properties. Thus, resale owners are in the same position as before, so they won't lose anything with this change.

As a marketing tool, it should help DVC Guides if they can say "Buy direct and have access to 4,500 RCI destinations. Buy resale and you only get about 500." Whether the additional 4,000 RCI properties are worth it is irrelevant; most buyers want more and 4,500 sounds a lot better than 500.

 

[tjkraz]

...because it is another opportunity to limit resale owners. I think we are going to start seeing more and more limitations to resale contracts as the current direct pricing continues to rise.

Well, the initial restrictions are nearly 3 years old and the only growth has been organic--adding new destinations to the programs from which resale owners are already banned.

New restrictions are a threat which will loom indefinitely. But this approach is the least harmful to existing owners. Some will still view themselves as being harmed but in reality, the restricted resale buyers are still getting what was available at the time of purchase.

IMO however, I think DVC's best approach would be an alliance with Marriott, Hilton, etc directly similar to the BVTC. I think it remains to be seen how this will work out and I'm doubtful of a distinction between qualified and non qualified points but we'll see.

Agree. They did add a NYC destination to Concierge Collection last fall and there's plenty of room for growth.

Still I wonder if the agreement with RCI would place any restrictions on their ability to independently contact with others.

 

[Dean]

Still I wonder if the agreement with RCI would place any restrictions on their ability to independently contact with others.

Obviously it depends on the contract. Since currently the BVTC exists, there has to be some provision within the RCI contract that allows it. Whether it would allow expansion would depend on the wording. My guess is it does. It is noted that other systems with corporate RCI memberships have similar direct exchange options and have expanded them while with RCI. However, practically I think my vision would preclude a major RCI roll in this situation as I see it being the major option if not the only exchange option. Remember that BVTC is a registered exchange company. Now that Marriott has gone to a points option, this is a much easier marriage than it would have been before. However, one of the biggest obstacles to this type of arrangement in a major way is that most (Bluegreen, Starwood, MVCI, Wyndham, Hilton) all have major Orlando options (and egos as does DVC). To be successful, other players would have to also make it their major exchange option also because you'd need to guarantee availability, not just a name on a sheet. Another issue is that all of the other systems have more variability for the resorts within their system than does DVC.

 

[cwdefouw]

On last years Winter Member Cruise, the RCI rep mentioned during the group presentation then that if there was an RCI property that a DVC member wanted to stay at, that was not on the list of 500 or so that we can see online, they would work with the member to make it happen. She did mention that the ones we see online are their better resorts and would provide more of the quality we are used to seeing at a DVC resort.

So they could do it before these announced changes, it was just not an advertised option. Perhaps they are seeing more demand from DVC owners and are going to give us what would appear to more options to find availability in their system. More resorts on the list should provide more available inventory, although a lot of it may not be "Disney" quality.

 

[Dean]

On last years Winter Member Cruise, the RCI rep mentioned during the group presentation then that if there was an RCI property that a DVC member wanted to stay at, that was not on the list of 500 or so that we can see online, they would work with the member to make it happen. She did mention that the ones we see online are their better resorts and would provide more of the quality we are used to seeing at a DVC resort.

So they could do it before these announced changes, it was just not an advertised option. Perhaps they are seeing more demand from DVC owners and are going to give us what would appear to more options to find availability in their system. More resorts on the list should provide more available inventory, although a lot of it may not be "Disney" quality.

I've never heard of this happening, was this part of a sales related presentation or a members meeting where they were signing up for sales? I think what they were really saying is that if there's anywhere you want to go they'll look at adding the resort to the list but this takes a few years in most cases.