It actually could be better than one-for-one in favor of the DVC Member, depending on how it is set up. For example, I own a 2BR high season lockoff unit, worth 189K Wyndham points. But, I can break those points up into studios (worth 28, 42, or 70K each, for low, medium, and high demand time), and trade them up into larger units. RCI cares a lot less about size than II---they care only about "overall supply and demand."
It seems as though DVC has not been willing to deposit developer-owned inventory for exchange, and I don't see that changing---they are able to rent them out for good money, so there's no need to give them away.
It's the only way to do other than a full week using RCI at the present time and I doubt they'll add a third option just for DVC. Still, DVC has NEVER been a regular member of RCI or II so it will be interesting to see how this unfolds.
I doubt it'll be any better in RCI but it could, mostly because RCI is a deposit first system so RCI will know what they're getting ahead of time. The basic formulas for RCI and II are the same. The main difference is RCI puts a little more emphasis on depositing in advance, usually at least 10 months and II puts far more emphasis on unit size and a little more emphasis on resort quality.
Yes and no. Certainly Orlando in general is relatively low trading power and DVC is worse because II doesn't know what resort or week it'll get so it has to AVERAGE the trade power across those options. While SOME of this could be better with RCI as I mentioned above, I think the DVC restrictions are still likely to be in place. The combo of high resort quality and low trade power can be pretty restrictive.
As I noted earlier in one of these 2 thread's, there are areas where RCI is better but not most where DVC members want to go. Not for Cancun, about even for PV, certainly less quality options for Aruba, far better for Cabo. For Maui there are really no great choices and only a few good choices. I'd say KBC is about the best with the Whaler close behind, both are dually affiliated. It really comes back to losing Marriott and the Westin. Oahu will be about the same overall because you pick up the Hilton's and Wyndham, Kauai will gain more choice but again, lose the top choices. The Big Island will be about the same overall roughly. RCI is more into All Inclusive resorts and you won't think that's a good thing when you see the prices.Yay, according to Dean, more options in Cabo.... but does anybody know what this will leave as options on Maui????We were really hoping for a week at either the Marriott or the Westin in a couple of years!
Also, what does this leave as options in Aruba??? We went there on our honeymoon and I was hoping to go back one day on a trade.
Now...why don't I get these emails??? I have accepted the option to receive them more than once on the DVC member site...
About as difficult as the Maui Marriott if not more so. The Wyndham is easier to a degree.
To a degree. It's not that II is singling out DVC but that II (and RCI's) model doesn't fit the expectations that DVC members tend to have. And while there are other resorts that are better than DVC IN SOME WAYS, there aren't a lot. DVC still has elite resorts even without the location issue. This is quite a feather in RCI's cap at this point.
There are many gold crown and II rated resorts I would hesitate to stay at (esp trading DVC or a similar top option), it's simply not a rating system designed to be used in this way. The problem is that the only good evaluations are third party like TST, TUG, redweeks and I shudder to add tripadvisors. One simply needs more info than the rating to decide but it can be a good starting point.
I was going to make that point and unfortunately it's often at or around a year out. RCI does tend to be more of a 1-2 year out exchange timetable compared to II's 6-12 months usual.
The issue with II is two. Trade power and internal trading preferences. It's not that II limits DVC but that the number of top options that make it to the general trade pool are very limited. That's true in RCI as well as II. Further, many are convinced that RCI is siphoning off the good stuff to rent for cash leaving only the leftovers for exchangers.
Actually DVC's availability is pretty good in II, the problem with not being an insider is that the main way to judge availability is what shows up online. This is in essence excess inventory and not representative of the overall availability. Lord knows I've tried to educate but it seems most didn't want to listen. Now we have to start almost all over.
The main thing that will be different is that the internal trading preferences will be gone but with them goes many of the timeshares members have been looking to trade to. I wonder if the fact that RCI is more of a 1-2 year out system won't work to members disadvantage more than the issue we've discussed in RCI. Further, if this is some type of extension of the RCI points program, most of the top RCI resorts are not in that program.
They certainly could potentially. They actually looked at that option a few years ago when the II contract was up and they extended it short term. Ken May, former CEO for DVC and then CEO for RCI, made a presentation and that was the exact topic at hand, dual affiliation. My guess is that DVC wants concessions that neither RCI or II would be willing to give unless they had an exclusive contract. There are almost no timeshares that don't have a preferred exchange company and in most cases, new buyers don't have the option of both. Those that owned when they changed over usually get the option of both if they pay their way. If the company pays, they only pay for one and often they chose which one.
To a degree that is correct. There are obviously other factors such as a certain level of availability and they tend not to add resorts under construction, stupidly in some cases. I corresponded with a member who wanted to exchange to one of the Westins which was adding another phase. Exactly what they wanted was in II but it was the new section which DVC had not added so they were out of luck.
It is a rough average based on the idea that DVC tended to deposit lessor DVC resorts and off or shoulder season weeks and it is predetermined. I'm sure it's reviewed periodically. Thus if DVC gave II BCV or BWV 2 BR Xmas or Easter, it wouldn't affect the trade power for that given trade at all.
I doubt that's help in this case as DVC is the member and not you or I. IF DVC employs the 1 in 4 or similar rule, it will likely not be waived for DVC members but we shall see.
If that means DVC will start depositing weeks earlier than they have in the past (or more weeks in peak seasons), I think it will negatively impact members who do not exchange out.
The 2 main places we were interested in. NOW I am wondering how this will affect the previous 160 points for the average studio / 1 bedroom trade?!
They have been depositing a lot of home resort options for some time now so this likely won't change much. Any negative affect of exchanging has likely been felt already and you just didn't know it yet. As you likely know, my opinion is that an exchange IS he member using it and by default, would come before non home resort DVC owners. AAMOF, I'd like to see DVC members be able to join RCI and/or II directly and thus deposit high demand resorts and week they chose giving them improved trade power.
