Post reply

A simple explanation... (by KC):

brendan71 wrote:

I don't know how RCI gets by with such shenanigans.

Because they CAN, very simply stated....

The lawsuit was originally initiated against RCI back in 2005 because of the (back then) relatively new RCI practice of renting out the best RCI deposits to the general public, instead of making those prime deposits available to RCI members as "exchange" inventory.

The results of the Murillo vs. RCI lawsuit make it quite clear (with only a very minor modification which lasts for only 36 months) that RCI can (and will) do whatever RCI darn well pleases with any and all deposits received by RCI.

RCI exchange business is reportedly off by more than 25% in the past year, while Interval International exchange business is reportedly up by 28% during that same time frame. One would like to believe that more people "voting with their feet" might actually make a difference, but overall RCI profits are actually WAY UP, so it's very clear that RCI can just openly thumb their noses at RCI exchangers, including any and all members who just drop their RCI memberships, while STILL greatly increasing overall RCI profits.

RCI is not the only exchange game in town, but RCI still has more exchange inventory than anyone else, although the quality of available RCI exchange inventory is (and will now forever remain) of considerably lower quality than what was available in years past. In short summary, the glory days of years past in exchanging with RCI are now officially just a fading fond memory and a historical footnote.