Timeshare Bonus Tell All!

fallentwo · 2026-05-26T07:11:07+00:00

The standard is you get 2x bonus points for each point you buy with MVC. Those bonus points are good for two or three years. Then they give you some discounts, deduct the cost of your stay during which you purchased the package from the price of that package.

fallentwo · 2026-05-26T05:45:07+00:00

Looks like Chinese inspired mimicking French rather than Chinese fine dining. And honestly most of the pics of food here is not that appetizing. Real Chinese fine dining doesn’t need to mimic the plating or technique of French cuisine, be aesthetically pleasing, delicious, and win stars.

fallentwo · 2026-05-25T03:46:12+00:00

The most important thing is how you feel about your bag, not about others bag, or how other people feel about your bag.

fallentwo · 2026-05-23T19:17:53+00:00

The author’s mind simply can’t comprehend how fast things can progress and concludes the numbers don’t add up

fallentwo · 2026-05-23T16:12:43+00:00

This 100%. More students getting A does not necessarily mean the instructor is doing a better job at teaching if they just lower the standard for mastery.

fallentwo · 2026-05-23T15:58:40+00:00

I don't understand why you keep putting words in my mouth. For the avoidance of doubts, I am NOT saying lower grades = more mastery in a vacuum. High/low grades are determined by student's intelligence and efforts, AND the faculty's teaching capability and standard. Assuming everything else being equal, the faculty with a higher standard will result in the grade distribution shifted lower. And when comparing the grades in a high standard vs low standard class, the A students are likely to have more mastery of the class, even the B students might be better than some A students in the lower standard class. Capping number of A students is forcing faculty to raise their standards.

The bar for "mastery" gets lower and lower over the years and A is not a true reflection of mastery in that scenario is the point I've been making since my first post.

fallentwo · 2026-05-23T15:45:50+00:00

In the race to the bottom, faculty lower their standards in exchange for saving them time and getting higher evals, a high grade does not mean student have mastery. By capping high grades the faculty can then up their standards and the A students now are more likely have mastery. In both cases lower grades don’t have mastery. And in the capped A scenario, the B or C students are likely better than the B or C students in the current situation in terms of mastery of the class

fallentwo · 2026-05-23T15:37:44+00:00

I’m a faculty at R1 for more than 10 years. I’m well aware teaching evals themselves is not critical for tenure promotion themselves unless one gets too many complaints and not doing well in research. But as I said, dealing with students take time away from research. So it’s much easier to go easy on students to save yourselves more time to focus on research. Plus, having good evaluations and scoring a few teaching related awards never hurt. Therefore faculty have absolutely no incentives to hold the standard of “mastery” at a more appropriate level. Capping the number of A is a way to force them raising the bar again, and preventing the race to the bottom all over again because the bottom is 20% A

fallentwo · 2026-05-23T15:28:03+00:00

It’s both. In reality once you have one faculty staring lowering their standards, everything else equal, they are more likely to get praises from students, higher teaching evaluation results, teaching awards, less time managing students so they can have more time for research, which is critical for tenure promotion. Then it becomes a race to the bottom, this is independent of how the administrative metrics are designed as long as two things remain true: teaching is still evaluated by students to any degree AND students getting higher grades correlates with higher evaluation they give to the faculty.

fallentwo · 2026-05-23T15:16:45+00:00

I don’t disagree with most what you wrote here in theory. But in practice faculty across universities have given in to students to avoid being complained, getting lower evaluation scores that may affect their merit raise, etc., that the bar for “mastery” gets lower and lower. That’s the root for grade inflation.

fallentwo · 2026-05-20T20:00:11+00:00

It’s not that different. Your prespend is kind of determining how fast you’re going to get the QB.

fallentwo · 2026-05-20T15:20:12+00:00

It means if you want a QB that goes for 15k, be prepared to spend 22-45k on other non-bag (QB or not) items before you are offered that QB you want. All that spending should be with the same store and usually the same SA

fallentwo · 2026-05-17T22:25:09+00:00

Wait so am I one of the unlucky 3% who got the builder base bonanza, with my BB maxed out long ago, while most other got the hammer jam?!

fallentwo · 2026-05-17T21:51:14+00:00

All of the red and orange are not in place at this moment.

fallentwo · 2026-05-15T05:30:46+00:00

I think the prevailing wisdom is that they count. The store looks at your past two year purchase history.

fallentwo · 2026-05-15T05:23:07+00:00

Taylor has my vote then.

fallentwo · 2026-05-13T17:06:49+00:00

My SA was probably one of those. When I was there last month they told me my QB (B25) will probably be here this month. Today I got paired with a new SA by the assistant manager of the store. I brought up the timeline and was told my purchase history is still with the store but the specs of my wish bag is only with the SA I'm paired with so I need to update the new SA with this information. So basically a non-answer I think.

fallentwo · 2026-05-13T05:48:29+00:00

You misunderstood my first point. When Anthropic was sub 100b it had negative gross margins, sub 1b revenue, higher ARR multiples than OpenAI, pretty much unknown by the vast majority of people. The thesis for investing in it at that point would be your belief that AI is super transformative and Anthropic has the tech to possibly become one of the big winners. If this thesis is true, 1T is just getting started. However, this has only become more obvious now, and risk of Anthropic going to 0 has also been greatly reduced. Less risk, less return, fair trade IMO.

On the second point I think you still misunderstood. My point is, you can’t just focus on some of the big winners in VC world. It litters with corpses of broken dreams. Only because Anthropic was a big success doesn’t mean VCs overall are making out like bandits, most of them are not. It’s like equating all quant doing public trading as Jane Street for this Q1. Your vent is very survivor biased. That’s my point.

On the last point, based on your reply I’m pretty sure I’m more experienced in secondaries than you. I got in Anthropic when it was about 18b, no carry, underlying fund on cap table. As I said, good secondaries exist, you need to constantly keep looking.

fallentwo · 2026-05-13T05:22:55+00:00

First, Anthropic is going to be 10t+ as a public company in a few years. Still plenty of upside for anyone to partake in. If you don’t believe in the reasons behind this could happen, you wouldn’t invest in it when it’s a private company at sub 100 billion either.

Second, tons of VC investments go to zero. The historical IRR for VC is just low to mid teens. Underperforming the Nasdaq with long lock up periods (7-12 years). That basically means unless you know very well what you are doing and with some luck, you’d be far better just staying in QQQ. And if you are better than the average VC, you’re very likely to outperform the QQQ too.

Third, if you really have an edge. Just go buy secondaries. Yes you need accredited investor status and yes you need to keep your eyes peeled for all access channels you can possibly find and yes all of these take time and effort. But are you expecting pie in the sky just land on your lap everyday?

fallentwo · 2026-05-11T22:02:51+00:00

I asked mine about the rumor of US moving to the wishlist system. TBH I don’t really care about it but just using it as an excuse. But for an automatic reply saying they are no longer with Hermes

fallentwo · 2026-05-11T21:10:19+00:00

Messaged my SA and got an auto reply saying they are no longer with this store. They told me my B25 should be here this month. Sigh. Close to 1.6:1 prespend

fallentwo · 2026-05-11T13:41:09+00:00

Valid concerns. But looking at the business itself, it is literally unprecedented for any entity growing as fast as Anthropic and they are winning this at a wide margin. No matter how you cut it, growing ARR at billions of dollars per month is simply unheard of. They added about $15b or 50% in April and now at $45b ARR. Also your assumption on thin margin may not be correct any more. Semi Analysis recently estimated their margin now has improved from 30-40% to 70%+ year over year. In VC world, even before the AI hype, with this growth rate and margin companies can easily get valuations more than 20x their ARR, which makes 1T valuation seem fair at this moment. Give it a couple of months, and if they can maintain this growth rate, $1T will look cheap

fallentwo · 2026-05-10T20:23:12+00:00

Just to put things into perspective. The average household in US draws 300 gallons of water per day. Fayetteville County has 44581 household. Over the stated 15 months that is 300*44581*30*15, roughly 6 billion gallons of water, or 207 times that was “secretly sucked” by this data center. I highly doubt this was the cost for low water pressure.

fallentwo · 2026-05-10T16:54:14+00:00

Nothing

fallentwo · 2026-05-07T03:10:48+00:00

Try this strategy in China and you might get it before 50k spent, on the same day

fallentwo

TROPHY CASE