smashr

Syndicated travel columnist Chris Elliott had a pretty terrible column in the Sunday edition of the Washington Post (and presumably other publications) that not only bashed frequent flier programs and elite status, but FlyerTalk specifically.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...051304000.html (Registration may be required)

So where exactly is this 'wrong crowd'? Is it just in OMNI, or should I try and stay away from Randy himself? ;-) Do they have T-shirts so I can better recognize them?

In all seriousness though, he seems to claim that it is simply not worth it to collect miles and be loyal to a few brands. I would tend to agree with him for both extremely infrequent travelers and those who are not capable of keeping track of the cost/reward for mileage runs, but for the vast majority of us, it is easy to prove the value.

In five years of frequent business travel, I've sat in first class an appreciable percentage of the time, received fee waivers and better service during irregular operations. I've twice taken Mrs. Smashr on trips to Europe in business class and we've stayed at true 5* hotels for free. Not bad for a small premium to chose my preferred brands, when I can, and when it is financially feasible to do so. I've never worked for an employer who mandated anything other than lowest reasonable cost economy flight, and I use discounts, sales and other certificates to try and get my leisure travel priced as low as possible. I've certainly paid a small premium over the years, but it is without a doubt worth it.

NYC96

Terrible?
He makes a living being "negative" about the airline industry.

ScottC

No, he makes a living being realistic. Remember- he isn't writing for the FT crowd, he's writing for the mom and pop travelers with a couple of flights a year. His shot at FT may be a little undeserved, but he does make some good points on other parts.

NYC96

Well, according to his website: Elliott.org it's about TROUBLE shooting. To me, that sides with negativity.

Elliott is National Geographic Traveler magazine’s reader advocate and writes the syndicated Travel Troubleshooter column, which appears in more than 50 U.S. newspapers and Web sites.

DBCme

He's not the first to argue mileage earning credit cards carry a higher interest rate. This never bothered me, I don't carry balances. BUT, I think most American's do. So this impacts them. Rather than bash these cards and the "losers" who get sucked into using them just to earn miles/points, he could offer a strategy: Use a mileage earning card for items you will pay off monthly, use the other card (lower interest rate) for what you will carry a balance on.

Expiry of miles: Can someone fill Chris is on the transaction rule which allows miles to stay active, even if one doesn't fly again within the year/18 months?
Again, he could of restated this by giving passengers creative ideas to stay with an airline program, without always flying like FT "losers."

His writings are often quite cynical. Is there so much joy in writing about the wrong in things?

ScottC

I'm not sure how you link a consumer advocate (and troubleshooting) with negativity? He helps a lot of consumers deal with issues of poor customer service. If you read his content, you'll see that a lot of consumers are treated like crap, and he helps fix it.

Like I said - I don't think any of his content will appeal to readers here, everything he says is old news to active FT members, but put yourself in the shoes of the amateur and you'll see that he does provide a valuable service.

ScottC

Did you read the entire article? There is much more to it than just credit cards. I think the main point in his article is about blind brand loyalty and changes to programs that impact us all.

Is it considered negative to complain when an airline or hotel changes redemption levels, or adds redemption fees to their programs? I think those things impact us all, especially when it reduces the value of our hard earned points and miles.

patgarrett

That AA $350 "service charge," and AA's response to the customer's query, are an absolute disgrace in my opinion. If Elliot is helping customers avoid being completely ripped off, then more power to him.

greggwiggins

If anyone wants an opportunity to discuss this with Chris Elliott, he's usually one of the Washington Post's Travel Section staffers who take part in a weekly webchat every Monday at 2:00pm EDT. Here's a link to the chat home page on the Washington Post's website.

NYC96

HIS articles are not always about the consumer, it's about the industry. Yet, the tone is usually negative. And, to some, that's OLD NEWS too

DBCme

Yes, I did read the whole article, but was not prepared to offer feedback on all his points. My overall point however was he has a consistent record of negativity. It's always one group against another. Possibly he could see valid points on both sides: Those darned airlines that require you to fly within 18 months or you loose your miles ... he could side with the airlines and say, "look people, they are called frequent flyer programs" for a reason. On the point of the consumer, he could add - "but here are flying alternatives to keep your FF account active..." (car rental/dining for miles, etc) With this in mind, brand loyalty is out the door for many people reading his works... who are not elite members.

I agree with you there is nothing wrong with complaining about the cons of each program. But rather than whine and calling the consumers the victims here, maybe he could empower folks to be creative and think outside the box created by the big-5, err big-4 carriers.

abmj-jr

I think that Elliott's slam at FT is probably understandable in light of the way he is frequently pilloried here. His columns and opinions are often ridiculed by knowledgeable FT regulars, even though his audience demographic is likely intended to be a much less-traveled and more unsophisticated group. He is probably right in that airline loyalty programs don't create the best deals for occasional leisure travelers who would undoubtedly do better in the long run to just shop for price and convenience. We tend to think otherwise but we are a different demographic.

CHIC SILBER

It's ironic that it was an article in the same paper a few years ago

that introduced me to FlyerTalk for which I am very grateful

I generally don't bother with stuff from the nonparticipants

avsfan733

He misses the most basic point. So because the travel companies suck and only give benefits to elites its the elites fault? Loyalty benefits both and he seems to think people aren't willing to abandon their travel company of choice for screwing them.

sbm12

Coincidentally enough, that bit of the story is about my aunt. It isn't clear to me that he actually tried to help her - as he promised he would during their email conversations - rather than just use her story as another example of the airline misbehaving. And in that particular case I have no doubt that he's correct. The airline's behavior is pretty poor.

Should people be aware that the loyalty cards have higher rates and not use them if they carry a balance? Absolutely. You see that exact same advice here on FT all the time.

Is it worthwhile to pay the annual fee on a CC just to extend the expiry date on miles? It depends on how many years you're going to pay just to get to the point of a "free" flight. Again, advice quite similar to that which is doled out here all the time.

Yes, the slam against FT is childish, uncalled for and rather out of place in the article, but other than that most of what he's written in this particular column is dead-on accurate. Blind loyalty without considering the opportunity cost - in time, money and otherwise - of that loyalty is foolish. The airline and hotel programs have conditioned the public that their reward programs are full of freebies and the CC companies further enable those dreams, paying BILLIONS of dollars to the carriers in the meantime and in many cases keeping them in business because the CC companies make even more money than they pay for those points they're giving away. That house of cards is quite fragile.

Those who know - many of whom are participants here - understand that none of it is "free." There are costs to getting the "free" and we judge whether those costs are worth it or not. Being blind to those costs is a bad thing and raising awareness of that issue is a good thing. Even the people quoted in the article who are "in the know" seem to have some things messed up, like the guy who is both UA and US elite. Bad planning.

But other than the strange FT slam I don't think the article is all that bashing. And it is syndicated, not a WaPo thing.