Originally Posted by
Great White North
The problem that Alaska may find is that loyalty bought over years can be destroyed very quickly. Furthermore, when consumers gt angry with a company, they tend to patronize a different company even if all other factors are equal. So gutting your loyalty program to bring it in-line with other vendors can simply drive people to those other vendors even if they don't offer anything better.
Of course, if Alaska simply wants to compete on the lowest price and not worry about loyalty, it could just cut the loyalty program completely and join the ranks of Ryan and Spirit.
You use the word "loyalty" quite a bit here, as do others. Let's just be real about things though. Loyalty is not "bought". That's not loyalty at all. As soon as the deal gets better somewhere else, whether it be because of a change in corporate policies or a better product becoming available, so called "loyalty" goes out the window. I'm not knocking it. Consumers (myself and everyone here) are in it for themselves. Nobody spends more at Alaska because they want the company to do better, the spend at Alaska because, at the end of the day, there's something in it for them. That could be a better shot at upgrades, better customer experience, you name it... There is no real consumer loyalty anymore. That's fine and all, I go for the best value to myself as well. I just keep hearing the word loyalty being tossed around as though their support was a one way street. Now that things have changed people are talking about taking their "loyalty" somewhere else... Until the next better thing comes along. How is that "loyalty"?