Originally Posted by
stant
it seems kind of bizarre that $20k spend would make a lot of plt100 members not qualify. There arent THAT many $100/night SPG properties (let alone sub $100/night). Last time I saw, my average nightly rate was around $250/night and thats with plenty of cheap (some even <$100) rooms in orlando in the mix...
Have you traveled outside the major markets? Ohio? Michigan? Colorado? Texas?
Have you looked at the US dollar exchange impact of foreign travel in, say, Canada? South Korea? Spain? Argentina? Malaysia? Australia? Mexico?
1) Not all Starwood Ambassador guests travel in NYC, Los Angeles, London, D.C., Boston, Paris or Tokyo.
2) Not all Starwood Ambassador guests spend most of their travel in the U.S. on which the spend threshold currency is based.
3) There are many hotels even within the U.S. that are sub-US$100 per night before tax. Even more that are sub-US$200 per night before tax. Even more that are sub-US$200 per night before tax that are the result of corporate contracts.
Maybe Stariott's intent is to reduce/limit the impact of point redemption nights from earning Ambassador status. I frankly don't know a single Ambassador guest (I know several) who don't use their points for at least a few nights per year as part of the 100 nights they stay with Starwood. This basically means that if an Ambassador guest even spends one night let alone one week (which would be more realistic) on a redemption stay, that USD200 average before tax spend threshold would go up or it simply means that 100 nights (which is a little over 1/4th of the year) spent in a hotel room isn't enough to ever qualify for Ambassador status.