Originally Posted by
WasKnown
I strongly disagree with anyone that believes loyalty programs are supposed to garner the loyalty of guests. IMO these programs exist to:
1) Get customers to book direct rather than through OTAs
2) Source a consistent stream of customers for their franchisees
Of course Marriott cares about retention... but retention of their franchisees. At the end of the day, Bonvoy only needs to be tolerable enough that people will continue to a ) book direct when staying at a Bonvoy hotel b) consider Bonvoy hotels as credible options to begin with.
I genuinely think the difference between OTAs and asset-lite hotel companies becomes smaller and smaller every day?
Is there a huge difference between Hyatt's relationship with SLH and the Hotels.com relationship with a large hotel operator?
I think the rise of soft flags (that essentially have very limited brand standards) like Luxury Collection and LXR are a slow march toward this.
1) A hotel could get guests to book direct by offering something for booking direct, such as a free breakfast.
2) If a program is not going to have useful benefits or is not going to enforce its benefit policies on behalf of customers, why would the customer favor a hotel that's a member of the program?
I realize it's in a very different part of the market, but look at Mandarin Oriental Fans. They don't give status or points, but if you book direct you can choose things such as breakfast or an upgrade subject to availability.
From a customer's point of view, does it matter if the property is owned or franchised/managed? I'd think what the customer gets would be more important.
How important are corporate contracts? I'd think that's where scale would have the biggest effect.