Originally Posted by
Fisch
Let’s keep the frustration and who is responsible for it legitimate; in my opinion. WS causes many issues on their own; this, again in my opinion is not one of them.
You make a reasonable point, and as the issuer of the card, RBC should perhaps bear more responsibility than WS.
But this is a challenge of co-branded credit cards - people sign up for and keep them because of their association with the co-brand partner - in this case, WS - and the benefits associated with that partner.
While it may be true that there was a global partnership between Boingo and MasterCard that created this partnership, I - and I suspect many other cardholders - have no idea what other airlines even offer Boingo WiFi. Certainly not AC, UA, AF, KL, or DL, which are the other airlines I fly most. So the value of this benefit was inextricably linked to the ability to use it on WS.
Could WS/RBC have prevented this benefit from ending? Possibly not. But there are things they could have done, or could do, e.g. offering cardholders some free WiFi sessions or a statement credit against in-flight WiFi purchases. At this point, there's no sign they'll do anything to compensate cardholders for the loss of this valuable benefit.