<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by wormwood:
The average user of the frequency program who never benefits because the opportunity was destroyed
Second, all frequency program users, except the rapists themselves, lose when dilution comes along or further offers are scrapped in fear of the vacuum cleaner approach used by some people.</font>
I completely disagree. I've consulted for consumer products companies in the past and have experience developing offers of this nature. Sure, mistakes are made sometimes, but for the most part the terms and conditions of these promotions are very carefully scrutinized and it is usually near impossible to really "take advantage" of the deal.
"Until 12/1 or while supplies last" "Maximum 4 per customer" "Program may be ended at any time" etc.
The results of these types of programs are constantly analyzed both in real-time and after the fact. Even if you are correct that this type of usage is something that hurts these companies, the types of "average" users you mention won't get hurt in that case, wormwood, because these programs will not go away. They just might have a mileage cap or other conditions that make no difference to those average users but will thwart the "vaccum cleaners."
I strongly suspect that in this specific case, however, that's not the case and one of these two scenarios is likely to apply:
a) All of the large purchases by users here are still just a drop in the bucket compared to the whole program size.
b) The economics of the deal are similar to or cheaper than other marketing programs the companies have (advertising, etc.) and the amount of usage (even per user) doesn't matter at all.
To be clear, I think there's a big difference and feel very differently about someone just using a program A LOT more than expected vs someone who tries to exploit a program by trying to circumvent program rules (ie: cancelling subscriptions, etc.).