Well, 2014 was still the end of the free Plat year. Would be good to see the 2015 numbers. Nevertheless, assuming we have 150,000, that's mostly heavy travellers. With Asia having lots of lounges, I see crowding here.
I was in a remote Pullman last week. I asked the Hotel GM on their occupancy: 6 executive rooms booked, 4 Plat guests (who may have booked exec rooms). That tells me it's crowded.

But surely if they ,Accor did not want someone to qualify as a Platinum via this method they wouldn't offer it :confused:

Just like some hotel GMs who upgrade classic and silver members, I think it has something to do with "experiencing" it. They give you a taste for what its like, but then the next round you need to earn it.

I take myself as an example, I don't hide the fact that I signed up with Accor several years ago with one of the Plat links. I got to feel what it was like and transferred from then on all my stays (99% of them) to Accor properties. I make Plat now just for the nights alone. So the "taste" of Platinum status made me switch completely to Accor.
(Sure, I have the best of the program as 80% of my stays are in Asia where they have lounges and upgrades are normally easy to come by). But these actions by Accor are in my opinion real calculated decisions.

Exactly.

Unfortunately some people aren't so well off (or in a fortunate position as by where work "pays" for their stays throughout the year) as to make the status by nights stays alone so this feature of points assists them greatly in achieving this :p

Yes, for self-paying leisure travelers who are loyal to Accor bonus points has helped a bit. I've been very loyal to Accor and find this "enhancing" a kick to my butt.

The thing is although many things can make sense when done properly in my experience that's a rather large "if".

I know people personally who start shifting stays away from chains once they've hit the metric for status, and I know people who have very negative views of some chains status schemes that required uninterrupted periods because they travelled less for a year due to an illness or job change.

You're right to add that note of caution. We're talking about Accor here, after all.

I imagine that's something every chain (and airline) tries to factor into their calculations. Every year, some people become 'less loyal' once they've got their status renewal in the bag. In some cases it makes sense, as people try to earn or retain status in a second programme. In other cases it's harder to understand, as staying elsewhere simply means not enjoying the status benefits they've earned.

The more valuable the staus benefits and -- crucially -- the more consistently they are delivered, the more people will be inclined to carry on staying at Accor properties.

Extra recognition for their very best customers would also make sense. Guaranteed suite upgrades, for example, for the relatively few customers who clock up 50,000 points or 75 nights a year.

Yes -- that kind of requirement is plain silly (as well as probably constituting illegal discrimination in some jurisdictions). If I got 70% of the way to lifetime status and then lost that progress because of parental leave, sickness or a career break I'd be extremely disinclined to start again.

Basing lifetime status on total nights is probably the simplest method. It would give people something very clear to shoot for. Total points might appeal more to Accor, once they've ensured that bonus points no longer count.

Those who shift their stays away after meeting the requirements for life status would've most likely shifted earlier if there was no "goal" to reach. Chains would love these people, as they would have contributed a few extra tens/hundreds of night stays, and there are hardly any benefits to be provided to them since they aren't around anymore.

For me, the key part of Accor bonus and non-stay points is being able to earn base room stays for leisure purposes with little to no out of pocket expense. If I can get status in the process, it's more entertainment than expectation of much from eliteness.

I know t makes me a bad FTer but I'm actually perfectly fine with the changes to the system- let me rack up a bunch of points from surveys and not have to worry about points expiring from a lack of actual hotel stays, and I'm just as happy with my card saying club as gold. I'd just prefer they don't stick me with the dumpster view room when I book with points, but hey, that should be where they put the folks who booked through Priceline or Expedia or other OTA.

Some independent hotels have been doing that for quite some time now. There was one place I stayed at where it clearly lists out which are the only room they can allocate to those who booked with discount OTAs. They also have a separate list of what appears to be for nicer corporate contracts, where most of the rooms from the other list cannot be assigned to those on these contracts.

10 years Platinum
 

By end of the year I should get for the 10th time Platinum status. As it’s also approaching Le Club’s 10th anniversary I was wondering if anything has been communicated or any insight news that Accor will implement a lifetime status soon?

Nothing at all, although it has been suggested several times to Accor HQ. It would seem a fitting gesture to say thank you to those who were loyal for a whopping 10 years.

would be nice if accor can have lifetime status.

Personally I think LCAH do have fairer way to attain elite status by using "status points"
People who tends to book higher priced rooms got higher status points.
(couple of nights at hotel's most expensive suite could earn you a platinum level)

While at other loyalty program (my other program is SPG) it tends to steer people to book 50 nights at the cheapest rooms as there are no extra benefit to stay at one of their suites (in terms of elite status earning)

This is my 4th year as platinum. I also think status points have been a good way to go to make sure elite membership is given to those who spend up.