seawolf

These two paragraphs don’t align with each other.

In the first paragraph you are saying not to escalate to corporate for fear of this program ending. The best approach in this case is to provide contact information in advance. No escalation to corporate, your fear of the program being discontinued does not materialize and guest gets the FF rate.

Isn't that the desire outcome? So, remind me again why providing contact information in advance is a dangerous trend given everybody wins here?

The only makes sense to those who is not a friend/family of a Carlson employee as your approach will end in one of the following:

• Hotel honors the rate
• Carry a financial exposure to be disputed by credit card (and hope the credit card company agrees)
• Look for another hotel last minute.

If one is eligible for this rate, why would they even entertain this approach and the potential consequences it can lead to when they could have just provided the requested contact to begin with and know what the desired outcome will be!?!?!?

That, coincidently, aligns with what one who is not a friend/family of a Carlson employee would want.

orbitmic

I think this is a rather arbitrary statement. As another person with a perfectly genuine entitlement to the rate, I also very much object to hotels asking for contact details in advance (which are NOT part of what the hotel is supposed to ask) and increasingly contacting the said friends.

The thing you do not seem to take into account and which I think is disturbing to Paul4travel, myself, and presumably some others is that we see that clearly as an attempt by some hotels to pressure people into not using the rate. There is - even in the language used in some of the emails that I have used - more than a hint of a "this is not welcome here".

The second thing which one should not be oblivious to is that having a genuine friend or family able to vouch for us does not in any way means that we are happy with them being disturbed on a regular basis, sometimes at most unsocial hours, alerted of any stay we make and anywhere we make it, and basically in "costing" our friends in terms of time wasted on our behalf. This is not what they agreed to when telling us they would be happy for us to use their names because it is simply not part of what is intended to be required of the employee by the rate as designed by Carlton, and frankly, I find it embarrassing to know that I am indirectly being a "pain in the back" of people I know and like just because some hotels decide to rewrite the rules of the game and behave like bullies. If we were not trying to protect the interest of our friends (in this case to be left alone), then we would be incredibly selfish.

So like Paul4travel, I refuse to indulge in those bullying tactics, provide the information that is required by the rate at the time that it is required, and do not encourage what I see as a slippery slope explicitly meant to discourage legitimate rate users (and not only illegitimate ones) from using the F&F rate.

Paul4Travel

I've spent enough time trying to explain what you're not intentioned/able to understand. Such bullying tactics will drive this rate to a no-way solution, determining in the long period the end of the program. Unfortunately this rate is highly spreaded and there's no way to preserve it against people (like you) who act in this insane way.
Exactly. Thanks for your contribution, I can see that my words remain intelligible to the most! Luckily.^

seawolf

I just illustrated a scenario where your concerns of "fear of discontinuation of the program" and "guest stays at eligible rate" were addressed and your best response involves questioning the intelligence of another FT member?

Furthermore, the property weeding out non-eligibility may prove to keep the program viable for the long term.

Orbitmic raised the concern about disrupting your Carlson contact. Please quote "your words" in the past couple of days mentioning that the disruption of the Carlson contact as the reason to not provide the contact. I only see "dangerous trend" and "rate could disappear within 24h" due to escalation as your concerns.

Orbitmic - I understand your concern on disturbing the Carlson contact.

Each property handles contact details differently. However asking for contact does not necessarily equal disrupting Carlson contact. Some properties will call contact (most disruptive), others will email (not as disruptive as calling), others will simply check corporate directory or simply seeing if you are willing to provide a contact (not disruptive).

For those properties that will reach out to the Carlson contact, they will likely reach out whether you provide 10 weeks prior to check-in or at check-in (some of us do more than 1-nighters). That disruption will likely occur if you choose to stay at those properties.

The F&F rate is also not a LRA rate. If the property doesn't want this business, they didn't have to load the rate to begin with. If corporate has a requirement for a limited number of rooms that must be F&F rate, then the hotel asking for contact (whether they act on it or not) is doing us a favor by ensuring that this limited supply is available for those who are friends/family.

Keep in mind that the F&F rate is not a public rate. Use of this rate may/may not disrupt your relationship with the Carlson employee. You will have to decide whether it is worth the potential disruption or not.

However I don’t subscribe at all to Paul4Travel’s suggestion that it is a dangerous trend nor that corporate escalation is the wrong approach for fear of program discontinuation. By his suggestion, then we should also not be escalating whenever other T&Cs are not being observed (eg elite benefits) for fear of discontinuation.

Paul4Travel

As I said before, I've spent enough time trying to explain what evidently you're not (at this point) able to understand. Nothing personal of course.

I try to make a last example, but you need to use a very f-l-e-x-i-b-l-e approach since the example doesn't match exactly :

Have you ever been on the Trick_it thread? well, making the same assumption you've made above concerning the corporate escalation, at that point everyone would be motivated to call the airline in order to have e.g. a confirmation of their dumped ticket fare?

At the end the common trick is not to attract the company's attention, even if there're some troubles related to the deal.

HIDDY

Yes I'd go along with that.

As a Accor Platinum I once made a booking for the Novotel Manchester. I kept to my side of the deal by checking in an hour before the cut off time which would have made the booking non guaranteed only to find out they had sold our room to someone else.
Ah but we tried calling you to find out if you were coming they said.As you didn't answer we assumed you had changed your plans.
They didn't seem at all bothered when I pointed out their version of the rules was completely different from those published in the rate I'd booked. They did rebook us a night in a Mercure located about 15 miles back in the direction we had came which riled me even more.

orbitmic

Sounds ghastly indeed! One word in your account is one that is always guaranteed to irritate me: "we assumed...". I just don't think that it is the place of a seller to "assume" anything about what the buyer wants/doesn't want, intends/doesn't intend etc. I very much hope that they offered you that night at the Mercure and a big apology!

seawolf

That's just it. The F&F rate is not a trick. It's not a hack. It's not a mistake rate. It's not a fuel dump. What's with the not bringing it to the corporate attention? The F&F program is a corporate sanctioned rate. If properties are not aligning to this F&F program, they need to brought in line.

At the end of the day, if you like to play this game of potentially arguing with front desk, getting charged rack or end up having to book another hotel, it's your choice. However the only dangerous trend being set by providing the contact details in advance is that it is only dangerous if the contact provided is actually verified by the hotel and that contact disavows you.

HIDDY

Yes we were suitably compensated with points and given a room upgrade and free breakfast at the Mercure but it was the third bad experience we've had at Accor hotels.....all of them located in England it has to be said. No problems in other regions of the world.

scr

Stayed at the Radisson Blu Falconer Hotel in Copenhagen this week. No e-mail beforehand, no questions asked at check-in.

Only stayed one night, and free breakfast was included.

PHLisa

Incorrect. The dangerous trend is random employees taking it upon themselves to decide that they want to make up rules that don't exist in the terms of the rate. I'm one of those people who has issues with that.

For me, it is not at all a matter of disturbing my friend or not. It is the fact that there are published rules to the published rate and I am not ok with individuals deciding they know better than corporate how the rate should be used.

Personally, I would not stay somewhere that gave me that kind of attitude, because I am sure that would extend to the service at the hotel as well. It is rude, unprofessional and unwelcoming to a potential guest.

You seem to be one of those "if you're not doing something illegal, why not let the government spy on you" types. It's the principle of the thing. It's because the implication is that I am doing something illegal, which I find offensive.

seawolf

I hope you read my entire position before you made the "You seem to be one of those" comment. I understand the not providing contact because the hotel is exceeding T&C. My position is if a property is doing that, then escalate to corporate to bring the property in line.

Other expressed a "don't response to hotel, don't escalate to corporate and hope for the best at check-in" position when they are rightfully eligible to use the rate because of the fear that corporate will end the F&F program.

So if the property decides to not offer WiFi or not offer free breakfast on the F&F rate, continue to not escalate to corporate due to that fear?? What about a hotel that doesn't honor Club Carlson elite benefits? Also don't escalate to corporate due to fear it will be discontinued? Not escalating to corporate due to fear doesn't make sense.

Paul4Travel

Nobody stated that corporate escalation must be avoided in every case or at any cost. What seems you're not interested to consider is that your conduct, even if legitimated and sufficiently fair, may involve some drastic consequences that go behind your single interest. This is what You should be able to took into consideration.

seawolf

I think we've established our respective positions and the pros/cons of each.

You can continue with your "hope for the best at check-in" approach at the properties that ask for contact prior to arrival.

Others can take the "provide contact prior to arrival" approach.

And I can take the "provide contact prior to arrival but then escalate to corporate" approach.

Paul4Travel

That's the problem. You're really unable to understand the consequences behavior involves..
but I've to admit that, after several posts, if you have not realized until now, I doubt you'll be able to figure it out in the near future.

I want to leave our "personal" discussion with some considerations:
1) these rates work if are commonly used but at the same time not widely abused
2) this rate will continue to exist till the moment when it will not involve more troubles (e.g. corporate escalations,etc) than benefits/revenues.
3)Acting in the way you've wrote, is a typical opportunist conduct. From the set: I take whatever I'm able to, wherever it is, in spite of the consequences.