mnredfox

Ditto, had like 5 stays last year and still was soft landed. I'm considering what to do pending if there is any promotions for points and or status. But basically in burn points mode after WOH changes.

MarkOK

Yep. For those staying 60 nights, WoH on the balance is quite equivalent (for some, better, for some maybe a little worse, on the balance though, largely equivalent).

For those staying 25 stays, though, WoH is terrible, gutted, a 'shell of its former self', etc.

Hyatt wanted to get rid of such 25 stay elites, that is what they did (*even elites that become elites from promos, are only globalites). My guess is that they found it was costly giving that many 'check in amenity points', diamond suite upgrades, and the rest of the benefits to so many customers who were maximizing benefit yield and staying only their exact 25 stays, while many (most?) of those customers had 25+ other nights spent keeping status at second (and perhaps third) programs. So, Hyatt tried to figure out how to get these elites to have to put in more nights with Hyatt, probably figuring a handful would just quit but many will also quit their second/third programs and just give Hyatt more business. They probably overestimated how many would meet the higher challenges, though, and the bashing/bellyaching by the travel blog community became a contagion that poisoned the brand of the program (a lot of the bellyaching, of course, was because the bloggers no longer could get top status with cheap 1 night mattress runs with Hyatt to score suite upgrades for choice top destinations, while still playing SPG, HH, Marriot, IHG, simultaneously and more heavily). Hyatt guessed wrong -- Hence the recent changes on award nights counting, retroactive credit, and this targetted promotion to give some people a second chance to reweigh their decisions (now that they made the big change in counting award nights). All programs have promos that make getting status easier here and there. But Hyatt's rapid fire of decisions as the first year rolls over into the second does show that they mis-estimated the number of people that would drop others for them. They want to right-size the program and get some people back.

I like WoH (counting free nights makes the 1 non-sane of the program sane). I like it better than gold passport. One of those reasons is because I feel that it is overall fair. I can spend a lot of nights and can spend a fair share of money on Hyatts, which I started doing consistently about a year ago. This is a program where I feel I can fairly get recognized for my 'loyalty'. It's similar in a lot of ways to how Airlines have moved from loyalty models that could be short-cut with cheap, long haul mileage runs to one which the primary divider is on dollars spent. I fairly -don't- get recognized with seat upgrades when I fly, because I only fly enough to maybe get 'AAdvantage gold' on a 'busy year (though, I have gotten a F upgrade recently without current status). At the same time, I know that those getting the upgrades are spending and flying way more than me, and deserve to be recognized before me. They aren't up there just because they had the time to kill on a bargain fare to asia and back over a long weekend.

Anyways, as the program shakes out and WoH adjusts and finds where they need to be, I hope they keep treating 1 night in the middle of a 7 day stay, the same as 1 night in a 1 night stay, and I hope they continue to offer as many benefits to globalists as they do. In the end, I know it has to be a program that works for Hyatt's bottom line, but I hope its a program where globalist is a 'selective' group.

notquiteaff

Except that Hyatt is the Alaska Airlines of the hotel world while Hilton, Marriott/SPG and IHG have the scale of UA, AA and Delta. And Alaska did NOT move to a revenue-based program because they understand that their size disadvantage requires a better program to compete against the big boys.

As an Alaska flyer, I simply cannot fully commit to them because they don't fly everywhere I want/need to go.

As a (former) Hyatt traveler, I simply couldn't fully commit to them because they simply don't have properties everywhere I want/need to go.

Also, I think you are overestimating the number of people who were doing "cheap long-haul mileage runs" and "cheap 1 night mattress runs". Maybe Hyatt also overestimated their impact and decided to throw them out... but it seems they may have thrown out way more people than they intended.

MSPeconomist

Why do you think that this is worse than SPG Gold with only no upgrades (just preferred rooms of the same category as what was booked) and a choice of a free drink or 250/125 points as a welcome amenity? Lounge access requires either paying for a club room or somehow getting an "OPUP" to club level?

joe_miami

Do you (or anyone) really believe Hyatt made these changes without actually crunching a lot of numbers?

It seems obvious, just from posts here, that a lot of people were doing the bare minimum to make Diamond and then squeezing Hyatt for every penny of value on long family vacations and whatnot.

notquiteaff

I am sure they crunched a lot of numbers. I am not sure they came to the correct conclusion. Do you (or anyone) really believe that companies always make the right decision?

I submit the "clever" naming of elite levels as an example where I don't think they fully thought this through.

True. But hopefully "a lot of people" here isn't a significant percentage of Hyatt's customer base. And I doubt that FTers are really a representative sample of the broader traveler community.

MarkOK

I think Hyatt does have better benefits at its top-tier than the others. It just doesn't give both better top-tier benefits and at a cheaper price anymore. It is a different program model, but it is one I personally like. All programs are devaluing in some way over time as the overall marketplace consolidates. Hyatt kept the top of their program great (including being very steady with point valuations), but chose to force the more marginal elites to either put-up more business or get a devaluation. That is a tough gamble, but I would rather Hyatt keep top benefits great than to go a different route devalue across the board. With my travel patterns, WoH is giving me quite a bit more benefits than gold passport would have - my business with them this year will be double to triple what I did last year with them while I will likely have fewer than 3 nights staying at a different brand (if any at all). But I am a data point, and you are another. On the whole, I would agree that Hyatt's gamble was too strong and now they are trying to make some corrective action.

With a smaller footprint, Hyatt doesn't have to make top-tier cheaper, as much as they have to make sure they can keep offering the best top tier. If their top tier isn't great, then why would any frequent traveler bother earning it? Like you said, they don't have the footprint to get frequent customers based on convenience (like Hilton, Marriot, and IHG in the US which has a hotel near every other interstate highway exit). What they maybe should be looking at is making explorist a little better (instead of club certificates, entice more with club access and free breakfasts??) so that they are 'better' than the competitors at that level of travel as well.

Comparing airlines to hotels is difficult, but I did waddle into that. Airline marketplaces are inherently more geographically limited than hotels. It's easier to find a Hyatt wherever most will travel than it is to use Alaskan Air to get there. And, as for benefits, Alaskan doesn't offer any more benefits than the big boys. So, they have a lower threshold for the same benefits as their competitors. Hyatt has a similar threshold for better top benefits than its competitors (at least for me, YMMV).

And I -don't- think there were that many mileage runners or mattress runners (outside of the travel blogosphere), but most airlines (and Hyatt) found that it makes sense to close such loopholes, and I agree. You want to reward your best customers, not those that found the easiest route to get there.

notquiteaff

Definitely. It's a status level without value (to me and many others, I believe). Definitely not something I would aim to earn if I was interested in Hyatt status.

A significant percentage (and I believe, their fastest growing segment) of properties is HP and HH. What better benefits do the top tier elites get there? It's like being Global Service on United and flying mostly CR2s

skywalkerLAX

Nothing to add to this analysis. Just finished another 40 minute phone call because my Globalist package for 2018 contained UA Club Passes that expire 4 months from now. Beautiful!

MarkOK

For me, the club access awards could be put to good use -- I easily have naturally 3- or 4 stays of 6-7 days each year at a club-located Hyatts. But, the full breakfast benefit that globalists have I think makes a large difference in terms of value. It doesn't reward anything at HH/HP, but it gives a real tangible benefit when you stay at more expensive FS (non club) properties where now the benefit of status at such properties is limited.

I don't know how HP and HH can be made all that much better in terms of benefits. With globalist status, I've stopped staying at them whenever I have a viable full service hyatt as an alternative (speciifically, that is 80 nights out of the 90 I have planned out). Many HH/HP don't have suites or different room categories (though, those that do, in my experience, do do the upgrades even if they don't have to). They all have free breakfasts (which at times is too mediocre). Giving point bonuses for staying at HP/HH seems cheesy to me in some way, but maybe that is enough to make most people happy (It wouldn't affect my decisions though). Something, I would enjoy is a $20 per night credit for food/drinks (don't they all have bar and quick bites thing). That way, I can get an appetizer and a glass of wine and/or a dessert and espresso. Some of those locations could probably use the extra turnover in food/drink stock and it wouldn't really cost Hyatt more than a few bucks in additional material costs.

(and as for the airline reference - yes. I fly in a single-class CRJ at least one leg of every one-way trip on AA. Even if I have super top status, it does nothing for most of my travel legs)

skywalkerLAX

And just guess how many legitimately renewed Globalists they pi****d off with all these claw back offers to members who didn't make the cut.

It's not about offering a challenge or status match during a random period in the programs lifetime. They pretty much extorted people to do 55/60 nights and then after this has been done the offers to all those who didn't invest that much time and cash come rolling in. They should seriously win an industry award for f'in every little thing up!

notquiteaff

I had one lengthy (one-week) stay last year where a Hyatt with a Club was a viable option. I used my explorer coupon for that, at the HR Maui. The other three will expire in a few days. I am just not going to put any effort into reaching 30 nights for four coupons. That's what I spent with Hyatt in the past to reach Diamond. Credit cards and UA Gold gave me Hilton Gold and Marriott Gold last year (this year Diamond and Gold) and that's now where I look first for my lodging needs. HIX (IHG) on roadtrips where it's the best option. Earning elite status no longer enters into the calculation at all. For Hyatt that means they need to compete on price, factoring in earnings promos. And in my experience and for my needs they are rarely competitive. E.g., next week I am staying at a full service Marriott with a more expensive and yet terrible HH nearby.

joe_miami

Why, exactly, should 60-night Globalists be angry because some people who stayed 51 nights are getting an offer for Globalist Lite? How do any new Lites negatively affect them?

skywalkerLAX

Because... here is an example. I knew I'd come to ~53 stays automatically last year while I had 9 award stays on full points throughout 2017. As a result in order to reach the 60 nights I had to book a local Hyatt Place and stayed at a Grand Hyatt in China that wasn't really ideal for my time in that city. I could have saved myself time, hassle and especially money if Hyatt would have been upfront for once that they'll count award stays retroactively for 2017. And while we're at the topic of 55/60 that's also something they changed without announcement and on the fly because the original plan was that a Globalist definitely needs 60 nights in 2017 to requalify, not 55 as it turned out.

You simply can't rely on what this company is telling you because they unilaterally change the rules all the damn time which is exactly the reason why I say enough with the white glove treatment. Hyatt has zero respect for their customer and neither should we have any more respect for them.

joe_miami

So you went out of your way to chase status at a hotel chain that you seem to dislike? To each his own, but life seems too short for that sort of approach.