nicolas75

Which means that any change is pure speculation.

thbe

3 changes in less than a week proves, that there were changes. Exactly 3.

It is pure speculations, how many nights you need to qualify for RA. But your speculation is not better than mine. Yours is more optimistic. Mine 75/30/3 is the last one with numbers, that was officially written in IHG's t&c.

Not a speculation is, that IHG is not reliable at this point. But as RA is the best top tier status, IHG think that they get away with that. Maybe they are right.

beachmouse

While you can't combine status-generating activities, BA's household account option does let family members pool their Avios.

IIRC, one of the IHG program improvement surveys floating around 1-2 years back did ask how people felt about that kind of household points pooling option. Though noting really came of that, and if it did, it would probably again be pooling of points only and not of status-generating activities.

Land-of-Miles

Several of us have been told by Ambassador Services that the criteria has not changed from 60/20/3 this is not speculation.

Tim O'Brien

+1^

IAN-UK

For heaven's sake! If you want to speculate further try examining the entrails of a chicken, but probably best to keep the results to yourself .

Six Continents/IHG always kept their criteria for renewing RA a secret - probably so they could select the account-holders they wanted as members.

They've very occasionally published entry requirements - just as they once allowed RA members to enrol friends/colleagues as members. But only for a year: after that the "secret" renewal process took over.

That drove "gamers" crazy, but for those who were happy with IHG hotels, had travel patterns, and budgets, that suited the requirements, it worked OK

It's their game, and their rules. They'll do what they want. Clearly it's in their interest to be perceived as behaving fairly, but there's no reason at all why the IHG view of fairness should match your version of what should be.

Land-of-Miles

I am not wholly sure about this. I stay a lot with IHG because I am RA and love the benefits, I like IC hotels and am generally happy with some of the other brands. I stay 100 nights plus with IHG because of RA and without RA I would be quite likely to push most stays elsewhere due to the sheer inconsistency of the non IC portfolio.

Lack of clarity about requirements does more harm than good I think. A split requirement between that required to achieve RA and a lower threshold to renew wouldn't be an entirely bad thing.

scubaccr

ok miles pooling is a worthwhile benefit if rest of family travel little and irregularly and accrue limited miles per year so unusable, and even more so if with scheme like krisflyer where banked miles expire at 3years so irregular travel means never enough at one time to use before expiry.

comment was not taken quite the way I intended as if regularly traveling as a couple\family it really makes no great difference if miles accrue in separate accounts or one account as even the individual accounts have enough miles to book award flights, my point was about miles/points from others then giving an unearned higher elite status due to operating as a shaed account

it was intended to mean - should/could not have a shared account for gaining status from other guests stays creditting to your own elite account. mentioning a rare exception such as BA does not negate the point I was trying to make, that loyalty schemes reward individuals for only their personal rooms/flights

the only such beneficial shared account i was aware of is the old version that is no longer available to new elites, from Hilton Honours. eg I had no Issues booking my other half on KLM we both gained status and did not lose out by not pooling the miles

Tim O'Brien

I don't disagree, RA is a driver to stay more nights, spend more money, because the stays are that bit more enjoyable (minibar, and early check in, late check out), and value driven (upgrades).

My stay patterns have changed significantly in the past year, from easily exceeding the required nights, long term stays with competitive negotiated rates with the property, to many less nights more recently, but paying for two high end suites each night at much higher rates, with substantial net spend.

Yesterday i sent a letter to Ruth Negus, via a corporate contact in the UK, to ask for consideration to be given to having a tandem criterion that would take a revenue model into consideration.

I pay for multiple higher yielding suites each night to accommodate my immediate family when staying with IC, average spend is c. USD800 to 1K a night, including ancillary spend, restaurants, gift shops.

For example, a person who spends an average of say USD75 a night for 40 HI nights, 20 IC nights at say USD150, equates to total revenue of USD6K, gains RA status, whereas YTD i have spent in many multiples of that but achieve no RA status under the current 60/20/3 criteria.

With InterContinental i'm facing a disincentive to pay for higher yielding multiple suites based on this Nights v a Revenue/Margin model.

I would really appreciate seeing total revenue being included say as a tandem alternative criterion to qualify for Royal Ambassador status.

I believe it would be more equitable, and mutually advantageous for IHG, and it's most loyal customers.

I also believe a win win for IHG and its most loyal customers, would be to award RA Lifetime status, for those that earn RA say for 10 years.

scubaccr

Whilst you may personally book two higher end rooms and think you are in the highest percentage of RA spenders, there are others who no doubt trump you on both cost per night and number of nights . Big companies like IHG will never worry about losing one individuals spend as one person compared to all the others is insignificant

If you are that concerned about the revenue points the best solution is to book, although maybe not always an option, a 2-room suite. Even if an hotel has no 2-room suites by ringing up an hotel direct, hotel might book you 2-connected rooms as a consolidated single booking. But if other room is also your family surely you have access to points accrued on second account any way.

I pay nearly all of my other halfs flights but in return have access to her accrued miles if I need them, or redeem on her behalf if values are right,. Not an issue hotel points wise as we share the rooms I book so all in my account mostly bar the odd stay.

I have booked 2-room suites before for four of us for this very reason and also as other couple had no status they got full access piggy backing my status that way.

Note- your average calculation rate for IC nights is too low for Europeans as my locals of London, Paris and Amsterdam are far far higher per night and even non London UK non IC nights cost far more too.

Tim O'Brien

not sure how you inferred that, my comments were in relation to how much i used to spend for high volume nights, in 2013 i paid for 404 suite nights, 279 for myself, and 125 for an employee, relative to this year with many more less nights, but substantial spend, certainly much much more than the example i wrote of, @ USD6K (someone who does 40 HI @ USD75, and 20 IC @USD150)

Not sure what your reference to IHG losing "one individuals spend" is about? no threats of leaving the chain here

Ironic that you were the one that suggested spend being a factor to consider, read down thread

I get the points, as previously mentioned, it's the nights that don't count. That's the point of suggesting a tandem criterion that factors in revenue. When i make a booking, if it's at a property i haven't stayed at, i reach out to a contact in the UK, she contacts the property, i get an email or call from the Sales Director, they always offer better rates than i can achieve, as a non corporate, and always offer me more generous upgrades, the issue of getting two bed suites is always discussed, usually we'll end up in one room category under Presidential, or Presidential in some instances.

My reference to the average IC rates is exactly that, an average, not picking three of the most expensive properties in Europe, why not include Budapest, Prague etc. I am referring to what RA can be acquired for, USD6K spend, another customer can spend many multiples of that, and not qualify for RA.

I don't disagree with your suggestion that a revenue model be considered by IHG^

Nickolash27

For all we know they already do consider revenue and maybe other factors. "By invitation" covers that. Where is the problem?

IAN-UK

Forgive my curiosity, but if you are happy shelling out for top-end suites, and the concomitant services and attention, each time you stay at an IC .... what do you get out of RA membership?

thbe

Me and others wasn't told that.

John Ollila wrote on Sep 8:
"If you send an email to Ambassador Service Center about possible Royal Ambassador qualification requirements, you probably get a reply saying that the current requirements are:
– 75 total nights
– Minimum of 30 InterContinental nights
– At least three different InterContinental hotels
– Only paid nights count"

I think, they changed it for new RA, but keep up the 60/20/3 for those, who are already RA and even more who are RA for years.

thbe

"Six Continents/IHG always kept their criteria for renewing RA a secret" and "They've very occasionally published entry requirements"?

Well, your point of view is wrong for sure.