mitpat474

+1 20-25k

Wan1dap

Because that would miss the point entirely. It's deliberately not revenue-based, and we can all see how successful that strategy is.

IAN-UK

I'd read something in the forum about no longer sending out RA invitation vouchers with renewals.

But I was surprised to hear that they stopped processing invitations in April: I'd called to ask if i could use one of the ancient invitations (no expiry date) I found clearing out my desk.

The agent said i could have used it until April of this year, but that is when they stopped creating RAs in this way ..... except "in special circumstances"

So i guess that is another sign of the end of RA as we know it.

bello

well said

kit125

+1 nicholas75! I couldn't agree more. If I could have all of my travel spend with IHG (and IC in particular), I would. RA has been good to me. And to the poster above... I did actually get my stripes the hard way initially. The year I made RA (about 10 years ago), I spent 100+ nights in HI/HIX with ~15 nights in IC. Since it's moved a lot more of my nights to IC (not to mention a change in job). Once upon a time, it was about how loyal you were to the company and not a brand. YMMV.

Alex_I

Two things IHG has done in the past year include:
1) Two back-to-back very generous promotional campaigns
2) Extensive surveys of what members value in hotel reward programs.
I did participate in both.
It is clear that IHG is actively looking into both bringing attention to the brand and getting back some of the members who switched to other programs in the past.
I have been Priority Club Platinum before (on stays) but then switched entirely to SPG and HHonors for the last 15 years.
Based on my stays with IHG during the Q4 2013 promotion, I have found that many IHG properties in USA are comparable to those of HHonors and ICs abroad could be outstanding. However, right now I would not switch to IHG mainly for 3 reasons:
a) Paid Ambassador program
b) No elite benefits on award stays
c) Inconsistency in elite benefits across hotels of the same brand.
I do fully understand that the current RAs would like the program to stay, but from my perspective the only chance IHG would have to chip away top customers from other chains is to work on those three issues starting with abandoning the Ambassador program.

Land-of-Miles

I don't know where to start with this.

AMB isn't paid if you are RA it is free. I can see the logic in scrapping regular AMB and integrating with the rest of the IHG Programme (or simply adding AMB benefits gratis for Plats who are frequent IC guests). RA though if properly constituted and with transparent rather than opaque thresholds (be they spend - which I think is the right yardstick, stays or nights), is a motivator for loyalty not a deterrent.

Most other issues you surface have nothing to do with AMB and are just examples of how poorly executed the IHG Rewards Benefits are. AMB is the one part of the IHG estate where the benefits are clear and well defined, it thus offers a model for the rest of the group to follow.

I am perfectly comfortable with properties not having to give status benefits on redemption stays. I have always felt uneasy about the fact that other chains programmes allow guests to rack up points on credit cars and in the cheapest properties in the chain and then expect the presidential suite in the top end properties on an annual redemption. I don't think that approach rewards the right behaviour and I do think that RA does encourage the right behaviours with the sole exception of the frustratingly opaque qualification criteria.

hdogan

Exactly! And I must say, my initial Amb fee was the best money *ever* spent. Even if I wasn't RA, just by using the BOGO in the right place will return that investment. And Ambassador extensions can be done with points, and not too many points at that too. Anyone staying any decent amount of nights can collect that many points. Thus, rewarding loyalty.

garethmorgan

I used to be RA on the basis of nights in IHG hotels. That was because most of my stays are in the UK and I generally stay in my club in London which has been the only IC in Britain. That meant that when I was abroad, and typically used ICs, I got the advantages. I never travel enough outside the UK to hit the number of IC nights required. I'm just back from a long trip and I stayed in 1 IC, in HK, to use up my Amb weekend voucher before my membership finished at the end of June. I'm not going to renew. I stayed at a couple of CPs, in Kowloon and Bangkok and got much better treatment as a Plat than I got from the Amb in the IC.

Even if they moved back to one program then I'm unlikely to refocus on IHG brands - I've moved a lot of my stays in the UK to Hilton and, as a Diamond, I get pretty good treatment in the UK and overseas - breakfast, lounge, upgrades etc.

zero savings

The "mystery" of RA may get a couple of people excited on FT, but for most it's just another frequent guest program, but with weird rules.

I have been an (earned) RA for 5 years. It's just another of the many, many loyalty programs run by hotels, airlines, car rental companies, rollercoaster parks, fast food restaurants, casinos, strip clubs, cruise lines, etc. It's free stuff in exchange for using their product a lot.
I find RA a good deal so I stay at IC's often. But there are thousands of us.

The RA target market is very frequent travellers, who by definition are busy and lead unsettled lives, with little time for the idiosyncrasies of weird ff programs. The simplification and standardisation of IC earning and drastic reduction in the frenetic number of IHG promotions are additional indicators that IHG gets this. The dual programs and free certs are surely next.

The cert value on eBay has nothing to do with cachet. It's just a good financial deal - pay $600 or whatever and get upgrades worth thousands, plus minibar and maybe lounge access.

NickB

For most posters, the right amount will always be just under what the poster spends. Close the door and pull up the drawbridge just after me to keep the peasants out ...

uk1

You are of course correct, but there are two discussions running in parallel. One is what we speculate makes sense for IHG and the other is what we would personally like.

I think $20k seems about right to mirror the current arrangement in converting nights to dollar - and setting a reasonable minimum bar that didn't upset too many, but I'm happy with $25k with all spend qualifying, if you are ......

uk1

In really simple terms, what I want to see is exactly what I see when I log into my Amex BA Premium Plus account when I look at the 241 requirement which will say something like, "You are 50% of the way to gain RA next year. Spend another £10,000 before 12th February 2015 to qualify for 12 months. "

Simple and incentivating.

mecabq

But the customer who racks up points on credit card spend and uses them for awards is generally not a status customer, nor is one, in the case of RA, who earns only in cheap properties, due to the InterContinental brand room night requirement to achieve RA status.

(I guess there are some people who stay 20 nights at IC Warsaw and 50 nights at cheap HIs to gain RA status, but that must be few, especially with the supposed requirement to stay at three different ICs.)

I think that not offering RA status benefits on awards is the single biggest flaw in the program. I am probably like the preponderance of RAs -- I spend a lot of nights at mundane, and not cheap, ICs and spend my hard-earned points on an occasional leisure stay, when the status benefits would be especially useful. I don't need the presidential suite, just a standard upgrade, early check-in and late check-out, free minibar, etc.

Land-of-Miles

I don't think so.

There are 2 issues I think one is transparency and the other getting to a level that is exclusive enough to make it worthwhile granting decent benefits.

It is really all too easy to incur spends of 10k to 15k especially for those frequently staying in IC's. I personally might struggle to consistently hit 25k of spend a year given the lack of IC's in locations I travel too frequently.

If the target is too low it diminishes the benefit for all.