Originally Posted by bulldoggolfer05

In regards to all of this hooplah about suing Marriott and whatnot, I am pretty sure that in the T&C of the program that Marriott states they have the right to amend and/or cancel the program at any time per their discretion...

Originally Posted by tfred

for some people the marriott changes are better. for golds, they just dont accumulate enough miles (and they know it, or should) to spend a week in Paris in their lifetime. they probably spend the points on weekends, short trips etc - all domestic. rewards that maximize short stays are probably better for them.

i have a tendency to believe the numbers that marriott gave since i tend to go on shorter trips - 5 nights - obviously just me. It is evident that the new marriott will make you pay for the privilidge of staying in london, paris or rome since everyone wants to go their for free. nothing wrong with that IMHO.

Originally Posted by sophiegirl

Yes, but what upset me was being unable to secure a room on points - so can't really use that as an example. "

Yes-but ther is anescape clause that Marriott has installed in the proposed changes.There will still be dates that are unbookable.They are saying "an average of 9 nights per year"-that is an average.High demand properties which have less than stellar records will still be able to lie about availibility of "standard" rooms or skirt around the whole thing by using averages in the system

I know Marriott plays dirty and lies through their teeth-why should I expect them to stand up for their customers when it has been shown time and again that they just do not give a rats backside.


AND -

I have every sympathy for those who are feeling betrayed, which is why I stated..."if it doesn't work for you, it is understandable that you would want to go elsewhere".

But bigguy - is it not reciprocal? There are multiple posts which suggest those of us not immediately abandoning Marriott are "blindly loyal", or worse, too stupid to understand alternative programs.

Sheep and apologist get little pity. from me.As to Loyalty-well Marriott has shown us all time and again that they do not know the meaning of the word.

I have never accused anyone of being stupid,ill informed or blindly loyal perhaps-I look to educate those who feel"You're doing a heck of a job Willie"



If I am to have sympathy (through the understanding of) your position - shouldn't the same courtesy be extended to those of us who find the change less dramatic?

Originally Posted by moldavian

Any thoughts as to how much business/money Marriott has lost since the announcement? I know that they have lost all of mine.

How much business will Marriott lose from the "thousands of elites" (the ones that supposedly approved the "enhancements") when they discover that their desired travel days are unavailable (you know, the "blackout" workaround)? After all, thats what they wanted right? The opportunity to book a standard room on any given day?

Originally Posted by bigguyinpasadena

"for some people the marriott changes are better. for golds, they just dont accumulate enough miles (and they know it, or should) to spend a week in Paris in their lifetime. they probably spend the points on weekends, short trips etc - all domestic. rewards that maximize short stays are probably better for them. "
You are very much mistaken on this point-as you have been in many of your points in this thread.
Your thread is also incredibly snobbish Many of us mere golds-and even some"gasp"silver and general members have large balences in our accounts.Are you damning us for beliving in loyalty as a two way street?

I actually have enough points for two weeks in Paris thank you very much.And this is after using points for domestic and international stays.

Originally Posted by tfred

Snobby ? I dont think so. I am the original cheap elite since i stay at mostly FI and CY in secondary markets. I probably average 2,000 +/- points a night. at 80 nights i make 160-200k points with bonuses. at gold level (assuming that there are enough with my travel pattern), a gold at 55 nights would be in the 110-130K That can get you a nice yearly marriott vacation someplace but may put a "grand splurge" travel package in difficult territory without taking the risk of periodic program changes that you know will occur

Originally Posted by MileageGoblin

What it seems to me is that IMO corporate realizes they have a huge MR point liability on their balance sheet and wants to lower it as best they can by increasing the redemption requirements. That or they expect more redemptions in the near future with the economy and want to "stick it to us."

Originally Posted by GUWonder

Costs of rooms in points is going to be rising as costs of rooms in cash is going to be plummeting = many more points for a much cheaper room.

Originally Posted by Big Mo

Marriott is not helping its case with this sort of BS response. Yes, the changes are helpful for some MR members--but that's probably a pretty small minority. Unhappiness with the changes is a rather typical response, as this thread attests.

In short, don't **** on my head and tell me that everybody else thinks it's raining.

Originally Posted by TravelsLots

Let a judge and jurey decide if they forced a condition that is not reasonable, and let a big lawfirm go after MR and see how they will feel on their point savings after that! Hope the jurey gives them $100M verdict to be paid to all MR members!

You are the ideal sucker for big corporate thinking they can do anything and you have nothing to protest about. Wrong, many big corporate decisions, on pensions, and other things, have been rulled down by the courts. Let it go through the process. Now we need a big lawfirm to take this case on for a class action lawsuit!

Originally Posted by tfred

for some people the marriott changes are better. for golds, they just dont accumulate enough miles (and they know it, or should) to spend a week in Paris in their lifetime. they probably spend the points on weekends, short trips etc - all domestic. rewards that maximize short stays are probably better for them.