Marriott is well within its right to make any changes to Marriott Rewards and amenities offered for elite members. There is no legal binding contract that Marriott must offer any special benefits to its most frequent customers. However, there is also no legal requirement that I spend my lodging dollars with Marriott.

It would be a understatement to say that many people on FT have not been pleased with the recent changes (increased point costs for awards, reduced offerings in concierge lounges during the week, reduction of extra benefits at properties that had previously exceeded the required standard [weekend lounge closings and loss of free breakfast coupons for gold/platinum members], and loss of room amenities [smaller water bottles, no lotion/mouthwash]). People on FT (and Marriott's own board for elite members) do not like being told by Ed French that Marriott Rewards is becoming a better program when it is not in their own eyes. Yes, companies like to put a positive spin on all changes, but customers are not stupid. A well known Lincoln story that a dog has 4 legs even if you call its tail a leg would be an apt metaphor here.

Just because a company can do something does not mean that it should. Yes, the economy is not doing well, and it is hitting hotel companies hard. However, the attempts to cut costs while trying to hold room rates up (maintain pricing integrity) does not go down well when anyone with a brain knows that room occupancy rates have dropped a great deal. I do not appreciate being squeezed for extra money to help keep hotels running in a weak economy. The discounted rates that I pay are still much higher than anything a hotel can get from selling inventory on opaque channels (priceline, hotwire, and etc.).

Marriott has decided to test the limits of customer goodwill. Some customers may not notice or care about the recent changes. It is hard for me to not notice these changes as someone who has put more than 300 paid nights at Marriott properties since 2006. The customers that do care will start voting with their feet and wallets. Over time, this will reduce the revenue growth at Marriott properties. Diminished expectations will lead to reduced revenue because people will be less willing to pay as much when the economy recovers. This lost goodwill does not show up on a balance sheet immediately, but it eventually appears on the revenue and P&L statements.

Home Depot made a similar change when its founders retired in 2000. Bob Nardelli decided that it was too expensive to keep up the customer service and chose to "save" money by cutting back on labor costs (replacing experienced workers with cheaper ones) and reducing the responsiveness to customer complaints. Many "high maintenance" customers decided that they did not want to do business with the "new" Home Depot. If you look at Home Depot's stock price from 2000 to now, you will see that it has underperformed its main competitor, Lowe's.

This recession will be long and deep. Marriott's attempt to cater to large business groups while telling the individual traveler (business or leisure) to go pound sand will not work. The attempt at rate integrity will fail because demand for travel will not recover as fast as the most recent 3 or 4 recessions.

In general, the 2009 Enhancement program hurts me more than it helps, based on my personal consumption pattern.
As far as taking actions as suggested by OP, I have shifted a fair number of nights to SPG and HH (partly because these 2 chains are running great promos). In a free market, MR can pretty much do whatever they wish. I too operate in the same free market, and tend to think I am not bound to be loyal to MR if it's program deems undesirable (as it is the 2009 Enhancement program). First half of this year, I will be in many cities where I find HH and SPG offer good values.

Good point. Whether right or wrong, I was not taking into account hotel category increases which happen annually - although these were a bit special since it is a new category level. The percentages I was quoting were relative to points needed for the same category before and after the change and may still be off a bit, but that was the best I could remember. Anyone wishing to rehash the numbers go for it. It really doesn't matter much now that it has gone into affect, and especially since all my points were cashed in prior to Jan 15. Although my balance is already back up to 230K. Amazing what 3 week stay at the Vail Marriott will do.

I know I didn't. I just said no to Stay Almost Anytime if We Decide to Let You.

For some people's travel patterns using other hotel chains is an option. However for others, like myself, that is not an option so we have to make the best of what it is. The only silver linings for people like myself is an 11% increase in points earned thanks to the 50% Plat bonus and the prospect of better award and paid room availability, lower room rates, and better upgrade availability down the road due to lower occupancy resulting from those leaving for other programs. My two main destinations are Vail, CO and San Jose CR both of which only have Marriott properties. That accounts for about 50 nights per year, CC another 15 nights, which leaves 10 nights to retain Plat. This is the main reason I chose Marriott to begin with and is probably the primary factor for many when choosing a hotel affinity program. After all the program has to have hotels in places you want to stay otherwise the program is pointless.

Now Marriott could devalue their program to the point I would ditch my current destinations, at least the ones I can, and develop others; but it has not gotten to that point yet.

I keep in mind that devaluation has happened to other programs as noted in the following post from the thread http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/hilto...ml#post6744846 found in the Hilton HHonors forum back on Nov 24, 2006:

They were only off by a little more than two years in their guess of when Marriott would finally get around to following the devaluations of the other programs. Ironically it is Marriott who devalued their program last, not only that, but they didn't slip it in like Starwood did as referenced above, but gave us almost 3 months notice.

Over time we forget these things, and in another few months this will be a distant memory much like the Starwood, Hilton and Hyatt devaluations from 2 years ago are.

Frankly I am more upset about the Marriott corporate directive advising hotels not to over achieve.

What is this thing about points=money? If that's true then the IRS wants to talk to you.

As for "everyones" banked points being devalued 30-50%, if "everyone" only booked 7 day awards (my travel patterns don't allow that) under the old system then, yeah, they will now have to pay more points (not money). If, on the other hand, the award stays required the infamous StayAnytime awards at double points (not money) then there will actually be fewer points required under the new program.

the IRS sure wants to talk to you when you win a million of them!!!

One big reason this devaluation has not driven me away from Marriott - they've treated me with class helping me to make the best of these changes.

And, yes, on the other hand, I was surprised and disappointed by the above.

With all due respect I think you overestimate the influence of the minority of vocal elites that feel this hurts them. I'd be willing to bet that the vast majority of Marriott revenue is derived from customers that either don't care or don't travel enough for it to make much difference.

I am a Platinum too but as far as I'm concerned these are good places to cut costs. I'd rather not have my room cost go up more just to subsidize free breakfast for a few thousand elites that think they are entitled to it. I'd rather have the opportunity to pay United Airlines $100 for 36" econ plus seating instead of seeing the seats go vacant just in case an elite wants them.

I have no problem with elites voting with their walle

You have it all wrong. The loyalty programs have become a fraud. The premise is simple: give us your business, spend money with us and use our services (hotel, airline, etc) and we will reward you with free service based on some formula. The trouble is -- after you have complied with the conditions, the vendor dilutes the program -- effectively retroactively. The asset you have accumulated (miles/points) is watered down. The changes don't simply apply to future points and mile accruals, they apply to your holdings. So the 300,000 miles are effectively worth 200,000 miles. This is not just a bad "business decision"; it's tantamount to unlawful taking of your property. Points and miles have long been deemed property in divorce cases and the airlines and hotel programs are custodians of that property. They have a fiduciary duty to safeguard that property, but instead they have figured out a way to periodically strip the property away from its holder.

Think of it another way: hotel programs and airlines sell billions of miles/points to credit card issuers, for which they derive substantial revenue. The sold miles are a liability on the airline's balance sheet and when the airline purges a few billion miles from member accounts by making changes to the program (i.e. increasing redemption levels, shortening expirations, etc), they get direct financial benefit. Delta just sold miles to AMEX for a cash infusion of a billion dollars now and another billion in the future. Instead of having AMEX constituents utilize all these miles, DL will merely dilute them and keep a few hundred million dollars' worth in its coffers. Where else can you monetize thin air and after you get the cash simply cut off the oxygen??

I've been waiting for some class action firm to finally do something about it, it just makes me livid. My wife has built up 400K MR points and Marriott diluted her account by the stroke of a pen.

These words that get thrown around here: "fraud," "my rights" etc. If this is fraud and it is illegal then get a class action going and win. By your logic a $2000 per week room in Hawaii in 2001 should be a $2000 per week room in 2009 - after all I've been saving $50 per week for years for the trip. How dare they increase their prices.

That 130,000 per week Hawaii room in 2001 should be a 130,000 per week Hawaii room in 2009 - after all I've been saving points for years for the trip. How dare they increase the points required to stay there.

Ludicrous on both counts. Points are subject to inflation the same way $1 is subject to inflation. Of course your points "dilute" because what you are buying with those points inflates.

Same path taken by Circuit City.

Personally, I don't think that the moves Marriott has been making are anywhere near in the category of Circuit City (or Home Depot). That said, some of what I'm seeing disturbs me.

They can make "rate integrity" a centerpiece of their business model all they want, as long as "product integrity" goes with it. But doing away with things ranging from lotion to breakfasts, to CL offerings/hours, etc. etc. along with a possibly devalued loyalty program all adds up to a lesser product.

I speak from the standpoint of one who pretty much went along with the rate increases that were totally detached from the rate of inflation....as long as they kept giving me better beds, TVs, in-room amenities, and so on.

I can only speak for myself, but in my business when customers are tougher to come by, we respond by offering them more, not less. That way we can justify maintaining revenue levels while at the same time giving clients a recognizable "thank-you" for their continuing patronage and loyalty.

In over 30 years in business, I can personally vouch for the fact that recessions are prime time for "flipping" customers. Being aggressive in going after new customers as a response to a downturn has paid off handsomely for me several times in the past, and the current slump is proving to be no exception.

I have no plans at the moment to revisit any of my preferred travel vendors. But in the past, I've switched my airline, car rental, and hotel providers...in most cases after ten years or more of loyalty. And once I've switched, I've "stayed switched".

Lets just say I'm keeping an eye out for what unfolds here. and paying a little
closer attention to the overtures I get from elsewhere. The first mistake would be in assuming I haven't or wouldn't notice some of the nickel-dime stuff.

Nope....instead what they've done is gotten my attention.

I think the OP is either not a very seasoned traveler, or is not spending enough time reading the financial pages (or both).

As someone who has been traveling very regularly for 20 years, I have seen changes in every hotel and air program I have been a part of, and in recent years, most of these changes have been negative impacts for the consumer.

This is the nature of business. You respond to current trends, and forecast for the future in order to keep your business solvent. Considering how horrible our economy is, to complain about something like this is just absurd. Does Marriott not have a right to do what they can to cut corners and shave costs to keep themselves in the black? In a bad economy, the travel industry is always among the first hit, and IMO, Marriott is doing the right thing for the longevity of Marriott.

To want to rally people to sit in front of Mr. Marriott to complain about a devaluation of points or change in TOS of a program that is a PERK is just silly.

If you are that displeased, then show your displeasure by taking your business elsewhere.

Compared to the stock market (another tangible asset that can be fought over in a divorce) the points have not been devalued nearly as much.

The big difference between the changes in the Marriott program vs. the changes in the Delta program is that the changes in the Delta program required cash out of pocket to redeem/change rewards. Last I checked, Marriott was not requiring any additional cash to redeem rewards, so there isn't the same outrage.

The most recent Delta proposed change would have been akin to Marriott charging you if you canceled a rewards reservation and the points needed to be redeposited in your account. Delta does charge for this, but waives the charge for Platinum Medallions. The threat to start charging caused the outrage, as this could add up to hundreds or thousands of dollars for some people each year.

For me, the one nice gesture that would have made the Marriott Rewards changes more palatable would have been to convert the old points into new points for Gold and Platinum members. It's not too late for MI to throw us this bone. If your balance was 200k, maybe giving an extra 50k to help defray the additional costs of multiple night stays.

It's like the program was in Mexico and they moved it to France, but left us with Pesos instead of Euros/Francs, or didn't give us a market value conversion. (Kinda like the ATM machine in the hotel adds a huge surcharge, but unlike in Europe, we don't have the option of taking money out of an ATM three doors down from the hotel. Oh, I'll miss the check cashing benefit...) MI changed the value of the currency without protecting the currency holdings of its best members. It makes us nervous about wanting to collect under the new currency, because it might be devalued next year, too.

This isn't a "right" that was taken away, as nothing MI did violated the TOS that were published. IMO, it's not too late for Marriott to make this right.

The fact that no class action firm has shown an interest strongly suggests that incorrect legal jargon notwithstanding, Marriott actions are on solid grounds.