Taking action against MR2009 changes
 

Anyone interested in sitting face2face with Mr Marriott, and or joining a group to fight for our Rights as MR members?



Email [email protected]



In your email---Please rate new MR09 from 0-10 (0=poor, 10=excellent), please rate MR08 also, and share the number of nites spent in 08 with Marriott and your current level.



Include your expected change in stay-behavior based on actions taken by MR management. Thx----

I am curious what "rights" you think you have re: MR that aren't given to you by the MR TOS? And there should be little doubt that the changes they made are within the terms of their TOS.

Now, feeling that the changes are a bad business decision is one thing. But claiming that some right that you have has somehow been violated is a bit much.

I travel 50+ nights per year. I get a kick out of people here (I am not suggesting that you are one of them) that think they are somehow entitled to special treatment because of where they decide to sleep at night. There are 10's of millions of people that do the same thing as them and do so much quieter and without expectation of others bowing at their feet.

Changes like those to MR are (in most cases) well calculated business decisions. Very seldom do companies retract these changes because they miscalculated the response. There will always be the noisy few who are high maintenance. Certainly Marriott has taken them into account in their business decision. To them I say - go ahead and move to Hilton. That just opens up more capacity for the rest of us. Rest assured that at some point Hilton will make a similar change that they deem is in their best business interest. After all, this is a business, not a charity.

Go take a peek in the Delta forum...:eek:

Well aware of that. I said seldom, not never.

and why did that happen (over at dl)?

Try the NW forum, even better!:(

Surely it was because everyone kept quiet and accepted whatever Delta decides to do as a fait accompli.

Their customers knew the changes were something that they could do nothing about recognizing it was Delta's perogative and besides, everyone else is doing it, so why fight it. ;)

I like the suggestion someone mentioned in a previous thread (re: one of the airlines) about sending in receipts of your 2009 stays at competitors with the total $ amount spent. Basically shows how much money MR lost due to the changes (obviously other factors play a part as well). Give out MR's fax number and coordinate a day for everyone to send it in.

I have personally shifted 95% of my stays so far to Starwood and will continue this throughout the year. I'm not making a big stink about it, but it's my prerogative. Marriott has only gotten 2 nights out of me this year and the only other nights they will get are award stays.

Marriott has every right to change their program and people have every right to take their business elsewhere if they don't like the changes. Marriott's program may still be better for some people depending on their travel habits and preferences, but for me, I think Starwood fits my needs better given the "enhancements" as well as the end of Premium Pounds.

Hey---

Not sure about your logic---

Marriott misled consumers by posting the changes as "enhancements" and "inclusive of no-blackouts', and the reality was that when the changes took effect everyones banked points (ie. money equivalents) were devalued from 30-50%).

If they had announced that changes were to happen were your points (money) are devalued by up to 50%---it would have allowed all customers to cash in their rewards prior to the change.

I don't understand your 'charity' concept--- and btw I was instrumental in having DL change their program on "choice seats" and roll-it-back to how it used to be...

In the meantime I have been matched by Sheraton and Hilton with Platinum status and will give them a try---

In the meantime, consider not being a pushover---

Did I say do nothing about it? Did I say not to express your opinion? No. What I said was that there is a big difference between doing that and stating that your RIGHTS have been violated as the OP specifically said.

Completely wrong.

Misleading consumers borders on illegal. Marketing sometimes requires consumers to read between the lines. There is a big difference. The same big difference between Marriott changing a business practice that you find disfavorable and you saying that your rights have been violated.

Whether points were devalued 50% heavily depends on how you use them. To say that everyone's points were devalued is nonsense. I've got somewhere around 600,000 points sitting there after two weeks already booked this year. My dream tracker that previously used all of my points now requires another 50,000. Far from 50%.

My point is this....You can't watch hotel rates go up, consumer costs in general go up and not expect "points costs" to go up as well. You can complain about it, that is your right. You can work to change it. That is your right. But the OP indicated that they had a right that was violated by these changes and that is nonsense.

There is a big difference between being a push over and realizing that I there is no right to a free hotel room for 10,000 points for life unless Marriott's TOS says there is (unless they've broken a law).

Bravo on your Delta work. That is how the system is supposed to work. But did you claim a right to the seats you were fighting for then?

In the history of loyalty and affinity programs, how many changes have there been versus how many retracted changes?

They did, as discussed here on FT since October 20, 2008. Many of us did cash in most of our points.

BTW, 50% devaluation is an exaggeration as also discussed here on FT about 3 months ago in the same thread. I think the devaluation ranged from 0-29% depending on what type of reward one was cashing in.

See the thread http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/marri...-bad-ugly.html for extensive discussion of this topic.

Mod - perhaps this thread should be merged with http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/marri...-bad-ugly.html since this is just a continuation of the same topic.

In general, I agree that the devaluation has been discussed quite a bit. But I do believe at the high end, the devaluation goes over 60%. Take a London property that was a Cat. 7, but is now a Cat. 8. Before Jan. 15, 7 nights would have been 150K points, now it is 240K points. That is more than a 30% increase in points. (And yes, I know that is more the extreme, but it shows that the upper end is somewhere more than 29%.)

I'll also admit that there are some awards that went down in cost as well (i.e. StayAnytime awards), but most of us here probably didn't make a habit of ordering those awards.

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.

that and the fact that class actions help no one (not the party being sued, nor the victims) but the lawyers

assuming there was one and we won, what would be get a cert for $10 that could only be used on rack rates

Oh surely they would give something more along the lines of Premium Pounds with and expiry date of 2 weeks. :D

Maybe I missed it in this thread, but no one has mentioned the biggest reversal I've ever seen: US Air late last year. They took away ALL bonuses for FFers, and then reinstated them --- retroactively.

I agree with you that b*tching in the forums will never be the sole cause of making a company reverse a business decision. But it's definitely a factor. Any business owner will testify that a ton of negative reviews on the Internet should be avoided if at all possible.

True, Marriott did their best to try to predict our reaction and take it into account, but that doesn't mean that they predicted accurately. The level of our vehemence may very well have taken them by surprise.

But the biggest factor by far is a change in bookings. If Marriott finds that there are vastly reduced bookings by elite members (and in general), they'll re-look at things like US Air did. This doesn't minimize, though, the factor of negative press.

Many, many people turn to this board when deciding which hotel chain to use, or which airline. For months, US Air boards were filled with hate and dissatisfaction. How many potential customers did it drive away? And for a few months the Marriott board has been similar. Surely it has had an effect on Marriott's business. Is the effect along the lines of what Marriott predicted when making their business decision? Well, they'll find out during the first half of this year.

US Air badly miscalculated, despite all their "brain"power, consultants, focus groups, research, PR firms, etc. It's highly possible that Marriott miscalculated, too.

Best comments so far. In the end - if you don't like the changes, then go somewhere else. I appreciate that some people cannot do this, but most people can. I personally believe there is a lot of 'greener on the other side' beliefs here, but every hotel chain and corresponding loyalty programme has it's advantages and disadvantages.

I personally, whilst not loving the changes, know that when I stay in Marriott hotels I get treated well. This hasn't always been the case with other hotel chains. All loyalty programmes get 'refreshed' every so often. No one ever likes the changes as they almost always reduce benefits somehow. Marriott will of calculated (either correctly or incorrectly) the advantages and disadvantages of changing it. I'm sure that cost was an issue (always will be) and I'm sure they expected some people to stop staying at Marriott. Only time will tell if they calculated correctly or not.

As for them calling the changes an enhancement - we live in a world of spin and marketing these days. Has anyone ever sued a politician - I don't think so (would be good if someone did though ^).

You're right about that, but the people in charge of Delta SkyMiles do monitor this board carefully. People who fly Delta know that and use the board specifically because it works better than notifying Delta directly. Marriott does not appear to pay as much attention to this board. Yes, the Concierges (surely that word is pluarlized some other way) do pay attention to the board, and that attention is appreciated, but it's not the same upper management notice given by the Delta execs.

Bottom line: over the past year, there have been a few policies that were overturned or changed in direct response to this Web site. Not so with Marriott, nor can we expect that.

Also, MI is much slower in doing things overall than Delta. Delta will change a policy two days after it's announced. Marriott just isn't that nimble.

Agreed here. I'm holding one MI reservation right now and the rest are Hilton. At this point last year, my Marriott reservations were solid and stretching into March. I doubt I'm alone. Marriott, though, is probably looking at that and figuring the economy is slowing travel, not that they are driving away their best customers. Switching to another chain is much, much easier than fighting with Marriott.

I used to drive an Oldsmobile. When it was time to get a new car, I bought an Infiniti. I didn't call GM and demand they change their offerings to please me. I test drove several cars and decided the Infiniti was best for me at that time. It wasn't just me that did that, and we can see what happened to GM, whereas Nissan is still in pretty good shape.

For Marriott's sake, hopefully they soon realize they're becoming like GM and, unless they change, they will suffer the same result.

Au contraire, we can count on the fact that they DO. Marriott is not ignorant of the power of the Internet. Far from it. So they surely monitor the most popular sites like FT, TripAdvisor, etc., to keep their finger on the pulse of their market. If there is a Marriott-related board site that is senior to FT for sheer number of posters, lurkers and frequent travelers, I am not aware of it. The Marriott execs know this very well, no question about it.

It's like the Hollywood stars who claim that they never read the magazines and Internet sites. Bull. Virtually all of them do. Who could resist? And how could Marriott resist looking at what people are posting on the top frequent traveler forum on the Internet? They look.

They would be FOOLISH to give credit to FT for being the reason they backed down. That would just encourage FTers to spew even more venom to get what they want (and I mean that affectionately of course). Good lord, can you imagine if the travel industry let it be publicly known that they bend to the will of FT? It would be a bloodbath. Never in a million years. There's absolutely no benefit for a company to admit such a thing, and I'm honestly surprised that a couple of companies have kinda done so.

Is it possible that we are overreacting just a wee bit?

I did my math based on my preferred award: I'm getting hit with a net 10% devaluation. In exchange for that, I might be getting better access to awards - I won't know this answer for several months when I attempt to redeem my next Travel Package.

So I'm cautiously optimistic that what Marriott has in essence done is create a "new" award that is a little more expensive than my "old" award, but also a little better in that, in theory, I have access to more rooms.

Of course, we all know individual properties can game this system. They do it in SPG all the time. But I think in many cases, the new system might actually give me a legitimate....wait for it....enhancement. :D



Yes, no question about it, I'm disappointed in the way elites are treated at properties Marriott deems "resorts". I'm disappointed in how elites are treated on weekends. It seems that Marriott has made a business decision to attempt to drive us away from the hotels in those cases. I don't know why they do that, but I don't have a hotel management degree.


But it's just part of the overall product choice decision. I'm doing a weekend in Chicago soon: $109/nt. for the main Marriott downtown vs. $160/nt. at the any of the big Hiltons. The Hiltons will treat me better (I'm Gold), but will they treat me approx. $60 per room per day better? I doubt it - I'm still with Marriott for those stays.

Three redemptions from last year vs. this year:

• 3 nights cat 6 went from 78k to 90k (13% devaluation)
• 4 nights cat 7 went from 110k to 140k (21% devaluation)
• 3 nights Prague Marriott with 4 nights CE FS Paris went from 150k to 250k (40% devaluation)

My points were earned under the old system. My new points will be earned under the new system, which gives me an additional 20% points per night and charges more. So Marriott did the conversion for points going forward for PM.

My point is the same gesture would have been nice had it been done for existing points. If there is a 20% increase in value of points rewarded, then maybe a 10% bump-up to soften the conversion of old points into new rewards redemptions would have been nice.

Am I angry? No. Do I think MR is the best value right now? No. I think right now Hilton wins, so I've shifted my business there. It's not an overreaction, it's a detatched evaluation of which is the better bargain for me right now.

Suppose there are two supermarkets next to each other, and I like both. Supermarket A comes out 10% lower on the basket of groceries I buy each week, so I'll go to Supermarket A. If Supermaket A increases prices 20% and Supermaket B leaves prices constant, I'll switch to Supermarket B, because price is what guides me there.

For hotels, for me, Marriott and Hilton are pretty indistinguishable. What drove me was the rewards program. Hilton looks better to me right now, so I'll switch. Why wouldn't I?

Yes they are much slower to act, because they have no reason to panic as most hotel chains are profitable unlike the airlines. WADR, I think the airlines were in panic reactionary mode due to high oil prices when most recent changes were implemented; whereas the hotel chains' changes, Marriott and others, are planned well in advance and are not reactionary in nature. After all it took over 2 years for Marriott to implement similar changes that Starwood, Hilton, and Hyatt implemented in 2006.

+1.

At this point last year, I had ~14 nights in MI properties. This year, I have decided to "try" spg. Guess what? I found out SPG is what is working for ME, at THIS POINT!

So, MI has 2 nights, spg has 11 so far this year, with 2 more this week! Also, I have rc'd the spg amex, and already spent ~$5K in the past 2 weeks. MI will see less and less from me.

I for one do not have the time to b!tch and moan to MR. I have decided to move my stays to what works for me! (and more importantly, my family as the ONLY thing they care about is vacation stays!!! :D )