Marriott LTPs should have gotten LTP - not LTPP
May 4, 2018, 11:56 am
#226
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: BDU
Programs: DL:MM, Marriott:LTT
Posts: 8,779
My bad...read your post to indicated spend to be included with the present qualification as opposed to a second avenue while leaving the present qualification intact.
May 4, 2018, 12:55 pm
#227
Join Date: Feb 2018
Programs: Bonvoy :Ambassador , ALL :Diamond, Skywards :Silver, Krisflyer :Silver
Posts: 2,804
Interestingly, new program only have 1 qualifying method.
Most of other hotel loyalty programs have alternative way to qualify. Either by stay or revenue.
Most of other hotel loyalty programs have alternative way to qualify. Either by stay or revenue.
May 4, 2018, 2:32 pm
#228
Join Date: Sep 2005
Programs: SPG Lifetime Platinum
Posts: 168
I don't really understand this.
At this point all the hotels are Marriott hotels from the perspective Marriott as a company. From that level there are no SPG vs Marriott hotels. The loyalty programs haven't yet caught up, but from the perspective of money for Marriott it is all the same color. As such, why would they care if a specific guest stays at one of their properties vs the other property? Let's say that more legacy MR members start to stay at SPG properties. From the Marriott company, why would they care? The only thing that matters to them is the percentage of the overall rooms occupied on a given night.** So they want as many of their members as possible spending nights in their hotels. Alienating people who are staying 100 nights or 70 nights a year in their hotels, whatever they may be branded, would mean they need to spend money to acquire someone else to spend a night in that room.
Obviously it is all a financial-driven decision process.
So I assume it makes sense for them to put in the USD 20K spend for Ambassador because they have done the numbers of what the program costs them and how to manage that cost. Remember that the program will significantly expand the addressable audience so the USD 20K spend may bring the overall number of members with Ambassadors right back to where it has been with SPG.
The same goes for Your24. By moving it up to the 100 night level, they may only be keeping the number of those who have access to it the same as it has been with SPG.
But, generally, they don't want to drive away those who are sleeping 75-100 nights in their rooms if the cost to retain them is less than the cost to acquire new guests to full those same room nights.
Years ago there was a global corporate contract that was cancelled with Starwood. 4000 room nights were lost at a single hotel due to the loss of that contract. Imagine that every major city with a Starwood property lost 2-3K room nights. Imagine the marketing costs to find other guests to fill those rooms. When that contract was renewed, several years later, the rate was extremely low. Why go so low? Because it was still cheaper than the cost of marketing and attracting new guests to make up those room nights.
So whether legacy SPG members do or don't start staying in legacy Marriott properties really doesn't matter to them other than a situation where that member would have been staying in say a Hyatt because there was no legacy SPG in that city, like Manila. The same goes for legacy Marriott members. The Marriott company would have no reason to care whether that member starts staying in legacy SPG properties except in a place where there was no legacy Marriott property in which case they want to capture the business of that guest in whatever property they happen to have in that city.
** Clearly I'm over simplifying it... they want more people in more expensive properties, but overall any bed not filled is a wasted revenue opportunity for them.
At this point all the hotels are Marriott hotels from the perspective Marriott as a company. From that level there are no SPG vs Marriott hotels. The loyalty programs haven't yet caught up, but from the perspective of money for Marriott it is all the same color. As such, why would they care if a specific guest stays at one of their properties vs the other property? Let's say that more legacy MR members start to stay at SPG properties. From the Marriott company, why would they care? The only thing that matters to them is the percentage of the overall rooms occupied on a given night.** So they want as many of their members as possible spending nights in their hotels. Alienating people who are staying 100 nights or 70 nights a year in their hotels, whatever they may be branded, would mean they need to spend money to acquire someone else to spend a night in that room.
Obviously it is all a financial-driven decision process.
So I assume it makes sense for them to put in the USD 20K spend for Ambassador because they have done the numbers of what the program costs them and how to manage that cost. Remember that the program will significantly expand the addressable audience so the USD 20K spend may bring the overall number of members with Ambassadors right back to where it has been with SPG.
The same goes for Your24. By moving it up to the 100 night level, they may only be keeping the number of those who have access to it the same as it has been with SPG.
But, generally, they don't want to drive away those who are sleeping 75-100 nights in their rooms if the cost to retain them is less than the cost to acquire new guests to full those same room nights.
Years ago there was a global corporate contract that was cancelled with Starwood. 4000 room nights were lost at a single hotel due to the loss of that contract. Imagine that every major city with a Starwood property lost 2-3K room nights. Imagine the marketing costs to find other guests to fill those rooms. When that contract was renewed, several years later, the rate was extremely low. Why go so low? Because it was still cheaper than the cost of marketing and attracting new guests to make up those room nights.
So whether legacy SPG members do or don't start staying in legacy Marriott properties really doesn't matter to them other than a situation where that member would have been staying in say a Hyatt because there was no legacy SPG in that city, like Manila. The same goes for legacy Marriott members. The Marriott company would have no reason to care whether that member starts staying in legacy SPG properties except in a place where there was no legacy Marriott property in which case they want to capture the business of that guest in whatever property they happen to have in that city.
** Clearly I'm over simplifying it... they want more people in more expensive properties, but overall any bed not filled is a wasted revenue opportunity for them.
May 4, 2018, 2:46 pm
#229
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Minneapolis: DL DM charter 2.3MM
Programs: A3*Gold, SPG Plat, HyattDiamond, MarriottPP, LHW exAccess, ICI, Raffles Amb, NW PE MM, TWA Gold MM
Posts: 100,369
Neither MR nor SPG had a pure revenue path to elite status, so I wouldn't necessarily expect it to be introduced at the time of the merger.
May 4, 2018, 2:52 pm
#230
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Albany, NY
Programs: SPG LTP, Hyatt Globalist, HH Gold, IHGPlat, RadGold, Marriott Plat, BW Diamond
Posts: 172
I’m in the same situation as you are. SPG LTP - but only over the 750 night threshold if you add in my recent Marriott stays. I wish SPG LTP’s would all stick together. I’m sorry you were kicked out of that Facebook group. I had a feeling that would be the case, so I didn’t even attempt to try to join.
May 4, 2018, 3:49 pm
#231
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: New York
Programs: MB-LTT , HH-Diam., HGP-Expl.
Posts: 778
I agree wholeheartedly with this, and as an SPG LTP with greater than 750 nights, but only after factoring in all the visits I made to Marriott properties since merge (eg. I still tally <750 nights just on the SPG side), I was disappointed to have been kicked out of the Facebook 750+ advocacy group without warning after making a respectful point in a comment thread that nights activity ought to be merged between SPG/MR given the fact that Marriott and SPG have encouraged everyone to stay across brands for the past few years. I hope that we can take care of each other and not be divided unnecessarily.
May 5, 2018, 4:54 am
#232
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: CLT
Programs: Marriott Plat, AA Gold
Posts: 1,076
Fair enough yosi, I guess I was assuming that the legacy MR guest’s nights would be incremental, but that’s probably less likely because there are fewer areas where Starwood has hotels and Marriott didn’t. Although with more and arguably better options to use for rewards, it might incentivize legacy MR members to focus their stays with Marriott and not spread them out as much.
Former Starwood members are probably where they hope to gain the most incremental nights, so maybe they are OK losing a few of the people who already stay a lot if they can get many of the mid-range night guests to increase somewhat significantly.
Former Starwood members are probably where they hope to gain the most incremental nights, so maybe they are OK losing a few of the people who already stay a lot if they can get many of the mid-range night guests to increase somewhat significantly.
May 6, 2018, 5:59 pm
#233
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Portland, OR, USA
Programs: UA 1K 3 Million/ex-many year GS, AA PLT/2 Mil, AS MVPG, HH Dia, Starwood Life Plat, Hertz PC
Posts: 1,401
I’m in the same situation as you are. SPG LTP - but only over the 750 night threshold if you add in my recent Marriott stays. I wish SPG LTP’s would all stick together. I’m sorry you were kicked out of that Facebook group. I had a feeling that would be the case, so I didn’t even attempt to try to join.
May 6, 2018, 8:45 pm
#234
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: New York, NY
Programs: UA - 1K 1MM; Hyatt - Explorist; Marriott - Lifetime Titanium
Posts: 1,586
At 1165 nights with SPG, and what will be around 3.6M Marriott points after the conversion, this isn't sitting too well with me. I think that most of the perspectives offered to date are well thought out. Candidly, it seems like a bonehead move for Marriott to put legacy SPG loyalists with top level qualifications at a lower tier. Really hope they re-think.
May 7, 2018, 7:34 am
#235
Join Date: May 2013
Location: New York
Programs: UA Silver, Marriott LTPP, Hertz Five Star
Posts: 1,078
I'm here with you as well. I never stayed at Marriotts much prior to the merger and so had a small handful of nights in MR. Post the merger they seemed to be encouraging folks like me to try the Marriott side more and so I did. The result is that instead of well over 750 SPG nights I have just under 700 but something like 150 MR nights. I don't quite understand the division among SPG LTPs - seems like the louder voice you get by being inclusive is more important.
If people want to say nobody had a crystal ball and psychic powers that Marriott and Starwood would later merge in 2003 or whatever, I'm not opposed to that argument. However, they announced the merger at the end of 2015, and started encouraging people to stay between the two brands in 2016/2017 with the status match.
If anyone wants to go "fine print" and say that there was technically no promise to ever count other properties nights towards lifetime and no obligation to do so, they would be technically correct. However, enforcing the fine print is not always the best way to encourage customer loyalty.
This is why (as I've stated many times), I support a path to old MR LTP/new grandfathered LTPP for members who met the old MR 2 million MR points equivalent / 750 nights in SPG, or in MR/SPG combined. Even if you take the position that no one's psychic and who knew that the brands would merge, combined activity from 2016 onwards should at least be considered.
The fine print argument really isn't great, because by the fine print, Marriott/SPG under existing terms could cancel our points individually, cancel everyones points, devalue them by making all redemption start at a billion points for a Residence Inn in the middle of the desert, etc... the fine print also does not prohibit MR from considering legacy SPG elites under similar terms to the old Marriott Elites for lifetime status. And the fact that Marriott can probably get away with it due to the strength of the combined Marriott + Starwood property portfolio isn't a great argument either. The fact the combined entity is in a strong enough position to not treat elites of similar loyalty similarly doesn't mean that it is a fair move.
May 7, 2018, 8:51 am
#236
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: MCI
Programs: AA Gold 1MM, AS MVP, UA Silver, WN A-List, Marriott LT Titanium, HH Diamond
Posts: 52,555
I was disappointed to have been kicked out of the Facebook 750+ advocacy group without warning after making a respectful point in a comment thread that nights activity ought to be merged between SPG/MR given the fact that Marriott and SPG have encouraged everyone to stay across brands for the past few years. I hope that we can take care of each other and not be divided unnecessarily.
It's caused me to think about writing my own impassioned letter to Marriott about the value of lifelong loyalty to Marriott and how thankful I am for the grandfathered tier that rewards those who've been with them through the years more than the competitor's loyalists who were recently acquired.
The two problems being that I'm not really impassioned about it and I still have to gather some points to get to the LTPP level...
But it does seem like the Starwood elites trying to make this case aren't looking to make any friends along the way. While I agree with some of the underlying points and have actually enjoyed SPG Plat more than MR Plat over the years, the acquired don't usually get to call the shots.