pinniped

This. The OP seems to be unaware of the definition of a "loophole", as well as unaware of how marketing/promotional programs are designed.

The 3-room feature was pretty smart on Starwood's part. I too booked a few family stays over the years because of it.

myko85

Ditto. Now I'm leaning more towards booking Hyatt for multi-room stays to achieve their LT program and Marriott for single room stays.

DAYflier

Very smart. And I'm not sure why Marriott is doing away with this benefit.

This was a big benefit for me. It kept me loyal to SPG properties even when a Hyatt or Marriott property made more sense. I often volunteered to book travel for my department when we traveled with together. And you can bet I bent over backwards to book us in the Sheraton--even if the Hyatt Place or Courtyard were cheaper and more conveniently located. I knew that our three night stay would become a nine night stay, and assist me in qualifying for elite status (whose benefits I really take advantage of during personal travel), so it was worth it to me to take my group a little bit out of their way to stay at the SPG property.

As far as loyalty programs go, this benefit does exactly what the OP was talking about: encouraging profitable behavior in the customer.

Marriott...are you listening?

Eastbay1K

I recall several years ago, booking multiple rooms on a trip in another program, and being surprised, after the fact, that I didn't receive squat in the credit department. (Yes, I know I could have looked up the rules.) The SPG multiple room benefit has been a great competitive advantage. And even when the year was running short on stays, and I went out to an inexpensive property and checked into 3 rooms for myself, who exactly did I hurt? The hotel, that would have had an empty room? Starwood, who earned incremental revenue on rooms 2 and 3? Or you (the generic "you") who might lose out on an upgrade in the one in ten billion chance we check into the St. Regis Kodiak on the same date? Did I decrease the value of your breakfast benefit? Are your 500 bonus points worth less?

And back to the OP. Would you like another perspective? I was a Westin Gold member, back when it was acceptable for "Gold" to be the top tier of a program, before we needed shinier and more precious metals to describe our importance in a loyalty program. I was (ok, maybe not as severe as) distraught when Starwood Preferred Guest was going to ruin my Westin program. The end result was that for the most part, SPG has been the best travel loyalty program around.

To continue on that perspective, when I started with loyalty programs, I was a low income student. Then, I was a modest income non student. Yet by the time I could afford better accommodations and classes of travel, I remained a loyal patron of those programs that treated me well, even if I had been one of their lower revenue elites. I don't know how someone can legitimately knock someone who spends 50 nights at 3 Points hotels as not as important, or loyal, or worthy, as someone who spends 50 nights at St. Luxury properties. You know what? That person is extremely unlikely to use a SNA at the St. Luxury, but will be thrilled with that corner suite on top floor of the 3 Points. If that same person has earned enough points (albeit not billions of them) on the $100-ish nights for a free weekend at a St. Luxury, good for him or her. Should that person be relegated to only the lower tier hotels?

This LTP's perspective is Westin treated me right. Starwood treated me right. Marriott now has a LTP out of me because of it. Don't eff it up.

PHLGovFlyer

Agreed.

On top of that, this has turned into yet another "which program's status is more worthy" thread. A question which has been hashed, rehashed, and bludgeoned well past death here on FT.

The entire premise of the argument seems to be that there are shortcuts available to MR members that allow them to earn annual status comparatively easily, making the MR program inferior. What the OP forgets is that FT is NOT representative of the traveling public or of MR's population in general (or SPG's). Additionally, the OP has zero information on the proportion of MR or SPG members that have achieved status through the various shortcuts available to BOTH programs.

IME I know of only one person outside of FT that is aware of any of the various MR & SPG shortcuts, and he knows of it only because I told him. OTOH, I know many elite members of hotel and airline loyalty programs that know almost nothing about even basic benefits. Last week a colleague who is 1K with United mentioned he was flying to India. I asked him if he had applied a SWU to his flight. He did not even know that he had systemwide or regional upgrades! He didn't know what they were! The idea that a majority (or even a meaningful fraction) of the elite population of MR or SPG uses shortcuts to regularly achieve their status is absurd.

yeunganson

I am pleasently surprised on the amount of feedback and discussion generated through my post. It does show passion on the program.

How the merged program will evolves have multiple factors that would include our feedback as members. Longtime Marriott members may see their program and consider aspects of them as features while we (or just I) coming from SPG will have a different set of eyes and a different perspective.

Some of the suggestions I have maybe considered valid and some maybe considered nonesense. What is important that if anything is to improve, we need to express what we think. It always easier to shut down other people's ideas but more difficult to come up with ideas of your own and face the music when someone doesn't them. My overall theme is pretty clear. I want a program that has few loopholes, encourages honorable behavior, limit free-loaders, and concentrate more on having loyalty members linking their memories with the hotel brand to establish a emotional connection.

As for my constructive critism on how Marriott ran their program, I stand by them. I am understanding Marriott members may have things they don't like about our program. I also stand by the belief the SPG program don't have much ways of gaming the system and I am very happy how SPG was able to keep the program integrity, enhance our benifits and cultivate such loyal following through the years.

CJKatl

Like the majority of the people who responded to this and the other thread, I want a program where I get the benefits I need. How others might qualify is none of my business. Gladys Kravitz is not my role model. What the PTB at Marriott decide is worthy of status and credit is up to them. None of us has the data to know how much Marriott earns from what activities so any opinion without that data would be ill-informed. This is not a "culture" or something with which anyone should have an "emotional connection" it is a marketing program. Those who participate in the program are customers, not members of an elite club. If someone finds the program beneath him or her, that person should not participate in the marketing program but commenting on other members being right or wrong based on their participating legally and as the rules allow makes no sense.

damon88

CJKatl

Sadly fewer and fewer.

Eastbay1K

And making her relevant in this thread, Gladys probably had booklets full of Blue Chip Stamps, and perhaps, S&H Green Stamps. In fact, she may have had more than her neighbors. But as long as she got the rewards she wanted from the redemption center when she brought in her stacks of books, what did it matter what any other neighbor had. If she found out about bonus stamp day somewhere but the neighbors didn't, did they complain on an IBB or tweet the living daylights out of the company?

pinniped

So, to summarize, you want a program that has few ways to earn points/status that don't benefit you, encourages your own pattern of behavior, limits access to people with other patterns of behavior, and concentrates more on providing benefits to you by having fewer elite members who reached your status tier via an alternative path.

I want that program too. Marriott should recognize me as Titanium Deluxe and all of you schmucks as the rusty old fender of a 1983 Plymouth Turismo.

Oxon Flyer

Lecturing to SPG members that they do not and should not have any emotional connection with their program is, IMHO, the most surefire way of losing your audience here.

The difference in 'emotional connection' between MR and SPG is the whole point.

pinniped

I will admit it's something that every marketing program *wants* to do, and Starwood has always been better at it than Marriott.

Marriott has run a solid, rewarding, stable...but boring program. The promotions are predictable. The hotels are predictable and almost always of acceptable quality. I enjoy heaps of FF miles and free hotel nights, but I rarely get excited about an upcoming Marriott stay. I am pretty unemotional about Marriott - it's more of a transactional thing.

Starwood always had a little more sizzle, both with better promotions, better on-property treatment, and more interesting twists like SPG Moments (which I've actually redeemed and loved). Sometimes I genuinely look forward to Starwood stays - especially in unusual international hotels. There is more of an emotional connection there.

I hope some of that uniqueness can survive past August 1.

Fizzer

You beat me too it. It was exactly what the Marriott CEO noted when he said he was totally surprised by the intensity of the emotional attachment that SPG Elites had to their program, which was of course, one of the attractions to Marriott

yosithezet