So I posted this in the HUGE DL thread, but yhought it may deserve a life/discussion of its own.

Seems FT'ers are in the minority whrn it comes to loyalty. (At least according to this survey)

https://www.deloitte.com/view/en_US/...56f70aRCRD.htm

Flyertalkers are in a minority, a very small minority, to the traveling public.

Not saying that's a bad thing.

I think there's also a difference between the occasional traveler and the elite traveler.

As an elite I get 3 free checked bags up to 70lbs, I don't get IVB, free same day standby, the rules are more flexible and I'm near the front of the line for a reroute, I never have to gate check due to full overhead bins, etc. All of this translates to real dollar savings. Sure, I can go online and book the cheapest fares from whomever but in the long run it can end up costing significantly more money.

Loyalty programs influence decisions to purchase that go way beyond FTers, so the answer to the headline question is "yes".

Airline loyalty programs have faced erosion because of the consumer-unfriendly actions of the airlines. In other words, airline management is responsible for the "erosion" of customer loyalty and the programs they operate.

Seems like FTers are indeed part of the majority according to your link above:

.... and the hotel programs part of FT is not as popular with the majority on FT as the airline programs.

Seems like FTers are a subset of the majority.

At least among business travelers who can make their own buying/flying decisions. For leisure travels, I guess it really doesn't matter. Have been top tier with Delta, AA, NW, UA, US Air, I can say WITHOUT hesitation that it makes a WORLD of difference!!!

I look at it a little differently. I believe most people in this world get sucked into their "primary" airline (whether they like it or not) because the routes they fly align best with that carrier/alliance.

Again, not Flyertalkers here...normal people. You live in Newark, you're flying United, you probably never think "What if I crossed NYC to get to JFK so I could participate in Skymiles?" In this sense, Chicagoans are probably unique in the U.S. in that they have two major hub operations a 2-minute train ride apart at O'Hare. They probably have more of a choice than the rest of us. For them, the nuances of AAdvantage vs. MileagePlus might drive some decisions. Perhaps it's no coincidence that those two programs are highly similar to each other, moreso than they are to DL or US.

I don't really think of it as "loyalty". Let's be honest: most of the world hates all of these companies. We just use the one that's least-bad for us.

Valid points. My statement was mot e in reference to the idea that many on here put way more value into a program thsn an average consumer... consider the debates of loyalty in the Hyatt, Hilton, and DL forums right now. I know it happens in others what does the 1 that primarily read.

I think for most of the traveling public that price rules.

Let's face it, if you don't have status or you aren't flying in a premium class, the traveling experience can be pretty unpleasant. If someone only flies once or twice a year, why on earth would they stay loyal to one airline? Especially when the experience is often so poor, and for the casual traveler they don't think they'll earn enough miles/points to qualify for a free flight, etc., for years.

I have friends who won't take vacations to cities without SPG hotels. They also choose Starwood above all other options even if the particular hotel is bad, overpriced or inconvenient to their intended activities.

Loyalty programs generally only pay off if you either travel a lot or charge a lot on your credit cards (especially since points expire after a few years in most programs, which makes them harder to save up over time). The average person does neither, so joining a loyalty program doesn't make much sense for them.

Take the example of my parents. Retired, leisure travellers, cross an ocean 4 times a year, give or take, plus transborder. They used to have loyalty to Air Canada, but now that the loyalty program is next to useless for a casual flyer, they fly whatever's the best deal - So next trip to England is on Icelandair.

Joining a loyalty program in this industry usually comes with low to negligible costs, so joining does usually make sense. Whether or not it makes sense to change flight purchase habits because of a program is question that should be asked, but a lot of people -- including "kettles" -- make decisions based on "loyalty" even if it may be to their immediate material detriment to some degree.

For example, there are lots of passengers on flights from the US to China and India who pay a sort of premium and go with their US carrier of choice even if it has a marginally higher fare because they want to collect miles in their program of choice. Some of these decisions based on the loyalty program may be irrational, yet they are often made to the benefit of the airline program operator despite the passenger's higher cost for "loyalty".

Even for domestic-only "kettles", it is quite routine for those who book them to be told they have a preferred carrier whose program they want to use for their paid flights -- it results in a benefit to the airline program operator as well since these customers often end up on their choice program's airline operator rather than on the competition.

It used to, but no longer. I smartened up. I used to only book Starwood properties, but have since realised I can often (usually?) get a better deal on a nicer hotel by looking elsewhere. Same thing with flights. I speak from the perspective of a three- or four-trip a year leisure traveller. Of course, I can see loyalty being of some value to more frequent travellers.

I think even if I dropped all the way to a very infrequent traveler, I'd still play the loyalty programs. There's still *some* value there.

I have LT Gold on AA, so that's a checked bag + priority checkin on Oneworld.

I'd probably acquire and keep Aegean Blue by flying just enough UA/US for it: again, a checked bag and priority checkin on Star Alliance.

I'd keep all of my hotel credit cards. They're good general-spend cards, better than a cashback or mileage card, so I'm getting some free nights and (in the case of HH) elite status for no real cost. If hotel cards were worse than mileage or cashback cards, I'd probably say the opportunity cost isn't worth it.

I probably wouldn't change my hotel stay patterns much if any. In the places where I prefer a non-brand hotel (B&B, boutique, campsite, whatever), I already book them. In the places where I'm willing to pay a bit of a premium for a big-chain hotel (much of Asia, the Middle East, and many large cities), I'd at least have the status and some options like SPG, PC, or HH Cash & Points to use to stretch the pool of points across more leisure stays.

I wouldn't chase elite status at hotels via stays, of course, so I'd be giving up SPG Platinum. That's really the one status I'd miss.

I disagree. If you live in or close to a single major hub operation (like ATL or EWR), and place a priority on convenience, you are likely a loyal customer of that airline but not one retained by the loyalty program. Those of us with medium to large airports with relatively diverse airline mixes (e.g. LAS, MCO, PDX, PIT) and those of us in high competition markets with multiple hubs (e.g. NYC, DC, Bay Area, Chicago) do have some choice in the matter without sacrificing too much convenience.

I live in a city without a major hub operation, and my usual destinations do not have nonstop flights on any airline from my home base. I have a choice of UA, US, WN, or DL - all would get me to most of my destinations reliably. I choose to fly UA for business and personal travel, and am willing to pay 20% or so more to fly on UA because of the benefits of elite status and award miles. That's a substantial premium to UA from my loyalty. I do occasionally fly others when UA lacks a convenient flight or when the price gap is too large, so it's not unwavering; but it certainly influences my choices and I am willing to pay more for it.