Here's a question: would you favor elimination of all elite levels except Platinum? It would mean that the universe of Elites would shrink dramatically, and the perks that Platinum members are to get would increase exponentially. Naturally it would seem to be unfair to those travelers who, for whatever reason, cannot make as many stays as others. The one response to this question made me think, and yes that is rare, that perhaps I was guilty of slighting fellow Rewards members in the Gold and Silver categories--that is not my intention, certainly, and sorry if it was taken that way.
Why do this? To create a distinct level of achievement that is not diminished. Recall that the original program at Mariott had but one level, the Marquis Club, and that was reached after less than 20 nights.
Why not do this? The program is entrenched and its inertia is hard to slow down or stop. Other hotels might have to copy this and if they didn't, well there is a chance it would be reversed.
Platinum achievement needs to be more special in my opinion.
What does everyone think?-- Edited by SteppingStones at 12/28/2009 10:11 AM PST
Everyone's situation is unique. We want what helps us most and Marriott wants to motivate us to do what helps it. That hopefully will result in a win/win.
It has for me. I have transitioned from silver (2007) to gold (2008) to platinum (2009). My business travel has decreased over that time. The amenities Marriott offers at the different levels, plus the deals available at different levels have motivated me to increase personal travel.
When I made silver, I thought I would never travel enough to make gold. But I navigated the Marriott website and learned the system and saw the opportunities. The bonus nights from the credit card and two for one specials have elevated me from gold to platinum this year. The new megabonus has me thinking of getaway weekends.
If there was only a platinum level available, I would most likely never have considered it and would not work towards such a seemingly unachiveable goal. The step approach has educated and motivated me to attain the next level twice. This is a win/win for Marriott and me.
Another poster has complained about the gap between silver (10) and gold (50). I could see silver upped to 25 and bronze at 10. This is entirely the opposite direction from your suggestion. But this structure has worked for me.
Very interesting question. I had to think about this one. I think I am in agreement with RainbowWill, that the steps that lead to Platinum are important. For someone who stays over 100 nights/year every year, it doesnt matter too much, but if I were just starting out, I would probably look at the 75 nights as a huge hurdle impossible to attain and probably look at a program other than Marriott.
I remember when I hit platinum for the first time: I had no idea in January that I would even come close that year. It just happened. So without the lower tiers, I probably would have made some different decisions on where to stay for that year.
Thanks for the question!!
I agree with the previous posters' comments. The tier system brings in business for Marriott and gives that 'reward' a more achievable feel for the member. When I first got platinum a few years back I wasn't expecting it. I was a few nights short and Marriott just bumped me up there as a 'thank you' for my business. Smart move on their part. I haven't stayed at any other brand since (which is, I'm sure, their intention). I'm sure others have had the same experiece.
Honestly I don't see it as a viable option given that all the other chains have at least 3 tiers in their programs, even Best Western ;). People want to strive to get to the next level, regardless of how you get to it (card, bonus, actual stays). Marriott makes money from all of these things so I think they'll stay with the current system.
To more directly address your point, most of the platinum folks that I see on these forums have well over the required 75nights. Three things I think would make it better.
1) either publish and/or lover the "premier" level requirements
2) create a new upper level that splits premier and platinum, say 125 nights or even 150 nights (double plat today)
3) make being platinum special again. The difference between plat and gold is there but its really fairly insignificant in a lot of ways.
For people to achieve platinum, for business folks, its really not *that* hard. To be loyal enough to essentially qualify for top status at two or more different chains....well that should net you some extra perks.
I stay with Marriott simply because over the past 4yrs, all of them platinum, 3 with 150+ nights (including my first yr) its become the norm. Most of my coworkers are platinum with Marriott, some are at the premier level so its just easier to stay. If Hilton or Starwood called me to say, here is our top level status, come try us out, I gotta say I'd be very tempted to give them a shot.
dear stepping stone
today after 1 year i cam back to kuala lumpur
all finisch no more level not only in asie ou europe
in the usa to. now you byu for 60 bucks more the acces
to the concierge lounge. if you stay alredy 100 nights
ou 0 with marriotts its the same. the lounge looks now
like a bistro
many guest completly drunk normal for 60 dollars
1 ou 10 whishy its the same price. eating
1 ou 10 snacks and this for 2 persones 30 bucks each.
i look many times your remarks
about platium member alredy long years and the
new one , but now you dont will see any difference.
its finisch with 60 dollars per day the new guest will be
for 1 week ou only for 1 ou 2
days a platium ou gold member with acces to the lounges.
and completly full the concierge lounge, i dont want to see you
when you have to wait a half hour for get a table.
now the money only the money , long member ou only
for 3 nights is the same no difference.
i hope this will change.
exuse my poor englisch but i think its important to signale
you can byu now the acces to the lounge.