Let me start by saying that at least for now, there’s nothing to panic about, and this was apparently a website error. However, several readers have brought this to my attention, so I can’t help but cover it. As a fairly low tech guy, I also have some questions to ask those who are more technologically literate.
In this post:
Marriott Bonvoy’s strange points website error
For a brief period today, the Marriott website was updated to indicate significantly reduced points earning rates at many limited service brands.
Officially (and in line with terms & conditions), Bonvoy members earn 10 points per dollar spent at a vast majority of brands, with only a small number of limited service brands earning five points per dollar spent.
However, Marriott’s website was updated today to indicate that travelers would earn just five points per dollar spent for stays at a lot more brands. This suggested that most limited service brands would have their points earning rates slashed in half, including at Aloft, Courtyard, Four Points, Moxy, and more.
Obviously slashing points earning rates by 50% would be terrible for many members, especially with the program continuing to increase award redemption rates at many properties, given dynamic award pricing.
Marriott quickly fixed its website, claiming this was an error. I reached out to a Marriott spokesperson to ask whether the error was the information as such, or just the timing with which the information was published.
The spokesperson has told me that this is “not indicative of any future changes.” That’s reassuring, because if this were actually a planned change, I’d expect the response to be “no comment” or non-answer, rather than a resounding denial of this being a planned change.
How do these kinds of IT glitches happen, though?
This brings me to my question. I’ve been covering the loyalty program space for a very long time. I can’t count the number of times that we’ve seen airline, hotel, and credit card websites display information prematurely, only to then be taken down, with the claim it was an error. In my experience, in a majority of situations, the error is the timing as such, rather than the information.
So this is where I’m coming to you, dear readers, to learn. Like I said, I’m a low tech guy — I can peck away at a keyboard pretty efficiently, but that’s about it. Based on my understanding, websites don’t have significant, unintended updates to text for absolutely no reason.
I’d assume that generally speaking, changes like the above happen for one of a few reasons:
- The company is planning the change, but accidentally published the information prematurely; this is the most common explanation, in my experience
- The company may have been considering the change at some point, but ended up deciding against it; I’m not sure how common this is, though?
- Someone is playing a prank; this hardly seems like the type of prank someone would play, though
It’s one thing if the update to the website were totally nonsensical, like St. Regis showing reduced points earning, while Residence Inn shows increased points earning, where you assume it’s a formatting error, or something.
However, this change wouldn’t really shock anyone, I’d think:
- If Marriott Bonvoy is going to reduce points earnings rates, I’d expect it to be in exactly the way that it was briefly published on the website
- The information that was briefly published wasn’t outdated in any sort of obvious way; it even listed MGM Rewards, so this is not something that might’ve been considered years ago, but wasn’t followed through on
- Heck, just a few months ago, Marriott’s CEO went on record as saying that it feels like the “right time to look across the enterprise and figure out what adjustments we can make to enhance and improve our efficiency,” and this seems like one of the ways that could be done
So to those who have a better understanding of how big companies handle their IT, could anyone provide some insights into how a website change like this could happen, aside from my theories above?
Bottom line
Marriott’s website was briefly updated today to indicate a reduction in points earning rates at many brands. A spokesperson has confirmed that this was a website error, and isn’t indicative of any future changes. That’s great news.
However, I can’t help but wonder how updates like this happen. In my experience, more often than not the error is the timing of the update being published, rather than the update as such. However, that’s apparently not the case here.
What do you make of this Marriott Bonvoy “website error?”
As an IT guy who did work at Starwood, I believe they created this page intentionally so make new brands categorized as such. It can’t be an error to create that page. It might be an error of timing or it might be a decision to walk it back (at least for now) due to perceived or real backlash.
Highly suspect. Hopefully reports like this can walk them back from what appears to be a likely plan for a future date. Things such as this don't just happen and their denial is not surprising, companies, the government, etc. lie all the time.
This kinda work has been my career and it's unlikely to be an error.
A large corporation like Marriott should have some type of Content Management System & process to update their web site. This requires a request for changes from the business users, probably some review by other stake holders, changes, localization,....before approval to be put live...
In short multiple steps, multiple people...
If it hadn't gone through much of that...
This kinda work has been my career and it's unlikely to be an error.
A large corporation like Marriott should have some type of Content Management System & process to update their web site. This requires a request for changes from the business users, probably some review by other stake holders, changes, localization,....before approval to be put live...
In short multiple steps, multiple people...
If it hadn't gone through much of that process, it wouldn't have gotten to the IT/web guys to make the actual changes to the site...
Marriott might still do it later as scheduled or push it back/change/cancel based on the reaction to this leak... but I'd call BS on "not indicative of future changes"
If this was indeed an error, Marriott's IT is a lot worse than I thought... and I didn't have a very high opinion of it as it was...
I would like to share that in event where you are redeeming and paying for a stay and they are overlapping stays for some valid reasons like mine. I have too many points and can afford to use it for a hotel nearer to where my meetings are held in the day and pay for a higher value room with great dining and views for the nite. BUT Marriott would ONLY credit the nites and...
I would like to share that in event where you are redeeming and paying for a stay and they are overlapping stays for some valid reasons like mine. I have too many points and can afford to use it for a hotel nearer to where my meetings are held in the day and pay for a higher value room with great dining and views for the nite. BUT Marriott would ONLY credit the nites and meagre points for the redemption nites and NIL for the paid nites until you are able to prove that you stayed in the paid nites. So you have no say over how you use your redemption points. And in overlapping stays instead of crediting points and nites for the paid stay they wud do it for the redemption nites until you discover and prove otherwise. So in event where you want to use your hard earned redemption points make sure there are NO overlapping with paid nites. Or a better option wud be to use the redemption points at Marriott and go to any other hotels for paid nites. And you can forget about trying to reason or show prove cos the response is rather standard and insincere. Chat gpt can generate a more personal and sincere response.
Marriott CEO is having quite a few glitches.
A year ago in February Marriott did not roll over Marriott Elite members who had airline status with United.
Despite members showing up at he airport, being surprised with no status and had to pay for their luggage (without the rollover), Marriott admitting to the Tech Glitch in their system, Marriott CEO Anthony Capuano decided not to reimburse those Marriott Elite members. So much for...
Marriott CEO is having quite a few glitches.
A year ago in February Marriott did not roll over Marriott Elite members who had airline status with United.
Despite members showing up at he airport, being surprised with no status and had to pay for their luggage (without the rollover), Marriott admitting to the Tech Glitch in their system, Marriott CEO Anthony Capuano decided not to reimburse those Marriott Elite members. So much for Lifetime Titanium members.
Now he promised Wall Street, $100 million in savings after an earnings call. People come people go.
As once famous NFL football coach Jerry Glanville told the ref, if you make calls like that, NFL means Not for Long for the coach, or perhaps even a CEO.
I work in tech. Usually the tech team creates a ticket based on a department's requirements. They then build it in a sandbox and the department tests it. Once approved, it is given a date to deploy to production. Very unlikely the web tech team updated the page by accident or for fun.
Reminding myself to come back here and flag that Marriott PR played you when this happens.
They didn't "play him" if he's writing this article though. Ben is literally saying he suspects Marriott's PR is BS.
Web Pages don’t write themselves… this is happening..
“not indicative of any future changes.”
They only need to move one brand between the categories compared to what was prematurely published, and the above statement would remain truthful albeit twisted!
Off topic but Marriott related. Currently staying at Sheraton Grand Taipei. I’m lifetime Titanium and used points for 5 nights (w 5th free). As I recall when I booked I think it was around 160,000 points for entire stay (40,000/night for 4 nights plus free 1). I was upgraded to a 2 room diplomat suite and the lounge is amazing with extensive breakfast (Western and Asian), afternoon tea and a 3 hour happy hour with...
Off topic but Marriott related. Currently staying at Sheraton Grand Taipei. I’m lifetime Titanium and used points for 5 nights (w 5th free). As I recall when I booked I think it was around 160,000 points for entire stay (40,000/night for 4 nights plus free 1). I was upgraded to a 2 room diplomat suite and the lounge is amazing with extensive breakfast (Western and Asian), afternoon tea and a 3 hour happy hour with open bar plus many varieties of hot food (could easily be dinner).
Just letting you know point value and upgraded delivery does exist, just need to usually look outside the US
It's entirely possible someone within Marriott's loyalty division under David Flueck disagreed with the direction Bonvoy was going and sought to undermine a planned devaluation by accidentally leaking it ahead of time. Especially if that person is one of the people whose jobs is being eliminated as part of Marriott's $100 million corporate downsizing.
Fair to generally assume the worst with Marriott I would stay. They think they are too big to fail, and habe some degree of industry power, and thus and can generally ratchet down benefits and customer service over time.
I might suggest that there is something to panic about- for anyone who is planning on earning Marriott points in the future.
There could be many innocent technical explanations for this. e.g. the website was coded to automatically pull the higher earning brands from one database table and the lower earning brands from a different database table.
In this hypothetical scenario, they could have moved some brands around in their database without intending to alter points earning policy but the way the website was coded it caused this unintended change.
The above is a very simplified example...
There could be many innocent technical explanations for this. e.g. the website was coded to automatically pull the higher earning brands from one database table and the lower earning brands from a different database table.
In this hypothetical scenario, they could have moved some brands around in their database without intending to alter points earning policy but the way the website was coded it caused this unintended change.
The above is a very simplified example of one of 100s of technical reasons why this might have happened without being indicative of any policy change. Thats not to say it is definitely an innocent technical mistake, but there are many ways it could be.
Here's an example. The Detroit suburb of Livonia. The Marriott is $107. The Courtyard (literally right next door) is also $107. The Fairfield a short drive away is $91. At Detroit's airport in Romulus, the Sheraton is $156, the Marriott is $156 and the Courtyard is $156.
At the Marriott as a platinum or higher, I'll get (1) a choice at check-in of 1,000 points or a $10 F&B credit and (2) a second choice...
Here's an example. The Detroit suburb of Livonia. The Marriott is $107. The Courtyard (literally right next door) is also $107. The Fairfield a short drive away is $91. At Detroit's airport in Romulus, the Sheraton is $156, the Marriott is $156 and the Courtyard is $156.
At the Marriott as a platinum or higher, I'll get (1) a choice at check-in of 1,000 points or a $10 F&B credit and (2) a second choice at check-in of 750 points or breakfast in the restaurant if the club lounge is closed.
At the Sheraton as a platinum or higher, I'll get a choice at check-in of 1,000 points, an amenity, or breakfast in the restaurant. That's in addition to my club lounge access (assuming it's open).
At the Courtyard, I'll get one choice at check-in of 500 points or a $10 F&B voucher.
At the Fairfield, I'll get one choice at check-in of 500 points or a F&B item from the pantry.
Why would I book the Courtyard or Fairfield, especially if the number of points per dollar is cut in half?
If you believe the Marriott explanation I have some Enron stock to sell you
The most likely explanation is that was discussed for the future and released early or tabled for further discussion but someone misunderstood (the later case allowing the statement you got from Marriott to be technically true).
That said, his could it happen "by accident"? If the page, or at least the earning rate section, is generated either on demand or as a static site generation process (which seems possible given the complexity of the program)...
The most likely explanation is that was discussed for the future and released early or tabled for further discussion but someone misunderstood (the later case allowing the statement you got from Marriott to be technically true).
That said, his could it happen "by accident"? If the page, or at least the earning rate section, is generated either on demand or as a static site generation process (which seems possible given the complexity of the program) then it's entirely possible that a programmer might have made a naive code simplification that would put some hotels into the wrong section. It's also possible that a DB admin might have "cleaned up" the database by "correcting" some values that appeared incorrect to them.
So I believe that happened? No, but it's an example of how it could.
Someone released it too early. A lot of times, engineers develop multiple versions of the site for each major release milestones. Some of those are simultaneously developed. A release engineer probably fat fingered the wrong release and rolled it back afterwards.
This is not to say that would be the final changes, but it shows they are thinking of changing some of those aspects.
This was an early release of what's to come. Anyone who thinks otherwise needs to ask how that chart would just randomly appear on Marriott's website.
Don't forget, Marriott is paying a bunch of points out through branded credit cards to both Chase and Amex for stays.
If Marriott cuts the base earning to 5 points per dollar at brands that make up a majority of its properties within North America, it will be virtually impossible for anyone just starting out or anyone who isn't a full-time road warrior on a large expense account to ever accumulate enough points for redemption at aspirational properties.
While Marriott's large footprint will insulate some properties (like those in small towns and other...
If Marriott cuts the base earning to 5 points per dollar at brands that make up a majority of its properties within North America, it will be virtually impossible for anyone just starting out or anyone who isn't a full-time road warrior on a large expense account to ever accumulate enough points for redemption at aspirational properties.
While Marriott's large footprint will insulate some properties (like those in small towns and other markets with little chain competition), this could be a massive blunder because anyone who cares about points won't stay at the limited service properties. Not only will that hurt the bottom line of owners, but it will ultimately cost corporate money.
It's not unheard of to see Fairfields and Courtyards with nightly rates as expensive or, in some cases, more expensive than a Delta, Marriott or Sheraton. Why would you stay at a Courtyard? It would make no sense (or cents).
Since this particular "mistake" is related to just website publication, I highly doubt this would be a prank unless someone in IT was fired and (s)he wanted to give a parting gift. I am certain, Marriott is actively working on it and we'd soon see these changes.
How would an error like that happen? It's not like a web page rewrites itself. Someone with a level of authority did the change.
The persons saying this was a mistake might have plausible deniability as they may not be in a position to actually know if this is part of a long-term de-evaluation that was accidentally published. Remember, they’ve already changed the meaning of a “night” at some brands.
Many web pages do, in fact, right themselves every time from program code merged with data . I have no idea whether that's happening in this case, but it's possible.
A fourth explanation is simply that they've made Bonvoy so complicated it is not hard to work off the wrong list. This "error" basically mirrors the list of hotels that get the 250 point bonus point amenity vs 500.
That being said, seems pretty obvious the most likely is they updated it early (as you note, they'd have to update the terms first in any event). Although, I guess bold of Marriott Comms to so...
A fourth explanation is simply that they've made Bonvoy so complicated it is not hard to work off the wrong list. This "error" basically mirrors the list of hotels that get the 250 point bonus point amenity vs 500.
That being said, seems pretty obvious the most likely is they updated it early (as you note, they'd have to update the terms first in any event). Although, I guess bold of Marriott Comms to so definitively tell everyone that is not indicative of future changes.
“ The company is planning the change, but accidentally published the information prematurely”
Guaranteed this was what happened.
Agreed
Would you stay at Marriott hotels if the earning rate were ZERO points per dollar?
Yes, I would. The points don't matter. I stay at Marriott hotels so I can take advantage of late checkout, so that I know my room meets some very minimal bar of cleanliness that downmarket hotel brands somehow cannot meet. I've literally checked into a Choice Hotel room that had wet semen.
Nice try, Skadden would never be caught dead in a Choice Hotel
I don't believe this has anything to do with tech processes, which differ so much between organizations and industries that there is no way to speculate meaningfully. Be especially careful of Computer Science professors, even at top universities like Stanford, speculating about the operations of a non-academic business; such professors tend to have a lot of naive assumptions of how technology works in the business world.
In my highly informed opinion, most likely, the business...
I don't believe this has anything to do with tech processes, which differ so much between organizations and industries that there is no way to speculate meaningfully. Be especially careful of Computer Science professors, even at top universities like Stanford, speculating about the operations of a non-academic business; such professors tend to have a lot of naive assumptions of how technology works in the business world.
In my highly informed opinion, most likely, the business team drafted several variations of points earning rates, and this one was published inadvertently.
It remains plausible that these rates will eventually take effect.
Frankly, non-Hyatt hotel points are so worthless that nobody cares.
The error was that they released the update early.
Given the pace of changes, it's clear they do not intend to use KY.