I was getting ready to write a scathing post about Starwood Preferred Guest’s point levels for the coming year, but Gary Leff has beaten me to it. I’ll just add to the chorus:

Hotel-point redemption rates vary, based on the “tiers” of the property. And those tiers are tied to the average room rate at the property. Roadside motel? Low tier. Ultra-luxe resort? Upper tier. Seems straightforward.

And when the rates go up, the tier typically goes up, and the points required for a reward room go up, too. But when the rates go down, the tier typically goes down too. (This is perhaps how hotel points differ most from airline miles.)

Except this year. Starwood left its tiers where they were for the coming year, despite hotel rates’ incredibly deflationary record this past year. And then they try to spin it as a great thing they’re doing for their customers. It’s like telling an American traveler to Europe that you’ll cut them a great deal by charging him the USD-EUR exchange rate from December 2009 on a visit in February 2010… when the euro has dropped from 1.50 to 1.35. Gee, thanks.

Pitching it over to Gary:

Rates were down close to 20%, Starwood members expected points prices to fall, too. But Starwood apparently had other plans, and tried to spin not raising prices as a huge win for members. ‘We expect hotel prices to go up, but we aren’t going to sock you for that now. Because we love you.’
[...]
Some of [last year's] increases should have been reversed — based on the value proposition as Starwood has articulated it — after the worst hotel revenue year ever. But they weren’t. Starwood Preferred Guest is swallowing the difference. And telling you to thank them for it.

Starwood still has a large number of lovely properties, place I actually want to redeem to be at. But their points are relatively hard to earn through stays, and those points are worth less as hotel points prices remain the same but rates have fallen. They seem to be taking the wrong competitive approach, when Hyatt seems to be doing nothing but adding value to its program.

Amen.

(image)

Upgraded: Awareness of airlines’ crappy recycling efforts
I have always bristled at the toss-everything-in-the-bag trash collection aboard US-based airlines. (It’s a striking contrast from European carriers, for example.) So I’m glad to see some light shining on the recycling practices — or lack thereof — of American carriers. The best of the bunch: Delta and Virgin America, who earn a grade of B- from Green America (pdf). Failing grades: United and US Airways. See the FastCompany roundup here.

Upgraded: Wifi on Alaska Airlines
Alaska Airlines will put wi-fi on all its aircraft, using Aircell’s service, which is sold under the Gogo name.

Downgraded: Rental car deals
Blame Toyota. The carmaker’s huge recall took out about 8% of vehicles of the American rental car fleet. Yes, recall repairs are being done, but the rates aren’t pulling back too quickly. That is, unless you’re doing a one-way rental from Florida to … well, anywhere.

(image)

Toilet Wars: They’re on. Japan’s ANA has announced (pdf) that their larger aircraft on international routes will feature one lavatory reserved for women only.

Seriously.

The image above shows the pink signage that will demarcate the testosterone-free zone on the restroom doors.

I’ve been skeptical of airline marketing targeted to a single gender for a while. (You may recall my skepticism of the efforts by American Airlines to create a website targeted at women. Granted, they’ve improved the site and made it less… lavender.) But this takes it to another level.

Restrooms are scarce resources on aircraft. Taking one lavatory out of commission for half the people on the plane means a greater likelihood of people (men) milling about in the aisles, waiting for a free loo. Better hope there’s no turbulence.

What’s driving this? The airline says it’s a response to “numerous requests from passengers for this service.” But what’s driving passengers to want this? Are men leaving that much of a mess? Was it the seat that was left up? Was the seat left down when it should have been up? Have the relations between the sexes gotten so bad that we can’t live in harmony in-flight?

So what do you think? Is this a great idea? A dumb gimmick? Something in between? Hit the comments.

Via Today in the Sky

I received an odd message today from the general manager of a Crowne Plaza Hotel. She asked me to delete a hotel review I left on TripAdvisor nearly five years ago, well before the current management took over the property.

Putting aside the author’s horrible, HORRIBLE grammar and spelling, I can sympathize and understand why a hotel manager might want to have old reviews deleted. When I stayed at the property, it was a Radisson. Today, it’s a Crowne Plaza. But on their site, TripAdvisor has simply renamed the hotel listing and incorporated into the reviews.

I’m torn here. Despite my sympathy for management who’s stuck with their predecessors’ bad reputation, why would I delete an old review? It was accurate when I wrote it. There’s clearly a date on the prose, so a reader can opt to dismiss it for its age. And the review wasn’t even that bad: while it was a middling review for a middling hotel, I’ve certainly experienced (and written) worse.

I’m also slightly skeptical of the request, because I’ve lost a lot of faith in TripAdvisor over the last few years, as some suspiciously enthusiastic (shill?) reviews have piled up. I used to trust the site; I no longer do, because it’s seemingly being gamed by hoteliers. Call me cynical, but getting old reviews deleted is a possible precursor to a positive-review blitz by management.

So what would you do? I’m putting up a poll at the bottom of this post, and I would love to hear what you think. Vote, and hit the comments!

The text of the hotel manager’s message is below, with the poll below that. And while it’s probably identifiable for determined googlers, I’m editing out the name of the property and the manager. The rest of this message is all hers, though…

Good Morning,
My name is B****** ******** and I am the General Manager for the Crowne Plaza **** ******, we became a Crowne Plaza in October of 2008, when you stayed with this property it was not under the same owenership nor franchise, it was a Radisson Hotel managed by Remington Corporation, can you please contact Trip Advisor.as our Hotel the Crowne Plaza **** ****** truly works extremely hard to provide excellt Customer Service l we have called and emailed Trip Advisor and are working on eliminating all of the emails prior to our obtaining ownership, we would also love for you to return so that you can enjoy the great customer service we are known for in this area, we are the winners of the 2009 Intercontinental Hotels Meetings and Excellence Award for North America and our team is extremely proud of our customer service.

Many thanks
B****** ***********
General Manager

 Loading ...

(Reading via the RSS feed? Trouble voting? Can’t see the poll? Click here to visit the site to vote and/or comment.)

The PBS investigative series “Frontline” used the one year anniversary of the February 2009 crash of a Colgan Air Q400 (flying under Continental colors) as a springboard for an hour on the issue of regional airlines, their safety, and their relationships with their affiliated airlines and the FAA.

Much of it isn’t news to travel geeks, but for many, the report will be a revelation. It’s a disturbing report, and well worth watching.

The biggest takeaways:

• Fatigue
  Many regional airline pilots aren’t paid very well, which leads them to live wherever it’s cheap (i.e., with their parents). But that isn’t necessarily close to their base of operations. This means long commutes, sometimes across the entire continent. So there’s a link between low pay and fatigue.
• Risk-Taking
  The airline operating the regional jets and turboprops — and a pilot up front — typically gets paid only when the flight actually arrives at its intended destination. Diversions to another airport? No paycheck. That can encourage risk-taking.
• Coziness
  The FAA, it’s argued, is too closely wed to the idea of “promoting” aviation, rather than regulating it. The airlines and their regulators are too close.
• Obfuscation
  The mainlines try to sell subcontracted flights as if they’re their own, by putting the “Operated by…” in the fine print. Consumers who aren’t obsessive about travel aren’t necessarily aware that they’re technically flying a codeshare on another airline.
• Inconsistency
  The regional airline industry has the gall to say, with a straight face, that their inflight services are on par with their mainline partners, for a “seamless” experience. Puh-leeze. When I don’t have to gate-check a regular-size carry-on when boarding a Canadair Regional Jet, then we’ll be closer to parity.

Personally, I’ve always avoided regional airlines when possible, preferring to fly on mainline planes, primarily because of comfort and convenience issues, rather than safety concerns. Wherever possible, I choose the larger plane, because they’re typically quieter, less cramped, less smelly (some of those CRJs smell just awful), and less likely to be delayed or canceled. (If air traffic control has to control the flow of aircraft into an airport, they’re more likely to bump a CRJ than a Boeing, if only because of the number of people served.) And that’s not even taking upgrade opportunities into account…

Watch the video below. It’s nearly an hour in its entirety.

(If you’re reading this via the feed, or can’t view the video above, click here to (re)load the post or head to the PBS site.)

Upgraded: British Airways first class
Downgraded: Qantas first class
Just days after Australia’s Qantas announced that they would be ditching two-thirds of their first-class seats (except on the A380) and making business class their primary premium cabin, British Airways went the opposite direction. Instead, they are pumping serious cash into an upgraded first-class cabin.

Upgraded: British Airways Visa Miles
In the spirit of the last item: In order to actually fly in BA’s first class, you’ll likely want to have a stash of BA frequent flier miles. To help toward that end, the BA mileage-earning Visa card giga-mega-uber-super-deal is back. 100,000 total bonus miles after only $2000 in spending. $75 annual fee. Details via Gary Leff.

Upgraded: Recycling
British Airways will partner with US-based Solena Group to build a plant in the UK to produce jet fuel from waste that would otherwise head to a landfill. The facility, scheduled to open in 2014, is intended to produce enough fuel to power only 2% of flights out of Heathrow.

(image)