Treating Loyal Customers - SQ could take some lessons from this

[solitaire]

http://www.usatoday.com/travel/news/...ers04_CV_N.htm

If american carriers, known for their inferior products and services as compared to Asian ones, can look after their high spending customers, then SQ can surely do the same for for their Solitaire group. Though they have changed their qualification criteria to be $ based and not mile based, the benefits have dwindled to almost nothing.

Or are they running it secretly for some?

[Cashsuds]

Sorry to dissapoint you "solitaire"... This is wishful thinking on your part that SQ would even consider something like this. The fact of the matter is - The "solitaire" status is not "worth a pinch of sh...." - Not you..

Solitaire status doesn't give you access to TPR, and the way they do is so subtle, putting you in "a" First Class lounge, which no First Class pax goes to anyway in T3. The differences between PPS and Solitaire are so small that one wonders whether its worth our loyalty.. One does not get access to First Class Partner Lounges all over the world, and they are "fast" closing down SKL's all over the world, so you have to use the same lounge as any other. What else is there for "solitaire"?

But good point!! I challlenge you to put a line to SQ to ask them about this and I would be more than interested to hear their reply. But "good luck" to you. What Solitaire status used to mean is now only a figment of our imagination that we can pretend it actually once existed! Dream on!!!

[B727]

I've always thought the real benefit of one's solitaire status is actually enjoyed by one's spouse

[LionCity]

I've always thought the real benefit of one's solitaire status is actually enjoyed by one's spouse

Sorry to disagree that there are not much differences between QPPS and TPPS, but I must agree with B727 that one real benefit of solitaire is spouse's benefit that the Mrs (she is flying mostly EY) is looking forward to. A relative of mine is a solitaire qualified from the old system and mostly from RTWs (brought from substantively less expensively at locations outside of Singapore) but otherwise flies EY and hoping for upgrades on those EY flights(and he gets it frequently while I got it only on two occasions). He still just maintain his status...barely. Whilst I spent more per annum the past five years and I can't even get into the F Class lounge whilst a TPPS can still stroll into the F Class Lounge when flying J or EY! My upgrade chances are also less even though I spent more per annum. SQ should treat me better!!!

[HUGE AL]

All the perks mainly benefit people who need to be upgraded. Those that already have an F ticket won't get too much.

Says United's Robin Urbanski: "It's like the (American Express) black (invitation-only Centurion) card: We try to keep the mystique."

Just lovin' the UA PR machine. There's nothing of a "mystique" to the AMEX Black Card. They are happy to disclose and have done so many times.

[Kiwi]

a TPPS can still stroll into the F Class Lounge when flying J or EY! My upgrade chances are also less even though I spent more per annum. SQ should treat me better!!!

Hmmm I thought that since the devaluations, TPP can only access SKL F lounge when flying SQ (or F on *A).

[Guy Betsy]

I've always thought the real benefit of one's solitaire status is actually enjoyed by one's spouse

Even so, on this feature. A friend had to fight tooth and nail and threaten to take SQ to court when they refused to give his spouse, a man, a spousal card. SQ finally relented and a spousal card was given, hushed hushed in California.

[LionCity]

Hmmm I thought that since the devaluations, TPP can only access SKL F lounge when flying SQ (or F on *A).

No experiences as QPPS flying non-SQ metal using the lounge but assumed that SKL Lounge access is allowed for QPPS when flying non-SQ Metal in past. Please correct me if I am wrong.

Although I am not very focused about this point that much, I feel that SQ devalued QPPS more than TPPS with the changes. Yes, SQ don't luv me as much.

I been to TPR on a couple of occasions, applicable only to myself only I actually felt more liked going to the F Lounge instead. Strictly from my own point of view, I see no major loss in privileges not able to access TPR. But others may feel differently depending on how they perceive service.

But I still enjoy SQ flights but sometimes I am bugged by the question how long the loyalty will remain....

[benlee]

The main issue bugging me about this PPS program is that there's actually no real tangible benefits unless I'm flying Y. All benefits under PPS is included in my J ticket. So it becomes just another card to carry around.

If anyone in SQ is reading this, I would suggest that they improve their PPS program and offer more real value to their loyal customers by uprading PPS pax flying J to have access to F Class Lounge/TPR and for TPPS and PPS pax flying F additional bonus miles when booking a F ticket. That will make a lot of people happy.

As for the TPR, yeah the novelty for me is starting to wear off for me too. There's only so many times I can enjoy their lobster and mini-burger. Hope they can change the menu more often and introduce new items.

[GramercyPark]

Just lovin' the UA PR machine. There's nothing of a "mystique" to the AMEX Black Card. They are happy to disclose and have done so many times.

Amex may acknowledge that they actually issue the card, but they have never, to the best of my knowledge, revealed the criteria that they use to determine which cardholders receive a Centurion invitation. There is endless conjecture in many places, but the actual figures are a secret. It's the same for UGS - lots of conjecture, but the company has "kept mum" about the actual selection criteria.

[Kiwi]

Actually UGS criteria were published.

[HUGE AL]

Amex may acknowledge that they actually issue the card, but they have never, to the best of my knowledge, revealed the criteria that they use to determine which cardholders receive a Centurion invitation. There is endless conjecture in many places, but the actual figures are a secret. It's the same for UGS - lots of conjecture, but the company has "kept mum" about the actual selection criteria.

I've seen it published in quite a few financial publications. IIRC, Robb Report also had an article on it a long time ago.

[B727]

[QUOTE=Guy Betsy;111355]A friend had to fight tooth and nail and threaten to take SQ to court when they refused to give his spouse, a man, a spousal card/QUOTE]

And rightly so. For an airline to fly to Stateside cities such as Los Angeles, San Francisco, New York, Houston and not want to accord spousal priveleges to same gender spouses is unthinkable. Really, (Singapore) Gurl, what were you thinking?

[LionCity]

[QUOTE=B727;112419]

A friend had to fight tooth and nail and threaten to take SQ to court when they refused to give his spouse, a man, a spousal card/QUOTE]

And rightly so. For an airline to fly to Stateside cities such as Los Angeles, San Francisco, New York, Houston and not want to accord spousal priveleges to same gender spouses is unthinkable. Really, (Singapore) Gurl, what were you thinking?

I am for giving the same gender spouse the privileges and we need to recognize that it is becoming a fact of life for many. But again it is another hush hush thing that we have no verification of the fact.

[MAN Flyer]

Even so, on this feature. A friend had to fight tooth and nail and threaten to take SQ to court when they refused to give his spouse, a man, a spousal card. SQ finally relented and a spousal card was given, hushed hushed in California.

Surprised to hear this. My Brother has my supplementary card - admittedly after an 'exchange' between me and KF - and I know of a few other examples where TPP's have given their supplmentary card to people other than their spouse anyway.