Re: [94attendees] IHG "Non-qualifying Stay"?

Dirk Kutscher <Dirk.Kutscher@neclab.eu> Wed, 18 November 2015 15:00 UTC

Return-Path: <Dirk.Kutscher@neclab.eu>
X-Original-To: 94attendees@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: 94attendees@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D7B3B1B3220 for <94attendees@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 18 Nov 2015 07:00:26 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 1.013
X-Spam-Level: *
X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.013 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, FM_IS_IT_OUR_ACCOUNT=4.2, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.585, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 3OrGpLuCL3Ut for <94attendees@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 18 Nov 2015 07:00:25 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mailer1.neclab.eu (mailer1.neclab.eu [195.37.70.40]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C610B1B31FE for <94attendees@ietf.org>; Wed, 18 Nov 2015 07:00:24 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mailer1.neclab.eu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 44A4910AEEF; Wed, 18 Nov 2015 16:00:23 +0100 (CET)
X-Virus-Scanned: Amavisd on Debian GNU/Linux (netlab.nec.de)
Received: from mailer1.neclab.eu ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (atlas-a.office.hd [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id lQWVhAfUOOsS; Wed, 18 Nov 2015 16:00:23 +0100 (CET)
X-ENC: Last-Hop-TLS-encrypted
X-ENC: Last-Hop-TLS-encrypted
Received: from ENCELADUS.office.hd (enceladus.office.hd [192.168.24.52]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mailer1.neclab.eu (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 252F010AE0E; Wed, 18 Nov 2015 16:00:15 +0100 (CET)
Received: from PALLENE.office.hd ([169.254.1.59]) by ENCELADUS.office.hd ([192.168.24.52]) with mapi id 14.03.0210.002; Wed, 18 Nov 2015 16:00:14 +0100
From: Dirk Kutscher <Dirk.Kutscher@neclab.eu>
To: "Eggert, Lars" <lars@netapp.com>, "Roberta Maglione (robmgl)" <robmgl@cisco.com>
Thread-Topic: [94attendees] IHG "Non-qualifying Stay"?
Thread-Index: AQHRHe2iyFHqsiy1oEKpNF8HGq4U6p6Z9JiAgAdtpQCAAAP0gIAAeeEQ
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2015 15:00:14 +0000
Message-ID: <82AB329A76E2484D934BBCA77E9F5249A6799E00@PALLENE.office.hd>
References: <E0B9279C-1A3C-4E61-8F7E-6D78B15AA8BA@netapp.com> <22085.62797.741761.727196@tale.kendall.corp.akamai.com> <5e70f48cb49043408ceeeaedebd34f10@XCH-RCD-009.cisco.com> <22311667-3592-4CE4-A65D-DB2A1B90D09A@netapp.com>
In-Reply-To: <22311667-3592-4CE4-A65D-DB2A1B90D09A@netapp.com>
Accept-Language: de-DE, en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.1.2.102]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/94attendees/ikCBTBHlK0wAXF1O-oVq-4azTOc>
Cc: "94attendees@ietf.org" <94attendees@ietf.org>, David C Lawrence <tale@akamai.com>
Subject: Re: [94attendees] IHG "Non-qualifying Stay"?
X-BeenThere: 94attendees@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Mailing list of IETF 94 attendees that have opted in on this list. " <94attendees.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/94attendees>, <mailto:94attendees-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/94attendees/>
List-Post: <mailto:94attendees@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:94attendees-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/94attendees>, <mailto:94attendees-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2015 15:00:27 -0000

Regarding the IAOC, I am really against requesting information on reward programs etc. from the IAOC.

First, it's too much effort (there are different reward programs with different conditions...).

Second, we should avoid making the impression that we base hotel selection on any criteria other than price and location -- also for compliance reasons.

If people have an interest in reward program policies for any hotel, I'd say they should figure it out themselves.

Best regards,
Dirk

-----Original Message-----
From: 94attendees [mailto:94attendees-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Eggert, Lars
Sent: Mittwoch, 18. November 2015 09:16
To: Roberta Maglione (robmgl)
Cc: 94attendees@ietf.org; David C Lawrence
Subject: Re: [94attendees] IHG "Non-qualifying Stay"?

On 2015-11-18, at 9:02, Roberta Maglione (robmgl) <robmgl@cisco.com>; wrote:
> I contacted the customer service and here there is their reply:
> 
> "After further review, we have confirmed the room rate paid during the stay in question was booked under a deeply discounted group rate. As such, it is ineligible for credit to your account per section 12  and 13 of the IHG Rewards Club Terms and Conditions. May we kindly inform you that points or miles will not be issued if your room is paid for by a trade group, association or company as part of a convention or group business meeting. If you stay at an IHG hotel under the terms of a contract or group commitment, you will not be eligible to receive points."

I got the same reply in the meantime. (I replied that I did pay with a personal card, let's see what comes back.)

> I still think they should have made this policy clear during the booking process.

+1

This is the first time ever that I haven't gotten status credit for stay booked at a group rate (that I ran through a personal credit card), and I must have had hundreds over the years.

It didn't matter this time, but for the future, when there are more hotel options, it would be nice to know whether an IETF-negotiated rate was bonus-eligible.

(BCC'ing the IAOC, so they can maybe put this on their already too long list of things to check.)

Lars