For several days, it appeared that Chase had closed one of the easiest ways to maximize the Sapphire Reserve’s annual hotel credits.
New language appeared on Chase’s website saying that back-to-back reservations at the same property would be considered a single stay. Only the first reservation would qualify for benefits through The Edit by Chase Travel, including the statement credit available to Sapphire Reserve cardholders.
That was significant because the card’s annual $500 benefit comes as two separate credits of up to $250. Each requires a prepaid stay of at least two nights, so one way to use the full benefit has been to divide a four-night visit into two back-to-back reservations at the same hotel.
Under the newly published language, that strategy seemingly would no longer work.
Sites including Frequent Miler, Doctor of Credit and Miles to Memories quickly noticed and reported the change. The news spread quickly – and then something unusual happened.
The restriction disappeared.
Chase Says The Restriction Was A Mistake
Chase removed the language from its website and told several outlets that it had been included incorrectly. The company confirmed that cardholders could continue using both $250 credits for back-to-back qualifying reservations at the same property.
In other words, nothing had actually changed.
Maybe that’s exactly what happened. Someone could have published an unfinished version of the webpage, copied language from another set of terms or included a restriction that had never received final approval.
But from the outside, we’ll probably never know whether this was always a simple mistake, a policy that appeared before Chase was ready to announce it or a change that became more trouble than it was worth after people noticed.
There’s no evidence proving that Chase intended to make the restriction permanent and then reversed course, so I’m willing to accept the company’s explanation. Still, the episode says quite a bit about the relationship between travel hackers and the programs they’re constantly trying to maximize.
Travel Hacking Has Always Been About Finding The Limits
Long before people called it “travel hacking,” frequent travelers were looking for gaps in the rules of airline, hotel and credit card programs.
Sometimes that meant finding an unusually generous award chart. Other times it involved combining promotions, booking trips in a particular order or splitting transactions so each one triggered a separate benefit.
The back-to-back strategy for The Edit wasn’t especially complicated. Chase offered two $250 credits, with each requiring a separate two-night stay. Cardholders realized they could reserve two nights, make another reservation for the following two nights and use both credits during one four-night hotel visit.
You could call that a loophole, but cardholders were still following the published requirements. Chase created the benefit, split it into two credits, and allowed both to be used in the same calendar year.
Customers simply figured out the most efficient way to use what Chase offered.
Why Some Loopholes Last Longer Than Others
Loyalty programs don’t necessarily shut down every opportunity as soon as someone discovers it.
Correcting a loophole may require changes to an airline’s reservation system, a hotel’s computer network or a bank’s credit-processing rules. Fixing it could cost more than letting a relatively small group of knowledgeable customers benefit.
There’s also the risk of making a program more complicated for everyone else. A new restriction might stop a handful of people from maximizing a promotion while creating customer-service headaches for thousands of ordinary members.
As long as relatively few people know about a strategy, the financial impact may not be large enough for the company to care.
That calculation can change once the strategy goes mainstream.
A trick that was once discussed by a small group of frequent travelers can quickly spread through blogs, social media, online forums, podcasts and private groups. Eventually, enough customers start using it that the company decides it’s time to close the door.
We’ve seen this pattern repeatedly with airline award rules, hotel promotions, credit card statement credits and other loyalty benefits. A strategy works for months or even years, more people discover it, and the program eventually decides it’s become too generous.
Why The News Spread So Quickly
To someone outside the points-and-miles world, the reaction to Chase adding one sentence to a webpage might have looked excessive. Within hours, multiple blogs had stories explaining that back-to-back stays would no longer qualify separately.
However, bloggers constantly monitor program websites and compare the latest terms with previous versions for a reason.
Airlines, hotels and credit card companies have a history of making meaningful changes without sending customers an email or publishing a formal announcement. Sometimes the only warning is a newly added sentence in the terms and conditions. Other times, members don’t learn about a restriction until they try to use a benefit and discover it no longer works.
That means a change appearing on Chase’s own website has to be taken seriously. Chase can fairly say that the information was incorrect. What it can’t reasonably expect is for no one to notice or report newly published terms affecting a $500 card benefit.
Blogs also watch one another because no single writer can continuously monitor every airline, hotel program, bank and rewards portal. One person spots a change, others verify it, and the news spreads. That process can occasionally amplify information that later turns out to be incorrect, but it’s also how travelers often learn about genuine changes that the programs never formally announce.
Did The Reaction Make A Difference?
It’s tempting to assume Chase planned to impose the restriction, saw the negative coverage and backed down. That would make for a satisfying story, but we don’t know that’s what happened.
Chase says the language was included incorrectly, and there’s no evidence to the contrary.
At the same time, programs have reversed unpopular changes when the backlash outweighed the potential savings. Sometimes they acknowledge that customers were unhappy. Other times they say a webpage was released prematurely, the language wasn’t approved, or the whole thing was simply a mistake.
Unless someone inside the company explains what happened, customers are left watching the sequence of events: a restriction appears, travel blogs report it, and the restriction vanishes.
Whether the reaction caused the reversal or merely called attention to an honest mistake, the monitoring system worked. Travelers learned about a possible restriction almost immediately, and Chase clarified that back-to-back stays remain eligible.
Final Thought
Travel hackers are always testing the limits of loyalty programs, while those programs are constantly deciding which forms of optimization they’re willing to tolerate.
The blogs sit awkwardly in the middle. Publishing a loophole can help it spread quickly enough to get shut down. But those same blogs provide the scrutiny that prevents airlines, hotels and banks from quietly changing valuable benefits without anyone noticing.
For now, Sapphire Reserve cardholders can continue booking two qualifying back-to-back stays at the same The Edit property and use both $250 credits. How long Chase will continue allowing that is another question.
Once a company sees how customers are maximizing a benefit, it can always decide to rewrite the rules. If it does, someone will likely notice.
Want to comment on this post? Great! Read this first to help ensure it gets approved.
Want to sponsor a post, write something for Your Mileage May Vary, or put ads on our site? Click here for more info.
Like this post? Please share it! We have plenty more just like it and would love it if you decided to hang around and sign up to get emailed notifications of when we post.
Whether you’ve read our articles before or this is the first time you’re stopping by, we’re really glad you’re here and hope you come back to visit again!
This post first appeared on Your Mileage May Vary
