- Equifax to Pay Around $700 Million to Resolve Data-Breach Probes by WSJ. Seems incredibly low all things considered.
- Watch Out for Non-Cancellable Hotel Rewards: Reader Got a Surprise $7000 Charge by VFTW. These types of charges are excessive. Gary highlights that Hyatt did an amazing job, but I’d say allowing properties under your management to charge these excessive cancellation fees in the first place means that they’ve done a bad job. I personally think that if an non-cancellable award stay is cancelled, the points should be forfeit as that’s how any sane person would assume the system works rather than having to pay a fee of $7,000 cash.
- AmEx warns of higher costs as it boosts rewards program, shares fall by Reuters.
- American Airlines insider xJonNYC with some news about the Alaska partnership.
look for more degradation to the AA/AS partnership (such as it is) coming. Not surprising, I suppose, but will definitely affect those who currently earn, etc. I’d expect reciprocal lounge access to remain however, but all up in the air at this point.
— JonNYC (@xJonNYC) July 19, 2019
Deals starting/expiring at the end of today or starting today (view the full deal calendar here):
- Kohl’s Rewards – Negative Changes Coming 7/22
- [Targeted] Lyft: 10-50% Off Next 10 Rides
- [YMMV] Raise: $10 Off $100+ With Promo Code GOFORIT
Deals starting/expiring at end of tomorrow:
Here are some of the most popular posts from past few days:
These companies have gotten too big to fail; and so now the straight line to corruption has stymied any potential for them to just-do-the-right-thing. We now know that these systemic problems aren’t going to be fixed by mere fines. Fines are just a cost of doing business – the same wrongheaded way.
Equifax is just going through the motions, here; trying to placate the obvious sentiment against their egregious missteps… one after another, and on and on.
Instead of less regulation, and less enforcement, and a mere fine, and — let’s all just go back to business as usual; (definition of insanity) instead, consumers need to be empowered to wield absolute control over their own personal information.
There should be a total opt-out, in regards to selling other people’s personal data without their express permission. Better yet, these systems that are susceptible to data-breaches should be managed on an opt-in basis, forcing anyone that aims to profit of the personal data of others… to recapture all of their users. This would include Amazon, Equifax, Facebook… and any other company that has been skating by – pimping out its user-base’s personals to the highest bidder; or just as bad… hoarding everyone’s data in a monopolistic fashion.
We need to get way out ahead of these pervasive societal trends. Otherwise, forget about the government being big-brother. We’ll instead have to worry about any random guy – right down the street – having access to our every move.
That Equifax article is behind a pay wall.
1) In a Private/Incognito/InPrivate window, navigate to:
http://facebook.com/l.php?u=https://www.wsj.com/articles/equifax-to-pay-around-700-million-to-resolve-data-breach-probes-11563577702
2) Click the “Follow Link” button (no Facebook account required)
Cheers; that worked. Would be nice if this site just provided similar non-pay-wall links. Unless we’re to assume that such links are an advertisement.
They aren’t an advertisement. I like to link to the original source. There are plenty of work arounds to access WSJ.
I saw plenty of News organizations reporting on the Equifax settlement. Since it wasn’t an exclusive, it would just be courteous to link a public link.
Look at when the WSJ article was published compared to the other sources.
You tell me, since you seem to be advocating for WSJ, for no apparent reason. This isn’t the first time you’ve posted paid links instead of free ones, either. It’s inconsiderate of the readers.
Was published on the 19th, before other sources picked the story up. Like I said, we post the original source. If you don’t like it, read another blog. You seem to constantly complain about this site so why do you keep reading it?
Same reason I don’t read the WSJ, or is that irony lost on you along with the solution to just post free links for Christ’s sake?
Do you not know how to do it? Or, do you expect readers to do extra legwork to read paid articles that you post?
Do you consider yourself an elitist? If you subscribe to outside paid sites than everyone else should, or to heck with them?
Are you getting paid by WSJ to repeatedly post paid links that don’t turn out to be exclusives?
Or, are you unable to take legitimate criticisms, and truly want readers to all fall in line, or go elsewhere?
I’ve already outlined the reason why we don’t always post links to free sites. Others have also explained work arounds to you. Do you not know how to follow the work arounds?
I don’t consider myself an elitist, but I like to give credit to other sites where it’s due and where possible I like to link to the original source.
Are you getting paid by WSJ to repeatedly post paid links that don’t turn out to be exclusives?
No. I’ve said no to this question from you multiple times but you keep asking it. Why do you keep asking it? You continually make accusations against us like this that have no bearing in reality and regardless of the number of times I correct you, you still post them.
I’m able to take criticisms, but yours have long since stopped being constructive. Instead you constantly accuse of doing things like linking to the WSJ to make money when that is not accurate at all.
Recap posts are for posts that I find interesting. If one of linked posts is to WSJ suggest you either: Pay for the WSJ, use a work around or find an alternative yourself or simply not read the article!
Just because you read something in the WSJ doesn’t mean the article was an exclusive, therefore there is no credit due. Just check the AP or something. In fact, I’d be surprised if WSJ doesn’t identify their own articles with an “exclusive” moniker, if and when that actually applies.
If you post an exclusive, that’s justified. But, just because you subscribe to the WSJ, and cannot be bothered to link an open link to an article for public consumption… readers shouldn’t have to deal with that inconsiderate modus operandi.
I haven’t accused you of anything. I’ve asked why you keep posting paid links? Does the sheer self-serving convenience (to you alone) outweigh what is being presented here to you? Or, do you not seem to understand what happens when people click on paid links? Newsflash: They don’t get to read the article, unless they sign up for the WSJ.
So, whether you get paid to shill for WSJ, or you do it of your own volition, out of the kindness of your heart to WSJ, and Not for your readers; you’re still doing it… for no apparent reason, other than to annoy non-subscribers, which just so happen to be readers to this site. Or, is this site intended to be on a subscription basis, as well?
> Just because you read something in the WSJ doesn’t mean the article was an exclusive, therefore there is no credit due.
Like I said, I like to post links to sites that break news stories. When WSJ originally posted this story other outlets weren’t covering it. It really doesn’t matter if it’s an exclusive or not. I first saw that WSJ was reporting this news before anybody else (likely because they have inside contacts) so I believe they deserve the credit and thus I link to them. If you disagree with our linking policies, I’m not sure what to tell you.
> I haven’t accused you of anything.
No, but you’ve repeatedly asked the same question even when I’ve directly answered that question before. Not only in this comment thread but in other posts as well.
> or no reason other than to annoy non-subscribers
Again, I’ve already provided my reasoning but you’ve decided that you don’t like it.
> Or, is this site intended to be on a subscription basis, as well?
This site and the recap in general is a place where I share my thoughts for free. Your welcome to disagree with those thoughts and I welcome constructive criticism but I won’t be changing my linking policy just because you find it slightly less convenient.
Fair enough. Be yourself – in permanence. No need to adapt and improve.
But hey, at least you’re honest about that.
Thanks for passing along VFTW’s report on that outrageous cancellation policy of some hotel chains. (Good that Gary could help this badly treated customer, but wow…. the whole industry goes to shame over this. (if it’s really as “common” as Gary claims) I’ve been reading avidly from the miles & points bloggers for a decade, and I don’t remember once reading about this dire cancellation penalty arrogance.
Concur with your judgment in full: “if an non-cancellable award stay is cancelled, the points should be forfeit” — and “any sane person would assume (that’s how) the system works rather than having to pay a fee of $7,000” Bingo.
Still, what a warning. I was tempted to open up a new Hyatt cc. Not any more.
FYI Reuters – the Amex Platinum is not battling the Citi Prestige. Citi Prestige has left the building in shame.
It’s also not battling the CSR — the CSR is the up and coming Yuppie card that could make sense for a variety of people with moderate income (if you have moderate income, you’ll like get $300 of value from fleixble travel credits making the net fee $150 which can be worth it for lounge access and earnings on food/travel spend). The amex plat is for the moderate+ income flyer who is regularly flying and prefers staying in hotels. They get great value from lounge access and will use the Uber credits no problem. It’s someone who wouldn’t hesitate to shop at Saks for a normal purchase.
I am excitedly waiting for Amex to start boosting their rewards program….oh wait the article say they already have…. I guess clawing back millions of referral MR, denying people the ability to sign up for cards with a bonus and blocking GC purchase credits count as improvements? Just not sure where the expense part is….
(Obviously this is disingenuous)
Take your logic elsewhere
All I can say is ‘ Churn baby, Churn’.
They’re spending significantly more on maintaining their Delta co-brand partnership. That is not the same as Amex “boosting its rewards program”. I haven’t noticed significant change in Amex’s rewards program offerings in the past couple years. I suppose the PRG revamp might be a cost center, but they also raised the annual fee across their card portfolio and have a monthly incentive to use the card.
All I really see are cuts. Cuts to the value of Priority Pass. Cuts to referral and signup bonuses. Cuts to creative use of the airline credit *cough*.
Amex always had a cadre of people who used their cards with high spend earning 1 point/dollar and they’re being forced to get with the times and offer competitive spend rewards + fringe benefits.