The Loyalty Scheme Nobody Uses

You launched a points scheme. Some people signed up in the first fortnight. Nobody has mentioned it since, and you are not sure whether anyone has redeemed anything.

It is not that guests do not care about being rewarded. It is that the scheme was built around what is easy to count.

Why they get ignored

The reward is too far away. Ten visits for something small. ⚠️ A reward nobody can picture reaching does not change behaviour at all — and most schemes are set at a threshold chosen by what the venue can afford rather than what a guest would work towards.

Nobody mentions it at the moment it matters. It exists on a card, in an app, on a poster. Not in the sentence the person says when the guest is paying, which is the only place it can actually enter the guest's head.

It rewards what they were going to do anyway. Your weekly regular collects points for being a weekly regular. That is a discount, not a loyalty scheme, and it costs you margin for behaviour you already had.

The staff do not believe in it. ⚠️ If it is extra work at the busiest moment with no visible benefit, it will be skipped, and no amount of reminding changes that.

What is actually worth rewarding

Not visits. Changes in behaviour you would pay for.

Coming back sooner. The gap between visits is the number that moves revenue, and it is the one almost no scheme targets.

Coming on the quiet night. ⚠️ A reward that shifts a guest from Saturday to Wednesday is worth far more than one that thanks them for Saturday — you had that Saturday already.

Bringing someone. Your regulars are your cheapest acquisition channel and are almost never rewarded for it.

Coming back after a lapse. A guest who has not been in for two months is the highest-value target you have, and the standard scheme does nothing for them because they have stopped earning points.

The version that works

Small, near, and specific. Something reachable in two or three visits, not ten.

Delivered by a person, not a card. ⚠️ "Your next one is on us" said out loud beats any number of accumulated points, because it lands at the moment of the decision to return.

Targeted at the behaviour you want. If Wednesdays are empty, the reward is for Wednesday. A general scheme is a general discount.

Visible to whoever is serving. If recognising a member requires a lookup nobody will do, it does not exist. This is the point at which most schemes actually die.

The lapsed-guest version

The single highest-return use, and almost nobody runs it:

A guest who has not been in for longer than their normal gap, contacted once, with a specific reason to come back.

⚠️ Their normal gap, not a fixed number of days. A monthly guest at six weeks is lapsing. A quarterly guest at six weeks is fine. Applying one threshold to both is why generic win-back messages perform badly.

Three reasons they get ignored, and the first is decisive

Cannot be remembered
The balance is invisible
The reward is too far away

⚠️ If it takes two sentences to explain, the floor will not explain it and the guest will not retain it. 　 ⇒ A scheme that cannot be said in one sentence does not run, however 　 　 well designed the rest of it is.

---

Accumulation means nine visits with nothing happening

Ten visits for one reward  nine of them feel like nothing
Something small each time  is remembered

⚠️ A stamp card is a promise that pays out rarely. 　 ⇒ Frequent and small beats rare and large, for memory if not for 　 　 arithmetic.

---

Reward returning, not spending

Rewarding spend  the people who spend a lot spend slightly more
Rewarding return  the people who come rarely come more often

⚠️ Only two things are worth rewarding: coming back, and bringing someone. 　 ⇒ Those are the two behaviours you actually want more of, and neither 　 　 of them is measured by the size of the bill.

---

Three properties of one that works

One  given on the night, not banked
Two  requires no memory from the guest — you remember
Three uses their name

⚠️ The third costs nothing and outperforms the rest. 　 ⇒ Being recognised is a stronger reason to return than anything a 　 　 scheme can hand over.

---

Never end one silently

Balances that vanish  read as a betrayal
An announced wind-down with a way to use what is banked  does not

⚠️ Ending a scheme is not the damage. Ending it quietly is. 　 ⇒ Provide the exit before you stop it, and say so.

---

Lapsed guests need something else entirely

A balance  will not bring them back
Being remembered  might

⚠️ Someone who has drifted away is not returning for points. 　 ⇒ They return because somebody knew who they were, which is a 　 　 different mechanism and cannot be automated into the scheme.

---

---

Three to hold

Redemption rate. ⚠️ The number that tells you within a month. Near-zero does not mean guests are saving up — it means they have forgotten, and the scheme is only generating liability.

Average gap between visits, before and after enrolment. The actual test. If it has not moved, you are funding a discount.

Share of members recognised at the point of service. If staff cannot tell, nothing downstream matters.

Where the record has to sit

A scheme needs two things at once: the guest's history, and the person serving them able to see it without leaving what they are doing. Split those across a separate app and a till and it fails on the floor, regardless of how the scheme is designed.

tasteck keeps guest visit history and points on the same record used to take the booking, so the person serving can see both.

Nobody ignored your scheme because they do not want to be rewarded. They ignored it because the reward was far away, generic, and mentioned by nobody.

---

Read next

• Raising the Repeat Nomination Rate at a Men's Wellness Spa
• Repeat Nomination vs. Photo Nomination: The Difference
• The Regular You Lost Without Noticing
• What a Regular Is Actually Worth
• What Happens On The Third Visit
• The Guest Who Only Deals With One Person
• The Regular Who Stopped Spending
• What Your Best Guest Would Tell You