Loyalty on the GRAJ protocol. One fee. 195 countries. Join the protocol.
Loyalty schemes hold value that belongs to the customer and lives inside one company's database. That is the design decision worth revisiting: points earned by real spending are an obligation, and one nobody can move is an obligation on the issuer's terms alone.
Issued points are value owed. Treating them as marketing rather than as a balance is how schemes end up with an obligation nobody sized and a customer relationship that gets worse the more they are used.
Value earned with one operator that can be recognised by another is worth substantially more to the person who earned it, and is the only version of loyalty that is not a lock-in mechanism.
Points that expire are a liability that resolves itself at the customer's expense. Whatever the policy is, saying it plainly at the point of earning is the difference between a programme and a trap.
Designed, not built. The contribution score is live and measures what an operator has added to the protocol; a customer-facing loyalty balance is a different thing and does not exist yet.